Introduction to the special issue “multilingual students and language education policy in Europe”

The maintenance of multilingualism is a goal in many European countries (Bartelheimer, Hufeisen, & Montanari, 2019). The recently introduced term new speakers (Soler & Darquennes, 2019) takes account of current changed language practices as well as educational and acquisition contexts. However, programs for the maintenance of and education in immigrant or historical minority languages encounter serious challenges, such as (a) monolingual beliefs in the teaching staff, (b) teacher-training that upgrades majority language proficiency and downgrades other languages instead of questioning the way children are generally instructed (Rolstad, 2014), (c) an antiquated view on language learning as a separate entity in lieu of language(s) across the curriculum, and (d) the lack of appropriate models for bilingual instruction. Language policy engagement is an important issue, particularly with respect to teachers as central and powerful agents for both the implementation but also the neglect of minority languages in schools (Curdt-Christiansen, 2018). Engagement is strongly related to parental language policies, too. There is a need for a theoretically grounded model of language identities that comprises pragmatic, emotional, essential, and peripheral aspects as well as all the external factors that influence families’ ideologies, policies, and practices (cf. the framework by Little, 2020).

The present issue highlights varied perspectives in less familiar language education settings in Europe. It focuses on general language policy, on teachers’ perspectives, on divergences between familial and school expectations, and on classroom didactics. All articles contribute to the topic of multilingualism and language education policy and address one or more of the challenges mentioned above.

In the opening piece, K.F. Cantone gives an overview of language diversity, policy, and education acts in Europe. Taking German by way of example, it is outlined that language education policy regarding immigrant minority languages is neither based on clear education acts nor does it satisfy the requirements for language learning and language maintenance. By contrast, majority language-only policy and an exclusive focus on second language learning hinder a resource-oriented, integrated view on multilingualism. The contribution recommends improving teacher-training for linguistically diverse classrooms, adapting to different acquisition conditions in minority language transmission, and revising mother-tongue instruction.

The following paper by M. Becker reports on a qualitative study conducted in Vitoria-Gasteiz, the capital city of the bilingual Basque Autonomous Community of Spain, where the majority of inhabitants are native speakers of Spanish. Within this linguistic environment, Becker investigates the perspectives and linguistic attitudes of primary school teachers in three school models in which Basque is taught to different extents. An important policy recommendation can be derived from this study. A minority language instruction based on few hours a week is not sufficient for fostering proficient and fluent speakers. Strong institutional support in favor of the minority language via specific school models, teacher training, and economic motivations to learn this language is an important component of minority language normalization. However, without large support by the society it cannot effectively influence language use in all domains and language transmission within the families.

In her contribution, I.M. Cavaion addresses the changing role of Italian in the coastal area of Slovenia. Although Italian is an official minority language taught in minority schools and in compulsory classes in all schools in this area, students do not reach high levels of proficiency in Italian, and Italian is not perceived as the language of the territory anymore. Cavaion investigates the perspectives and perceptions of mainstream elementary/middle school teachers of Italian in order to trace the factors that explain the loss of prestige of Italian as a second language. From this exploratory study, we can carve out a relevant implication for language education policy. The altered linguistic situation in the coastal area should be analyzed in more detail, for Italian may no longer be perceived as a first or second language. This language shift has severe consequences for teaching and schooling models. New ways of teaching and innovative learning methods become indispensable for creating opportunities of language practices in different domains and for increasing the prestige of Italian among young people.

Hopp, Jakisch, Sturm, Becker & Thoma present data from a project on developing and measuring the efficacy of multilingual teaching approaches in the context of English Foreign Language instruction in primary schools in Germany. In a quantitative analysis of monolingual and multilingual students within a longitudinal study, the authors discovered that minority language proficiency and metalinguistic awareness are significant predictors of both English vocabulary and grammar skills. Hence, the goal of the present study – reported in their contribution – was to design and implement a multilingual teaching approach that systematically integrates language comparisons and metalinguistic awareness tasks. Their contribution outlines different aspects of this approach and discusses the potentials and challenges of including multilingualism in early foreign language teaching. Importantly, implementing such a teaching approach not only addresses the resources of multilingual students but also suggests a new way of teaching foreign languages that includes awareness of all the languages present in the classroom as well as the promotion and appreciation of minority languages.

Finally, X.L. Curdt-Christiansen discusses language attitudes, ideologies, and family language policies in transnational families in the UK which are at odds with teachers’ attitudes and views. Looking at eight families of different Chinese regions with primary school children and at eight teachers, the explanatory study analyzes the disparate expectations for educating multilingual children with regard to the role of language(s) and academic development. A central explanation for the divergent views is the majority language-only education policy that suppresses multilingual resources and the promotion of multilingualism in schools. Teachers unfortunately aim at influencing (language) educational practices at home, which, according to the data collected, are considered as disturbing and unhelpful due to presupposed language barriers. Curdt-Christiansen strongly suggests that schools and parents should improve communication in order to provide a meaningful collaboration based on appreciation and understanding of different language, cultural, and educational practices.

As a whole, this special issue aims at pointing out the importance of including multilingual students’ resources in everyday schooling and improving language education policy in the field of immigrant and historical minority languages.

Acknowledgments

I thank the authors who participated in the special issue as well as the colleagues who helped by reviewing an article. A particular thank you goes to the IMRJ for the support and for the help throughout the whole process before publication.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.