Читать книгу The Multicultural Classroom: Learning from Australian First Nations Perspectives - Jasmin Peskoller - Страница 15

Generally, a variety of definitions and models of bilingual education and a seemingly equally extensive number of ways for classifying and grouping them exist in the field. Fundamentally, Baker (2011) and Grosjean (2010) emphasize the need for a distinction to be made between approaches in which bilingualism is encouraged and those in which a monolingual classroom is targeted (Baker 2011, 207; Grosjean 2010, 230–235). Thus, a distinction can be made between strong and weak forms of bilingual education, which can be differentiated from monolingual forms of education (Baker & Wright 2017, 198ff.); similarly, García (2009, 146–153) makes use of the terms monoglossic and heteroglossic for purposes of differentiation. A further distinction relates to the goals of bilingual education. The three most common types of bilingual education and their respective objectives are listed in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Aims of Bilingual Education Models5

Adding to this concise overview of types of bilingual education models, Table 1 depicts an extract from Baker’s comprehensive typology of bilingual education to exemplify one way of classifying the various existing approaches to, and sub-branches of, bilingual education.

Monolingual Forms of Education
Type of Program	Typical Type of Child	Language of the Classroom	Societal and Educational Aim	Aim in Language Outcome
Mainstreaming / Submersion	Language Minority	Majority Language	Assimilation	Monolingualism
Weak Forms of Bilingual Education
Type of Program	Typical Type of Child	Language of the Classroom	Societal and Educational Aim	Aim in Language Outcome
Transitional	Language Minority	Moves from minority to majority language	Assimilation/ Subtractive	Relative Monolingualism
Mainstream (with [Foreign] Language Teaching)	Language Majority	Majority language with second/foreign language lessons	Limited Enrichment	Limited Bilingualism
Strong Forms of Bilingual Education
Type of Program	Typical Type of Child	Language of the Classroom	Societal and Educational Aim	Aim in Language Outcome
Immersion	Language Majority	Bilingual with initial emphasis on L2	Pluralism and Enrichment	Bilingualism & Biliteracy
Maintenance/ Heritage Language	Language Minority	Bilingual with emphasis on L1	Maintenance, Pluralism and Enrichment	Bilingualism & Biliteracy
Two Way/Dual Language	Mixed Language Minority & Majority	Minority & Majority	Maintenance, Pluralism and Enrichment.	Bilingualism & Biliteracy
Mainstream Bilingual	Language Majority	Two Majority Languages	Maintenance, Pluralism and Enrichment.	Bilingualism

Table 1: A Typology of Bilingual Education6

While weak forms of bilingual education include the risk of fostering a subtractive form of bilingualism (see Figure 2), strong forms, on the contrary, encourage additive bilingualism. Connecting the concepts of language and culture, Baker (2011, 249) states that “bilingual education ideally develops a broader enculturation, a more sensitive view of different creeds and cultures” and it “will usually deepen an engagement with the cultures associated with the languages, fostering a sympathetic understanding of differences”.

Two approaches that are classified as strong forms of bilingual education in the typology presented in Table 1, immersion education and two-way education, will now be investigated more deeply. In addition, the two-way concept is explored further in connection with contemporary Australian educational discourse in Chapter IV.4.1.