Language and Education Multilingual resources for

This article was downloaded by: [Ms Viv Edwards] On: 05 March 2015, At: 00:37 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Language and Education Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rlae20

Multilingual resources for children a

Viv Edwards & Sue Walker

b

a

Faculty of Education , University of Reading , Bulmershe Court, Earley, Reading, RG6 1HY b

Department of Typography & Graphic Communication , University of Reading , 2 Earley Gate, Whiteknights, PO Box 239, Reading, RG6 2AU Published online: 04 Nov 2009.

To cite this article: Viv Edwards & Sue Walker (1994) Multilingual resources for children, Language and Education, 8:3, 147-156, DOI: 10.1080/09500789409541387 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500789409541387

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sublicensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

MULTILINGUAL RESOURCES FOR CHILDREN Viv Edwards Faculty of Education, University of Reading, Bulmershe Court, Earley, Reading, RG6 1HY

Downloaded by [Ms Viv Edwards] at 00:37 05 March 2015

and Sue Walker Department of Typography & Graphic Communication, University of Reading, 2 Earley Gate, Whiteknights, PO Box 239, Reading, RG6 2AU Abstract This article is a response to Grace Feuerverger's contribution in the current issue of Language and Education which describes a multicultural literacy intervention for minority students in Toronto. Whereas the use of multilingual resources is a recent phenomenon in Canada, British schools have been using such materials for over a decade. While agreeing with Grace Feuerverger that they have the potential to empower students and bring about change, we argue diat their uncritical use is unlikely to result in significant improvement. We outline a range of problems around the production and use of multilingual resources, drawing on the conventional wisdom accumulated by teachers over the last ten years and on the early work of the 'Multilingual Resources for Children' project which we currently co-direct. Finally, we point to economic and political reasons for international co-operation in this area.

This paper is written as a response to Grace Feuerverger's article, 'A multicultural literacy intervention for minority language students', which also appears in this issue of Language and Education. It should be said at the outset that we share the author's excitement at the use of materials in a range of other languages. We agree with her that, when such materials are used creatively and critically, they have the potential to enhance the status of minority students and broaden the perspectives of majority students. And we consider her account of events in the initiative in the East York Board of Education to be a timely contribution to the debate both on the acquisition of literacy and on the needs of bilingual children in multi-ethnic classrooms. Our own perspective is that of researchers in the UK where multilingual resources have been a regular feature of classrooms since the late 1970s. The account of the Toronto initiative is valuable not only because it describes what is currently taking place in Canada but because it offers insights into developments in Britain ten years ago or more. Unfortunately, however, this process has received little or no attention from British researchers. Although the pros and cons of 0950-0782/94/03/0147-10$01.80/0 LANGUAGE AND EDUCATION

© 1994 V. Edwards & S. Walker Vol. 8, No. 3, 1994

147


148

LANGUAGE AND EDUCATION

multilingual resources have been discussed in general terms (cf. Chatterji, 1991; English Magazine, 1989; Edwards & Redfern, 1992), there exists no comparable account which draws, as Grace Feuerverger does, on the perspectives of researchers, teachers, children and parents. The first initiative in this area is, in fact, the 'Multilingual Resources for Children' project on which we are currently working. This project is still very much at the stage of data collection. Our current perceptions are not yet grounded in detailed classroom observation; rather they reflect the conventional wisdom accumulated by teachers over the past decade. This conventional wisdom, however, raises a number of issues which are likely to have a direct bearing on the future progress of the Toronto initiative and other projects which, hopefully, will follow in its wake. For far too long, teachers and researchers have overlooked or underplayed the importance of international co-operation in the study of multilingual classrooms. Yet many of the issues which currently confront teachers in schools in London and Toronto are equally pertinent in Melbourne, San Francisco or Brussels. The need to look to colleagues experiencing similar challenges in other locations is particularly pressing for British researchers working in a political climate which is increasingly inward-looking and nationalistic (cf. Bourne & Cameron, 1988). In the discussion which follows, we will try to broaden the net, addressing both questions raised by Grace Feuerverger and other issues which have emerged as important in British classrooms. Multilingual resources will be discussed in three main categories: imported materials, self-made materials and dual texts. In each case, perceived problems will be highlighted and, wherever possible, solutions will be suggested. As was the case in the account of the Toronto initiative, the main emphasis in this article will be placed on dual texts. This is not because we necessarily attach more importance to materials of this kind. Rather it is a reflection of the fact that these are the most common examples of multilingual resources in use in British classrooms.

