This article discusses the rationale for using language diaries as a method to evaluate language use and language choice in multilingual contexts, as well as the benefits and limitations of this approach vis-à-vis other research methods. This is illustrated using examples from two contexts: Flemish Sign Language/Dutch bilinguals in Flanders and Gaelic/English bilinguals in the Western Isles of Scotland. In both cases, the language diaries were part of a larger mixed-method study which aimed to evaluate language use and language choice in contexts in which the majority language is in almost all instances the unmarked choice. Language diaries provide a new perspective on individual language practices as they allow for an evaluation of contextualised examples of language use and give insight into the factors that drive language and modality choice, and language ideologies. Language diaries give participants ownership over the information shared with the researcher and provide access to a number of different domains. Despite being based on self-reported practices, their situated nature demonstrates how language use can change through personal circumstances. This in turn contributes to a greater understanding of the use of Flemish Sign Language and Gaelic in the wider sociolinguistic contexts in which these languages exist.
LINK
Background to the problem Dutch society demonstrates a development which is apparent in many societies in the 21st century; it is becoming ethnically heterogeneous. This means that children who are secondlanguage speakers of Dutch are learning English, a core curriculum subject, through the medium of the Dutch language. Research questions What are the consequences of this for the individual learner and the class situation?Is a bi-lingual background a help or a hindrance when acquiring further language competences. Does the home situation facilitate or impede the learner? Additionally, how should the TEFL professional respond to this situation in terms of methodology, use of the Dutch language, subject matter and assessment? Method of approach A group of ethnic minority students at Fontys University of Professional Education was interviewed. The interviews were subjected to qualitative analysis. To ensure triangulation lecturers involved in teaching English at F.U.P.E. were asked to fill in a questionnaire on their teaching approach to Dutch second language English learners. Thier response was quantitatively and qualitatively analysed. Findings and conclusions The students encountered surprisingly few problems. Their bi-lingualism and home situation were not a constraint in their English language development. TEFL professionals should bear the heterogeneous classroom in mind when developing courses and lesson material. The introduction to English at primary school level and the assessment of DL2 learners require further research.
DOCUMENT
The inclusive education debate is often framed as a choice between outmoded special schools and progressive inclusive general education schools. However, the rhetoric of ‘choice’ hides what is in reality a context of restricted resources, both in general education and in special congregated settings. We interview three deaf-parented families with a total of six deaf children enrolled in different educational settings in Belgium. We explore the educational choices parents made for their children and how these choices are influenced (1) by their own knowledge of and lived experience with the educational choices available and (2) actually existing resources. Our study shows a clear contrast between the capital parents bring to their children’s educational experiences and the choices available. Parents want to send their children to congregated settings to give them an education in sign language but are hindered from doing so because of the schools’ lack of adherence to educational standards. Instead they are pushed into a general education system that tasks their time and energy, as well as their child’s bodies. The paucity of options for these parents calls for a rethinking of the parameters of the inclusive education debate, moving beyond placement to a holistic focus on deaf children’s linguistic, educational, and social development.
DOCUMENT
