THE STUDY OF INTEGRATIVE AND INSTRUMENTAL MOTIVATION OF STUDENTS LEARNING ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE IN LAUSANNE, SWITZERLAND

The present article investigates the impact of two orientations - integrative and instrumental – on the motivation to learn English as a foreign language. It provides an empirical study based on a questionnaire answered by 197 middle and high schoolers in Lausanne, Switzerland. The focus lies on the analysis of the motivation orientations of these two groups of students according to three main variables: curriculum, plurilingualism and stay in an English speaking country. The study finds that for the informants integrative and instrumental motivation seem of similar importance. Important further influences on motivation were multilinguality and stays abroad.


INTRODUCTION 1
The present article investigates two orientations -integrative and instrumental -that impact the motivation to learn English as a foreign language. The study employs concepts elaborated by Lambert (1959, 1972), by Gardner (1982), Dörnyei (2009aDörnyei ( , 2009b, and Dörnyei and Ushioda (2011). Based on a questionnaire answered by middle school and high school students, we analyse whether teenagers' motivation in Lausanne is driven more by an integrative or an instrumental purpose at different stages of their education. To do so, we have carried out a qualitative and quantitative questionnaire study of 103 middle schoolers aged 13-15 who have been learning English for approximately two years, and 94 high schoolers aged 17-18 who have been learning English for approximately five or six years and are about to pass their high school leaving certificate. As English has become an important tool for supra-regional communication in Swiss multilingual society, this study aims to find whether specific trends emerge in specific contexts of this multilingual country. We thus study these two groups of students according to several variables: level of education, plurilingualism and stay in an English speaking country. In this questionnaire-based study, we thus analyse whether middle schoolers' and high schoolers' motivation in Lausanne is influenced by instrumental or integrative motivation -as well as the question how these two categories of students react with respect to the orientation of the curriculum, plurilingualism and stay in an English speaking country.
The article is structured as follows: in chapter 2, we define the integrative and instrumental types of motivation orientations. We also provide a brief overview of the Swiss linguistic context and present our expectations. In chapter 3, we will present our methodology and the questionnaire. In chapter 4, we will analyse and discuss the results. Finally, chapter 5 will be dedicated to the conclusion.

DEFINING THE CONCEPTS OF INTEGRATIVE AND INSTRUMENTAL MOTIVATION
The construct of motivation has generated a significant amount of literature among scholars, and it appears that there is "little consensus on its conceptual range of reference" (Dörnyei and Ushioda 2011: 3): Dörnyei and Ushioda state that the term "motivation is responsible for why people decide to do something, how long they are willing to sustain the activity, [and] how hard they are going to pursue it" (2011: 4). Gardner (1985:10) likewise stresses the importance of the desire to learn, but also the satisfaction obtained, in order to sustain the necessary work and strife in learning a second language. Gardner further insists on the fact that when doing such an activity, satisfaction must be "linked with a striving to do so, [otherwise] it is not truly motivation" (1985: 11). Gardener andLambert (1959, 1972) highlight two types of motivation orientations in foreign language learning: integrative and instrumental. Integrative motivation is defined as "reflecting a sincere and personal interest in the people and culture represented by the other group" (Gardner and Lambert 1972:132, as quoted in Ushioda and Dörnyei 2009:2). Dörnyei -without taking issue with Gardner's definition of integrativeness -takes this notion further. He states that "the term [integrativeness] is not so much related to any actual, or metaphorical, integration into an L2 community, as to some more basic identification process within the individual's self-concept" (Dörnyei and Csizér 2002: 453). Dörnyei proceeds to qualify the individual's self-concept as the "ideal L2 self, which is the L2-specific facet of one's ideal self': if the person we would like to become speaks an L2, the 'ideal L2 self' is 'a powerful motivator' to learn the L2, because of the desire to reduce the discrepancy between our actual and ideal selves" (Dörnyei 2009b: 29). Taguchi et al. (2009) test Dörnyei's research and come to the conclusion that "integrativeness can be interpreted as being an L2specific facet of an L2 learner's ideal self." In other words, they provide "empirical evidence for the validity of equating the ideal L2 self with integrativeness" (Taguchi et al. 2009: 67).
As far as instrumental motivation is concerned, the concept refers to the "pragmatic utility of learning the L2" (Dörnyei 2009b: 26). In other words, if students learn the L2 "because it would be useful in obtaining a job or if it ma[kes] them better educated," they would be classified as instrumentally oriented (Gardner 1985: 22). The concept of instrumentality, similarly to the one of integrativeness, has undergone developments thanks to subsequent research. Higgins (1987, 1998, in Dörnyei 2009b further divided the concept of instrumentality into two different types that she labels instrumentality with a promotion and a prevention focus. The former refers to "goals and hopes of becoming professionally and personally successful in the L2." The latter "deals with duties and obligations that individuals perceive they have towards others" (Taguchi et al. 2009: 67).
In a recent large-scale, complex study, Heinzmann (2013) investigates motivations to learn English and French in primary students from the Canton of Fribourg. For these very young learners, the author finds "self-concept", learning anxiety and positive attitudes towards the target language to be key variables impacting on motivation to learn these languages (Heinzmann 2013: 208).

