Interventions

Interventions Our “Interventions” section contains reports and policy documents on issues of language policy. In this issue, we are pleased to carry three significant documents that will inform discussion of multilingual policy. The Language-Rich Europe project is a collaborative project undertaken with EU funding. It has carried out an extensive study of policies and practices in some 24 countries and regions across Europe. The full report offers a very detailed mapping of the role and status of different languages in official documents, in the various sectors of education and in civil society (media, public services and business). The findings, summarised here, will provide a solid basis for comparing practices and policies between countries, for collaboration and for sharing good practice. The CEL/ELC has undertaken studies through a number of working groups that have brought together members of the association to address issues of common interest. We are pleased to present the reports of two of these groups. The first provides detailed guidance on developing language policies in institutions of higher education. Recognising the increasing importance of language capability for universities, it makes recommendations on the issues institutions need to consider. The second report addresses the future of language degrees, which are coming under pressure in a number of countries. Examining the current environment, it identifies the challenges confronting educators in this area and suggests that work is needed to identify the unique competences of language graduates and to design language degrees that take better advantage of them.

European Journal of Language Policy 5.1 (2013), 115–153 © Liverpool University Press

ISSN 1757-6822 (print) 1757-6830 (online) doi:10.3828/ejlp.2013.6

116 Guus Extra and Kutlay Yağmur

Language-rich Europe: key findings and discussion Guus Extra and Kutlay Yağmur [email protected] Babylon Research Centre, Tilburg University, The Netherlands

Kutlay Yağmur [email protected] Babylon Research Centre, Tilburg University, The Netherlands In spite of the challenges involved in the comparison of policies and practices for multi/plurilingualism in different national or regional contexts, the comparative data presented in this study provide a rich source of cross-national insights.1 Leaving aside the degree of recognition of multi/plurilingualism, there are multi/plurilingual policies and practices in all 24 countries/regions surveyed, with many EU and CoE recommendations being followed. On the basis of both the comparative cross-national findings presented here, and the contextual detail provided by our researchers in the country profiles, we hope that policy-makers, practitioners and specialists working in the field will be able to identify good practice, which can subsequently serve as a basis for development and knowledge exchange. Below, we summarise the key findings for each of the language domains surveyed. Languages in official documents and databases

Legislation on national and R/M languages is provided in almost all countries/ regions, on foreign languages in 14 countries/regions, and on immigrant languages in only six countries/regions. 1. The report, Language Rich Europe: Trends in Policies and Practices for Multilingualism in Europe, edited by Guus Extra and Kutlay Yağmur, was published in November 2012 by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the British Council. It was funded with support from the European Commission and sponsored by Rosetta Stone. This executive summary is reprinted with permission. The text is the one shown on the website, which differs in minor respects from the printed version, and is available from www.language-rich.eu/home/research/crossnational-findings.html

Language-rich Europe: key findings and discussion 117

Official language policy documents on the promotion of national and foreign languages are available in almost all countries/regions, on R/M languages in 18 countries/regions and on immigrant languages in only four countries/regions. The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (ECRML) has been ratified by Parliament in 11 out of the 18 countries surveyed, and signed by governments in France and Italy. It has been neither signed nor ratified by Bulgaria, Estonia, Greece, Lithuania and Portugal. The largest numbers of officially offered R/M languages in education emerge in South-Eastern and Central European countries. In Western Europe, Italy and France are the clearest exceptions to this general rule, as they offer a wide variety of languages. The concepts of “regional” or “minority” languages are not specified in the ECRML but immigrant languages are explicitly excluded from it. In Western European countries, immigrant languages often have a more prominent appearance than R/M languages but enjoy less recognition, protection and/or promotion. Most countries/regions are familiar with official language data collection mechanisms and most of them address three types of languages: national languages, R/M languages and immigrant languages. Only four out of 24 countries/regions have no language data mechanisms at all: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Denmark, Greece and the Netherlands. Portugal only collects data on the national language. There is also variation in the major language question(s) asked in official nation/region-wide language data collection mechanisms. Over half of the countries/regions surveyed ask a home-language question, while others ask about the main language and/or the mother tongue. Languages in pre-primary education

Many EU and CoE documents underline the importance of early language learning. At pre-primary level, 14 of the 24 countries/regions surveyed provide additional support in the national language for all children funded by the state. The Netherlands and Ukraine devote the most time to this. Foreign-language provision at this level is offered by nine countries/regions: Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Basque Country, Bulgaria, Catalonia, Estonia, Spain and Ukraine, although it may be partly or fully funded by parents/ guardians. English, French and German are the most common languages offered. R/M languages are offered by 17 countries/regions, and are mainly funded by


the state/region. In some countries there are minimum group size requirements to form a group. The widest variety of languages is offered in Austria, Hungary, Italy, Romania and Ukraine. Provision in immigrant languages in pre-primary education is not yet very common. However, in spite of the difficulties involved in identifying appropriate teachers and learning materials, three countries (Denmark, Spain and Switzerland) do offer support to very young children for the maintenance and development of their languages and cultures of origin. In Denmark national, regional and local funds cover all costs for these programmes, while in Spain and Switzerland source-country-related funds partly cover the costs through bilateral agreements. The only country offering early language learning across all language types is Spain. Languages in primary education

According to both the EU and CoE, all young European children should learn two languages in addition to the national language(s) of the country in which they reside. In primary education, apart from Italy and Ukraine, all countries/ regions offer extra support for newcomers in learning the national language. Apart from Wales, all countries/regions have foreign-language provision in primary education. Denmark and Greece make two foreign languages compulsory, while 18 countries/regions have one compulsory foreign language. In England, Northern Ireland and Scotland, foreign languages are optional. Foreign languages are taught from the first year of primary in 12 of the countries surveyed, from the mid-phase in seven, and from the final phase only in the Netherlands, Scotland and Switzerland. English, French and German emerge as the most commonly taught foreign languages. In many cases, one of these languages is the compulsory subject to be studied by all pupils. Italian, Russian and Spanish are other languages offered either as compulsory or optional foreign languages. Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) is widespread for foreign languages only in Spain, while this approach is being used in 13 other countries/ regions, although not systematically. Seven countries/regions report using the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) explicitly in foreign-language learning, although more may base their national standards on its principles and


approaches. A1/A2 is the CEFR target for this age group of foreign-language learning. Apart from Denmark and Estonia, R/M languages are offered in 22 countries/ regions. R/M-language classes and lessons in other subjects taught through R/M languages are open to all pupils irrespective of language background in 20 countries/regions, although Bulgaria and Greece only target native speakers of these languages. The offer is rich in a number of countries/regions, with Austria, Bulgaria, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Romania and Ukraine offering four or more R/M languages either as subjects or in the majority of cases as a medium of instruction. Twelve countries/regions report widespread CLIL, with another six saying that is used locally. Only five countries/regions report offering immigrant languages at primary level. These are Austria, Denmark, France, Spain and Switzerland (in the canton of Zürich). In France and Switzerland, immigrant-language classes are open to all pupils, while in Austria, Denmark and Spain they are reserved for native speakers of immigrant languages. France, Spain and Switzerland offer lessons partly in school hours, whereas in the other countries they are offered as extra-curricular activities. Achievement in immigrant languages is not linked to any national, regional or school-based standards, although the development of language skills is monitored in all countries except Austria. Lessons in immigrant languages are fully funded by the state in Austria and Denmark, whereas in France, Spain and Switzerland they are mainly supported by the country of origin. In primary education qualified language teachers are employed to teach languages as follows in the countries/regions surveyed: 16 out of 24 in the national language, 17 out of 22 in R/M languages, 14 out of 23 in foreign languages, and two out of five in immigrant languages. In Austria, England, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Switzerland, foreign languages are taught by generally qualified classroom teachers. Pre-service and in-service training is widespread in most countries/regions except for immigrant languages. A clear area for development in foreign-language teaching is teacher mobility: nine countries/regions out of 24 report having no support at all in this area, and only Catalonia reports structured teacher mobility programmes. More should be done to stimulate language teachers to spend more time in the country of the language they are teaching to acquire higher-level linguistic and cultural competencies. A number of countries/regions are taking active measures to increase the supply of language teachers. The Basque Country, Denmark, Estonia and Switzerland are recruiting national-language teachers. Bulgaria, Denmark,


