educ bilingue en

8/13/2019 Educ Bilingue En

1/35

BILINGUAL EDUCATION:SOME POLICY ISSUES

Pdraig Riagin and Georges Ldi

Language Policy Division

DG IV Directorate of School, ut!of!School and "igher #ducation$ouncil of #uro%e, Stras&ourg


2/35

www.coe.int/lang

2


3/35

French edition:lments pour une politique de lducation bilingue

The opinions expressed in this work are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy ofthe Council of Europe.

All correspondence concerning this publication or the reproduction or translation of all or part of the documentshould be addressed to the irector of !chool" #ut$of$!chool and %igher Education of the Council of Europe &F$'()(* !trasbourg Cedex or decs$lang+coe.int,.

The reproduction of extracts is authorised" except for commercial purposes" on condition that the source is -uoted.


4/35

Council of Europe" ))0

4


5/35

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1reface.........................................................................................................................................................................*

Chapter 2

2ntroduction.................................................................................................................................................................(

Chapter 22

The social setting.......................................................................................................................................................33

Chapter 222

The school setting..................................................................................................................................................... .3(

Chapter 24

Facts and stereotypes in relation to bilingual education............................................................................................

Chapter 4

From policy planning to assessment and e5aluation.................................................................................................0)

!elect 6ibliography...................................................................................................................................................07


6/35

Preface

2n many contexts" children grow up bilingual or e5en plurilingual" mainly because two or more languages arespoken in their en5ironment. 2n 8estern societies of the 39th and early )th century" this wasconsidered to be a burden rather than an opportunity. At the end of the 39th century" a reputed English

professor could write" without reproach: 2f it were possible for a child to li5e in two languages at oncee-ually well" so much the worse. %is intellectual and spiritual growth would not thereby be doubled"but hal5ed. ;nity of mind and character would ha5e great difficulty in asserting itself in suchcircumstances repertoire. Ama?ority of the world>s population may be called bilingual according to this definition. A bilingualcompetence" e5en an asymmetric one" is increasingly 5iewed and 5alued as a resource rather than as adeficit. And more and more fre-uently" children@s bi$/plurilingualism is the result of their parents>conscious choice. As a French speaking mother li5ing in a erman speaking context put it: B2>d like mychildren to be bilingual 2 don>t know what else 2 will teach them" but bilingualism has been a re5elationto me since 2 ha5e been li5ing in 6asles perspecti5es on language education" Chapter22will consider the 5arious contextual factors which need to be taken into account when designing a

3aurie" !. !. 3G9).Lectures on Language and Linguistic Method in School. Cambridge: Cambridge ;ni5ersity1ress.

The goal of 6ilingual language education is not necessarilysocietalbilingualism. The Council of Europe and theE; promote linguistic di5ersification. The goal of bilingual education can" therefore" be de5eloping di5erse"dynamic and plurilingual repertoires with particular &partial, competences in different languages as a starting pointfor life long learning.

5


7/35

bilingual programme. These include demographic" economic" social and political patterns and trends.Chapter 222 then considers 5arious models of bilingual education" a topic which co5ers a range ofprogrammes operating under that banner. Chapter 24 sur5eys the e5idence to date regarding theeffecti5eness of bilingual education and also deals with some fre-uently asked -uestions that are raisedby teachers and parents alike. Finally" it is clear that our approach" which stresses the importance oftailoring the design of bilingual programmes to local contexts and needs" will re-uire policy makers tocontinuously monitor and e5aluate their programmes" and Chapter 4 discusses some of the key issues

in this area. A short select bibliography is attached to assist those who may wish to read further.

1. H IiagJin" 2TE" The inguistics 2nstitute of 2reland. Kdi" ;ni5ersity of 6asel

6


8/35

Chapter I

Introducton

anguage policy issues are una5oidable in an education system. The content of education L which includes socialand cultural 5alues as well as academic knowledge L has to be taught through the medium of language. 2nlinguistically homogeneous societies" which in Europe are the exception" choices about the language of education

may be relati5ely straightforward and uncontentious. 2n multilingual societies" howe5er" these decisions can createtensions between" and e5en within" 5arious groups o5er how many and which languages to use in schools" how touse them and who makes that choice. A growing number of communities" regions and states are facing acute

problems in language policy. These problems arise from dis?unctions between the language of particularcommunities and the language or languages of wider social and economic life. 2n many cases" this wider context iswithin the national boundaries of their country" but for others it may relate to wider entities &e.g. the European;nion," a state &or states, with which they wish to communicate or into which their citiMens are forced" or aspire"to mo5e to because of economic" social or political pressures.

anguage di5ersity L as measured by the 5ariety of languages spoken and by the number of speakers of eachlanguage L is a widely acknowledged and 5alued feature of Europe>s cultural life. The lack of uniform criteria and

procedures in official censuses and sur5eys may make it impossible to -uantify linguistic di5ersity in any preciseway" yet the e5idence of di5ersity is undeniable. E5en at an international le5el" the degree of di5ersity among

national and officially recognised languages is striking. 2n only a relati5ely small number of cases do states sharethe same official language. #nly fi5e languages are spoken as their principal language by more than 3)N ofEurope>s population L Iussian" English" erman" French and 2talian. #fficial statistics understate Europe@sdi5ersity" owing to an acknowledged undercount of minorities within states. 2n one study of twel5e 8esternEuropean countries in 399'" some 7* non$national language communities were identified. i5ersity in central andeastern Europe is e5en greater.

!ome broad distinctions are possible. First" because of the transnational distribution of the speakers of somelanguages" it sometimes happens that a language can be a national language in one state" and a regional orminority language in another state. !econdly" there are a large number of indigenous minorities whose numbersand geographic spread is -uite limited. Oonetheless" in most cases they inhabit territory that has been associatedwith them for many centuries. Thirdly" there are many immigrant groups who ha5e their origin in recent migrationinto or within Europe" and where their ethnic and linguistic character differs from that of the ma?ority. 8hile

immigrant groups include both those of European and non$European origin" the latter are now a ma?or factor incurrent European di5ersity. Finally" neighbouring languages and languages of wider communication are used incross$border communication throughout Europe.

inguistic di5ersity has to be considered in the contemporary economic" political" cultural and social context. As aconse-uence of the dramatic changes that ha5e taken place in Europe o5er the last decades of the twentiethcentury" there has been a significant shift in the perspecti5es from which linguistic di5ersity is 5iewed. Economicchanges are fre-uently referred to as Blobalisation


9/35

the languages they speak &or do not speak," then the distribution of linguistic competences will clearly affect thesocial cohesion of the state. 8hile social and political concerns may gi5e added weight to the learning of statelanguages L to le5els where children will not" at the 5ery least" be disad5antaged later in their educational andadult careers L such concerns also stimulate demands in many localities for the teaching of minority and regionallanguages. Dany parents and communities argue that if too much time and energy is de5oted to the teaching ofsecond or third languages" then the child>s first language" and maybe his/her general educational progress as well"will suffer. The sense of the 5alue of one>s own language is a fundamental dimension of the sense of knowing the

place which one occupies in social space. As languages are a particularly 5isible aspect of group identities" theycan easily come to symbolise the group" particularly when inter$group conflicts arise. Closer examination oftenre5eals that it is often not language per se" but other issues between the groups that ha5e created difficulties.%owe5er" while social" political or economic factors may be the primary causes of inter$group problems" languageissues are part of both the problem and the resolution. Thus the mo5ement towards a new" more radical" phase ofglobalisation and political integration is proceeding" side by side" with a growing re$assertion of local" regionaland ethnic interests" of which the emergence of newly independent states in Eastern and Central Europe is but onemanifestation.

The tensions created by these trends in society pose difficult challenges for educational policy makers at all le5elsabout the languages to be taught" and the manner in which they are taught in the schools and other educationalinstitutions in Europe. Iesearch has identified multiple factors associated with academic under$achie5ement"including health problems" unemployment" substandard housing" domestic 5iolence" and family mobility" as

parents mo5e fre-uently to find work. For immigrant children" these difficulties are often exacerbated by the stressof ad?usting to a new culture. Education" clearly" is not in itself a solution to the under$achie5ement of any groupof children. Oonetheless" it can make a difference.

