Search

Transformations associated with the increasing speed, scale, and complexity of mobilities, together with the information technology revolution, have changed the demography of most countries of the world and brought about accompanying social, cultural, and economic shifts (Heugh, 2013). This complex diversity has changed the very nature of communication within and across languages, in society in general, and in education. These changes in turn require a reconceptualization of our approach to language/s education in ways that recognize a diversity of goals for people from different backgrounds, people who are learning a variety of languages in diverse settings and who may be interested in developing different capabilities and achieving different outcomes. In this article, we address the reconceptualization of the goals and outcomes of learning additional languages and processes for their formulation and realization. We will make explicit the educational values that underpin our position. Recognizing the immense diversity that the learning of additional languages in diverse contexts encompasses, our consideration is necessarily conceptual. The point of departure for our discussion is communicative language teaching, the dominant paradigm for language teaching for the past 40 years. We briefly trace its historical development and provide an account of some of the conceptual and theoretical expansions since its initial formulation. In light of this expansion we then discuss goals for learning additional languages by: (a) reaffirming the multilingual character of communication and learning to communicate, focusing on the exchange of meaning, (b) (re-)inserting the importance of personal development and aesthetics, and (c) recognizing the centrality of reflectivity and reflexivity in communication and learning to communicate. We conclude with a set of principles that are intended to capture the expanded nature of goals and their rendering for the purposes of teaching and learning.

Understanding and working with the complexity of second language learning and use in an intercultural orientation necessitates a re-examination of the different theories of learning that inform the different schools of second language acquisition (SLA). This re-examination takes place in a context where explicitly conceptualizing the nature of learning in SLA has not been sufficiently foregrounded. It also necessitates understanding how language itself, as the substance or object of learning a second language, is conceptualized. Neither the theorization of learning, nor of language on its own is sufficient to provide an adequate account of second language learning for contemporary times. In particular, this paper argues that views of language and learning derived solely from the field of (applied) linguistics are not sufficient to address the complex language learning needs of contemporary times and that a more interdisciplinary approach to language and learning is required. It is this interdisciplinary understanding that provides the basis for views of both language and learning that we consider to be necessary within an intercultural orientation. In particular, the paper will emphasize the interpretative nature of learning and the ways that such a view contributes to our understanding of learning in language education. From this perspective, the process of learning to communicate in a second language can be characterized as involving both a "moving between" linguistic and cultural systems and an acknowledgement of the role of mutual interpretation in exchanging meanings through the acts of both communicating and learning.

The increasing influence of sociocultural theories of learning on assessment practices in second language education necessitates an expansion of the knowledge base that teacher-assessors need to develop (what teachers need to know) and related changes in the processes of language teacher education (how they learn and develop it). Teacher assessors need to acquire concepts from diverse assessment paradigms; they need to learn to use these concepts in developing, using and analysing assessment procedures and results; they need to exercise critical perspectives on their own assessment practices for particular purposes in diverse contexts, especially in seeking to do justice to all in education. In this paper I argue that, to develop language assessment literacy with the dual goals of transforming teacher assessment practices and developing teacher understanding of the phenomenon of assessment itself and themselves as assessors, it is necessary to reconsider both the knowledge base and the complex processes of language teacher education. I draw on projects I have conducted on developing and investigating teacher understanding and practices in second language assessment, to discuss the need to work with the often tacit preconceptions, beliefs, understandings and world-views about assessment that teacher-assessors bring to teacher professional learning programs and that inform their conceptualizations, interpretations, judgments and decisions in assessment. I discuss the need in developing language assessment literacy for processes that develop teacher-assessors' capability to explore and evaluate their own preconceptions so as to become aware of how they interpret their own assessment practices and their students' second language learning. Through these processes they develop a deeper understanding of the interpretive nature of assessment and their own self-awareness as assessors. (Contains 1 note.)