THE SWISS CONTEXT
This section presents a brief overview of the status of English in Switzerland, as well as the status of English in the education system of the Canton de Vaud. In fact, these aspects are important in order to fully understand the discussion of the results in chapter 4. Switzerland is a multilingual country where "language and nation are not congruent" (Dürmüller 1997: 9). In fact, there are four national languages with a great disparity in terms of speakers, territory and status. The German speaking part of the country is the largest, followed by the French speaking part, and finally the Italian part. As far as Romansh is concerned, it is spoken by less than 1% of the Swiss population and is not considered an official language. On top of these four languages, many other languages are spoken in Switzerland due to important waves of immigration and the openness of the Swiss economy.
The non-national languages, along the same lines as the national languages, are not distributed evenly across Switzerland. English is mainly found in the urban areas of Zurich, Zug, Basel and the Lake Geneva region (Lüdi and Werlen 2005: 18). The report highlights that in the German and French regions, English is the most widely spoken second language in both the family and the workplace, more frequently used than other national languages (Lüdi and Werlen 2005: 22). English has experienced the largest progression between 1990 and 2000 in both sectors. In the French part of Switzerland, English is spoken by 17.7% of the population, more often than German (15.4%) and Italian (6.8%). There has therefore been a massive increase in the use of English as a foreign language in the French part of Switzerland (Lüdi and Werlen 2005: 50).
Given the great disparity in terms of speakers, territory and status with respect to the four national languages, and the rising importance of English as the most popular second-language among the Swiss population, Murray, Wegmüller and Khan (2000) state that English may be generalised as an "instrumental language" among the different linguistic groups in the country. In fact, the Swiss people who took part in the survey claimed that they mastered English better than any of the other national languages (Murray, Wegmüller and Khan 2000: 3).
After having reviewed the role of the English language in Switzerland, let us turn to the education system in the Canton de Vaud. It is first important to point out that each Swiss canton has their own education system, which is based only on Federal recommendation (Conférence des Directeurs de l'Instruction Publique). The main elements of the education system in the Canton de Vaud are as follows.
At the end of primary school (8P), students are divided into different programmes according to their aptitudes. They are placed in a three-year VG programme (9VG-10VG-11VG) standing for Voie Générale or a three-year VP programme (9VP-10VP-11VP) standing for Voie Prégymnasiale. Students who have completed a VG education are then given the choice to either start a vocational training (Formation Professionnelle Initiale) or attend an Ecole de Culture Générale (ECG) at high school. Students with a VP education typically later enter a Voie Maturité (M) at high school that prepares them to enrol at University.
The importance given to English in the educational programme has changed over the last few years. The Swiss economy is based mainly on exports. Partly for this reason, English has acquired a more prominent place in the language repertoire in Switzerland. In the past, Swiss students in the Canton de Vaud began learning English at middle school, at the age of twelve. Today, due to the perceived importance of English as a second language, students begin to learn English as of the age of ten, that is at the end of primary school. The growing importance of learning English has also impacted the educational system of other cantons. In Zurich, a portion of the population has expressed an interest in having primary school students learn English as a second language before learning French. In an article published in Le Temps, a newspaper based in Geneva, Modoux speaks of guerre des langues (war of languages). He observes that: Des signaux inquiétants se sont multipliés ces derniers mois. Dans plusieurs cantons alémaniques, des initiatives réclament un allègement de l'enseignement des langues «étrangères» au niveau primaire. Apprendre l'anglais et le français, c'est trop, se plaignent surtout des enseignants, mais aussi des parents. Des politiciens relaient ces doléances. La Suisse romande est sur la défensive car elle a compris que le français ferait les frais d'un repli alémanique sur une seule langue étrangère -forcément l'anglais.
The importance of English has also had a large impact at the high school level in the French speaking part of Switzerland, where English has become viewed as more essential than German. In fact, for example, high school students now have the option to leave out German, yet English remains compulsory. This situation was anticipated in the report by Murray, Wegmüller and Khan (2000: 3) stating that English may acquire the status of first foreign language at school, before other national languages. In the next section, we will turn to the expectations of our results which will be discussed in chapter 4.

