Abstract There has been a rapid global expansion of English instruction in the early grades in public school curricula. Particularly in so-called developing countries, the increase of and its shift from exclusively private to public education is linked to the idea that acquiring English promotes personal, social, and economic development. The author takes one case of a recent early English program, the national program in Mexico, and argues that it is a representative case of a language education programme and policy organized around neoliberal principles. The policy’s stated goal is to address issues of access and equity for public school students; however, findings indicate that the actual processes of teaching and learning at the classroom level remain highly stratified across social class lines. An analysis of English lessons in schools at different points on the socioeconomic spectrum illustrates that instruction is preparing children with certain types of skills and dispositions congruent to their class position and revealing the hidden curriculum of work in early English education.
{"title":"The hidden curriculum of work in English language education","authors":"P. Sayer","doi":"10.1075/aila.00020.say","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.00020.say","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract There has been a rapid global expansion of English instruction in the early grades in public school curricula. Particularly in so-called developing countries, the increase of and its shift from exclusively private to public education is linked to the idea that acquiring English promotes personal, social, and economic development. The author takes one case of a recent early English program, the national program in Mexico, and argues that it is a representative case of a language education programme and policy organized around neoliberal principles. The policy’s stated goal is to address issues of access and equity for public school students; however, findings indicate that the actual processes of teaching and learning at the classroom level remain highly stratified across social class lines. An analysis of English lessons in schools at different points on the socioeconomic spectrum illustrates that instruction is preparing children with certain types of skills and dispositions congruent to their class position and revealing the hidden curriculum of work in early English education.","PeriodicalId":45044,"journal":{"name":"AILA Review","volume":"32 1","pages":"36-63"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2019-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42592616","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In their introduction to this volume, Enever and Driscoll describe this collection as the latest product of the Research Network in Early Language Learning. Established in 2015, the international professional network aims to deepen our mutual understanding of early language learning and stimulate collaboration on young learners’ (3–12 years) second language (L2), foreign language (FL), and minority language (ML) learning across disciplines and regions. Reflecting the breadth of the field of early language learning, the present collection is composed of seven studies that are broad in terms of scope, region, and methodology. Despite such diversity, the papers in this volume are united in their effort to contextualize the policy and practice of early language learning. Policy is not merely a system but rather reflects dynamic interaction, or synergy, between agents and environments, which are themselves multi-layered and complex entities. This dynamic synergy, both in space and time, is the “context.” Policy discussions without contextualization are essentially meaningless. Although conducting a policy analysis with sufficient contextualization is always challenging, such analyses – including the seven presented in this volume – can help us identify common underlying mechanisms of how policy works, despite their seeming differences. Similarly, as exemplified in Bronfenbrenner’s ecological system model, human development and learning are also embedded in multi-layered and interconnected environments, or what Bronfenbrenner called ecological systems (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). We cannot understand children’s language learning without contextualizing it in dynamic, whole ecological systems. Sufficiently contextualized studies on early language learning can help us find common mechanisms and issues associated with children’s language learning and teaching, even when those studies take place in substantially varied environments. Collectively, the papers in this volume address important contextual changes that we have to keep in mind when considering the policy and practice of early language learning; these include changes in (1) learner characteristics, (2) technology, and (3) pedagogical approaches in language education. These changes
{"title":"Common challenges in diverse contexts","authors":"Y. Butler","doi":"10.1075/aila.00026.but","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.00026.but","url":null,"abstract":"In their introduction to this volume, Enever and Driscoll describe this collection as the latest product of the Research Network in Early Language Learning. Established in 2015, the international professional network aims to deepen our mutual understanding of early language learning and stimulate collaboration on young learners’ (3–12 years) second language (L2), foreign language (FL), and minority language (ML) learning across disciplines and regions. Reflecting the breadth of the field of early language learning, the present collection is composed of seven studies that are broad in terms of scope, region, and methodology. Despite such diversity, the papers in this volume are united in their effort to contextualize the policy and practice of early language learning. Policy is not merely a system but rather reflects dynamic interaction, or synergy, between agents and environments, which are themselves multi-layered and complex entities. This dynamic synergy, both in space