Policymaking in the field of foreign language teaching has not been given much thought so far. Discussions of policy decisions, therefore, tend to be confused. In this article, a number of fundamental issues regarding planning foreign language teaching on a national level are dealt with. They relate to the levels at which policy decisions may be taken, but in particular to such issues as the role of needs; the choice of which languages to offer and which to learn; and the special role of different educational levels. Examples are drawn from the recent Dutch National Action Programme on Foreign Languages. Insight is also given into how this program was developed and is being implemented at the moment.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
1. J. lo Bianco, National Policy on Languages (Camberra: Commonwealth Department of Education, 1987).
2.
in National Foreign Language Planning: Practices and Perspectives, ed. K. Sajavaara, S. Takala, R. Lambert, and C. Morfit (Jyväskylä: National Institute for Education Research, 1993).
3.
Theo J. M. van Els , “Towards a Foreign Language Teaching Policy for the European Community: A Dutch Perspective,”Language, Culture and Curriculum, 1(1):55-57 (1988).
4.
T. van Els and M. Oud-de Glas, eds., Research into Foreign Language Needs (Augsburg: Universität Augsburg, Augsburger I- & I-Schriften, Bd. 29, 1983).
5.
5. Richterich, ed., Case Studies, p. 4. See also J. Trim, “The Place of Needs Analysis in the Council of Europe Modern Languages Project,” in Research into Foreign Language Needs, ed. van Els and Oud-de Glas, pp. 223-241.
6.
A revised statement of the principles is given by idem, Objectives for Foreign Language Learning, vols. 1 and 2 (Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 1986, 1987).
7.
7. The final report appeared in 1978. For a short introduction, see M. Oud-de Glas, “Foreign Language Needs in the Netherlands,” in Research into Foreign Language Needs, ed. van Els and Oud-de Glas, pp. 151-170.
8.
8. Van Elset al., Applied Linguistics, pp. 164-166; Van Els and Extra, “Foreign and Second Language Teaching,” pp. 103-105.
9.
9. Van Els and Extra, “Foreign and Second Language Teaching,” p. 103.
10.
10. These quotations from a paper by Jean-Pierre van Deth (1985) are cited in a discussion of diversification in van Els, “Towards a Foreign Language Teaching Policy for the European Community,” pp. 59-60.
11.
11. The position of the languages that do not belong to the small group of (unofficial!) languages of communication of the European Community—that is, English, French, and, to a lesser degree, German—is such a sensitive subject that it is difficult to agree upon a common denominator for them. They are not, of course, all “small” or “minor” in the true sense of the word. They are commonly referred to as “les langues moins diffusées et moins enseignées” (the less widespread and less widely taught languages), which has led to the less clumsy coinage “les langues modimes” (the modime languages).
12.
12. Oud-de Glas, “Foreign Language Needs in the Netherlands.”
13.
13. Theo J. M. van Els and Erna W.C.M. van Hest, eds., The Dutch National Action Programme on Foreign Languages: Recommendations and Policy Reactions (Enschede: NAPMVT, 1992).
14.
14. Van Elset al., Applied Linguistics, pp. 170-172.
15.
B. Weltens , The Attrition of French as a Foreign Language (Dordrecht: Foris, 1988).
16.
16. Van Elset al., Applied Linguistics, p. 192.
17.
17. B. Pan and J. Berko Gleason, “The Study of Language Loss: Models and Hypotheses for an Emerging Discipline,”Applied Psycholinguistics, 7:198 (1986).
18.
Richard D. Lambert , International Studies and the Undergraduate (Washington, DC: American Council on Education, 1989).
19.
19. Van Elset al., Applied Linguistics, p. 322.
20.
20. Van Els, “Foreign Language Teaching Policy.”
21.
For the Council of Europe model, see van Ek, Objectives for Foreign Language Learning.
22.
Theo J. M. van Els , “Foreign Language Teaching in the Netherlands, 1880-1940: An Outline of Methodological Developments,” in Aspects de l'histoire de l'enseignement des langues: 1880-1940, ed. Anick Giroud, special issue of Bulletin CILA, pp. 35-47 (1992).
23.
see van Els and van Hest, eds., Dutch National Action Programme. See also RichardD. Lambert, Implications of the New Dutch National Action Plan for American Foreign Language Policy (Washington, DC: National Foreign Language Center, 1991).
24.
See also van Els and Extra, “Foreign and Second Language Teaching,” pp. 108-113; Structures of the Education and Initial Training Systems in the Member States of the European Community (Brussels: EURYDICE and CEDEFOP, 1990).
25.
See also van Els , “Foreign Language Teaching Policy,” p. 53.
26.
26. See Coulmas, Language Policy for the European Community, passim. See also footnote 11 of the present article.
