Teaching L2 to non-literate and low-literate - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

Teaching L2 to non-literate and low-literate adult migrants in Europe

Fernanda Minuz

Lorenzo RoccaAlessandro Borri

Language, the Sustainable Development Goals, and Vulnerable Populations Perspectives on Literacy

New York, 11th May 2017

C.P.I.A. Montagna

Learner Oriented Approach – LOA

to: (Carless: 2007; Purpura: 2014)

“Ensure

that language tests do not infringe the human rights of migrants, and fully respect the principles of transparency and equity according to internationally accepted codes of practice” (Council of Europe: 2015)

“Promote social inclusion

,

social cohesion

and respect for diversity”

“

Avoid the exclusion

of many people. This raises human rights issues […].

It is particularly problematic when dealing with people who are illiterate or with low levels of education

”

Council of Europe

(47 countries)

EDUCATION

Language Policy Programme

Linguistic Integration of Adult Migrants (LIAM)Guiding principles

: Human rightsDemocracyRule of law

Actions to promote

:

Social inclusion

Cohesion

Respect for diversity

Langage support for adult refugees:

A Council of Europe ToolkitAims

To support Council of Europe member states in their efforts to respond to the challenges posed by migration flows

To assist organizations that provide language support for refugees, especially the volunteers working for them

CEFR: Common E

uropean Framework of References

A

reference tool translated into 40 languages fordeveloping a shared understanding in 2 areas:

Elaboration of language syllabuses, examinationsDescription of 6 levels of proficiency (from A1 to C2) The CEFR is

not normative but descriptive and must be

adapted for migration contexts

The learner as

literate

social agent

The aim is to describe

language competences,

NOT literacy profiles

At least,

2 issues

in this adaptation

THE MISUSE OF THE CEFR2013: 81%

2010: 75%2007: 61%2002: 29%

Language requirements for migration purposes:% CoE countries involved

823

26

CoE LIAM Survey: 2013

18

DICHOTOMY TEST VS. INTEGRATION?

“Encouraging integration through testing is not per se problematic. It is however important to be aware of the limitations of such tests and ensure that they contribute to integration and do not become a barrier to it” (Parliamentary Assembly, Recommendation 2034: 2014)

“Literacy is a necessary prerequisite for any kind of written test. […] Policy makers need to provide training courses that strongly support the acquisition of literacy skills, instead of providing writing or reading tests”(ALTE LAMI Booklet, p.23)

ETHICAL AND TECHNICAL CONCERNSHow should test results be used, for what purposes?

What will be the impact of using tests on making decisions for the migrant?What unintended or negative consequences may occur? Are there

vulnerable groups of test takers that may be discriminated against, such as those with

limited literacy? (Booklet, p.7)

NON LITERATE/ LOW EDUCATED ADULT L2 LEARNERSTeachers’ experience and international

research reveal specif difficulties in learning L2 due to:Lack of metalinguistic skills and, for NL learners, different ways of processing language and abstract visual information, working memory Less study skills, weaker learning strategies, no or less familiarity with educational practices and activities, including tests and exams

Lack of textual competence in their mother-tongue, inability to deal with metalinguistic rules and, sometimes, to understand non-linguistic codes

Situated cognition and learning

Non literate/low educated learners have less resourcesthan schooled learners, while facing the harder job tolearn a new language and to read and write

Italiano L2 in contesti migratoriA. Borri, F. Minuz, L. Rocca, C. Sola

Loescher, Torino, 2014http://www.coe.int/en/web/lang-migrants/literacy

IL2S is a tool to plan courses, to create teaching materials and to prepare diagnostic and achievement tests at levels preceding the level A1 of the Common European Framework.

It is explicitly related to CEFR, especially to the notion of communicative language competence as a multidimensional competence and part of a more general action competence

Canada

Centre for Canadian Language Benchmark-Centre des niveaux de compétence linguistique canadiens, ESL for Literacy Learners/Alphabétisation pour immigrants adultes en français langue seconde (FLS), 2001. Revised 2015Europe

Beacco J. C., De Ferrari M., Lhote G., Niveau A1.1 pour le français: Référentiel et certification pour les premiers acquis en français

, 2006Fritz T., Faistauer R., Ritter M., Hribesch A., RahmenCurriculum, 2006Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge,

Konzept für einen bundesweiten Integrationskurs mit Alphabetisierung, 2007; 2009Beroepsoderwijs en volwasseneneducatie, Raamwerk Alfabetisering NT2, 2008Finnish National Board of Education

National core curriculum for literacy training for adult migrants, 2012

Link

to the CEFR

Focus on the acquisition of written language

Progression

:

from a «Foundation», «Basis», «Grundlagen», «Découvert» stage to autonomy in reading and writing texts

APPROACHLiteracy learning

encompasses:the acquisition of the technical skills needed to read and writethe ability to deal with written texts, which nowadays can be printed or digital, multimodal and multicodethe acquisition of the written language as semiotic code, “matrix of social meanings, a privileged place of symbolic production" (Cardona 1981)

the access to communication fluxes in the host societies, where writing is “an imperative means” (Adami 2001), further education, full citizenship

Literacy and L2 teaching is a new field, which draws its methodologies both from language teaching and adult education

AIMSRespond to needs of adult migrants, insofar they are different from the needs of other target groups of learners

Provide teachers, course designers and educational authorities with an instrument which is coherent with the other tools commonly in use: primarily the CEFR, and the syllabi, language profiles and guidelines on which it is basedIntegrate the descriptors for language competence with those for literacy learningProvide referential for language learning, as well as for literacy

Elaborate a single and coherent frame for beginner learners, which could accommodate different users’ profiles

VALIDATION

UsersThose who work in the different branches of education: curricula, teaching material, course and class planning; tests and certifications

STEPS AND METHODOLOGY

Structered interviewsComments on Q1

collected by the research team

All research participants

RESULTSHeterogeneity and irregular attendance critical issues in L2 courses.

IL2S coherence with the CEFR is positive. Accuracy of IL2S as descriptive and assessment tool and its validity in representing the development of communicative language skills and literacy were confirmed.It is useful in outlining the learners’ profiles, in designing courses.

Problems: complex structure of the tool; some descriptors unclear.

IL2S helped in reviewing current practices and notions.

TO CONCLUDEAlthough IL2S is focused on the Italian language, we have proposed it as a contribution to a European Language L2 and Literacy Syllabus

An (until now) informal group of experts from 9 countries has proposed it to the CoE

Migration has both local and international dimensions, as the constantly changing routes and forms of people’s movements show. New educational needs require new tools.

fernandaminuz@gmail.com

lrocca@unistrapg.cvcl.italexandros@cpiamontagna.it