Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 279 The Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability ISSN: 1838-3815 (online) Journal Homepage: https://ojs.deakin.edu.au/index.php/jtlge/ Employment, work abroad and bilingual education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence Francisco Javier Palacios-Hidalgo1, María Elena Gómez-Parra1, Roberto Espejo-Mohedano2 and Cristina A. Huertas-Abril1 Corresponding author: Francisco Javier Palacios-Hidalgo (francisco.palacios@uco.es) 1Department of English and German Philologies, University of Córdoba, Córdoba, Spain 2Department of Statistics, University of Córdoba, Córdoba, Spain Abstract Bilingual programs have become more common in higher education around the world in an attempt to provide learners with the education they need to face today’s world. These programs can provide academic, linguistic, intercultural, and professional benefits to students. Consequently, countries like Spain have developed bilingual education to help students become proficient in foreign languages and develop essential competences for their professional futures. Research has analysed how Spanish bilingual education is implemented, and how teachers are trained. However, few studies examine how bilingual programs impact graduates’ employability, mobility, and intercultural awareness, and how graduates perceive their skill development. Moreover, little has been studied about bilingual graduates’ work situation and whether participating in these programs has helped them find work abroad. This paper analyses whether a combination of participation in Spanish bilingual programs, employment, and experiences working abroad affects bilingual education graduates’ self- perceived employability, mobility, and intercultural awareness. This study adopts a quantitative approach, in which 741 respondents participated. Findings show that bilingual graduates who are currently working have higher self-perceived employability and better perceptions of their mobility and employability competences than those who followed monolingual studies, even when they have not worked abroad. Keywords: Employment, work abroad; Spanish bilingual education, bilingual education graduates, intercultural competence, international mobility, employability, linguistic success. Introduction Being able to speak more than one’s first language is a skill of paramount importance in today’s world, and political and educational bodies from every part of the globe seem to be well aware of it. Such is the case of the Council of Europe and the European Commission (European supranational organizations comprising a group of countries that operate under the same economic, political and legal space and that respond to the same values of democracy and human rights; European https://ojs.deakin.edu.au/index.php/jtlge/ mailto:francisco.palacios@uco.es Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 280 Commission, 2020), which claim that the knowledge of languages (including their linguistic and cultural aspects) provides a better understanding of other cultures, thus contributing to the development of citizenship and democratic competences (Council of Europe, 2019, p. 15). Indeed, this has been the premise followed in the European continent for decades, as can be seen from the diversity of official documents published in the field of language learning and teaching and intercultural awareness (e.g., the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages, Council of Europe, 2001, 2018; the White Paper on Education and Training, European Commission, 1995; and the Language Learning and the Linguistic Diversity Promotion Plan, European Commission, 2003) that have shown the urgency of developing the communicative and intercultural skills of young learners to help them actively participate in the globalised society of today. As a result, bilingual and multilingual education has become more common in educational systems around the world in an attempt to provide 21st-century students with the type of adaptive education they need to face the communicative situations they will encounter in their lives (García, 2009). This type of education, which may be strictly bilingual or multilingual depending on the number of languages of instruction used, is understood as the use of more than one language (national or foreign) to teach a wide range of non-linguistic areas of the curriculum (Ozfidan & Toprak, 2019; Rascón-Moreno, 2021; Terra, 2018; Turner, 2021). Research has reported the benefits of bilingual and multilingual education for students in the academic and linguistic fields (Pérez-Vidal & Roquet, 2015), but also in terms of intercultural awareness (Romanowski, 2018), professional skills (Callahan & Gándara, 2014), and willingness to travel abroad (Yang, 2017). Considering these gains, and taking Europe’s guidelines into account, countries like Spain developed bilingual and multilingual education programs at all educational stages (Chumbay & Quito-Ochoa, 2020; García-Calvo et al., 2019; Mancebo-Pérez, 2020; Pérez-Murillo, 2019) in order to help students become proficient in local and foreign languages as well as to develop essential skills. In this light, research has extensively analysed how Spanish bilingual education is implemented (Barrios & Milla- Lara, 2020; Chumbay & Quito-Ochoa, 2020; Valdés-Sánchez & Espinet, 2020), and also how teachers who take part in these programs are trained (Custodio-Espinar, 2019; Marzà, 2021; Palacios-Hidalgo, Gómez-Parra, & Huertas-Abril, 2018). Furthermore, the specialized scientific literature has also examined the academic and linguistic results of bilingual programs in Europe and other international contexts (Dockrell et al., 2021; Kirsch, Aleksić, Mortini, & Andersen, 2020; Lorenzo, Granados, & Rico, 2021). Similarly, studies have explored the influence of language learning on students’ academic mobility (Mitchell, 2021) and employment (Hsieh, in press), and the specific effects of bilingual and multilingual education on their intercultural awareness (Gómez-Parra, 2020). While employability, mobility and intercultural awareness are key elements in evaluating the effects of bilingual education and individuals’ linguistic success (Gómez-Parra, Huertas-Abril, & Espejo- Mohedano, 2021), few studies examine how these programs impact graduates’ lives concerning these three aspects and how graduates perceive their development of such skills. Moreover, little has been studied about the work situation of Spanish bilingual/multilingual education graduates or whether their participation in these programs has helped them find work abroad. The study reported in this paper analysed whether a combination of participation in Spanish bilingual/multilingual education programs, being currently employed, and having worked abroad affects bilingual education graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility, and intercultural awareness. Three research questions underpin this study: RQ1. Do graduates from Spanish bilingual/multilingual education programs, who are currently employed and have worked abroad, have positive perceptions of their linguistic success? RQ2. Do graduates from Spanish bilingual/multilingual education, who are currently employed, consider themselves more linguistically successful than those who did not participate in these programs? Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 281 RQ3. Do graduates from Spanish bilingual/multilingual education, who have worked abroad, consider themselves more linguistically successful than those who did not participate in these programs? Theoretical framework: CLIL, competences and employability The efforts of educational organisations in highlighting the need to enhance language learning among younger generations have been translated into a somewhat widespread implementation of bilingual and multilingual education in every part of the world (e.g., Dos Santos, 2019; Moore, 2021; Theobald, 2019). Likewise, European educational systems have engaged in developing bilingual and multilingual programs at all educational levels in an attempt to promote the learning of national and foreign languages among their citizens, as well as the development of their communicative competence (e.g., Cenoz & Gorter, 2019; Lundberg, 2018; Nance, 2020). These educational programs may be bilingual or multilingual depending on the number of languages of instruction used. Countries and regions within them may choose strictly bilingual programs, a trilingual option, or a multilingual type of education. For instance, Spanish regions may be monolingual (e.g., Andalusia or the Canary Islands) where Spanish is the only official language spoken. Conversely, they may be bilingual where a co-official language is also spoken in addition to Spanish; such is the case of Catalonia (with Catalan as the co-official language), Galicia (where Galician has co-official status), and the Basque Country (with Basque as a co-official language). In this light, monolingual areas follow strict bilingual education programs, since only Spanish and a foreign language (generally English) are used as languages of instruction (Méndez, 2013); on the other hand, bilingual regions follow trilingual programs to ensure the teaching and learning of Spanish, the foreign language and also co-official languages (Cenoz & Gorter, 2019). Other countries, such as Luxembourg, implement a multilingual approach (Kirsch et al., 2020). Among the different existing approaches to bilingual and multilingual education, Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) has become a common approach implemented in Europe and Spain (Bower, 2021; Renau-Renau, & Mas-Martí, 2019), and increasingly in other contexts (cf. Sasajima, 2019; Yang, 2019). According to Coyle, Hood and Marsh (2010), CLIL is a dual-focused educational approach in which an additional language is used for the learning and teaching of both content and language (p. 23). Dalton-Puffer and Smit (2013) state some of the clear differences between CLIL and other types of bilingual and multilingual education (such as immersion programs or content-based instruction), highlighting that, while in CLIL a foreign language or a lingua franca is used for instruction, other bilingual programs focus on second national languages of the context where they are implemented. In this case, students taking part in CLIL face the difficulty that the use of the language being learnt is almost totally limited to the classroom since it is not frequently spoken in other situations of learners’ daily life (Dalton-Puffer & Smit 2013). Moreover, CLIL usually starts after students have acquired literacy skills in their first language(s), unlike other forms of bilingual and multilingual education, in which literacy in the languages of instruction is regularly acquired simultaneously. Moreover, CLIL teachers are usually non-native speakers of the language of instruction, and lessons are normally established as non-language lessons (i.e., science, music, or mathematics), while also offering the target language as a language subject taught by language specialists. Cenoz, Genesee and Gorter (2014) add other disparities between CLIL and other ways of bilingual and multilingual education, such as the main learning focus, which in the former is to develop the necessary skills to guarantee effective communication, while in other approaches it is to acquire native-like proficiency. Some scholars consider CLIL as a type of content-based instruction (Coyle et al., 2010; Dalton-Puffer, 2007). However, Cenoz (2015) states some differences between the two concepts. Despite both being broad terms encompassing different methodologies, CLIL tends to be used for the learning of Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 282 foreign majority languages like English, French or German, whereas content-based instruction is also used for the learning of second or minority languages. Additionally, Cenoz (2015) refers to the origin and context of both approaches, with CLIL being more linked to the use of English-medium instruction in Europe in the 1990s, and content-based instruction often associated with the first French-medium immersion programmes in Canada in the 1960s (p. 21). Several studies have reported the varied benefits that bilingual and multilingual education and CLIL may have for students. In their work, Pérez-Vidal and Roquet (2015) find linguistic gains in certain language domains in students enrolled in a bilingual Catalan/Spanish program, such as in reading and grammar. Similarly, Hipfner-Boucher, Lam and Chen (2014) discover that children participating in bilingual education had higher levels of phonological awareness and word reading skills. As for intercultural awareness, Romanowski (2018) discusses how certain forms of bilingual education favour intercultural learning, an idea also supported by Hus and Hegedis (2021), who show that teachers of bilingual programs believe that this sort of education is the most appropriate for intercultural learning. Yang (2017) explores the views of bilingual education university undergraduates and reveals that improved international mobility and employability are well- regarded advantages of this type of education according to students. Finally, Callahan and Gándara (2014) and Porras, Ee and Gándara (2014) examine how participation in bilingual education and speaking more than one language enhances employability. Certainly, ‘competence’ and ‘communicative competence’ are key terms not only in European bilingual and multilingual education but in European educational systems in general. The former is understood as the set of knowledge, skills and attitudes that involves meeting complex demands, by drawing on and mobilising psychosocial resources (including skills and attitudes) in a particular context (OECD, 2005, p. 4), whereas the latter draws on an individual’s knowledge of language, practical IT skills and attitudes towards those with whom he or she is communicating (p. 4). The development of students’ communicative competence is then key in bilingual and multilingual education. Nevertheless, if these programs are to prepare students to face the challenges of 21st- century society, it may be reasonable to assume that communication-related competences are not their only focus, but that other professional skills like international mobility and employability that have become essential dimensions to measure social progress are also important. In this sense, national and international organisations within Europe devote efforts to guarantee that European citizens are granted