%istorically" it is necessary to distinguish between programmes designed for minority language groups and thosedesigned for the teaching of foreign languages. 8ith children from minority language homes" language education

programmes ha5e focused on teaching the most prestigious language of a country to those who do not alreadyknow it" so that those children will be able to participate more effecti5ely in the predominant culture of thatcountry. Fre-uently" little if any attention was" or is paid to the children@s home language or culture. 2n fact" manyeducators ha5e argued that simply pro5iding traditional mainstream instruction is a less expensi5e and moreefficient solution to the problem. Dinority$language or immigrant children simply participate in the regular school

program" on the assumption that as they learn the ma?ority language" these students will -uickly catch up withtheir monolingual peers in academic sub?ects. Iesearch has shown that there are se5eral weaknesses in this

approach. !tudents miss a considerable amount of sub?ect content since they do not know enough of the ma?oritylanguage to understand. This is the ma?or educational reason gi5en for the generally poor academic performanceof such student groups. 2n addition" students> abilities in their first language often deteriorate" thus leading to=subtracti5e> bilingualism" where competence in the child>s first language is reduced or lost. There is thus nosupport among language education professionals nowadays for this type of submersion" or sink or swim

programme.

8ith regard to the teaching of foreign languages" there was a general decline in the teaching of classical languagesand a corresponding growth in the teaching of modern foreign languages from the mid$nineteenth century to thefirst half of the twentieth century. 2n the case of French" which was one of the most widely taught foreignlanguages in the late 3G))s" there was a growth in the proportion of countries teaching it" up until the start of thetwentieth century. The teaching of English" which had been confined to a minority of countries in the mid$nineteenth century" also became increasingly widespread. erman was widely taught during the second half of the

nineteenth century" but it had decreased considerably by the start of the twentieth century. After 397*" the growthin the teaching of modern foreign languages was confined more and more to English. The extent to which Frenchwas taught declined considerably in the post 397* period" although the decline had begun somewhat earlier. Apartfrom erman" which is showing a slight growth in popularity as a foreign language" and to an e5en more limiteddegree !panish and 2talian" few other national languages are taught outside of their political territories.

8hile the lack of di5ersity in the teaching of foreign languages constitutes one problem" the other concerns thefact that foreign languages are typically taught only as sub?ects" and this greatly constrains the le5els of

proficiency possible in the course of compulsory education.

The Council of Europe has long been concerned with these issues. The Council>s 5arious inter5entions are basedon three principles formulated to help its member states to de5elop and implement education programmes which:

strengthen human rights and pluralist democracy bring the people of Europe closer together and create greater confidence and mutual understanding enable all Europeans to realise their potential to the full throughout their li5es.

8


10/35

The Council>s acti5ities with regard to minority languages began in the 39()s in the context of migration in8estern Europe" and in the past decade they ha5e been extended to include national minorities. There are twospecific Con5entions and a number of Iecommendations which embody the main principles of this work.

(a) The Frameor! "on#ention $or the %rotection o$ &ational Minorities.

This text sets out the principles and obligations in5ol5ed in the protection of national minorities Bwithin the rule of

law" respecting the territorial integrity and national so5ereignty of !tates of the minority language. The number has to be =considered sufficient> tosupport the educational facility in -uestion. Furthermore" because of the need to balance the 5arious rights andinterests in5ol5ed" and because of the ultimate aim of attaining factual as well as legal e-uality" the prohibition ofdiscrimination in public education can ne5er be in5oked in an attempt to depri5e children of the benefits oflearning the official or ma?ority language of the state in which they li5e . The Charter therefore also urges thatactions in fa5our of minority languages be undertaken @without pre?udice to the teaching of the official language&s,of the state>. Clause &G, then continues to ask that these recommended actions be undertaken" when sufficientnumbers are present" in pre$school" primary" secondary" technical and 5ocational" third$le5el" adult education andteacher training units and institutions.

(c) ecommendation &o. (*+), o$ the "ommittee o$ Ministers0

2n 399G" the Committee of Dinisters" re5iewing these and other earlier initiati5es" stressed again the =politicalimportance> of intensifying and di5ersifying language learning. Ooting the =challenges of intensified internationalcooperation>" the promotion of =mutual understanding and tolerance>" =the dangers of marginalisation and thede5elopment =of the richness and di5ersity of European cultural life>" it concluded =the needs of a multilingual andmulticultural Europe can be met only by appreciably de5eloping Europeans> ability to communicate with oneanother across linguistic and cultural boundaries and that this re-uires a sustained" lifelong effort which must beencouraged" put on an organised footing and financed at all le5els of education by the competent bodies


11/35

The language reciprocity established in the abo5e documents implicitly" sometimes -uite explicitly" points to theneed for good 6ilingual Education programmes" and to a considerable extent determines their broad ob?ecti5es.6ilingual education leads to demonstrably better outcomes in academic achie5ement than submersion

programmes.

6ilingual Education may be defined as educational programmes which &a, include some degree of teaching non$language sub?ects through the medium of the child>s second and/or third languages and &b, which aim" in

accordance with principles set out in Council of Europe policy statements" at the de5elopment of some degree ofadditi5e bilingualism among the school population. 6ilingual education" so defined" excludes submersion typeprogrammes on the one hand" and =teaching language as a sub?ect> on the other.

%owe5er" bilingual education programmes can make a significant and positi5e contribution" only if they are welldesigned" carefully implemented and relate sensiti5ely to the social and linguistic context. The -ualifications arecrucially important. The research literature pro5ides ample e5idence that bilingual programmes that are poorlydesigned or implemented" or that fail to take proper account of their context" not only fail in their societalob?ecti5es" but can se5erely limit the capacity of pupils to participate in higher education and in the labour market.%owe5er" on the other hand" successful programmes pro5ide no theoretical or empirical basis for an ideal modelof bilingual education" suitable for all situations. #ne of the few points on which researchers in the field agree isthat similar models ha5e produced contrary results in different settings. This is not to say that a proper e5aluationof particular models cannot pro5ide fruitful results. 8hile it is ob5ious that attention must be paid to pro5en

examples of good practice" it is also clear that success is due more to the fit between the components of aprogramme and the goals and resources of a gi5en community" rather than to the application of any uni5ersaltheory. 1rogramme components will" and should" 5ary depending on factors that differ not only across but withincommunities.

Thus" while there are no easy answers to the -uestions posed by multilingualism and linguistic di5ersity" there is agood degree of agreement about the 5ariables which are known to influence educational outcomes" and it isintended to draw attention to these in the following chapters.

7!ee the uide $or the e#elopment o$ Language 'ducation %olicies in 'urope &))0" !trasbourg: Council ofEurope, for a fuller discussion.

10


12/35

Chapter II

The !oca" !ettn#

6ilingual education policy is formulated" implemented and accomplishes its results within a complexinterrelated set of economic" social and political processes. 1olicy$makers" and others who participate inthe policy process" need to take a wide perspecti5e in thinking about bilingual education" and not

restrict their deliberations to ?ust -uestions of programme type or the language&s, of instruction. 8hat iscritical is finding a set of programme components that will work for the children in a gi5en community.This set of components will" and should" 5ary depending on factors that differ not only between butwithin communities. 2n fact" it is probable that their combined conse-uences for the effecti5eness ofbilingual education policies and programmes are of more importance than specifically educationalfactors &programme" curriculum" syllabus" teaching methods,per se.

Dany 5ariables which enter into the planning of a bilingual education policy are those which impingeon any education policy. 1lanning the de5elopment of a primary school system would" for example"re-uire some attention to the siMe and degree of concentration or dispersal of school populations" trendsin birth$rates" effects of migration" gender ratio" socio$economic status of families" labour marketre-uirements" parental and teacher attitudes" supply and training of teachers etc.. All of these factors arealso rele5ant to planning bilingual education" but only when this demographic and social data has beencombined with data on language abilities" language use" language attitudes" language markets" languageshift" etc.. Thus" matters such as the following come into focus: language&s, spoken at home and in thecommunity community and parental patterns of language use student and parental attitudes towardlanguage and its role in education" official and local goals for proficiency &additi5e 5. subtracti5ebilingualism, etc.. The success or failure of e5en a well$designed bilingual education programme withsufficient funding" materials and well$-ualified teachers in a gi5en situation or in a gi5en perioddepends on the interrelation of most of these factors.

