SCP El6

ST.
JOHN PAUL II COLLEGE OF DAVAO

COLLEGE OF TEACHER EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT
Physically Detached Yet Academically Attached
SIMPLIFIED COURSE PACK (SCP) FOR SELF-DIRECTED

LEARNING
EL6 – Language Policies in Multilingual Society
This Simplified Course Pack (SCP) is a draft version only and may not
be used, published or redistributed without the prior written consent of
the Academic Council of SJPIICD. Contents of this SCP are only
intended for the consumption of the students who are officially enrolled
in the course/subject. Revision and modification process of this SCP
are expected.
SCP-EL6 | 1
ST. JOHN PAUL II COLLEGE OF DAVAO
DEPARTMENT
By 2023, a recognized professional institution providing quality,

Vision
economically accessible, and transformative education grounded on
the teachings of St. John Paul II.
Serve the nation by providing competent JPCean graduates through

quality teaching and learning, transparent governance, holistic
Mission
student services, and meaningful community-oriented researches,
guided by the ideals of St. John Paul II.
Respect
Hard Work
Perseverance
Core Values
Self-Sacrifice
Compassion
Family Attachment
Inquisitive
Ingenious
Graduate Attributes
Innovative
Inspiring
Course Code/Title EL6/Language Policies in Multilingual Society

Explore the relationship between language and society. In particular, it examines why
people use language differently in different social situations, and aims to explain how
they convey social meaning and signal aspects of our social and cultural identity
Course Description through language. We will discuss how language is used in multilingual and
monolingual speech communities, explore the reasons for language change, and
identify the social and contextual factors conditioning various linguistic responses.
Course Requirement
Time Frame 54 Hours
“Based 40” Cumulative Averaging Grading System
Grading System Periodical Grading = Attendance (5%) + Participation (10%) + Quiz (25%) + Exam
(60%)
Final-Final Grade = Prelim Grade (30%) + Midterm Grade (30%) + Final Grade (40%)
Contact Detail
Dean/Program Head Amie P. Matalam, MM (09953860989)
SCP-EL6 | 2
DEPARTMENT
Course Map
Language Policies in Multilingual Society
SCP-Topics: Prelim Period SCP- Topics: Midterm Period SCP- Topics: Final Period
Cognitive issues related to

Week Language Policy and Planning in
Week 1 Second Language Acquisition Week 7 bilingual and multilingual Southeast Asian Context
13
development
History of bilingualism, Cognitive issues related to

Week Language Policy and Planning in
Week 2 multilingualism and bilingual Week 8 bilingual and multilingual Southeast Asian Context
14
education development (Cont.
Types of bilinguals - compound, Bilingual education programs – Week

Week 3 Week 9 Language Revitalization
sequential, semi-lingual, limited heritage, immersion, transition etc 15
Bilingual and multilingual education

Bilingual and multilingual speech – Week 10 policies – European, American policies on Week
Week 4 Language Revitalization
code-switching and translanguaging bilingual and multilingual education 16
Bilingual and multilingual education

Bilingual and multilingual speech- Week 11 policies – European, American policies on Week
Week 5 Language Revitalization
mixing and confusion bilingual and multilingual education (Cont) 17
Week
Week 6 Preliminary Examination Week 12 Midterm Examination Final Examination
18
Course Outcomes
1. Provide future English language teachers with a basis in the current theories and practices of
bilingual and multilingual pedagogy, research, policy, and education;
2. Develop knowledge of the theoretical and practical approaches to bilingual and multilingual
education and development;
3. Develop knowledge of bilingualism and multilingualism as a means for diversification and
innovation in language learning and teacher development; and
4. demonstrate an understanding of the social, cultural and educational issues specific to
bilingual and multilingual children and adults and their relationship to the larger society
SCP-EL6 | 3
DEPARTMENT
Welcome Aboard!
This course will explore the relationship between language and
society. In particular, it examines why people use language
differently in different social situations, and aims to explain how
they convey social meaning and signal aspects of our social and
cultural identity through language. We will discuss how language is
used in multilingual and monolingual speech communities, explore
the reasons for language change, and identify the social and
contextual factors conditioning various linguistic responses.
Week 1 Introduction to Second Language Acquisition

Lesson Title Important Concepts in Second Language Acquisition
Learning Outcome(s) Describe language acquisition
At SJPIICD, I Matter!
LEARNING INTENT!
Terms to Ponder
Language Acquisition Device- According to Chomsky, the innate

language faculty responsible for L1 acquisition.
Learner Language –The term given to the language that learners
produce in speech and writing during the course of language
acquisition.
Linguistic Competence-This refers to the person’s underlying
(subconscious) linguistic ability to create and understand
sentences, including sentences they have ever heard before.
Linguistic Performance-This refers to the real world linguistic
output.
SCP-EL6 | 4
DEPARTMENT
Essential Content
Second language Acquisition (SLA) refers to both to the study of

individuals and groups who are learning a language subsequent to
learning their first one as young children, and to the process of
learning that language. The additional language is called a second
language (L2), even though it may actually be the third, fourth, tenth
to be acquired. It is also commonly called a target language (TL), which
refers to any language that is the aim or goal of learning. The scope of
SLA include informal L2 learning that take place in naturalistic
contexts, formal L2 learning that takes place in the classrooms, and L2
learning that involves a mixture of these setting and circumstances.
For example, “informal learning”, happens when a child from Japan is
brought to the US and “picks up” English in the course of playing and
attending school with native English-speaking children without any
specialized language instruction, or when an adult Guatemalan
immigrant in Canada learns English as a result of interacting with
native English speakers or with co-workers who speak English as a
second language. “Formal learning” occurs when a high school student
in English takes a class in French, when an undergraduate student in
Russia takes a course in Arabic, or when an attorney in Columbia takes a

night class in English. A combination of formal and informal learning
takes place when a student from the USA takes Chinese language
classes in Taipei or Beijing while also using Chinese outside of class
for social interaction and daily living experiences.
SCP-EL6 | 5
DEPARTMENT
In trying to
understand the process of second language acquisition; we are seeking
to answer three basic questions:
1. What exactly does the L2 earner come to know?

2. How does the learner acquire this knowledge?
3. Why are some learners more successful than others?
SLA has emerged as a field of study primarily from within

linguistics and psychology, as result of efforts to answer the what,
how, and why questions posed above. There are corresponding
differences in what is emphasized by researchers who come from each
of these fields:
• Linguists- emphasize the characteristics of the difference and

similarities in the languages that are being learned, and the
linguistic competence (underlying knowledge) and linguistic
performance (actual production) of learners at various stages of
acquisition.
• Psychologists and psycholinguists emphasize the mental or
cognitive process involved in acquisition, and the presentation of
languages in the brain.
• Sociolinguists emphasize variability in learner linguistic

performance and extend the scope of study to communicative
competence (underlying knowledge that additionally accounts for
language use or pragmatic competence).
SCP-EL6 | 6
DEPARTMENT
• Social psychologists emphasize group-related phenomena, such

as identity and social motivation, and the interactional and larger
social contexts of learning.
What is second language?
It is necessary to make further distinctions according to the
function the L2 will serve in our lives, since this may significantly
affect what we learn. These differences may determine the specific
areas of vocabulary knowledge we need, the level of grammatical
complexity we have to attain, and whether speaking or reading skills
are more important. The following are distinctions commonly made in
the literature:
• A second language is typically an official or societally dominant
language needed for education, employment, and other basic
purposes. It is often acquired by minority group members or
immigrants who speak another language natively.
• A foreign language is one not widely used in the learners’
immediate social context which might be used for future travel or
other cross-cultural communication situations, or studies as a
• curricular requirements or elective in school, but with no
immediate or necessary practical application.
• A library language is one which functions primarily as a tools for
further learning through reading, especially when books and
journals in a desired field of study are not commonly published in
the learners’ native tongue.
SCP-EL6 | 7
DEPARTMENT
• An auxiliary language is one which learners need to know for

some official functions in their immediate political setting, or will
need for purposes of wider communication, although their first
language serves most other needs in their lives.
What is a first language?
The important features that all shades of L1s share are that they
are assumed to be languages which are acquired during early
childhood-normally beginning before the age of about three years-and
that they are learned as part of growing up among people who speak
them.
SELF-SUPPORT: You can click the URL Search Indicator below to help you further understand the lessons.
Search Indicator
Cook, V. (1996). Second language learning and language teaching.

London: Arnold.
Ellis, R. (1987). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford:

OUP.
Saville-Troike, M., & Barto, K. (2018). Introducing second language

acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
SCP-EL6 | 8
DEPARTMENT
I
LET’S NITIATE!
Activity 1. Match the following terms to their definitions:
No A B
1 target language a. has no immediate or necessary practical
application, might be used later for travel or be
required for school.
2 second language b. the aim or goal of language learning
3 first language c. an officially or societally dominant language
(not speakers’ L1) needed for education,
employment or other basic purposes
4 foreign language d. acquired during a childhood
I
LET’S NQUIRE!
Activity 1. List all of the languages that you know how to speak. First
classify them as L1(s) and L2(s) as “second,” foreign,” “library,” auxiliary,”
or “special purposes.” Finally, distinguish between the ways you learned
each of the languages: through informal exposure, formal instructions, or
some combination of these.
I
LET’S NFER!
Activity 1. Reflection Paper. Do you think that you are (or would be) a
“good” or a “poor” L2 learner? Why do you think so? Consider whether
you believe that your own relative level of success as a language learner is
due primarily to linguistic, psychological, or social factors (social may
include type of instructions contexts of learning, or attitudes toward the
L1 and L2).
SCP-EL6 | 9
DEPARTMENT
SCP-TOPICS: PRELIM PERIOD TOPICS
Week 2 Bilingualism, multilingualism and bilingual education

Lesson Title
Trace the history of bilingualism, multilingualism, and
Learning Outcome(s) bilingual education; and
Discuss the importance of bilingual education
Time Frame
LEARNING INTENT!
Terms to Ponder
Essential Content
What is Bilingualism?
Put simply, bilingualism is the ability to use two languages.

However, defining bilingualism is problematic since individuals with
varying bilingual characteristics may be classified as bilingual.
Definitions of bilingualism range from a minimal proficiency in

two languages, to an advanced level of proficiency which allows the
speaker to function and appear as a native-like speaker of two
languages. A person may describe themselves as bilingual but may
mean only the ability to converse and communicate orally. Others
may be proficient in reading in two or more languages (or bi-
literate). A person may be bilingual by virtue of having grown up
learning and using two languages simultaneously (simultaneous
bilingualism). Or they may become bilingual by learning a second
SCP-EL6 | 10
DEPARTMENT
language sometime after their first language. This is known as

sequential bilingualism. To be bilingual means different things to
different people.
Bilingualism encompasses a range of proficiencies and
contexts. A young child entering school may be called bilingual but
it may be that she uses her first or home language for domestic and
familial purposes and that English is her preferred language for
communication outside the home. Or she may be largely
monolingual in her first language only when she starts school. A
child who has recently arrived in England from overseas may have a
good level of literacy in English but may be unable to converse or
use spoken English in the classroom context. On the other hand,
many pupils described as bilingual routinely use three languages or
more and thus 'plurilingual' would be a better description.In terms
of competence, a bilingual may have very high levels of proficiency
in both languages or may have only limited proficiency in one and
be far more proficient in the other.
The use of the term ‘bilingual’ is thus dependent upon:
context; linguistic proficiency and purpose. Many educators use
‘bilingual pupils’ in preference to 'pupils learning EAL' in order to
heighten awareness of pupils' linguistic knowledge and expertise as
well as their cultural affiliations. Rampton (1990) suggests replacing
terms such as 'native speaker' and 'mother tongue' with language
expertise, language affiliation and language inheritance. These
terms may help trainees to understand the complex nature of
bilingualism and plurilingualism in multiethnic schools.
SCP-EL6 | 11
DEPARTMENT
Literacy abilities may be an additional dimension to

bilingualism, but they are often referred to separately
as biliteracy, leaving bilingualism to carry the weight of oral
language abilities. Bilingualism is a specific case of multilingualism,
which has no ceiling on the number of languages a speaker may
dominate. The timing and sequence in which one learns each of the
languages has led to other distinctions between kinds of
multilingualism. Much of the linguistics literature, for example,
identifies native language or mother tongue as a first language,
ignoring the possibility or diminishing the value of having more
than one native language or mother tongue. Such a person is often
referred to as a simultaneous bilingual, while someone who
acquires the second language after the first one is often referred to
as a sequential bilingual ("early" if between early childhood and
puberty, and "late" if after puberty). The context of language
acquisition leads naturally to distinguishing between "informal"
bilinguals, who acquire their languages outside of formal settings
like schools, imitating the natural processes of acquiring the mother
tongue, and "formal" bilinguals, who generally learn the language in
schools or similar settings.
Multilingualism
This refers to the act of using, or promoting the use if, multiple
languages, either by an individual speaker or by a community of
speakers. Mutilingual speakers outnumber monolingual speakers in
the world’s population. Multilingualism is becoming a social
phenomenon governed by the needs of globalization and cultural
openness.
SCP-EL6 | 12
DEPARTMENT
A mutilingual person is one who can communicate in more

than one language, be it actively (through speaking, writing, or
signing) or passively (through listening, reading, or perceiving). The
terms bilingual and trilingual are used to describe comparable
situations in which two or the languages are involved. A
multilingual person is generally referred to as a polyglot.
Those who grow up in a multilingual environment acquire
multilingual competence in the natural course of using two or more
languages from childhood with the people around them, and tend to
regard it is perfectly normal to do so. Adding second languages at
an older age often takes considerable effort, however, and thus
requires motivation. This motivation may arise from a variety of
conditions, including the following:
• Invasion or conquest of one’s country by speakers of another
language;
• A need or desire to contact speaker of other languages in economic
or other specific domains;
• Immigration to a country where use of a language other than one’s
L1 is required;
• Adoption of religious beliefs and practices which involve use of
another language;
• A need or desire to pursue educational experiences where access
requires proficiency in another language;
• A desire for occupational or social advancement which is furthered
by knowledge of another language;
SCP-EL6 | 13
DEPARTMENT
• An interest in knowing more about people of other cultures and

having access to their technologies or literatures. (Crystal 1997b)
What is a multi-lingual person?
Children acquiring two languages are called simultaneous

bilinguals. Take note! In the case of simultaneous bilinguals, one
language usually dominates over the other.
Example An English-speaking father married to a

