1887
Describing School Achievement in Asian Languages for Diverse Learner Groups
  • ISSN 0155-0640
  • E-ISSN: 1833-7139

Abstract

In school languages education in Australia at present there is an increasing diversity of languages and learners learning particular languages that results from a greater global movement of students. This diversity builds on a long-established profile of diversity that reflects the migration history of Australia. It stands in sharp contrast to the force of standardisation in education in general and in the history of the development of state and national frameworks for the learning of languages K-12 in Australia and indeed beyond. These frameworks have characteristically generalised across diverse languages, diverse learner groups and diverse program conditions, in particular, the amount of time made available for language learning. In addition, in the absence of empirical studies of learner achievements in learning particular languages over time, the development of such frameworks has drawn primarily on internationally available language proficiency descriptions [such as the American Council for the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL), the International Second Language Proficiency Rating Scale (ISLPR), and more recently the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR)] that were developed primarily to serve reporting and credentialing rather than learning purposes.

Drawing on a description of the current context of linguistic and cultural diversity and on a brief characterisation of the history of curriculum and assessment framework development for the languages area, I provide a rationale for acknowledging in the development and use of frameworks (i.e. descriptions of achievements) the diversity of languages that comprise the languages learning area in Australia and, in particular, the diverse learner groups who come to their learning with diverse experiences of learning and using particular languages. The Student Achievement in Asian Languages Education (SAALE) study provides an example of the development of descriptions of achievement that are sensitive to these dimensions of context. I discuss the rationale for such context-sensitive descriptions in relation to their potential purposes and uses at the language policy and planning and educational systems level, at the teaching and learning level, and in ongoing research.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/aral.35.3.01sca
2012-01-01
2019-12-10
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Australasian Curriculum, AssessmentCertification Authorities (ACACA)
    Australasian Curriculum, AssessmentCertification Authorities (ACACA) (1991) National Assessment Framework for Languages at Senior Secondary Level (NAFLSSL). Hosted by the Senior Secondary Assessment Board of South Australia, www.saceboard.sa.edu.au/ccafl/.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Australasian Curriculum, AssessmentCertification Authorities (ACACA)
    Australasian Curriculum, AssessmentCertification Authorities (ACACA) (2001) The Collaborative Curriculum and Assessment Framework for Languages (CCAFL). Hosted by the Senior Secondary Assessment Board of South Australia, www.saceboard.sa.edu.au/ccafl/.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bachman, L. & Palmer, A.
    (2010) Language assessment in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Ball, S.
    (2000) Performativities and fabrications in the education economy: towards a performative society?Australian Educational Researcher, 27(2), 1–23. doi: 10.1007/BF03219719
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03219719 [Google Scholar]
  5. Board of Studies of Victoria
    Board of Studies of Victoria (1995) Curriculum and Standards Framework – Languages other than English (CSF). Melbourne. Board of Studies of Victoria.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Breen, M.P. , Barratt-Pugh, C. , Derewianka, B. , House, H. , Hudson, C. , Lumley, T. & Rohl, M.
    (1997) Profiling ESL children. How teachers interpret and use national and state assessment frameworks [Vol.1]. Canberra: Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Brinton, D.M. , Kagan, O. & Bauckus, S.
    (Eds) (2008) Heritage language education. A new field emerging. New York. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Clyne, M.
    (1991) Community languages. The Australian experience. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511597084
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597084 [Google Scholar]
  9. (2005) Australia’s language potential. Sydney: University of NSW Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Cook, G.
    (2010) Translation in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Council of Europe
    Council of Europe (2001) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR): Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Curriculum Corporation of Australia
    Curriculum Corporation of Australia (1994) Languages other than English: a curriculum profile for Australian schools. Melbourne: Curriculum Corporation.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations
    Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. National Asian Languages and Studies in Schools Program (NALSSP). (n.d.).Retrieved25 March 2012, fromwww.deewr.gov.au/schooling/nalssp/Pages/default.aspx.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Elder, C.
    (2000a) Learner diversity and its implications for outcomes-based assessment. In C. Elder (Ed.) Defining standards and monitoring progress in languages other than English. Guest edited issue of the Australian Review of Applied Linguistics , 23(2), 36–61.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. (2000b) Outing the ‘native speaker’: The problem of diverse learner backgrounds in foreign language classrooms. Language, Curriculum and Culture, 13(1): 86–108. doi: 10.1080/07908310008666591
    https://doi.org/10.1080/07908310008666591 [Google Scholar]
  16. Elder, C. , Kim, H. & Knoch, U.
    (this issue). Documenting the diversity of learner achievements in Asian languages using common measures.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Fulcher, G.
    (2008) Evaluating language quality. In E. Shohamy & N.H. Hornberger (Eds) Encyclopaedia of language and education: Language testing and assessment, 7, 157–176.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Garcia, O.
    (2009) Bilingual education in the 21st century. A global perspective. Chichester, West Sussex. Wiley Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Hill, K. , Iwashita, N. , McNamara, T. , Scarino, A. , & Scrimgeour, A.
    (2004) A report on assessing student outcomes in Asian languages (Japanese and Indonesian). Report tothe Australian Government Department of Education, Science and Training.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Hulstijn, J.H.
    (2011) Language proficiency in native and nonnative speakers: an agenda for research and suggestions for second-language assessment. Language Assessment Quarterly, 8, 229–249. doi: 10.1080/15434303.2011.565844
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2011.565844 [Google Scholar]
  21. Inbar-Lourie, O.
    (2008) Constructing a language assessment knowledge base: A focus on language assessment courses. Language Testing, 25(3), 385–402. doi: 10.1177/0265532208090158