Perceived Problems With Other Language Materials Other language resources take three main forms: materials imported from other countries; small-scale, locally produced materials; and bilingual books or dual texts. We will look at each of these in turn. Imported materials Occasionally the materials in other languages which are found in British schools originate from countries such as the USA or Australia which are home to large linguistic minorities. In most cases, however, they come from the country of origin of the group in question. Bookshops specialising in publications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, China, Africa and the Caribbean are now very much a part of the British education and cultural scene.1 These publications are a valuable supplement to any school library. They do, however, attract some negative comment. British teachers, accustomed to high


MULTILINGUAL RESOURCES FOR CHILDREN

149

quality paper, printing, colour and illustrations, are sometimes heard to comment that they consider books originating outside Europe to be of inferior quality: they are worried about the status messages this sends to monolingual and bilingual children alike (cf. Keiner, 1990). One of the areas which we are exploring as part of the 'Multilingual Resources for Children project' is how well-founded such criticisms are. Are children's choices influenced by features such as the opacity of paper or the quality of colour reproduction? Do linguistic minority teachers working in community schools2 have similar reservations? Or might it be the case that judgements of aesthetic value are heavily influenced by culture and that teachers are unduly worried by appearance? Another feature of imported materials which sometimes gives rise to concern is the fact that they deal with experiences far-removed from their British-born readers. A child who, with the exception of a few brief visits to the country of origin, has known only a British urban environment, may find it difficult to relate to the experiences and expectations which permeate books designed for a home audience. It is possible to argue, however, that such a view is far too sweeping. Many Indian books for children deal with themes which have an international appeal. The repertoire of writers like Ira Saxena, for instance, extends to computer adventures and environmental issues.3 Similarly, there are problems of language level to which we will return later in the discussion of dual texts. Speakers of community languages tend to operate at a lower level of proficiency than native speakers. Texts which match the linguistic competence of children born overseas may well be aimed at much younger readers and thus risk being dismissed as childish. Locally produced materials For many years, children who spoke languages other than English were educated in specialist reception centres or in separate classes. In the early 1980s, however, there was a concerted move to integrate children into mainstream schools and classrooms. This move was justified on several grounds: the integrated classroom offered a wide range of language models and opportunities for more realistic communication; it also ensured that children had access to the whole curriculum (Edwards & Redfern, 1992). Language support teachers (sometimes known as resource teachers in Canada) began to work alongside class and subject teachers. But, whereas the original impetus was towards English language support, research evidence pointing to the importance of a sound foundation in the mother tongue (cf. Cummins, 1984) influenced many local education authorities to provide bilingual language support, often organised by specialist community language teaching teams. Sometimes members of these teams teach community languages as part of the curriculum; on other occasions they offer bilingual support to children in the mainstream classroom. Part of the brief of such specialist teachers has been to produce their own materials. In most cases, these materials are intended only for local use; in some cases, however, there have been attempts to market them to colleagues in other local authorities.


150


Occasionally, local initiatives have resulted in materials of a high standard of design and production. In most cases, such materials may be characterised as 'cheap and cheefuT—eminently practical, low-cost responses to the shortage of suitable teaching materials. As such, they are open to the same criticisms regarding hidden status messages which apply to many of the imported materials described above. The greatly improved possibilities for desk top publishing in non-Latin scripts may well result in a far more polished appearance for such materials. Programs currently available for use in schools tend to have a very limited range of fonts and styles; they also tend to produce very low resolution print. (For a useful discussion of multilingual word processing, see Abbott, 1992.) However, they often represent an improvement on handwriting in terms of both legibility and status, except perhaps in the case of languages with a calligraphic tradition, like Urdu. Dual texts Community language teachers are likely to use single language materials with bilingual children studying the community language as part of the curriculum; bilingual support teachers working with mixed groups of children in mainstream classes are more likely to use dual texts. This is also the genre preferred by most mainstream teachers and commercial publishers. However, these books, too, require critical examination. Dual texts have been warmly welcomed by teachers eager to promote linguistic and cultural diversity in their classrooms. Grace Feuerverger points to the potential of dual texts for empowerment and effecting change, a theme which is echoed by various British commentators (cf. Edwards & Redfern, 1992; Houlton, 1985; Chatterji, 1991). Yet there is a real danger that their presence may be simply tokenistic and that they do little or nothing to promote the life chances of linguistic minority children. Issues which need to be considered in this discussion are summarised in Table 1 under the headings of pedagogical status, linguistic status and typographic status. Pedagogical issues

