FULL VERSION - European Commission - Europa

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2 Conceptual framework and work methodology2.1 The notions of multilingualism and educationThe Work Group agrees that ‘multilingualism’ and other related terms, such as ‘linguisticdiversity’ and ‘plurilingualism’, are neither apolitical nor ideologically neutral notions. There isfurther agreement about the fact that though these terms are sometimes usedinterchangeably, they should be distinguished from one another. Multilingualism is an allencompassingterm, which may be used for individuals or groups of people who can use anumber of languages, or for communities where several languages co-exist –regardless ofwhether this state of affairs is officially recognized or not. Moreover, the term may be used todescribe a school curriculum offering several languages to pupils and encouraging them tolearn more than one foreign language. It may also be used –and it often is- when one istaking a position in favour of reducing the dominant position of English inside and outsideEurope. In other words, though the term is equivocal, it does mark a negative position towardmonolingualism and its counterpart: monoculturalism.WG1 believes that monolingual and monocultural practices are bound to have negativeimplications for European integration since the condition for the formation of a united Europeis that all member states participate equally in its making and that the national interests, thecultural and linguistic rights of each state are not questioned.However, from the point of view of language education, with which WG1 is cruciallyconcerned, it is also important to point out that the group supports the plurilingual approachto education for the development of multilingualism. The group’s understanding ofplurilingualism agrees with the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages(CEFR: 4) as it explains that the plurilingual approach emphasises the fact that:“…as an individual person's experience of language in its cultural contexts expands,from the language of the home to that of society at large and then to the languages ofother peoples (whether learnt at school or college, or by direct experience), he or shedoes not keep these languages and cultures in strictly separated mentalcompartments, but rather builds up a communicative competence to which allknowledge and experience of language contributes and in which languagesinterrelate and interact.”Approaches to language education, i.e., to teaching and learning, conducive to multilingualcitizenry in Europe have been at the heart of the discussions of WG1. However, in makingthis statement it is important to assert that the term education has been used broadly used tocover formal education (public, state or private), but also informal education. It also coversteaching (in a classroom context or from a distance), as well as learning: formal, non-formaland informal. It has covered cultural activities and awareness raising which may occurthrough social practices and organized projects.When referring to education, people generally tend to think of teaching rather than learning.In as far as learning is concerned, it seems that most people are familiar with formal learningsituations, i.e. those provided in institutional contexts concerned with the learning processrather than the outcome of teaching or those provided through computer or web-basedprogrammes (e.g. self-access learning and distance learning programmes). Fewer peopleare familiar with non-formal learning contexts, i.e. learning which is intentional from thelearner’s perspective, but not provided by educational or training institutions. This, like formallearning, is also practiced as a structured activity –structured in terms of learning objectives,learning time or learning support. Finally, the kind of learning that we are all familiar with butrarely think of as social practice with remarkable results is non-intentional informal learning.Such learning is the product of daily life activities related to work, social or family or leisure. Itis not structured (in terms of learning objectives, learning time or learning support) andtypically does not lead to certification. Our WG was interested in all these educationalopportunities.Civil Society Platform on Multilingualism: 40Policy Recommendations for the Promotion of Multilingualism in the European Union 06/06/10 – FULL VERSION
2.2 Work methodologyWG1 was initially composed of ten (10) European organizations which participated throughtheir representatives, 62 who met to compile a survey questionnaire. Each representativeasked members of his/her organization to complete this questionnaire which contained 40questions (see Annex 5.1) on the following areas:Raising AwarenessLanguage assessmentMethodology/PedagogyResearchNon-formal learningTeacher TrainingLess widely used languagesLifelong LearningEarly Language LearningMost of the respondents were members of the organizations represented in the WG.Based on the responses to the first questionnaire, a second one was drafted (see Annex5.2), designed specifically for a single organization. 