Teaching and Learning Languages Other Than English (LOTE ...

[Pages:31]Office for Policy, Research and Innovation

Teaching and Learning Languages Other Than English (LOTE) in Victorian Schools

Paper No. 14 February 2008

Published by

Education Policy and Research Division Office for Policy, Research and Innovation Department of Education and Early Childhood Development Melbourne February 2008

? State of Victoria 2008

The copyright in this document is owned by the State of Victoria or in the case of some materials, by third parties (third party materials). No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968, NEALS (see below) or with permission.

An educational institution situated in Australia which is not conducted for profit, or a body responsible for administering such an institution, may copy and communicate the materials, other than third party materials, for the educational purposes of the institution.

Authorised by the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, 2 Treasury Place, East Melbourne, Victoria 3002.

Also available at:

Author The report was written by Sue Fernandez, Research Unit for Multilingualism and Cross cultural Communication at the University of Melbourne

This project was managed by the Education Policy and Research Division, Office for Policy, Research and Innovation

For more information contact: Sandra Mahar, Research Manager Email: research@edumail..au

Contents

1. Introduction

1

2. Background

2

3. The benefits of language learning

4

General cognitive development and the development of literacy

6

Cultural and intercultural benefits of language learning

8

4. Globalisation and language and intercultural skills

12

Languages and intercultural competence as an economic imperative

13

5. A review of literature on LOTE teaching and learning

16

Background to the (re-)emergence of communicative language teaching 16

Communicative language teaching?current trends

18

The role of grammar in communicative language teaching

19

LOTE in the Victorian Essential Learning Standards

20

Intercultural language teaching and learning: an emerging pedagogy

20

References

24

i

1. Introduction

The Adelaide Declaration on National Goals for Schooling in the Twenty-first Century identified learning languages other than English as one of the eight key learning areas to be included in a balanced curriculum (MCCETYA 1999). Since then, learning other languages has experienced fluctuating fortunes in the curricula of various Australian states and territories; its struggle for acceptance as a legitimate area in its own right is ongoing. However, contemporary developments-including mass movements of peoples across the globe, increasingly diverse, multicultural communities, rapid technological change and increasing economic globalisation-have highlighted and reinforced the critical need for knowledge and understanding of other languages and cultures. This was recognised by the former Chief of the Australian Defence Force, General Peter Cosgrove, when he remarked that `Language skills and cultural sensitivity will be the new currency of this world order' (Cosgrove 2002). This report on Teaching and Learning Languages Other Than English (LOTE) in Victorian Schools aims to provide a succinct overview of LOTE as part of students' essential learning. It will do so from a range of perspectives, beginning with a brief summary of policy developments in language teaching in Victoria and nationally. This background material sets the context for the main body of the report, which looks more broadly at language teaching in its contemporary context, drawing from both local and international research literature to explore the significant contributions of LOTE study to students' learning in a globalised world, and recent developments in research into the principles and practices of effective LOTE teaching. Links will be drawn with the Victorian Essential Learning Standards Discipline-based Learning strand which includes the LOTE domain, comprising the dimensions of `communicating in a language other than English' and `intercultural knowledge and language awareness'. The structure of the report is as follows:

1. Introduction 2. Background: Languages in Victorian schools: local and national issues and perspectives 3. The benefits of language learning: cognitive, academic, general educational, and intercultural 4. Globalisation and language learning-Australian and international perspectives 5. A review of research literature on effective LOTE teaching and learning.

Introduction 1

2. Background

Many people express surprise to learn that the household of Victoria's first Governor, Charles La Trobe, was bilingual in French and English, and that almost all business transactions in Melbourne in the midlate years of the nineteenth century could be carried out in German. Four French-English bilingual schools, as well as several German-English ones, operated in Victoria in the late 1800s; the first ethnic school was established in Mill Park in 1857 (Clyne 2005, pp. 1-2). Lo Bianco (2003c, p. 15), describing this period, notes that `broad toleration of language pluralism was common'. However, the dawning of the twentieth century and the outbreak of the First World War saw a fundamental shift take place in the role and status of languages in Victoria and across Australia. Laws which banned bilingual education were introduced in most states between 1917 and 1918, and restrictions were placed on the amount of broadcasting permitted in `foreign' languages (Lo Bianco 2003c, p. 16).