2t is not the intention" nor would it be possible in a short publication" to re5iew all aspects of therelationships between socio$linguistic and socio$demographic 5ariables*. The purpose is more focused.2t is to draw attention to some of the key issues which are most likely to arise in planning or operatingbilingual education schools" and to draw attention to some important concepts which can help to shape

and direct analyses and discussions.

emograph and Language i#ersit

6oth the Framework Con5ention for Oational Dinorities and the European Charter for Iegional orDinority anguages frame their pro5isions for education in a 5ery flexible manner. They propose"without further definition" that these ser5ices should be pro5ided where there is =sufficient demand>.6ut this information is" of course" a basic re-uirement irrespecti5e of the languages in5ol5ed. Thegeographical distribution of existing or prospecti5e pupils who speak a minority language &i.e. numbersand location, is the most basic planning consideration. Although this seems a straightforward task" allof the terms =geographical distribution>" =speaker>" =numbers> and =location> can be problematical.

anguage =speaker@ is a broad and general term. 2t includes at least two dimensions L understanding andspeaking/writing L corresponding to a recepti5e ability &listening/reading, and producti5e ability&spoken interaction/production and writing,. 6oth dimensions 5ary across a wide range of proficiency"and there can be considerable disagreement about the le5els of proficiency re-uired before an indi5idualis ?udged a =speaker> of a language. There are" in addition" problems in measuring these dimensions.8hile there is a large and growing body of research dealing with the de5elopment and application oflanguage testing instruments and procedures" such tests are rarely used outside restricted and controlledsettings. The time re-uired to conduct the tests and other operational difficulties ha5e so far inhibitedtheir use among large and 5ariable populations. 2n these situations" researchers ha5e relied on simple"self$rating scales against which the respondents are asked to assess themsel5es. &The Europeananguage 1ortfolio for instance, 8hile these measures are sub?ecti5e" there is some e5idence that they

are" nonetheless" useful indicators of proficiency. 2n any case" in many circumstances they may be theonly ones a5ailable.

* For a fuller discussion" the reader is directed to one of the standard textbooks on bilingualism" e.g. Iomaine" ! &399*," & nd

Ed.,/ilingualism. #xford: 6lackwell.

11


13/35

The official census of population in some European states asks -uestions of the type =what languagescan you speak>" or =do you speak language Q> or =which languages do you speak at home/at work>The responses permissible in census -uestionnaires are" howe5er" typically brief and often ?ust a simpleyes/no. 8hile such data is ob5iously limited" it can pro5ide a preliminary estimate. 8here this data isnot a5ailable" or more detailed information is re-uired" language sur5eys are necessary'. E5enindi5idual schools can conduct a home language sur5ey without too much difficulty" and many

bilingual schools do this as a routine part of their induction procedures.

The next most important -uestion to be resol5ed in any policy process is to determine the basic unit ofanalysis L pupil" family" community" region" state" multi$state or international 2n practical terms" theanswer to this -uestion will depend on the administrati5e le5el at which the decision about bilingualeducation is taken. An indi5idual school will focus on the language abilities of pupils entering theschool" the language ability of parents and the languages spoken in its catchment area. 2t wouldob5iously be wise also to obtain information about the distribution of language abilities in thecommunity ser5ed by the school. This information may re5eal a homogeneous pattern" or alternati5ely"it could be mildly to strongly heterogeneous. Either way" the facts will ha5e ma?or implications for thedecisions taken by the school.

At policy$making le5els beyond the school" at least two other considerations arise. First" the geographicdistribution of speakers can be complicated in many cases by differences between linguistic andpolitical boundaries. 2n certain circumstances" this factor can modify or e5en radically changeconclusions based on local data. !ome languages are spoken in more than one state. This includessituations where the same language is an official language in more than one state" but also where alanguage can be an official language in one state" and an unofficial" minority language in another. Thereare e5en examples where the same language can be a minority language in more than one state" and anofficial language in none. #ne has also to note the growing importance of languages such as Englishwhose status in many countries cannot be classed as either a minority or state language" but which isemerging as the preferred second language of many.

!econdly" while fertility and mortality are generally considered the primary forces underlyingpopulation change" the contemporary significance of migration cannot be ignored. #b5iously" there arenumerous large immigrant communities in many states" which ha5e their origin in recent migration intoa nation$state where their ethnic character differs from that of the ma?ority. 6ut the significance ofmigration is wider than this. uring the last three decades Europe has de5eloped a complex migratorysystem in which nearly all forms of internal and external mobility are intermingled. All these populationexchanges L seasonal" temporary" permanent" cyclical" return L form global networks of connecti5ityincluding connections which impinge on relations between language groups. anguage policy inEurope cannot be based solely on de5elopments within the geographic or political boundaries ofindi5idual states or regions.

Language 0se

An indi5idual or community>s proficiency le5els in a language may or may not be reflected in the usemade of that language. 2n order to examine this relationship" information is re-uired. As in the case ofthe first sociolinguistic 5ariable discussed abo5e L language ability L the concept of language use can bebroken down into a number of dimensions or components.

#ne approach en5isages social life as comprised of a number of domains" i.e. the 5arious social settingswithin which most people li5e their li5es such as home" school" work" religion" community" media andpublic ser5ices. irect obser5ation or sur5eys methods can then be used to estimate the language orlanguages used in each domain.

Iesearch points to a clear relationship between the number and distribution of speakers and the use of a

language in social domains. enerally" it is only the more widely spoken languages that dominate in all' A useful" and recent" re5iew of language sur5eys" which also pro5ides references for many indi5idual studies" can be foundin Raplan I.6. S I.6. 6aldauf &399(,Language %lanning1 $rom practice to theor. Cle5edon: Dultilingual Datters" pp 3)$3).

12


14/35

domains. Among the lesser spoken languages some form of a bilingual situation usually pertains" withthe local language spoken mostly in the pri5ate domains &home and community" perhaps religion, whileanother" usually the national" language is used in public domains &school" work" media and publicser5ices,. 2t is 5ery important to establish the extent to which these patterns exist in a gi5en situation.For example" knowledge about the language use patterns of parents and children in the home andcommunity can contribute to the construction and selection of bilingual curriculum materialsappropriate to the language background of the students. %owe5er" the relationship between the

demographic siMe of a language community and domain language use is not absolute. 2t must be notedthat while the abo5e features of domain use are most characteristic of lesser spoken languages" they willalso occur when speakers of one of the more widely used languages find themsel5es in a minorityposition among speakers of another language. A second approach focuses on the language or languagesused in interactions between people" and also on the nature of the interaction &topic" setting" etc., andthe relationships between and characteristics of the participants &age" gender" social status" etc.,. Danyresearch and sur5ey designs incorporate both approaches" because they pro5ide somewhat different" ifo5erlapping" information. 2nter$personal encounters ob5iously occur within the domains ofneighbourhoods" workplaces" schools" churches" social and recreational clubs and 5oluntaryassociations of social language groups" but interactionist data pro5ides a finer$grained picture of thenature" extent and character of contacts between speakers. Furthermore" such data allows a fullerexamination of the relationship between speakers of different social classes and language use. 2t is notonly styles of life and social identities that differ between social classes" but language use may differalso. &!ocial class here refers to the broad structuring of society in groups that are roughly similar interms of wealth" income and/of status,. !ocial class is 5ery often described and measured in terms ofoccupational structure" to which it has a close" but not exact" relationship. A linguistic class di5ision (

occurs whene5er language groups are differentially distributed in terms of social class. The relationshipis hierarchical to the extent that language groups are differentially socially stratified" e.g. it is fre-uentlyfound that speakers of lesser spoken language groups are located at the lower end of the social scale.The relationship may alternati5ely" or additionally" be segmental to the extent that the language groupsare occupationally specialised" e.g. rural occupations in the case of many minority languagesprofessional and academic groups in the case of" say" knowledge and use of English. The same holdstrue in border regions" where the preference for the neighbouring language 5s. an international 5ehicular

language depends on the range of professional acti5ities: managers may use more English" employeeswith crossborder acti5ities may ha5e a greater need of knowledge in the language of the neighbour stateor region. The social location of language groups with regard to these two parameters is of criticalimportance in determining the prestige of the language and attitudes towards it.

Language 2ttitudes

anguage attitudes are also multi$dimensionalG. The term can refer to attitudes which are cogniti5e&beliefs about the languages," or affecti5e &feelings towards languages, or beha5ioural &inclinationtowards certain language beha5iour,. Thus" attitudes in a language context deal with issues such ase5aluation &how fa5ourably a language is 5iewed," language preference &e.g." which of two languages ispreferred for certain purposes or in certain situations," desirability and reasons for learning a particularlanguage" e5aluation of social groups who use a particular language or language 5ariety" desirability ofbilingualism and bilingual education" and opinions concerning language shift or maintenance languagepolicies. All of these factors affect the moti5ation of students and thus affect the classroom situation.

2t is not necessarily the case that all dimensions of the attitudinal pattern in a particular situation willpoint in the same direction. 2n fact" it is not unusual for groups to both 5alue their language as a markerof their group identity and" at the same" hold negati5e 5iews of it in terms of its utility and socialprestige. Although this may seem contradictory" it is perfectly understandable when the social positionof the language group is considered.