Teachers may be happy to buy and display a range of dual texts in their classrooms and libraries, but we suspect that all too often they fail to think critically about how best to use them. We know very little, for instance, about how the books are used by different children of different ages with diverse language and literacy experiences and backgrounds. Nor do we know how they are shared by parents and children or by children and siblings or other relatives. It seems likely, however, that bilingual children—other than those who have recently arrived in the country—often choose to read the text in English and ignore the other language. There are many reasons why this might be the case. When books are adaptations of well-known tides, such as the Spot series,5 the English text may simply seem more familiar. For children who have been born


151

Table 1 Issues of status in multilingual resources Issues Pedagogical status

Are dual texts used in a wide range of ways?


Are attempts made to help children to approach dual texts in ways appropriate to their needs?

What attempts are made to develop a whole school approach to dual language texts? Linguistic status

Is the translation of the nonEnglish text in a dual text appropriate? How accessible to audience is the text?

Typographic status

Does one script take precedence over the other in a dual text? - size of letterforms - spacing between letters and lines - weight of letterforms - colour - position on page

For example While dual texts may be displayed they are not always incorporated into everyday activities, such as storytelling Although monolingual children will read the English text, their attention can be drawn e.g. to differences and similarities in scripts. Teachers can usefully discuss with bilingual children which language they read first and why, and develop strategies to encourage them to read the community language It is important to look closely at which strategies work best and why, and to ensure that good practice is disseminated through the school The translation, say, of a traditional story in the community language may be made by an agency geared to commercial rather than educational material Imported materials sometimes deal with experiences far removed from British-born readers Are the pictures placed in suck a way that they are more relevant to one language than the other} What messages are sent to readers when the English text is typeset, and the other language is handwritten?

Is one script of a higher quality than the other in a dual text? - different mode: handwritten or typeset?

in Britain or who have lived here for some time, proficiency in English will probably outstrip proficiency in the community language, another reason for feeling more comfortable with the English text. Many community language teachers react to this dilemma by insisting that minority language publications are used in their classes to the exclusion of all other books, including dual texts.

152



If it is indeed the case that most bilingual children read only the English text, we need to face a number of uncomfortable questions. The presence of other languages and scripts in British schools has important status issues for the speakers of other languages which are unaffected by the bilingual reader's preferred language. But, if we are to argue that dual texts can be used to promote the literacy development of bilingual pupils, it is essential to monitor the ways in which they are used and to promote reading activities which fully utilise the second language. Equally important, as the principal in Feuerverger's study points out, we need to look at ways of integrating these with other resources across the school. How can such books be made a part of a structured, progressive approach to literacy across the curriculum? There is an urgent need to look closely at what works and why, and to identify and disseminate examples of good practice. Linguistic status

While community language teachers have been aware of problems from the outset, their monolingual colleagues have perhaps been too captivated with the novelty of bilingual resources to look more critically at issues around translation. Yet the quality of translation is critical to the success or otherwise of a book. In some cases, the starting point has been a traditional story in the community language; in other cases, it is an existing English story which has enough space for the insertion of a second language translation. We have anecdotal evidence, particularly in the latter case, of text being sent to agencies better geared to commercial than to educational translation. Those responsible for the translation may well have expertise in the language of advertising or adult novels, but little or no experience of the language of children's books. This is certainly one possible explanation for the incidence of erudite vocabulary and complex structures which are found in many dual texts, resulting in a far higher level of difficulty in the other language than in English. Another common assumption is that anyone who speaks another language is capable of translation. The reality, of course, is that quality translation is a highly skilled act of recreation which faithfully mirrors the spirit of the original. Very few people are equipped to meet these demands. A further complication for those producing dual texts is that translations may be restricted by the length of the original and the look of the page. Yet if children are to be persuaded to read the other language text, teachers must be confident in the quality of the translation. A related issue concerns the language variety chosen for translation. In the UK, many Moslem children speak Panjabi at home but study Urdu as the language of high culture. Similarly, many Italian children speak a southern Italian dialect but study standard Italian; and most Bangladeshi children speak Sylheti but study Bengali. There is a view, however, among many community language teachers that it would be more realistic educational goal to promote the language of the home as a bridge to the acquisition of the standard or official language (Alladina & Edwards, 1990). Commercial questions must also be taken into consideration. If the target community is Greek Cypriot, for instance, should the text be translated into the conservative Cypriot dialect spoken by the majority



