Proposal for second-language-education reform in Ontario

[Machjo]

So then you are proposing discrimination?

Yes, I am. But to be more precise, we could call it counter-discrimination. After all, isn't giving native English-speakers an unfair advantage in international aviation discriminatory to all other language communities? Isn't adopting French and English as Canada's official languages discriminatory to Canada's indigenous languages? Isn't adopting six official languages at the UN level and then forcing all other language groups to learn one of those six privileged languages discriminatory?

So, Liberalman, does it not make sense that to be fair, either no law is discriminatory or, if we insist on discriminatory laws, that we establish counter-discriminatory laws to balance them out? Or do you only care about privileging your own ethnic language?

 

[Machjo]

By the way, Lou Garu. yesterday you mentioned you were going to read more into it. I'd certainly be curious as to your ideas on the proposal and how you might improve on it.

And Liberalman, I'd be open to any suggestion of your too.

 

[Machjo]

And Brian Barker, thanks for the clip. By the way, would you have any recommendations on the proposal made in this thread? It's still in its infancy and I'd certainly be open to ideas on how to polish it up.

 

[Machjo]

As for Liberalman, seeing that you oppose discrimination, does that mean you'd be in favour of allowing each school to choose both its language of instruction and its second language as per market demand?

That could lead to linguistic chaos in society after a generation.

 

[Machjo]

And just another point for Liberalman. The Proposal above would actually lead to less discrimination than now seeing that it would allow each school to teach the second-language of its choice from among any of the world's languages, unlike now where it is conferred on ly on some schools as per the local school board, with most schools having to teach French as a second-language.

As for the non-state-onwed schools that choose to participate in the voucher programme by applying directly to the MoE, they'd be required to at least offer Esperanto and the local indigenous language, but would still not be required necessarily to make them compulsory, and would still be free to offer other languages if they wish, with the parents being free to choose. If anything, this proposal would grant schools more freedom than they do now overall.

 

[Lou Garu]

Yes, I am. But to be more precise, we could call it counter-discrimination. After all, isn't giving native English-speakers an unfair advantage in international aviation discriminatory to all other language communities? Isn't adopting French and English as Canada's official languages discriminatory to Canada's indigenous languages? Isn't adopting six official languages at the UN level and then forcing all other language groups to learn one of those six privileged languages discriminatory?

So, Liberalman, does it not make sense that to be fair, either no law is discriminatory or, if we insist on discriminatory laws, that we establish counter-discriminatory laws to balance them out? Or do you only care about privileging your own ethnic language?

If THIS doesn't illustrate a fundamental problem with Language ,then I can't think of a better one, I tell Liberalman "no" flat out,and you say "yes" , both to the question regarding discrimination, (your answer is better ,btw) .It was a matter of perception based on "how" the question was asked plus on "what" the question asked.
This is somewhat based on regionality, cultural mind set, both are variations I tend to appreciate. Nor do I expect (or hope ) to see change anytime soon.

Reading,....t'was done superficially, some details on Esperanto I wasn't aware of ( none critical ) ,Umm the state of Sign in the world I hadn't even thought of ( my bad).And I had NO clue that Sign had been used as a jumpstart for children ( neat that ).The forth one ,no, I need more coffee for that one, but I will before end of day.

Suggestions ?!?! I don't have any yet , not even sure It needs one yet , sorta early days I end to think.
In anycase I will be back /around.....till then

 

[lingosteve2]

I completely agree with the original proposal as I understand it. That is, provide language learning choice in our schools, and make sure to offer native languages. My reasons are the following.
1) If the learner can choose the language to learn he/she will be motivated and be more likely to learn.
2) We should support our aboriginal languages. They only exist in Canada. They are unique. With new web based resources we only need speakers to record their voices and transcribe these. We do not need a typical Canadian government trough of money to be set up for all the consultants to come and slurp up the "funding".
3) The lack of teachers is not an issue. Ample resources are available via the web that are in most cases far superior to school language programs, which have been spectacularly ineffective in Canada.

 

[Machjo]

I completely agree with the original proposal as I understand it. That is, provide language learning choice in our schools, and make sure to offer native languages.

My apologies if I led to a misundertanding. As for making sure to offer native languages, the proposal above would not do that except on reserves (which are under federal juristdiction anyway) and maybe other communities with strong indigenous presence. After all, there is nothing in the proposal above that would require any school participating in the voucher programme to teach the local indigenous language. Sure it would require non-state-owned schools that choose to participate in the voucher programme to offer the local indigenous language, but that does not necessarily equate with compelling them to teach it if no parent is interested. Also, there is nothing in it requiring any private school to participate in the voucher programme. Overall, the proposal is very moderate, perhaps even too moderate for my own tase, but what I believe might be a reasonable compromise. What I would hope for it to do though would to to at least give the local indigenous languages some symbolic recognition under the law and to remove any possible legal obstacle to the development of these languages. That's a far cry from 'making sure to offer native languages', but at least it might increase the chances of native languages, which would still be a step in the right direction at least.

My reasons are the following.
1) If the learner can choose the language to learn he/she will be motivated and be more likely to learn.

True. In fact, recent research has in fact proven that intrinsic motivation is an important part of success in second-language learning.

2) We should support our aboriginal languages. They only exist in Canada. They are unique. With new web based resources we only need speakers to record their voices and transcribe these. We do not need a typical Canadian government trough of money to be set up for all the consultants to come and slurp up the "funding".