England, Friesland, Hungary, Lithuania and Ukraine are recruiting extra foreign-language teachers. The Basque country, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Denmark, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Spain and Ukraine are recruiting R/M-language teachers. None of the countries/regions surveyed are actively recruiting immigrant-language teachers. Languages in secondary education

Additional support in the national language is provided for newcomers either before or during mainstream education in 21 countries/regions, with Denmark, Italy and Ukraine reporting no provision. As expected, all countries/regions surveyed offer foreign languages at both lower and upper secondary education. Significant differences emerge, however, in the number of compulsory languages offered, the range of languages, monitoring of language skills, the use of CLIL, and the extent to which the CEFR is used to evaluate the level achieved. The only countries/regions to make two languages compulsory at both lower and upper secondary level are Austria, Estonia, France, Poland, Portugal and Romania. As expected, attainment targets in line with the CEFR for foreign languages are much better established in secondary schools than primary schools in the participating countries/regions, with 13 of them explicitly stating a level to be achieved. B2 seems to be the commonly agreed level for proficiency in the first foreign language, with B1 for the second. Nineteen countries/regions offer R/M languages within secondary education. The countries/regions not offering R/M-language education are Denmark, England, Estonia, Greece and Poland. Seventeen countries/regions monitor the language skills acquired either through national/regional or school-based tests, with only Austria and Italy reporting no monitoring. Austria and Wales set no targets for the standard to be achieved, but all other countries/regions do. All countries/regions offer the languages free of charge to all pupils. Few countries/regions are making immigrant-language provision available systematically (three in pre-primary and five in primary), and in secondary eight countries/regions out of the 24 responded positively. These are Austria, Denmark, England, Estonia, France, the Netherlands, Scotland and Switzerland. Full state funding is available for immigrant languages in Austria, Denmark, England, the Netherlands and Scotland. In France and Switzerland funding is


provided by the countries of origin of immigrant pupils and in Estonia parents meet the costs. The only countries/regions offering immigrant languages in both primary and secondary education are Austria, Denmark, France and Switzerland. The most commonly offered foreign languages are English, German and French, although other European languages such as Spanish and Italian are also offered. Some immigrant languages such as Arabic, Croatian, Polish, Russian and Turkish are offered as optional foreign languages, and Arabic and Turkish have a firm status as examination subjects in secondary schools in France and the Netherlands. Russian is offered widely in Eastern European countries either as an R/M language or as a foreign language. As in primary education, CLIL is widespread in the teaching of R/M languages, but much less so in foreign languages, with only France reporting widespread practice, and 14 other countries/regions reporting localised examples. Foreign-language teachers are well qualified, and only in Estonia and Northern Ireland do general classroom teachers teach foreign languages. There is a little more structured support for mobility at secondary level than at primary, with Austria as well as Catalonia reporting that teachers spend a semester abroad as part of their pre-service or in-service development. Another 17 countries/regions encourage and support the mobility of teachers financially, leaving Estonia, France, Italy, Portugal and Romania as countries where teachers are less likely to spend time in a target-language country. In line with EU and CoE recommendations, foreign-language teachers in most countries are required to have attained a certain proficiency level in the foreign language and this is measured against CEFR levels in eight countries/ regions. C1 appears to be the most common level required, although B2 is considered appropriate in the Basque Country. There is a shortage of language teachers in some countries/regions, and special measures are being taken to recruit professionals with appropriate qualifications and to encourage people to qualify as language teachers. The most active countries/regions in teacher recruitment are Scotland, the Basque Country, England, Romania and Switzerland, who are all recruiting for teachers in at least three of the four language categories.

122 Guus Extra and Kutlay Yağmur Languages in further and higher education

New/primary data was collected directly from the largest 69 Vocational and Education Training (VET) centres in our 67 participating cities: the national language is quite well supported, with 30 out of the 69 VET institutions surveyed offering a wide variety of support programmes in the national language, ranging from basic communication to advanced skills. Twenty-four institutions offer a limited variety of programmes, while 15 of the institutions surveyed offer no support. Sixty-two of the 69 institutions surveyed offer foreign languages, with 15 reporting that more than four languages are taught, 22 offering three to four languages, and 25 one to two languages. Forty-one institutions offer a wide variety of programmes, from basic language skills to advanced, while 18 offer basic language skills only. Twenty-six institutions align their programmes with the CEFR. Twenty-five institutions offer R/M languages, with 13 fully covering the costs. The countries/regions offering R/M-language courses in all three of the VET institutions surveyed are the Basque Country, Catalonia, Hungary, Northern Ireland and Wales. Immigrant languages are only offered in four of the institutions surveyed – one each in Austria, England, Italy and Wales. As expected, English, French, German and Spanish are prominent among foreign languages, with some Russian offered as an R/M language in some countries/regions and a foreign language in others. Arabic is also offered in a number of VET institutions. The main offer for R/M languages is from countries/regions where there is more than one official language. New/primary data was gathered on 65 general/public universities across countries/regions. As is to be expected, all of the targeted European universities in our sample cities provide instruction in the national language because in most cases it is the main language of their student population and it is the official state language. However, in the majority of institutions surveyed other languages can also be used. The international mobility of students and staff, and the desire to attract a global and diverse student body, appear to be making English the second language of many European universities and many textbooks are also being written in English. A very high number of universities offer language courses to non-language students, as recommended by the European institutions. The offer is wide, with 31 institutions (almost half) giving students the choice of more than four languages. Only eight universities from our sample do not offer non-language


students the opportunity to learn other languages. The actual take-up of these courses was beyond the scope of the research. Almost all universities make special efforts to attract international students. Half also report conscious efforts to attract students with an immigrant background at home. Student mobility is supported financially by European universities but only ten of the universities surveyed make mobility programmes compulsory for language students. Languages in audio-visual media and press

To explore the diversity of languages in the media, we asked our researchers to record the languages offered during one week on national radio and TV according to the best-selling newspapers in the cities surveyed. Most participating countries/regions offer some radio and TV broadcasting in languages other than the national language. Catalonia provides TV broadcasting in a rich variety of foreign, R/M and immigrant languages. Hungary and Italy provide radio broadcasting in more than ten languages. In terms of dubbing and subtitling, LRE findings are comparable to earlier studies, with around half of the countries/regions commonly using dubbing practices, while the other half commonly providing subtitles. The countries/ regions where both TV and cinema are dubbed are Austria, Catalonia, Hungary, Italy, Northern Ireland, Poland, and Spain. The countries/regions where subtitles are used in both TV and cinema are Bosnia and Herzegovina, Denmark, England, Estonia, Friesland, Greece, Portugal, Romania, Scotland, Switzerland and Wales. Other countries/regions have a hybrid approach where programmes are subtitled in one medium and dubbed in the other. Regarding the availability of newspapers at the largest kiosks and train stations in our surveyed cities in each country/region, all researchers went into these kiosks and train stations and listed the available newspapers in different languages, following the methodology of linguistic landscaping to provide a snapshot at a given place and time. Overall, newspapers in English were the most common, followed by German, French, Russian and Italian. Arabic and Turkish newspapers also figured prominently. Recognition of sign languages and the availability of sign languages for important media events were also investigated. Sign languages are officially recognised/promoted in all countries/regions with the exception of the Basque Country, Denmark, Greece, Italy and Poland. Deaf people can always make


use of sign languages in official interactions with the authorities in half of the countries/regions surveyed. Facilities for sign language in important media events are always available in Estonia and regularly available in another nine countries/regions. However, in Italy, Poland and Romania researchers report that these facilities are not available. Languages in public services and spaces