EXPECTATIONS
We expect motivation to learn English in Switzerland to be multifaceted, that is both instrumental and integrative: Andres and Watts (1993: 118) state that learners may be driven by instrumental motives, all the while expressing a strong desire "to assimilate to the culture of the native language community". Along the same lines, Taguchi et al. (2009: 70) state that "it is reasonable that integrativeness is determined by both attitudes toward the L2 speakers and pragmatic incentives if it is an aspect of our ideal self to be personally agreeable and professionally successful" (Taguchi et al. 2009: 67).
Given the rising importance of English in the multilingual context of Switzerland, we expect the students to be interested primarily in the utility of learning English for their future jobs, earning a higher salary, or simply studying and living abroad. In fact, according to Lambert (1967, in Andres andWatts 1993: 118), if a language is used as a lingua franca in a given country, instrumental motivation to learn the language will dominate. The main reason for such a claim is that English will be assessed as a highly useful and indispensable tool for supra-regional communication. During a previous study run in 1988, Dürmüller (in Andres and Watts 1993: 118) found that at the high school level, in the German speaking part of Switzerland, instrumental motivation was stronger.
In this study, we analyse whether middle schoolers and high schoolers' motivation in Lausanne follows the same trend as Dürmüller's findings -that is a stronger instrumental motivation -as well as study how these two categories of students react with respect to the orientation of the curriculum, plurilingualism and stay in an English speaking country.

MEASUREMENT TOOLS
The current study employed a questionnaire in French following the procedure suggested in Dörnyei's work (2003Dörnyei's work ( , 2012 and based on the main components of Dörnyei et al.'s Hungarian studies (2006). Furthermore, other items relevant to our study were added to the questionnaire, e.g. an open-ended question where students were free to give their opinion on the benefits of learning English.
The questionnaire comprises three major parts: the first consists of items measuring the integrative dimension, that is the learners' attitudes toward the L2 community of the target language (questions 1 to 8), and the ideal L2 self (questions 1 to 8 on page 2), which refers to the "L2 specific facet of one's ideal self" (Dörnyei 2005: 106). The second part consists of items measuring the instrumental dimension, with a further breakdown to assess the promotion (questions 9 to 16) and prevention (questions 17 to 25) dimensions of instrumentality. We also gave the students the opportunity to express themselves in a qualitative question where they were free to choose three reasons pertaining to the benefits of studying English. Finally, the last part is composed of questions about the learners' background information (e.g. gender, age, nationality, class name, school name, orientation of the curriculum, stay abroad, mother tongue and languages spoken).
The final version of the questionnaire (see appendix 7.1) adopted both statement-type and question-type items; the former were measured by five-point Likert scales while the latter by five-point rating scale with "absolutely true" anchoring the left end and "not true at all" anchoring the right end. The total number of questionnaire items was thirty-four and, following Gardner (2010) rather than Dörnyei, Csizér and Németh (2006), contained both positively and negatively keyed items in order to facilitate testing instrumentality with prevention focus..

