Multilingual spaces in Europe and the use of the CEFR

1
Multilingual spaces in Europe and the use of the
CEFR
Relatering af prøver til Common European
Framework Fredag den 21. april 2006 Eigtveds
Pakhus, Asiatisk Plads 2G
Piet Van Avermaet Centre for Intercultural
Education Univerity of Ghent Belgium piet.vanaverm
aet_at_ugent.be
2
Multilingual Europe

• Europe is a multilingual space
• Its institutions promote multilingualism and
  plurilingualism
• CEFR is seen as a basic instrument in the
  promotion of multilingual Europe and plurilingual
  citizens
• So far, no problem!

3
Monolingual nation states (1/2)

• Most European nation states are de facto
  multilingual (regional minority languages,
  immigrants, media, ). A variety of multilingual
  spaces.
• However
• Without knowledge of the national language one
  cannot function in society
• Knowledge of the national language will open all
  doors to work, school, etc.
• Immigrant languages are an obstacle to
  integration
• Immigrant languages have a negative effect on the
  school and learning results of immigrant children
• This are ideological assumptions. There is hardly
  any empirical evidence.

4
Monolingual nation states (2/2)

• The cornerstone of integration policies in most
  European countries is LANGUAGE (i.e. the language
  of the majority group)
• Monolingualism is the norm ideological in nature
  (citizenship, integration, language use in the
  street, language conditions for candidates on the
  social housing market).
• To realise this policy the CEFR is used as a
  basic instrument.
• This seems less obvious to me!

5
(mis)use of the CEFR (1/2)

• CEFR is developed for the learning, teaching and
  assessing of foreign languages and not meant for
  an L2 context
• CEFR descriptors at the lower levels assume
  literacy. This is problematic when used for
  integration and citizenship programmes and tests
  where a large part of the target group is
  (functional) illiterate or has low literacy
  skills.
• CEFR descriptors at higher levels mainly have
  higher educated people in mind. Lower and semi
  skilled people that have no higher education
  background or do not study at higher level do not
  belong to the target group.
• The CEFR descriptors mainly refer to adults and
  adolescents. It is less appropriate to use it for
  children or young learners.
• The level descriptions are not domain specific.
  Descriptors, taxonomies, lists are not exhaustive
  and not specific enough to be used directly for
  curriculum and test development.

6
(mis)use of the CEFR (2/2)Apply double standards

• And above all, it seems that the CEFR is used
• To promote multilingualism
• To promote monoligualism
• We cannot blame the CEFR for that.
• Exactly, but we must warn the users of possible
  misuse and its impact.
• And given the widely usage of the CEFR - we
  must provide alternative uses from which the
  different target populations and the concept of
  multilingualism can benefit.

7
good and bad multilingualism (1/2)

• selective multilingualism
• European space
• good multilingualism
• added value and surplus
• Extra qualifications
• Is needed, a must in a globalising world
• Promoted
• Transparency
• Role of CEFR

8
good and bad multilingualism (2/2)

• selective multilingualism
• Multilingual spaces in European cities
• bad multilingualism
• Is problematic
• Not recognised, no value at work, school, street
• Seen as an obstacle in process of acquisition of
  dominant language, participation and integration
• Adapt to a monolingual policy and discourse
• Promotion of monolingualism norm
• Transparency
• Role of CEFR
• At same time at school discourse and policy of
  surplus of multilingualism French, English,
  German,

9
Reality of bad multilingualism (1/2)

• Example Rabot in Ghent (ethnographic research)
• Migrants have a language deficit BUT,
• In neighbourhood functional and complex
  multilingualism
• Task specific competences in many languages,
  also in dominant language immediately relevant
  in specific contexts and important for social
  networks in neighbourhood
• Lack of other specific competences
• Most migrants know the dominant language
  proficient in specific repertoire that is
  demanded by specific tasks and not proficient in
  others.
• Similar to foreign students or higher educated
  people.
• Shift from dichotomous model to polycentric
  model constant switches from variety to variety
  depending on context, interaction partner, topic,
  ...

10
Reality of bad multilingualism (2/2)

• SO,
• Multilingualism of migrants is specifically
  organised and Dutch has a specific place in
  that multilingual repertoire
• No universal recipe to remedy language
  deficit
• Not for newcomers at school
• Neither for citizenship or integration courses or
  tests

11
Redefine multilingualism

• Multilingualism is often seen as knowing,
  mastering several languages.
• Sometimes full proficiency.
• Preferable term is multilingual repertoires
  repertoires is not about languages, they
  consist out of parts/pieces of language
  genres, styles of language use, specific
  registers for certain domains or situations. We
  understand German, but writing is a problem. We
  speak English at conferences but getting the full
  picture of the menu at the Fat Duck is a
  problem. We know just enough Italian to guide
  ourselves through a meal in Italy, but going to
  the theatre?
• The same goes for our mother tongue.

12
Multilingual spaces and the CEFR

• Lets have a look at the CEFR from that
  perspective.
• CEFR wants to promote multi- and plurilingualism
• CEFR is used for
• L2 curriculum and test development
• for low(er) skilled people
• for illiterate, low and semi literate people
• We must use it in a more dynamic, functional way
  
• In a way that really promotes multilingualism and
  not only good multilingualism
• In a more relaxed way
• No pre canned mojitos, but a variety of
  handmade cocktails

13
A few examples (1/2)

• MAATWERK
• Proposal for more tailor made integration courses
  (NTU/ITTA/CINOP/CTO)
• Based on candidates needs
• From the start
• Low(er) skilled or illiterate people are very
  well capable of expressing why they want to
  learn, what kind of Dutch they want to learn.
• Competency clusters often range more than just
  one level.
• Candidates have the opportunity to learn that
  part of a multilingual repertoire they lack and
  expressed a need for.
• It can be reflected in CEFR profile instead of
  just one level.
• From assessment perspective portfolio has great
  potential here.

14
A few examples (2/2)

• Certificate Dutch as a foreign language (CNaVT)
  (Leuven/Amsterdam)
• Portfolio project (IrelandDublin)

15
To summarize (1/3)

• We need more theory and empirical research for
  some assumptions that are now made.
• A theoretical rationale as a basis for the
  development of language policies, curriculum and
  test development coherence and building an
  argument .
• Acknowledge the multilingual reality of Europe.
• Curricula or tests could be based on an accurate
  and realistic analysis of the needs and
  possibilities of the learner/user/candidate/
• Curricula or tests to teach or measure the
  proficiency of the official language(s) of a
  country or region can meet those parts of a
  multilingual repertoire of task specific
  competences that are absent or are needed by a
  person.

16
To summarize (2/3)

• This is the case for foreign language teaching
  and testing as well as for citizenship or
  integration purposes, for
• We all too often provide people with a pair of
  roller-skates to protect themselves against the
  rain.
• Our major concern often seems to be a technical
  one
• Is the exam at the intended level?
• How do I know that my ?
• Looking for items/tests that are exactly at the
  same level
• Sometimes this technical approach seems to be
  counter productive and ignores what is really at
  stake social cohesion of a multicultural
  society.

17
To summarize (3/3)

• Lets re-focus
• The needs of the stakeholders
• Tailor made work
• Really promote multilingualism the use of
  multilingual repertoires in different
  multilingual spaces
• The CEFR as a compendium/toolkit to
• Assist in curriculum development and develop task
  specific competences for assessment instruments.
• In the first place roughly profile a curriculum
  or a test/assessment tool.
• The CEFR as a tool to communicate with
  candidates/students about their needs. (like in
  maatwerk and the Dublin portfolio project).