Developing curricula for languages in the context of the Australian Curriculum is a complex undertaking that needs to address a number of demands. These include: the nature of language-and-culture learning for contemporary times within an increasingly diverse linguistic and cultural world; the goals of mainstream education and the "given" curriculum constructs that pertain to the curriculum as a whole and languages curricula as a part of that whole; the process of transposing concepts from current research into a design for language learning for diverse learners and diverse languages; and the need to achieve jurisdictional and professional consensus about the nature and extent of change that is sustainable and productive for the present and into the future. Drawing on these demands and my experience as an actor in the process of development, I discuss the rationale for and the major features of the design for languages. I conclude with a reflection on the evolving process of curriculum development and particularly on implications for teachers.

In school languages education in Australia at present there is an increasing diversity of languages and learners learning particular languages that results from a greater global movement of students. This diversity builds on a long-established profile of diversity that reflects the migration history of Australia. It stands in sharp contrast to the force of standardisation in education in general and in the history of the development of state and national frameworks for the learning of languages K-12 in Australia and indeed beyond. These frameworks have characteristically generalised across diverse languages, diverse learner groups and diverse program conditions, in particular, the amount of time made available for language learning. In addition, in the absence of empirical studies of learner achievements in learning particular languages over time, the development of such frameworks has drawn primarily on internationally available language proficiency descriptions [such as the American Council for the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL), the International Second Language Proficiency Rating Scale (ISLPR), and more recently the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR)] that were developed primarily to serve reporting and credentialing rather than learning purposes. Drawing on a description of the current context of linguistic and cultural diversity and on a brief characterisation of the history of curriculum and assessment framework development for the languages area, I provide a rationale for acknowledging in the development and use of frameworks (i.e. descriptions of achievements) the diversity of languages that comprise the languages learning area in Australia and, in particular, the diverse learner groups who come to their learning with diverse experiences of learning and using particular languages. The Student Achievement in Asian Languages Education (SAALE) study provides an example of the development of descriptions of achievement that are sensitive to these dimensions of context. I discuss the rationale for such context-sensitive descriptions in relation to their potential purposes and uses at the language policy and planning and educational systems level, at the teaching and learning level, and in ongoing research.

The evaluation of the Professional Standards Project (PSP) highlights its success both as a set of resources that provided the catalyst for professional conversations and learning and the National and State processes of facilitation of these conversations and learning, as well as the classroom-based investigations undertaken by teachers. For the Australian Federation of Modern Language Teachers Associations (AFMLTA) the PSP provided the necessary National and State processes for inviting teachers of languages to begin to experiment with using the professional teaching standards that had been developed by them, as the profession, for the profession. As such, it became a common activity for all State/Territory MLTAs that allowed for ongoing learning about the actual use of the professional standards. As one who has been and continues to be intimately involved in the development of the professional standards themselves and the PSP and allied projects including the Intercultural Language Teaching and Learning in Practice (ILTLP) Project and the project to develop a guide for the teaching and learning languages, the author engages in a moment of reflection. In so doing, she focuses on two aspects: (1) the professional standards; and (2) teachers, their lifeworlds, their interpretations of meaning, and effecting change.

Teachers of languages, as well as educators in general and employers, increasingly recognise the importance of developing intercultural capability. This recognition, however, brings the question of how this is evidenced as an outcome of learning. The assessment of this capability poses a range of theoretical and practical challenges. I begin with a description of languages learning within an intercultural orientation and a model for understanding assessment. I then discuss issues of conceptualising and defining the construct, as integral to the process of assessment. Next, I consider issues in eliciting intercultural capability in a proposed framework that includes assessment as both communicative performance (elicited in "critical moments") and meta-awareness (elicited in commentaries). To conclude, I discuss issues related to identifying and judging evidence of the development of the intercultural capability and warranting the inferences made about students' developing understanding. The discussion is based on the experience of ongoing studies investigating the assessment of the intercultural capability in learning languages and in international education.