DATA COLLECTION
The data was collected in a middle-school and a high school in the city centre of Lausanne in November and December 2013. A total of 197 students ranging from 12 to 21 years old (average age 16.10) participated in the survey. All the informants live in the Canton de Vaud and study in Lausanne, and they are in the last two years of middle school -10th and 11th grades -, or at high school -1st, 2nd and 3rd year.

PROCESSING AND ANALYSING DATA
First of all, we converted the question-type items into numbers. "Absolutely true" anchoring the left end was converted into 5 and "not true at all" anchoring the right end into 1. Then, the data obtained were keyed in and analysed in Microsoft Excel. For each question, we calculated the mean, the mode and the standard deviation. These statistical tools enabled us to draw charts which provide an easier reading of the discussion of the results. We also ran chisquare tests to investigate whether the differences between the nominal variables were significant. We used p < 0.05 as the level of significance.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
We will first provide a broad overview of the results, taking into account both integrative and instrumental dimensions. Then we explore the data further, and analyse how the level of education, the number of languages spoken by the informants and the time spent in an English speaking country interact with the integrative and instrumental motivation to learn English. In the charts below, the integrative dimension is based on the questions focusing on the attitudes towards the community (questions 1 to 8), as well as the ideal L2 self (questions 1 to 8 on page 2 of the questionnaire). Gardner associates the concept of integrativeness with attitudes towards the community, while Dörnyei also adds the ideal L2 self to this dimension. Instrumentality consists of both instrumentality promotion (questions 9 to 16) and instrumentality prevention (questions 17 to 25).

OVERALL RESULTS
As discussed in section 3, the integrative dimension is comprised of the learners' attitudes toward the L2 community of the target language and the ideal L2 self. The instrumental dimension consists of both instrumentality promotion and prevention. Figure 1 below provides a global overview of the results of our survey. 5 represents "very much" and 1 "not at all." Among the variables that constitute the integrative dimension, we can see that the results are close, 3.79 for the attitudes towards the L2 community and 3.51 for the ideal L2 self, representing a variation of 7.38%. This result is extremely statistically significant at t (392) = 4.34, p < 0.0001 according to an independent samples t-test. This validates Dörnyei's (2009b: 27) assumptions and goes along the same lines as Tagushi et al's (2009: 67) findings. As stated in section 2, if a person's ideal self is to become proficient in the L2, s/he will automatically have a positive disposition toward the L2 speakers and culture.
As far as the instrumental dimension is concerned, the results show a larger difference between the instrumentality promotion (3.60) and prevention (2.91) variables, representing a variation of 19.16%, also extremely statistically significant at t (392) = 5.66, p < 0.0001 according to an independent samples t-test. Students' motivation in Lausanne to master English is therefore driven more by personal hopes and aspirations of becoming successful students and professionals than by the mere objective of obtaining good results, passing an exam or not disappointing parents. Therefore, the higher score achieved for instrumentality promotion shows that the informants value English as an important tool, and that they consider it useful for their future studies and careers. This seems to align with Lambert's assumptions (1967 in Andres andWatts 1993: 118): he states that the growing importance of English as a supra-regional tool for communication between the different linguistic regions of Switzerland should make instrumental motivation to learn the L2 stronger.
That said, our results need to be put into perspective since both the integrative and instrumental dimensions are very close. Hence, it is very difficult to draw clear conclusions. We view different potential reasons for this outcome based on my personal experience as a teacher.
First, for the informants investigated in this study in Lausanne, frequent communication with individuals from other linguistic regions is a less prominent feature at this stage in their life. Therefore, the subjects in the sample do not yet consider English as an instrument for supra-regional communication.
Second, whenever there is supra-regional communication, it is very often held among family members, and in the language of the territory. As an example, interregional marriages bring individuals from the German and the French regions together. We have also often heard of German speaking grandparents communicating in French with their Romand grandchildren. In most cases, communication is not held in English and thus, the students in our sample may be too young to become fully aware of the pragmatic utility of speaking English in supra-regional communication. For a future research topic, it could be interesting to compare whether young professionals who are completing their vocational training after middle school, would respond similarly, being already in a professional setting.
Third, the content of the teaching programmes may impact on integrative or instrumental motivation of the students to learn the language. The middle school curriculum focuses more on the pragmatic facets of learning English than the high school curriculum, such as introducing oneself, ordering food at a restaurant, asking for directions, etc. We can also say that there are more tests at middle school than high school, influencing the results of the instrumentality prevention questions of those pupils. By contrast, the high school curriculum seems to insist more on objectives in terms of culture and literature (Département de la Formation, de la Jeunesse et de la Culture: 25).

