The Windup
We think dual language education (DLE) programs in Canadian schools are a good thing. More specifically, to provide consistency for youth in education, we think it is most practical for the Canadian Government to centrally (federally) implement a bilingual education system in Canada's two official languages, French and English. Currently, language education is mandated provincially and regionally, by school board. There is a lot of inconsistency. Within Canada there are certainly regional differences in terms of minority languages, and perhaps schools need to address these alternative language needs as well. We, however, have limited the scope of our discussion to the relevance of a bilingual French-English education in elementary and secondary schools.
After evaluating the negative aspects of the DLE program, it is clear that federally standardized policies would reduce or pacify most of the concerns. First, the use of a second language (such as French) will increase outside of school communities as proficiency in the language grows inside the classroom. While Merisuo-Storm's article discusses the relationship between a reduction of language learning and negative attitudes towards a cultural group, we posit that language learning, in fact, promotes positive associations with cultures that use that language (Diffey 2010) and, thus, has the potential to improve intercultural relationships. The 2.8 million taxpayer dollars being spent on bilingual services (Baluja & Bradshaw 2012) will be worthwhile when the next generation of Canadians are more global citizens (Diffey 2010). If the federal government possessed jurisdiction of the DLE programs there would be more transparency and understanding, and with more accountability and centralization Acts like the 2003 The Next Act could be more successfully implemented (Cardinal 2008).
Our main concern remains whether students in a DLE program are at a cognitive disadvantage. In certain tests the results showed they were: students' content learning was compromised when learning in a non-native language. Other research shows, however, that there are positive cognitive aspects of the DLE programs. These include increased metalinguistic awareness (Barac and Bialstok 2012), increased curriculum coverage without an increase in students' time commitment (Merisuo-Storm 2007), and evidence that higher levels of bilingual proficiency are associated with higher cognitive development (Genesse and Lindholt-Leary).
After evaluating the negative aspects of the DLE program, it is clear that federally standardized policies would reduce or pacify most of the concerns. First, the use of a second language (such as French) will increase outside of school communities as proficiency in the language grows inside the classroom. While Merisuo-Storm's article discusses the relationship between a reduction of language learning and negative attitudes towards a cultural group, we posit that language learning, in fact, promotes positive associations with cultures that use that language (Diffey 2010) and, thus, has the potential to improve intercultural relationships. The 2.8 million taxpayer dollars being spent on bilingual services (Baluja & Bradshaw 2012) will be worthwhile when the next generation of Canadians are more global citizens (Diffey 2010). If the federal government possessed jurisdiction of the DLE programs there would be more transparency and understanding, and with more accountability and centralization Acts like the 2003 The Next Act could be more successfully implemented (Cardinal 2008).
Our main concern remains whether students in a DLE program are at a cognitive disadvantage. In certain tests the results showed they were: students' content learning was compromised when learning in a non-native language. Other research shows, however, that there are positive cognitive aspects of the DLE programs. These include increased metalinguistic awareness (Barac and Bialstok 2012), increased curriculum coverage without an increase in students' time commitment (Merisuo-Storm 2007), and evidence that higher levels of bilingual proficiency are associated with higher cognitive development (Genesse and Lindholt-Leary).
Bilingual education according to Marita Currently, Canada has two official languages: French and English. While there are an increasing number of households that do not consider either official language their primary home-spoken language, in the 2011 census about 85% of the Canadian population identified the language spoken most often at home as one of the official languages (64.7% English/20.6% French). The official languages not only maintain a significant representation as primary languages in Canadian households, they are the primary languages of private and public sector business and government. As such, Canadian citizens, particularly youth, benefit from fluency in both official languages. Bilingual proficiency creates more job opportunity, promotes positive relationships between language-cultures, develops metalinguistic awareness/competencies, and supplements cognitive and metacognitive development. DLE programs prepare youth for more successful futures not only nationally, but given contemporary globalization and the freer movement of people, in an international setting as well.
