220 likes | 426 Views
A response to multilingual reality: Two-way immersion education in Germany – a model for England?. Gabriela Meier, April 2009. Overview. Multilingual reality TWI education TWI education in Germany/Berlin TWI education in England? Challenges/limitations. Berlin : 31% (2006)
E N D
A response to multilingual reality: Two-way immersion education in Germany – a model for England? Gabriela Meier, April 2009
Overview • Multilingual reality • TWI education • TWI education in Germany/Berlin • TWI education in England? • Challenges/limitations
Berlin : 31% (2006) London: 25% (2008) Sources: SENBJS 2006, Collis 2008 School children who speak a language other than the language of instruction at home
Bilingual model (two-way immersion) Theoretical model • Classes: 50% majority-language speakers 50% speakers of one migrant language • Two teachers one of each language/culture • The same curriculum • Lessons: 50% in one language 50% in the migrant language Aims: • Bilingualism (after 6 to 8 years). • Positive cross-cultural attitudes
TWI programmes • state-run programmes using community languages • Examples • USA (over 300 programmes) • Germany (22 streams)
Founded/PlaceName (level)DE withStudents 1689 Berlin Collège Français(III) FR 800 1960 Berlin John-F.-Kennedy School (III) EN 1700 1972 Saarbrücken Lycée Franco-Allemand (III) FR 1000 1973 Freiburg Lycée Franco-Allemand (III) FR 900 1992 Berlin Staatliche Europa-Schule (III) EN, FR, RU, SP, 6000 PT, IT, GR, TU, PL Wolfsburg Deutsch-Ital. Gesamtschule (III) IT 500 1998 Hagen Deutsch-Ital. Grundschule (I) IT ? 1998 Sillenbuch Deutsch-Franz. Grundschule (I) FR ? 1999 Hamburg Europa-Schule (II) IT, PT, TU 500 2001 Cologne Deutsch-Ital. Schule (II) IT ? 2008 Cologne Deutsch-Türkische Schule (I) TU ?
Founded/PlaceName (level)DE withStudents 1689 Berlin Collège Français(III) FR 800 1960 Berlin John-F.-Kennedy School (III) EN 1700 1972 Saarbrücken Lycée Franco-Allemand (III) FR 1000 1973 Freiburg Lycée Franco-Allemand (III) FR 900 1992 Berlin Staatliche Europa-Schule (III) EN, FR, RU, SP, 6000 PT, IT, GR, TU, PL Wolfsburg Deutsch-Ital. Gesamtschule (III) IT 500 1998 Hagen Deutsch-Ital. Grundschule (I) IT ? 1998 Sillenbuch Deutsch-Franz. Grundschule (I) FR ? 1999 Hamburg Europa-Schule (II) IT, PT, TU 500 2001 Cologne Deutsch-Ital. Schule (II) IT ? 2008 Cologne Deutsch-Türkische Schule (I) TU ?
Staatliche Europa-Schule Berlin (SESB) Language combinations • German – Russian • German – French • German – English • German – Italian • German – Spanish • School trial has run since 1992 (year 1 to 13) • Nearly 6000 students currently in bilingual streams University access in Germany, Greece, France, Italy • German – Greek • German – Turkish • German – Portuguese • German - Polish
TWI education in London?Languages spoken by children in London schoolsBengali & Silheti 40,400 Greek 6,300Panjabi 29,800 Akan (Ahanti) 6,000Gujerati 28,600 Portuguese 6,000Hindi/Urdu 26,000 French 5,600Turkish 15,600 Spanish 5,500Arabic 11,000 Tamil 3,700Yorubu (Nigeria) 10,400 Farsi 2.500Somali 8,300 Italian 2,500Cantonese 6,900 Vietnamese 2,400Source: Baker, P. and Eversely, J. (2000) Multilingual Capital, London: Battlebridge
Wix primary school (started 2006) Wandsworth, London English-French (28 pupils per year) Collaboration between local primary and Lycée Charles de Gaulle TWI is possible in England
Reason 1: • Improve motivation for language learning • high-level proficiency in two languages • positive attitude towards language learning/bilingualism • greater language awareness and confidence • builds on students’ or local language expertise • regular exposure to and opportunities to use the language • language relevant in everyday life • Addresses: • Increasing lack of language skills and • low take-up of languages at secondary level and beyond
Reason 1: • Improve motivation for language learning • high-level proficiency in two languages • positive attitude towards language learning/bilingualism • greater language awareness and confidence • builds on students’ or local language expertise • regular exposure to and opportunities to use the language • language relevant in everyday life • Addresses: • Increasing lack of language skills and • low take-up of languages at secondary level and beyond
Reason 2: • Increase status of locally spoken languages • languages studied by majority and minority language speakers • elevating a migrant language to a language of instruction • signal to parents and children that language is important • providing role models (teachers) • Addresses: • Low status of some migrant languages and their speakers
Reason 3: • Potential for community cohesion • reduce ethnic segregation in schools • more positive cross-cultural attitudes • potential for multiple identity development • positive class climate/class cohesion • greater conflict resolution skills • better home-school communication • potential two-way integration • Addresses: • Duty to promote community cohesion in schools (DCFS, 2007)
Reason 3: • Potential for community cohesion • reduce ethnic segregation in schools • more positive cross-cultural attitudes • potential for multiple identity development • positive class climate/class cohesion • greater conflict resolution skills • better home-school communication • potential two-way integration • Addresses: • Duty to promote community cohesion in schools (DCFS, 2007)
Reason 4: • Student-centred approach/individual development • builds on students’ skills/develops linguistic potential • using children’s home life as a knowledge resource • have high expectations of all students • represent the student’s cultures in school • accept children for who they are • Addresses: • Every Child Matters Strategy: Change for children in schools (DfES, 2005)
Implementation: challenges • Find appropriate site • Interested parents • Ideally bilingual/multilingual neighbourhood • Reasonably liberal/open-minded population • Sympathetic authorities • Sympathetic host school • Integrate into school system • integrate into school: inform all staff/teachers/governors • Start with two classes • Integrate into curriculum • Integrate with FE/HE provisions (long term) • Local integration • cooperate with parents, community organisations, embassies
Paradigm Shift • TWI education would challenge • how we view languages of the wider world • how we view speakers of those languages • our understanding of social integration • attitudes of native English speakers’ to language study • Freeman (1998) Bilingual education and social change, Clevedon, Multilingual Matters • Two-way immersion education = two-way integration
Further research • Long-term effects of TWI education (economic, societal, political) • Feasibility study taking into account economic, linguistic, cultural, political, popular and educational factors.
Contact: Gabriela Meier, University of Exeter, Department of Politics, Amory Building, Exeter EX4 4RJ (g.s.meier@exeter.ac.uk)