EDUCATION LEVEL: MIDDLE SCHOOL -HIGH SCHOOL
We will now move on to the analysis of whether the levels of education -namely middle school and high school -impact on the motivation orientation. The results were statistically significant according to chi-square (p = 0.003).  For each variable, the trend is similar. As far as the attitudes towards the native community are concerned, middle schoolers obtain an average of 3.89 and high schoolers 3.68. The attraction towards the L2 group seems to have a large impact among the students, even if it has become very difficult -due to the globalization process -to identify clearly with an L2 English speaking community. One explanation could be that teenagers are still very much fascinated by English pop songs, Hollywood movies, and the "Californian dream." This could even be more so for the younger students at the middle school level.
As far as the instrumental dimension is concerned, the promotion and prevention variables vary to a certain extent. At the high school level, the variation represents 27.81% meaning that students are more motivated by promotional incentives, such as becoming successful students and professionals, than purely preventional motives, such as avoiding poor results. This result is statistically extremely significant at t (392) = 6.72, p < 0.0001 according to an independent samples t-test.
In middle school, the same trend can be outlined, that is, instrumentality promotion is a stronger motivation to learn the L2 than instrumentality prevention. Interestingly, this motivation is seen less at the high school level, the variation of 20.63% is statistically extremely significant at p < 0.0001, t (204) = 5.66 according to an independent samples t-test. Yet, surprisingly, the students' answers to instrumentality prevention questions represent the biggest difference between high schoolers and middle schoolers. Middle schoolers' average is 3.15 and high schoolers' 2.66, representing a variation of 15.64%, which is statistically extremely significant at p < 0.0001, t(392) = 5.24 according to an independent samples t-test. This may explain part of the conclusions in the preceding section. It was found that middle schoolers are more motivated to learn the language in order to obtain good grades than high schoolers, corroborating my experience as a middle school teacher.

