LEARNMe Project Workshop

1. LEARNMe Project Workshop Navigating mainstream education policy and provision for linguistic diversity 8-9 May 2014 Constant Leung

2. Social Integration ±English A Peculiar English Problem?A view from English as an Additional Language Language Matters Languages Matter (for whom)? ‘Modern Languages’ are an important part of school curriculum for all’ To wit: Routine provision for French … EU’s 1+2 policy But: Minority community languages are not a concern for school curriculum Minority students’ L2 is part of (under)achievement issue ‘Language is key to social integration/national cohesion’ To wit: Language proficiency tests for naturalisation & citizenship Language = national language

3. Educational Provision for Minorities: 5 Policy Models • Comprehensive support - linguistic, academic, community outreach, intercultural education, e.g. Denmark, Sweden • Non-systematic support – ‘randomness of support’, ‘no clearly articulate policy’, e.g. Italy, Cyprus, Greece • Compensatory support – ‘… all types of support policies with only academic support being a rather weak aspect that is further undermined by tracking and streaming …’ e.g. Austria, Belgium • Integration – ‘the systems are welcoming…’; ‘linguistic support is not a central focus … no mother tongue teaching or [no] teaching as a second language is offered continuously …’ e.g. Ireland • Centralised entry support – focus on ‘centralised reception of migrant children and the provision of academic support as the main driver of educational inclusion’ e.g. France, Luxembourg (European Commission, 2013: 8)

6. Current policy & provision (England) Mainstreaming & Equality of Entitlement • All pupils, irrespective of language backgrounds, participate in mainstream English-medium classes following the National Curriculum • ‘Language [English] teaching is the professional responsibility of all teachers …’ (NCC 1991:1 and all official guidance since then, repeated in 2013, see NC 2014 documents) • One common curriculum for all; no differentiated curriculum or language assessment for different ethnolinguistic groups

7. Mainstreaming & Non-differentiated treatment • Statutory National Curriculum - no provision for EAL or local minority community languages • Common assessment (formats & criteria) for all pupils, irrespective of language background • Very little central govt English as an Additional Language (EAL) provision in place (due to progressive funding cuts); negligible or no local government-funded EAL provision in cities such as London and Birmingham • No publicly funded local minority community language education provision • EAL support work, where provided by school, tends to be carried out by teaching assistants

8. English as an Additional Language – Diversity

9. Ethnic diversity Current trajectory Primary schools 2005 19.3% 2006 20.6% 2007 21.9% 2008 23.3% 2009 24.5% 2010 25.5% 2011 26.5% 2012 27.6% 2013 28.5% Secondary schools 2005 15.9% 2006 16.8% 2007 18.0% 2008 19.5% 2009 20.6% 2010 21.4% 2011 22.2% 2012 23.2% 2013 24.2% (National Statistics, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/schools-pupils-and-their-characteristics-january-2013)

10. EAL – linguistic diversity 1m+ classified as ‘First language other than English’ 8.2m pupils in England 2013 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/207670/Main_text-_SFR21_2013.pdf Growth: Primary schools 2005 11.5% 2006 12.5% 2007 13.5% 2008 14.4% 2009 15.2% 2010 16.0% 2011 16.8% 2012 17.5% 2013 18.1% Secondary schools 2005 9% 2006 9.5% 2007 10.6% 2008 10.8% 2009 11.1% 2010 11.6% 2011 12.3% 2012 12.9% 2013 13.6%

11. What happened? One size fits all?

12. Bullock Report 1975 Context: Responding and reacting to widely acknowledged racism and racially discriminatory in school practice. Common sense would suggest that the best arrangement is usually one where the immigrant children are not cut off from the social and educational life of a normal school …[English language teaching in special centres] is often carried out in complete isolation from the child’s school … Specialist language teachers need to work in close liaison with other teachers. In whatever circumstances they operate, they should be given time to consult with these teachers in the schools and to be in touch with the child’s education as a whole. (The Bullock Report, DES 1975: 289-290)

13. Swann Report 1985 The needs of English as a second language learners should be met by provision within the mainstream school as part of a comprehensive programme of language education for all children. (The Swann Report, DES 1985: 426)

14. The Swann Report, DES 1985: 385-386 ‘We believe that the language needs of an ethnic minority child should no longer be compartmentalised … and seen as outside the mainstream of education since language learning and the development of effective communication skills is a feature of every child’s education. In many respects, ethnic minority children’s language needs serve to highlight the need for positive action to be taken to enhance the quality of language education provided for all pupils … since … we have the additional resource within our society of bilingual … communities, it is surely right and proper that the education system should seek to build on the opportunities which this situation offers. Linguistic diversity provides the opportunity for all schools , whether monolingual or multilingual, to broaden the linguistic horizons of all pupils by ensuring that they acquire a real understanding of the role, range and richness of language in all its forms.’ (Added emphasis)

15. L2 = L1: Good policy fit English as a second language learning has come to be perceived as part of a continuum of language development, not in itself a very different process from extending the repertoires of a first language across an increasingly differentiated range of domains … Swann … was able to return English language learners to the mainstream classroom. (Bourne, 1989: 64, emphasis added)