63 As this organization joined the WG at alater date, there was an opportunity to assess the first instrument and prepare the secondone, with fewer and more targeted questions, which were (a) institution related on the onehand and (b) thematic related on the other, focusing on: Early Language Learning and Lifelong Learning Language assessment Language teacher training and Language researchThe responses provided were taken into account, as were the responses to the firstquestionnaire, for the position papers that WG members drafted. These were then revised onthe basis of the discussion that followed as to what categories of information the reportsshould contain.The WG position papers and this Report have also taken into account the “Best Practice”examples (see Annex 5.4) submitted to the WG. In other words, the proposal andrecommendations this report makes are also based on the information generated by thetemplate that the WG created requesting:Administrating Organisation of the “best practice” exampleProject Target Group or GroupsFinancing (by whom and how much)Reason(s) why the project is considered to be a “best practice” exampleSustainability of the projectProject location(s) (country/ies) and durationTopics / aims of the projectContact / WebsiteProject objectives and descriptionAnother good practice example you know of62 Chair: Cor van der Meer (Mercator). Members: EFIL - Ilyana Panteleeva, ISSA - Aija Tuna, EAEA - MartaLottes, EEU - Seán ó Riain, EEE-YFU - Katrine Korsgaarg, ETC - Gaëlle Collot, ALTE - Martin Nuttall, ECSWE -Kamiel van Herp.63 The Organization is European Federation of National Institutions of Language (EFNIL), in which all EUmember states are represented through their national language institutes.Civil Society Platform on Multilingualism: 41Policy Recommendations for the Promotion of Multilingualism in the European Union 06/06/10 – FULL VERSION
Page 1 and 2: Civil Society Platform on Multiling
Page 3: 1.3 Post-Lisbon scenario: a "new ri
Page 8 and 9: languages, and on best practices in
Page 10 and 11: On Translation and Terminology*Full
Page 12 and 13: Recommendations1 EU language plan t
Page 14 and 15: Introduction“(The Union) …shall
Page 16 and 17: flower. The popularity of a garden
Page 18 and 19: Concern that multilingualism was be
Page 20 and 21: 1.6 Sub-group feedbackThe responses
Page 22 and 23: discrimination in favour of RMLs. S
Page 24 and 25: 3.3 Sub-group feedbackGroup members
Page 26 and 27: Slovenian or the RMLs. In this resp
Page 28 and 29: 5.3 Linguistic ObservatorySeveral o
Page 30 and 31: Work group on Language Diversity an
Page 32 and 33: understand people from other cultur
Page 34: target groups are not exclusive amo
Page 39: 1 Defining the task of the Work Gro
Page 43 and 44: articles. 69 The only other languag
Page 45 and 46: education in European schools is ca
Page 47 and 48: The question of what role language
Page 49 and 50: trainees; Offer training mechanisms
Page 51 and 52: investigating expectations and asse
Page 53 and 54: learning. The key of course is the
Page 55 and 56: As a pedagogy this education promot
Page 57 and 58: mechanism to disseminate best pract
Page 59 and 60: 3 Education and training Mobility g
Page 61 and 62: In order to facilitate the circulat
Page 63 and 64: target groups (content creator or c
Page 65 and 66: Civil Society Platform onMultilingu
Page 67 and 68: WORKING GROUP ON LANGUAGE PLANNING
Page 69 and 70: (6.2) Linguistic rights for all EU
Page 71 and 72: cost-benefit analysis comparing Eng
Page 73 and 74: (a) Constantly insisting that its i
Page 75 and 76: Hicks, Davyth 2005 Cornish: languag
Page 77 and 78: WORKING GROUP ON LANGUAGE DIVERSITY
Page 79 and 80: 4.1 In which way do you think this
Page 81 and 82: 8 What should the European Union do
Page 83 and 84: 10 What are the most common barrier
Page 85 and 86: Additional questions concerning lan
Page 87 and 88: References 8EU official documentsEu
Page 89 and 90: WORKING GROUP ON EDUCATIONANNEX 6.1
Page 91 and 92:
27. In which way are there constrai
Page 93 and 94:
8. On what topics is your instituti
Page 95 and 96:
Annex 6.4 GROUP MEMBERS′ POSITION
Page 97 and 98:
water, and one begins skiing on the
Page 99 and 100:
Cor van der Meer - Mercator Europea
Page 101 and 102:
supported study completed in 2006 (
Page 103 and 104:
Finally, one of the greatest challe
Page 105 and 106:
Marta Lottes - European Association
Page 107 and 108:
o More flexible provision of langua
Page 109 and 110:
) An international THEATRE YOUTH FO
Page 111 and 112:
Pasporta Servo http://www.pasportas
Page 113 and 114:
interpretation and reporting system
Page 115 and 116:
proficiency in a particular languag
Page 117 and 118:
of mediating competence. This will
Page 119 and 120:
Annex 6.5 BEST PRACTICE EXAMPLESBES
Page 121 and 122:
extended and systematic research on
Page 123 and 124:
BEST PRACTICE EXAMPLE 2: Laying see
Page 125 and 126:
- Bonjour, monsieur l’facteur, av
Page 127 and 128:
BEST PRACTICE EXAMPLE 3: Non formal
Page 129 and 130:
BEST PRACTICE EXAMPLE 4: Multiplica
Page 131 and 132:
Possible follow-up Project:The even
Page 133 and 134:
Foundation Holdler ‘68Main reason
Page 135 and 136:
dialogue.Possible follow-up Project
Page 137 and 138:
WORKING GROUP ON TRANSLATION AND TE
Page 139:
Sutton, Geoffrey, 2008. Concise Enc
show all

FULL VERSION - European Commission - Europa

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?