and time, is the “context.” Policy discussions without contextualization are essentially meaningless. Although conducting a policy analysis with sufficient contextualization is always challenging, such analyses – including the seven presented in this volume – can help us identify common underlying mechanisms of how policy works, despite their seeming differences. Similarly, as exemplified in Bronfenbrenner’s ecological system model, human development and learning are also embedded in multi-layered and interconnected environments, or what Bronfenbrenner called ecological systems (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). We cannot understand children’s language learning without contextualizing it in dynamic, whole ecological systems. Sufficiently contextualized studies on early language learning can help us find common mechanisms and issues associated with children’s language learning and teaching, even when those studies take place in substantially varied environments. Collectively, the papers in this volume address important contextual changes that we have to keep in mind when considering the policy and practice of early language learning; these include changes in (1) learner characteristics, (2) technology, and (3) pedagogical approaches in language education. These changes","PeriodicalId":45044,"journal":{"name":"AILA Review","volume":"32 1","pages":"178-186"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2019-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44748603","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This paper explores headteachers’ and teachers’ perceptions of foreign languages(FL) and cultural learning in three primary schools in areas of disadvantage in England. Drawing upon a new theoretical frame for primary languages, Critical Cosmopolitanism (Delanty, 2006; Beck and Sznaider, 2006) and The Grammar of Culture (Holliday, 2018), we argue that the grand narrative of a target language inhabited by a target culture is outdated and approaches to cultural learning in primary schools could lead the way. There is substantial evidence that most learners find language lessons fun, particularly activities such as songs, stories and intercultural events (Driscoll et al., 2004, 2014; Cable et al. 2010). The discourse on conditions for inclusive practice is less commonplace and little is known about FL learning in areas of high deprivation (Nikolov & Mihaljevic Djigunovic, 2011). Teachers and headteachers in this study were committed to cultural learning and staff adopted creative approaches to teaching. The findings, however, also indicate that traditional notions of a mono or homogenised national culture with associated stereotypes linger in teachers’ framing of FL. There exists a need for a more personalised approach to cultural learning drawing upon children’s own cultural experiences. Data was analysed thematically following strict ethical guidelines and all names were anonymised to ensure confidentiality.
摘要:本文探讨了英国劣势地区三所小学的校长和教师对外语和文化学习的看法。借鉴了一种新的主要语言理论框架，批判世界主义(Delanty, 2006;Beck和Sznaider, 2006)和《文化语法》(Holliday, 2018)，我们认为目标文化居住的目标语言的宏大叙事已经过时，小学文化学习方法可以引领潮流。有大量证据表明，大多数学习者觉得语言课程很有趣，尤其是歌曲、故事和跨文化活动(Driscoll et al.， 2004, 2014;Cable et al. 2010)。关于包容性实践条件的论述不太常见，人们对高贫困地区的外语学习知之甚少(Nikolov & Mihaljevic Djigunovic, 2011)。在本研究中，教师和校长致力于文化学习，教职员工采用创造性的教学方法。然而，研究结果也表明，单一或同质化的民族文化的传统观念与相关的刻板印象仍然存在于教师对外语的框架中。需要利用儿童自己的文化经验，采用更个性化的文化学习方法。数据是按照严格的道德准则进行主题分析的，所有名字都是匿名的，以确保保密。
{"title":"Cultural threads in three primary schools","authors":"Patricia Driscoll, A. Holliday","doi":"10.1075/aila.00021.dri","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.00021.dri","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper explores headteachers’ and teachers’ perceptions of foreign languages(FL) and cultural learning in three primary schools in areas of disadvantage in England. Drawing upon a new theoretical frame for primary languages, Critical Cosmopolitanism (Delanty, 2006; Beck and Sznaider, 2006) and The Grammar of Culture (Holliday, 2018), we argue that the grand narrative of a target language inhabited by a target culture is outdated and approaches to cultural learning in primary schools could lead the way. There is substantial evidence that most learners find language lessons fun, particularly activities such as songs, stories and intercultural events (Driscoll et al., 2004, 2014; Cable et al. 2010). The discourse on conditions for inclusive practice is less commonplace and little is known about FL learning in areas of high deprivation (Nikolov & Mihaljevic Djigunovic, 2011). Teachers and headteachers in this study were committed to cultural learning and staff adopted creative approaches to teaching. The findings, however, also indicate that traditional notions of a mono or homogenised national culture with associated stereotypes linger in teachers’ framing of FL. There exists a need for a more personalised approach to cultural learning drawing upon children’s own cultural experiences. Data was analysed thematically following strict ethical guidelines and all names were anonymised to ensure confidentiality.","PeriodicalId":45044,"journal":{"name":"AILA Review","volume":"32 1","pages":"64-90"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2019-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46583901","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract In this article we explore how primary school learners of English in Germany engage with examples of English that they were asked to locate in their local environments (their linguistic landscapes, LLs). In association with each located image, the learners completed a standardised worksheet in German that asked for brief written comments about its location, the reason why they had selected the image and why they thought that English had been used. Their written reflections demonstrate that these children are remarkably sophisticated in their analyses of linguistic, social and cultural aspects of what they found. They show that with nuanced pedagogies primary school children can benefit greatly from leaving the classroom to find language examples in the worlds around them.