opportunities to freely move within the borders of the continent for professional reasons. These initiatives and efforts seem to be resulting in the growing international mobility of European working-age citizens seeking economic integration (Fries-Tersch, Jones, & Siöland, 2021). Among the different European countries, Spain is rated as one of the most important destinations for high-skilled movers, but it also suffers a considerable outflow of nationals (around 56,000 working-age citizens leaving the country) that choose to look for better labour opportunities somewhere else (Fries-Tersch, Jones, & Siöland, 2021). Within this context, research shows that bilingual and multilingual education …can help to improve employability of university graduates in the international job market (Schluessel 2007; Tsung 2009; Zelasko and Antúnez 2000), as many companies demand an intercultural and multilingual profile for the staff they hire, in addition to the competences which are specific to the job these will develop (Gómez-Parra, 2018, p. 95). In fact, in the 2006 Eurydice Report, a summary developed by the European Information Network that provides insights on the structure of European education, it was already pointed that one of the key aims of bilingual programs and CLIL specifically was preparing pupils for life in a more internationalised society and offering them better job prospects on the labour market (Eurydice European Unit, 2006, p. 22). However, it seems necessary to examine to what extent CLIL and Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 283 bilingual and multilingual education contribute to enhancing graduates’ professional competences, something still unknown (Tudor, 2008; Yang, 2017). As mentioned previously, research is profuse when analysing how bilingual and multilingual education is implemented in different contexts, how teachers who participate in these programs are trained, and the academic results of students, among other areas of study. Nevertheless, few investigations have explored whether graduates consider that their participation in these programs has enhanced their linguistic success. This type of success has been traditionally measured in terms of neurolinguistic and psycholinguistic benefits (cf. Li & Grant, 2016; Thierry, 2016), and little has been mentioned in relation to students’ and/or graduates’ professional or intercultural gains. Nevertheless, Gómez-Parra et al. (2021) have recently demonstrated that linguistic success can be understood as a combination of intercultural competence, international mobility, and employability, and that the evaluation of the success of bilingual and multilingual programs may be related to it. Methodology This paper reports on a study which aimed to determine whether a combination of participation in Spanish bilingual/multilingual education programs, being currently employed, and having worked abroad affects bilingual education graduates’ self-perceived linguistic success, understood as a combination of employability, mobility, and intercultural awareness. To this purpose, an online questionnaire was used to examine potential differences among groups when considering participation in Spanish bilingual/multilingual education, employment, and work abroad as grouping variables. The work follows a quantitative approach, which involves measurement and assumes that the phenomena under study can be measured (Watson, 2015, p. 1), and which allows using a large group of participants to examine the relations among the variables (Muijs, 2010). This study is part of the research project ‘Facing bilinguals: Study of bilingual education programmes’ results through social data analysis (BESOC)’ (Ref. no. EDU2017-84800-R), granted by the 2017 call of the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, and whose objective is to study how bilingual education programs across the world impact on 21st-century citizens. The BESOC team has been designed ad hoc and is composed of experts in the fields of Philology, Psychopedagogy, Statistics, Informatics, Economics, and Legal and Business Sciences. It also had the support of distinguished international experts in bilingual and multilingual education. This guarantees the multidisciplinarity of the research project. Procedure An online questionnaire was used for the collection of data. First, Facebook Audience Insights was used for cross-sectional sample modelling; this tool allows selecting individuals that meet certain conditions (such as age, languages spoken, or educational background) by using their personal information and their behaviour on Facebook. The researchers chose to use this tool instead of simply selecting a convenience sample as it guarantees to obtain a larger number of participants for the study. Once the audience was identified, the questionnaire was made available through SurveyMonkey, inserted in advertisements, and distributed on Facebook. In this way, users located in Spain were provided the link to the questionnaire and invited to participate in the study. The research team had access to the anonymous responses to the questionnaire but not to respondents’ personal, activity and interaction information, which was exclusively manipulated by Facebook. Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 284 After gathering the responses to the questionnaire (from December 2019 to January 2020), data were refined by identifying and dismissing anomalous information, and discarding incomplete responses (due to the size of the sample, this process was applied instead of imputation; Van Buuren, 2018). Instrument An online format was chosen for the design and administration of the instrument in order to guarantee accessibility and reaching a larger sample. The questionnaire (see Appendix) was designed by the BESOC team as part of the aforementioned research project. It consists of a total of 37 items classified as follows: 13 general questions, with binary and numerical variables, including age, gender, languages spoken, participation in bilingual programs, employment, and experience working abroad, among others; and 24 specific questions related to linguistic success, measured with a 10- point Likert (1 = Very little; 10 = A lot), which are in turn divided into three dimensions (international mobility, employability, and intercultural competence). It is worth mentioning that the instrument makes no reference to the languages of instruction of the bilingual programs in which respondents may have participated, their nationality or region of origin, the educational stage in which they received this teaching, or the type of schooling in which they were enrolled (i.e., public, or state- funded education); these variables, therefore, are not considered in the study. Additionally, it is worth noticing the possible conflicts of the questionnaire relying on self-reported answers and the potential bias of the results (Devaux & Sassi, 2016). Nonetheless, as stated by Althubaiti (2016), when self-reporting data are correctly utilized, they can help to provide a wider range of responses than many other data collection instruments (p. 212). The questionnaire was published and validated by Gómez-Parra et al. (2021), who tested its reliability and internal consistency by applying Cronbach’s Alpha (higher than 0.88 for the three dimensions, and 0.950 for the total scale; Taber, 2018), Bartlett’s sphericity test (0.00; sig. < 0.05) and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy (0.949; sig. > 0.8). The authors also performed confirmatory factor analysis to verify whether the three established dimensions can be used to measure linguistic success (Gómez-Parra et al., 2021). Participants 741 respondents comprised the national representative sample of the study. 