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532208090158 [Google Scholar]
  22. Johnstone, R.
    (2000) Context-sensitive assessment of modern languages in primary (elementary) and early secondary education: Scotland and the European experience. Language Testing, 17(2), 123–143.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Kramsch, C.
    (2006) From communicative competence to symbolic competence. Modern Language Journal, 90, 249–252. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2006.00395_3.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00395_3.x [Google Scholar]
  24. (2009) The multilingual subject. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Lantolf, J. & Frawley, L.
    (1992) Proficiency: understanding the construct. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 10(2), 181–196. doi: 10.1017/S0272263100007300
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100007300 [Google Scholar]
  26. Leung, C. & Lewkowicz, J.
    (2008) Assessing diverse populations. In E. Shohamy & N.H. Hornberger (Eds). Encyclopedia of language and education. Volume 7. Language testing and assessment (2nd ed.) (pp.301–317). New York: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978‑0‑387‑30424‑3_183
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30424-3_183 [Google Scholar]
  27. Leung, C. & Rea-Dickins, P.
    (2007) Teacher assessment as policy instrument: contradictions and capacities. Language Assessment Quarterly, 4(1), 6–36. doi: 10.1080/15434300701348318
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15434300701348318 [Google Scholar]
  28. Lo Bianco, J.
    (2010) The struggle to retain diversity in languages education. In A.J. Liddicoat and A. Scarino (Eds). Languages in Australian education: problems, prospects and future directions (pp.97–108). Newcastle Upon Tyne. Cambridge Scholars.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. (2009) Second languages and Australian schooling. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Luke, A.
    (2011) Generalizing across borders: policy and the limits of educational science. Educational Researcher, 40(8), 367–377. doi: 10.3102/0013189X11424314
    https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11424314 [Google Scholar]
  31. Macqueen, S. , Harding, L. & Elder, C.
    (2011) Investigating the validity of the ESL VELS student data (Final report). Melbourne: Language Testing Research Centre.
  32. McNamara, T. & Elder, C.
    (2010) Beyond scales. In A.J. Liddicoat and A. Scarino (Eds). Languages in Australian education: problems, prospects and future directions (pp.193–202). Newcastle Upon Tyne. Cambridge Scholars.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. McKay, P.
    (1992) ESL Development: language and literacy in schools project. Volumes1 and 2, National Languages and Literacy Institute of Australia: Melbourne, Victoria.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. (2005) Research into the assessment of school age language learners. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 243–263. doi: 10.1017/S0267190505000139
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190505000139 [Google Scholar]
  35. (2006) Assessing young language learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Mercurio, A. & Scarino, A.
    (2005) Heritage languages at upper secondary level in South Australia: A struggle for legitimacy. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 8, 2 & 3, 145–159. doi: 10.1080/13670050508668603
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050508668603 [Google Scholar]
  37. Ministerial Council on Education, EmploymentTraining and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA)
    Ministerial Council on Education, EmploymentTraining and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA) 2008Melbourne declaration on educational goals for young Australians. Melbourne. MCEETYA. Retrieved25 March, 2012, fromwww.mceecdya.edu.au/verve/_resources/National_Declaration_on_the_Educational_Goals_for_Young_Australians.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Nicholas, H.
    (2000) Is there progress in standards?Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 23(2), 79–88.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Orton, J.
    (2008) The current state of Chinese language education in Australian schools. Melbourne: Education Services Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Peyton, J.K. , Ranard, D. A. & McGinnis, S.
    (Eds.) (2001) Heritage languages in America. McHenry, IL: Centre for Applied Linguistics and Delta Systems Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Scarino, A.
    (1995) Language scales and language tests: development in Languages other than English. Melbourne Papers in Language Testing, 4(2), 30–42.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. (2000) Complexities in describing and using standards in languages education in the school setting: whose conceptions and values are at work?Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 23(2), 7–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. (2008) The role of assessment in policy-making for languages education in Australian schools: a struggle for legitimacy and diversity. Current Issues in Language Planning, 9(3), 344–362. doi: 10.2167/cilp140.0
    https://doi.org/10.2167/cilp140.0 [Google Scholar]
  44. (2010) Language and languages in the curriculum. In A.J. Liddicoat and A. Scarino (eds). Languages in Australian education: problems, prospects and future directions (pp.157–178). Newcastle Upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Scarino, A. , Elder, C. , Iwashita, N. , Kim, S. H. O. , Kohler, M. & Scrimgeour, A.
    (2011) Student achievement in Asian languages education. Part 1: Project Report. Report prepared for the Department of Education, Employment & Workplace Relations (DEEWR). Available fromwww.saale.unisa.edu.au.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Scarino, A. , Vale, D. , McKay, P. , & Clark. J.
    (1989) The Australian Language Levels (ALL) Guidelines. Canberra. Curriculum Development Centre.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Spolsky, B.
    (2008) Historical and future perspective. In E. Shohamy & N.H. Hornberger (Eds). Encyclopedia of language and education. Volume 7: Language testing and assessment (2nd ed.) (pp.445–454). New York: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978‑0‑387‑30424‑3_192
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30424-3_192 [Google Scholar]
  48. Stroud, C. & Heugh, K.
    (2011) Languages in education. In R. Mesthrie (ed). Cambridge handbook of sociolinguistics (pp.413–429). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511997068.030
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511997068.030 [Google Scholar]
  49. Stroud, C. & Wee, L.
    (2010) Language policy and planning in Singaporean late modernity. In L. Lim , A. Pakir & L. Wee . (Eds) English in Singapore: modernity and management (pp.181–204). Singapore: NUS Press. doi: 10.5790/hongkong/9789888028436.003.0008
    https://doi.org/10.5790/hongkong/9789888028436.003.0008 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/aral.35.3.01sca
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error