http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/cmlr.66.1.001 - Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:41:21 AM - IP Address:37.44.207.42

Indigenous, Minority, and Heritage Language Education in Canada: Policies, Contexts, and Issues Patricia A. Duff Duanduan Li

In contrast to the plethora of studies published in recent years in The Canadian Modern Language Review and other journals on the teaching and learning of French and English as additional languages in Canada and the teaching of academic content through these languages for second language (L2) learners, considerably less scholarly attention has been paid to education in three other critical educational contexts: Indigenous, minority, and heritage language settings. Yet Canada has a national commitment to education in languages other than English, largely because of the historical status of French in Canada: francophones are the largest linguistic minority nationally, and French is the mother tongue of approximately 22% of Canadians (vs. 58% for English), according to 2006 census data (Statistics Canada, 2007). The remainder of Canadians – approximately 20% of the total of just over 31 million – speak neither English nor French as a mother tongue and are often referred to as ‘allophones’ (Statistics Canada, 2007). National policies have also aimed, in recent years, to be more responsive to the situation and status of Indigenous and other languages that are spoken by many Canadians – or that Canadians aspire to learn, often for reasons of cultural affiliation, personal identity, and connections to both their past (imagined and real) and to their future aspirations for themselves. In addition to the protection and promotion of Canada’s two official languages, English and French, and thus to Canada’s so-called linguistic duality, there has been legislative support for these non-official languages since the late 1960s (see Burnaby, 2008, and Duff, 2008, for recent reviews of language policies and trends in Canada). Although government policies and publications have for several decades referred to the first peoples of Canada as Aboriginal (encompassing North American Indian, Inuit, and Me´tis), as explained by Ball in this issue, Indigenous is now becoming the preferred term in Canada and # 2009 The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 66, 1 (September/septembre), 1–8 doi:10.3138/cmlr.66.1.001

http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/cmlr.66.1.001 - Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:41:21 AM - IP Address:37.44.207.42

2

Duff and Li

internationally, in non-governmental discourse especially. Therefore, like other contributors to this issue, we use the term ‘Indigenous’ instead of ‘Aboriginal’ here unless citing government documents and policies. Learners within and across each of these three categories – Indigenous, minority, and heritage language groups – are, of course, very diverse and have completely different social, cultural, educational, and linguistic histories. They are also far from homogeneous with respect to their educational needs and goals. Some learners come from homes and communities where the ancestral language has a great deal of vitality and support and enjoys a high status and visibility, and have regular exposure to significant numbers of proficient users of the language. Children may grow up hearing, speaking, reading, and writing the language right through to adolescence or adulthood, across both informal and formal settings. In other cases, children and adults may already have shifted to either English or French and may have only latent or partial knowledge of the ancestral language, often in a spoken vernacular, without a full range of literacy skills and with limited knowledge of standard varieties of the language or of the varieties taught in formal educational settings; they may not possess a full range of registers in the language, including academic registers and sociolinguistically differentiated language reflecting different levels of formality and politeness. In more extreme cases, the target language may have very few remaining proficient speakers and few curriculum materials or schooling opportunities and supports to ensure that new generations can learn the language well and use it in their everyday lives, or even occasionally. This introductory article briefly describes the current context for Indigenous language education and research in Canada, then foregrounds the challenges facing francophone minority learners in anglo-dominant contexts, and finally summarizes issues connected with heritage language education in an increasingly culturally and linguistically diverse country. We then discuss the unique contributions of each of the five articles featured in this special issue.

Terminology, policies, and contexts for Indigenous, minority, and heritage language education in Canada Indigenous language education According to Statistics Canada (2008), there are currently more than 1 million self-identified ‘Aboriginal’ (Indigenous) persons in Canada, # 2009 The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 66, 1 (September/septembre), 1–8

http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/cmlr.66.1.001 - Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:41:21 AM - IP Address:37.44.207.42