Mandarin Chinese speaking mother with the family living in Hong
Kong, where the community language (and primary language of
education) is Cantonese. If the child goes to a Cantonese medium
school from a young age, then trilingualism will be the result.
Language Policies in the Philippines
The Language provision in the 1987 Constitution of the

Republic of the Philippines which are embodied in Article XIV,
Sec. 6 and 7 provide the legal basis for the various language policies
that are being implemented in the country.
The ratification of the above-mentioned constitution
resolved the issue on what the national language is, since the
1935 and 1973 Philippine Charters were not clear about this.
The provision are as follows:
1. Section 6. The national language of the Philippines is Filipino. As it
evolves, it shall be further developed and enriched on the basis
of existing Philippine and other languages.
SCP-EL6 | 14
DEPARTMENT
2. For purposes of communication and instruction, the official

languages of the Philippines are Filipino and, until otherwise
provided by law, English.
The Philippine Bilingual Education Policy (BEP)
Consistent with the 1987 constitutional mandate and a

declared policy of the National Board of Education (NBE) on
bilingualism in the schools (NBE Resolution No. 73-7, s.1973) the
Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS) promulgated
its language policy.
The policy was first implemented in 1974 when DECS issued Dept.
Order No. 25, s. 1974 titled, “Implementing Guidelines for the Policy
on Bilingual Education.”
Bilingual education in the Philippines is defined operationally
as the separate use of Filipino and English as the media of
instruction in specific subject areas. As embodied in the DECS
Order No. 25, Pilipino (changed to Filipino in 1987) shall be used as
medium of instruction in social studies/social sciences, music, arts,
physical education, home economics, practical arts and character
education. English, on the other hand is allocated to science,
mathematics and technology subjects. The same subject allocation
is provided in the 1987 Policy on Bilingual Education which is
disseminated through Department Order No. 52, s. 1987.
The policy is as follows:
The policy on Bilingual Education aims at the achievement of
competence in both Filipino and English at the national level,
SCP-EL6 | 15
DEPARTMENT
through the teaching of both languages and their use as media of

instruction at all levels. The regional languages shall be used as
auxiliary languages in Grades I and II. The aspiration of the
Filipino nation is to have its citizens possess skills in Filipino to
enable them to perform their functions and duties in order to meet
the needs of the country in the community of nations.
The goals of the Bilingual Education Policy shall be:

1. enhanced learning through two languages to achieve quality
education as called for by the 1987 Constitution;
2. the propagation of Filipino as a language of literacy;
3. the development of Filipino as a linguistic symbol of national unity

and identity;
4. the cultivation and elaboration of Filipino as a language of scholarly
discourse, that is to say its continuing intellectualization; and
the maintenance of English as an international language for the
Philippines and as a non-exclusive language of science and
technology.
Filipino and English shall be used as media of instruction, the

use allocated to specific subjects in the curriculum as indicated in
the Department Order No. 25, s. 1974. The regional languages shall
be used as auxiliary media of instruction and as initial language for
literacy, where needed. Filipino and English shall be taught as
SCP-EL6 | 16
DEPARTMENT
language
subjects in all levels to achieve the goals of bilingual competence.
Since competence in the use of both Filipino and English is
one of the goals of the Bilingual Education Policy, continuing
improvement in the teaching of both languages, their use as media
of instruction and the specification of their functions in Philippine
schooling shall be the responsibility of the whole educational
system.
Tertiary level institutions shall lead in the continuing
intellectualization of Filipino. The program of intellectualization,
however, shall also be pursued in both the elementary and
secondary levels. The Department of Education, Culture and Sports
shall cooperate with the National Language Commission which
according to the 1987 Constitution, shall be tasked with the further
development and enrichment of Filipino.
The Department of Education Culture and Sports shall

provide the means by which the language policy can be
implemented with the cooperation of government and non-
government organizations. The Department shall program funds for
implementing the Policy, in such areas as materials production, in-
service training, compensatory and enrichment program for non-
Tagalogs, development of a suitable and standardized Filipino for
classroom use and the development of appropriate evaluative
instruments.
Guidelines for the implementation of the 1987 Policy on
Bilingual Education are specified in the DECS Order No. 54, s.
SCP-EL6 | 17
DEPARTMENT
1987. Among
these are the need to intellectualize Filipino and the concrete steps
suggested towards its realization.
Executive Order No. 335
On August 25, 1988, then President Corazon Aquino signed

Executive Order No. 335 enjoining all
departments/bureaus/offices/agencies/instrumentalities of the
government to take such steps as are necessary for the purpose of
using the Filipino language in official transactions,
communications, and correspondence. The order was issued on the
belief that the use of Filipino in official transactions,
communications and correspondence in government offices will
result to a greater understanding and appreciation of government
programs, projects and activities throughout the country, thereby
serving as an instrument of unity and peace for national progress.
All departments/bureaus/offices/agencies/instrumentalities of the

government are enjoined to do the following:
1. Take steps to enhance the use of Filipino in official communications,

transactions and correspondence in their respective offices, whether
national or local;
2. Assign one or more personnel, as maybe necessary, in every office to

take charge of communications and correspondence written in
Filipino;
SCP-EL6 | 18
DEPARTMENT
3. Translate into
Filipino names of offices, buildings, public edifices, and signboards
of all offices, divisions or its instrumentalities, and if so desired,
imprint below in smaller letters the English text;
Filipinize the “Oath of Office” for government officials and

personnel;
Make as part of the training programs for personnel
development in each office the proficiency in the use of Filipino in
official communications and correspondence.
The Commission on the Filipino Language, formerly Institute

of Philippine/National Language, is ordered to formulate and
implement programs and projects for the full and effective
implementation of the objectives expressed in the Executive Order.
The Language Policy of the Commission on Higher Education
In 1994, Republic Act No. 7722, creating the Commission on

Higher Education (CHED) was signed. This Act which is know as
the “Higher Education Act of 1994” provides that the CHED shall be
independent and separate from the DECS and attached to the Office
of the President for administrative purposes only. Its coverage shall
be both public and private institutions of higher education as well
as degree-granting programs in all post-secondary educational
institutions, public and private.
SCP-EL6 | 19
DEPARTMENT
One
of the first steps undertaken by CHED was to update the General
Education Curriculum (GEC) of tertiary courses leading to an initial
bachelor’s degree covering four (4) curriculum years. This
was done to make the curriculum more responsive to the demands

of the next millenium.
The requirements of the new GEC are embodied in the CHED

Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 59, s. 1996. Listed under
miscellaneous of this CMO is its language policy which is as follows:
In consonance with the Bilingual Education Policy underlined

in DECS Order No. 52, Series of 1987, the following are the
guidelines vis-a-vis medium of instruction, to wit:
1. Language courses, whether Filipino or English, should be taught in

that language.
2. At the discretion of the HEI, Literature subjects may be taught in
Filipino, English or any other language as long as there are enough
instructional materials for the same and both students and
instructors/professors are competent in the language.
Courses in the Humanities and Social Sciences should
preferably be taught in Filipino.
SCP-EL6 | 20
DEPARTMENT
Search
Indicator
." New Dictionary of the History of Ideas. . Encyclopedia.com. 4 Aug.
2020 . (2020, August 06). Retrieved August 06, 2020, from
https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/dictionaries-
thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/bilingualism-and-
multilingualism
Espiritu, C. (n.d.). Language Policies in the Philippines. Retrieved

August 06, 2020, from https://ncca.gov.ph/about-ncca-
3/subcommissions/subcommission-on-cultural-
disseminationscd/language-and-translation/language-policies-
in-the-philippines/
Retrieved from
https://www.naldic.org.uk/Resources/NALDIC/Initial%20Teac
her%20Education/Documents/B1.pdf
LET’S INITIATE!
Activity 1. Let us try to check your understanding of the topics. Write
your answers to the space provided below every after the questions.
1. List at least five possible motivations for learning a second language at

an older age.
2. What is the initial stage of language development for L1 and L2?
3. How can parents support their bilingual children’s language acquisition?
SCP-EL6 | 21
DEPARTMENT
LET’S INQUIRE!
Activity 1. If you can use two or more languages, why is this so? What has
been your reason for learning second language (s)? If you can use only one,
why haven’t you learned other languages? Compare your response to these
reasons as primarily based on individual preference and need or on social
and political circumstances.
SCP-EL6 | 22
DEPARTMENT
LET’S INFER!
Activity 1. Critique the Bilingual Education Policy in the Philippines.
Write the advantages and disadvantages of the policy and provide
recommendation/s.
Bilingual Education Policy
Advantages Disadvantages Recommendation
SCP-EL6 | 23
DEPARTMENT
Week 3 Bilingualism and Multilingualism

Bilingualism: acquisition of two first languages? A focus on
Lesson Title
the product
Describe the different types of bilingualism and their
Learning Outcome(s)
connection with second language learning
LEARNING INTENT! At SJPIICD, I Matter!

Terms to Ponder
Essential Content
Bilingualism: acquisition of two first language?
Bilingualism: [from Latin bi- two, lingua tongue and -alism as

in nationalism] The capability to make alternate (and sometimes
mixed) use of two languages, in contrast to monolingualism or
unilingualism and multilingualism. In the social context of
languages like English, especially in England and the US, the
SCP-EL6 | 24
DEPARTMENT
traditional tendency has been to consider the possession and use of

one language the norm. Bilingualism, however, is at least as
common as monolingualism, about half the world's population
(about 2.5bn people) is bilingual and kinds of bilingualism are
probably present in every country in the world. The capability to
function in two (or more) languages has been closely researched in
recent years and is often discussed in terms of such categories,
scales, and dichotomies as:
Individual and social bilingualism

Balanced bilingualism
Compound and coordinate bilingualism
Additive and subtractive bilingualism
Monolingualism: If someone is only capable of speaking and

understanding one language, his mother tongue. Or to put it
another way, if someone is not fitting in any of the classification or
categorization of multilinguals.
Bilingualism: using or knowing more than one language (can be more

than two languages); so every bilingual person is also multilingual,
but the contrary is not necessarily true, e.g. consider someone
speaking three languages.
According to the use of both languages
SCP-EL6 | 25
DEPARTMENT
Coordinated Bilinguals
(Subtractive)- A coordinate bilingual acquires the two languages in
different contexts (e.g., home and school), so the words of the two
languages belong to separate and independent systems.
Compound Bilinguals (Additive)- A compound bilingual is an individual

who learns two languages in the same environment so that he/she
acquires one notion with two verbal expressions
According to order of Acquisition

Simultaneous Bilinguals- Refers to a child who learns two languages at
the same time, from birth.
Consecutive Bilinguals (Sequential Bilinguals) (belongs to field of second

language acquisition)- The second language (L2) was acquired after
the first one (L1).
According to skill
Passive Bilingual- A person who is a native speaker in one and is

capable of understanding but not speaking another language.
Dominant Bilingual-A person being more proficient in one of the two

languages (in most cases native-like).
SCP-EL6 | 26
DEPARTMENT
Balanced Bilingual-
Someone who is more or less equally proficient in both languages,
but will not necessarily pass for a native speaker in both languages.
Equilingual- If somebody passes in any situation in both languages for a

native speaker, i.e. he or she is indistinguishable from a native
speaker. This is the strictest kind of defining bilingualism.
Unfortunately it is very often the inherent semantics some people
and even some scientists bear in mind, when they talk about
bilingualism.
According to Age
Early Bilingual- Someone who has acquired two languages early in

childhood (usually received systematic training/learning of a second
language before age 6).
Late Bilingual- Someone who has become a bilingual later than childhood
(after age 12).
Search Indicator
Klein, B. (n.d.). Classification of Bilingualism/Multilingualism.