Language policies and strategies at city level were explored, as well as the number of languages in which public services are offered. In addition, city representatives reported the actual languages available in both written and oral communication in education, emergency, health, social, legal, transport, immigration and tourism services, as well as theatre programmes. Sixty-three cities in total were surveyed, the basic criteria for selection being that in each country a capital city, the second largest city, and a city/town with a regional language presence were chosen. According to researchers’ reports, all the cities combined provide services in 140 languages other than the national language. Around one-third of the cities surveyed have a widely practised institutionalised strategy for promoting multilingualism, and half of the cities surveyed report that the offer of multilingual services is widely practised. Only ten cities out of the 63 cities surveyed do not provide multilingual services. Twentythree cities make it policy to include language skills in the job descriptions of their staff, and 18 provide widespread language training for staff. The five cities with the most developed policies according to the data are Barcelona, Krakow, London, Milan and Vienna. The most multilingual provision is in tourism, immigration and integration, legal services (oral communication) and transport services (written communication). Health services are also commonly offered in a number of languages. The lowest levels of multilingual services are in the cultural sector (theatre) and political debates/decision-making. Education services also do not rank as high as one might expect, given the large number of students (and their parents) attending schools across Europe who are not fluent in the official language of the country where they are educated. Seventeen cities offer most of the above services in more than four languages, while 23 offer them in three to four languages. The cities which report offering the most oral communication services in the most languages are Aberdeen, Barcelona, Belfast, Glasgow, Lugano, Madrid, Milan, Valencia and Zürich.


A lower number of cities responded positively for written communication services, with only six reporting that most services are offered in more than four languages and 27 in three to four languages. This might suggest that cities place less emphasis on providing documents in multiple languages than in providing on-the-spot oral interpreting and mediation. English is the most widely offered language other than the national language for oral and written services in all cities surveyed, followed by German, Russian, French and Spanish. Chinese and Arabic also emerge as high priority and are offered by a number of cities. Welsh, Catalan and Basque are used widely in public services in these regions. The outcomes for the most frequent languages in public services are very similar to those obtained for languages of newspapers. We can infer that there are three types of target groups for oral and written communication services in public services and spaces: (1) international travellers, business people and tourists; (2) immigrant groups; and (3) speakers and readers of R/M languages. In most city websites, English is the main language next to the national language. German and French are also quite common across our sample of cities. Some second-largest cities have more multilingual websites than the capital city in the same national context. For instance, while Rome offers information only in Italian and English, industrial Milan offers information in eight different languages next to Italian. The same phenomenon is observed in Poland for Krakow versus Warsaw. In the regional cities surveyed, English is again the most common language used on city websites next to the national languages. Languages in business

LRE developed a survey to explore the language strategies of companies, to find out whether they prioritise and support language training for their employees, and also to establish the range of languages used to communicate with customers and in promotional materials. The criteria investigated are divided into three main categories: general company language strategies, internal language strategies and external language strategies. Data was collected from a selected set of companies based in cities across all countries/regions and 484 companies were surveyed in total. Four business sectors were targeted (banks, hotels, building construction companies and


supermarkets). Overall, although the number of hotels participating was relatively high compared to other sectors, there was a good balance of sectors. In the area of general language strategies, a quarter of the companies surveyed have an explicit languages strategy in place and over half take languages into account when recruiting. A quarter regularly encourage mobility of staff for language learning and development of intercultural awareness. However, 70 per cent do not keep a record of staff language skills, and very few take advantage of EU programmes for language learning. Widespread provision of language training is reported for business English in 27% of the companies surveyed, with 14% offering support in the national language for non-native speakers, and 12% for other languages. A relatively small percentage have reward- or promotion schemes for language learning, with 11% reporting that it is widespread for business English and only 5% for the national language and other languages. The number of companies forging partnerships with the education sector to develop the language skills of their staff also appears modest, with a quarter doing so either regularly or occasionally for English, 17% for the national language for non-native speakers and 14% for other languages. In the sectors surveyed just under half of the companies use business English widely in addition to the national language in external communications, and as many as 30 per cent use other languages in addition to English and the national language on their websites. German, Russian, French and Spanish emerge as the most commonly used languages by the companies surveyed. The high frequency of Catalan, Basque and Galician reflects the importance of these languages in the regions of Spain, and the high frequency of Welsh reflects the value placed on it in Wales. Chinese, Japanese, Arabic and Turkish are also valued and supported by some of the companies surveyed, although perhaps higher prioritisation of these might be expected. Conclusions

The comparative findings presented above highlight some interesting trends in policies and practices for multi/plurilingualism in the European context. While some countries/regions have highly developed policies and practices in specific domains, others need to develop further if they wish to align themselves more closely with European recommendations and create more language-rich societies. Of all the language domains researched, it is in primary


and secondary education where most efforts are being made to promote multi/ plurilingualism. However, in early language learning, and in the sectors of further and higher education, the media, public services and business, our LRE research findings suggest that the officially declared commitment of European countries/regions to support multi/plurilingualism still needs to be turned into action plans and practices at the local and institutional level. Of all the non-national language varieties researched, immigrant languages are the least recognised, protected and/or promoted, in spite of all of the affirmative action at the European level. More attention to languages other than national ones would allow European cities and enterprises to become more inclusive in the context of increasing mobility and migration in Europe. We believe that the findings presented here go beyond the current state of our knowledge with regard to language policies and practices in Europe from three different perspectives: (1) the high number of participating European countries and regions; (2) the broad spectrum of chosen language varieties in the constellation of languages in Europe; and (3) the range of chosen language domains within and beyond education. The scope and magnitude of the LRE survey, resulting in a substantial database on a range of language policies and practices within and beyond education sectors, can be expressed in a formula of 260 questions in total raised for 24 countries/regions which amount to 6240 scored and analysed values (minus partial data for Friesland only). The overall objectives of the LRE project are: • to facilitate the exchange of good practice in promoting intercultural dialogue and social inclusion through language teaching and learning; • to promote European cooperation in developing language policies and practices across several education sectors and across broader society; • to raise awareness of the European Union and Council of Europe (EU and CoE) recommendations for promoting language learning and linguistic diversity across Europe. The purpose of the draft indicators developed through the LRE project is to act as a tool to support countries and regions in evaluating themselves against EU and CoE documents on multilingualism and plurilingualism. Through this process, we aim to raise awareness at both the public and the political macro-level among European, national and regional language policymakers, and to motivate key stakeholders across a variety of sectors, languages and countries/regions to take action. Suggestions for further indicators are welcome, as is an active response to our findings.

128 Karen M. Lauridsen

Higher education language policy: report of the CEL/ELC Working Group Karen M. Lauridsen Centre for Teaching and Learning at the School of Business and Social Sciences, Aarhus University, Denmark [email protected] 1. Background: language policy – what and why?