16. English & EAL – odd bedfellows English (mainstream subject) • Increasing emphasis on prescriptive traditional grammar, age-related literacy targets … • Emphasis on teacher-led pedagogy Theory: Traditional 3Rs? EAL • Language acquisition by natural exposure, with incidental support • No dedicated teaching programme Theory: Krashen’s comprehensible input … (1981)? (For further discussion, see Leung 2009, 2010)

17. Statutory Assessment ‘Summative assessment for bilingual pupils … should be based on national curriculum measures … It is not recommended that additional locally developed scales of fluency are used for summative purposes … (DfES, 2005:6)

18. Cumulative Policy Impacts over 30 Years • Equal access to common curriculum for all individuals from diverse backgrounds • Equal opportunities for participation in common educational process • Common assessment - formal level playing field • Schools and teachers are held & feel accountable (Arnot et al, 2014) • Enterprising local authorities/schools find short-term monies for projects • English-medium curriculum (first language norms) • No long-term promotion of local community language heritage • No centrally funded provision for local minority community language teaching • No ring-fenced centrally -funded provision for EAL teaching; little/no specialist EAL teacher education • Inappropriate English as a first-language normed assessment framework for EAL learners (particularly early stage learners)

19. Educational Provision for Minorities: 5 Policy Models • Comprehensive support - linguistic, academic, community outreach, intercultural education, e.g. Denmark, Sweden • Non-systematic support – ‘randomness of support’, ‘no clearly articulate policy’, e.g. Italy, Cyprus, Greece • Compensatory support – ‘… all types of support policies with only academic support being a rather weak aspect that is further undermined by tracking and streaming …’ e.g. Austria, Belgium • Integration – ‘the systems are welcoming…’; ‘linguistic support is not a central focus … no mother tongue teaching or [no] teaching as a second language is offered continuously …’ e.g. Ireland • Centralised entry support – focus on ‘centralised reception of migrant children and the provision of academic support as the main driver of educational inclusion’ e.g. France, Luxembourg (European Commission, 2013: 8)

20. Heart of the Matter How did we get here?

21. English Language in school policies in England

22. Historical Trajectory

23. Equal citizenship? Pluralisms & Ethnolinguistic Diversity Liberal individualistic pluralism Corporate pluralism Policy acceptance of group rights and entitlements, e.g. university quotas for some groups Equality of conditions to ensure outcomes Group/community membership supported Institutional/societal multilingualism (Gordon, 1981; Sampson, 1989:915) • Anti-discrimination legislation level playing field; no direct govt intervention to protect/promote groups • Equality of opportunity; not equality of outcomes • Laissez faire on minority community provision – based on individual choice & voluntary responsibility • Institutional mono-lingualism as default policy

24. Nation State Late 19th & 20th century views on the concept of nation-state: Liberal democracy can guarantee individual freedom and mobility, no need for ethnic and linguistic division/separate identities (a hindrance) [viz arguments against bilingual education in California, Proposition 227, 1998-] Marxist thinkers also viewed ethnicity/linguistic differences as a non-central issue for the development of a socialist nation-state [viz equal citizenship constitutional rights for all minorities in the former USSR] (See May, 2012, 2014)

25. A contemporary example of individualist liberal democratic view British Home Secretary to an audience of Black teenagers: Wherever we come from, whatever our roots, or our faith, we have a stake in being British and we can be proud of that. Celebrating diversity and building a fairer, more confident multicultural nation with a fresh, strong sense of national identity is an important and timely project. Having confidence in yourself and holding on to a dream of what you can achieve is so important. Nothing should hold you back in reaching your full potential. I want a society that gives you these chances, a society where each of you, regardless of colour or race or religion has an equal opportunity to succeed. It is your future and we need to hear from you. (TTA 2000:7) (Emphasis added.) Languages are not in the frame

26. Equality of Entitlement Equality of entitlement is based on ‘a politics of universalism, emphasizing the equal dignity of all citizens, and the content of this politics has been the equalization of rights and entitlements’ (Taylor, 1992: 37). No matter who you are and what you need, you’ll get the same. In curriculum terms, all pupils will be offered the same educational provision (subject content, teaching material, medium of instruction, and learning environment etc).

27. Equality of Treatment Equality of treatment is based on ‘a politics of difference … Everyone should be recognized for his or her unique identity … with the politics of difference, what we are asked to recognize is the unique identity of this individual or group, their distinctiveness from everyone else…’ (Taylor,1992:38). The politics of difference redefines nondiscrimination as requiring that we make distinctions between different individuals or groups of individuals the basis of differential treatment.

28. Back to Curriculum for Equal Citizens ‘What and whose students are of most worth? Do these students lend themselves to a common or core curriculum? If yes, how ought we organize their commonalities and differences? If no, ought these students be left to individualized, independent, and private processes of education?’ ‘What and whose knowledge is of most worth? Does this knowledge lend itself to public, pedagogical (or andragogical) forms? If yes, how ought we organize it for teaching? If no, ought this knowledge be left to emotive and intuitive processes of the private self?’ ‘What and whose practices are of most worth? Do these practices lend themselves to critical, public scrutiny and reform? If yes, what evidence of what students learned from these practices will be judged? If no, ought these practices be left to the private processes of self-justification?’ (Petrina, 2004: 88)

29. Language Curriculum for Diversity and DifferenceTime for Re-balancing? In addition to recognition of difference, we ask: • What language theory is being invoked? • What theory of learning and teaching is being promoted? • What kind of policy and planning process is at work? (Drawn from TESOL, 2012)