Subject literacies and access to quality education Strasbourg, 27 – 28 September 2012 Language Policy Unit - DG II Council of Europe, Strasbourg, France www.coe.int/lang.
Download ReportTranscript Subject literacies and access to quality education Strasbourg, 27 – 28 September 2012 Language Policy Unit - DG II Council of Europe, Strasbourg, France www.coe.int/lang.
Subject literacies and access to quality education Strasbourg, 27 – 28 September 2012 Language Policy Unit - DG II Council of Europe, Strasbourg, France www.coe.int/lang SUBJECT LITERACIES AND ACCESS TO QUALITY EDUCATION Strasbourg, 27 – 28 September 2012 Aims and objectives – main issues and priorities – working methods E. Thürmann What do we mean by „subject literacy“? SUBJECT LITERACIES AND ACCESS TO QUALITY EDUCATION, STRASBOURG, 27 – 28 SEPTEMBER 2012 Two leading questions • How can educators provide learning opportunities for students to gain control over a language variety which is crucial for successful learning in and across all school subjects and extend their capacity to move freely across a broad spectrum of language varieties in and out of school? • Are frameworks for academic language use a viable option for mapping such learning opportuinities into curriculum documents and guidelines? SUBJECT LITERACIES AND ACCESS TO QUALITY EDUCATION, STRASBOURG, 27 – 28 SEPTEMBER 2012 Aims and Objectives Prepare envisaged awareness-raising intergovernmental conference in 2013 on “Language Requirements in Subject Learning – Frameworks for Curriculum Development” • Take stock of CoE´s relevant documents on the role of language in knowledge building and subject literacies • Compare and contrast two approaches to framework construction (Norway, North-Rhine-Westfalia) • Take stock of developments in other countries (educational contexts) • Consider options for frameworks from the perspective of content domains (las, science, mathematics, social sciences) • Identify need for support and recommend further action SUBJECT LITERACIES AND ACCESS TO QUALITY EDUCATION, STRASBOURG, 27 – 28 SEPTEMBER 2012 Issues and Priorities • What do we have to consider when talking about language use and language requirements of the content classroom? • How can we bridge the gap between content standards and the academic language implicit in these standards? • Which options for a Framework structure? • Which priorities for developing descriptors, defining curricular standards and their implementation? What do we have to consider when talking about language in the content classroom? Classroom language use • Teacher-learner interaction (monologic – dialogic instruction – IRF-cycle) • learner-learner interaction (various types of „talk“) Science Organise procedures - negotiate meaning Retrieve information and acquire knowledge (Re-) Structure mental concepts Present Evaluate learning learning outprocess comes Make social noise SUBJECT LITERACIES AND ACCESS TO QUALITY EDUCATION, STRASBOURG, 27 – 28 SEPTEMBER 2012 What do we have to consider when talking about language in the content classroom? Language use in classrooms is a blend of different varieties Science Science • Basic colloquial language (BCL) • School Navigational Language (SNL) • Essential Academic Language (EAL) • Curriculum Content Language (CCL) Cp. Bailey & Heritage (2008) - (Scarcella (2008) SUBJECT LITERACIES AND ACCESS TO QUALITY EDUCATION, STRASBOURG, 27 – 28 SEPTEMBER 2012 What do we have to consider when talking about language in the content classroom? Basic colloquiaql use Contenental Drift Scientists of the early 20th century believed that oceans and continents were geographically fixed. They regarded the surface of the planet as a static skin spread over a molten, gradually cooling interior. They believed that the cooling of the planet resulted in its contraction, which caused the outer skin to contort and wrinkle into mountains and valleys. Many people noticed, however, that the Science easternScience shorelines of South America and the western shoreline of Africa seemed to fit together like a jigsaw puzzle. One scientist who took this observation seriously was Alfred Wegener. Wegener. Essential academic use Curriculum content use What do we have to consider when talking about language in the content classroom? • Basic colloquial language (BCL) • School Navigational Language (SNL) • Essential Academic Language (EAL) • Curriculum Content Language (CCL) intimate casual consultative formal frozen More or less: distanced – decontextualised – dispassionate – exact – objective – complex – highly structured – complete – unambiguous – explicit … Bridging the gap between content standards and implicit academic language Science Biology Students are able to … identify similarities and differences as a result of criteria-based comparisons, e.g. anatomy and morphology of organisms. • Semiotic system? • Discourse funtion(s)? • Mode (oral/written)? • Skill(s)? • Discourse function(s)? Choice of linguistic/textual means Bridging the gap between content standards and implicit academic language http://lalas.ceee.gwu.edu/ SUBJECT LITERACIES AND ACCESS TO QUALITY EDUCATION, STRASBOURG, 27 – 28 SEPTEMBER 2012 Which options for a Framework structure? subject-specific content semiotic systems genres literacy cognitivelanguage functions text- / discourse competence coherence/cohesion – references – linearity – development of ideas structure … linguistic elements – language means pronunciation spelling lexis correctness, appropriateness grammar SUBJECT LITERACIES AND ACCESS TO QUALITY EDUCATION, STRASBOURG, 27 – 28 SEPTEMBER 2012 Which options for a Framework structure? common educational language objectives e.g. LaS, history, maths, science e.g. Norway - NRW language requirements of the content classroom The approach to subject literacies and common educational language objectives across the curriculum can only be managed with the help of a common framework. A twoway approach seems to be a viable strategy for conceptualising the framework´s architecture. common educational language objectives language requirements of the content classroom Which priorities for developing descriptors, defining curricular standards and implementation? level action supra, CoE • focus on a common framework structure which is LPU compatible with aims and objectives of subject teaching across the curriculum • support for filling the framework dimensions (e.g. genres, cognitive-language functions, language means) with inventories of possible descriptors to choose from • application of general descriptors to specific subject areas, to a range of subject literacies • … cp. Francis Goullier (2012) Which priorities for developing descriptors, defining curricular standards and implementation? level action Macro: ministries, national / regional / local authorities • Update and enrich curricular documents across the whole range of content areas by applying a / the framework for language of education (essential academic language) as a coordinating tool • Provide ressources for the training and the mission of „Literacy Coaches“ • Update and enrich teachers´ professional policy profile accordingly and implement it through teacher education • Recommend new strategies for textbook providers Which priorities for developing descriptors, defining curricular standards and implementation? level action meso: individual school Micro: teachers / classrooms • exploit school autonomy and strive for consensus of a whole-school language learning policy (school-based language development plan) • set up an academic language analysis team to bridge the gap between content standards and the academic language implicit in these standards • critical-friends approach to classroom observation using a set of criteria for language-sensitive subject teaching and learning • network with other schools focussing on subject literacy and language of education • … Which priorities for developing descriptors, defining curricular standards and implementation? level action nano: individual learner • invest in language of education and subject literacy to boost „cultural capital“ • take notice of and adopt communicative strategies and textual patterns which help to solve problems encountered in the learning process • be aware of his/her own socio-cultural background and language biography and its intrinsic norms and values with respect to academic requirements • be willing and able to switch codes in and out of school according to situational requirements • … Working methods Setting the scene: The CoE´ perspective, LaS, LaC Exemplary curricular initiatives: Norway, Northrhine-Westfalia (Germany) Subject literacies: History, language as a subject, mathematics, science Summing up – Next steps Working methods Identifying and reflecting on context factors for framework construction/implementation Contribution of content teaching to language education and a general Framework for subject literacies Needs for support? - Next steps? Recommendations (CoE)? Thanks for your attention