The twenty-first century has witnessed a dramatic increase in the internationalisation of higher education.1 This is due to a number of interrelated factors: open borders and globalisation in general have first of all resulted in a significant increase in migration; secondly, globalisation has opened up new opportunities in countries and cultures with which most Europeans have previously had little or no contact at all. In addition to that, within Europe, the Bologna Process and the development of the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) has sparked both educational development and student and staff mobility to a level that has never been seen before. These developments have a tremendous impact on the development of European higher education, and despite the differences that still exist among different kinds of higher education institutions (HEIs), and despite the differences in geographical location and the communities they serve, almost all European HEIs now face the benefits and the challenges of globalisation and internationalisation. A Higher Education Language Policy (HELP) should always be seen within the national or regional context of the HEI in question, and it should be a 1. This report was prepared by a Working Group of the Conseil européen pour les langues/European Language Council, and published in January 2013. The participants were: Karen M. Lauridsen, Aarhus Universitet, DK (Chair); Ian Tudor, Université Libre de Bruxelles, BE; Peter Stear, Freie Universität Berlin, DE; Janina Leithold-Cünnen, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, DE; Sheree Borge, Cork University of Technology, IE; Anne Marie Barrault-Méthy, Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV, FR; Michael J. Hammersley, Fondazione Aldini Valeriani, Bologna, IT; Adalyat Akbarova, Kazakh Ablai Khan University of International Relations and World Languages, KZ; Kevin Haines, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, NL; Jolanta Urbanikova, Universytet Warszawski, PL; Ana Madeira, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, PT; Gladis Garcia Soza, University of Essex, UK; Alessia Cogo, University of Southampton, UK.

Higher education language policy 129

function of the HEI mission, vision and strategies for research, education and service to HEI stakeholder communities. Across these core activities, a language policy establishes the languages of instruction and of administration and communication as well as the aims and objectives of language programmes, language support measures and the way in which these are put into practice within a particular HEI. The goal of this document is not to prescribe one specific way of doing this, but to address the components of an HEI language policy and thereby assist HEI leaders and management teams in the development of their own language policies. Successful implementation of language strategies hinges on many interrelated factors, most crucially (1) that the programmes offered should prepare HE graduates for the – now global – labour market with the knowledge, skills and competences of the disciplines they have studied, and with cultural awareness, intercultural communication skills and a language repertoire that enable them to work both within and without their immediate local community; and (2) that researchers have the capability of sharing their knowledge through publication to the international scholarly community as well as to the national and local communities of non-expert stakeholders. In order for this to happen, not only the researchers, lecturers and students, but also the librarians, technicians and administrative staff must have the necessary language skills. 2. The basic tenets of an HE language policy

An HE Language Policy may encompass some or all the following principal areas: • the HEI institutional language or languages, the language(s) of administration and communication; • language degree programmes (e.g. modern-language degrees, translation and interpreting, teacher training); • languages for non-language students, languages for mobility and employment; • the language(s) of instruction and language support for lecturers not teaching through the medium of their own first languages; • language support for researchers; • language support for librarians, technicians and administrative staff; • languages for the wider community. A key question is obviously which languages should be taught in a given HEI.


The answer to this depends on a number of factors, among which are the following: • the language repertoire that students already have or are expected to have when they enrol in an HE programme; • the language repertoire that faculty and lecturers have or are expected to have; • the geographical location of the HEI; • the HEI mission and vision as well as the strategies that the HEI has adopted in order to enhance graduate mobility and employability. This last point also includes preparing students for studies, internships or work in an international organisation (any public or private organisation with links across borders). In the context of developing an HE Language Policy, it is important to consider new opportunities for collaboration, business, trade and industry in countries and cultures that were formerly outside the reach of the country in which the HEI is situated. The languages of such countries may be in increasing demand and might therefore be included in the range of languages offered. The ultimate decision as to which languages should be offered should therefore also be seen within the geographical, economic and societal context of a given HEI. In what follows in this document, language degree programmes, translation and interpreting, or teacher training programmes will not be dealt with. The content of such programmes and the range of languages offered are considered part of the educational strategy of the main academic area (faculty/school/ college) responsible for these programmes. Where students do not have the language skills needed for entry to these programmes, the HEI may choose to include language provision for them as part of the HE language policy. The HEI may, of course, also choose to include all degree programmes in the language policy. It should be noted that this document does not address the question of who should provide the language courses and language support measures needed within a given HEI. In principle there are several possibilities – a language department or language centre within a given academic area (faculty/ school/college), a central language centre within and for the whole HEI, an HEI-external language centre, or any combination of these. These are issues that can only be resolved by the HEIs themselves in the light of their own specific contexts. Finally, as important as the issue may be, this document does not attempt to prescribe a national language education policy from primary through to higher education. While language provision at primary and secondary levels does


have significant implications for what may be expected from students and staff and for language provision requirements in higher education, such national or regional policies fall outside the scope of this document. 3. HEI institutional language or languages

It is important to determine the relative status of the languages employed in any given HEI. Is the HEI in question a monolingual HEI (the local language only; a major language such as English only)? Is it a truly bi- or tri-lingual HEI? Does the HEI have one official language (the national or regional language) and another (e.g. English) as its second language? Or does the HEI have two official languages (e.g. French and Flemish in Belgium; Finnish and Swedish in Finland) and maybe in addition to that another or third language? These questions are important because they have widespread and significant implications for the language repertoire required from faculty, lecturers, students and staff, and for how the HEI communicates with internal and external stakeholders, in official documents, on its website and so on. The following questions therefore need to be addressed: • What is/are the official language(s) of the HEI? • What is/are the language(s) of administration and communication at institutional/departmental/research group/administrative unit and so on levels? • What is/are the language(s) of instruction? • Who are the HEI stakeholders/targets audiences, and which language(s) is/are used in communication with these audiences (e.g. current or future students; current or future faculty, lecturers, librarians, service and administrative staff; authorities; other HEIs; local community; the corporate sector; etc.)? As it would be the case for any other policy within an HEI, it obviously needs to be determined who the decisions makers are and who the actors are at all levels of the organisation (HEI, faculties/schools, departments/centres/administrative units). Are the current actors (organisational units and individuals) capable of developing and implementing a language policy, or will the HEI need further organisational and human resources to do so? While this, as well as the issue of funding, is pivotal to the success of a language policy, it will not be dealt with further in this document as the question of resources (human or otherwise) is fundamental to any policy development and implementation. As the first step in a Higher Education Language Policy, an HEI should


determine the relative status and use of the languages employed in the institution, taking into consideration the answers to the following questions: • What is/are the official language(s) of the HEI? • What is/are the language(s) of administration and communication at institutional/departmental/research group/administrative unit and so on levels? • What is/are the language(s) of instruction? • Who are the HEI stakeholders/targets audiences, and which language(s) is/are used in communication with these audiences? 4. Languages for students

Students in higher education form a much more heterogeneous group than ever before; there are • local students whose first language coincides with the first (official, national) language of the country or region in which they live, and in which the HEI is situated; • students of migrant families whose first language is considered a heritage language and for whom the official language of the country or region is a second or other language; • exchange students; • international students on full degree programmes. Even these four groups cannot be considered well-defined entities; some of the students across these categories have a (very) limited language repertoire while others are truly multilingual. Some of the local students enrol in programmes targeted at the local community which are taught in their own first language. Others choose to enrol in programmes that also attract international students; these international programmes may be taught in the local language, especially if this is one of the major European languages. Finally, other programmes are taught through the medium of one of the major European languages in countries or regions where the local first language is another one of the major languages or is one of the less widely used and taught European languages. It is therefore important to note that, in Europe today, even though many international programmes are in fact taught through the medium of English (English Medium Instruction – EMI – programmes in non-English language countries), there are certainly other international programmes taught through the medium of other (major European) languages.