472 (63.7%) were women, 263 (35.5%) were men, and one (0.8%) did not answer this question. The mean age was 39.9 (SD = 14.6), while the mean time of study in bilingual/multilingual education was 7.92 years (SD = 6.35). According to their work situation, 483 (65.18%) participants were employed, out of whom only 79 (10.66%) had participated in a Spanish bilingual or multilingual program; in terms of experience working abroad, 242 (32.66%) claimed having done so, of whom only 41 (5.53%) had studied in a bilingual or multilingual program. As mentioned before, nationality and educational stage in which respondents participated in bilingual and/or multilingual education were not considered for the study. Table 1 shows the distribution of participants (including frequencies and percentages). Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 285 Table 1: Distribution of Participants Item Participation in bilingual or multilingual education N % Gender Male Yes 51 6.88 No 212 28.61 Female Yes 89 12.01 No 383 51.69 N-A Yes 2 0.27 No 4 0.54 Total 741 Employed Yes Yes 79 10.66 No 404 54.52 No Yes 63 8.50 No 195 26.32 Total 741 Experience working abroad Yes Yes 41 5.53 No 201 27.13 No Yes 101 13.63 No 398 53.71 Total 741 Data analysis Data were analysed using SPSS V22.0. First, the 759 responses initially gathered were reduced to 741 after finding 18 participants who had provided contradictory information. Then, a descriptive analysis of the data was developed to get a general summary of the collected information. Finally, Mann-Whitney U and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to discover statistically significant differences (when sig. < 0.05; Field, 2013; Sokal & Rohlf, 2001) among groups considering the three grouping variables (i.e., participation in Spanish bilingual/multilingual education, employment, and experience work abroad). Results Table 2 shows the results of responses in the items of the questionnaire regarding employability, distinguishing between participants and non-participants of bilingual or multilingual education. Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 286 Table 2: Descriptive Results in the Dimension ‘Employability’ Item Participation in bilingual or multilingual education N Mean SD Bilingualism/languages favouring employability Yes 142 6.577 3.08123 No 599 5.778 3.33008 Total 741 Bilingualism/languages impacting job development Yes 142 6.485 3.10510 No 599 5.998 3.34899 Total 741 Use of second language to communicate with colleagues Yes 142 5.809 3.39573 No 599 4.609 3.31324 Total 741 Difficulty to communicate in the second language with colleagues Yes 142 4.288 3.06335 No 599 4.297 3.11247 Total 741 Use of second language abroad when travelling for work Yes 142 3.063 3.26541 No 599 6.101 3.42204 Total 741 Bilingualism/languages improving salary Yes 142 6.626 2.90416 No 599 5.581 3.26986 Total 741 As presented in Table 2, mean scores differ when considering participation in Spanish bilingual/multilingual education; when considering their employability, participants of bilingual programs score higher than their non-bilingual counterparts in 4 of the 6 questions. The results of Mann-Whitney U and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests applied to these 6 items are presented in Table 3, finding statistically significant differences (sig. < 0.05) in 3 of the 6 items in favour of bilingual education graduates. Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 287 Table 3: Significant Differences According to Participation in Bilingual/Multilingual Education Item Mann- Whitney U Wilcoxon W Z Sig. Bilingualism/languages favouring employability 36727.50 216427.50 -2.556 .011* Bilingualism/languages impacting job development 39181.00 218881.00 -1.478 .139 Use of second language to communicate with colleagues 33878.00 213578.00 -3.833 .000* Difficulty to communicate in the second language with colleagues 42063.00 221763.00 -.206 .837 Use of second language abroad when travelling for work 39618.50 219318.50 -1.288 .198 Bilingualism/languages improving salary 34791.50 214491.50 -3.406 .001* Note. Significant differences (sig. < 0.05) marked with (*) and in bold. Table 4 shows the descriptive values when considering the three grouping variables of the study (i.e., participation in Spanish bilingual/multilingual education, employment, and experience working abroad), the three dimensions (i.e., mobility, employability, and intercultural competence), and the total scale (i.e., linguistic success as a whole). Table 4: Descriptive Values Employed Experience working abroad Participation in bilingual or multilingual education N Min. Max. Mean SD Yes Yes Yes Mobility 32 5.00 50.00 38.4375 11.74442 Employ. 32 4.00 40.00 28.4375 11.30783 Intercult. 32 25.00 50.00 41.4375 8.09993 Total 32 59.00 140.00 108.3125 25.75497 No Mobility 162 5.00 50.00 39.3148 9.50676 Employ. 162 4.00 40.00 29.7346 8.65616 Intercult. 162 5.00 50.00 39.9198 10.23814 Total 162 14.00 140.00 108.9691 24.88718 No Yes Mobility 47 5.00 50.00 31.4894 14.18798 Employ. 47 4.00 40.00 23.9787 10.78342 Intercult. 47 13.00 50.00 36.6383 11.24901 Total 47 32.00 140.00 92.1064 32.3131 No Mobility 242 5.00 50.00 30.3967 13.57229 Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 288 Employ. 242 4.00 40.00 20.0413 11.27579 Intercult. 242 5.00 50.00 32.5868 13.69567 Total 242 14.00 140.00 83.0248 34.41761 No Yes Yes Mobility 9 19.00 50.00 37.4444 10.73675 Employ. 9 12.00 40.00 28.1111 11.03907 Intercult. 9 25.00 50.00 41.5556 8.83333 Total 9 56.00 140.00 107.1111 28.68991 No Mobility 39 5.00 50.00 32.6410 13.56367 Employ. 39 4.00 39.00 23.2564 11.62058 Intercult. 39 5.00 50.00 35.5641 13.13852 Total 39 14.00 135.00 91.4615 36.25483 No Yes Mobility 54 5.00 50.00 33.3333 13.08463 Employ. 54 4.00 40.00 24.3519 10.15197 Intercult. 54 10.00 50.00 36.1852 10.80020 Total 54 36.00 140.00 93.8704 30.24120 No Mobility 156 5.00 50.00 28.4295 14.89192 Employ. 156 4.00 40.00 18.5641 11.41147 Intercult. 