(The term =cultural di5ision of labour> was originally formulated to describe this phenomenon by Dichael%echter &39(G, in his paper @roup Formation and the Cultural i5ision of abour@. 2merican 3ournal o$

Sociolog" G7" " 90$03G.

G !ee" for example" iles %." D. %ewstone S 1. 6all &39G0, @anguage Attitudes in Dultilingual !ettings:1rologue with [email protected] o$ Multilingual and Multicultural e#elopment" 7" $0" G3$3)).

13


15/35

2t is fre-uently obser5ed that some languages are more prestigious and ha5e a higher status than others.6ut it is important to stress that language at all times is a characteristic of a particular social group.There is a close connection between attitudes towards a particular language and attitudes towards thesocial group that speaks that language. The prestige of a language" in a 5ery real sense" is not aboutlanguage per se" but about social class and status. The negati5e 5iews that speakers of the more widelyspoken language can ha5e of the lesser spoken languages often reflect their 5iews of the language grouprather than of the language. These 5iews lead to social e5aluations based on social stereotypes rather

than language per se. Oonetheless" while they are not fixed or in5ariable" they often constitute animportant component in the attitudes held about the relati5e 5alue of languages.

%owe5er" language also has a key role in defining or symbolising community or regional identity andmembership. The sense of the 5alue of one>s own language is a fundamental dimension of the sense ofknowing the place which one occupies in social space. As languages are a particularly 5isible aspect ofgroup identities" they can easily come to symbolise the group. anguage can become" for an indi5idualor a group" a 5aluable resource to be protected and this will be reflected in the attitudes held.

Language Shi$t

Trends in the numbers of speakers and degrees of language use are of ma?or importance to the operation

of bilingual education programmes. =anguage shift> occurs when there are significant changes in thepatterns of language use and/or the number of speakers of a language. Although the term is usuallyapplied to situations where there is a decline in both these measures" it re-uires only a moment>sreflection to see that language shift always occurs in association with a positi5e shift in anotherlanguage. &This is sometimes referred to as =language spread>.,. 8here shift does not occur" thesituation is described as stable. Again" although comprehensi5e data are lacking" and there areexceptions" it would appear to be the case that the languages on the upper end of the siMe spectrum arespreading. At the other end of the scale" there is considerable e5idence that the numbers of speakers ofmany of the lesser spoken languages are in decline" while the number of speakers of other languagesmo5es more or less in accordance with national population le5els $ i.e. they are stable. 6ilingualeducation" if accompanied by other policies" can be a means for re5ersing language shift whilemaintaining linguistic di5ersity.

The Linguistic Mar!et

inguistic competence" together with other skills and -ualifications" are forms of human capital. ikeany other capital resource it functions and deri5es its 5alue from the market. This led the Frenchsociologist 1ierre 6ourdieu9 to formulate the now well$known concept of the =linguistic market>.inguistic markets are most easily understood as a relationship between those speakers who supply aparticular linguistic competence and those who demand it. The capacity of indi5iduals to maintain oralter their social position is thus determined by the 5olume of capital they possess. 2t is part of thepractical competence of speakers to know when" where" and how to speak one language rather thananother in order to deri5e a @profit@ most ad5antageous to their interests. 2n a plurilingual situation" thedistribution of linguistic capital is thus often related to the distribution of other forms of capital whichtogether define the location of speakers and communities of particular languages within the o5erallsocial hierarchy.

2t is important" howe5er" to recognise that linguistic practices are not to be understood as solelydetermined by economic considerations in the strict sense. Economic concepts and terminology areused here as metaphors to suggest that language practices may" to some extent" be described ineconomic terms. Thus" when an indi5idual adopts a strategy with regard to the ac-uisition and use of alanguage" the profit that is realised may be symbolic or cultural" rather than simply or primarilyeconomic. As Fishman obser5ed 3)"@anguages that are not being imposed by force" must pro5ide &or

96ourdieu 1. &39G, "e que parler #eut dire1 lconomie des changes linguistiques. 1aris ibrairie ArthemeFayard. 1ublished in English as Language and Smbolic %oer. &Edited S introduced by .6. Thompson,.

Cambridge: 1olity 1ress 3993.3)Fishman .A. &39((, @The !pread of English as a Oew 1erspecti5e for the study of anguage Daintenance andanguage !hift@. 2n: Fishman .A." I.. Cooper S A.8. Conrad" The Spread o$ 'nglish. Iowley" Dass.: Oewbury%ouse

14


16/35

promise to pro5ide, entrUe to scarce power and resources or there would be little reason for indigenouspopulations to adopt them for intergroup use... anguages are rarely ac-uired for their own sake@.

The structure of the linguistic market therefore ob5iously defines the acceptability and desirability of alanguage. 2t follows therefore" that language attitudes and strategies of language learning and use areine5itably and una5oidably linked to more general social strategies of indi5iduals and communities.Thus strategies of social mobility that in5ol5e" for example" education" changes of occupation" changes

of residence or migration" are all likely to ha5e linguistic conse-uences. The 5ery anticipation of suchstrategies may" in fact" carry implications for language beha5iour in ad5ance of any actual mobilisation"be it social or spatial.

est it be thought that this theoretical approach points to the ultimate domination of the national=market> language" it should be noted that the market metaphor also allows for the possibility that" incertain circumstances" minority languages can sur5i5e and prosper. A language competence can beaccorded a 5alue in local or regional contexts that it is denied in the national or international market" ina way analogous to the 5iability and durability of local markets within national economic markets. Andlanguage markets can partly be sub?ect to political inter5entions" as will be seen later on.

#n the other hand" it must be mentioned here that linguistic markets are more and more internationaland o5erlap language borders. Therefore" neighbouring and international languages play an increasing

role in national settings. 2n most cases" they don>t compete with the national or regional languages as3" but may replace them as the most 5alued languages to be taught at school. 2n some regions of theerman part of !witMerland" for example" English has a higher prestige than the other nationallanguages. 1arents and employers ask for more teaching of English instead of French and/or 2talian.Dore generally speaking" English is chosen as first foreign language e5en in language border regions orin multilingual countries. This can lead to a decreasing interest in the learning and teaching ofneighbouring and minority languages respecti5ely and" subse-uently" a loss in linguistic di5ersity.

namics o$ "hange

To conclude this section" it is necessary to emphasise that patterns of linguistic di5ersity are in aconstant process of change. !ocio$economic processes are the main energising forces which bring about

change in linguistic patterns. Although to speak of broad socio$economic changes may seem to bemo5ing away from our central concerns" this is not so. ust as present day planning in education has totake careful note of demographic and economic trends" bilingual education as an integral part ofeducation cannot a5oid attending to the same issues.

Contemporary capitalism>s greater mobility has altered the forces shaping de5elopment. The growinginternationalisation of corporate structures has created new labour markets transcending nationalboundaries. Capitalist de5elopment" howe5er" is une5en de5elopment" and the resultant imbalancesbetween economic areas lie at the root of much of recent migration flows and their conse-uences inboth the areas of destination and areas of origin. 2t needs to be noted" howe5er" that there has been agrowth in migration of highly skilled" as well as unskilled workers.

6ut globalisation is too often read in a strictly economic sense. ifferent social groups and different

indi5iduals are placed in 5ery distinct ways in relation to these de5elopments. !ome social groups andcultures are highly ad5antaged by them" while others are seriously penalised or e5en condemned toextinction. The process therefore affects patterns of social identities and their relation to territorial unitsboth within and between states. The restructuring of the economy is thus paralleled by the restructuringof other significant social and political institutions.

2t would appear that" as a result of globalisation trends" Europe is being transformed in two oppositedirections. #n the one hand" the emergence of international bodies such as the Council of Europe andthe European ;nion is indicati5e of the impetus of global information" communication and mobilityprocesses towards integration. 6ut" on the other hand" the system of nation$states is weakening as aresult of the need for global economic regulation and there has been a resurgence of regional and socialmo5ements. Ielated to these de5elopments" but also as a result of other pressures" are changes in the

socio$political structures of Europe. The remo5al of centralising state forces in much of Eastern Europeand the re$emergence of regionalism and ethnicity ha5e been significant factors in the last decade of thetwentieth century. The break$up of the former !o5iet ;nion" the di5ision of CMechoslo5akia and theconflicts within former Pugosla5ia ha5e had demographic conse-uences already.

15


17/35

2t is not difficult to see how these changes are already affecting patterns of linguistic di5ersity. There iscompelling e5idence of an increase in the number of people who ha5e learnt" or are learning" one of theinternational or world languages. 2n 8estern Europe" this is primarily English" while in Central andEastern Europe" Iussian has filled this role" although recently losing ground to English. At the otherend of the scale" the problems and demands of minority and immigrant language groups ha5e becomemore pressing and urgent. There are no signs of either of these trends weakening.