Retrieved August 09, 2020, from
https://www.bklein.de/buc/buc_classification.php
SCP-EL6 | 27
DEPARTMENT
D'Acierno,
M. (1990, February 28). Three Types of Bilingualism. Retrieved
August 09, 2020, from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED321574
I
LET’S NITIATE!
Activity 1. List down 3 types of bilinguals and provide 1 sentence
definition.
1.
2.
3.
I
LET’S NQUIRE!
Activity 1. Fill out the advantages and disadvantages of a type of
bilingual.
No Type of Bilingual How is it Advantages Disadvantages

acquired?
1
2
3
SCP-EL6 | 28
DEPARTMENT
4
5
I
LET’S NFER!
Activity 1. Create a short video explaining the factors affecting type
of bilingualism (Explain at least 2 types of bilinguals).
SCP-EL6 | 29
DEPARTMENT
Week 4 & 5 Code-switching and Translanguaging

Lesson Title Understanding code-switching and translanguaging
Discuss the nature of code-switching; and
Learning Outcome(s)
Compare and contrast translanguaging and mixing.
LEARNING INTENT!
Terms to Ponder
Code–switching- It refers to two or more languages are in use on one

single conversation side by side and express an authentic form from
both of the basic language.
SCP-EL6 | 30
DEPARTMENT
Translanguaging- is a method for children who have a reasonably

good grasp of both languages; it is a strategy for retaining and
developing bilingualism rather than for initial teaching of the
second language.
Essential Content
“Translanguaging” has two potential advantages. It may

promote a deeper and fuller understanding of the subject matter. It
is possible in a monolingual context, for students to answer
questions or write an essay without fully understanding the subject.
Whole sentences or paragraphs can be copied or adapted from a
textbook without rarely understanding them. This is less easy in a
bilingual situation. To read and discuss a topic in one language,
and then to write about it in another, means that the subject matter
has to be properly ‘digested’ and reconstructed. Translanguaging
may also help students develop skills in the weaker language …”
(The Care and Education of Young Bilinguals. Multilingual Matters,
2000. p104-105)
What is translanguaging and how can it be used?
The simplest definition is:

♦ receiving information in one language and then,
♦ using it in the other language.
SCP-EL6 | 31
DEPARTMENT
Every language develops through being used in purposeful

and real situations. And that is especially true of learning a second
language and continuing to use both by developing and improving
them constantly. In translanguaging, we:
♦ receive information using our passive language skills (listening

and reading), and then we
♦ use the information using our active language skills (talking and
writing).
Translanguaging is a method for children who have a

resonably good grasp of both languages; it is a strategy for retaining
and developing bilingualism rather than for initial teaching of the
second language.
It is, therefore, a natural skill for any bilingual individual.
When translanguaging, the pupil:
o internalizes the words he hears;

o assigns his own labels to the message / concept, and then
o switches the message / concept to the other language;
o augments the message / concept and supplements it.
This process is translanguaging, not translating. It requires:
o a full understanding of the language in which the message is received,

and
SCP-EL6 | 32
DEPARTMENT
o sufficient
vocabulary and a firm enough grasp of the other language in order
to express the message, i.e.
o a passive understanding of both languages, and
o an active knowledge and mastery of at least one of the languages.
The skill of translanguaging offers exciting and broad
possibilities in the development of two languages, but as yet, few
teachers are willing to attempt to use two languages in one class. To
an individual who is an active bilingual, translanguaging is a
natural way of developing and strengthening both languages whilst
simultaneously gaining a deeper understanding.
Code –switching
It refers to two or more languages are in use on one single

conversation side by side and express an authentic form from both
of the basic language. This also means the practice of alternating
between two or more languages or varieties of language in
conversation. This occurs when a speaker alternates between two or
more languages or language varieties, in the context of a single

conversation.
Reasons for Code-switching
• To hide fluency or memory problems in the second language.

• To mark switching from informal situations to formal situations.
• No similar words in English
SCP-EL6 | 33
DEPARTMENT
• Did not know
the English word
• To fill the gap in speaking
• Easier to speak in own language
• To avoid misunderstanding
• To convey intimacy
• So others would not understand (privacy)
• To add emphasis
• Other reasons
Types of Code-switching
1. Intra-sentential Switching-It is possibly the most complex type

among the three, as it can occur within the boundaries of a clause
or a sentence.
In Spanish-English switching one could say, “La onda is to fight y

jambar. We can see in this example the speaker uses ‘is to fight’
(phrase) instead of using the Spanish equivalent of it which is ‘par
pelear’.
2. Inter-sentential Switching- It happens between a sentence

boundaries where one clause or sentence is in one language and
the next clause or sentence is in the other. This takes place within
the same sentence or between speaker turns, it entails fluency in
both languages such that a speaker is able to follow the rules of
the two languages.
In Assyrian-English switching one could say:
SCP-EL6 | 34
DEPARTMENT
“Ani wideile
what happened?” (Those, I did them what happened?”)
3. Tag-switching- This refers to the switching of wither a tag phrase

or a word, or both, from one language to another, (Common in
intra-sentential switches).
In Spanish-English switching one could say, “El as de Mexico y
asi los criaron a ellos, you know.” (“He’s from Mexico, and they
raise them like that, you know.”) The example shows a person
speaking Spanish but at the end of his/her sentence decides to use
a tag phrase which is ‘you know’.
Code Mixing- This refers to the change from one language to

another within the same utterance in terms of lexical, grammatical
and morphological aspect. It is possible in bilingual or multilingual
environments. Also, it is a language contact phenomenon that
does not reflect the grammars of both languages working
simultaneously.
Words are borrowed from one language and adapt it in other
language and it is usually without a change of topic. It often
occurs within one sentence, one element is spoken in language
and the rest in language B. This term is usually found in mainly in

informal interaction.
Reasons for Code Mixing
• Interjection
SCP-EL6 | 35
DEPARTMENT
• Quoting
somebody else
• Expressing group identity
• Because of real lexical need
• Talking about a particular topic
• Repetition used for clarification
• Being emphatic about something
• To soften or strengthen request or command
• Intention of clarifying the speech content for interlocutor
• To exclude other people when a comment is intended for only a
limited audience.
Types of Code Mixing
1. Intra-sentential Code Mixing- This kind of code mixing occurs

within a phrase, a clause or a sentence boundary.
2. Intra-lexical Code Mixing- This kind of code mixing occurs within

a word boundary involving a change in pronunciation.
Search Indicator
SCP-EL6 | 36
DEPARTMENT
Auer, P. (1999).
Code-switching in conversation: Language, interaction and
identity (3rd ed., Vol. 22). London: Routledge.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226701211360
Gardner-Chloros, P. (2011). Code-switching. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.
I
LET’S NITIATE!
Activity 1. Take 20 screenshots of the posts of your friends (with their
permission). Since code-switching occurs in the context of sentences, it is
required that each screenshot has to contain at the very least a complete
SCP-EL6 | 37
DEPARTMENT
sentence. Therefore,
data that does not contain whole sentences will be excluded from the
corpus.
I
LET’S NQUIRE!
Activity 1. The collected screenshots should be marked and classified
based on the type of code switching utilized. The qualitative results
illustrate types of code-switching within each of the 10 topics, including
gossip, technology topic, compliments and thanking, achievement, movies
and songs, family and intimacy, makeup, travelling, and religion. For the
purpose, screenshots of the most interesting instances of code-switching
within topic should be provided. Also, in this part, the most frequently
used English and Bisaya words within each topic should be identified.
I
LET’S NFER!
Activity 1. You should present a content analysis of the posts that
included code-switching. Since the posts were categorized into 10
different types according to their topic, the results for each type are
presented separately, starting from the topics which showed the highest
occurrence of codes witching in the following order: gossip, humor,
technology, compliments and thanking, achievement, movies and songs,
family and intimacy, makeup, travelling, and religion. To illustrate the use
of code-switching, screenshots from each topic should be provided. When
the matrix sentence is in Bisaya, English translations should be provided
in boldface and are also underlined. Sometimes participants would use an
English word, but written in the Bisaya script, to make the reader aware
of this, such words should be color-coded in red.
Cognitive issues related to bilingual and multilingual

Week 7 & 8
development
Advantages and disadvantages of bilingual and multilingual
Lesson Title
education
Learning Outcome(s) Discuss the cognitive advantages and disadvantages of
SCP-EL6 | 38
DEPARTMENT
bilingual and multilingual education.
LEARNING INTENT!
Terms to Ponder
Bilingualism refers to the act of using two languages at

varying levels (Linguistic Society of America, 2020).
Multilingualism- refers to the act of using, or promoting the

use, multiple languages, either by an individual speaker or by a
community of speakers (Linguistic Society of America, 2020).
Essential Content
Every year, thousands of middle- and upper-class American
children study a foreign language for enrichment. These children, their
parents, and their teachers are guided by the belief that knowing
another language “is good for you.” At the same time (and sometimes
in the same schools) thousands of other children—usually from
immigrant and lower-class backgrounds—are discouraged from and
sometimes forbidden to speak their native language. Their families are
told that communication in their native languages will prevent them

from mastering English and that raising children with more than one
SCP-EL6 | 39
DEPARTMENT
language will
“confuse” them and have long-lasting, detrimental effects.
Cognitive Development
Empirical evidence suggests that bilingualism in children is
associated with increased meta-cognitive skills and superior divergent
thinking ability (a type of cognitive flexibility), as well as with better
performance on some perceptual tasks (such as recognizing a
perceptual object “embedded” in a visual background) and
classification tasks (for reviews, see Bialystok, 2001; Cummins, 1976;
Diaz, 1983, 1985).
Other studies report that bilingualism has a negative impact on

language development and is associated with delays in lexical
acquisition (e.g., Pearson, Fernandez, & Oller, 1993; Umbel & Oller,
1995) and a smaller vocabulary than that of monolingual children
(Verhallen & Schoonen, 1993; Vermeer, 1992). Bilingual children score
on par with their monolingual counterparts on tests of verbal ability by
middle school, and well-controlled studies provide no evidence for
lower intellectual abilities of bilingual children compared to
monolinguals (Baker & Jones, 1998; Cook, 1997; Hakuta, 1986).
Lexical Organization
In children learning a first language, a noticeable change takes
place in the salience of various word-word relations during middle
childhood. For example, a 6-year-old is quick to point out the thematic

relationship between an iron and a shirt (“Because you can iron a
SCP-EL6 | 40
DEPARTMENT
shirt!”) but has
difficulties attributing the relationship between planes and buses to
their shared taxonomy. They might say that “Planes and buses both
have fumes” instead of recognizing that both are vehicles. By 8 years of
age, most children readily acknowledge both thematic and taxonomic
relationships (Hashimoto, McGregor, & Graham, 2007). Children
learning two languages simultaneously or sequentially must store and
retrieve a larger number of words, because vocabularies are distributed
across two linguistic systems.
Word-learning
Speech-language pathologists have long been aware that
application of monolingual language norms to bilingual clients is
inappropriate. What are the alternatives? One possibility is to use
processing-based measures, such as word-learning, to index language
ability in bilinguals (e.g., Peña, Iglesias, & Lidz, 2001) because these
tasks reflect a child’s general ability to process linguistic information
but do not rely on extant linguistic knowledge. Therefore, bilinguals
with poor language knowledge due to low proficiency should perform
just as well on word-learning tasks as monolinguals, and better than
bilinguals who experience language deficits. However, little is known
about the effects of bilingualism on word-learning.
CURRENT PROBLEMS IN BILINGUAL EDUCATION
Lack of Language Development Opportunity

There exists an astounding relationship between language
proficiency in general, and English language proficiency specifically,
SCP-EL6 | 41
DEPARTMENT
and language
development activity in the classroom. As documented by research
studies, students with the least oral language skills spend the most
time in desk oriented, non-verbal instructional activity. The converse is
also true, students with the most oral language skills spend the most
time in verbal instructional activities.
Either in bilingual or monolingual programs, the most pressing
need of limited English proficient children is language development.
Since oral language development usually precedes written language
development, written activity is relatively non-productive without the
prerequisite oral language capability. In general, this need is not being
met.
Limited Use of the Native Language
A few years ago, Dr. William Bennett, then Secretary of the
Department of Education, criticized bilingual education programs as
programs which did not teach the English language, used the native
language exclusively for instructional purposes, and had instructional
content composed only of learning the culture of the native language.
In an article I wrote, and in a personal confrontation, I challenged the
Secretary to identify one classroom in any public school in any city of
the country in which there was native language utilization without
English language instruction. The Secretary stated that I had
misinterpreted his statement, though I had a copy of it released by his
office, but he failed to identify any such program.
Premature Transition to English

Where bilingual programs actually use native language
instruction, teachers are under tremendous pressures to make a
SCP-EL6 | 42
DEPARTMENT
premature
transition into English language instruction or to exit the students
from the bilingual program into regular English language classrooms.
Premature transitioning is forced by a shortage of bilingual
teachers, opposition to bilingual education and early subject matter
achievement testing in the English language. Extensive premature
exiting from bilingual programs also results from the use of a student’s
facility with the English language in a social context rather than
English language facility in an academic context.
Inadequacies of Instructional Materials

In spite of some investments into the development of bilingual
instructional materials, there is still a marked shortage in the field.
Early native language materials were usually obtained from foreign
publishers. Though syntax and morphology were generally acceptable,
the lexical characteristics and context of the materials were
inappropriate, unfamiliar and confusing for the limited English
proficient children raised in the U.S.
Textbook publishers have been reluctant to invest in the

development of materials in any language other than English due to
limited marketability. The same holds true for supplemental and
reference materials. Aside from basic reading materials and basic
arithmetic, very little is commercially available in support of bilingual
education, especially for secondary students.
The lack of appropriate cultural representation in curriculum
materials has also been a problem. Early publisher reaction to the
need for such materials for use in bilingual and other multicultural
SCP-EL6 | 43
DEPARTMENT
programs left
a lot to be desired. A common response was to use a little brown or
black ink to give color to people in the pictures. This resulted in the
typical minority family being made up of Father, Mother, Dick, Baby
and their dog, Spot, with everyone including the dog having dark
complexions.
Search Indicator
Current Problems in Bilingual Education: Part I. (2018, June 06).
Retrieved October 02, 2020, from https://www.idra.org/resource-
center/current-problems-in-bilingual-education-part-i/
Marian, V., Google Scholar More articles by this author, Faroqi-Shah, Y.,
Kaushanskaya, M., Blumenfeld, H., Sheng, L., & Maian, V. (n.d.).
Bilingualism: Consequences for Language, Cognition, Development, and
the Brain. Retrieved October 02, 2020, from
https://leader.pubs.asha.org/doi/10.1044/leader.FTR2.14132009.10
Retrieved October 02, 2020, from

https://www.linguisticsociety.org/resource/multilingualism
SCP-EL6 | 44
DEPARTMENT
I
LET’S NITIATE!
Activity 1. Let us try to check your understanding of the topics.
Write your answers to the space provided below every after the
questions.
1. What are the benefits of being bilingual or multilingual?

