Search

Due to the growing status of English as the language of international communication, English immersion programs have been on the rise in China and the rest of the world. Though there has been much discussion on the theoretical and practical characteristics and features of immersion, current models are not adequate for explaining the language-driven English immersion programs in the English as a Foreign Language (EFL) context such as China. Drawing on interviews, observations and documentary data and test scores gathered during a longitudinal study of a public-funded foreign languages school in China, this paper reports on a Sino-Canadian collaborative educational program and concludes that in addition to exhibiting most of the core features of immersion programs suggested by Swain and Johnson (1997), the program revealed several noteworthy emerging characteristics. The study argues for the importance of re-contextualizing Swain and Johnson's model of immersion to address the local social, cultural and educational contexts as more and more schools are adopting this model of language-driven bilingual education in China.

In mainland China, most ethnic minority students today face the challenge of learning three languages in schools, namely, their home language (L1), Mandarin Chinese (L2) and a foreign language, usually English (L3). Research into trilingual education for minority groups has been most active since the turn of the twenty-first century. This paper offers an overview of recent research, depicting major models adopted by minority schools and the contextual factors leading to the models in various minority regions in China. The paper begins with an account of "state" policies relevant to language provision for minority groups in China, which is followed by a discussion of the outcomes and models of trilingual education. A critical analysis is then made of contextual factors such as ethnolinguistic vitality, history, economy, geopolitics and the changing status of the three languages that affect trilingual education for minority groups. The paper argues that language policymaking in different domains including "families, schools, regions and the state" should be informed by research evidence on practical models that are effective in meeting the cognitive and affective needs of children from ethnic minority backgrounds.

Greater China is used in this article to refer to mainland China, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan and Macao. While a holistic approach is adopted to present and compare the rapid spread of English and development in English language education in these geographically close, and sociopolitically, culturally and economically interrelated but hugely different societies, an emphasis is placed on mainland China owing to its size and diversity of its population. Through describing and juxtaposing English language use and education, this article unfolds the stories of the spread of English in these societies in the past few decades. It draws on the research data and discussions included in the author's recent book "English language education across Greater China", with evidence and findings from other recent publications. On the basis of these discussions, this article critiques the frequently cited models and notions used to describe the spread of English in post-modern societies. It argues that there is a need to come up with new conceptual models in order to catch the essence of the phenomena in the contemporary societies. (Contains 4 notes.)

Two main bodies of literature are identifiable in minority education policy studies in China. Many adopt a descriptive approach to examining policy documents and general outcomes in their historical contexts while others focus on evaluating preferential policies made to address inequality issues in minority education. In most discussions, educators and scholars analyse or speculate about rationale behind minority education policies promulgated by governments at various levels in different periods. Rare attempts are made to develop a conceptual framework to make it possible to analyse the policy process in its entirety. Scholars and educators have seldom defined the relevant actors of a policy, to relate the policy to issues concerning these actors in the matrix of the social hierarchy, and to evaluate how policy outcomes feed back into the policy making and implementation cycle. This paper proposes an analytical framework that addresses these issues on the basis of a comparative analysis of recent literature on bi/trilingual education policies, official policy documents for minority groups and their implementation. The comparative overview is complemented by three case studies in three regions where empirical data were collected. (Contains 3 notes and 4 figures.)

In major texts on bilingualism and bilingual education, one often finds such notions as biculturalism, multiculturalism, pluralism or interculturalism that are used interchangeably as concepts--as opposed to monoculturalism or cultural assimilation--to address political and sociocultural dimensions in language learning and teaching. Recently, some scholars have begun to make distinctions between them as processes or outcomes of bilingual education. They compare the terms conceptually and evaluate the implications these concepts might have for bilingual education. The notion of "acting interculturally", for example, is such an attempt that aims to shed light on the conceptual perplexity between being bicultural and being intercultural and to argue for learning outcomes that are attainable and desirable in bilingual education. On the basis of an overview of conceptual discussions on these notions and an analysis of key guiding ideas and research on bilingual education in China, this paper argues that a conceptual distinction between these terms is not only necessary for advancing theories of bilingualism in general but also crucial for addressing multifaceted issues in bilingual education, including sociopolitical concerns, in a country like China whose language education policies and curricula are determined by the government's political agenda for maintaining an unwavering state. (Contains 3 notes.)

In recent decades, the People's Republic of China (PRC) has instigated language policies in education ostensibly designed to foster trilingualism in ethnic minority groups. The policies, which, as this paper shows, vary from region to region, encompass the minority group's home language, Chinese, and English. Based on data arising from interviews, documentary analysis and secondary sources, this paper examines the tensions behind these trilingual education policies by comparing the implementation of policies for three minority groups: the Zhuang, the Uyghur and the Yi people. It identifies some of the facilitators and barriers that affect the achievement of trilingualism, and finds that ethnic minority languages are at a disadvantage compared with Chinese and English. The paper concludes by making some suggestions for enhancing the effectiveness of the trilingualism policy. (Contains 1 figure.)

This paper starts with an overview of the sociolinguistic context and a series of policy documents concerning English language education promulgated recently in China. It moves on to an analysis of disparities in English language education policies practised in different regions, differences between urban and rural areas, between social classes and between linguistic minority and majority groups. The juxtaposition aims to reveal what different regions and social and ethnic groups in China have in common and how divergent they can be in terms of local policies and practices in English language provision. Also discussed in the paper are issues such as tensions between the spread of English and Chinese language education, and between mother tongue, Chinese and English language education in the case of minority groups, inequality in education and other linguistic, political and cultural dimensions. (Contains 3 tables, 2 figures, and 3 notes.)

This paper is an analysis of two conceptions of bilingualism that exist in parallel in China. One is traditional bilingualism referring to the use of a native minority language and standard Chinese by minority groups and the other, seen as bilingualism with modern characteristics, is a modern-day phenomenon in which the majority Han group aspire to produce bilinguals with a strong competence in mother tongue Chinese and a foreign language, primarily English, by using Chinese and the foreign language as mediums of instruction in teaching school subjects. The focus of the analysis is on the latter for the simple reason that current literature on the new phenomenon is mostly available only in Chinese. An equally important aim of this paper is to explore the impact of the new phenomenon on minority education and to examine the reason why this impact is largely ignored in bilingualism discussions, despite obvious consequences with respect to ethnic identity, personality development and academic performance of minority students. Thus, the traditional conception is briefly reviewed at the start.

Due to the growing status of English as the language of international communication, English immersion programs have been on the rise in China and the rest of the world. Though there has been much discussion on the theoretical and practical characteristics and features of immersion, current models are not adequate for explaining the language-driven English immersion programs in the English as a Foreign Language (EFL) context such as China. Drawing on interviews, observations and documentary data and test scores gathered during a longitudinal study of a public-funded foreign languages school in China, this paper reports on a Sino-Canadian collaborative educational program and concludes that in addition to exhibiting most of the core features of immersion programs suggested by Swain and Johnson (1997), the program revealed several noteworthy emerging characteristics. The study argues for the importance of re-contextualizing Swain and Johnson's model of immersion to address the local social, cultural and educational contexts as more and more schools are adopting this model of language-driven bilingual education in China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]