Language %olicies

Economic competiti5eness" social inclusion and human rights ha5e become the key goals around whichlanguage policy is constructed" implemented and e5aluated in contemporary Europe. Taken together"they form a complex mix of goals which are not always easy to reconcile. The language policy re-uiredto maximise the goal of economic competiti5eness may" for example" be in more or less direct conflictwith the kind of policy re-uired to maximise the goal of social inclusion or human rights.

ust as the state can use a range of legal" monetary" financial and other measures to change the structureof the economic market" so it can use its authority to change the structure of the linguistic market" inorder to enhance the symbolic" cultural and economic 5alue attached to the competence to speak onelanguage rather than another. 2t can do this because the state is both a ma?or employer itself and animportant actor in the regulation of other labour markets. Thus it can ha5e real economic and politicaleffects on the allocation of positions and economic ad5antages to holders of the legally recognisedlinguistic competence.

%owe5er broader societal goals are incorporated into language policy" the ultimate linguistic ob?ecti5eof the state will implicitly or explicitly incline towards monolingualism or bi$/plurilingualism.

Donolingual ob?ecti5es in their extreme form lead to assimilationist policies. 1olicies of this type aredesigned" with or without the agreement of the minority language group" to assimilate it into thelanguage and culture of the ma?ority as -uickly as possible. At worst" there may well be deliberateactions to suppress the language. 2n this extreme case" bilingual education as understood here can ha5eno role. Teaching minority language children through the medium of the ma?ority language only isfre-uently called Bsubmersion


18/35

an integral element" is an approach that fa5ours experimentation without excessi5e commitment" andlearning from mistakes as well as successes.

Chapter III

The !choo" !ettn#

etermining media of instruction for school systems is perhaps the most uni5ersal element of alllanguage policy strategies. The school system has traditionally represented the main social institutionwithin which the linguistic and cultural future of the next generation is de5eloped. The degree to whicheducational considerations influence the choice of medium 5aries from case to case" but politicalconsiderations nearly always play a role. Education" and the extent to which an education systemde5elops minority languages" is crucial for minorities. Furthermore" schools are important socialinstitutions where culture and group identity are constructed and reproduced. 2t is also in schools andaround school matters that the social networks which consolidate minority groups are created andreconstructed. Thus" how state education systems respond to the re-uisites of language policy is often akey test of how far the education system and" by inference" the state" is committed to the resolution oflanguage problems. #n the other hand" it is also through the school system that languages for all thestudents are pro5ided. A policy of linguistic di5ersity means teaching and learning for a whole schoolpopulation" minority and/or neighbouring languages as well as international languages. 2n many cases"bilingual education programmes ha5e already found a 5aluable role and ha5e demonstrated the potentialto be of much wider rele5ance and usefulness.

2t will" howe5er" be clear from the discussion so far that the extent to which bilingual education policyimpacts on target populations has also as much" if not more" to do with the manner in which that policyis embedded in economic and social processes as with ethnicity. The formation" implementation andeffecti5eness of bilingual programmes are conditioned by social and economic processes. !pecifically"they are influenced by occupational and social class structures" whose impact on bilingual educationcan be most readily identified when those structures are themsel5es in transformation. Dany language

education and minority language policies are ineffecti5e either because they do not fully recognise therealities of the socio$economic system within which they operate or because they run counter to statepolicies in other domains. 2t is only in recent years that there has been an attempt to de5elop a morecomprehensi5e approach to bilingual education.

6earing in mind the wider ob?ecti5es of language policy" a number of -uestions arise about the specificsof bilingual education. 8hat are the goals of bilingual education $ monolingualism or plurilingualism8hich types and designs of bilingual education should be considered These are -uestions which willbe discussed in this part. Chapters 24 and 4 will then consider the -uestions: %ow are indi5idual orschool outcomes to be measured 8hat is the o5erall outcome 8hat are the indi5idual outcomes ofbilingual education 8hich group gains by the outcome of bilingual education

%rogramme Models and Tpes

The defining features of bilingual programmes 5ary enormously in practice. 2t will help to recognise asmall number of basic models which are classified in terms of their o5erall ob?ecti5es or goals&monolingual or plurilingual competences of the target population,. 8ithin each group of models" it isthen possible to identify a number of 5ariants or programme types which define the specificcharacteristics of the particular model used in a particular location &e.g. assimilation" restoration"maintenance or enrichment model,. Finally" it is possible to identify design features of indi5idualprogrammes &e.g. when the bilingual programme starts" its duration" etc.,

/ilingual 'ducation Models

The initial classification of models is based on the goals of bilingual education. A distinction may be

made" with Colin 6aker33"between weak and strong models of bilingual education:

33 Colin 6aker &))3,Foundations o$ /ilingual 'ducation and /ilingualism. Cle5edon" Dultilingual Datters" 0rdedition.

17


19/35

8eak models of bilingual education consider bilingualism not as an aim in itself but as anintermediate stage between monolingualism in 3 and monolingualism in . These are generallyreferred to as transitional models. !ome models included under this heading &see below, pro5idesuch limited instruction in the children>s first language" and promote their exit into full instruction at such an early age" that they cannot be termed =bilingual education> models as definedearlier. They meet neither the legitimate concerns of parents" nor the standards set by the Council ofEurope.

#n the contrary" strong modelsaim at adult bi$/plurilingualism and bi$/pluriliteracy. 2n other words"they consider plurilingual repertoires in their different forms as a 5alued resource and represent aninstrument to achie5e this goal. They lend support to the aspiration of parents li5ing in multilingualsettings that their children should be competent in a number of languages.

/ilingual %rogramme Tpes

4ea! $orms o$ bilingual educationnormally aim at a controlled transitionfrom an 3 different from theofficial school language to the latter. E5en if they are not explicitly designed to suppress the children>s3" this doesn>t get any further support from the educational system beyond the transition period. 8eakforms of bilingual education typically appear in cases of immigration and minority language contexts

where Bsubmersion< programmes &i.e. uncontrolled schooling in the ma?ority language only, arere?ected for pedagogical reasons. There is plenty of e5idence in many western European countries thatfirst instruction in 3 gi5es immigrant children speaking other languages a better preparation when theyenter later into secondary schools where the state language is the medium of instruction" and allowsthem full democratic citiMenship. %owe5er" while in the case of children speaking a minority languagein a gi5en state" bilingual programmes aiming at transition to the ma?ority language can a5oid thenegati5e conse-uences of submersi5e schooling" it cannot in itself sol5e the political" cultural andidentity problems which are fre-uently present in such situations.

2n many cases" transitional bilingual programmes designed by the educational system are supplementedby pri5ate efforts from parents and communities to counterbalance the danger of language loss by anadditional support. 2n the case of migrant children" these efforts may be co$financed by the countries oforigin.

!trong models of bilingual education depend on the social context. #ne may wish to distinguishbetween

models aiming at the maintenanceof a lesser used language or of the language of origin ofmigrants with the double aim to ac-uire the mainstream language and simultaneously tomaintain the community language. They are referred to in the literature as languagemaintenance or shelter models" heritage language programmes" etc.

models aiming at the restorationof a minority language that has lost its prestige" some of its

domains of use and" last but not least" many of its speakers for economic or political reasonsthe aim may be" in this case" to create the necessary condition for Bnormalising< the use of theminority language" i.e. for restoring its use as an official and written language3

models aiming at the enrichmentof monolingual &or already plurilingual, children@s languagerepertoires" i.e. to achie5e functional bi$/plurilingualism where it wouldn>t de5elop naturally.The support can be gi5en nation$wide &e. g. for English as foreign language in OorthernEurope, or limited to a region &e. g. for erman and French respecti5ely in the French anderman parts of the ;pper Ihine Iegion,. The idea is to ac-uire a second language moreefficiently by means of bilingual education than by means of traditional language teaching &e.g.the Canadian immersion model,. For demographic reasons" these models reach potentially byfar the largest number of students.

esigning /ilingual 'ducation ithin Model5Tpes

3 Cf. for example Aracil" luis &39'*,: "on$lit linguistique et normalisation linguistique dans l6'urope nou#elle7 Oancy.

18


20/35

8ithin the broad structure of 6ilingual Education Dodels" a finer sub$di5ision can be based on criterialike duration/continuity" intensity and regularity of bilingual education" composition of the classes aswell as selection of topics chosen for second/foreign language medium teaching.

!chematically" each type of school$supported bilingual education can be placed in the following grid:

Axis &a, is discussed first" the distinction between full and partial immersion is presented and then thedistinction between alternati5e and exclusi5e use of 3/ for a gi5en topic in partial immersionmodels is commented upon briefly.