156 5.00 50.00 31.1218 14.36184 Total 156 14.00 140.00 78.1154 36.21459 Table 5 shows the mean ranks and sum of ranks after the cross-tabulation of the three variables, which are necessary to calculate non-parametric Mann Whitney and Wilcoxon tests. Table 5: Ranks Employed Experience working abroad Participation in bilingual or multilingual education N Mean rank Sum of ranks Yes Yes Mobility Yes 32 98.34 3147.00 No 162 97.33 15768.00 Total 194 Employability Yes 32 96.48 3087.50 No 162 97.70 15827.50 Total 194 Intercultural Yes 32 101.16 3237.00 No 162 96.78 15678.00 Total 194 Total Yes 32 97.33 3114.50 No 162 97.53 15800.50 Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 289 Total 194 No Mobility Yes 47 150.88 7091.50 No 242 143.86 34813.50 Total 289 Employability Yes 47 169.83 7982.00 No 242 140.18 33923.00 Total 289 Intercultural Yes 47 164.72 7742.00 No 242 141.17 34163.00 Total 289 Total Yes 47 162.43 7634.00 No 242 141.62 34271.00 Total 289 No Yes Mobility Yes 9 27.83 250.50 No 39 23.73 925.50 Total 48 Employability Yes 9 30.44 274.00 No 39 23.13 902.00 Total 48 Intercultural Yes 9 29.72 267.50 No 39 23.29 908.50 Total 48 Total Yes 9 29.50 265.50 No 39 23.35 910.50 Total 48 No Mobility Yes 54 120.21 6491.50 No 156 100.41 15663.50 Total 210 Employability Yes 54 127.88 6905.50 No 156 97.75 15249.50 Total 210 Intercultural Yes 54 119.34 6444.50 No 156 100.71 15710.50 Total 210 Total Yes 54 124.84 6741.50 No 156 98.80 15413.50 Total 210 Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 290 Finally, Table 6 presents results of Mann-Whitney U and Wilcoxon W tests applied to the cross- tabulations considered in order to discover statistically significant differences between participants and non-participants of bilingual education programs. Table 6: Significant Differences According to Participation in Bilingual/Multilingual Education Employed Experience working abroad Mobility Employ. Intercult. Linguistic success Yes Yes Mann-Whitney U 2565.000 2559.500 2475.000 2586.500 Wilcoxon W 15768.000 3087.500 15678.000 3114.500 Z -.093 -.112 -.406 -.019 Sig. .926 .911 .685 .985 No Mann-Whitney U 5410.500 4520.000 4760.000 4868.000 Wilcoxon W 34813.500 33923.000 34163.000 34271.000 Z -.528 -2.228 -1.770 -1.562 Sig. .598 .026* .077 .118 No Yes Mann-Whitney U 145.500 122.000 128.500 130.500 Wilcoxon W 925.500 902.000 908.500 910.500 Z -.793 -1.416 -1.245 -1.189 Sig. .428 .157 .213 .234 Sig. (one-sided) .435 .164 .219 .239 No Mann-Whitney U 3417.500 3003.500 3464.500 3167.500 Wilcoxon W 15663.500 15249.500 15710.500 15413.500 Z -2.066 -3.148 -1.945 -2.714 Sig. .039* .002* .052 .007* Note. Significant differences (sig. < 0.05) marked with (*) and in bold. When considering participants in bilingual/multilingual education, statistically significant differences are found in mobility, employability, and global linguistic success in favour of graduates who are not employed and have not worked abroad. Likewise, significant discrepancies are appreciated in employability in favour of employed graduates who have not worked in another country. Discussion The number of subjects that have participated in the study (n = 741) has allowed the identification of how graduates from Spanish bilingual/multilingual programs perceive their international mobility, employability, intercultural competence, and global linguistic success in comparison to their non- bilingual/multilingual counterparts. Moreover, the results of the study have shown that, unlike individuals’ experiences working abroad, being employed may be a determinant factor in bilingual education graduates’ self-perceived employability. Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 291 When examining participants’ responses regarding their employability, different perceptions can be found depending on whether subjects have been enrolled in a bilingual/multilingual program or monolingual education (see Tables 2 and 3). Graduates from Spanish bilingual/multilingual programs are more positive regarding how their bilingualism/languages have favoured their employability and how this can improve their salary; likewise, they claim using the languages they speak more than graduates from monolingual education when communicating with their colleagues, and believing that their bilingualism/languages have a positive impact on the development of their job (although differences are not statistically significant in this respect; cf. Table 2 and Table 3). These findings are in line with previous studies (e.g., Callahan & Gándara, 2014; Porras, Ee, & Gándara, 2014) that show employers’ opinions about the potential of bilingual and multilingual education for the improvement of their businesses and the service they offer to their customers, who, as a result, are willing to pay more to employees who speak more than one language. This also links with research on students’ perceived advantages of bilingual/multilingual programs in different contexts (e.g., Yang, 2017), which reveals that enhanced employability is one of the key benefits of participating in bilingual/multilingual programs seen by learners. Although the results of these studies are not focused on Spain, they may help understand bilingual/multilingual education graduates’ high self- perceived employability skills. Data analysis has also shown that bilingual/multilingual graduates who are currently working but have not worked abroad have higher self-perceived employability skills than those who followed monolingual studies (see Table 6). This reveals that the idea of enhanced employability thanks to participation in bilingual or multilingual education seen among university undergraduates (Bozdoğan & Karlıdağ, 2013; Yang, 2017) prevails among employed graduates, who consider their educational background has helped them to find work. Likewise, graduates who have studied in a bilingual/multilingual program but are not employed and have not worked abroad have better perceptions of their mobility and employability competences as well as their global linguistic success than their counterparts, which may also suggest the prevalence of the idea of how beneficial bilingual and multilingual education is in terms of international orientation and job prospects (Goris, Denessen, & Verhoeven, 2019; Yang, 2017). Moreover, research has shown that students of bilingual and multilingual education consider their participation in this educational option may be an advantage for them to study and work in another country (e.g., Bozdoğan & Karlıdağ, 2013). The results of the present study, however, indicate that having worked in a different country does not seem to impact participants’ self-perceived linguistic success or employability. Similarly, studies in the field of intercultural learning have extensively analysed its essential role in bilingual and multilingual education, and especially in CLIL, and how these approaches can help enhance students’ intercultural awareness (Gómez-Parra, 2020; Yang, 2019). Nevertheless, this study has not found any hints of improved intercultural awareness when considering the combination of participation in Spanish bilingual/multilingual education programs, being employed, and having worked abroad. Conclusions This paper has reported on the effect of participation in Spanish bilingual/multilingual education programs, being currently employed, and having worked abroad on bilingual/multilingual education graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility, intercultural awareness, and global linguistic success. Findings show that having participated in bilingual/multilingual education and being employed are determining factors in graduates’ self-perceived employability skills, while work abroad, seems not to have impacted their perceptions of their linguistic success, employability, mobility, or intercultural awareness. Notwithstanding how employment and work-abroad experiences affect bilingual education graduates’ perceptions, participation in bilingual and multilingual programs certainly results in more positive views of linguistic success among alumni. Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 292 In relation to RQ1 (Do graduates from Spanish bilingual/multilingual education programs, who are currently employed and have worked abroad, have positive perceptions of their linguistic success?), results have shown that when considering a combination of these three variables, no effect on bilingual graduates’ perceptions of linguistic success, employability, mobility or intercultural competence is found; however, when graduates have studied in a bilingual/multilingual program but are not employed and have not worked abroad, they value their international mobility, employability skills and global linguistic success more positively than graduates from Spanish monolingual education. As for RQ2 (Do graduates from Spanish bilingual/multilingual education, who are currently employed, consider themselves more linguistically successful than those who did not participate in these programs?), the study has proved that bilingual/multilingual graduates currently working have higher self-perceived employability only if they have not worked in a foreign country; conversely, the other two dimensions and global linguistic success are not affected when these two variables are combined. Finally, regarding RQ3 (Do graduates from Spanish bilingual/multilingual education, who have worked abroad, consider themselves more linguistically successful than those who did not participate in these programs?), findings have revealed that experiences working abroad do not affect how Spanish bilingual graduates view their linguistic success. This study and its results should be interpreted considering some limitations. First, deeper analysis is still necessary to determine the relationship between the three established dimensions, participation in bilingual/multilingual education programs, employment, work abroad, and self- perceived linguistic success. Second, the sample could be expanded to allow generalising the results, comparing the perceptions of bilingual/multilingual graduates from different countries and contexts, and drawing more conclusions. Third, these findings may show bias since they are based on self- reported quantitative information (Althubaiti, 2016; Devaux & Sassi, 2016); in this sense, other instruments and a mixed-method approach could be used in future studies in order to gather more data. Notwithstanding these constraints, it is worth mentioning that the BESOC team is in the process of studying the correlation between these variables in different contexts, which will allow obtaining more data regarding the real effects of bilingual and multilingual education on graduates. Nevertheless, the implications of the study for educational policy are clear. The findings regarding the role of employment, work-abroad experiences and participation in bilingual/multilingual education should be seen as a motivation to promote this type of teaching and more specifically the CLIL approach. Nonetheless, a revision of how this type of education is planned and implemented at all educational levels cannot be overlooked. In this sense, the place that international mobility, employability, and intercultural awareness occupy in Spanish bilingual/multilingual education must be revisited so that graduates are fully prepared. Furthermore, these results suggest the perceived potential of Spanish bilingual/multilingual programs according to graduates, and they should be seen as an encouragement to continue examining how bilingual and multilingual education can be best implemented so as to help improve the professional competences of 21st-century citizens. Acknowledgement This paper was supported by the Project ‘Facing Bilinguals: Study of Bilingual Education Programmes’ Results through Social Data Analysis’ (Ref. no. EDU2017-84800-R), granted by a competitive call of the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation. Moreover, it was also supported by the Spanish Ministry of Education (Resolución de 5 de diciembre de 2017, de la Secretaría de Estado de Educación, Formación Profesional y Universidades, por la que se convocan ayudas para la formación de profesorado universitario, de los Subprogramas de Formación y de Movilidad incluidos en el Programa Estatal de Promoción del Talento y su Empleabilidad, en el marco del Plan Estatal de Investigación Científica y Técnica y de Innovación 2013-2016). Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 293 Disclosure statement No potential competing interest was reported by the authors. The authors also declare that they had no access to participants’ personal information/activity on Facebook and that responses were collected on a voluntary and anonymous basis. References Althubaiti, A. (2016). Information bias in health research: Definition, pitfalls, and adjustment methods. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, 9, 211–217. doi:10.2147/JMDH.S104807 Barrios, E., & Milla-Lara, M. D. (2020). CLIL methodology, materials and resources, and assessment in a monolingual context: An analysis of stakeholders’ perceptions in Andalusia. The Language Learning Journal, 48(1), 60–80. doi:10.1080/09571736.2018.1544269 Bower, K. (2021). Content and language integrated learning in England: Missed opportunities and ways forward. In U. Lanvers, A. S. Thompson, & M. East (Eds.), Language learning in Anglophone countries (pp. 267–287). Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-56654-8_14 Bozdoğan, D., & Karlıdağ, B. (2013). A case of CLIL practice in the Turkish context: Lending an ear to students. Asian EFL Journal Research Articles, 15(4), 89–110. https://bit.ly/2QrN8qw Callahan, R. M., & Gándara, P. C. (Eds.). (2014). The bilingual advantage: Language, literacy and the US labor market. Multilingual Matters. doi:10.1007/s10993-015-9362-2 Cenoz, J. (2015). Content-based instruction and content and language integrated learning: The same or different? Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 8–24. doi:10.1080/07908318.2014.1000922 Cenoz, J., Genesee, F., & Gorter, D. (2014). Critical analysis of CLIL: Taking stock and looking forward. Applied Linguistics, 35(3), 243–262. doi:10.1093/applin/amt011 Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. (2019). Minority languages, national state languages, and English in Europe: Multilingual education in the Basque Country and Friesland. Journal of Multilingual Education Research, 9, 61–77. https://bit.ly/3my6Psv Chumbay, J., & Quito-Ochoa, J. F. (2020). Language-driven CLIL: Developing written production at the secondary school level. English Language Teaching, 13(8), 74–90. doi:10.5539/elt.v13n8p74 Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Council for Cultural Cooperation, Education Committee, Language Policy Division. https://bit.ly/2CRb2mh Council of Europe. (2018). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Companion volume with new descriptors. Council of Europe. https://bit.ly/2MLNMdV Council of Europe. (2019). Council Recommendation of 22 May 2019 on a comprehensive approach to the teaching and learning of languages. Official Journal of the European Union, 62(5), 15–22. https://bit.ly/2OSkiwh Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Custodio-Espinar, M. (2019). CLIL teacher education in Spain. In K. Tsuchiya & M. D. Pérez-Murillo (Eds.), Content and language integrated learning in Spanish and Japanese contexts (pp. 313–337). Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-27443-6_13 Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007). Discourse in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms. John Benjamins. Dalton-Puffer, C., & Smit, U. (2013). Content and language integrated learning: A research agenda. Language Teaching, 46(4), 545–559. doi:10.1017/S0261444813000256 Devaux, M., & Sassi, F. (2016). Social disparities in hazardous alcohol use: Self-report bias may lead to incorrect estimates. European Journal of Public Health, 26(1), 129–134. doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckv190 Dockrell, J. E., Papadopoulos, T. C., Mifsud, C. L., Bourke, L., Vilageliu, O., Bešić, E., Seifert, S., Gasteiger- Klicpera, B., Ralli, A., Dimakos, I., Karpava, S., Martins, M., Sousa, O., Castro, S., Søndergaard-Knudsen, H., Donau, P., Haznedar, B., Mikulajová, M., & Gerdzhikova, N. (2021). Teaching and learning in a multilingual Europe: Findings from a cross-European study. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 1–28. doi:10.1007/s10212-020-00523-z Dos Santos, L. M. (2019). Bilingual English education: Expectation of parents who enrol their children in bilingual primary schools. International Journal of Instruction, 12(4), 747–766. https://bit.ly/2QrN8qw https://bit.ly/3my6Psv https://bit.ly/2CRb2mh https://bit.ly/2MLNMdV https://bit.ly/2OSkiwh Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 294 doi:10.29333/iji.2019.12448a European Commission. (1995). White paper on education and training – Teaching and learning – Towards the learning society. Commission of the European Communities. https://bit.ly/1Jq0nbT European Commission. (2003). Promoting language learning and linguistic diversity: An action plan 2004 – 2006. Commission of the European Communities. https://bit.ly/2m64fPc European Commission. (2020). The European Union: What it is and what it does. Publications Office of the European Union. doi:10.2775/41083 Eurydice European Unit. (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at school in Europe. Eurydice European Unit. https://bit.ly/2Q12P86 Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics (4th ed.). Sage. Fries-Tersch, E., Jones, M., & Siöland, L. (2021). Social Europe annual report on intra-EU labour mobility 2020. Publications Office of the European Union. doi:10.2767/075264 García-Calvo, S., Banegas, D. L., & Salaberri Ramiro, M. S. (2019). Satisfaction’s study in bilingual physical education after applying a schedule based on content and language integrated learning. Sportis. Scientific Journal of School Sport, Physical Education and Psychomotricity, 5(2), 305–322. doi:10.17979/sportis.2019.5.2.5235 García, O. (2009). Bilingual education in the 21st century: A global perspective. Wiley-Blackwell. Gómez-Parra, M. E. (2018). Bilingual and intercultural education (BIE): Meeting 21st century educational demands. Theoria et Historia Scientiarum, 15, 85–99. doi:10.12775/ths.2018.007 Gómez-Parra, M. E. (2020). Measuring intercultural learning through CLIL. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 9(1), 43–56. doi:10.7821/naer.2020.1.457 Gómez-Parra, M. E., Huertas-Abril, C. A., & Espejo-Mohedano, R. (2021). Key factors to evaluate the impact of bilingual programs: Employability, mobility and intercultural awareness. Porta Linguarum, 35, 93–109. doi:10.30827/portalin.v0i35.15453 Goris, J., Denessen, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2019). The contribution of CLIL to learners’ international orientation and EFL confidence. The Language Learning Journal, 47(2), 246–256. doi:10.1080/09571736.2016.1275034 Hipfner-Boucher, K., Lam, K., & Chen, X. (2014). The effects of bilingual education on the English language and literacy outcomes of Chinese-speaking children. Written Language & Literacy, 17(1), 116–138. doi:10.1075/wll.17.1.06hip Hsieh, Y.-J. T. (in press). Learning language and gaining employment: Problems for refugee migrants in Australia. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal. doi.:10.1108/EDI-12-2020-0358 Hus, V., & Hegedis, P. J. (2021). Attitudes of primary education students toward intercultural and bilingual education in primary schools. New Horizons in Education and Social Studies, 9, 118–127. doi:10.9734/bpi/nhess/v9/7491d Kirsch, C., Aleksić, G., Mortini, S., & Andersen, K. (2020). Developing multilingual practices in early childhood education through professional development in Luxembourg. International Multilingual Research Journal, 14(1), 1–19. doi:10.1080/19313152.2020.1730023 Li, P., & Grant, A. (2016). Second language learning success revealed by brain networks. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19(4), 657–664. doi:10.1017/S1366728915000280 Lorenzo, F., Granados, A., & Rico, N. (2021). Equity in bilingual education: Socioeconomic status and Content and Language Integrated Learning in monolingual Southern Europe. Applied Linguistics, 42(3), 393–413. doi.:10.1093/APPLIN/AMAA037 Lundberg, A. (2018). Multilingual educational language policies in Switzerland and Sweden. A meta-analysis. Language Problems and Language Planning, 42(1), 45–69. doi:10.1075/lplp.00005.lun Mancebo-Pérez, L. (2020). CLIL in pre-primary education: Total physical response through storytelling [Master’s thesis, University of Jaén / University of Córdoba]. https://bit.ly/3qPC3Nr Marzà, A. (2021). Meta-CLIL: When methodology and aim meet in initial teacher training. In M. L. Carrió-Pastor & B. Bellés-Fortuño (Eds.), Teaching language and content in multicultural and multilingual classrooms (pp. 253–292). Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-56615-9_10 Méndez, M. del C. (2013). The intercultural turn brought about by the implementation of CLIL programmes in Spanish monolingual areas: A case study of Andalusian primary and secondary schools. Language Learning Journal, 41(3), 268–283. doi:10.1080/09571736.2013.836345 Mitchell, R. (2021). Language and student mobility in Europe. In R. Mitchell & H. Tyne (Eds.), Language, mobility and study abroad in the contemporary European context (pp. 3–12). Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781003087953-1 https://bit.ly/1Jq0nbT https://bit.ly/2m64fPc https://bit.ly/2Q12P86 https://bit.ly/3qPC3Nr Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 295 Moore, S. C. K. (2021). A history of bilingual education in the US: Examining the politics of language policymaking. Multilingual Matters. https://bit.ly/3wIbFIz Muijs, D. (2010). Doing quantitative research in education with SPSS (2nd ed.). Sage. Nance, C. (2020). Bilingual language exposure and the peer group: Acquiring phonetics and phonology in Gaelic Medium Education. International Journal of Bilingualism, 24(2), 360–375. doi:10.1177/1367006919826872 OECD. (2005). The definition and selection of key competences. Executive summary. OECD. https://bit.ly/2XxyGNC Ozfidan, B., & Toprak, M. (2020). Cultural awareness on a bilingual education: A mixed method study. Multicultural Learning and Teaching, 15(1), 1–10. doi:10.1515/mlt-2017-0019 Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2018). Formación inicial del docente AICLE en España: Retos y claves. Estudios Franco-Alemanes, 10, 141–161. https://bit.ly/3p27PFi Pérez-Murillo, M. D. (2019). The internationalization of Spanish higher education: An interdisciplinary approach to initial teacher education for CLIL. In K. Tsuchiya & M. D. Pérez-Murillo (Eds.), Content and language integrated learning in Spanish and Japanese contexts (pp. 339–371). Springer International. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-27443-6_14 Pérez-Vidal, C., & Roquet, H. (2015). The linguistic impact of a CLIL science programme: An analysis measuring relative gains. System, 54, 80–90. doi:10.1016/j.system.2015.05.004 Porras, D. A., Ee, J., & Gándara, P. (2014). Employer preferences: Do bilingual applicants and employees experience an advantage? In R. M. Callahan & P. C. Gándara (Eds.), The bilingual advantage: Language, literacy and the US labor market (pp. 234–257). Multilingual Matters. https://bit.ly/2WtZ0b0 Rascón-Moreno, D. (2021). Student perspectives on dual immersion in California: A comparison with the perceptions of CLIL learners in Madrid. Linguistics and Education, 61(3), 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.linged.2020.100887 Renau-Renau, M. L., & Mas-Martí, S. (2019). A CLIL approach: Evolution and current situation in Europe and in Spain. International Journal of Science and Research, 8(12), 1110–1119. doi:10.21275/ART20203503 Romanowski, P. (2018). CLIL’s role in facilitating intercultural learning. Applied Linguistics Papers, 25(2), 71–87. https://bit.ly/2IBCpGf Sasajima, S. (2019). Teacher development: J-CLIL. In K. Tsuchiya & M. D. Pérez-Murillo (Eds.), Content and language integrated learning in Spanish and Japanese contexts (pp. 287–312). Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-27443-6_12 Sokal, R. R., & Rohlf, F. J. (2001). Biometry: The principles and practice of statistics in biological research (3rd ed.). W. H. Freeman. Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273–1296. doi:10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2 Terra, S. E. L. (2018). Bilingual education in Mozambique: A case-study on educational policy, teacher beliefs, and implemented practices. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 24(1), 16–30. doi:10.1080/13670050.2018.1441803 Theobald, M. (2019). Scaffolding storytelling and participation with a bilingual child in a culturally and linguistically diverse preschool in Australia. Research on Children and Social Interaction, 3(1–2), 224–247. doi:10.1558/rcsi.37294 Thierry, G. (2016). Neurolinguistic relativity: How language flexes human perception and cognition. Language Learning, 66(3), 690–713. doi:10.1111/lang.12186 Tudor, I. (2008). The language challenge for higher education institutions in Europe, and the specific case of CLIL. In J. M. Castell & J. M. Mestres-Serra (Eds.), El Multilingüisme a les universitats en l’espai Europeu d’educació superior (pp. 41–64). Institut d’Estudis Catalans. doi:10.2436/15.0100.01.16 Turner, M. (2021). Drawing on students’ diverse language resources to facilitate learning in a Japanese-English bilingual program in Australia. Language Teaching Research, 25(1), 61–80. doi:10.1177/1362168820938824 Valdés-Sánchez, L., & Espinet, M. (2020). Coteaching in a science-CLIL classroom: Changes in discursive interaction as evidence of an English teacher’s science-CLIL professional identity development. International Journal of Science Education, 42(14), 2426–2452. doi:10.1080/09500693.2019.1710873 Van Buuren, S. (2018). Flexible imputation of missing data (2nd ed.). Chapman and Hall/CRC. Watson, R. (2015). Quantitative research. Nursing Standard, 29(31), 1–7. doi:10.7748/ns.29.31.44.e8681 Yang, W. (2017). Tuning university undergraduates for high mobility and employability under the content and language integrated learning approach. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, https://bit.ly/3wIbFIz https://bit.ly/2XxyGNC https://bit.ly/3p27PFi https://bit.ly/2WtZ0b0 https://bit.ly/2IBCpGf Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 296 20(6), 607–624. doi:10.1080/13670050.2015.1061474 Yang, W. (2019). Developing tertiary level CLIL learners’ intercultural awareness with a self-produced coursebook integrating content and language. Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes, 7(3), 329–347. doi:10.22190/jtesap1903329y Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 297 Appendix: Questionnaire Section 1: Personal and general information – Age – Gender – Languages you speak – Country/countries where you went to school – Country where you live now – Other countries you have lived in – Which language/s did you learn at school? – In a bilingual programme? – If yes, for how long? – Are you employed? – How much do you use your second language as written? – How much do you use your second language as oral? – How much do you think your bilingualism/languages help/s you learn more languages? Section 2: Mobility – Have you ever worked abroad? – How much do you think your bilingualism/languages favour/s your mobility abroad? – How much do you use your second language/s abroad when you travel for pleasure? – Do you feel more international due to your second language? – How much do you think your second language makes you more willing to travel abroad? – How much does your second language influence your destination when travelling abroad? – Have you ever followed a training course abroad? – How much do you think your bilingualism/languages make/s you willing to follow training courses abroad? Section 3: Employability – How much do you think your bilingualism/languages has/have favoured your employability? – How much do you think your second language has impacted the development of your job? – How much do/would you use your second language to communicate with your colleagues at work? – How difficult do/would you find to communicate in your second language with your colleagues? – How much do/would you use your second language abroad when you travel for work? – E6. How much do you think your bilingualism/languages can improve your salary? Section 4: Intercultural competence – How much do you think your bilingualism/languages make/s you a citizen of the world? – How much do you think your bilingualism/languages favour/s your understanding and acceptance of others? – How much do you think your bilingualism/languages favour/s your adaptation to other cultures abroad? – How much do you think your bilingualism/languages make/s you willing to live in a foreign country? – How much do you think your bilingualism/languages has/have impacted the way you are? – How much do you think your bilingualism/languages has/have impacted the way you live? – How much do you think your bilingualism/languages make/s you evolve as an intercultural individual? Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., Gómez-Parra, M. E., Espejo-Mohedano, R., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2021). Employment, work abroad and Bilingual Education: Spanish bilingual graduates’ self-perceived employability, mobility and intercultural competence. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 12(2), 279-298. 298 – How much do you think your bilingualism/languages make/s you competent in different cultural contexts? – How much do you consider that being bilingual/plurilingual helped you understand/feel empathy with foreign citizens? – How much do you think your bilingualism/languages help/s you have access to and enjoy a wider spectrum of cultural products (e.g., books, films, TV series, music, videos, video games, etc.)? Note. Source: Gómez-Parra et al., 2021