2. What are the disadvantages of being bilingual or multilingual?
3. What is/are the effect/s of premature transition to English?
I
LET’S NQUIRE!
Activity 1.
1. How does bilingualism affect the cognitive development of a child?

2. What is the reason why bilingual children code-switch in a
conversation?
I
LET’S NFER!
Activity 1. Create a table and summarize the current issues in
bilingual education in the Philippines.
SCP-EL6 | 45
DEPARTMENT
Bilingual education programs – heritage, immersion, and transition

Week 9
Lesson Title Bilingual Education Models
Learning Outcome(s) Describe the various bilingual education models.
LEARNING INTENT!
Terms to Ponder

varying levels (Linguistic Society of America,2020).
Multilingualism- refers to the act of using, or promoting the use

if, multiple languages, either by an individual speaker or by a
community of speakers (Linguistic Society of America,2020).
Essential Content
A Brief History of Immersion Bilingual Education

Immersion bilingual education has its roots back in the early days of
the Civil Rights movement, especially the Brown v. Board of Education
decision. Public education, in the U.S., at least, became “a right which
must be made available to all on equal terms.” That set the scene for the
Bilingual Education Acts of 1968 and 1974 and the precedent that
students must be able to access education equally regardless of language
barriers.
Unfortunately, bilingual education has not always met its full
potential when it has been implemented. Without a clear vision, educators
have struggled with the reality and practicalities of it.
SCP-EL6 | 46
DEPARTMENT
If you are in the trenches of language teaching, you already

know that the benefits of immersion bilingual education are too great to
pass up. The success of this method of language learning is well-
documented. We know that bilingual education can improve
students’ attention span and reading ability, and make them more
empathetic. Besides, it meets all the criteria for effective teaching and
learning: it is student-centered, task-oriented and equitable.
But problems arise because teachers often lack the training to make
immersion bilingual education effective. In fact, many of us still aren’t
sure exactly what immersion bilingual education even is!
What Is Immersion Bilingual Education, and What Does It Mean for

You and Your Students?
Confusion arises because “immersion” and “bilingual education” are

actually two different things.
Immersion is a particular type of language teaching in which the target

language is the content and also the medium of instruction. In other
words, it is both the vehicle for learning and the package that is delivered.
You learn the language by receiving instruction in the language.
There are three widely accepted immersion models.
SCP-EL6 | 47
DEPARTMENT
1. Total immersion. In this model, 100% of the school day is in

the target language.
2. Partial immersion. Half of the instruction is in the target
language, while the other half is in the students’ native
language.
3. Two-way immersion. In this model, students receive instruction
in both their native and the target language. It is different from
partial immersion, because students of different language
backgrounds are typically combined in one classroom, accessing
the same content together.
“Bilingualism” is completely different from immersion, but the two

practices can be combined. Effectively, bilingual education just means
that students receive instruction in two languages. For example, classes
might be taught in Spanish for part of the day and then in English for
another part of the day.
There are four different models of bilingual education, based on your
program’s goals.
1. Enrichment. In this model, the goal is to integrate the minority
target language (and its culture) into the community. For
example, if you teach in an English school with a large
population of native French speakers, the focus of your program
will be to make French language and culture a part of school
and classroom life.
SCP-EL6 | 48
DEPARTMENT
2. Heritage. The goal of this model is to revive a languishing

indigenous language. For example, some schools in Mexico are
trying to revive the ancient Nahuatl language spoken by the
Aztecs.
3. Maintenance. In this model, students’ receive instruction in
both languages solely so that they can become more proficient in
the target language. No effort is made to deepen or extend
knowledge of the native language. With this model, native
Spanish speakers in an American classroom learn Spanish for
no other purpose than enhancing their ability to learn English.
4. Transitional. This model aims to leave the students’ native
language completely behind and fully embrace the target
language.
Understanding these different models of immersion and bilingual

learning is important as you try to decide what your goals are and how
best to meet them.
No matter what your goals are, FluentU can help you implement
bilingual immersion learning in your school or classroom. FluentU takes
real-world videos—like music, movie trailers, news and inspiring talks—
and turns them into personalized language lessons for your students.
Not only does it give you ample material to successfully transition into
immersive, authentic teaching, but it allows you to switch easily between
languages, levels and subjects, making it easy to design lesson plans,
organize activities and assign homework in a bilingual or multilingual
education setting.
SCP-EL6 | 49
DEPARTMENT
Here are some questions to ask yourself as you reflect on the model best
suited to your goals.
Questions to Ponder While Creating an Immersion Bilingual

Curriculum and Education Model
Ask yourself these questions as you try to choose an immersion bilingual

education model that works for you.
How many years will students be engaged in this program?
Early immersion programs (those starting at age 5 or 6) can have very
different goals from those of middle or late immersion programs. It is also
reasonable to assume that a “maintenance” or “transition” model will
reach completion sooner than a “heritage” or “enrichment” model, which
have more long-term goals.
Can we make sure that students in a bilingual program will be taught
the same core subjects as their peers?
One of the criticisms of bilingual education is that students often do
not perform as well on standardized tests. An effective program will
include reading, math, science, social studies and the arts.
Can we communicate with students in the target language at least
90% of the time?
If your goal is total immersion, all staff will need to communicate with
students in the target language at all times. If this seems unrealistic, a
total immersion model may not be ideal.
SCP-EL6 | 50
DEPARTMENT
How will we train staff?

In any good program, all staff needs to be on board. Schedule
meetings and training opportunities on a regular basis to make sure that
everyone is on the same page.
What will we use for materials?
Any textbooks, worksheets or resource materials need to reflect your
goals. If your goal is a two-way immersion program, then any materials
should be written in the language of instruction.
For example, if Art is taught in French, then all textbooks and examples
for that class should be in French. If Social Studies is taught in Spanish,
then all materials should be in Spanish. In a 100% immersion program,
all materials would be written solely in the target language. Whatever
model you have chosen, find materials with language that is simple
enough to be accessible for all students.
Are parents and local authorities on board with this endeavor?
Communicate with parents regularly via meetings, email and phone
calls to make sure that they understand your goals. Give them
information on the value of immersion bilingual education programs.
A good source to refer them to is CARLA (the Center for Advanced
Research on Language Acquisition). They have compiled a list for
parents of the proven benefits of immersion education.
Check out this blog post on Education Week for even more data about the
the value of bilingual learning to young children and the growth of their
brains.
SCP-EL6 | 51
DEPARTMENT
What basic skills (writing, reading comprehension, etc.) will students

need to master in order to succeed?
Before starting on a journey, you need a basic road map. Look at
academic expectations for each grade level and structure your curriculum
to reflect them. Make sure you are clear about the ways students will
demonstrate learning.
What are our goals for the program?
Do you want students to become completely fluent in the target
language? Or do you just want them to gain appreciation for the language
and the culture? Your goals will determine the model you choose.
How will we monitor progress?
Look at your program and curriculum and ask yourself: “How will I
know that I’ve succeeded after a year?” Check in with colleagues often.
Survey parents and students. Do whatever it takes to verify that you are
advancing towards your goals as the year progresses.
Learn more about CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) for
other considerations to guide you as you construct your immersion
program.
Signs of a Successful Immersion Bilingual Education Program
How to tell if your program truly is succeeding? Here are the signs of an
effective program.
• The administration and staff are supportive and
knowledgeable. Ask anyone that works in your school about
your initiative for immersion bilingual education, and they will
be able to tell you what it is and why it is of value to the
students.
SCP-EL6 | 52
DEPARTMENT
• Teachers are highly qualified. All the teachers on staff are

qualified in their subject matter.
• The vision has been clearly communicated. Everyone
understands the curriculum and model, and all your fellow
travelers know the final destination.
• There are many opportunities for parent
involvement. Parents are invited to volunteer and they are
frequently informed of student progress, so they feel like a part
of the process.
• The classroom is structured. Discipline and orderly routines
help students feel less chaotic as they try to navigate the
unpredictable world of language acquisition.
Tips for Getting Started
If you are trying to get an immersion bilingual education program off the
ground, don’t feel overwhelmed! Here are some guidelines to help.
• Seek out the knowledge of colleagues and
experts. Collaborate with subject area teachers when a lesson
doesn’t go well. Your colleagues are a wealth of information.
Another great resource lies in other schools that have successful
immersion bilingual education programs. Observe classes and
chat with instructors.
• Come up with creative themes and subjects. What about
putting Mandarin Chinese vocabulary to music as part of a
Music class? Or learning Spanish through word problems in
Math? You can even combine teaching art with language. If you
are feeling inspired, so will your students.
• Keep it task-oriented. The magic of immersion and bilingual
teaching is that they get you away from traditional memorization
SCP-EL6 | 53
DEPARTMENT
• and drills, and immerse the students in a more realistic learning

setting. Keep tasks in the classroom relevant and focused on the
problems and tasks of real life. Consider activities like role play,
presentations and cooking classes.
• Use visuals. Infographics, posters, drawings, signs, slideshow
presentations…these will all help you hold your students’
interest and make the lesson more memorable.
• Celebrate success. Immersion bilingual education is hard, so
reward yourselves for progress. Incorporate celebrations of
individual and group success into the routine life of the
classroom, and watch your students’ motivation soar.
Search Indicator
Current Problems in Bilingual Education: Part I. (2018, June 06).
Retrieved October 02, 2020, from https://www.idra.org/resource-
center/current-problems-in-bilingual-education-part-i/
Marian, V., Google Scholar More articles by this author, Faroqi-Shah, Y.,
Kaushanskaya, M., Blumenfeld, H., Sheng, L., & Maian, V. (n.d.).
Bilingualism: Consequences for Language, Cognition, Development, and
the Brain. Retrieved October 02, 2020, from
https://leader.pubs.asha.org/doi/10.1044/leader.FTR2.14132009.10
Retrieved October 02, 2020, from

https://www.linguisticsociety.org/resource/multilingualism
SCP-EL6 | 54
DEPARTMENT
I
LET’S NITIATE!
questions.
1. What is Bilingual Education?

2. What are the different immersion models?
3. What are the four models of Bilingual Education?
I
LET’S NQUIRE!
Activity 1.
1. What are the important tips to remember if you plan to implement an

immersion bilingual education program off the ground?
I
LET’S NFER!
Activity 1. Interview a teacher who is teaching MTB-MLE. Summarize
the answers given in a PowerPoint Presentation.
1. Is the bilingual education program given the necessary resources to

function effectively?
2. Does the school value and support bilingual education as a most

promising instructional program for children who are of limited English
proficiency?
3. What criteria are being used by the school to ensure that children are
placed in a quality instructional program, one that will cause children to
achieve and excel?
SCP-EL6 | 55
DEPARTMENT
Week 10-11 Bilingual and multilingual education policies
Lesson Title European, American policies on bilingual and multilingual education

Differentiate the American and European policies on bilingual and
Learning Outcome(s) multilingual education policies.
LEARNING INTENT!
Terms to Ponder

varying levels (Linguistic Society of America, 2020).