As for the starting point" a distinction may be made between early" middle and late forms ofbilingual education" the first starting at pre$school age" the last as late as upper secondary ore5en higher education" the second somewhere in$between.

There is no uni-ue answer to the -uestion of the ideal moment to start with bilingual education.2t depends on the socio$economic setting as well as on the programme>s basic goals. From thepoint of 5iew of second language ac-uisition" one might say Bthe sooner the better< as long as

the -uestion of the time of exposure to is appropriately sol5ed &the younger the children are"the more exposure time they need for successful second language ac-uisition,. This isparticularly true for enrichment programmes in a linguistically rich 3 en5ironment. 6ut e5enthen" an early start raises fre-uently critical -uestions: 8ill the 3 not be endangered 2sn>t it afirst step to language shift &for example towards the ma?ority language as the only medium ofinstruction, 8ill literacy in the state language suffer from bilingual education in the case ofintellectually challenged children !hould bilingual education be made a5ailable to all thepupils or only to an elite 2n maintenance and restoration programmes" these -uestions aremore acute. The goal of strengthening 3 could be endangered by a too early start ofimmersion in " especially in cases where the state language is also strongly present in thechildren>s daily life. The goal of maintaining a heritage language can thus make policy makersfeel that an 3 en5ironment should be maintained as long as possible &at least for primary

education, before introducing as a &partial, medium of education. #n the contrary" thedesigners of transitional models may argue that education in 3 should only last as long asnecessary and transition to full immersion in should start at the earliest possible age in orderto achie5e the e-uality of opportunities between immigrant and local children. enerallyspeaking" different goals should howe5er be achie5ed by 5arying the intensity of use of 3 and rather then by waiting too long until introducing and this in order to make maximalprofit of small children@s capacity for learning languages.

The duration of the bilingual education experience is as important as its beginning. 2t is knownthat many years are needed to ac-uire cogniti5e$academic language proficiency in 3 as well asin .

L81The programmes must include a sufficient number of years for 3 teaching" not only inmaintenance programmes" but e5en in transitional models. 2n the latter" the duration" intensityand continuity of 3 medium teaching are determined by the need to enhance scholasticachie5ement of alloglot or minority pupils and to integrate them in the mainstream society assoon as possible. 2ndeed" many experiences with immigrant children in Europe show thatac-uisition of cogniti5e$academic language proficiency in a second language does not workproperly where competence in 3 is not sufficiently de5eloped. The reason for this finding isthat language competences in two or more languages are not independent" but are rooted in acommon underlying proficiency &see" for example" Cummins ))),. Thus" second languageac-uisition is much more efficient if the learner can rely on a fully de5eloped first language.The crucial -uestions for deciding on the exit point are thus pedagogic: whether the thresholdle5el in 3 necessary for successfully constructing cogniti5e/academic language proficiency in is reached. They are also political: whether the linguistic right obtaining primary instructionthrough the medium of 3 is respected &see Chapter 2,. Thus" the exit of children from a

19


21/35

transitional bilingual programme can be earlier &e.g. at the end of primary school, or later &e.g.at the end of lower secondary school, depending on whether these goals are achie5ed or not.

L912t is stating the ob5ious to say that a sufficient length of time is re-uired for successful learning. This is particularly important in early enrichment programmes. Rnowing that childrenforget languages as fast as they learn them" a continuity in the pro5ision of medium teachingis necessary. ;nless is strongly supported in the community" a short early immersion at

kindergarden or primary school without a continuation at secondary le5el will not be 5eryeffecti5e. 1articular care is due at the transition points between pre$school and primary schoolas well as between primary and secondary education. #n the axis of duration one might alsotake into account the 5arious forms in which teaching in another language is prepared &e.g. byteaching the as a sub?ect, and continued &e.g. by student mobility programmes,. 2n otherwords" intensi5e language courses before teaching through the medium of starts" as well asdifferent forms of compulsory stays in a $context after the programme" can compensate for ashorter duration of the period of bilingual teaching.

The next step in designing a bilingual education programme concerns the use of 3 and . Theintensity of immersion ranges from one topic being taught partially through the medium of

to full immersion" i.e. the whole curriculum being taught through the medium of . #ne mustbear in mind that there are efficient forms of language teaching which cannot be considered asforms of bilingual education &e.g. intensi5e language courses in combined with exchangepedagogy" i.e. shorter periods of exposure to by indi5idual exchanges" class exchanges orteacher exchanges,. 6ilingual education presupposes a continuous use of more than onelanguage as a medium of instruction rather than as a sub?ect.

The choice depends first on the goals of the bilingual programme and will often 5ary from onegrade to the other. 2n an enrichment programme" one might for example begin with intensi5elanguage courses at primary school le5el" switch to *)N of the sub?ects being taught throughthe medium of at the lower secondary le5el and reach a full immersion at the uppersecondary le5el:

Figure 3: 5ariable allocation of time/sub?ects to the languages throughout the curriculum

grade 3 0 7 * ' ( G 9 3) 33 3

L 2

L 1

6alanced bilingualism will be achie5ed through a large number of topics taught through the medium ofthe weaker language. For functional bilingualism" a lesser degree of immersion might be sufficient.Thus" in the same minority language community" one can find two models with a different balancebetween ma?ority and minority language:

pre$school primary school lower secondary school

3 0 7 * ' grade

20


22/35

Dodel 2Iomansch Iomansch Iomansch

omansch

erman

erman

Dodel 22Iomansch omansch omansch

ermanerman erman

medium of instruction language taught as sub:ect

Figure : Allocation of time/sub?ects to erman and Iomansch in two types of bilingual education in

the Canton of raubKnden &!witMerland,

The main difference is that model 22 indicates a rather ad5anced stage of ermanisation in thecommunity and fa5ours it at the same time. Dodel 2 forces non Ihaeto$Iomansch speaking pupils toac-uire the minority language L which is" at least during primary education" the main medium ofinstruction $ and contributes significantly to its public use.

%owe5er" the choice is also context bound. 2n a linguistically rich 3 en5ironment" as in some Canadianexamples" one might take the risk of full immersion in for a limited period. This solution would beexcluded in a diglossic situation like the erman part of !witMerland" where literacy in the nationallanguage would suffer badly from lack of appropriate support by the school.

Furthermore" the degree of support for the languages outside school will play a ma?or role. 2n order toreach the same le5el of proficiency" fewer lessons in English" for example" will be necessary in acountry where many tele5ision programmes and mo5ies are offered in English than in a country wherethe national language is absolutely dominant. !imilarly" the absence of audio5isual media in a minoritylanguage will lead to the need for more topics being taught through the medium of this language.

Another criterion" which can 5ary considerably" is the selection of topics chosen for and 3medium teaching respecti5ely &except in cases of full immersion where all the sub?ects are taughtthrough the medium of ,. The choice of the topic to be taught in one or another language dependson different factors such as the a5ailability of teachers &who need not necessarily be nati5espeakers" but who should ha5e an excellent communicati5e competence in the language that ser5esas medium of instruction," teaching materials" the existence of examinations to be taken in one orother language" etc. Experience in countries with a long tradition of bilingual education such asuxemburg point towards the use of for less Bdiscourse bound< topics such as mathematics first.2n some cases" topic related aspects make the choice easier &e.g. minority culture in the minoritylanguage" national history in the national language" history of the French Ie5olution in French"etc.,. 2n the case of life science sub?ects in upper secondary education one might take into accountthat most textbooks and many uni5ersity programmes use English.

A final -uestion concerns the target population for bilingual education. 8here the schoolpopulation is homogeneous &composed of mainstream language speakers," the relation between 3and is unidirectional. 2n this case" the main -uestions are &a, whether the benefit of bilingualeducation is accessible to some pilot classes in a school only" to all the students of the whole school

&e.g. in the so$called European !chools, or to the entire school population of a region/country &b,whether a 5ariety of target languages is offered or not &c, whether the goal is balanced or

21


23/35

functional bilingualism" etc. ;ni5ersality would mean that bilingual education is not only reser5edfor an elite and can be concei5ed for the educational system as a whole.

2n regions with a linguistically mixed population" special attention should be paid to thecomposition of the class. Although bilingual education is sometimes only offered to one community&e.g. national minority speakers of other languages than Estonian in Estonia," in many casespro5ision in the minority or the neighbouring language is also pro5ided for speakers of the

mainstream language. 2n these cases" where children of two language communities ac-uire thelanguage of the other &two way dual language model, one can make use of the fact that childrenlearn best from mutual interaction and integrate students of two language communities in the sameclass. 6oth languages are then normally present in a similar proportion in the classroom. This isusually called Bdual immersion interest constitute important sources of primary moti5ationwhich arises directly from the immediate learning situation and must not be deri5ed from apotential future ad5antage to which the knowledge of the language could lead. earning the

22


24/35

language and learning non$linguistic contents are integrated processes that fa5our the learningprocesses.