Policies, Contexts, and Issues

3

just under 4% of the total population. Yet fewer than 30% of Canadian Indigenous people report being able to speak or understand an Indigenous language (often their L2) conversationally; even smaller numbers report it as their mother tongue, the language they first learned and continue to understand, or as their current home language. Unfortunately, Indigenous languages – with the possible exception of Cree, which has the largest number of speakers – continue to lose speakers in Canada with each new census (Norris, 2007; Statistics Canada, 2008). Thus, while new languages and significant numbers of new speakers of existing languages are being added to the evolving Canadian linguistic ecology through changing immigration patterns, others are being removed under the pressures of anglophone or francophone assimilation and globalization. However, many Indigenous communities and educators are working hard to develop programs to help adults and children (re)learn or reconnect with their ancestral languages and knowledge(s), as Sarkar and Metallic’s contribution to this issue demonstrates. The Canadian government now also recognizes the importance of language revitalization for the health and wellbeing of individuals and communities, and is therefore providing support for innovative language immersion programs, language teaching, teacher education, and language documentation and digitization activities – although many current initiatives are also being initiated at the grassroots level, based on local needs and wishes (e.g., Blair, Paskemin, & Laderoute, 2003). Research on language revitalization and maintenance within Indigenous communities, both within and outside Canada, is becoming very visible at present, given the high stakes and dire consequences of not acting to preserve these languages (e.g., Hinton, 2008; Hinton & Hale, 2001; Hornberger, 2008; Reyhner & Lockard, 2009). Increasingly, too, studies are adopting new ‘decolonizing’ Indigenous epistemologies and ways of reporting results that are consistent with local cultural and narrative practices (e.g., Denzin, Lincoln, & Smith, 2008; Smith, 1999). For example, in this issue, Cranmer describes the role of storywriting in Indigenous scholarship in her review of a book on that theme. Minority language education Canada’s two official languages have enjoyed official recognition since Confederation in 1867, but in 1969 the Official Languages Act (OLA) was designed to highlight and legislate support for national bilingualism and the rights of English and French minorities in different regions # 2009 The Canadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 66, 1 (September/septembre), 1–8

http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/cmlr.66.1.001 - Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:41:21 AM - IP Address:37.44.207.42

4

Duff and Li

of Canada to education and services in their first language (L1) (Canadian Heritage, 2009). The OLA also ensures that Canadian students have opportunities to learn both official languages at school, through English or French L2 programs or, alternatively, through intensive or immersion programs, and suggests that there might be economic and not just social, cultural, or political advantages in knowing both languages. Whereas provincial or territorial governments control most curricular matters, official bilingualism policy at the national level affects provincial/territorial practices, funding, and priorities to a certain extent as well. ‘Minority-language instruction’ in Canadian national policy documents (e.g., Canadian Heritage, 2009) generally denotes provisions for L1-medium education at all levels for French-speaking minorities living in English-speaking provinces and for English speakers in Quebec. It also provides support for teaching in the language of the minority. Heritage language education Technically, in Canada the term ‘heritage language’ (HL) refers to languages other than the official languages (English and French) or Indigenous languages (Cummins, 1992). Although there is now considerable interest in policy, research, and professional development in HL education internationally (e.g., Brinton, Kagan, & Bauckus, 2008), Canada has long been a leader in developing pro-active policies and initiatives to support minority and heritage language instruction and maintenance. Indeed, according to Baker (2001), the term ‘heritage language education’ seems to have originated with Canadian programs, despite the existence of comparable programs in the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States that have gone by other names (e.g., community, complementary, ancestral, ethnic, immigrant, minority, original, non-official, or second/third language programs). Given Canada’s historical status as a leader in this area, then, it is surprising that the most recent special issue of CMLR related to HL education in Canada appeared nearly two decades ago (Cummins, 1991). In contrast, in the United States a new online journal, Heritage Language Journal (http://www.heritagelanguages.org), has been published since 2003, and a special issue of the International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism (Hornberger, 2005) featured developments in HL education in the United States and Australia. The Modern Language Journal, that same year, featured a Perspectives section with a series of invited essays and commentaries on heritage language education in the United States (Byrnes, 2005). (See also recent edited # 2009 The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 66, 1 (September/septembre), 1–8

Policies, Contexts, and Issues

5

http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/cmlr.66.1.001 - Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:41:21 AM - IP Address:37.44.207.42

volumes by Kondo-Brown & Brown, 2008; Peyton, Ranard, & McGinnis, 2001; and He & Xiao, 2008. This last volume, on Chinese as a heritage language, is reviewed in this issue by Lester.)