4.1 Languages for non-language students – languages for mobility and employment Different kinds of language programmes or modules may be available to students in order to enhance their language proficiency as a key qualification for mobility and employability. First of all, there are combined programmes such as Business and Language(s), International Law and Language(s), International Studies, Areas Studies and so on. Some of these programmes are simply taught in a given language without any language support for students learning through the medium of that language; other programmes are offered as Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) programmes, or at least partly as CLIL programmes. In these programmes, language components would often be Language(s) for Special or Specific Purposes (LSP). Some of these programmes may require ab initio language instruction or language preparation at levels A or B in the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR), while others would be at a higher level of the CEFR. Second, additional language programmes (modules) – including language programmes for international students in the official language of the country/ region/HEI in question – may be offered as either mandatory or optional. As a rule, if mandatory, such programmes • will have a certain number of ECTS credit points within a non-language degree programme; • may be an LSP (Languages for Specific Purposes) module or have a certain LSP component. If optional, such programmes • may or may not have a certain number of ECTS credit points within a non-language degree programme; • may or may not be an LSP (Languages for Specific Purposes) module or have a certain LSP component. • may or may not be offered free of charge for the students. 4.2 Students learning through the medium of another language Today many students learn though the medium of another language than their own first language. These students may be characterised as belonging to one of the following groups: • Students who choose to study abroad for a full degree or as part of an exchange programme and thereby also choose to study through the medium of another language.


• Home (domestic) students who choose to study through the medium of another language; in major parts of Europe, more often than not, this is English Medium Instruction (EMI programmes). The reasons for this choice may be twofold: o The students have the option to choose between similar programmes run in their own first language or run through the medium of another language. o The students can only enrol in a programme with a given specialisation if they enrol in, say, an EMI programme because the same specialisation is not available in their first language. • Students who live and study in a country where the official language is not their first language, and for whom both the official language of the region/HEI or for example EMI programmes entail learning through the medium of another language (the student’s second, third, … language). • Students enrolling in programmes in their heritage languages (e.g. children of migrants; returning expatriates; students whose families have been expatriated from their original home country). These students are not necessarily literate or fully literate in these languages. Depending on the educational system in question, students may need language support/language courses in order to enrol at the next level of the system; examples of this would be: • Students applying to programmes: Do they have the necessary language skills in their first or other languages? What are the minimum requirements? How are they ascertained? • Migrant students: Do they have the necessary language skills to study in the official language of the HEI or in their second/third languages (e.g. English), or in their heritage languages? What are the minimum requirements? How are they ascertained? • Do first-, second- and third-cycle students have the necessary academic reading and writing skills needed (in their first, second or other foreign languages)? • Do students need support in LSP (including the terminology) of their first, second or other foreign languages? In order to establish a coherent and consistent language policy, it is important that an HEI considers which of the above strategies it intends to implement, both in the immediate future and in the long term. It should then list a concrete set of objectives based on some or all of the above points.


As part of a Higher Education Language Policy (HELP), an HEI should consider the following interrelated questions as regards the students: • Given the programmes and the level of internationalisation the HEI has or wants to have, and as a direct implication of that, what are the language proficiency levels required by students who apply to its programmes? • Given the programmes and the level of internationalisation the HEI has or wants to have, and as a direct implication of that, what are the language proficiency levels expected from the graduates of these programmes? • Given the profile of the HEI and its educational strategies, which language components are to be offered within and without the (non-language) degree programmes? Students may need support for all four language skills (receptive and productive, oral and written), and in addition to that, they may need special support in academic reading and writing both in their first and their other languages. 5. Language support for lecturers

Like the students, the lecturers (HE teachers) also have very diverse linguistic repertoires. All of this has major implications for the languages used, the language programmes and the language support needed within the HEI. Lecturers required to start teaching though the medium of another language than their own first language may need to enhance their skills in that language. Pedagogical, didactic and intercultural issues are not considered in this report even though they will be at least as important as the language skills. Foreign lecturers may need support both in the official language of the region/HEI and, if it is a different one, in the language of instruction. More often than not, the language proficiency of lecturers is taken for granted rather than ascertained by means of language tests or other measures designed to assess and validate formal as well as non-formal language learning. As part of their HELP, HEIs should employ measures to validate lecturers’ formal as well as non-formal learning of the language of instruction. Moreover, HEIs should consider the need for and their provision of • Language courses for lecturers in the language(s) of instruction. • Language courses for lecturers in the language(s) of administration and communication. • Translation or language revision of teaching materials.

136 Karen M. Lauridsen 6. Language support for researchers

Furthermore, faculty may need language support, including language revision and perhaps even translation, in order to publish in the appropriate media (scholarly journals and books, but also other media targeted towards a broader audience in the local/regional community). Foreign faculty may need support both in the official language of the region/ HEI and, if it is a different one, in the language(s) in which it is appropriate for them to publish their research. As part of their HELP, HEIs should consider the need for and their provision of • Language courses for researchers in the language(s) in which they are expected to publish or otherwise communicate the results of their research. • Language courses for researchers in the language(s) of instruction and of administration and communication. • Pre-publication language revision. • Translation. 7. Language support for librarians, technicians, administrative staff and janitors

As an integral component in the internationalisation of any HEI, the librarians, technicians, administrative staff and janitors who have direct contact and communicate with international faculty, lecturers, students and other stakeholders, need to have the necessary language skills in order to do so. As part of their HELP, HEIs should consider the need for and their provision of • Language courses for librarians, technical and administrative staff in the language(s) of communication. 8. Languages for the wider community

In some countries, HEIs provide general language courses or LSP courses to a wider audience. This, however, will not be further considered in this document.


9. Recommendations

HEIs are encouraged, within the framework of their own societal context, mission, vision and strategies, to develop the aims and objectives of a Higher Education Language Policy (HELP) that allows them to implement these strategies. In this process, they may want to determine the needs, the measures that are already in place, and the measures that need to be put in place in order for them to do so. The recommendations of the sections above are meant to assist HEI leadership and management teams in this process. These recommendations are collected here: As the first step in a Higher Education Language Policy, HEIs should determine the relative status and use of the languages employed in the institution, taking into consideration the answers to the following questions: • What is/are the official language(s) of the HEI? • What is/are the language(s) of communication at institutional/departmental/research group/administrative unit and so on levels? • What is/are the language(s) of instruction? • Who are the HEI stakeholders/target audiences, and which language(s) is/ are used in communication with these audiences? HEIs should further consider the following interrelated questions as regards the students: • Given the programmes and the level of internationalisation the HEI has or wants to have, and as a direct implication of that, what are the language proficiency levels required by students who apply to its programmes? • Given the programmes and the level of internationalisation the HEI has or wants to have, and as a direct implication of that, what are the language proficiency levels expected from the graduates of these programmes? • Given the profile of the HEI and its educational strategies, which language components are to be offered within and without the (non-language) degree programmes? Students may need support for all four language skills (receptive and productive, oral and written), and in addition to that, they may need special support in academic reading and writing both in their first and their other languages.


As regards academic staff, HEIs should consider measures to validate formal as well as non-formal learning of the language of instruction. Moreover, HEIs should consider the need for and their provision of • Language courses for academic and non-academic staff in the language(s) of administration and communication. • Language courses for researchers and lecturers in the language(s) of instruction. • Language revision. • Translation.