community of speakers (Linguistic Society of America, 2020).
Essential Content
Multilingual education in the EU and the US: Policy and practice
Education policy
A fundamental difference between approaches to language

education in the EU and the US is the extent to which multiple
languages are included in specified outcomes. While EU frameworks
include both “mother tongue” (L1) and foreign language (L2 and L3)
targets, US policies have not emphasized development of languages
SCP-EL6 | 56
DEPARTMENT
other than English, despite increasing globalization. In one EU policy

document this foundational difference is highlighted as linguistic
heterogeneity is positioned in contrast with the clichéd melting
pot metaphor for American assimilation:
It is this diversity that makes the European Union what it is: not a
“melting pot” in which differences are rendered down, but a common
home in which diversity is celebrated, and where our many mother
tongues are a source of wealth and a bridge to greater solidarity and
mutual understanding. (CEC 2005)
Yet, the second, contrasting metaphor—the bridge to greater

solidarity—represents EU linguistic diversity in inclusive terms that,
paradoxically, parallel the thread that bonds metaphor for the
generally monolingual US language policy, which we discuss in greater
detail below. In terms of specific policy goals, multilingualism is
emphasized across EU position statements. For example, Article 22 of
the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union states, “The
Union shall respect cultural, religious and linguistic diversity” (Official
Journal EC 2000). This Article serves as the basis for EU policies that
set trilingualism as a goal for every citizen: in the 2002 meeting of the
European Council, it was determined everyone should learn two
foreign languages (FLs) in addition to the L1. The EU tracks progress
toward such goals through assessments and surveys facilitated by the
European Commission (British Council 2013). Using language that
directly connects language diversity (a source of wealth) and
inclusiveness (a bridge), EU policies stand in contrast to the US
policies that valorize English (a thread that bonds) and that do not
emphasize multilingualism.
SCP-EL6 | 57
DEPARTMENT
Adding further coherence to language policy across member

states, standards for L2 and L3 development are provided within the
Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) (Council of
Europe 2001), which was recently revised (Council of Europe 2017) to
address criticisms regarding its lack of empirical basis (e.g.,
Alderson 2007). The levels and descriptions have long been widely used in
language curricula as well as in immigration and employment criteria
across Europe. For example, immigrants to the Netherlands must pass a
test (Basic Civic Integration
Examination, https://www.naarnederland.nl/en/the-exam) in oral Dutch
(CEFR A1 level) and basic writing (A1 level), while still in their home
country. Within three years after their immigration, newcomers need to
pass a Dutch exam (https://inburgeren.nl/en/taking-an-exam.jsp) that
demonstrates a CEFR A2 proficiency level in all language skills (i.e.,
listening, speaking, reading, and writing).
The EU appears to be approaching this vision of a trilingual citizenry:

currently more than half of its citizens are able to converse in at least two
languages. However, it is doubtful that this goal has been achieved as a
result of EU policy based in valuing language diversity; this outcome has,
arguably, resulted largely from the growth of English, the most widely
spoken FL in the EU (European Commission 2012). Further, even the
high rates of English competence cannot be directly traced to educational
programs designed to achieve policy goals, since the extent to which
English learning can be attributed to formal education—as compared to
population mobility, media exposure, or other factors—remains unclear.
SCP-EL6 | 58
DEPARTMENT
For example, regarding English competency in the Netherlands, Verspoor,

de Bot, and Xu (2015) explain:
Although the Dutch educational system is known for producing

high levels of proficiency in especially English, there is in fact very
little empirical support for crediting these results to the educational
system. Instead, most studies attribute these results to the relative
ease with which English can be acquired through exposure outside
school, mainly through the media (cf. Bonnet, 2002). Students are
motivated to learn English as it is an important international
language, and it has a prominent place in the Dutch society,
educational system, and scientific world. (p. 6)
Such conclusions suggest paradoxical relationships between

the putative intent of EU policy: achieving greater cross-cultural
communication through linguistic heterogeneity—and a significant
force through which multilingualism is being achieved:
homogenizing use of English as an international language.
The use of English as an international language (EIL) also has
implications for language education in the US, as it bolsters the
case for monolingual tendencies there. For example, the economist
and former Harvard University president Larry Summers has
argued that the worldwide dominance of English makes it “less
clear that the substantial investment necessary to speak a foreign
tongue is universally worthwhile” (Summers 2012). In line with this
stance, US language policies functionally support English-only
curricula (Gutiérrez, Baquedano-López, and Asato 2000) by
foregrounding the role of English as a homogenizing force for social
integration in federal and state language-education policies. Though
this stance provides a clear contrast to the EU values for
SCP-EL6 | 59
DEPARTMENT
multilingualism found in policy positions, a closer examination of

how policy is enacted in educational programing suggests that, at
least in some European contexts, there may be similarities with
regard to the prioritization of English education.
In the US, a majority of states (31/50) currently have language

policies that grant official status to English in domains such as
education and law (Liu, Sokhey, Kennedy, and Miller 2014). On the
federal level, although English is not the official language of the US,
attempts have been made to make it so and also to limit the use of
languages other than English. The most recent attempt, the English
Language Unity Act, seeks “to declare English as the official
language of the United States, to establish a uniform English
language rule for naturalization, and to avoid misconstructions of
the English language texts of the laws of the United States” (US
Congress 2017). Introduced in the US House of Representatives in
February 2017, it is not currently federal law; and, should it
become law, it would not officially apply to language education,
although it would lend support to statewide policies that limit
access to multilingual education. In an echo of the
EU bridge metaphor, the Act is framed in positive, inclusive terms
by presenting English as a common thread binding
individuals rather than as a vehicle for exclusion:
1. The United States is comprised of individuals from diverse

ethnic, cultural, and linguistic backgrounds, and continues to
benefit from this rich diversity.
SCP-EL6 | 60
DEPARTMENT
2. Throughout the history of the United States, the common thread

binding individuals of differing backgrounds has been the English
language.
3. Among the powers reserved to the States respectively is the
power to establish the English language as the official language of
the respective States… (US Congress 2017)
This US proposal parallels EU policy by framing diversity as a

cultural resource, but its major premise results in an opposing
emphasis: in the EU, language diversity is to be both preserved and
further developed; while, in the US, English is needed as
the thread that facilitates diversity. This state of affairs suggests a
paradox in the role of EIL in which, regardless of policy emphasis, it
functions to diminish language diversity. In both the US and the
EU, English is positioned as a common language connecting
speakers of diverse L1s in differing geopolitical contexts, often at
the expense of regional and minority languages.
The positioning of English as social integrator is also evident

in current US law regarding language education, which requires
states to address “limited English proficient” or “English learner”
(EL) students’ need to develop English but does not require any
form of multilingual development in achieving this aim. The Every
Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)—an Obama administration
amendment of civil rights law guiding funding for public
education—includes Title III, the English Language Acquisition,
Language Enhancement, and Academic Achievement Act. Broadly
SCP-EL6 | 61
DEPARTMENT
speaking, ESSA focuses on closing “achievement gaps” and Title III

frames this priority in terms of differences between L1 and L2
English speakers. The first purpose listed in Title III is “to help
insure that English learners, including immigrant children and
youth, attain English proficiency and develop high levels of
academic achievement in English”. Further emphasizing the
homogenizing role of English, the second purpose stipulates the
goal that ELs should succeed in meeting “the same challenging
State academic standards that all children are expected to meet”
(Purposes 3–5 prescribe support for EL’s school staff (3–4) and
families (5); US DoE 2017). Since the US has no national
educational standards, it is not clear what is meant by “challenging
standards”. States are required by federal law to measure student
progress toward English language and math standards. Historically,
states have developed these individually, but, recently, the Common
Core State Standards (CCSS) were adopted in a majority of US
states after the Obama administration tied federal education
funding to their implementation. The CCSS do not include
multilingual standards, and as of the writing of this article, we
could find no US states that require students to develop proficiency
in languages other than English. Thus, federal education policy, as
implemented by states, does not require, nor does it necessarily
exclude, multilingual education.
From policy to practice in the US
In practice, the instructional programs employed for carrying
out US policy aims are left to states and local school districts,
which can and do interpret them broadly to include or exclude
SCP-EL6 | 62
DEPARTMENT
minority- and foreign-language education (Johnson 2009). For

example, with respect to regional heritage languages such as L1
Spanish in US border states (e.g., Texas), bilingual education,
mirroring the ESSA logic, has been viewed primarily in a facilitative
role for English-language development. To this end, newcomers are
typically placed into sheltered ESL (English as a Second Language)
classes, and then transferred into English-only instruction. Some
border states (e.g., Arizona, California) have explicitly sought to
limit bilingual-education programs through controversial policy
initiatives (e.g., Proposition 203, 2000) while in one border state,
New Mexico, access to L1 Spanish bilingual education has been
historically protected. In other areas that are known for
cosmopolitanism, diverse immigration patterns, and linguistic
heterogeneity, bilingual-education programs are increasingly offered
in public school systems. For example, New York City offers
bilingual education in L1s that reflect immigration demographics,
including, for example, Spanish, Chinese, Haitian Creole, and
Arabic, typically with English as the L2 target. Though there are
signs of a growing commitment to expanding such programs in
large cities like New York (NYC DoE 2016), the availability of
bilingual-education programs remains exceptional, politically
charged, and highly varied across regions.
With regard to how educational programs designed to
implement language policy are funded, we also identified cross-
continental parallels, as the EU and the US share a tendency to
misalign policy and funding for minority- and regional-language
education in particular. For instance, though in both contexts
SCP-EL6 | 63
DEPARTMENT
protections are granted to endangered languages, these are not

always realized in practice. In the EU, the 1992 European Charter
for Regional or Minority Languages (Council of Europe 1992)
guaranteed educational rights to speakers of endangered and
regional languages, and this policy was reinforced in the 2008
Council Resolution on a European Strategy for Multilingualism
(CEC 2008). As an example, in theory at least, EU policy legally
guarantees Frisian-language education in the northern Dutch
province of Friesland. In practice, however, the use of Frisian
continues to decline, despite the implementation of a variety of
education programs (Gorter 2008; Gorter and Cenoz 2011).
Approaches to maintaining Frisian include bilingual (Frisian,
Dutch) and trilingual (Frisian, Dutch, English) education programs;
however, these have had limited success in halting attrition in
Frisian due to a dearth of available Frisian teachers, the rising
emphasis on English in Dutch schools, somewhat weak motivation
among parents and students for developing academic Frisian as
compared to English, and lack of financial support (Gorter and
Cenoz 2011). In addition to further illustrating the homogenizing
influence of English, this situation points to misalignment between
stated EU policy ideals, local aims, and availability of financial
resources for implementation.
Similarly, in the US, indigenous languages are legally
protected under the Native American Languages Act of 1990, which
established that “it is the policy of the United States to preserve,
protect, and promote the rights and freedom of Native Americans to
use, practice, and develop Native American languages” (US
SCP-EL6 | 64
DEPARTMENT
Congress 2000). However, as noted in one of a series of

amendments to the Act that were designed to address its lack of
funding, “although this was an important step towards assuring the
preservation and revitalization of Native American languages, the
Act did not dedicate any financial resources to the effort” (US
Congress 2000). The education of Native American youth with the
goal of preserving indigenous languages remains a challenge, and,
like the case of Frisian in the Netherlands, the reported use of
indigenous languages among younger as opposed to older Native
Americans continues to rapidly decline (US Census 2011).
From policy to practice in the EU: The case of the Netherlands
To further examine the relationships between language policy
and practice in Europe, we turn our attention to the Netherlands,
which, given the language profile discussed earlier, would seem to
represent a case study for successful achievement of EU targets.
However, as we illustrate, trilingualism has often been narrowly
interpreted there in ways that, somewhat paradoxically, highlight
parallels between the EU and the US. To orient readers, we first
provide a brief overview of the social context within which language
curricula are conceptualized in the Netherlands, including
immigration patterns and related policy shifts. Then, after providing
a quick structural overview of Dutch school systems, we focus on
how language policies are being implemented in two dominant
educational frameworks (communicative foreign language teaching,
and programs that integrate content and language learning).
Dutch policy regarding the goal and role of bilingual education
has evolved historically alongside changing immigration and
SCP-EL6 | 65
DEPARTMENT
socioeconomic interests in the Netherlands. As detailed by Driessen

(2000), prior to the 1980s, the “two-track” approach assumed that
the children of migrant guest workers, many of whom immigrated
from Mediterranean countries in the 1960s, would not remain in
the Netherlands. Thus, the early rationale for bilingual education
was that L1 language maintenance was important for students’
reintegration to their origin countries. As it became clear that the
students would remain, the rationale shifted. In the 1980s, the
rationale for education in L1 minority languages was reframed in
terms of integration—as a means of bridging achievement gaps
between L1/minority and L2/majority language proficiency. During
this period, bilingual programs and their aims became marginalized
as L1 language maintenance was no longer seen as the
responsibility of the Dutch government. Glastra and Schedler
(2004) explain how, during this period, Dutch government policy
stated that the question of whether minority pupils would benefit
from learning their own language in second language acquisition
was at least controversial. It advised that education in languages
and cultures of origin, the attendance of which was on a voluntary
basis, should no longer be part of the regular curriculum. Instead,
it urged for special attention with regard to instruction in Dutch as
a second language … (p. 47)
In practice, schools offered—often, outside school hours—
onderwijs in eigen taal en cultuur [education in own language and
culture], which evolved in the 1990s to onderwijs in allochtone
levende talen [education in allochthonous living languages]. Another
rationale offered for minority L1 education, also related to the goal
of integration, was to enhance students’ sense of cultural identity
SCP-EL6 | 66
DEPARTMENT
through “intercultural education”. In practice, however, most

students were unlikely to receive viable instruction in their L1
regardless of which rationale was offered because instruction was
typically available only in standard varieties that students did not
speak (e.g., standard Arabic rather than Berber).
Ultimately, this type of bilingual education for immigrant
students was abandoned altogether in 2004 for a combination of
reasons, including a lack of available teachers to match the L1
minority languages, political debates regarding which minority
languages should be taught, and lack of financial support (Kuiken
and Van der Linden 2013). The argument for cancelling the funding
of minority L1 programs was that education in immigrant languages
contradicted the goal of integrating immigrant youth (Extra and
Yağmur 2006). Kuiken and Van der Linden (2013) observe that this
policy shift “flies in the face of European directives to promote a
multilingual society where European citizens master two other
languages besides their native tongue” (p. 213). Though immigrant
youth are often already proficient in speaking more than one
language, language-education programs have positioned minority
L1s not as platforms for multilingual development but as, at best,
bridges to learning Dutch.
Currently, in practice, the EU goal that each citizen should
speak three languages is generally interpreted in Dutch curricula as
Dutch plus two “big” European languages, particularly, English
plus French or German. As Verspoor and Cremer (2008)
demonstrate in their review of Dutch FL-education scholarship,
“[T]here is only government financing of second-language education
SCP-EL6 | 67
DEPARTMENT
if this concerns education in the European languages. Although the