Until the mid-1960s, French was the most widely taught second language in Victorian secondary schools, followed by German. By the early 1970s, lobbying by various groups including teachers, academics and ethnic communities saw the introduction of a broader range of language programs, including Italian, into Victorian schools. At about the same time, Asian languages, especially Indonesian and to a lesser extent Japanese, also gained a place in Victorian schools (Clyne, Fernandez & Grey 2004, p. 5). The expansion of language offerings was enhanced by the advent of the comprehensive National Policy on Languages (Lo Bianco 1987) which provided the internal social and cultural and external economic and international rationale for multilingualism and second languages acquisition in Australia. Against this backdrop, primary school language programs were introduced in Victoria in the 1980s.

Successive languages in education policies in Victoria have set relatively robust targets for implementation. The 1985 policy document The role of languages other than English in Victorian schools proposed `a concerted effort' over the ensuing 15 years to make the continuous study of LOTE part of the regular education of all children from Prep to Year 12 by the year 2000 (Clyne 2005, p. 154). This ambitious target has yet to be met; figures from Languages other than English in government schools 2005 compiled on behalf of the Victorian Department of Education & Training show that there has been a gradual decline in the numbers of students learning LOTE at the lower primary level since 1999, although figures at the upper primary level have remained stable (Department of Education & Training 2005). Comparisons with some other states, however, reveal that the situation for LOTE in Victoria is relatively favourable: in 2001, for example, there were 679,822 students studying LOTE across all sectors in Victorian schools, compared to New South Wales (which has a population 25 per cent larger than Victoria) where the figure was 356,890 (Clyne, Fernandez & Grey 2004, p. 6). The 2003 Victorian figures for Year 12 study of languages are also relatively strong in comparison with the national average of 13.5 per cent: in that year, approximately 20.2 per cent of students completing Year 12 in Victorian schools studied a language. In New South Wales the figure was 12.8 per cent, in Queensland 5.9 per cent according to data compiled by curriculum authorities in these states.

Despite Victoria's favourable performance when compared with other states, problems and difficulties persist for LOTE in securing an equal place alongside the other discipline-based domains in the Victorian

2 Teaching and Learning Languages Other Than English (LOTE) in Victorian Schools

curriculum. The LOTE analysis was established in August 2001 to examine future directions for languages, including greater accountability, increased student choice, continuity of access and equity, and greater flexibility in the delivery of language programs. The final report of the steering committee titled Languages for Victoria's Future (Department of Education & Training 2002) records several critical issues confronting LOTE programs in Victorian schools, including issues of `crowded curriculum', the low status of LOTE in comparison with other key learning areas, and inadequate teacher supply. `In broad terms, the analysis found that the important economic, social and community benefits gained from learning languages are not widely understood both in schools and the wider community...' (Department of Education & Training 2002, p. iii). These issues are, of course, not unique to Victoria. They have been highlighted in policy documents from other states, and most recently in the 2003 MCEETYA Review of Languages Education in Australian Schools, which developed the 2005 National Statement for Languages in Australian Schools (National Statement) and the National Plan for Languages Education in Australian Schools 2005-2008 (National Plan). The National Statement notes that `quality languages education is not yet part of the learning experience of all students' (MCEETYA 2005, p. 4) and the National Plan includes `Advocacy and Promotion of Languages Learning' as one of six nationally agreed interdependent strategic areas (MCEETYA 2005, p. 11). In late 2005, the Department of Education, Science and Training approved eight significant national projects which are currently addressing a range of national issues surrounding LOTE teaching and learning, including: a review of teacher education for languages teachers enhancing the quality of Indigenous languages programs an investigation into the state and nature of languages education in Australian schools the development of a nationally co-ordinated strategy and materials to promote language learning to

parents, students, schools and the wider community. Complementing these projects is a national professional learning program, the Intercultural Language Teaching and Learning in Practice (ILTLP) Project, which aims to develop languages teachers' knowledge and understanding of intercultural language teaching and learning. This newly emerging perspective is reflected in its inclusion as one of the two dimensions of the LOTE domain in the Victorian Essential Learning Standards (the Standards).

