A “ Complicated Conversation ” with the Canadian Language Benchmarks.

10
A “Complicated Conversation” with the Canadian Language Benchmarks. Douglas Fleming PhD Faculty of Education, University of Ottawa dfleming@ uottawa.ca CCEBRAL 2014

description

A “ Complicated Conversation ” with the Canadian Language Benchmarks. Douglas Fleming PhD Faculty of Education, University of Ottawa [email protected] CCEBRAL 2014. Introduction - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of A “ Complicated Conversation ” with the Canadian Language Benchmarks.

Page 1: A  “ Complicated Conversation ”  with the Canadian Language Benchmarks.

 A “Complicated Conversation”

with the Canadian Language

Benchmarks.

Douglas Fleming PhD 

Faculty of Education, University of [email protected]

CCEBRAL 2014

Page 2: A  “ Complicated Conversation ”  with the Canadian Language Benchmarks.

Introduction

This session engages the Canadian Language Benchmarks (CLB) within the context of national second language programming and citizenship.

Findings from two studies:comparing how citizenship is conceptualized by a

sample of LINC students with how it is embedded within the 2000 and 2012 versions of the CLB.

how eight experienced ESL/literacy teachers described how they developed over the course of their careers a keen awareness of the importance of bringing critical perspectives to their classroom treatment of citizenship.

Page 3: A  “ Complicated Conversation ”  with the Canadian Language Benchmarks.

Concepts

Jackson’s (1968): hidden curriculum;

Students learn sets of implicit rules governing the privileging of certain kinds of knowledge and classroom behavior;

the hidden curriculum also exerts control over teachers through curricular microprocesses and governmentality (Foucault, 1978).

teachers can view engaging with documents such as these as “complicated conversations” (Pinar, 2012).

Page 4: A  “ Complicated Conversation ”  with the Canadian Language Benchmarks.

Related Empirical Work in General Education

Lynch (1989) and Connell (1982): curricula used in particular schools were differently framed according to the gender and social class of students;

Anyon (1980): teachers used the same curriculum material in different ways according to the socio-economic conditions within which they worked.

Apple (1979): teachers are forced to divide curriculum knowledge into various levels of status, according to the socio-economic background of the students in question.

Page 5: A  “ Complicated Conversation ”  with the Canadian Language Benchmarks.

Study 1 (Fleming, 2010)

comparing how citizenship is conceptualized by a sample of LINC students with how it is embedded within the CLB.;

• the students conceptualized citizenship in terms of multiculturalism, civic rights, and a respect for legal responsibilities;

• Linked to shifts in identity (esp. for women), family roles, a commitment to their new nation-state and access to labour and civic rights;

•in contrast, the CLB constructed isolated, passive and depoliticised conceptions of second language learners.

Page 6: A  “ Complicated Conversation ”  with the Canadian Language Benchmarks.

•the original 2000 version of the CLB:• the word "vote" does not appear;• rights and responsibilities almost exclusively related to

being good consumers, but not as workers, family members or participants in community activities;

• labor rights nonexistent;

•improvements in the 2012 version of the CLB:• several additions of content that refer to labour rights;• two references to voting;

•however:• there is still a heavy emphasis on consumer rights;• voting and labour rights are mentioned in reference to

passive skills.

Page 7: A  “ Complicated Conversation ”  with the Canadian Language Benchmarks.

• Study 2 (Fleming, 2014)

eight experienced ESL/literacy teachers described how they

developed an awareness of the importance of critical perspectives to the classroom treatment of citizenship.

• the participants in this study endorsed justice-orientated versions of citizenship;

• they linked participatory notions of citizenship to critical conceptions of literacy;

• they noted that they strengthened these positions as their careers progressed.

Page 8: A  “ Complicated Conversation ”  with the Canadian Language Benchmarks.

Despite claims that it is nothing more than an assessment instrument, as the first study shows, the CLB is a hidden curriculum in the sense that it:

encapsulates a privileged body of content and methods;

promotes an obedient and passive engagement with the nation-state;

links (rarely attainable) normative English language fluency with full citizenship;

Page 9: A  “ Complicated Conversation ”  with the Canadian Language Benchmarks.

Why is this a “complicated conversation”?

the CLB is nominally an assessment instrument;to be valid as a language assessment, such an

instrument must avoid making performance dependent on unfamiliar;

Canadian citizenship is (for the most part) unfamiliar content for newcomers to the country;

However, the CLB (esp. in the 2012 version) is also used to inform curriculum development;

curricular content found within the document becomes

exemplars for classroom teachers and thus privileged.

Page 10: A  “ Complicated Conversation ”  with the Canadian Language Benchmarks.

As the second study shows, teachers can critically engage such documents by:exercising professional autonomy;designing curricula and pedagogical tasks tailor-made

for the learners they face;not giving in to the temptation to delay treating

citizenship until the higher levels of second language proficiency;

conceptualising their engagement as an “complicated conversation” in which they own an equal half of the dialogue.