Historically, Canadian DLE, along with the rest of the education legislation, has been implemented on a provincial (and regional) level. While certain school boards choose to offer multilingual programs that cater to their student population, typical DLE integrates Canada’s two official languages. A decentralized system theoretically caters to localized language needs, and holds a lot of promise when it comes to multilingual education (which will surely become the norm in the not-so-distant future). Even so, despite DLE programs having similar mandates about a) developing advanced levels of functional proficiency in written and oral forms of the second language and b) promoting awareness, understanding, and tolerance of the other culture, within current programs there is a lot of inconsistency when it comes to the content standards, level, and duration of French/English immersion. A federally implemented DLE system would, therefore, be ideal for French and English language learning in Canada. While both indigenous and immigrant languages are becoming increasingly important nationally and globally, the official languages are, at present, the dominant mode of communication in Canada. Student experience of provincial DLE varies greatly; the level of bilingualism emerging from DLE programs is, thus, inconsistent as well. Federal jurisdiction over French-English bilingual education would provide a consistent and reliable foundation for language learning. DLE raises controversial questions about national identity, nationalism, culture, ethnicity, power, and pedagogy, but they are questions worth debating and, as I point out, there is a lot of multi-faceted evidence in support of bilingual education. Centralized DLE is, however, not the only sensible language reform on the horizon for Canada. French/English bilingualism is arguably no longer sufficient in an increasingly multilingual country and globalized world. Mandarin, Spanish, Hindi, and Arabic attend English as the world’s big languages. And, within Canada, Chinese languages, Punjabi, Spanish, Italian, Arabic, Aboriginal languages, etc. maintain significant (and growing) representation. According to the 2011 census, one-fifth of Canada’s population spoke a language other than the official languages at home, be it alone or in some combination with English or French. Progressively, unilingualism, and perhaps bilingualism, is insufficient to be a successful, global citizen. If global is more important than national, then perhaps federally implemented mandatory language schooling in the aforementioned world’s big languages is the future course of Canadian language education. On the other hand, if national and local trumps global, then in conjunction with a federal DLE program in English and French, provincial and municipal governments should investigate the possibility of region-specific language programs that address the heterogeneous landscape of Canada. |
Bilingual education according to Jordan I feel that bilingual education is very important and that it should be available to all students in Canada. That being said, I do not believe that it should be mandatory. There a number of positive and negative viewpoints that led me to this conclusion.
For starters, bilingual education gives students an advantage by exposing them to a second language at an early age. This early exposure can provide a facilitated learning experience that those who are exposed at a later age do not have the opportunity to benefit from. Additionally, second language skills can prove to be a huge asset in many geographical locations when seeking employment later in life. Being bilingual can allow a person to be eligible for a wider range of job positions and can increase chances of advancement in the work field. Being proficient in more than one language can also save a person from being placed in post-employment second language training programs. Bilingual education can even be beneficial with respect to recreational activities. When travelling to other regions of the world where English is not the predominant language, having a second language to communicate with is always beneficial. Bilingual education should be available to all students in Canada regardless of where they live. The prominence of our official languages varies greatly throughout the country; however, I feel that even in areas that predominantly speak one language, bilingual education should be available. No one can be certain of their future needs with respect to language. This being the case, programs should be available for those who wish to prepare for future unknown situations that may require second language education. Despite each of the beneficial aspects of bilingual education, I do not believe that it should be mandatory. Some individuals may have difficulty mastering language skills in their first language. Having these difficulties in addition to attempting to learn a second language could lead to a loss in motivation in regards to language capabilities. Depending on the intensity of the bilingual education system, it is possible that a student could be enrolled in a course that he or she would find difficult even if was taught in their first language. This could lead to more difficulty in understanding subject matter, and the student’s grade and morale could each suffer. Issues may also arise when a student needs certain courses to get into post-secondary education. It is possible that as a result of the additional French courses, they may not be able to fit other required courses into their schedule. In this situation, the student should be able to adjust their bilingual education accordingly. Overall I feel that bilingual education is very important and should be available to all students regardless of where they reside in Canada. The benefits of being trained in a second language are indisputable. That being said, it may not be a feasible option for some students. Therefore, bilingual education should not be mandatory for all students. |
Bilingual education according to Rachel As stated above, the federal implementation of
a standardized Dual Language Education policy is key in the progress of Canada
as a bilingual nation. It is key because only the federal
government can ensure that the highest quality of language-based and
subject-based learning is being given to students across Canada. Though the
data from 2011 Statistics Canada suggests that between 2006 and 2011 Canada’s population had a 17.5% increase in bilingualism- this method of
collecting data requires only that a person identify as bilingual.