Background 3

3. The benefits of language learning

Teachers of mathematics and science in Australian schools rarely if ever find themselves in the position of having to justify the place of their discipline in students' education; for teachers of LOTE, however, there appears to be an ongoing need to advocate for the importance and benefits of languages study to the overall education of students. In this regard there are many parallels with other countries in which English is the principal language, including the USA and the UK, both of which continue to produce reviews and reports lamenting the lack of recognition for the benefits of language learning, the low status of language study, the poor uptake amongst secondary and tertiary students and the lack of recognition of the importance of language skills amongst business leaders. These studies include the Nuffield Languages Inquiry (1998-2000) in the UK (The Nuffield Foundation 2000) and Looking Beyond Borders: the importance of foreign area and language studies 2005 in the USA (National Association of State Boards of Education 2005). Writing in the US context about languages in the elementary (primary) school, Curtain and Dahlberg (2004, p. 395) note:

Every skill and outcome that is important to society is introduced through the elementary school curriculum. The lists of curriculum requirements in almost every state attest to the importance of reading, math, social studies, science, music, art and physical education. The introduction of computers into nearly every elementary school program clearly reflects the values of our electronic, information age. Not until world languages become a secure part of the elementary school curriculum will language learning begin to meet the needs and challenges of the twenty-first century.

In Europe, however, languages have long been a fundamental and accepted part of educational programs. With the continued expansion of the European Union, European language policies are moving towards the teaching of `at least two foreign languages from a very early age', a component of the curriculum considered `basic skills' (Euridyce 2005). In Finland, all students in Year 12 study English and Swedish in addition to Finnish, with more than 40 per cent also taking German; in the Netherlands, 99 per cent of students take English in addition to Dutch at Year 12 level, and 41 per cent also take German and 21 per cent French (Clyne 2005, p. 24). Amongst the countries where English is the majority language, there appears to be a pervasive complacency that `English is enough', combined with a lack of real awareness of and appreciation for the insights and understandings accruing from language learning. According to Clyne (2005, p. xi), these are manifestations of what can be regarded as `a monolingual mindset' which views English monolingualism as the norm, despite the fact that there are many more bilinguals and multilinguals in the world than there are monolinguals-particularly English monolinguals as according to a report by the National Centre for Languages in the UK, only six per cent of the world's population are native English speakers; 75 per cent speak no English at all (CiLT 2005, p. 4).

The contrast is indeed very stark between the European perspective on multiple languages as `basic skills', and the view in many English-speaking countries of LOTE as an optional, dispensable item in a `crowded curriculum'. As Liddicoat (2002a, p. 30) points out, language study once occupied a higher place in the curriculum of English-speaking countries, valued for its role in `training the mind'. He argues that, as that perception changed, so too did the view of the intrinsic importance of language study in its

4 Teaching and Learning Languages Other Than English (LOTE) in Victorian Schools

own right. Languages instead came to be seen as a `useful support' for other curriculum areas-for the improved cognitive flexibility and other academic benefits, for supporting and enhancing literacy in English, and for supporting trade and productivity. Liddicoat maintains that, while these supportive functions of languages are in fact accurate, they are not the main reason for including LOTE in the curriculum:

We in the English-speaking world seem to have lost sight of languages as educationally important. We have replaced this idea with the view that languages are educationally useful and we have seen this view increasingly undermined by the argument that `everyone speaks English' (2002a, p.30)

He goes on to note that the latter view is na?ve and simplistic, but that the emergence of English as a lingua franca cannot be denied. He makes the point that the European policies towards three languages-mother tongue, plus (usually) English, plus another language-`don't so much reflect a view that languages are useful, but rather a view that learning languages is important' (Liddicoat 2002a, p. 30 [emphasis added]).

Liddicoat goes on to enumerate the important educational outcomes of learning languages, all of which are central to the needs of students who will be required to participate in an increasingly interconnected world: knowledge of the language and the ability to use it in communication with other people understanding of the culture of another group understanding one's own language and culture through comparison with another language and culture knowing how to communicate in contexts where shared language resources between participants are

limited knowing how to communicate across cultural boundaries (Liddicoat 2002a, p. 30).

The focus on culture in Liddicoat's list is a relatively recent direction for language education, in accordance with the shift towards intercultural language teaching which will be introduced in the latter part of this section, and discussed at greater length in section 5.

The MCEETYA National Statement sets out the following rationale:

Learning languages

enriches our learners intellectually, educationally and culturally enables our learners to communicate across cultures contributes to social cohesiveness through better communication and understanding further develops the existing linguistic and cultural resources in our community contributes to our strategic, economic and international development enhances employment and career prospects for the individual (MCEETYA 2005, p. 2) The following overview and discussion will focus chiefly on the first two aspects of the first point in this list-the intellectual and educational enrichment which flow from language study; the latter section focuses

The benefits of language learning 5

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download