The future of language degrees 139

The future of language degrees: report of CEL/ELC Special Interest Group Michael Kelly (editor) University of Southampton [email protected] Young people graduating from university know that it is increasingly important to be able to work in different linguistic and cultural environments.1 As a result, students of many different subjects are taking up language learning. At the same time, specialist degrees concentrating on language studies are coming under significant pressure in many European countries. In some countries, language departments are closing and the future of language degrees is being called into question. Important social changes have affected the study preferences of students, often accelerated by the economic crisis of the last four years. There have been changes in schools, in career expectations for students and in government priorities. This report attempts to understand the changes that are happening, what issues they raise and how language degrees can use their strengths and find new opportunities. It addresses the questions: What is a language degree? What pressures are they experiencing? What opportunities for development are available? What issues must be addressed? And what strengths do language degrees have? The report finds that language degrees make Europe’s graduates more employable in a global context, but that they will have to make more explicit their specific expertise and contribution. Existing programmes were established to meet a variety of needs, particularly for translation and interpreting and for teaching and research in languages and cultures. This report suggests that further research is now needed to establish more precisely what the new needs are. It identifies possibilities in the growing need for cultural mediators, and 1. This report was prepared by a Special Interest Group of the Conseil européen pour les langues/ European Language Council, and published in November 2012. The participants were: Michael Kelly (Chair), University of Southampton; Boris Vejdovsky (Deputy Chair), Université de Lausanne; Manuel Célio Conceição, Universidade do Algarve; Biljana Cubrovic, University of Belgrade; Andrea Dlaska, University of Surrey; Sven Halse, Aarhus University; Ole Helmersen, Copenhagen Business School; Yulia Kovalyova, National Research Tomsk Polytechnic University; Irina Kraeva, Moscow State Linguistic University; Sharon Millar, Odense Universitet; Paul Pauwels, Lessius University College, Antwerp.

140 Michael Kelly

in the growing number of careers that now require a high level of intercultural awareness. It suggests that work is required to identify the unique competences of language graduates and to design language degrees that take better advantage of them. The diversity in language degrees is a source of richness and invention, but can also bring fragmentation and misunderstanding. Enhancing collaboration is an urgent need, both for the future development of language degrees and for the future success of their graduates. What is a language degree?

Languages are taught in many varied forms in higher education, and often the same institution has several academic units that carry some responsibility for teaching in the area of languages. While most universities provide support for language learning for students on many degree programmes, there are fewer degree programmes in which students can study languages as an integral part of their degree. Each type of specialist language degree has a particular history and identity, and each has a different outcome in potential careers for students. They fall into the following types, though they are sometimes combined in practice as universities learn from each other. Modern languages/philology

The longest established degree programmes are those that combine the study of language and literature. In some countries these are called modern languages, and in other countries philology degrees, referring to their origins at a time when the principal purpose of studying literature was to deepen the students’ understanding of language. These degrees were introduced in most countries from the end of the nineteenth century and took their pattern from the study of classical languages, which focused on a canon of the most esteemed authors. The first focus of literary study was on the use of language (broadly grammar and rhetoric) and this was extended first to include literary analysis and then to the study of classical civilisations as a background to understanding the literary and philosophical texts. Many philology degrees involve only one foreign language, though they may in some cases involve two. They have traditionally focused on the major Germanic and Romance languages, but other languages are playing a growing


role (Slavonic, Middle Eastern and Asian languages). In more recent years, much debate has turned on theoretical frameworks for analysis such as gender studies, post-colonial studies and cultural studies. The canonical works have been extended to include a wider range of writers. Other cultural forms are often included, especially cinema and audio-visual culture. There has also been some tendency for the study of linguistics to become more prominent. Philology degrees are mainly taught in older established universities. In some countries, most of the students of these degrees take up a career in teaching. In other countries, the degree is mainly seen as a liberal arts qualification. Applied languages

Degree programmes in applied languages were established mainly from the 1960s onwards, and tend to be concentrated in newer universities. They focus on learning languages with reference to particular social settings, often in business contexts. In addition to increasing language competence, often in at least two foreign languages, these programmes may provide detailed study of different aspects of societies, such as social and political structures and the business environment. In recent years, much debate has focused on the place of intercultural communication. In many cases, the degrees are located in a school of business or social studies, and the language-related studies are now often a minor component. The degrees frequently have a strong vocational emphasis, preparing students to work in particular areas of business or the professions. Translation and interpreting

Courses in translation and interpreting have been established in some countries since the seventeenth century, though most of those now active were established during the twentieth century. In many cases, first-cycle degrees in applied languages include components of interpreting and translating, but the majority of more specialised professional degrees are postgraduate qualifications, situated in the second cycle of studies. There are relatively small numbers of professional courses across Europe and they are primarily concerned to prepare students to enter employment in the language industries.

142 Michael Kelly Language-based area studies

Since the 1960s, a range of specialist programmes have been developed in which languages are combined with historical and political studies of a particular country or area. The EU has strongly promoted European studies and there is widespread interest in American studies and Latin American studies. Other areas studied include Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Africa and South Asia. Language studies have normally been an integral part of these degrees, particularly where the area has one or two dominant languages. Language-based area studies have generally been recognised as strategically important, and graduates often find employment in government agencies, non-governmental organisations and international corporate enterprises. Languages in education

Courses in language teacher training take two main forms. They may be integrated into a first-cycle degree in philology or applied languages, sometimes with an additional second-cycle component. Or they may be a second-cycle degree, open to students who have studied a first degree in philology or applied languages. In many cases, the focus of the course is on pedagogy, but in some cases it is focused on philology. In recent years, there has been increasing focus on teaching one’s own language as a second or foreign language. These courses generally lead to an officially recognised status as a teacher and to employment in a school nationally, or to employment internationally as a teacher in the public or private sector. What are the pressures on language degrees?

Many different types of pressures affect the ability of universities to offer degrees with foreign-language courses as part of them. Some pressures are external, imposed by changes in education, societal developments or specific, national political decisions. Other pressures derive from university internal developments such as interdepartmental competition. The main pressures are briefly outlined.


Changes in primary and secondary schools

The latest Eurobarometer study shows that language competence across Europe is in decline. Fewer citizens than previously have competence in two languages other than their first language (MT+2). Added to this, and perhaps more serious, there seems to be a decline in the perception of relevance of knowing major foreign languages other than English. Thus, the idea of the relevance of foreign languages puts pressure on universities’ offering of language degrees. On the other hand, the latest barometer also shows that Chinese is being studied more widely. The reason undoubtedly is that the prevailing political discourse promotes a growth potential related to knowledge of Chinese, whereas the same discourse plays down the relevance of other, even major European languages in many countries. Languages are under pressure in the entire education system in many countries. Changes made to curricula in primary and secondary school affect the uptake of language degrees at university level. In many countries, languages are being cut (severely) in primary and secondary school. For example: in Denmark a reform of secondary education has meant that just 3 per cent leave with knowledge of three foreign languages against 41 per cent before the reform. Similarly, an OECD report (September 2010) showed that “secondary school pupils in the UK spend less time studying languages than anywhere else in the developed world”. An English report, Review of Modern Foreign Languages Provision in Higher Education in England paints a bleak picture of the challenges faced by language degrees that probably also applies to many other countries across Europe. This development has an in-built self-reinforcing tendency. When fewer students graduate with language or related degrees, recruitment of language teachers for primary and secondary education suffers. As a best-practice example, the “Foreign Language Centre” in Norway has taken a number of initiatives that look promising in the sense that they seem to work towards reversing the trend, but it will take a long time to assess how it will affect language degrees. The utility value of languages