153

of Hellenophones in Britain, or into modern standard Greek? If the publisher is hoping to reach a British market, it would make good sense to seek a Cypriot Greek translation; if, however, the publisher is hoping to reach an international audience (which might include Greek children learning English in Greece or Greek Americans), modern standard Greek would be the obvious choice. Being a good translator of children's books is not simply a matter of speaking another language. It is essential to have first-hand experience of children who speak the community language in question; and a familiarity with children's literature in English and the community language. To ensure quality, the translation needs to be tested in co-operation with children and community language teachers. It is also important to ensure a high quality of proof-reading. Chatterji (1991: 3) describes one book included in a review of dual texts as having 'great chunks of text missing in the translation'. The responsibility for ensuring a high quality of both translation and proof-reading lies with publishers who often have little sensitivity to multilingual matters. It also goes without saying that the representation of gender and race needs to be just as carefully constructed as in monolingual texts (cf. Klein, 1985; Corson, 1993). Typographic status

The collaboration of linguists, teachers and typographers on the 'Multilingual Resources for Children' project has created many opportunities for exploring typographic issues that have considerable bearing on what constitutes a successful dual text book. What messages are sent to readers, for instance when the English text is typeset and the other language is handwritten? What messages are sent and received when the English text always comes first? Sometimes such issues can be resolved simply by a critical approach to dual language publishing which questions the automatic dominance of English. On other occasions, however, the problems are seemingly intractable. One such example arises when the second language runs from right to left. Chatterji (1991: 3) describes the situation thus: Dual language books in a language which reads from right to left e.g. Urdu, Hebrew and Arabic are sometimes criticised for being in the English mode, i.e. from left to right. There is a simple technical explanation for this. To produce just one Urdu edition which reads from right to left alongside others that read from left to right would mean producing a complete new set of plates especially for that edition, because of resequencing the order of the pages. Therefore instead of a plate showing picture 1 on page 1 (as in all the other language editions), picture 1 would have to be on the last page. As a high cost of printing is in the making of the plates, this would increase the price of that particular edition to an unpayable level. Mantra [a small community language publisher] include an apology and an explanation in all their Urdu books. A range of other typographic factors also influence perceptions of status, including mode, weight, size, spacing and colour. Text in dual texts can be typeset, word


154


processed or handwritten. When both languages are set in the same mode (typeset/ typeset, word processed/word processed etc.), status problems are minimised. However, difficulties in typesetting non-Latin scripts mean that, in many cases, the English text is typeset and the other language script is produced in a lower resolution form. The typeset language is likely to be considered more important. There are also a number of factors which affect the use of space in dual texts. For example, when a dual text has been first published in English, the other language is often added in the spaces left on the page in the English edition so as to minimise typesetting, plate making and printing costs. This means that the other language text is sometimes squashed in, or placed away from the picture to which it relates. The spacing between lines and words can also be different in the two languages. This could have a number of unfortunate effects: a tight line feed and word space may affect ease of reading, or a wide line feed may make one language appear more 'babyish' than the other. Size and weight, too, can make one text appear more significant than the other. Urdu, for instance, naturally takes up less space than English and is sometimes made larger to take up the same amount of space, or heavier to compensate for lack of prominence. If bilingual children are to be encouraged to read other language texts, serious attention needs to be paid to configurations of text and pictures. It is important, for example, to consider the message that is sent when the action in the pictures always relates to the English text, or whether language learning is impaired or enhanced when texts are positioned overleaf from a relevant illustration. Almost every possible text/figure configuration has been found in the books we have reviewed as part of the 'Multilingual Resources for Children' project: text below the illustration, text above the illustration; text above and below the illustration; text to the left of the illustration; text to the right of the illustration; text to the left and the right of the illustration. If we are serious in our intent that bilingual children should be encouraged to read the other language texts, we need to look closely at the configurations which cue the reader most effectively. What becomes clear from this discussion of status in relation to dual texts is that the presence of such materials in the classroom is not in itself sufficient. Teachers need to be sensitised to a whole range of important questions around their use, the quality of translation, typography and production.