{"title":"Using young learners’ language environments for EFL learning","authors":"Jana Roos, H. Nicholas","doi":"10.1075/aila.00022.roo","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.00022.roo","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this article we explore how primary school learners of English in Germany engage with examples of English that they were asked to locate in their local environments (their linguistic landscapes, LLs). In association with each located image, the learners completed a standardised worksheet in German that asked for brief written comments about its location, the reason why they had selected the image and why they thought that English had been used. Their written reflections demonstrate that these children are remarkably sophisticated in their analyses of linguistic, social and cultural aspects of what they found. They show that with nuanced pedagogies primary school children can benefit greatly from leaving the classroom to find language examples in the worlds around them.","PeriodicalId":45044,"journal":{"name":"AILA Review","volume":"32 1","pages":"91-111"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2019-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47949148","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Around the world, the popularity of English has escalated, particularly at the primary school level (Butler, 2015), yet provision of sufficient qualified teacher expertise to meet demand continues to be inadequate. The OECD report on Equity and Quality in Education reports that: “The highest performing education systems are those that combine equity with quality. They give all children opportunities for a good quality education” (OECD, 2012). This paper adopts a sociohistorical perspective to critically examine the OECD criteria of achieving equity and quality through fairness and inclusiveness with reference to Uruguay, India and China – all contexts where English has been introduced at primary and kindergarten levels. The analysis draws on data from classroom observations, interviews with teachers and key stakeholders. Findings indicate that while access to the quality provision of English in primary schools and kindergartens has been substantially expanded in recent years in each jurisdiction, the challenges of ensuring universal quality provision have proved complex under conditions where the pre-existing historical and political contexts have limited progress towards equity.
{"title":"Looking beyond the local","authors":"J. Enever","doi":"10.1075/aila.00019.ene","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.00019.ene","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Around the world, the popularity of English has escalated, particularly at the primary school level (Butler, 2015), yet provision of sufficient qualified teacher expertise to meet demand continues to be inadequate. The OECD report on Equity and Quality in Education reports that: “The highest performing education systems are those that combine equity with quality. They give all children opportunities for a good quality education” (OECD, 2012). This paper adopts a sociohistorical perspective to critically examine the OECD criteria of achieving equity and quality through fairness and inclusiveness with reference to Uruguay, India and China – all contexts where English has been introduced at primary and kindergarten levels. The analysis draws on data from classroom observations, interviews with teachers and key stakeholders. Findings indicate that while access to the quality provision of English in primary schools and kindergartens has been substantially expanded in recent years in each jurisdiction, the challenges of ensuring universal quality provision have proved complex under conditions where the pre-existing historical and political contexts have limited progress towards equity.","PeriodicalId":45044,"journal":{"name":"AILA Review","volume":"32 1","pages":"10-35"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2019-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44184613","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Policy and practice in early language learning","authors":"","doi":"10.1075/aila.32","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.32","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45044,"journal":{"name":"AILA Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2019-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47516968","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Introduction","authors":"J. Enever, Patrick J. Driscoll","doi":"10.1075/aila.00018.int","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.00018.int","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45044,"journal":{"name":"AILA Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2019-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44477222","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Any discussion of transdisciplinary applied linguistics needs to engage with three central questions. First, while interdisciplinarity may allow for disciplines to stay in place and engage with each other, transdisciplinarity implies a space beyond or above disciplines. As a result, we have to consider whether applied linguistics is seen as a discipline (in which case it is not transdisciplinary) or whether it is seen as a transdisciplinary field of study (in which case it is not a discipline). Second, while applied linguists may engage with work from other fields – sociology, geography, philosophy, cognitive science are common examples – this does not necessarily mean that we engage with those fields as disciplines. Rather, the engagement with such work is often on the basis that relevant thinkers are engaging themselves with broader epistemic shifts. Such work may therefore be seen as having to do with epistemes rather than disciplines. Third, a focus on transdisciplinarity obscures broader concerns about unequal relations of knowledge production, particularly between North and South. If applied linguistics is to become a responsible field of work, it needs to engage with southern epistemologies. In order to do so, applied linguistic practices can be more usefully understood as temporary assemblages of thought and action that come together at particular moments when language-related concerns need to be addressed. This flexible account helps us see how applied linguistic practices are assemblages of different language-oriented projects, epistemes and matters of concern.
