Monika Jezak
University of Ottawa
I have been, on numerous occasions, an advisor on the Niveaux de compétence linguistique canadiens (NCLC) since 2009, but it was my research residency at the Centre for Canadian Language Benchmarks (CCLB) in the fall of 2015 that really brought home to me the scope, value, and quality of the Benchmarks project. The great efforts involved in the development of the Canadian Language Benchmarks (CLB) and the Niveaux de compétence linguistique canadiens (NCLC) gave birth to the highly efficient system of official language training that we know today. Indeed, as I was perusing documents related to the French and English standards, and various research papers, I came to realize that this success depended on many factors, namely: twenty years of outstanding, yet understated work by leading Canadian scholars (often not even directly acknowledged in the published documents); a steady commitment by government and non government stakeholders at the federal, provincial, and local levels; and, last but not least, unconditional commitment and caring on the part of an invested community of practice.
Modern Canada has a humanist view of immigrant integration and prides itself on being a welcoming land. As recently as March 6, 2016, during an interview with Lara Logan on the American television program 60 minutes, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stated that “accepting 25,000 Syrian refugees does right by the values that define us as a nation,” and that “welcoming those immigrants is not just about welcoming 25,000 Syrian refugees, it’s welcoming 25,000 new Canadians.” These statements fall in line with the last fifty years of Canadian non-discriminatory immigration policy and implicitly underline the importance of immigrant access to official languages: a necessary, even though not sufficient, means to successful integration, as underscored in the CCLB motto: Language is the key.
It is towards this humanist goal that generations of Canadian researchers and practitioners have offered their knowledge, expertise, hard work, creativity, and problem-solving ingenuity. This book is a testimony to the journey that led to the present state of Benchmarks-related language training, and a tribute to all those who contributed to the excellence of this Canadian product.
This book is intended for broad readership. Given the dearth of comprehensive appraisals of the Canadian Benchmark system, it is meant as a basic academic reference for discussion, in the Canadian context, of language policy, linguistic integration of adult migrants, second language teacher education, and task-based language learning. It is relevant to Canadian researchers, graduate and undergraduate students, policy-makers, and various second language training stakeholders (administrators, instructors, assessors, curriculum and teaching material designers, and others). Finally, the book is of relevance internationally as well, in an ongoing reflection in the community of researchers and political decision-makers concerned with similar products abroad, such as the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) and the ACTFL guidelines.
The book guides the reader through a reflection on the past, present, and future of the Canadian Benchmarks. It begins with a critical overview of the political and historical context that led to the present international and national positioning of the framework. It continues with its theoretical grounding, and proceeds with a description of current practices, tools, and resources. The conclusion builds on the information provided in preceding chapters to offer an outlook into the framework’s future possibilities for growth.
In the introductory chapter, Enrica Piccardo of the University of Toronto, OISE, and I overview the past and present of the Canadian language framework for adult immigrants. We deemed it necessary to re-state the definition and the main features of both the CLB and the NCLC, as well as to trace the historical and the political context that led to the development of these Canadian standards. We stressed also the fact that they do not operate presently in a vacuum: they are indeed a part of a global education market which they share with other language frameworks. We used the concept of “glocalization” to explain the impact of this new dynamic on the positioning of the CLB and the NCLC.
The second chapter is by Monique Bournot-Trites of the University of British Columbia, who was a project lead for the development of the common theoretical framework for both English-and French-language standards. This chapter gives an overview of the CLB- and NCLC-related research. In particular, it outlines a design-based methodology used in various CCLB projects, and sheds light on the meticulous validation process that led to the common theoretical framework and to the scale-building.
The third chapter, by Eve Haque and Antonella Valeo of York University, gives voice to the CLB teachers. Using data gathered through various surveys, the authors reflect on the Benchmarks-related classroom and testing practices, teaching methodologies and contexts, as well as teacher training. They do a critical appraisal of the notion of continuum of development and of the task as the backbone of teaching in the CLB. Finally, and my personal favourite, the authors draw on the interview material to show how the CLB may inform teachers’ everyday classroom practices.
The fourth and the fifth chapters provide an overview of CLBand NCLC-related materials, tools, and resources for teaching and assessment. The author of chapter four is Anne Senior, while chapter five was written by Élissa Beaulieu and Morgan Le Thiec, the CLB and NCLC specialists respectively. What is striking in comparing the chapters is the concurrent parallelism yet asymmetry of the two linguistic contexts. On the one hand, almost all assessment tools, teaching materials, training programs, and learning support resources, have their equivalent in French and English. On the other hand, the CLB benefit from the majority-language context, with a large number of learners in ESL classes and a multitude of programs, while the NCLC-related teaching is scattered across the country, and altogether inconspicuous. Consequently, the CLB get priority in developing tools and resources, with the French side translating or adapting the existing English material. The same goes for teacher status and training, where a much more robust system was developed on the English side, resulting, over the last twenty years, in a much stronger community of practice, and a nationwide, recognizable, “Benchmarks teaching culture.” Clearly, both CLB- and NCLC-related teaching and assessment face challenges for the future and will need nurturing to continue their growth in Canada. However, given the new Canadian demographics where Francophone and Francophile immigration is necessary for the survival of French communities outside of Quebec,1 the NCLC has yet to gain proper recognition for the crucial role it plays in those particular French minority contexts.
In the concluding chapter, Samira ElAtia offers a bold outlook on the future of the CLB, the NCLC, and the CCLB, proposing various scenarios to branch the Benchmarks out into the domains of higher education, essential skills, literacy, and workplace training, as well as international and indigenous languages. The choice of Samira to write a conclusion was highly symbolic, since she works at an institution loaded with Benchmarks history, the English Language Program of the University of Alberta where Dr. Pawlikowska-Smith drafted a version of the CLB in 2000.
As mentioned before, the chapters in this book are meant to be a tribute to the excellence of Canadian policy, research, and practice in official language training for adult immigrants. The recognition of exceptional achievements does not mean there were no past failures, or present and future challenges. The standardization of official language teaching and assessment (much as it is a salient trait of modern education markets) is an ongoing struggle, and shall be seen, as proposed by Enrica Piccardo, as a “non-finito” process.2 A “non finito” is a sculpting technique where parts of the sculpture remain as raw stone. In Michelangelo’s High Renaissance Italy, the non-finished aspect of the sculpture was perceived as the artists’ failure. However, some three hundred years later, another artist, Rodin, prided himself on his non-finitos, making them his artistic trademark. It will be up to the readers to approach the material presented in this book with the eyes of Michelangelo or Rodin.
Enjoy!
1 Fraser, Graham, and François Boileau. 2014. Agir maintenant pour l’avenir des communautés francophones : pallier le déséquilibre en immigration. Ottawa : Ministre des Travaux publics et des Services gouvernementaux Canada. 38 pages.
2 Piccardo, Enrica, 2012. “Le Cadre européen de référence au-delà de l’Europe, un outil confronté à son propre succès. Quelles conséquences possibles ? Quels effets de retour ?” Symposium Échelles de compétence en langue additionnelle: outils en transition. ACLA annual conference, Waterloo, Ontario.