Going back to the Leathes Report of 1918, a long series of policy documents have outlined the clear national benefits of second language acquisition and associated intercultural learning, not least in terms of capabilities in the areas of defence and diplomacy or the economy and trade. There has been much less recognition, however, of the ways in which pre-existing multilingual resources of the UK might more actively complement language skills acquired in more formal education contexts.
One of the positive outcomes of the radical transformations in language education in recent years has been the erosion of boundaries (and hierarchies) between different language areas. This has been accompanied by increased permeability between formal and informal language acquisition, and a more holistic commitment to the value of multilingualism as the hallmark of a society that is at once inclusive and outward-looking.
Linking everyday language use in wider society with questions of language education across the pipeline addresses two significant and interconnected impediments. On the one hand, such an approach demonstrates a disconnect between those languages and cultures taught and studied in the classroom, and the broader linguistic repertoires of the UK. On the other hand, it allows us to acknowledge the deep-seated tendency to view multilingualism as a challenge to be resolved rather than an opportunity which we should capitalise more actively.
This is particularly true in the area of primary education: linguistically superdiverse classrooms, to which pupils bring a multitude of different home languages other than English, require us to find ways of nurturing this linguistic diversity, which is of great value for individuals, communities and wider society, while ensuring that learners are also able to acquire the high standard of English they will need in their future lives.
A number of home, heritage and community languages (HHCLs) are also major world languages in their own right – subjects in which there is a perceived deficit in capacity in formal education. There have been initiatives that demonstrate the political will to acknowledge and address this mismatch. For instance, Scotland’s 1+2 policy, which entitles pupils to start a first additional language from P1 and to continue this until the end of secondary education, includes Cantonese, Mandarin and Urdu among the eight languages that pupils can take up to national qualification level.
Of course, such a significant rethinking of language offerings requires considerable resources and other major reforms, including in Initial Teacher Education. Then there is the further challenge of ensuring a continued pipeline, not least in terms of the provision of university qualifications in these subjects. Such an aspiration must be part of a longer-term commitment to reversing the decline of language education at the degree level, expanding provision in lesser-taught but strategically important languages, and addressing the emergence of cold spots where learners are prevented from studying languages within a reasonable distance from home.
Acknowledge the deep-seated tendency to view multilingualism as a challenge to be resolved rather than an opportunity which we should capitalize on more actively.
In the meantime, however, there are a number of shorter-term, practical measures that would allow us to begin to link more active acknowledgement of the importance of HHCLs with a broader and more inclusive commitment to multilingual learning in the UK.
First, we should ensure that learners’ pre-existing linguistic capabilities are reflected more purposefully in language pedagogy. An excellent start would be to cultivate multilingual awareness at KS2 alongside the progress in a single language currently required by the national curriculum. This would permit pupils with languages other than English to appreciate the ways in which their bilingualism matters, and foster a whole-school understanding of how important it is to encourage curiosity about a range of languages.
Secondly, while the number of registrations in HHCLs at GCSE has increased, these numbers remain relatively low, such that alternative qualifications are required. Drawing on earlier initiatives such as the Languages Ladder, stepped qualifications that allow multilingual speakers a flexible approach to accrediting their skills would not only encourage engagement with more active formal language learning, but also raise awareness of the value of these languages, both in the communities in which they are spoken, and in wider society.
Finally, there would be numerous practical and educational benefits to a joined up, cross-sectoral approach to language education that incentivised and resourced connections between schools, universities, colleges and complimentary education in HHCLs. For example, formal education establishments could provide classrooms and exam facilities for complimentary schools. Such an approach would permit closer collaboration and contribute to a more holistic approach to languages in the UK from which we would all benefit, individually and collectively, in multiple ways.