There is an increasing concern that subjects studied at university should have an immediate and recognisable usefulness. The resulting “utility culture” works against the type of subjects that “take time”. The recognition that it is

144 Michael Kelly

time-consuming and hard work to really acquire foreign-language competence at a high level means that students may be deterred from studying languages. The “utility culture” entails an increasingly instrumental approach to both education and research. This probably challenges the humanities, including languages, more than other university subjects. The tendency towards the knowledge being imparted to students being readily applicable on a rapidly shifting labour market challenges language degrees. Global role of English

Large parts of the labour market are becoming increasingly globalised. Instead of this being an advantage for language degrees, the predominant use of English seems to pull in the opposite direction. Just as the value of possessing a telephone increases with the number of people possessing them, the value of a good command of English increases with the number of people across the world knowing English. This tends to reduce the value of bothering to learn additional languages, at least when it comes to the job market. The Bologna process, paradoxically, puts pressure on language degrees or language learning (outside English) at universities. It is increasingly expected, and practised, that students going on exchange can study in English in non-English speaking countries and that universities in non-English speaking countries offer whole degree programmes in English. The relevance for students to learn the local languages for other than social purposes decreases as a consequence. So, the room given to other languages at the lower levels in the education system has drastic consequences for language degrees at universities. Economic pressures

The financing of university education in general has a tendency to disadvantage languages, both because of the utility culture but also because languages as “soft” subjects tend to be given lower priority when university funding is reduced in times of economic crisis. Because of the nature of language learning, the same advantages of scale that other university subjects may utilise are difficult for language programmes to copy.


What are the opportunities for language degrees?

As well as bringing pressures to bear, the changes taking place in the world also bring new opportunities. These arise in many different contexts: Context of the world. There is increasing demand for flexibility of the workforce and growing attention to generic skills. There are new kinds of jobs in languages, such as language technology, terminology management, web editing, international media and culture. There has been an intensification of internationalisation in politics, business and leisure. Migration and mobility have become key features of life in almost every country. Context of higher education. There is increased flexibility in degree programmes. The Common European Framework of Reference allows a clear articulation of linguistic needs. There are more students than ever in higher education, including larger numbers of students with foreign roots. Context of research insights. Developments in our discipline enable new areas to be added to the curriculum, which may be attractive to students. These include, for example, discourse studies, language acquisition research and ethnography. New opportunities

As a result of these changes, a number of new opportunities can be identified: • There is a growing range of “language” professions for which language degrees can train people, or at least prepare them. • Language degrees provide a good basis for generic skills that are language based, such as analysing and summarising. • Language degrees have an inherent capacity for interdisciplinarity, since language is always “about something”. If this is exploited, graduates will be informed about and used to working with content outside their domain. • High-level language learning involves abstract thinking, such as insight into patterns and structures. This is a transferable skill. • Learning a language to a high level of proficiency is not easy, as can be demonstrated by means of the different levels of the CEFR, and by means of research results. So it cannot be considered an easily acquired skill. • Different levels of professional language competence are needed – also in (“new”) languages not offered at secondary school level, for example migrant languages, or languages of the East.

146 Michael Kelly

• Increase in internationalisation means increase in the need for foreign languages, and not just English, to foster in-depth contacts. Understanding the language means understanding the worldview. • Second-generation immigrants are good candidates for degrees combining the language of their parents and the language of the country where they live. • Degree combinations with languages and professionally oriented subjects have been made possible. • Language learning in HE can be strengthened using insights from language-acquisition research. Making use of the opportunities

Language departments can explore these new opportunities in the light of the degrees they offer and the expertise they have in different fields. They can develop pilot projects and share experiences. In the process, departments need to be active in demonstrating their usefulness to business and government, and to find the means to convince prospective students. They can, for example, illustrate career opportunities that their degree opens up and demonstrate that they deliver high-level knowledge and skills. They can also illustrate the wider assets they offer, such as more generic skills such as communication, team-working, problem-solving, project management and networking. What are the issues for language degrees?

In responding to the pressures and opportunities, language departments need to examine the internal issues which may have impeded them in recognising the nature of changes or in finding innovative responses in a timely fashion. This section seeks to identify the kind of difficulties that may exist and offers some suggestions to overcome them. Recognising assets

Language degrees need to enable students to validate and certify their formation and qualification as cultural mediators. It has been the experience


of innumerable language and literature instructors throughout Europe to see their students bloom after a study-stay abroad. While all recognise the invaluable asset of language learning, multilingualism, and multilingual experience in another country, many degrees do not explicitly recognise and validate that asset. Student attributes and attitudes

Students come to university from school with varying types and degrees of literacy in (foreign) language(s) that do not always match the current demands and expectations of university degree programmes. Given changing political and social imperatives in many European countries, student populations have become more diverse and less easily categorised in terms of abilities and ambitions. Students are increasingly concerned with the potential value of their studies for their future employment, and tend to compare the career advantages of language degrees with the benefits of other subject areas. Main points for language degrees: 1. Language degrees need to develop greater flexibility to accommodate these wider societal changes. 2. Language degrees need to offer answers to the often-asked question, What can I do with this degree? 3. Language degrees need to come up with innovative responses that do not rely on standard vocational options, such as teaching. Curriculum design

It remains difficult to define a curriculum that moves beyond the traditional box-like structure that encases subjects apart from each other. It is therefore a challenge to adopt a less fragmented approach that gives priority not only to integration between subjects and across other disciplines, but also relevance of content and skills. Language degrees at the applied end of the spectrum tend to be associated with practical skills rather than research skills and academic rigour. Curricula should therefore highlight the research component of degrees which may include writing research proposals, researching companies in preparation for a placement year and conducting ethnographic studies while abroad.

148 Michael Kelly

Main points for language degrees: 1. Language degrees need to target alternative career paths and highlight those elements that make their graduates an asset to a range of professions. Language degrees need to define learning outcomes for language proficiency in a variety of contexts, but also for cultural agility and research skills. 2. Language degrees need to overcome scepticism about, and resistance to, utility-based change among some university teachers. 3. Language degrees need to devise strategies of cross-university collaboration, especially for fields with a restricted number of students. This will enable institutions to reduce the pressure put on them by the need of increased pedagogical flexibility and students’ targeted profiling. 4. Strategies need to be developed to support language degrees that have few students, or have a wide range of profiles. They often struggle to achieve a critical mass to ensure feasibility. Strategies need to address the complex financial and organisational difficulties that arise. 5. Language degrees face the difficulty of finding relevant and efficient ways of attesting the new skills developed in language learning. 6. An overall issue is the choice of language of instruction and assessment and the degree to which this should be the target language. Marketing matters

Language degrees have something of a branding problem and are faced with mounting difficulties in selling themselves in what is an increasingly competitive market. This may be due to a lack of broad appeal to a target audience that includes not only prospective students but also employers. Raising the profile of language degrees and cementing some form of brand in the public imagination is at least partly dependent on dealing with the student and curriculum issues raised above. It is a further problem that the nature and value of language degrees is not sufficiently known by school students who are considering their future university studies. School students may not have sufficient contact with universities to gain a clear understanding of what is involved and the difference between studying at school and university. Main points for language degrees: 1. Language degrees need to demonstrate more convincingly that they are not a luxury but that they offer a pathway to a broad range of careers.


2. University staff need to consider how they can foster greater understanding of language degrees in schools, for example through outreach work and cooperation with schools and school teachers. 3. Language degrees should offer options for students to work with schools as “ambassadors” for languages, with appropriate training. They should also offer opportunities for teachers to undertake continuous professional development. What are the strengths of language degrees?