Research across the three linguistic and educational domains: Articles in this special issue Although any one of the three focal linguistic contexts in this current issue would merit an entire separate collection of papers, we have decided instead to look across these domains to highlight interesting developments, insights, and approaches to research in the three contexts. As a result of this decision, and also because of our space constraints, the range of languages, theoretical frameworks, and research methodologies (including approaches to research synthesis) represented is necessarily both selective and partial; we hope, however, that the selection presented here gives an indication of the fuller spectrum of research and contexts that exist. The articles in this issue reflect both quantitative and qualitative research methods and employ both traditional academic discourse for reporting on or synthesizing research and more innovative narrative devices and discourse, including French/English code-switching that mirrors common practice in the communities being discussed (Brogden). As a set, the contributions showcase research on Indigenous L1 and L2 learning in various parts of Canada and with a range of languages and programs, as well as English as second language/dialect for some Indigenous speakers (Ball); French as an L1, and often also a language of subsequent study, for francophone minority communities in Saskatchewan (Brogden); language revitalization efforts in Indigenous communities, such as the Mi’gmaq in Eastern Canada (Sarkar & Metallic); and cross-generational HL maintenance and development in such languages as Spanish (Guardado) and Mandarin Chinese (Comanaru & Noels). The research also collectively represents language education and learning in both urban and rural contexts; in formal creditbearing courses (from kindergarten through university) and in informal home and community contexts; and with young children, young adults, and older (sometimes retired) adults. The authors focus on broader language policy contexts, relevant historical factors, practical issues related to the development and implementation of linguistic and cultural interventions and educational programs for minority groups, social-psychological characteristics of HL learners, and language socialization within family and community groups as well as at school. # 2009 The Canadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 66, 1 (September/septembre), 1–8

http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/cmlr.66.1.001 - Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:41:21 AM - IP Address:37.44.207.42

6

Duff and Li

A theme that runs through most of the articles is the close connection between identity and language learning, especially for minority groups, and the non-linear linguistic trajectories of language/literacy learning for many learners as they learn, forget, shift to other languages, and then perhaps shift back again to a language previously learned. Similarly, authors highlight the principle that the relationship between learners’ first language/literacy learning and their subsequent language/literacy experiences must be examined in tandem in the context of the broader linguistic ecologies in which students dwell and move over time. Ball also stresses the need to look at language learning more holistically, paying attention to such non-linguistic factors as health care; nutrition; suitable housing; early interventions for specialneeds students; and effective, culturally appropriate socialization by caregivers and teachers in order to understand children’s linguistic and academic achievements. Sarkar and Metallic emphasize that learners need a sense of agency in their language learning in order to succeed. Indeed, it is only when the communities in question have a passion for their ancestral/heritage languages and cultures, are resourceful, and can obtain or create appropriate educational or institutional leadership, instruction, and support that language learning is likely to proceed well for individuals and for the communities as a whole. The learners will still likely experience shifts, tensions, or even struggles in their identities in relation to their languages and to their vacillations in language ability, even in the best of circumstances. The research in this special issue is situated cross-nationally (Bell) and, more specifically, from West to East, in British Columbia (Guardado), Alberta (Comanaru & Noels), Saskatchewan (Brogden), and Quebec (Sarkar & Metallic), and is reported in both English and French. Some of the languages being learned, such as Indigenous languages, are relatively vulnerable in terms of the number of remaining speakers with proficiency in those languages and also in relation to local and national linguistic ecologies and the dynamics of language shift and obsolescence. Other target languages, such as French, Mandarin Chinese, and Spanish, are not themselves endangered nationally or internationally; however, the well-documented and insidious forces of subtractive bilingualism within families and schools, especially once children enter public school and encounter more socially dominant and seemingly valued languages, should not be underestimated. Each thematic area represents important, exciting new developments in research on a variety of linguistic and cultural communities. It is our hope that by calling for and publishing articles in these focal areas, we can encourage future issues of this journal and of other # 2009 The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 66, 1 (September/septembre), 1–8

http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/cmlr.66.1.001 - Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:41:21 AM - IP Address:37.44.207.42

Policies, Contexts, and Issues

7

Canadian publications to devote more space to this burgeoning and timely research, reinforcing a recognition of the linguistic diversity and richness of Canada and of its crucial significance in contemporary society and in language education across the lifespan.

