Bilingual Education in Flanders: Policy and Press Debate (1999–2006)

Bollen, Katrien; Baten, Kristof

doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2010.01089.x

Cited by 16 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While in 1998 the French speaking region (Wallonia) enabled schools to organize bilingual education, in the Dutch speaking region (Flanders) bilingual instruction is still virtually nonexistent. In fact bilingual education in Flanders is only allowed as a scientific experiment and only few projects on this subject have been conducted (Bollen and Baten 2010). The overwhelming social and political pressure for Dutch monolingualism and the aversion to bilingual education in Flanders are related to historically deep-rooted fears against the dominance of French, and the strong presence of the right-wing Flemish-nationalist politics.…”

Section: Turkish Minority In Flanders and The Language Policy Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Speaking Turkish in Belgian Primary Schools: Teacher Beliefs versus Effective Consequences

Ağırdağ¹,

Jordens²,

Houtte³

2014

bilig

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this mixed-method study, we explore teachers' beliefs concerning the use of the Turkish language by Turkish children in Belgian primary schools, and we compare these findings with the effective consequences of language maintenance. The qualitative analyses revealed that teachers have very negative views about the use of the Turkish language, as they believe that speaking the mother tongue is detrimental to academic achievement. These adverse teacher beliefs are not only shaped by the assimilationist policy context in Belgium, but they are also (re)produced and reinforced by interactions between teachers and the Turkish middle-class. Nevertheless, the quantitative analyses with a data of 435 Turkish pupils in 48 schools have shown that there is no evidence that speaking Turkish, at home or at school, harms pupils' academic achievement. However, the negative school culture about the Turkish language causes feelings of rejection and reduces the sense of school belonging for pupils who speak Turkish more frequently at school.

show abstract

Section: Turkish Minority In Flanders and The Language Policy Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Speaking Turkish in Belgian Primary Schools: Teacher Beliefs versus Effective Consequences

Ağırdağ¹,

Jordens²,

Houtte³

2014

bilig

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In spite of the favourable results of studies on MLE and a fairly positive (yet ambiguous) slant in the Flemish media coverage of MLE (Bollen & Baten, 2010), the situation is not likely to change drastically in the near future. In their plea for MLE in Flanders, Mettewie and Housen (2012) stress the importance of flexibility (social, educational, financial but especially political) when trying to implement MLE, and urge policy-makers to maximally build their language-in-education policy onto local (linguistic) resources, in order to meet both global and specific needs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this context, Brisk (2005, p. 20) rightly stresses that 'proponents [of transitional programs] should never lose sight that the goal of education is to develop children and not to defend languages'. In an analysis of the media coverage of bilingual education in Flanders, Bollen and Baten (2010) find a fairly positive bias towards bilingual education, but with a strong tendency to promote it for the majority (i.e. native speakers of Dutch) while rejecting it for minorities (i.e.…”

Section: An Ambivalent Position Towards Multilingualism and Mlementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The reluctance of Flanders to introduce forms of MLE or immersion in its curricula corresponds with the position of Dutch on each of these four levels. Dutch in Flanders has had late standardisation, is perceived to be suffering from language threats -one of the main objections to MLE in Flanders is that is un-Flemish and a threat to the position of Dutch (Bollen & Baten, 2010) -has long been dominated by French and has very strict language legislation.…”

Section: An Ambivalent Position Towards Multilingualism and Mlementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Eliminating social inequality by reinforcing standard language ideology? Language policy for Dutch in Flemish schools

Delarue

Caluwe

2014

Current Issues in Language Planning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flanders, the northern, Dutch-speaking part of Belgium, is experiencing growing intraand interlingual diversity. On the intralingual level, Tussentaal ('in-between-language') has emerged as a cluster of intermediate varieties between the Flemish dialects and Standard Dutch, gradually becoming the colloquial language. At the same time, Flanders is encountering increasing numbers of immigrants and their languages. This paper analyses the way Flemish language-in-education policy deals with perceived problems of substandardisation and multilingualism, in order to create equal opportunities for all pupils, regardless of their native language or social background. Both the policy and the measures it proposes are strongly influenced by different, yet intertwined ideologies of standardisation and monolingualism. By propagating Standard Dutch as the only acceptable language and by denying all forms of language diversity, Flemish language-in-education policy not only fails to create equal opportunities, but also reinforces ideologies that maintain inequality. Instead, language policy should be open towards language diversity, taking the role of teachers in forming and implementing policies into consideration.Keywords: language-in-education policy; standard language ideology; monolingualism; social inequality; Dutch in Flanders; Tussentaal Language policy: ideology, planning and practice Language policies are present in some form in all domains of society (Ricento, 2006). It is in the domain of education, however, that such policies have the most impact on the members of society, as language-in-education policies play a paramount role in how a society articulates and plans for the future of its members (Liddicoat, 2013). Official documents are the most overt and articulated forms of language policy, but policies also exist in more covert forms, underlying the practices of language use and language learning in education. As such, policies discuss societal beliefs and attitudes about the value of languages or language varieties: which languages or language varieties are considered to have the most value regarding future societal success for pupils, and subsequently have a place in the classroom? This inextricable link between policy and society is used by Djité (1994) to discern between two kinds of processes in language policy: (i) processes at the societal level, where certain problems (e.g. social inequality) are formulated, together with possible solutions and (ii) at the linguistic level, where the linguistic norms which a community will use (or is expected to use) are selected.

show abstract

“…In his report, Manço (2002) refers to a study conducted by Liege University in 1993 and mentions that in Flanders, Turkish people mostly live in Limburg, Ghent and in Antwerp and of all Turks-directed work places in Belgium, 18 % of them is in Limburg, 11 % of them is in Ghent and 10 % of them is in Antwerp. (Bollen and Baten 2010). Speakers of other languages are labeled as 'people who refuse to learn Dutch' and they are increasingly excluded from the welfare policies such as social housing.…”

Section: Flemish Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determinants of Language Use and Attitudes among Turkish Speakers in Flanders: A Focus on Generational Difference

Altınkamış

Ağırdağ²

2014

bilig

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The focus of this research is Turkish immigrants' language usepreference and language attitudes towards their first language, Turkish, in terms of intergenerational differences in the Flemish speaking part of Belgium. Borrowing the procedure by Yagmur and van de Vijver (2012), 136 participants were given "The Language Use, Choice and Preference Scale" and "The Attitudes to Turkish Language Scale". As we hypothesized that social class, place of birth, gender and age would be related to attitudes to Turkish, they were considered as independent variables in the study. The results indicated that generation with length of residence was significantly associated with some variables. Also, social class was found to be a significant contributor to respondents' attitudes towards Turkish. Gender was not a relevant category in terms of all language outcomes.

show abstract

Bilingual Education in Flanders: Policy and Press Debate (1999–2006)

Cited by 16 publications

References 20 publications

Speaking Turkish in Belgian Primary Schools: Teacher Beliefs versus Effective Consequences

Speaking Turkish in Belgian Primary Schools: Teacher Beliefs versus Effective Consequences

Eliminating social inequality by reinforcing standard language ideology? Language policy for Dutch in Flemish schools

Determinants of Language Use and Attitudes among Turkish Speakers in Flanders: A Focus on Generational Difference

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About