Transcript Bilingual Education in Germany

Ira Koenig
Applied Linguistics (M1)
2008-09, Q1
Teresa Naves
Outline






General remarks on educational policy in Germany
Remarks on terminology
Brief history of Bilingual programs in Germany
Aims
Types of bilingual programs
Characteristics of the program
Initiation
Target group
Implementation
Material
Methodology
Evaluation
Teachers
Use of Mother Tongue
Extension/extra offers
Other languages
General remarks on educational policy in Germany
 Due to the German federal system, education organized by federal
states
→ different school systems
→ different programs of BE
 Presentation: focus on BE program of high schools (“Gymnasium”)
→ school type that initiated BE programs
in the federal state of North Rine Westphalia (NRW)
→ state with most bilingual sectors
Remarks on terminology
 Different articles: ambiguous use of terms
- Bilingual Education (Mäsch, Wedel et.al.)
- CLIL (Wannagat, Wedel et.al.)
- late immersion (Wannagat)
 Term ‘Bilingual Education’ critized, as it is not bilingual in the proper
sense of the word
→ no instruction in mother tongue (compare: Naves: Successful CLIL
programmes:2004)
not like BE programs in the US
 Research: use of only FL frequently characterizes bilingual classes
(Wedel et.al.: 20)
Brief history of Bilingual programs in Germany
 started in second half of the 1960s: German/French cooperation
treaties 1963 → 1st programs: French-German (Mäsch: 155)
 now: more than 450 schools of all school types (high school,
comprehensive school etc.)
 “[..] the once dominant German- French bilingual streams [have been
replaced] with German- English ones” (Wedel et.al :663)
 languages: English, French, Italian, Dutch, Modern Greek, Dutch,
Polish, Russian, Spanish, Czech
Aims
 “The different bilingual sections are meant to contribute to a better




understanding and awareness of other European cultures and to go
well beyond a mastery of their respective languages.” (Mäsch :161)
“The type of bilingual education provided is aimed at inculcating the
language [..] as a language of a partner; as such this goes far beyond
using language as a mere means of communication” (Mäsch: 156)
“BE is aimed at developing bicultural competence” (Mäsch :162)
“They should become brokers between the German culture and
another” (Mäsch :165)
“[..] it leads to a real-life possibility of study and employment mobility”
(Mäsch :165)
Types of bilingual programs
 CLIL moduls: - students taught content from different subjects in
different languages (Wedel et.al :21)
-limited projects: subjects taught in English
(Carl et.al.:26) →no need for permission etc. from state
departments
 Bilingual sections: long- term : grades 5-13 (10)
- additive types: teaching of language/ bilingual
disciplines shared between two teachers, one
TL, one L1
- integrative types: most frequent (Mäsch:160)
“official decrees [..] have moved it, unlike the additive type, from
an experimental to a highly developed and consolidated stage”
(Mäsch:160)
Types of bilingual programs
 bilingual sections also identified as ‘late immersion’ :
“[..] the German CLIL model [..] meet[s] the criteria for immersion
programmes defined by Johnson and Swain” (Wannagat:665),
as, for example:
- ”The L2 is a medium of instruction”
-“The immersion curriculum parallels the local L1 curriculum”
- “Exposure to L2 is largely confined to the classroom”
- “students enter with similar (and limited) level of L2
proficiency” (Wannagat:664)
→ this type of program presented
Characteristics of the program: Initiation
 School:
- Decisive will of an initiator
-Comitted group of teachers/ headmaster (Mäsch:167)
“Generally speaking, the bilingual section will stand or fall on the good
will of the school director and the professional, didactic and, last but
not least, human qualities of the teachers in the bilingual disciplines”
(Mäsch:169)
Characteristics of the program: Initiation
 Students:
- optional (runs parallel to ‘traditional’ EFL classes)
- uppon parents’ initiative (after consulting teachers- extra effort
involved)
“The German-English sections benefit from the growing recognition of many parents that,
after 1992, a knowledge of foreign languages will become ever more important to the
future of their children.[..]; that is why these particular sections are at present
experiencing a boom after several years of stagnation.” (Mäsch:161)
→ decisive factor: parental involvement (comp.Naves: Successful
CLIL programmes:2004)
- open to all students
- no extra cost involved: public schools
“no significant extra costs are involved in running a bilingual section.” (Mäsch:170)