Dutch government stresses that all immigrant languages be
respected, state support is no longer given” (p. 185). This state of
affairs points to a larger pattern wherein language policy goals and
guidelines are provided but, at least when it comes to minority- and
heritage-language education, these are not supported with funding.
Further contributing to the diminished role of minority and heritage
bilingual education in the Netherlands is the growth of English,
which replaced French as the dominant L2 in the early twentieth
century (Wilhelm 2005). English no longer even truly functions as
an FL in the Netherlands (Edwards 2016), since a large majority
(90%) of Dutch citizens claim proficiency (European
Commission 2012), and English is one of three required subjects in
Dutch public school curricula (the others are mathematics and
Dutch). Accordingly, we use “FL” in the Dutch context to refer to
foreign languages other than, or in addition to, English. Whereas
instruction in FLs is generally deferred until secondary school,
students typically begin receiving instruction in English in later
primary school, and all students continue English classes
throughout secondary school. Increasingly, however, Dutch primary
schools are offering English in even earlier grades in the form of
either VVTO [vroeg vreemdetalenonderwijs; or, “early foreign
language education”] or even TPO [tweetalig primair onderwijs; or,
“bilingual primary education”] in which 30–50% of the curriculum
is offered in English. Such bilingual programs are even more
common at the secondary level.
SCP-EL6 | 68
DEPARTMENT
Language-education requirements vary depending on which of

three vocational or pre-university tracks students are sorted into at
the end of primary school (approximately age 12) (Figure 1). In
theory, all students have equal opportunity to transfer to the pre-
university education streams, but in practice immigrant students
with a non-Western background continue to be overrepresented in
the vocational tracks (20% of all secondary students from non-
Western immigrant backgrounds undertake this track, compared to
9% of all students from non-immigrant backgrounds) and
underrepresented in the university tracks (13% of students from
non-Western immigrant backgrounds compared to 23% of students
with non-immigrant backgrounds) (CBS 2016). Thus, the varying
language-education criteria across tracks, combined with the
dearth of programs in minority L1s, differentially affect the
language-education opportunities of students from immigrant
backgrounds.
All students are required to study English throughout
secondary education, but requirements for additional FLs vary
depending on the track into which students are sorted. All
secondary students must study at least one FL, usually German or
French. Students in vocational tracks (VMBO, cf. Figure 1) are
required to study one FL for the first two years, while students in
the HAVO and VWO (cf. Figure 1) stream must study two FLs for
the first three years. English is compulsory in the higher grades of
every track for qualifying examinations; VWO students must also
take exams in one additional FL. In addition to German and French,
qualifying examinations exist for Spanish, Russian, Arabic, and
Turkish; however, especially as regards the latter two languages,
SCP-EL6 | 69
DEPARTMENT
such programs are quite rare. In 2017, only 77 pupils took final
examinations in Arabic, and 178 in Turkish (SLO 2017). Again,
pointing to a misalignment between policy and material support,
Benedictus-van den Berg suggests the reason for these low
numbers is weak government funding, and observes that the “low
uptake of Turkish and Arabic is all the more noteworthy given the
increase in the number of Turkish-Dutch and Moroccan-Dutch
children in primary schools in urban areas” (Extra and
Yağmur 2012, p. 165).
CLT approaches
Models that Dutch schools adopt for the delivery of FL instruction
(including English) vary, but the two most prominent are the
“traditional” Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) approach, in
which the FL is only the target of instruction, and the bilingual
Content- and Language-Integrated Learning approach (CLIL), in
which the FL functions as both instructional goal and medium.
Most Dutch secondary schools adopt a CLT approach by offering
language subjects (e.g., courses in English, French, German) in
which the main focus is on the development of target-language
proficiency. Required learning outcomes are formulated in terms of
communicative acts (e.g., de kandidaat kan adequaat reageren in
sociale contacten met doeltaalgebruikers [the candidate can react
adequately in social contact with users of the target language] or de
kandidaat kan informatie vragen en verstrekken [the candidate can
ask for or provide information]) (College voor Toetsen en
Examens 2016, p. 26). Key principles of the CLT approach include a
SCP-EL6 | 70
DEPARTMENT
focus on meaningful communication and ample opportunity for

authentic use of the target language through interaction (Canale
and Swain 1980; Richards 2006). Expected proficiency levels are
specified in relation to the CEFR, for every educational track, target
language, and language skill (i.e., listening, speaking, reading,
writing).
The CLIL model
Bilingual education remains a controversial issue in the
Netherlands. However, since the late 1980s, bilingual programs that
focus on European FL targets with Dutch as the L1 have rapidly
expanded, and Tweetalig Onderwijs (TTO) [bilingual education] is
becoming more prominent in the Dutch education system as
English continues to gain traction. Bilingual education has seen a
rapid growth, both in the number of schools offering bilingual
programs, as well as in the breadth of educational tracks in which
it is implemented. Currently, around 20% of Dutch secondary
schools offer bilingual streams; and, whereas at first bilingual
programs were exclusively offered in pre-university tracks, today
bilingual routes are also available at the pre-vocational level and are
also being piloted in Dutch primary schools (Denman, Tanner, and
De Graaff 2013; Mearns, De Graaff, and Coyle 2017). Consistent
with the growth of EIL, there has been a sharp increase in Dutch-
English bilingual education programs on the secondary level
(Kuiken and Van der Linden 2013), and practically all bilingual
tracks in the Netherlands are now offered in Dutch-English.
Although Dutch-German programs do exist in schools close to the
German border, these are very rare.
SCP-EL6 | 71
DEPARTMENT
Search Indicator
Alderson, J. C. (2007). The CEFR and the need for more

research. Modern Language Journal,91, 659–663.
Bonnet, G. (Ed.) (2002). The assessment of pupils’ skills in English in
eight European countries. Paris: European Network of Policy Makers
for the Evaluation of Education Systems.
British Council (2013). Language rich Europe: Multilingualism for
stable and prosperous
societies. https://www.britishcouncil.nl/sites/default/files/lre_review
_and_recommendations.pdf.
Cummins, J. (2007). Rethinking monolingual instructional strategies
in multilingual classrooms. Canadian Journal of Applied
Linguistics,10, 221–240.
I
LET’S NITIATE!
Activity 1. Let us try to check your understanding of the topics. Write
your answers to the space provided below every after the questions.
1. What does it mean by Linguistic Imperialism?

2. Discuss the role of English language in the socio-economic perspective.
SCP-EL6 | 72
DEPARTMENT
I
LET’S NQUIRE!
Activity 1. In this activity, you are required to expound your answer to
each of the questions below.
1. As an English user (if your mother tongue is not English), do you

demonstrate different sociocultural identities, either implicitly or
explicitly, in different contexts? Conduct a self-analysis by reflecting on
your own everyday linguistic practices.
I
LET’S NFER!
Activity 1. In this activity, you are required to expound your answer to
each of the questions below.
1. Reflect on your own English teaching or learning experiences to discuss

whether globalization-driven bilingual education policies in your
area/country really lead to social stratification and subaltern
subjectivities. If they do, what is (are) the new alternative(s) in language,
pedagogy and curriculum that can improve the present situation?
SCP-EL6 | 73
DEPARTMENT
Week 13-14
Lesson Title Language Policy and Planning in Southeast Asian Contexts
Learning Outcome(s) Describe the language policy and planning in Southeast Asian Contexts
LEARNING INTENT!
Terms to Ponder

varying levels (Linguistic Society of America,2020).

community of speakers (Linguistic Society of America,2020).
Essential Content
The Global Spread of English

English has become an everyday presence in many cosmopolitan
cities in Southeast Asia. For instance, in international airports in
Seoul, Singapore, Hong Kong and Kuala Lumpur, bilingual or
multilingual signs are everywhere, and among them are always
English signs. The global spread of English has arisen from a host
of historical, political and socioeconomic factors. In many Southeast
Asian contexts such as Singapore, Hong Kong and Malaysia, where
English was historically a colonial language imposed by former
British colonial governments, English has carried with it the
SCP-EL6 | 74
DEPARTMENT
baggage of colonial histories and exploitations. However, today

English has also become a predominant medium of global trade,
finance and commerce, science, technology and the Internet. It
serves as a chief medium of communication for different peoples
coming from both within and beyond Asia. It is a common scene in
Southeast Asian cities that people of diverse ethnic backgrounds
are communicating in some variety of English. So, has English
shaken off (or merely masked?) its colonial history and become a
widely used “lingua franca” (or common language for intercultural
communication among peoples from Southeast Asia and beyond? In
the following sections we review different arguments and
perspectives on this question.
Linguistic Imperialism
The theory of linguistic imperialism has been put
forward to describe and explain, among other phenomena,
the global spread and domination of English (Phillipson,
1992, 1994, 1997, 1998). Imperialism is typically
chacterized by exploitation, penetration, fragmentation,
and marginalization of native peoples, their labours,
cultures and resources. Imperialism has taken many
forms, including economic, political, military, cultural and
social penetrations and exploitations. Linguistic
imperialism, which is a form of cultural imperialism,
“permeates all other types of imperialism, since language is
SCP-EL6 | 75
DEPARTMENT
the means used to mediate and express them” (Phillipson,

1992, p. 65). English linguistic imperialism is one example
of linguicism, a notion defined by Phillipson (1992, p. 47)
as:
ideologies, structures, and practices which are used to
legitimate, effectuate, and reproduce an unequal division of
power and resources (both material and immaterial) between
groups which are defined on the basis of language.
Phillipson (1992) argues that in the postcolonial era —
in the last phase of English linguistic imperialism — the
ex-colonizers need not be physically present in the
“Periphery” countries, for there exists an indigenous
English-educated elite who identify with the ex-colonizers’
Anglocentric interests and values, typically through having
studied in a “Centre” country, and it is in their own
interests to perpetuate the domination of English in their
home countries at the expense of the natural use and
development of the indigenous language(s). The Centre
countries, especially the UK and the US, exercise influence
through hegemonic language ideologies (or ideas about
language) by dictating the norms of “standard” English to
learners and speakers of English in Periphery countries.
Why do people in former colonies seem to willingly
accept the continued domination of English in their
SCP-EL6 | 76
DEPARTMENT
societies? To explain this, Phillipson (1992) draws on the

Gramscian notion of “hegemony”, which prevails in the
third and last stage of imperialism called “neo-neo-
colonialism”:
The sophistication of the arguments grows on a scale
advancing from the use of force to the use of carrots to the
use of ideas. At one stage, the colonial power could use
coercion when selling one of its products, English. When the
counterpart became slightly more equal, and brute force
could no longer be applied or was no longer an ethically
acceptable alternative, carrots were more suitable. But the
ideal way to make people do what you want is of course to
make them want it themselves, and to make them believe
that it is good for them. This simplifies the role of the ‘seller’,
who then can appear as ‘helping’ or ‘giving aid’, rather than
‘forcing’ or ‘bargaining with’ the victim. (p. 286)
The notion of “hegemony” attempts to explain why

some ex-colonial peoples seem to embrace their former
colonizers’ cultures and languages as superior to their
native Language Policy and Planning in Southeast Asian
Contexts cultures and languages. English, for instance,
can be seen to be standing in a hegemonic relationship to
many former British-colonized peoples when they have
internalized (e.g., through education and socialization) the
belief that English is intrinsically a better language for
science and technology, for arts and cultures, is superior to
their own native language, or is the marker of civilized,
SCP-EL6 | 77
DEPARTMENT
modern citizenship. We shall return to a discussion of

different perspectives on this issue in the section on
multlilingual and multicultural identities in Southeast
Asia. Now, let us look at another related set of questions
revolving around which variety of English should serve as a
standard for learners in non-Anglo countries, for instance,
in the former colonies of Britain in Southeast Asia.
World Englishes
In many Southeast Asian cities such as Singapore and
Hong Kong, it is common to find people conversing in
different varieties of English. Which variety (or varieties)
should be put forward by language planners and educators
as the pedagogical model(s) to teach and learn in schools?
In many ex-British colonies, British English norms have
been used as the target norms. American English has also
become important because of its increasing trade and
political presence in Southeast Asia in the post-war era.
Researchers of World Englishes (Kachru, 1985, 1992,
1997) have differentiated among different kinds of English,
chiefly based on geographic locations and national
boundaries. Those English varieties spoken in Anglo
countries (e.g., the UK, the US, Australia, Canada) are
called “core” or “inner circle” varieties, while those spoken
SCP-EL6 | 78
DEPARTMENT
as second languages (ESL) (e.g., India) are called “outer

circle” varieties. Those spoken in places as foreign
languages (EFL) are called “expanding circle” varieties. An
image of three concentric circles (inner circle, outer circle,
expanding circle) is used to build a model of a hierarchy of
Englishes, each having different status and authority. The
inner circle varieties are norm-giving; the outer circle
norm-developing; and the expanding circle varieties norm-
dependent. This means that many learners in Southeast
Asian societies will find themselves trying to learn the
target varieties in the inner circle (e.g., British English or
American English).
The World English (WE) paradigm (or theoretical
framework) has changed our concept of “English” from a
monolithic notion to a pluralistic notion of “Englishes”.
That is, there is not one single legitimate English in the
world; there are many legitimate Englishes. It has also
highlighted the notion of ownership of English by people in
excolonies of Anglo-speaking countries. That means
English no longer belongs only to the former colonial
masters. Different Englishes are now being developed and
appropriated (i.e., taken as their own) in their own right by
peoples who use them as their first or second languages
SCP-EL6 | 79
DEPARTMENT
and very often as a marker of their own identities (e.g., in