THE INFLUENCE OF THE NUMBER OF LANGUAGES SPOKEN
In this section, we will analyse whether the number of languages spoken by the informants impacts on their integrative and instrumental motivation to learn the L2. For the sake of this exercise, we decided to analyse the results for the students who speak only one language, and those who speak two or more languages. The results are statistically significant according to chi-square (p = 0.027). This is noteworthy as Heinzmann (2013) found that the difference between mono-and bilinguality was not significant in her data.
We can see in Figures 3 and 4 that the students who speak more than one language show higher results for all the dimensions. Within the integrative dimension, students who speak more than one language have a more positive attitude towards the L2 community (+6.48%) and a stronger ideal L2 self (+15.44%). This is significant according to the t-test (p = 0.006). These results are not surprising. First, students who master another language, even if it is not English, have probably experienced closer and deeper contacts with an L2 community. We assume here that an L2 cannot be school learnt at the age of the informants in the sample and that mastering an L2 requires either a long stay abroad or being the family language. Consequently, these students are able to understand the L2 community better than those students who have never interacted with other L2 communities due to the language barrier. As a result, students who speak more than one language are more open, show more positive feelings towards the L2 community, and show have more respect for other cultures and ways of life (Dörnyei 2009b: 22-23). These features may impact on their intercultural communication skills.
Second, students who speak more than one language obtain a higher average for the questions testing the ideal L2 self (+15.44%, extremely significant according to a t-test, p < 0.0001). Those students seem to value the importance of being able to speak to an L2 community and may want to transpose the same positive feelings towards English L2 communities. In other words, they would like to reach the same level of satisfaction with English L2 communities, and, they are more motivated to reduce the discrepancy between their actual level of English and their desired level of English. The prospect of interacting with an English L2 community, as they do with their current L2 community, may be very motivating to them. These findings are in line with Dörnyei's (2009b:27)  Attitudes towards the community Ideal L2 Self Instrumentality promotion Instrumentality prevention that students whose "ideal self is to become proficient in the L2 will automatically have a positive disposition toward the L2 speakers and culture" (Dörnyei ibid.).
As far as the instrumental dimension is concerned, students who speak more than one language obtain a statistical mean of 3.78 to the instrumentality promotion questions, and those speaking only one language, 3.46 (the results are statistically very significant according to an unpaired t-test, P = 0.0099). This variation of 9.23% can be explained by Dörnyei's findings. In fact, promotional instrumentality refers to the potential pragmatic gains of L2 proficiency and concerns "hopes, wishes and aspirations" towards a desired end-state (Higgins 1998: 5). Here, too, if the informants' pragmatic goal is to exchange with an L2 English community, as they do with the community of the second or third language they speak, the informants will draw more motivation from this dimension.
Regarding the instrumentality prevention questions, students who speak more than one language answered on average 3.01 to these questions, and those speaking only one language, 2.83. This is a small variation of 6.16% that concerns "the duties, obligations, and responsibilities" (Higgins 1998: 5) that will ensure the avoidance towards a feared end-state. The difference is statistically not significant, p = 0,15, according to an unpaired t-test. Correspondingly, we do not think that being multilingual influences the answer to these questions to a great extent. Yet, we do find this result rather surprising in the sense that an individual who speaks more than one language should value instrumentality prevention less. His/her ease in many languages should mitigate the feeling of fear and obligation. In any event, what must be kept in mind is that a plurilingual repertoire may have a positive impact on the motivation to learn other languages.

STAY IN AN ENGLISH SPEAKING COUNTRY
In this section, we will analyse whether students' time in an English speaking country influences their integrative and instrumental motivation to learn the L2. In our sample, the range goes from "never abroad" to two months abroad. Figures 5 and 6 illustrate that the students who spent time in an English speaking country show higher levels of integrative motivation than those who have never been abroad. Moreover, it seems that the more time they spent abroad, the more this trend is reinforced. The figures show that students who spent a month abroad obtain a stronger mean for the attitudes towards the community, and the ideal L2 self by respectively 9.01% and 16.46%. For those who spent two months abroad, the corresponding variations are 2.45% and 25.86%.
We suspect that the explanation for these variations is similar to the ones discussed in the previous section. Students who have experienced privileged contacts with the L2 community have a better knowledge of its culture and way of life. In addition, the more time students spent in an English speaking country, the more eager they are to learn English in order to integrate into their new community. Our results are in line with Gardner's (2002) conclusions; he states that "in the extreme, this might involve complete identification with the community (and possibly even withdrawal from one's original group), but more commonly it might well involve integration within both communities" (as quoted in Dörnyei 2009b: 22-23).
The accentuation of the variation is even stronger for the answers to the ideal L2 self questions. When students are keen on integrating into the L2 community, their desire to reduce the discrepancy between their ideal and their actual self grows stronger overtime. The more they wish to integrate, the more they want to master the English language and successfully interact with their peers. Our results show this to be the biggest source of motivation.  Concerning the data for instrumentality, the variations are less pronounced than for integrativeness, yet a trend emerges which shows that students who have spent time abroad are less responsive to this dimension, and to a much greater extent to the instrumentality prevention questions. One of the reasons for these variations may be that those students who spent time with the L2 community are more motivated to learn the language in order to better understand the culture and to communicate than they are affected by prevention measures. In fact, they are not motivated to learn the language to avoid a "feared end-state." They feel they want to learn the language for themselves, more than for potential "duties, responsibilities and obligations [they] have towards others (Dörnyei 2009b: 18). However, those students who are going abroad may already be more motivated than the other students in the first place. As a result, the directionality explained above does not necessarily follow as described.
On the instrumentality promotion side, we were surprised that our results do not show a stronger variation for the answers to these questions. As promotional instrumentality deals with hopes, wishes and aspirations (Higgins 1998: 5) it is the pragmatic utility of speaking English fluently in order to integrate as much as possible within the L2 community. Therefore, we would have expected the students to be more motivated by this dimension.