Back to the Future Prolonged use of other language materials in British schools thus points to a range of problems. Teachers seem reluctant to use imported materials beause they are perceived to be of inferior quality or because they do not speak to the experience of British-born children. Locally produced materials are a commendable attempt to address the problem of a dearth of suitable resources, but are produced for small audiences and on low budgets. They therefore risk perpetuating the status differential between English and other languages. Dual texts, while setting out to enhance the status of other languages, sometimes inadvertently have the opposite effect. The use of hand-written second language texts and poor



155

quality translations, for instance, sends clear messages that the second language is very much the poor relation. The presence of other language materials in schools and classrooms is a clear commitment to linguistic diversity and has the potential to empower and bring about change. If this potential is to be translated into reality, we need to look carefully at current practice and identify both strengths and weaknesses. The emergence in recent years of anti-racist education (cf. Massey, 1991) and critical language awareness (cf. Fairclough, 1992; Corson, 1990) gives important clues as to what may be wrong with current practice. There has been a growing realisation that it is not enough to acknowledge and celebrate linguistic and cultural diversity in the classroom. A frequent criticism of multilingual resources is that their presence in the classroom is merely tokenistic. Under what conditions, however, does tokenism give way to empowerment? How do teachers set about creating the conditions for change? If we are serious about the educational benefits of promoting literacy in the mother tongue, we need to look at examples of the kinds of practice which work well and why. We also need to consider how such practice fits into a structured, progressive approach to literacy across the curriculum. One of the important messages which we hope will emerge from this discussion is the need for international co-operation from publishers, teachers and researchers. The observations we have offered have grown out of the experience of using multilingual resources for over a decade in British classrooms. We believe that many of the issues that have engaged British teachers are already—or will soon be—challenging educationalists in other countries. We also recognise that the current political agenda for education in the UK, with its emphasis on national language and culture and its return to assimilationist policies (cf. Bourne & Cameron, 1990), may seriously curtail further development in this area. We look to colleagues in other parts of the world where budgets are perhaps more generous and the political climate less myopic and xenophobic for support in looking critically at both the production of resources and the ways in which they are incorporated into classroom practice. In addition to these political imperatives, there are compelling economic reasons for international co-operation. Practical difficulties which deter publishers can often be overcome if the market for individual titles is seen as international rather than local. For instance, a Chinese-English dual text might sell only 1,000 copies in the UK but, if the same book were made available in Hong Kong, Canada, Australia and the USA, it might be possible to make minority language pubishing a more viable commercial proposition. Notes 1. Details of British specialist bookshops can be obtained from AIMER (Access to Information on Multicultural Education Resources), a data-base project housed at the Reading and Language Information, University of Reading, Bulmershe Court, Earley, Reading RG6 1HY. 2. We should signal here a difference in terminology and circumstances in Britain and Canada. In Britain, community languages are sometimes taught as subjects in mainstream

156


schools but are most often taught by volunteer teachers who receive varying levels of support: in some cases, local education authorities pay teacher salaries; in other cases, they offer free accommodation. In Canada, heritage language teaching receives a higher level of official support. In Ontario, there is a requirement to provide classes in any language when a request is received from ten or more parents. See Edwards & Redfern (1992) for further discussion of language and education in Britain and Canada. 3. See, for instance, Caught by Computer (New Delhi: Children's Book Trust 1987) and For the Green Planet (New Delhi: Children's Book Trust 1991).


References Abbott C. (1992) PAL project. Share IT 9-10. Alladina, S. and Edwards, V. (eds) Multilingualism in the British Isles Vol. 2. London: Longman. Bourne, J and Cameron, D. (1988) No common ground: Kingman, grammar and the nation. Language and Education 2 (3), 147-60. Chatterji, M. (1991) Selection criteria for dual language books. Children's Book Foundation Newsletter, Spring: 3-4. Corson, D. (1990) Language Policy Across the Curriculum. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. (1993) Language Minority Education and Gender. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Cummins J. (1984) Bilingualism and Special Education: Issues in Assessment and Pedagogy. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Edwards, V. and Redfern, A. (1992) The World in a Classroom: Language in Education in Britain and Canada. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. English Magazine (1989) Checklist on dual language texts. English Magazine 21, 38. Fairclough, N. (1992) Critical Language Awareness. London: Longman. Houlton, D. (1985) All Our Languages. London: Edward Arnold. Keiner, J. (1990) The Hebrew speech community. In S. Alladina and V. Edwards (eds) Multilingualism in the British Isles Vol. 2 (pp. 239-52). London: Longman. Klein, G. (1985) Reading into Racism: Bias in Children's Literature and Learning Materials. London: Routledge. Massey, I. (1991) More than Skin Deep: Developing Anti-Racist Multicultural Education in School. Sevenoaks: Hodder & Stoughton.