“the fact that the schools are publicly-funded is important, given the frequently- held
conception that bilingual education is an expensive alternative which should only be
provided with parsimony” (Baetens:2-3)
Characteristics of the program: Target group
 students unilingual:
some from immigrant background, but
homogenous groups
- same command of L1/ FL
- they all live in German speaking context
(although some may
speak a different language at home)
“aimed at a predominantly homogenous, indigenous school population
[..] For mixed or migratory school populations, however, other models
are considered more appropriate” (Mäsch:157)
“The target population of the bilingual section is primarily German
pupils; that is why the curriculum programmes adopted respectively in
the different German Länder (states) are taught. The bilingual factors
are additional elements. The subject content of the bilingual
disciplines and the weekly periods given to other subjects cannot be
reduced” (Mäsch:160)
Characteristics of the program: Implementation
 TL: FL 1
 constitution of the classes: “it is advisable to set up a separate bilingual
class whenever possible, rather than to integrate it with a normal class “
(Mäsch:169)
 hours of instruction:
lower secondary (grades 5-10)
- grades 5/6: increased amount of units 7 (=45 min.)/ week
-from grade 7 onwards: English: 5 U, Subject: 2-3 (add. U in grades 7/8)
upper secondary (grades 11-13)
“Two conditions [..] for continuation in the bilingual stream”
- English as intensive course( “Leistungskurs”) (1 out of 2 intensive
courses): 5 U/week
- 1 bil. subject as ordinary course (“Grundkurs”): 3 U/week
(Mäsch: 159, 169)
Characteristics of the program: Implementation
 subjects taught in English:
- Geography
- Politics
- History
“Although other subjects [..] are conceivable as bilingual disciplines,
these social science subjects are particularly appropriate “ (Mäsch:162)
→ TL understood as partner language, subjects’ affinity with the partner
culture, no such relationship in natural science subjects
→ covered by general language ( to greater extent than natural sciences)
(Mäsch:162)
- optional: Art/ Physical E
- according to bil. curriculum, max. of 2 bil. subjects at the same time
(Mäsch: 162)
Characteristics of the program: Implementation
 certificate/ “Bilingual Mention” with graduation (“Abitur”)
- no need to do language exams when entering university in countries
of partner language
conditions to obtain mention:
- English intensive course/ subject have to be part of graduation exams
(written/oral exams)
 possibility to abandon bilingual section, continue in ‘normal’ class
(Mäsch: 159)
Characteristics of the program: Material
 specially designed material: for example: Bilingual Geography. Klett
“[..] since 1993 printed materials for the bilingual disciplines have been
published in Germany by Klett Schulbuch Verlag in Stuttgart.” (Mäsch:170)
 authentic material TL (higher grades)
“original sources very complex for lower grades” (Wedel et.al :21)
→ problems : for example History: subjects have to stick to German
curriculum- basically German history , FL material reflects learning
culture of each country (Wedel et.al :21)
 teachers’ own material: “In the lower grades teachers often have to adapt
their texts linguistically and develop substantial materials of their own.”
(Mäsch: 170)
Example: Politics → Read On (adapted newspaper articles used for
discussion)
Characteristics of the program: Methodology
 “Communication in bilingual subjects is fundamentally determined by
the imparting of information. Here the language is not just a matter to
be learnt, but is more of a vehicle- the original function of languageand is experienced as such by pupils.” (Mäsch:163)
 both teacher-fronted/ traditional and alternative approaches (-that
allow for learner autonomy)
- high amount of projects/oral presentations
-pair/group work
For example: Politics: discussions in small groups with native assistant
teacher (special exchange program)
“[..] the content is relatively free; what is of concern are attitudes and
judgements rather than any specific learning matter” (Mäsch:164)
- creative tasks
For example: History: recording/ staging plays (e.g.: Historical events:
“Boston Tea Party”)
Characteristics of the program: Methodology
 different skills:
- receptive: exposure to teacher /listenings/ film material/ readings
- productive: -speaking in class, projects/ writings (emphasis on creative
writing)
 - not only language skills, but also critical reflection, evaluation,
judgement etc.