Singapore and India).
While the WE paradigm has been seen as progressive
in liberalizing the ownership of English and in pluralizing
English, some researchers have observed that it
misleadingly presupposes that all people in a nation
necessarily speak the same national variety of Bilingual
Education: Southeast Asian Perspectives English. It has
also failed to question the native speaker/non-native
speaker (NS/NNS) dichotomy in any profound fashion
(Graddol, 1997; Pennycook, 2003). It continues to privilege
native speakers in the inner circle (as norm-giving) over
non-native speakers, and then ESL speakers in the outer
circle (as norm-developing) over EFL speakers in the
expanding circles (as norm-dependent). We shall return to
a discussion of this issue later when we discuss developing
frameworks for language policy and planning that are
appropriate in Southeast Asian contexts. In the next
section, let us return to the questions we raised at the
beginning of the section on linguistic imperialism.
SCP-EL6 | 80
DEPARTMENT
Emergence of Hybridized Multilingual and Multicultural

Identities in Southeast Asia
Is English an imposed language, a vehicle of linguistic and

cultural imperialism, and a killer language that threatens
the continued existence (e.g., learning and use) of other
natural languages and cultures in ex-colonies (e.g.,
Phillipson, 1997)? Or is it merely a medium for
international communication that exists side by side with
other local languages which different peoples keep for
expressing their local identities (e.g., Crystal, 1997)? It
seems that both positions seem to be a simplification of
what usually is a much more complex situation. Instead of
trying to argue for one or the other position in the abstract,
perhaps we should go beyond such a totalizing,
dichotomous way of thinking and actually look at each
specific sociocultural context in all its concrete
complexities. For instance, in a study (Lai, 2003) of young
people’s cultural identification patterns and language
attitudes, it was found that young people who identify
themselves as Hong Kongers are also affectively inclined
towards both Cantonese and English. To them, Cantonese
and English are not mutually exclusive and they find it
natural (or almost impossible; see Li & Tse, 2002) to mix
SCP-EL6 | 81
DEPARTMENT
English words into their everyday Cantonese. Also, given

the special socio-political, historical context of Hong Kong,
it seems that many Hong Kong people did not entirely
accept British colonial rule in the pre-1997 era and yet are
equally ambivalent about Socialist Chinese domination in
the post-1997 era. Such mixed, ambivalent feelings in
national and sociocultural identification seem to correlate
with the freely intertwining of Cantonese and English
words in the everyday public life of Hong Kong people, and
these “non-pure” linguistic practices seem to be playing an
important role in marking out the Hong Kong identity —
they seem to serve as distinctive linguistic and cultural
markers of “Hong Kong-ness” and seem to constitute some
defiant acts of identity. It is almost like saying: We’re Hong
Kong-ese and I don’t care whether I’m speaking “pure
Chinese/English” or not!
In this sense, then, if “Singlish” is a linguistic marker

of the distinctive local Singaporean identity (Chua, 2003),
then the so-called “mixed code” of Hong Kong is its
counterpart in Hong Kong. Like Singlish, the so-called
“Hong Kong mixed code” is not a monolithic, stable entity.
In practice, it consists of a whole continuum of different
styles of speaking and writing, from the use of here and
SCP-EL6 | 82
DEPARTMENT
there a few English lexical items in otherwise Cantonese

utterances/sentences to the intertwining of extended
English and Cantonese utterances/sentences (Lin, 2000).
From the perspectives of performativity theory on
languages and communication resources (Pennycook,
2004), it is a better idea not to view languages as separate
stable systems with solid boundaries. As Pennycook (2004)
argues, the idea of languages as discrete, stable, monolithic
entities with solid boundaries is actually the product of
colonial knowledge production. In practice, people draw on
a whole range of linguistic resources which cannot be
easily pigeonholed as “separate languages” in their
everyday linguistic practices. Parallel to these hybridized
linguistic practices are their similarly hybridized
sociocultural identities. At least among many Hong Kong
people as we witness it today, there do not seem to be any
clearcut “pure” sociocultural identities: Hong Kong people’s
identity seems to be always a “hyphenated” one, indicating
its “in-between-ness” (Abbas, 1997). We would want to
argue that, as a result of the rise of international
cosmopolitan cities in Southeast Asia and the rise of a
whole new generation of bilingual speakers in these
cosmopolitan cities, we shall witness the rise of
SCP-EL6 | 83
DEPARTMENT
cosmopolitan varieties of Asian Englishes (Lin & Shim,

2004) which will not fit comfortably into the hierarchical
WE paradigm of core, inner, outer or expanding circles. We
predict that these cosmopolitan speakers of Asian
Englishes will increasingly seek to assert the legitimacy
and status of their speaking styles on an equal footing with
Anglo-American English speaking styles, ultimately
bringing about a paradigm shift in institutionalizing what
target models to teach, learn and test in schools in these
societies (Luk & Lin, 2005), although as things stand now
we are still a long way from reaching these goals.
Recent research has actually found that, in East Asian
cosmopolitan cities, there are increasing transnational
popular cultural flows and linguistic hybridization taking
place. For instance, Rip Slyme, a popular rap group in
Japan, has used English in their lyrics to fashion a kind of
“double” identity (Pennycook, 2003):
… Rip Slyme locate their Japaneseness explicitly, yet at the
same time they use the English word for Japanese, seeming
in the same instant to refashion their identity from the
outside. This Japanese identity is then both ‘freaky’ and
‘double’, the latter a recently coined term to describe people
of mixed origin. (p. 527)
Admitting research in this direction is still scarce,
Pennycook (2003) concludes his article by hinting at the
development of bilingual and bicultural identities through
SCP-EL6 | 84
DEPARTMENT
transnational popular cultural practices mediated by both

English and local languages:
How does the use of English work as it locates its users both
as part of the global imagined community of English users
and as participants in the global music industry, creating
links through the ‘international language’ and yet relocating
through its juxtaposition with Japanese? How do these new
global raplishes work as tools for the performance of
identities? (p. 529)
What the theory of linguistic imperialism fails to show
is perhaps how English can be actively taken up, how
people can actually appropriate (i.e., claim ownership of)
English and why people strategically choose to use English
(Lin, Wang, Akamatsu & Riazi, 2002). Pennycook (2003)
observes that the linguistic imperialism theory cannot
account for a sense of agency, resistance, or appropriation
on the part of ex-colonized peoples. It Bilingual Education:
Southeast Asian Perspectives tends to construct ex-
colonized peoples as passive victims (Li, 2002). Somehow
between the dichotomous positions of uncritically
celebrating the global spread of English as an innocuous
tool for communication, science and technology (Crystal,
1997), and constructing English as a monolithic universal
killer language colonizing relentlessly the linguistic and
SCP-EL6 | 85
DEPARTMENT
cultural habitats of ex-colonial societies, we have to steer a

levelheaded, middle way by taking a socioculturally
situated perspective; i.e., we need to look at each
sociocultural context in all its complexities before jumping
to a conclusion. Going beyond the debate between the
“imperialism-resistance” theories (e.g., Phillipson, 1992)
and the “postcolonial performativity” theories (e.g.,
Pennycook, 2003, 2004), we have to find a way of
understanding and exposing new forms of inequalities in
education and society and new productions of subaltern
subjectivities (i.e., marginalized identities and an
underclass sense of self; see Ashcroft, Griffiths & Tiffin,
1998) under forces of globalization. While doing critical
education analysis we must also be wary of falling into the
trap of doing merely essentialist identity politics (e.g.,
arguing that one’s L1 must be more important than one’s
L2). Rather, we must struggle to study the new material
and institutional conditions that might lead to social and
educational inequalities, and to explore practical
alternatives in LPP policy and practice.
SCP-EL6 | 86
DEPARTMENT
The New Cosmopolitan Bilingual Elites and the Newly

Ghetto-ized Locals under Globalization-driven Bilingual
Education Policies
As much as we would want to celebrate the new

opportunities that globalization has seemed to offer us in
reworking and refashioning our identities as new
transnational, global Cosmopolitans, unbound by old forms
of essentialist nationalism and culturalism and binary
frameworks of identity politics, we also see the anxieties
created by globalization forces. Zygmunt Bauman (1998)
points out this economic underside of globalization in his
book, Globalization: The Human Consequences:
In the words of John Kavanagh of the Washington Institute
of Policy Research: Globalization has given more
opportunities for the extremely wealthy to make money more
quickly. These individuals have utilized the latest technology
to move large sums of money around the globe extremely
quickly and speculate ever more efficiently. Unfortunately,
the technology makes no impact on the lives of the world
poor. In fact, globalization is a paradox: while it is very
beneficial to a very few, it leaves out or marginalizes two-
thirds of the world’s population. As the folklore of the new
generation of ‘enlightened classes’, gestated in the new,
brave and monetarist world of nomadic capital, would have
it, opening up sluices and dynamiting all state-maintained
dams will make the world a free place for everybody.
According to such folkloristic beliefs, freedom (of trade and
capital mobility, first and foremost) is the hothouse in which
wealth would grow faster than ever before; and once the
wealth is multiplied, there will be more of it for everybody.
SCP-EL6 | 87
DEPARTMENT
The poor of the world — whether old or new, hereditary or

computer-made — would hardly recognize their plight in this
folkloristic fiction. … New Language Policy and Planning in
Southeast Asian Contexts fortunes are born, sprout and
flourish in the virtual reality, tightly isolated from the
oldfashioned rough-and-ready realities of the poor. The
creation of wealth is on the way to finally emancipating itself
from its perennial — constraining and vexing — connections
with making things, processing materials, creating jobs and
managing people. The old rich needed the poor to make and
keep them rich. That dependency at all times mitigated the
conflict of interest and prompted some effort, however
tenuous, to care. The new rich do not need the poor any
more. (Bauman, 1998, pp. 71–2).
Thus, increasingly under the forces of economic

globalization, entire factories and jobs can disappear
overnight from one locality as fast, nomadic global capital
holds no allegiance to communities in any locality and
roams from one locality to another across the Globe
searching for ever-cheaper land and labour (Bauman,
1998). Also, while the Cosmopolitan multilingual elite well-
versed in global English and new knowledge technologies
(often mediated through global English) can find jobs
anywhere across the Globe (i.e., gaining transnational
mobility), those monolingual locals who never catch on to
the new skills and new global languages (often due to lack
of class-based capital and habitus; see discussion below)
SCP-EL6 | 88
DEPARTMENT
are ever more locked up in non-mobility both

geographically and socio-economically.
Search Indicator
Alderson, J. C. (2007). The CEFR and the need for more research. Modern
Language Journal,91, 659–663.
Bonnet, G. (Ed.) (2002). The assessment of pupils’ skills in English in eight
European countries. Paris: European Network of Policy Makers for the
Evaluation of Education Systems.
British Council (2013). Language rich Europe: Multilingualism for stable and
prosperous
societies. https://www.britishcouncil.nl/sites/default/files/lre_review_and_r
ecommendations.pdf.
Cummins, J. (2007). Rethinking monolingual instructional strategies in
multilingual classrooms. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics,10, 221–
240.
SCP-EL6 | 89
DEPARTMENT
Week 15-17 Language Revitalization

Lesson Title Diversity and language policy for endangered languages
Learning Outcome(s) Discuss the steps involved in preserving endangered languages.
LEARNING INTENT!
Terms to Ponder
Endangered language is one that is likely to become

extinct in the near future. Many languages are failing out of
use and being replaced by others that are more widely used
in the region or nation, such as English in the U.S. or
Spanish in Mexico. Many other languages are no longer
being learned by new generations of children or by new
adult speakers; these languages will become extinct when
their last speaker dies. In fact, dozens of languages today
have only one native speaker still living, and that person's
death will mean the extinction of the language: It will no
longer be spoken, or known, by anyone.
Essential Content
What is language death?