References Baker, C. (2001). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism (3rd ed.). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. Blair, H., Paskemin, D., & Laderoute, B. (2003). Preparing Indigenous language advocates, teachers, and researchers in Western Canada. In J. Reyhner, O. Trujillo, R.L. Carrasco, & L. Lockard (Eds.), Nurturing Native languages (pp. 93 –104). Flagstaff: Northern Arizona University. Brinton, D., Kagan, O., & Bauckus, S. (Eds.). (2008). Heritage language education: A new field emerging. New York: Routledge. Burnaby, B. (2008). Language policy and education in Canada. In S. May & N.H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education (2nd ed.): Vol. 1. Language policy and political issues in education (pp. 331–341). New York: Springer. Byrnes, H. (Ed.). (2005). Perspectives: The position of heritage languages in language education policy. Modern Language Journal, 89, 582–616. Canadian Heritage. (2009). Official languages: History of bilingualism in Canada. Retrieved May 15, 2009, from http://canadianheritage.gc.ca/pgm/lo-ol/ pgm/dclo-elm-eng.cfm. Cummins, J. (Ed.). (1991). Heritage languages [Special issue]. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 47(4). Cummins, J. (1992). Heritage language teaching in Canadian schools. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 24, 287 –296. Denzin, N., Lincoln, Y., & Smith, L.T. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of critical and indigenous methodologies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Duff, P. (2008). Heritage language education in Canada. In D. Brinton, O. Kagan, & S. Bauckus (Eds.), Heritage language education: A new field emerging (pp. 71 – 90). New York: Routledge. He, A.W., & Xiao, Y. (Eds.). (2008). Chinese as a heritage language: Fostering rooted world citizenry. Honolulu: National Foreign Language Resource Center. Hinton, L. (2008). Learning and teaching endangered Indigenous languages. In N. Van Deusen-Scholl & N.H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education (2nd ed.): Vol. 4. Second and foreign language education (pp. 157 –167). New York: Springer. # 2009 The Canadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 66, 1 (September/septembre), 1–8

http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/cmlr.66.1.001 - Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:41:21 AM - IP Address:37.44.207.42

8

Duff and Li

Hinton, L., & Hale, K. (Eds.). (2001). The green book of language revitalization in practice. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Hornberger, N.H. (Ed.). (2005). Heritage/community language education: US and Australian perspectives [Special issue]. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 8(2/3). Hornberger, N.H. (Ed.). (2008). Can schools save indigenous languages? Policy and practice on four continents. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Kondo-Brown, K., & Brown, J.D. (Eds.). (2008). Teaching Chinese, Japanese and Korean heritage language students: Curriculum needs, materials, and assessment. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum. Norris, M.J. (2007). Aboriginal languages in Canada: Emerging trends and perspectives on second language acquisition. Canadian Social Trends, 83 (Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 11-008) Peyton, J.K, Ranard, D.A., & McGinnis, S. (Eds.). (2001). Heritage languages in America: Preserving a national resource. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. Reyhner, J., & Lockard, L. (Eds.). (2009). Indigenous language revitalization: Encouragement, guidance and lessons learned. Flagstaff: Northern Arizona University. Smith, L.T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. Dunedin, New Zealand: University of Otago Press. Statistics Canada. (2007). The evolving linguistic portrait, 2006 census. Retrieved June 11, 2009, from http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/english/census06/ analysis/language/pdf/97-555-XIE2006001.pdf (Catalogue no. 97-555-XIE) Statistics Canada. (2008). Aboriginal peoples in Canada in 2006: Inuit, Me´tis and First Nations, 2006 census. Retrieved June 11, 2009, from http://www12. statcan.gc.ca/english/census06/analysis/aboriginal/pdf/ 97-558-XIE2006001.pdf (Catalogue no. 97-558-XIE)

# 2009 The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 66, 1 (September/septembre), 1–8