“Learning in the CLIL context supports the development of analytical
and hypothesizing skills, and provides a more favourable environment
for learner autonomy” (Wannagat:665)
Characteristics of the program: Evaluation
 lower secondary:
written tests:
- focus on content, to be evaluated as if written in L1- bonus for good
English, no negative impact as long as understandable
- “ bilingual students should be assessed according to the same
standards as non-bilingual students.” (Mäsch: 167)
“Administrative Regulations for Bilingual Sections in the German State of
NRW states the following: ‘ In disciplines taught in the partner
language the primary concern of evaluation is the pupil’s performance
in the subject matter...It is comparable to evaluation of disciplines not
taught bilingually... General deficiencies in the foreign language must
not negatively influcence evaluation as long as communication is
guaranteed. On the other hand, positive linguistic performance will be
favourably credited as an extra.” (Mäsch: 166)
 upper secondary: participation in class/written tests 50/50
Characteristics of the program: Teachers
 the teacher’s language competence has to meet the complexity of the
subject (Drober:56)
 German university system: two degrees
-English
-Subject
 ideally native speakers, but mostly L1 natives with native-like command
(Drober:56)
 first special degrees (Univ. of Wuppertal/Bochum)
 1988: Recommendations for the teaching of bilingual disciplines.
Ministry for education in NRW. (Mäsch: 171)
Characteristics of the program: Use of Mother Tongue
 “The pedagogically justified inclusion of the mother tongue is based on
the principle : ‘As much as possible in the partner language, as much as
necessary in the mother tongue.’” (Mäsch:165)
 “It is important to point out that in the bilingual sections the
expression if spontaneous opinions in the mother tongue must be
allowed, not only in order to maintain general motivation and interest
[..], but also to guarantee the expression of personal opinions in spite of
[..] inadequate foreign langugae competence.” (Mäsch:164)
Characteristics of the program: Extension/extra offers
students (all students, but especially those of bilingual sectors)
encouraged to take part in
 exchange programs (ES countries or English lingua franca): USA,
England, Canada, China, Israel
 high school year: spend a year abroad in grade 11
 pen friends, projects in class that let them get in touch with
peers in ‘authentic’ situation
“Meetings with representatives of the partner language play an
important role. Every pupil has a pen-friend in the partner
country [..]” (Mäsch:159)
 competitions: nation- wide language competitions
 extra activities: cinema etc.
Characteristics of the program: Other languages
 being part of bilingual sector does not mean students have to focus
only on English, but encouraged to learn more languages:
- grade 7 (grade 6- changes due to changes in school system):
FL 2: French/ Latin (compulsory)
- grade 9: FL 3: Spanish/ French/ Greek (optional)
- grade 11: FL 4: Japanese/ Spanish/ Hebrew (optional)
References
 Baetens Beardsmore, Hugo: Introduction. European Models of
Bilingual Education. Multilingual Matters LTD: Clevedon.
Philadelphia. Adelaide. 1993
 Carl, Susanne et.al.(2006): Bilinguale Module an Schulen- wie geht
das? PRAXIS Fremdsprachenunterricht, 6, 26-30
 Drober, E. (2007). English is dead! long live english! on the situation of
english at the german hochschule today. [Englisch ist tot! Es lebe
Englisch! Zur Situation des Englischen an der Hochschule heute]
PRAXIS Fremdsprachenunterricht, 4(2), 55-57. Retrieved from CSA
Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts database.
 *Mäsch, Nando: The German Model of Bilingual Education: An
Administrator’s Perspective. European Models of Bilingual Education.
Multilingual Matters LTD: Clevedon. Philadelphia. Adelaide. 1993
References
 *Wannagat, U. (2007). Learning through L2 - content and language
integrated learning (CLIL) and english as medium of instruction
(EMI). International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,
10(5), 663-682. Retrieved from CSA Linguistics and Language Behavior
Abstracts database.
 * Wedel, Heike et.al.(2006): Spaziergänge in der “Bili-Landschaft”.
PRAXIS Fremdsprachenunterricht, 6, 20-23.