Why does it matter?

Given the importance of good language policies and practices for creating prosperous and stable societies, we need to identify what constitutes good practice, and develop a framework through which to evaluate it. LRE presents a draft framework, using Council of Europe and EU documents as a starting point.

Who is it for?

The project is targeted at decision makers and practitioners in education, business, public services and the media. We also hope to bring into the debate  the beneficiaries of good language policies and practices - teachers and learners.

What are the benchmarks we are using to compare and evaluate the data?

The questions used in the survey are rooted in EU and Council of Europe conclusions, resolutions, recommendations, and frameworks. A non-exclusive list and summary is included in the  introduction to the study. The full documents are on the websites of the respective organisations. We cover a number of areas addressed in the EU Council Conclusions of November 2011. The data is complemented by in-depth country commentaries written by our in-country experts. 

Which domains are covered by the research?

The research covers 8 domains. Domain 1 is a meta-domain called official documents and databases, which provides information about legislation and policy documents on languages in each country, as well as information about the way that data on linguistic diversity is collected. Domain 2 covers pre-primary education, domain 3 is primary education and domain 4 is secondary education. Domain 5 covers further and higher education, domain 6 covers audiovisual media and press, domain 7 covers public services and spaces, and domain 8 covers business.

How did you do the research at national, city and business level?

For the first four domains reporting at the national level, researchers provided answers on the basis of desk research and expert opinion. For the city-level research a field manual was produced by our research team in Tilburg which gave guidelines for how to conduct the research. This was through questionnaires, interviews and e-mail correspondence with the city authorities, as well as desk research. The data on businesses was collected through questionnaires and telephone interviews.

How did you ensure that the sample size was big enough to generalize?

For further and higher education we have taken small samples - 3 institutions from each country, and this can only give an indication of what is happening. The country commentaries expand on this data. Across all the countries, we have surveyed 69 VET institutions and 65 universities, which gives a good initial overview. For businesses, we again collected a small sample in each country, 24, from 4 sectors - banking, supermarkets, construction and hotels. Overall we collected data from 484 companies across Europe. It is not possible to generalise about individual countries from this, but we can gain insights into trends across Europe. 

What language types are covered?

We decided to conduct research according to language types; national languages, regional or minority languages, foreign languages and immigrant languages. We are aware that these titles are not universally agreed, and that there are overlaps between the categories. 

Who decided on the choice of questions and indicators?

The questions were first developed by our research team in Babylon,  Centre for Studies of the Multilicultural Society in Tilburg, Netherlands. These were then refined in consultation with the international steering group and stakeholders from the relevant domains. The questions and indicators now need to be looked at by a broader group of stakeholders, to be refined and challenged, probably reduced. We are looking forward to that conversation.

Why were the indicators chosen / what is the background of the reasons behind the need for this study?

The questions and indicators were chosen to reflect some of the key issues highlighted in EU and Council of Europe documents - the need to value all languages, to promote the teaching and learning of more languages, to have clear curricula and evaluation criteria for language learning, to have qualified teachers, to support language learning in higher education and business, to support mobility for language and intercultural learning, and so on. As the European Commission has been reviewing the work done over the last 3 years, we thought it was timely to do some research of our own to start a discussion with stakeholders.

How were the countries chosen? Why weren’t all European countries involved?

Participation in the project from a given country depends on whether or not we are able to recruit partners within the timeframe to put in a bid for EC funding, and also whether we have the capacity to support the partner through the local British Council office. The countries that did not take part in the survey will still be able to get involved in knowledge exchange and contribute examples of good practice. They may also decide to evaluate themselves using the LRE framework.

Do the cities selected really represent the country?

The cities do not reflect the whole of a country, but they give an indication how those cities approach multilingualism, the extent to which they are language rich and language friendly. The questions we asked cities represent an initial tool for self-evaluation 

What about regional differences within a country? Or between big cities and rural areas?

A survey like this with 260 values for each country can only capture common practice. It can’t go into great detail and take into consideration this kind of variation and nuance. We hope to trigger follow-up studies which can do this.

How did you score languages and countries? What were the reasons behind scoring?

We haven't produced scores for countries or scored languages against each other. We have presented the findings in each domain in the form of spheres, with bigger spheres representing greater alignment with EU documents or more languages offered. Reseachers were given three options to respond to each question in the questionnaire, with the first option representing closest alignment to EU and COE documents as we interpreted them, the second option less alignment, and the third option lower alignment still.  Where there was doubt about the degree of alignment, the researchers consulted the appropriate experts. All reponses were peer reviewed as was the country commentary, which goes into more depth and explores the context further.

Why don't you show a list of overall country comparisons?

The purpose of the project is knowledge exchange and awareness raising. Scores and comparisons can be misleading as contexts are not easily comparable. 

Is there a risk of judgements of countries and their policies?

The country reports are written by experts and have been peer reviewed. There is no ranking of countries or criticism. Good practice, however, has been highlighted and is captured both in the publication and on the website.

Who wrote the commentaries/essays?

The essays/commentaries have been written by experts in language policy and practice in their country and at European level. They have been peer reviewed.

What stage are you at in the project?

The research phase has been completed and the draft findings are being put out for consultation with stakeholders. Through a series of workshops and consultations later in the year, the findings and the methodology will be discussed, and refinements will be made. The final publication will be in December 2012 and will be launched in London at an international conference. Recommendations at national and European level will be made to policy makers in Brussels in March 2013.

What similar studies exist?

There are many good studies which cover language policies and practices in the EU and Wider Europe. Good sources for these are the European Commission and Council of Europe websites. Eurydice and Eurostat publish data on language diversity in education. The Council of Europe produce excellent individual language policy profiles which are anlaytical in-depth reports. Expert groups regularly bring out studies of specific sectors or domains, and in 2011 a policy handbook for Early Language Learning was published. 

Isn't all this talk about policy academic? Does this really relate to people's lives?

According to our research, over 50% of companies take language skills into consideration when recruiting, so our education systems need to provide good and effective language learning to enhance employability. Multilingual health services can save lives. Europe's prosperity depends on being able to build trust and communicate effectively with international partners in China, India, Latin America, East Asia, Africa and the Middle East. The traditional umbrella languages or linguae francae are not enough to do this.

How is the project funded, who pays for what?

The project is co-funded by the European Commission under its Lifelong Learning Programme. Partners contribute staff time. There are sponsors: Rosetta Stone, Oxford University Press and Cambridge University Press. The British Council has also made a contribution and manages the project.

How was the tender awarded?

The British Council and partners are awarded EU contracts and co-funding grants through competitive tenders, and they were selected for this project for their diversity, good coverage across Europe, and the value for money to the EC. The project was also commended for being innovative in going beyond the education domain.

What timeframe does this measure?

The study reflects the current situation in all the countries/regions surveyed. The commentary by each country team gives a historical perspective

How many countries are involved?

15 EU member states, plus Bosnia and Herzegovina, Switzerland and Ukraine. There are 3 profiles for Spain 1) Spain (Madrid, Seville, Valencia) 2) Catalonia and 3) Basque Country. There are 4 profiles for the UK (England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales) and for the Netherlands there is a separate regional profile for Friesland.

What will happen next?

The draft findings will be discussed by groups of stakeholders and we will form networks in each country and across Europe to discuss the indicators, the methodology and the findings. The network will make recommendations to policy makers on the basis of the findings and their own knowledge of the current language policy context.

Is the British Council supportive of multilingualism?

YES!  Individuals and societies that speak more languages benefit both culturally and economically.