I'm not sure I get the thrust of your argument here, but based on what I understnd of it, I think I agree with you in principle.

3) The lack of teachers is not an issue. Ample resources are available via the web that are in most cases far superior to school language programs, which have been spectacularly ineffective in Canada.

For children, teachers are indispensable as a human motivational face in the classroom. But yes, technology could certianly offer its assistance to the teachers.

 

[Machjo]

Another thing I'd aimed to do was to come up with a policy that was easy enough for most to understand without needing a law degree yet still comprehensive enough to satisfy the requirements of many international human rights documents.

 

[Machjo]

resources are available via the web that are in most cases far superior to school language programs, which have been spectacularly ineffective in Canada.

Concerning your comment about second-language policies having proven to be spectacularly ineffective in Canada, that is not unique to Canada. If you look at the statistics for Europe, the myth of the multi-lingual European will be shattered quickly. The truth of the matter is that most languages are difficult to learn no matter what system is adopted. Europe is facing the same problems Canada is in this regard, and that's one reason a number of European ministries of education have added Esperanto to the list of languages that can be chosen to fulfil graduation requirements in recent years.

 

[Lou Garu]

These are for you to read, Machjo

http://www3.unesco.org/iycp/uk/uk_visu_projet.asp?Proj=00341
Culture of Peace Project and Resources


wiki :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_language

and Esperanto is still the best bet

 

[Machjo]

These are for you to read, Machjo

http://www3.unesco.org/iycp/uk/uk_visu_projet.asp?Proj=00341
Culture of Peace Project and Resources

Thank you.

wiki :Universal language - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and Esperanto is still the best bet

Perhaps. Though I still don't think it would be wise for Canada to promote Esperanto per se at the UN. I think it would be wiser to just promote the idea of a universal auxiliary language without promoting any language in particular. I'd be open to any language the UN should propose, though I wouldn't be surprised if the language chosen should be a language based on Esperanto or some kind of revised Esperanto.

In the mean time, though, I don't see why we couldn't promote Esperanto as a second language in Canada as a solution for the time being.

 

[Lou Garu]

Thank you.




Perhaps. Though I still don't think it would be wise for Canada to promote Esperanto per se at the UN. I think it would be wiser to just promote the idea of a universal auxiliary language without promoting any language in particular. I'd be open to any language the UN should propose, though I wouldn't be surprised if the language chosen should be a language based on Esperanto or some kind of revised Esperanto.

In the mean time, though, I don't see why we couldn't promote Esperanto as a second language in Canada as a solution for the time being.

Present day Esperanto IS the reformed esparanto. There IS a derivitive directly descended called Ido, but has a much smaller base.

I still tend to think however narrowing our sights and going with a "mashup " is a option, just going to take longer than introducing on of the constructed languages.......

 

[Machjo]

Present day Esperanto IS the reformed esparanto. There IS a derivitive directly descended called Ido, but has a much smaller base.

I still tend to think however narrowing our sights and going with a "mashup " is a option, just going to take longer than introducing on of the constructed languages.......

Again, I'd have nothing against Esperanto even in its current form being adopted at the UN. I just don't think it would be wise for Canada to propose that to the UN. For the sake of promoting consultation and avoiding any impression of Canada trying to impose its view, it would make more sense for Canada to promote only the idea of a universal auxiliary language, expressing its support for any language the UN could agree to. If that languaga happen to be Esperanto, then so much the better.

But at a practical level, I don't see why we couldn't promote Esperanto in Ontario's secondary schools for now.

 

[Lou Garu]

Thank you.




Perhaps. Though I still don't think it would be wise for Canada to promote Esperanto per se at the UN. I think it would be wiser to just promote the idea of a universal auxiliary language without promoting any language in particular. I'd be open to any language the UN should propose, though I wouldn't be surprised if the language chosen should be a language based on Esperanto or some kind of revised Esperanto.

In the mean time, though, I don't see why we couldn't promote Esperanto as a second language in Canada as a solution for the time being.[/quot

esperanto.ca and local Bahai's will tell you more than you want to hear about the efforts they made on that.......but once more into the breach.....

 

[Lou Garu]

BTW Muchjo, French became more popular when it became tied to better jobs in the goverment.......thin edge of the wedge and all that........

 

[Machjo]

"but once more into the breach"

?

 

[Machjo]

BTW Muchjo, French became more popular when it became tied to better jobs in the goverment.......thin edge of the wedge and all that........

I agree. Pitically speaning, though, how likely is it that we'd get support for making Canada's indigenous languages official. Highly unlikely in the short term. In fact, even the proposal I made above, as moderate as it is, would likely be a tough sell. At least it woudl have the virtue of raising the market value of indigenous languages in some private schools, perhaps.

 

[Lou Garu]

I agree. Pitically speaning, though, how likely is it that we'd get support for making Canada's indigenous languages official. Highly unlikely in the short term. In fact, even the proposal I made above, as moderate as it is, would likely be a tough sell. At least it woudl have the virtue of raising the market value of indigenous languages in some private schools, perhaps.

Think job security

 

[Machjo]

Think job security

For whom?

The proposal I made above might (and I stress 'might') help create new employment opportunities for those who know the local indigenous language as language teachers. Though even there there would be no guarantee owing the the moderateness of the proposal. But it would be a very modest proposal.