ANALYSIS OF THE QUALITATIVE QUESTION
At the end of the quantitative questions, students were given the opportunity to answer the following question "What benefits do you think learning English will have for you?" We summarized the answers Table 1, from the most to the least recurrent occurrences. We will then comment on the answers.  English is an international language that will enable me to communicate with lots of people around the world.

2.
English is important to have a good job and better opportunities.
3. I want to travel around the world and to be able to have a conversation with other travellers and the locals.

4.
I would like to speak English to make new friends and have deeper contacts with them.

5.
English is important to be a successful student and/or study abroad later.
6. I would like to understand English movies, songs, books, or computer games.

7.
Knowing English makes me a better educated person.
8. I would like to live in the USA (or England) later.

9.
English will enable me to have a higher salary.
10. I will be proud of speaking English.
11. I want to read English literature.

I love English.
We can observe at first sight that the answers given by both high school and middle school students give as much importance to the integrative as to the instrumental dimension. Answers 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 9 deal with instrumentality and answers 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11 and 12 deal with integrativeness. The results are therefore quite similar to the ones provided for the quantitative questions. Again, motivation is multifaceted. It seems that the informants in our sample are both driven by instrumental and integrative motives since they are interested in high achievements, as well as the English culture. We decided to include answer number 3 in both dimensions since it mixes an integrative and an instrumental aspect. It is instrumental in the sense that speaking English allows people to travel more easily around the world, but also integrative since students attach an importance to developing contacts with the locals. This being said, there is a great disparity in terms of the number of occurrences of the benefits that students would like to draw from the English language. We cannot provide precise percentages since the question is open-ended, but we can outline some trends. While reading through the questionnaires, we realise that the first three answers were much more popular among the informants. The first "English is an international language that will enable me to communicate with lots of people around the world" , which could refer to both integrative or instrumental motivation, was proposed by approximately two thirds of the informants. The following two were also very popular, and were written by about half of the students. Furthermore, answers 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 were provided by about one quarter, and answers 9 to 12 were more marginal.
The reason for this outcome may be due to the way we formulated the question. In fact, when we prepared the questionnaire, we did not think of the fact that the word "benefit" has a connotation which leads the informants to give instrumental reasons for learning English first. In our case, the students immediately thought of pragmatic aspects of learning English such as work, travel and communication around the world. In order to be less biased, the replacement of the word "benefit" with a softer one like "advantage," or the proposal of a wider question such as "why do you like English?" could have provided different results.
Moreover, it is interesting to highlight that the students' answers deal mainly with instrumentality promotion. None of the students provided a negatively worded answer that would prevent them from attaining a "feared-end state." Similarly to the quantitative results, the informants are less sensitive to learning English for preventative measures. We also noticed that the only students who said that they were learning English in order to get good test scores were at middle school level, confirming our previous quantitative results.
Concerning the answers to integrativeness, students seem integratively motivated by making new English speaking friends, understanding English movies, songs or books. High schoolers are also keener on learning English literature.
Further, we realised that informants are more inclined towards the American L2 community than the English L2 community. This is the reason why we put "or England" between brackets in question 8. Most students are fascinated by the "American dream," and see themselves studying in prestigious universities like Harvard or Stanford. As an example, the picture below shows the drawing of a student in love with the United States of America. Consequently, we would say that both the attitudes towards the community, and the ideal L2 self dimensions weigh equally.
Illustration 1: drawing by a student on the questionnaire.