6ilingual teaching is demanding for the teachers who ha5e to make a conscious use of thelanguage for the purposes of sub?ect teaching through more than one language. ealing intensi5elywith the difficulties inherent to the sub?ects taught strengthens the learners> language awarenessand contributes to the de5elopment of the language curriculum across sub?ect borders.

2n fact" bilingual teaching re-uires a general reorientation of the way language learning is treated. Thisconcerns among other things the relation between the four skills &listening" reading" speaking andwriting," the use of di5ersified language resources in the classroom" the function of traditional forms oflanguage teaching" of language awareness" new forms of assessment" the use of new informationtechnologies etc. 2n other words" successful bilingual education re-uires an appropriate framework.

6ecause of its efficiency" bilingual education is increasingly replacing traditional forms of languageteaching. #nce teachers are trained and teaching materials elaborated" it does not cost more than amonolingual form of education. #n the other hand" society benefits from the high rewards thatdi5ersified linguistic competences bring to the indi5idual and to the community. !tudies in theeconomics of language learning and teaching show that competences in one" or se5eral" foreignlanguages can translate into higher salaries" in comparison to others who ha5e the same basic-ualifications and types of ?ob30.

2t is important to stress the particular need for intensi5e teacher training. The double focus on a sub?ect&e.g. mathematics, and on a language &e.g. English as a medium in non$English speaking countries,re-uires teachers of mathematics who are at the same time language teachers. 2t is not sufficient orefficient to take an English geographer to %ungary and to ask him/her to teach geography in English.!/he must also be trained in teaching geography in a foreign language &and ideally be able to answer-uestions asked in %ungarian,. 6ilingual schools re-uire a specific methodology that has to bede5eloped separately in each model of bilingual education. This is likewise true for teaching materials.A textbook designed for erman pupils in ermany will most probably pro5e inappropriate for

erman$medium teaching in enmark" at least with students ha5ing an intermediate proficiency inerman. As stated abo5e" the teaching will in many cases include both languages &repetition in theother language" some readings in the other language" systematic changes from one language to theother,. These techni-ues re-uire a particularly well thought$through strategy in using either language Land highly de5eloped bilingual skills on the part of the teachers.

As indicated in Chapter 222" bilingual education exists in many di5erse forms suited to 5ery differentsituations. ;nfortunately" for those looking for simple answers" most situations are in some waysuni-ue" so that models cannot simply be transferred from one situation to the other. As pointed out inChapters 22 and 222" careful examination of the sociolinguistic factors is necessary before any decision istaken about appropriate models or types of bilingual education. The check$list in the appendix toChapter 222 and 24 should help in such decision$making and a model will ha5e to be assessed

thoroughly in pilot classes before a decision is taken on its general implementation.

6efore dealing with the results of e5aluations of different models and types of bilingual education" it ishelpful to look first at some of the most fre-uently expressed concerns about bilingual education. Theseconcerns are often based on pre?udices and/or unreliable information. 2t is clear that many fears ha5etheir origin in a confusion between different models of bilingual education or in inappropriate transfersof outcomes from one situation to the other. Oe5ertheless" they constitute a se5ere handicap for anypolicy of bilingual education and may ha5e a negati5e impact on its results.

"an language pro$icienc be completel or $ull achie#ed in more than one language;

This -uestion is at the root of much implicit or explicit resistance to bilingual education. 2t may arise in

different forms: 8ill the mother tongue not be harmed by bilingual education 2sn>t it too early to start

30!ee for example the work of the !wiss economist rin" F." 399(: angue et diffUrentiels de statut socio$Uconomi-ue en !uisse. 6erne: #ffice fUdUral de la statisti-ue.

23


25/35

with bilingual education in preschool 8ill proficiency in the official/state language not be hamperedby support for the minority language Can full literacy be ac-uired in two languages simultaneously#b5iously" the e5idence that the capacity of the brain does not impede symmetric plurilingualism as anoutcome of bilingual education" e5en with intellectually less gifted children" is not a sufficient counter$argument" because ade-uate support by the educational system is needed to achie5e this goal $ andinade-uate support still is more common than one might wish.

The main problem consists in correctly estimating the language proficiency of the pupils" bearing inmind the rule formulated by the 3Gth century !wiss pedagogue ohann 1estaloMMi: Oe5er compare achild with others" but always with him/herself. The problem arises at the point of designing a bilingualprogramme" at its conception as well as when e5aluating its outcomes.

2n order to measure language proficiency" classical language tests are not ade-uate. As the "ommon'uropean Frameor! o$ re$erence $or languages1 learning7 teaching and assessment states" needsanalyses and language audits ha5e produced an extensi5e literature on the language$using tasks alearner may be e-uipped or re-uired to tackle in order to deal with the demands of the situations whicharise in the 5arious domains. Oowadays" reporting typical or likely beha5iour of learners" formulatingthe ob?ecti5es for learning and teaching and constructing tests at appropriate le5els are typicallyexpressed in terms of specific communication tasks the learner is able to perform or might be asked toperform in tests. The description of these tasks should be positi5ely worded &Bwhat the learner can do


26/35

The model helps to explain" for example" why minority language children who are transferred intomainstream$language$only schooling perform poorly despite good con5ersational abilities. 2t is becausethey ha5e not de5eloped sufficient proficiency to operate in a cogniti5ely demanding and contextreduced en5ironment.

2t is worth recalling in this context the fact that an elaborate and symmetric bilingual competence allows

the performance of cogniti5ely demanding tasks in both languages. Asymmetric bilinguals can performdemanding tasks in one" but only more basic tasks in the other language and this in situations whereboth interlocutors rely hea5ily on the shared contextual knowledge &e.g. by asking for something andaccompanying the re-uest by gestures,. 2f a person has only basic interpersonal communicati5e skills inboth languages" one may speak of restricted bilingualism.

2n dealing with the different models and types of bilingual education" the -uestion of languageproficiency is almost always of crucial importance. 8hether the goal is smmetric bilingualism"$unctional bilingualism&full competences in 3 and functional competences in , or e5en simply fullcompetence in the state language independently of the de5elopment of 3 &subtracti#e bilingualism,"the worst case" to be absolutely a5oided" is restricted bilingualismwhere neither 3 nor are fullyde5eloped. This might" howe5er" be the outcome of wrongly planned or organised bilingual education.2n order to a5oid this" it is necessary as a rule to aim at establishing firmly a high proficiency in 3before mo5ing entirely to . This might be the condition for students de5eloping a cogniti5e academicproficiency in the latter and a5oiding restricted bilingualism &also called Bdouble semilingualismo does bilingual education a$$ect the students6 culture;A fundamentalist argument against bilingual education is that languages are linked to cultures" andtherefore" a person can only belong to one culture and the biculturalism which accompaniesbilingualism will exclude the student from both cultures. This argument is espoused both by opponentsto maintenance models &who argue in fa5our of minority$language$only schooling, as well as opponentsto 3 medium teaching in transitional or $medium teaching in enrichment models.

Iecent research has shown that this is not the case on the condition that both cultures are 5alued in thesocial context of the student. Thus biculturalism constitutes no risk either in maintenance or inenrichment programmes" as long as this condition is realised. #n the other hand" such a risk may existin submersion or transitional programmes in so far as and the corresponding cultural habits are notfully accepted by the students &or where they are not accepted for other reasons" for instance because of

racism" by the ma?ority,.Should literac not be restricted to one language onl;

2n the framework of research on specific models of bilingual education" biliteracy is often seen as apedagogical problem. o literacy knowledge and skills in one language promote or inhibit the learningof literacy knowledge and skills in the other 2ndeed" the most important argument for promoting 3literacy in bilingual programmes for language minorities is that it facilitates the de5elopment of literacyin the socially dominant .

The real -uestion might be" therefore" whether bilingual education yields better results than dominant$language$only education. This also means addressing the -uestion of the option between the educationalhuman right for any child to use his or her own language as the main medium of education and strongbeliefs about the well$being and/or the professional prospects of the next generation. These areillustrated by the -uestion 8hy isn@t my child learning English asked by parents in bilingual classes&confused with =!panish> classes, in the ;!. #n the other hand" certain types of bilingualism canbecome stigmatised when a society percei5es certain forms of beha5iour as inappropriate relati5e to

25


27/35

social norms and con5entionalised forms of language beha5iour. This is particularly the case forbilingual but monoliterate children whose oral competence in the language of origin or heritagelanguage is not 5alued in 8estern societies which strongly 5alue the written language.