{"title":"Applied linguistics as epistemic assemblage","authors":"A. Pennycook","doi":"10.1075/AILA.00015.PEN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/AILA.00015.PEN","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Any discussion of transdisciplinary applied linguistics needs to engage with three central questions. First, while interdisciplinarity may allow for disciplines to stay in place and engage with each other, transdisciplinarity implies a space beyond or above disciplines. As a result, we have to consider whether applied linguistics is seen as a discipline (in which case it is not transdisciplinary) or whether it is seen as a transdisciplinary field of study (in which case it is not a discipline). Second, while applied linguists may engage with work from other fields – sociology, geography, philosophy, cognitive science are common examples – this does not necessarily mean that we engage with those fields as disciplines. Rather, the engagement with such work is often on the basis that relevant thinkers are engaging themselves with broader epistemic shifts. Such work may therefore be seen as having to do with epistemes rather than disciplines. Third, a focus on transdisciplinarity obscures broader concerns about unequal relations of knowledge production, particularly between North and South. If applied linguistics is to become a responsible field of work, it needs to engage with southern epistemologies. In order to do so, applied linguistic practices can be more usefully understood as temporary assemblages of thought and action that come together at particular moments when language-related concerns need to be addressed. This flexible account helps us see how applied linguistic practices are assemblages of different language-oriented projects, epistemes and matters of concern.","PeriodicalId":45044,"journal":{"name":"AILA Review","volume":"31 1","pages":"113-134"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47074587","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Language teaching and learning is commonly considered as a research discipline that resides within the field of ‘applied linguistics’, at least in the way the field is conceptualized by English-speaking academia. However, if we consider language teaching and learning as practice, this fit is not as neat as it at first might appear. Teaching, learning and using an additional language is complex and multifaceted; it involves languages, cultures, learning, communication, identities, etc., which in turn are situated academically within a host of disciplines. Research in language teaching and learning is therefore transdisciplinary in the sense that multiple disciplines can provide different lenses through which to understand the same phenomena and to build new understandings of the object of interest. Moreover, as a field in which languages and cultures are inherently brought into contact, language teaching and learning is also at an intersection between disciplines that are conceptualized and developed differently in different languages and academic traditions. For example, ‘language teaching’ as a disciplinary area does not map well onto its French translation equivalent ‘didactique des langues’. These interactions across academic traditions therefore represent an often-unacknowledged form of transdisciplinarity. This contribution will examine how language teaching and learning can be informed by a transdisciplinary perspective in both these senses. In particular, it will focus on the idea of language learning from an intercultural perspective to examine how multiple disciplines and different disciplinary traditions contribute to shaping understanding of the field; it will also consider some of the challenges of bringing multiple disciplines to bear on this understanding.
{"title":"Language teaching and learning as a transdisciplinary endeavour: Multilingualism and epistemological diversity","authors":"A. Liddicoat","doi":"10.1075/AILA.00011.LID","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/AILA.00011.LID","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Language teaching and learning is commonly considered as a research discipline that resides within the field of ‘applied linguistics’, at least in the way the field is conceptualized by English-speaking academia. However, if we consider language teaching and learning as practice, this fit is not as neat as it at first might appear. Teaching, learning and using an additional language is complex and multifaceted; it involves languages, cultures, learning, communication, identities, etc., which in turn are situated academically within a host of disciplines. Research in language teaching and learning is therefore transdisciplinary in the sense that multiple disciplines can provide different lenses through which to understand the same phenomena and to build new understandings of the object of interest. Moreover, as a field in which languages and cultures are inherently brought into contact, language teaching and learning is also at an intersection between disciplines that are conceptualized and developed differently in different languages and academic traditions. For example, ‘language teaching’ as a disciplinary area does not map well onto its French translation equivalent ‘didactique des langues’. These interactions across academic traditions therefore represent an often-unacknowledged form of transdisciplinarity. This contribution will examine how language teaching and learning can be informed by a transdisciplinary perspective in both these senses. In particular, it will focus on the idea of language learning from an intercultural perspective to examine how multiple disciplines and different disciplinary traditions contribute to shaping understanding of the field; it will also consider some of the challenges of bringing multiple disciplines to bear on this understanding.","PeriodicalId":45044,"journal":{"name":"AILA Review","volume":"31 1","pages":"14-28"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41773496","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：