‘Language death’ can be seen as the end-point in the process
of language endangerment, when a language ceases to be
spoken. Mufwene (2004) defines it as follows:
Used to describe community level loss of competence in a

language, it denotes a process that does not affect all speakers
at the same time nor to the same extent. Under one conception
of the process, it has to do with the statistical assessment of
the maintenance versus loss of competence in a language
variety among its speakers. Total death is declared when there
SCP-EL6 | 90
DEPARTMENT
are no speakers left of a particular language variety in a

population that had used it. (Mufwene 2004: 204)
Language shift: its causes and implications

All over the world, people are stopping speaking minority
languages and shifting to languages of wider communication;
within this latter term lies one of the reasons for the shift.
Linguists are increasingly alarmed at the rate at which
languages are going out of use, as it has increased
dramatically in the last 50–100 years. A special issue of the
journal Language (Hale 1992) called for a concerted effort to
record the remaining speakers and to create archives for
future reference (language documentation). In this issue,
Krauss (1992) estimated that 90 per cent of the world’s
languages would be severely endangered by 2100. In more
optimistic estimates such as those in Nettle and Romaine
(2000) and Crystal (2000),‘only’ 50 per cent will be lost.
Processes of language shift and endangerment

The causes of language endangerment fall into four main
categories:
1 Natural catastrophes, famine, disease: for example, Malol,

Papua New Guinea (earthquake);
2 War and genocide: for example, Tasmania (genocide by
colonists); Brazilian indigenous peoples (disputes over land
and resources); El Salvador (civil war);
3 Overt repression: for example, for ‘national unity’ (including
forcible resettlement): for example, Kurdish, Welsh, Native
American languages;
4 Cultural/political/economic dominance: for example, Ainu,
Manx, Sorbian, Quechua and many others.
SCP-EL6 | 91
DEPARTMENT
These factors often overlap. The dividing lines can be

difficult to distinguish: for example in the Americas disease
and suppression of Native cultures spread after colonization,
and in Ireland many Irish speakers died or emigrated due to
the effects of the potato blight famine in the nineteenth
century, compounded by British government inaction.
The sudden demise of a whole speaker community is a

relatively rare factor. The fourth category,
cultural/political/economic dominance, is the most common,
and is often associated with colonization and overt repression.
It can be further subdivided into five common factors:
1 Economic: e.g. rural poverty leads to migration to cities and

abroad. Minority languages come to be associated with
poverty. If the local economy improves, tourism may bring
speakers of majority languages.
2 Cultural dominance by the majority community, e.g. education
and literature through the majority or state language only;
indigenous language and culture may become ‘folklorized’.
3 Political: e.g. education policies which ignore or exclude local

languages, lack of recognition or political representation, ban
on the use of minority languages in public life.
4 Historical: e.g. colonization, boundary disputes, the rise of one
group and their language variety to political and cultural
dominance.
5 Attitudinal: e.g. minority languages become associated with
poverty, illiteracy and hardship, while the dominant language
is associated with progress/escape.
How do we measure linguistic diversity?

Overviews of language endangerment generally start with
statistics about the number of languages in the world and the
SCP-EL6 | 92
DEPARTMENT
proportion
considered endangered. The source most frequently
referenced is Ethnologue, subtitled ‘An encyclopedic reference
work cataloguing all of the world’s 6,909 known living
languages’ (Lewis 2009), published by the Summer Institute
of Linguistics.4 Table 6.1 shows how the sixteenth edition of
the Ethnologue (Lewis 2009) estimates the distribution of
living languages by area of origin.
Statistics commonly quoted (the sources are unclear) include:
● Only about eighty languages have more than 10 million

speakers
● Only 208 languages have over one million speakers
● Eighty per cent have fewer than 20,000 speakers
● Average number of speakers per language: 5,000–6,000.
A feature of minorized languages is that accurate data is

frequently not available, but it is clear that the vast majority
of languages are used by relatively small numbers of people.
The statistics also mask inherent problems in the counting of
languages, as the Introduction to Ethnologue recognizes.
Many linguists use the criterion of mutual comprehensibility:
if users of two varieties cannot understand each other, the
varieties are considered to be different languages. If they can
understand each other, the varieties are considered mutually
comprehensible dialects of the same language. However,
mutual intelligibility is notoriously difficult to measure, as it
has both psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic variables.
Attitudes play a role whether or not people want to
understand each other.
How do we measure the health of languages?
The health of a language, in keeping with the

anthropomorphic metaphor, is commonly termed its vitality.
SCP-EL6 | 93
DEPARTMENT
Assessing language vitality helps plan language policy,

and repeated assessments can help assess the effectiveness of
programs (Grenoble and Whaley 2006: 3).
Fishman (1991) attempted to trace the process of
language endangerment with his ‘Graded Intergenerational
Disruption Scale’ (GIDS), which outlines eight stages of
community language loss and simultaneously suggests
revitalization measures to counter each stage. Fishman sees
transmission in the family as the ‘gold standard’ of language
vitality and the most important factor in language survival
(1991: 113). Intergenerational transmission is also the focus
of another taxonomy favoured by linguists, that of Krauss
(1997). The GIDS framework can perhaps be criticized for not
including discussion of reasons for language shift, which
might also hold some keys to reversing the process. Yet it is
useful to activists as a framework to plot the status of
languages and to plan priorities.
The most comprehensive language vitality scale at the
time of writing is UNESCO’s Language Vitality and
Endangerment framework, produced by a group of eminent
linguists, which encompasses nine factors in language
vitality:
(1) Intergenerational language transmission
(2) Absolute number of speakers
(3) Proportion of speakers within the local population
(4) Trends in existing language domains
(5) Response to new domains and media
(6) Materials for language education and literacy
(7) Governmental and institutional language policies, including
official status and use
(8) Community members’ attitudes toward their own language
(9) Amount and quality of documentation.
This framework recognizes that factors cannot easily
be separated: for example, the domains in which a
language is used relate to attitudes status. It also includes
SCP-EL6 | 94
DEPARTMENT
factors ignored by other schemes, such as attitudes and

documentation. However, although the preamble to the
framework stresses the importance of language
revitalization, this is not included in the framework itself.
Why worry about loss of linguistic diversity?

Value to linguistic science
Throughout history languages have died out and been

replaced by others. Until recently this was seen as a
natural cycle of change. But the growing number of
varieties no longer being learnt by children, coupled with a
tendency for speakers to shift to languages of wider
communication (especially varieties or creoles of English),
means that there is a noticeable reduction in typological
diversity. Unless the myriad inventive ways in which
humans express themselves are documented now, future
generations may not be aware of them: for example, Ubykh,
a Caucasian language whose last fully competent speaker
died in 1992, has eighty-four distinct consonants and
according to some analyses, only two phonologically
SCP-EL6 | 95
DEPARTMENT
distinct
vowels. Krauss (1992: 10) called for ‘some rethinking of our
priorities, lest linguistics go down in history as the only
science that has presided obliviously over the
disappearance of ninety per cent of the
very field to which it is dedicated’.
Cultural heritage
UNESCO’s website cites linguistic diversity as a ‘pillar of
Cultural Diversity’:
Languages, with their complex implications for identity,

communication, social integration, education and
development, are of strategic importance for people and the
planet. ... When languages fade, so does the world’s rich
tapestry of cultural diversity. Opportunities, traditions,
memory, unique modes of thinking and expression –
valuable resources for ensuring a better future are also lost.
All societies have oral literature, that is, cultural

traditions expressed through language in the form of
stories, legends, historical narratives, poetry and songs.
Harrison (2007) and others argue that the loss of
endangered languages means the loss of such knowledge
and cultural richness, both to the communities who speak
them and to human beings in general (what UNESCO
describes as ‘intangible cultural heritage’).
Policies to support endangered languages
1. Increasing the number of speakers
Arguably the simplest way to maintain a language is to

speak it; however, persuading communities to do this
seems to be the most difficult measure to implement (e.g.
Dauenhauer and Dauenhauer 1998). It involves
two policy strands:
SCP-EL6 | 96
DEPARTMENT
1 Improving language proficiency and creating new

speakers, usually through teaching (known as acquisition
planning). This can overlap with domains of use, in that
efforts often focus on the sphere of education.
2 Ensuring that people want to speak the language (known
as prestige planning: Haarmann, 1984; 1990).
2. Domains of Use
An almost universal feature of language minorization
and endangerment is that languages are confined to low-
status or private domains of use. Many language activists
therefore aim to ‘transcend diglossia’ (in the terms of
Fishman 1991). New domains such as education, signage,
official communications, media, computers and mobile
phones increase both language awareness and perceived
utility. Although such activities as social networking
websites, blogging and texting in an endangered. Teaching
endangered languages in schools is not only a practical
measure: it also plays a symbolic role in many language

revitalization campaigns. In many places around the world,
e.g. France, Sudan or the Ryuku islands in Japan,
members of endangered-language communities remember
humiliating experiences such as having to wear (and pass
on to another pupil) a symbol if they were caught speaking
their home language.
3. Addressing structural simplification and linguistic

capacity
Change and growth are signs of a healthy language, but
the amount and rate of language change accelerate in
endangered languages (Dorian 1981); this is often
perceived as decay leading to obsolescence. Languages may
undergo simplification or regularization, and reduction or
replacement of syntactic structures, especially under the
SCP-EL6 | 97
DEPARTMENT
influence of contact languages (Denison 1977; Schmidt

1985). This becomes a vicious circle: as Dorian (1977: 24)
noted, ‘reduced use of a language will lead also to a
reduced form of that language’.
Without young speakers, an endangered language will die
within a generation. Adolescence is a crucial age for
motivation and language consolidation; encouraging young
people to develop their own identification with, and
version(s) of, an endangered language might motivate them
to use it more and to create a ‘language of their own’.
Holton (2009) argues that ‘repurposing language’, including
conscious creolization, may be a way to maintain vibrant
new forms of endangered languages. However, some elderly
speakers who consider themselves custodians of a
language may be reluctant to accept what they see as
‘bastardization’.
Search Indicator
Alderson, J. C. (2007). The CEFR and the need for more research. Modern
Language Journal,91, 659–663.
Bonnet, G. (Ed.) (2002). The assessment of pupils’ skills in English in eight
European countries. Paris: European Network of Policy Makers for the
Evaluation of Education Systems.
British Council (2013). Language rich Europe: Multilingualism for stable and
prosperous
societies. https://www.britishcouncil.nl/sites/default/files/lre_review_and_r
ecommendations.pdf.
SCP-EL6 | 98
DEPARTMENT
Cummins,
J. (2007). Rethinking monolingual instructional strategies in multilingual
classrooms. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics,10, 221–240.
SCP-EL6 | 99
DEPARTMENT
I
LET’S NITIATE!
questions.
1. What is an endangered language?

2. What causes language endangerment?
I
LET’S NQUIRE!
Activity 1. Write your answers to the space provided below every
after the questions.
1. Discuss the processes involved in language shift and endangerment.
I
LET’S NFER!
Activity 1. Write your answers to the space provided below every
after the questions.
1. Discuss comprehensively the policies that need to be implemented to

support endangered languages.
SCP-EL6 | 100

SCP El6

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

SCP El6

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SCP El6

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ST.

JOHN PAUL II COLLEGE OF DAVAO

SIMPLIFIED COURSE PACK (SCP) FOR SELF-DIRECTED

EL6 – Language Policies in Multilingual Society

By 2023, a recognized professional institution providing quality,

Serve the nation by providing competent JPCean graduates through

Course Code/Title EL6/Language Policies in Multilingual Society

Language Policies in Multilingual Society

Cognitive issues related to

History of bilingualism, Cognitive issues related to

Types of bilinguals - compound, Bilingual education programs – Week

Bilingual and multilingual education

Bilingual and multilingual education

Week 1 Introduction to Second Language Acquisition

Language Acquisition Device- According to Chomsky, the innate

Second language Acquisition (SLA) refers to both to the study of

Russia takes a course in Arabic, or when an attorney in Columbia takes a

1. What exactly does the L2 earner come to know?

SLA has emerged as a field of study primarily from within

• Linguists- emphasize the characteristics of the difference and

• Sociolinguists emphasize variability in learner linguistic

• Social psychologists emphasize group-related phenomena, such

• An auxiliary language is one which learners need to know for

Cook, V. (1996). Second language learning and language teaching.

Ellis, R. (1987). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford:

Saville-Troike, M., & Barto, K. (2018). Introducing second language

SCP-TOPICS: PRELIM PERIOD TOPICS

Week 2 Bilingualism, multilingualism and bilingual education

Put simply, bilingualism is the ability to use two languages.

Definitions of bilingualism range from a minimal proficiency in

language sometime after their first language. This is known as

Literacy abilities may be an additional dimension to

A mutilingual person is one who can communicate in more

• An interest in knowing more about people of other cultures and

What is a multi-lingual person?

Children acquiring two languages are called simultaneous

Example An English-speaking father married to a

Language Policies in the Philippines

The Language provision in the 1987 Constitution of the

2. For purposes of communication and instruction, the official

Consistent with the 1987 constitutional mandate and a

through the teaching of both languages and their use as media of

The goals of the Bilingual Education Policy shall be:

3. the development of Filipino as a linguistic symbol of national unity

Filipino and English shall be used as media of instruction, the

The Department of Education Culture and Sports shall

Executive Order No. 335

On August 25, 1988, then President Corazon Aquino signed

All departments/bureaus/offices/agencies/instrumentalities of the

1. Take steps to enhance the use of Filipino in official communications,

2. Assign one or more personnel, as maybe necessary, in every office to

Filipinize the “Oath of Office” for government officials and

The Commission on the Filipino Language, formerly Institute

The Language Policy of the Commission on Higher Education

In 1994, Republic Act No. 7722, creating the Commission on

was done to make the curriculum more responsive to the demands

The requirements of the new GEC are embodied in the CHED

In consonance with the Bilingual Education Policy underlined