In order to have a bilingual nation the federal government could modify the DELF test to see levels of French at the end of high school, just as they already test English literacy in Grades 3, 6 and 9. That The Next Act has yet to reach the goals a decade after its 'implementation' shows unless the federal government steps in to create standardized language policies there will be a slow progress or stagnation of official language development. One foreseeable problem with this suggestion would be the resistance from the provinces to give up one of their powers. As the 1982 Constitution defines divisions of powers, it will be exceedingly hard to implement a federal policy without all the provinces approving it. That being said, there seems to be more cognitive benefits (Barac and Bialstok 2012) than drawbacks and so it is difficult for Premiers, that represent the provinces, to argue against DLE. In the past, when the Section 23 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was first implemented there was resistance from the Western provinces to create schools for French minority language speakers and so , the Supreme Court of Canada had to use its judiciary powers to force their hand. Using the qualifications of the Charter section it seems that the majority of students could request to be educated in the official language that was not their mother tongue. Therefore, if there was enough of a statistical demand for French, or English, within a school board district a DLE could be implemented. In addition, the provincial government could, and should be encouraged to, continue implementing language programs in Aboriginal and Immigrant languages. As the statistical information shows, the retention rate is higher when there is a linguistic community present. To preserve languages, and support the multicultural policies in place within Canada, the provincial government should continue to develop and implement multilingual programs. In 1990, there were 63 languages based instructions offered throughout Canada that were not legally required. This choice in implementing various language based instructions shows the willingness of provinces, especially Western provinces, to create a multilingual society. However, Aboriginal language programs should not be in the control, and therefore jurisdiction, of either the provincial or federal government. Instead, band councils should be able to implement language programs that increase the retention rates of their community. In a society where globalization is increasing, it can only be beneficial for students to learn as many languages as possible. As Canadian citizens pay their education through taxes, it seems that they should be able to decide which languages that are taught to their children. In thinking about future generations, it seems that the immersion of students into various languages will not only benefit them cognitively but will also increase their appeal in a global market. |
Interested in Learning More about Bilingual or Multilingual Education in Canada?
![Picture](/uploads/2/4/8/6/24865880/8215263.png)
CPF is national volunteer organization, consisting mostly of parents, who promote bilingual education systems within Canada since 1977. Their mission is to promote and create French-second-language opportunities for young Canadians. Their website has resources and French activities that may be useful for teacher considering whether to work within a French or bilingual school board.
![Picture](/uploads/2/4/8/6/24865880/5718726.png)
The Alliance Française Ottawa website provides information on the DELF- DALF exams that allows for people to obtain official diplomas that certify French competencies. These exams are internationally accepted and access listening, speaking, reading and writing French.
![Picture](/uploads/2/4/8/6/24865880/6246944.png)
Languages Canada is a national organization that promotes quality English and French language training in Canada. The youth section of their school programs are minimal but there are centers in Quebec, New Brunswick, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and British Columbia. The conferences and event listed on the site homepage can be a great opportunity to take part in workshops, activities and lectures concerning preserving and promoting Canada's official languages.
![Picture](/uploads/2/4/8/6/24865880/3188334.png)
Coelho's Language and Learning in Multilingual Classrooms is a teacher resource that provides strategies and techniques that can be applied to a classroom that is multilingual. Although this book does not focus on French or English language learning, it details one process of how educators can alleviate the stress of learning a new language, especially for new immigrants, within the Canadian schooling system. "Chapter 7 Making Space for Community Languages" details how other languages and cultures can enrich classroom dynamics. It especially highlights the benefits of being bilingual and multilingual in the 21st century.