2n fact" =partial> or =unbalanced> bilingualism is more the rule than the exception and depends" amongother things" on the distribution of the languages in the indi5idual>s repertoire. Thus" persons or groupscan be characterised as being more or less functionally literate in each of their languages and these

degrees of literacy do not necessarily reflect the o5erall degree of their bilingualism."an bilingual education be e$$icient in a situation that is alread diglossic (e. g. bilingual education

2rabic5French ith diglossia classical 2rab5Moroccan 2rab or bilingual education Spanish5'nglish in"atalonia); ?s bilingual education harm$ul to children ho are alread bilingual ith anotherlanguage (e.g. migrant children);

6oth -uestions are based on the belief that the language capacity of a child is limited and that a thirdlanguage will necessarily affect the proficiency in the first two. #n the other hand" unsuccessfulbilingual education in diglossic contexts is due mostly to the fact that the diglossic situation" i.e. thedi5ersity of 3s" is not taken into account sufficiently when designing the programme. 1roblems due tosubmersion of migrant children in the school language before integrating them into a bilingualprogramme can clearly not be attributed to the bilingual programme" but to the pre5ious submersion.

6ilingual programmes in a diglossic situation or for students who are already bilingual ha5e thus to benewly designed for the specific context and must take into account explicitly the diglossia and students@bilingualism respecti5ely.

?s there a ris! o$ students mi


28/35

words" lexical items of 3 are used as a kind of rescue buoys $ and simultaneously as a call for help $ inorder to o5ercome a restricted lexical competence.

2n multilingual contexts" howe5er" the setting can often be defined simultaneously as exolingual andbilingual by interlocutors of different mother tongues and making use of multiple sets of 5arieties tocommunicate. A nati5e speaker may" for example" accept an 3 item as appropriated &i.e. gi5e it thestatus of a code$switching, and e5en take it up. #n the other hand" a bilingual speaker can be corrected

by his/her bilingual interlocutor who signals by this correction that s/he doesn>t share the opinion thatthe situation is suited for bilingual speech. The status of a lexical transfer can therefore 5ary from oneturn to the other depending on its mutual perception as expression of a lexical gap or the richness of abilingual competence.3G

#ne of the ma?or conclusions of the authors> reflections is that all forms of bilingual education are notsuited to all aims and to all social contexts respecti5ely. 2n order to choose between policy alternati5es"policy makers will ha5e to analyse the ad5antages and disad5antages of different forms of bilingualeducation with respect to their own goals.

The following table might illustrate some of these choices:

Form

Goal

Unilingual

L1 as medium, L2

as subject

Partial immersion

L1 and L2

as mediums

Full immersion

L2 as medium, L1 as

subject

Submersion

L2 as medium,

no status for L1

Transi-

tion

Oot appropriate 6est way to

combine theac-uisition of adominant andthe strengthening of3 as a support forit for youngerpupils

ood way to achie5e the

ac-uisition of adominant for#EI pupils" butbased on a unilingual5ision of the society.Oot appropriate forearly/primary years

Oot appropriate

ainte-

nanceEfficient inmaintaining 3" butbased on aunilingual 5ision ofthe society and thusincompatible withCouncil of Europestandards

6est way tocombine themaintenance of alesser used 3 andthe learning offoreign languages inthe school context

Oot appropriate Oot appropriate

!nric"-

mentOot 5ery efficient 6est way for the

learning of foreignlanguages in theschool context

ood experience where3 &in its standard andwritten form, is stronglypresent in the socialcontext

Oot appropriate

3GCf. Kdi eorges" BCode$switching and unbalanced bilingualism


29/35

Append' to Chapter! III and I$

#"ec$list for decision ma$ers in t"e conte%t of policies for bilingual education

1& 'nalysis of t"e tas$

8hat is the problem

%ow can we find solutions that are practicable" adapted to the specific national/regional situation"the ob?ect of a large consensus and that take into account the need for linguistic di5ersity

8hat actions do our European partners take

%ow much time do we ha5e

2& 'nalysis of t"e conte%t

!tereotypes about languages in school and in society

!ituation in Europe &role of English" mobility" language policies of the Council of Europe and theEuropean ;nion,

Actual language situation in the country &repertoires of the population Ye. g. language census dataZ"legal status of languages" domains and fre-uency of actual use of languages" language needs interms of economic" cultural and political factors,

8hich languages are actually taught and how

1ossible reactions of the social partners" the teachers" the parents" the media" etc.

(& )uestions to be tac$led

%ow many languages are to be learnt and taught respecti5ely

8hich languages should be dealt with &national languageYsZ" regional languageYsZ" neighbouring

languages" languages of immigration" international languages, To meet what needs and with which political goals &e. g.


30/35

29


31/35

Chapter $

Fro( po"c% p"annn# to a!!e!!(ent and e)a"uaton

A significant part of the energy re-uired to establish and maintain any education programme is" ofnecessity" de5oted to financial" manpower and other organisational matters. The same is true ofbilingual education. #fficials and teachers charged with these responsibilities" howe5er" know from

experience that energy and resources must also be found for continuous monitoring and assessment ofpupil achie5ement. 6ilingual education schools" of course" are an element of wider education systems"and may be re-uired to integrate their assessment procedures with pre$existing forms" e.g. state &orregional, examinations. 2f bilingual education students are to be enabled to both attain and demonstratetheir full potential" the difficulties this can create must be recognised and any necessaryaccommodations made. 6ut there are other issues" which are particular to the nature of bilingualeducation itself.

6ilingual education will be a no5el experience for many" if not most or all" parents in a gi5en situation.8hile they may be encouraged by the prospects of a bilingual education for their children" the power ofresidual stereotypical fears that bilingualism will ha5e a negati5e impact remains a potent factor. Thesepreoccupations ha5e to be taken seriously. 2n Canada" for example" ma?or concerns are: %ow does the

competence in English &usually 3, de5elop %ow do competences in the contents &mathematics"sciences" history" etc., de5elop %ow do competences in French &usually " rarely 0, de5elop %owdo other competences &cogniti5e" creati5e" metalinguistic skills, de5elop %ow does social competencede5elop %ow do learning strategies de5elop 2s some other approach more feasible and ?ust as or moreeffecti5e These are some of the -uestions that not only parents" but also teachers" go5ernment officialsand maybe other citiMens are asking.

epending on the particular circumstances" wider political and sociolinguistic issues may be important.8hat is the impact of bilingual education on the maintenance of the minority language %ow doattitudes towards the languages and language communities in contact de5elop Furthermore" the reasonswhy some groups of culturally di5erse students experience long$term persistent underachie5ement ha5emuch more to do with issues of status and power than with linguistic factors in isolation 39. Thus"

educational inter5entions that challenge the low status that has been assigned to a linguistic or culturalgroup are much more likely to be successful than those that reinforce this low status. 2t follows that ama?or criterion for ?udging the likely efficacy of any form of bilingual education or all$English programis the extent to which it generates a sense of empowerment among culturally di5erse students andcommunities by challenging the de5aluation of students@ identities in the wider society.

=alidit and eliabilit

2t is important that any assessment should meet standards of 5alidity and reliability 9A.The first standardre-uires the assessor to demonstrate that the inferences drawn from assessment outcomes areappropriate and 5alid" gi5en the nature and purpose of the assessment. For example" does a particulartest of language ability 5alidly measure a student>s ability to follow an academic programme in hissecond language &see below for a further discussion, The second standard" reliability" re-uires theassessor to control for 5ariations in assessment outcomes that are due to factors that are irrele5ant toany assessment of bilingual education per se. For example" it has already been noted that the under$achie5ement of some groups of bilingual students can be explained by reference to social and culturalfactors that cause under$achie5ement in all forms of education" and not ?ust bilingual education.

39Cummins ./eond 2d#ersarial iscourse1 Searching $or "ommon round in the 'ducation o$ /ilingualStudents.1resentation to the California !tate 6oard of Education" February 9" 399G" !acramento" California.

) For a fuller discussion see Oational Iesearch Council. &399(,. ?mpro#ing schooling $or language-minoritchildren. August" . S %akuta" R. &Eds.,. 8ashington" C: Oational Academy 1ress. Chapter *.

30


32/35

"ontrol roups

Assessment of a particular education programme" bilingual education in this case" in5ariably in5ol5escomparison with a control group. epending on the purposes of the assessment" these

educ bilingue en

Documents