CONCLUSION
The overall results of this study display very close correspondences between the integrative and instrumental dimensions. Overall it seems difficult to differentiate both dimensions clearly, corroborating Tagushi et al. 's findings (2009: 67). People may have an interest in the learning process, high achievements and/or the English culture.
This situation proves unusual in the multilingual context of Switzerland where English should play an important role as a supra-regional communication tool (Lambert 1967, in Andres and Watts: 118). We ascribed this situation mainly to the young age of the informants and their lack of communication with citizens in other linguistic regions. Also, whenever there is interregional communication, the latter takes place more in a family context and therefore in the language spoken in the territory.
We also found that the components of the integrative dimension -attitudes towards the L2 community and the ideal L2 self -are very close. This is in line with Dörnyei (2009b) and Tagushi et al.'s (2009) findings: if a person's ideal L2 self is to become proficient in the L2, s/he will automatically have a positive disposition toward the L2 speakers and culture. As concerns the components of the instrumental dimension, we could observe that the informants are more sensitive to instrumentality promotion than prevention.
The analysis of the answers for instrumentality and integrativeness filtering on the level of education showed the results to be close as well, yet middle schoolers display a stronger instrumental motivation. This is partially due to the fact that for middle schoolers prevention focus, the avoidance of bad test scores, is a more important factor than for high schoolers.
The stronger disposition of the high schoolers could be due to the teaching programme. In fact, much importance is given to English culture, and literature in the high school curriculum. This could very well influence the students' motivation to learn English. The strongest instrumental motivation amongst middle school students can also be explained by their curriculum, which insists more on usage-based facets of learning English and more testing, Third, we looked at two other variables: the number of languages spoken by the informants, and the time spent in an English speaking country. We saw that a plurilingual and de facto a pluricultural repertoire has a positive impact on the motivation to learn languages since the students display stronger results for all dimensions. This confirms the findings discussed in Dörnyei (2009b: 22-23), who finds that students who speak more than one language are more open, show more positive feelings towards the L2 community.
The same conclusions can be drawn for those who have had the opportunity of spending time in an English-speaking country. Moreover, a trend emerged which showed that the more time they spent abroad, the more they show positive attitudes towards the L2 community. Concerning their sensitivity to instrumentality, the results show that students who have spent time abroad are less responsive to this dimension, and to a much greater extent to the instrumentality prevention questions.
Concerning the benefits of learning English, we identified twelve recurrent answers, with an approximate equal importance given to instrumental and integrative reasons. The most popular responses were better career opportunities, and ease and enjoyment while travelling. These answers may be due to the connotation of the word benefit influencing the students to provide instrumentally oriented answers first. In addition, the answers only dealt with instrumentality promotion; none of answers dealt with prevention measures. The integratively oriented answers dealt primarily with the ability to understand English movies, songs or books. We deduct that students were more inclined to learn about the American L2 community than other English speaking communities.
This current study, however, is restricted in scope. It is based on the results drawn from an MA thesis project. Given a larger number of informants and more extensive crosstabulation of results, e.g. by means of multivariate analyses, it is possible that additional correspondences and findings could have been made. For future research, we hope to be able to address these issues. It could further be interesting to carry out a similar research with young professionals who are completing their vocational training after middle school. Since they are already in a professional setting, we wonder if they would respond similarly to high school students. It would also be interesting to analyse the answers of university students, in order to see if some trends that emerged between the middle school and high school students are reinforced at the university level. A third approach would consist of comparing the answers of German speaking students with French speaking students.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERNCES
ANDRES, Franz and Richard D. WATTS (1993). "English as Lingua Franca in Switzerland: Myth or Reality?" Bulletin CILA 58, 109-27. BRIGGS, Charles L. (1987). Learning How to Ask. A sociolinguistic appraisal of the interview in social science research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.