This paper provides background to considering how to assess intercultural language learning. It describes why traditional views of assessment are not sufficient. Essentially, assessing intercultural language learning requires assessment of both students' performance of communication in the target language and how they understand and explain the intercultural (that is, the movement between two languages and cultures) to themselves. A set of features of assessment of students' intercultural capability is included.

This paper describes the need to reconceptualise teaching and learning programs for intercultural language learning. The shift is from concepts such as "content" and its "coverage" (intended to address "learner needs and interests") to developing programs focused on meaning making in interaction and on learners as meaning makers. Specific questions are provided to stimulate a reconsideration of programming practices.

The Intercultural Language Teaching and Learning in Practice (ILTLP) Project is a large scale, national professional learning program designed to extend the understanding and practice of language teachers with regard to intercultural language learning. The latter is an orientation to language learning that underpins the National Statement and Plan for Languages Education in Australian Schools (MCEETYA, 2005). This paper describes the ILTLP Project, its design, goals, and outcomes. It offers a rationale for and a description of an intercultural orientation.

The history of the role of assessment in policy-making for languages education in Australia over the past 20 years is characterised by a complex and shifting interface between language policy, curriculum and assessment. Three phases can be identified during which significant changes occur. These highlight an ongoing struggle for legitimacy for languages as an area of study and for its intrinsic diversity. Common themes in this account include the relationship and tensions between (1) language policy and general educational policy, (2) national and State/Territory-based educational developments in Australia, and (3) the influence and consequences of both inclusion and exclusion from nationwide assessment in education. The paper demonstrates the ways in which the dominant discourses at particular moments of history shape educational policies and practices which, in turn, operate to shape the place and status of languages learning in school education of children.

This paper addresses changing meanings attached to the concept of "community" in languages education in the school setting in Australia. The change consists of a shift from "community" as a necessary definitional category, created in the mid 1970s to mark the recognition of languages other than English used in the Australian community, to a recognition, in the current context of increasing mobility of people and ideas, of the need to problematise the concept of "community" towards working with the complexity of the lived, dynamic languages and cultures in the repertoires of students. Intercultural language learning is discussed as a way of thinking about communities in languages education in current times.

Drawing on two major developments in languages education, namely communicative language teaching and frameworks of outcomes and standards, this address presents a reflection on "words" as the most basic resource of language teachers, and the way in which they are always open to interpretation and reinterpretation over time. With both developments, the focus has been on seeking to institute educational changes without considering the process of interpretation and the interpretive frames of reference that teachers bring to their work. This approach to development fails to address not only the central role of teachers as interpreters and makers of their own meanings that guide their actions, but also the ongoing intellectual project of developing understanding in and through education.

In addressing the theme of transition in learning languages, describes aspects of three projects. Data are drawn from the projects to highlight issues in context, culture, and communication and principles that support transition and continuity in learning languages. (Author/VWL)

Addresses the following issues as they relate to the concept of standards in education: the content of standards, defining standards, setting standards, and using standards. (Author/VWL)

Suggests that the Australian Language Levels (ALL Guidelines should combine the sociocultural goals with the concept of cultural awareness and integrate them with the concept of intercultural goals at all stages of language learning. (Author/VWL)

Summarizes the Australian Language Levels (ALL) guidelines, originally defined in 1988, from the perspective of a professional who helped develop them and has examined their application over a period of years. Highlights aims in writing the guidelines, key concepts, goals and outcomes, and student evaluation and teacher training, and considers some possible refinements. (MSE)

Explores questions regarding the knowledge and proficiency level expected of second-language learners, the acquisition of valued knowledge, the relationship between cognition and language learning, the nature of "progress," and quality curriculum design. These questions are discussed in reference to the development in Australia of the Statement and Profile for Languages Other than English. (24 references) (Author/CK)

Addresses the question of the relationship between the "Australian Language Levels (ALL) Guidelines" and current directions in language teaching and learning in Australia. Presents observations about these guidelines and their current status and use and relates these observations to the current draft of the "National Statement and Profile for Languages K-12 (NSPL)." (27 references) (Author/CK)