This section points out that language degrees provide a distinctive education with many benefits to learners that are often not recognised. Cultural agility

Learning languages is intrinsically a multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary activity. Learners of languages have to utilise skills that reach far beyond transcoding from one linguistic code to another. Learning a language calls for a sense of history, geography, philosophy, poetry, communication and semiotics, to mention but a few relevant fields. Thus, when learning languages students progress in fields of knowledge that make them more competent and skilful in multiple domains, which in turn makes them more professionally marketable. This increased cultural agility not only exposes students to different disciplines of thought, but just as importantly it teaches them about the relations among the latter. Learning languages is a multidisciplinary activity, in that it borrows from curricular activity employed in areas ranging from writing for academic purposes, through to media studies, film, television and computing. It is also multidisciplinary in that it exposes learners to fields that are often tightly partitioned and to which they would not have had access. By gaining a language degree a student may gain insights into film studies, but also sociology or physics. In a world where boundaries between disciplines, but also between technology and the humanities, are collapsing, learning languages is an economical means of exposing oneself to several disciplines and exploring the links between them. Cultural agility and the ability to work across disciplinary boundaries are attributes highly valued by employers. Language degrees need to highlight

150 Michael Kelly

in their curriculum, their learning outcomes and their communication with external stakeholders how these skills are developed and how they may be applied in the world of work, postgraduate study or academic research. Building on their expertise in engaging students in communications across cultures and disciplines, language degrees should also seek to lead in the development of employability strategies in their institutions. Main points for language degrees: 1. A unique feature of language studies is to promote the mutual knowledge and understanding of languages and cultures. They need to formulate learning outcomes relating to the development of cross-cultural understanding. 2. Language degrees need to use their expertise in intercultural and crossdisciplinary communication to shape their institutions’ employability agenda. 3. Language degrees need to validate the student’s capabilities to translate from/into their own culture. 4. Language degrees need to recognise the inter-cultural experience to offer a unique possibility to view one’s own culture from a renewed perspective. Thus, the promotion of language studies is not limited to technical aspects, but includes, on the contrary, political and ethical questions. Entering the realms of others

Language acquisition has a sociopolitical dimension. Learning more than one language is a powerful means of breaking out of one’s own cultural, political and ideological isolation, as it enables learners to enter the realms of others. It is essential, then, to note that in any process of multilingual acquisition, that process is double. On the one hand, the learner initiates a move toward other peoples and cultures, even as his or her culture is approached and entered by them. Main points for language degrees: 1. Language degrees need to recognise the new competencies acquired by students exposed to other cultures. 2. More research is needed to establish how language degrees enable students to become cultural mediators and what further steps are needed to enhance this capability.


Critical reflection

Multilingualism fosters the development of a meta-language: the ability to speak and think about language and communication. By reflecting on their own language and that of others, learners develop specific skills connected with the new linguistic aptitudes: for example, analytical skills, communicative skills and inter-cultural communicative skills. In addition, they develop the ability to stand outside a communication or another activity and to think critically about it. Main points for language degrees: 1. Language degrees need to recognise the added value of the transversal skills thus acquired 2. Language degrees need to recognise the capacity to reflect critically on professional and social practices and encourage students to consider how to act upon them to change and improve them. Thinking outside the box

Language learning enables learners to “think outside the box”. By realising where the boundaries of one’s own culture and thinking are, learners access forms of creativity and personal development they would not have suspected otherwise. Language affects all fields of culture, even those, like architecture or engineering, where language might appear as a simple medium to communicate content. A closer look at the question will show that language is part and parcel of computing as well as medicine, and that computer scientists or medical doctors with a training in language may find it a benefit in thinking about their respective fields of expertise. Main points for language degrees: 1. Language degrees need to recognise the creative capabilities fostered by (multi)linguistic formation. 2. Language degrees need to recognise the benefits that language learning can offer to students in other fields of competence. Expanding communicative networks

Multilingualism spreads virally. It is a mantra of the contemporary world that it is a village and that it is interconnected. However, a quick survey of

152 Michael Kelly

contemporary means of communication will show that information is often predictable, repetitive and redundant. Not only does a multilingual formation enable trainees to communicate effectively and appropriately, it also enables them to expand their communicative networks beyond grids pre-formatted by technological language. Further research is needed to establish how far the increase in personal development for holders of language degrees can generate new economic possibilities, for example in facilitating new contacts, new market openings or newly generated projects. It may well prove that the relatively modest investment (in time, energy, money) devoted to multilingual acquisition has far-reaching effects and can offer a considerable return on capital. Main points for language degrees: 1. Language degrees need to recognise their learners’ capability to produce innovative, productive and efficient communication. 2. Language degrees need to recognise that they may be able to accelerate the formation of students in their specific fields of competence by developing access to a wider range of social and cultural opportunities. Taking advantage of unique assets

This report demonstrates that those responsible for language degrees face many challenges from the changes currently taking place. But they are not without resources, and the changes are creating new opportunities and needs, which language degrees are well placed to meet. The report highlights the key role language degrees play in making Europe’s graduates more employable in a global context. It cautions at the same time, however, that as other disciplines internationalise their curricula language degrees will have to make more explicit their specific expertise and contribution. Different degree programmes were established to meet a variety of needs. This report identifies some of these, but suggests that further research is now needed to establish more precisely what the new needs are. Some established needs will continue to be important, particularly in translation and interpreting and in language teaching. However, these professions are themselves undergoing rapid change and it will be important for language degrees to respond creatively to address the changes. Outside the traditional language professions, new roles are emerging to which language degrees can and should respond. There is a growing need for cultural mediators who are able to work across geographical and cultural


borders to connect different communities and to negotiate between different worldviews. A growing number of careers now require people to have a high level of intercultural awareness, which enables them to build relationships with individuals and organisations from a wide range of different cultural perspectives. Graduates from language degrees possess an impressive array of competences. In some cases their attributes may be common to graduates of several subject areas, but there are certainly competences that are distinctive to language graduates. Work is required to identify these unique assets more precisely and then to design language degrees that take better advantage of them. As this report shows, there are many opportunities for language degrees to grasp, but there are also challenges ahead, not least in finding the flexibility to respond to new needs in a timely way. There is a great diversity in the profile and organisation of language degrees, which is both a strength and a weakness. On the one hand, variety is a source of richness and invention. On the other hand, variety can also bring fragmentation and misunderstanding. The key to building on strengths and overcoming weaknesses undoubtedly lies in collaboration. There are different levels of cooperation, exchange of ideas and good practices at institutional, national and European levels. Enhancing collaboration is an urgent need, both for the future development of language degrees and more importantly for the future success of our graduates. Their degrees should enable them to move between universities and markets, and prepare them for a future in which they can thrive as citizens of a rich and diverse Europe.

Interventions

Interventions

Suggest Documents

Interventions

Coronary Interventions - Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions

Alternative interventions to violence: Creative interventions

Alternative interventions to violence: Creative interventions

Interventions Toward the Poor Nutritional Interventions - BVSDE

Internet Interventions

Drug Interventions

Positive Interventions

OD INTERVENTIONS

Cardiovascular Interventions

Interventions Worksheet

Interventions Worksheet

Hoarding Interventions

Internet Interventions

Situating Interventions 1 Situating interventions to bridge the intention

NON-PHARMACOLOGICAL INTERVENTIONS:

Aging interventions get human

Internet Interventions - ScienceDirect.com

Feminist Interventions in

Tier 1 Interventions - Corwin

cash based interventions - Data.unhcr.org

cash based interventions - data.unhcr.org

Sonic Interventions

Captivating Essential Interventions