Norwegian Perspectives on Education and Cultural Diversity [1 ed.] 9781527521391

Citation preview

Norwegian Perspectives on Education and Cultural Diversity

Norwegian Perspectives on Education and Cultural Diversity Edited by

Lars Anders Kulbrandstad, Thor Ola Engen and Sidsel Lied

Norwegian Perspectives on Education and Cultural Diversity Edited by Lars Anders Kulbrandstad, Thor Ola Engen, and Sidsel Lied This book first published 2018 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2018 by Lars Anders Kulbrandstad, Thor Ola Engen, Sidsel Lied and contributors All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-5275-0587-1 ISBN (13): 978-1-5275-0587-2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section One: Profile and Perspectives Chapter One ................................................................................................. 2 Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group Thor Ola Engen, Lise Iversen Kulbrandstad, Lars Anders Kulbrandstad and Sidsel Lied Section Two: Diversity, Literacy and Inclusion Chapter Two .............................................................................................. 40 Developing Research-based Literacy Teaching Practices for Diverse Schools in Norway Lise Iversen Kulbrandstad Chapter Three ............................................................................................ 65 Inclusion of Newly Arrived Students: Why Different Introductory Models can be Successful Models Thore-André Skrefsrud Chapter Four .............................................................................................. 83 Missing Recognition? Inclusive Education and Language Minority Students in Norwegian Schools Kari Nes Chapter Five ............................................................................................ 103 «It’s just in my heart»: A Portrait of a Translingual Young Person as a Writer of Poetry Joke Dewilde Chapter Six .............................................................................................. 121 Jim Cummins’ Hypotheses on Transfer of Linguistic Skills from the First to the Second Language: A Refutation of a Refutation Thor Ola Engen

vi

Table of Contents

Section Three: Diversity, Language and Assessment Chapter Seven.......................................................................................... 142 Increased Linguistic Diversity in Norway: Attitudes and Reflections Lars Anders Kulbrandstad Chapter Eight ........................................................................................... 160 Creating Challenging Language Learning Spaces in Multilingual Early Childhood Education Contexts Gunhild Tomter Alstad Chapter Nine............................................................................................ 183 Standardized Testing Mantling Linguistic Diversity? Marte Monsen and Steinar Laberg Chapter Ten ............................................................................................. 202 Assessment of Language Awareness in Multilingual First Grade Students Gunhild Tveit Randen Section Four: Diversity, History and Religion Chapter Eleven ........................................................................................ 224 A Farewell to the World? Non-Western History in Norwegian Curricula Morten Løtveit Chapter Twelve ....................................................................................... 244 Memory of Diversity Eva Marie Syversen Chapter Thirteen ...................................................................................... 264 The Discourse on Religious Literacy and the Implications of Empirical Research Kolbjørn Kjørven Chapter Fourteen ..................................................................................... 281 Children’s Dialogue with Values: Values in Children’s Memorial Messages in the Aftermath of July 22nd 2011 Sidsel Lied

Norwegian Perspectives on Education and Cultural Diversity

vii

Afterword ................................................................................................ 303 Jim Cummins Contributors ............................................................................................. 307

SECTION ONE: PROFILE AND PERSPECTIVES

CHAPTER ONE EDUCATION AND DIVERSITY: INTRODUCTION OF A MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH GROUP THOR OLA ENGEN, LISE IVERSEN KULBRANDSTAD, LARS ANDERS KULBRANDSTAD AND SIDSEL LIED

The present anthology has contributions from members of Education and Diversity, a multidisciplinary research group at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences (before January 1st 2017, Hedmark University of Applied Sciences). The chapters of the book deal with the current research topics in the group. This introductory chapter describes some connecting threads by presenting some key concepts and epistemological assumptions of the research group, following its development from cooperation between two researchers with roots in education and linguistics in the early 1980s to the current position, involving more than twenty researchers, now also including religious studies, history, social studies, literature and music. The introduction is followed by a presentation of the articles in the book.

Introduction The multidisciplinary research group Education and Diversity (ED) was formally appointed a strategic research area at the former Hedmark University of Applied Sciences (HUAS) in the late 1990s. Teaching and research activities can, however, be traced back to the early 1980s. At the time, most immigrants to Norway came to find work in industry and thus made their homes in the cities. But when Vietnamese refugees, who had escaped from their home countries by boat and been picked up by

Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group

3

Norwegian merchant ships, were granted residence permits, several established their new homes outside the cities. Some came to the agricultural county of Hedmark, north of Oslo. Very soon an in-service programme for teachers was developed at HUAS, and a few years later a textbook in migration pedagogy for higher education was published (Engen ed. 1985). Since then, Norwegian society has undergone important transformations– and so has Norwegian teacher education. In 1995, 5% of people living in Norway had immigrant family backgrounds, which means that either they themselves have immigrated to Norway or they were born in Norway of two immigrant parents. In 2016, 16% had an immigrant family background (Statistics Norway 1996, 2016). This development has put multicultural and multilingual topics at the top of the agenda and the activities of ED have moved from the periphery to the centre of educational research. While Norwegian research on the implications of increased cultural and linguistic diversity for education aligns with research elsewhere in overarching questions, theories and methods, there are historical and political circumstances that form a unique context for this research in Norway. Likewise, while the research activities in the Education and Diversity group have much in common with research at other universities in the country, there are characteristics in the background of the group, its competence profile and organisation that make it stand out as distinctive. From the outset, the research agenda of the ED group was influenced not only by international research, but also by theoretical ideas developed by Norwegians–earlier and in other contexts. Some of these ideas originate in Sami1 school experiences in a Norwegian majority school; others in Norwegian majority experiences in a historical era where the school had a central role in the struggle to relieve Norway from historically rooted, institutionalised Danish cultural influence2, in order to transform the country from an inferior semi-colony to a position as an independent state. We will take these aspects of the early history of multi- or intercultural education in Norway as our point of departure. The early ED research efforts are presented in close relation to these theoretical ideas, since we aim to identify some possibly distinctive Norwegian contributions to the field of multi- or intercultural education. The ED researchers were also, of course, inspired by international research, not least on second language and bilingual education teaching 1

The Sami population is mostly located in Northern Norway, but small groups of the inter Scandinavian Southern Sami population lives in other counties, included Hedmark County. 2 Norway was a Danish colony for four hundred years, ending in 1814 when Norway entered a union with Sweden, which lasted until 1905.

4

Chapter One

and learning. This influence became more and more evident when membership of the ED group steadily increased and researchers from different academic backgrounds joined the group. In the second part of the chapter, we will therefore present projects and research work from ED researchers and discuss how they communicate with the present international body of research.

Two inspiring pioneers from Northern Norway Although some noteworthy measures to meet the educational needs of Sami children in the northernmost of the Norwegian counties, Finnmark, had been taken already in the early 18th century (Niemi 2003; Darnell and Hoëm 1996), we will, however, start with the work of Sami teacher, writer and labour party politician, Per Fokstad (1890–1973). He entered the field of multi- or intercultural education in 1917 with the publication of wellinformed academic arguments against the ongoing Norwegianisation in schools, advocating the use of the mother tongue (Sami) as the language of instruction (Fokstad 1917). Over the following decades, mainly through his academic-political activity, Fokstad gradually built a position as probably the most central voice in the early history of multi- or intercultural education in Norway. His ideas in favour of a transition model for Sami education with the curriculum taught in the Sami language, for at least the first three years of schooling and with Norwegian taught as a foreign language, were for a long time ignored. However, in the preparation of a new Primary Education Act in 1963, Norwegian authorities accepted recommendations of teaching through the Sami language from the committee appointed to examine Sami issues, of which Fokstad was a central member (Darnell and Hoëm 1996; Zachariassen 2012). At this time, Fokstad had acquired powerful allies also internationally, such as the European Convention on Human Rights (1950), and the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which in article 27 stated that: In those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right, in community with the other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practise their own religion, or to use their own language (United Nations 1966).

The UN covenant did not come into effect until 1976, but in the 1960s and -70s worldwide revitalisation movements anticipated its implementation, by strongly challenging:

Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group

5

[…] the assimilationist conception of citizenship education […] Indigenous peoples and ethnic groups within the various Western nations– such as American Indians in the United States, Aborigines in Australia, Maori in New Zealand, African Caribbeans in the United Kingdom, and Moluccans in the Netherlands–wanted their histories and cultures to be reflected in their national cultures and in the school, college, and university curricula (Banks 2004, 297)

According to James Banks, these movements were triggered by the Civil Rights Movement in the US and echoed throughout the world. Based on his experiences as a Sami student and teacher, Fokstad had advocated the idea that the history and culture of the Sami people should be reflected in the school curriculum in its own right almost fifty years earlier, and for this reason, the Sami people might have been mentioned among the groups listed by Banks. In any case, Fokstad’s persistent efforts deserve to be regarded as a unique contribution to the field of multi- or intercultural education (cf. Zachariassen 2012). Fokstad’s work was published in Norwegian, so it is no wonder why Banks did not know about it. But even among Norwegian mainstream educationalists, few were familiar with his writings until the 1990s, when ED member Lars Anders Kulbrandstad drew attention to it in an article (Kulbrandstad 1992). Indirectly, Fokstad’s ideas were nevertheless a major influence to ED from the start, as they were mediated by the work of Anton Hoëm, an educational sociologist also from Finnmark. Based on a series of empirical studies in Sami areas in the 1960s, Hoëm (1978) synthesised his findings in a comprehensive theory of socialisation, which turned out to be a powerful conceptual tool when it came to analysing (minority) students' achievements, motivation structure and identity development in school and kindergarten (for short introductions in English, see Engen 1994, Engen 2009a). And as Hoëm’s theory of socialisation, either explicitly or implicitly, also anticipated concepts like cultural capital (Bourdieu), empowerment (Cummins) and recognition (Honneth), his work should too be considered as a distinct Norwegian contribution to the field of multi- or intercultural education (Beck et al. 2010). Historically, Fokstad’s and Hoëm’s academic efforts–and in this way also the early research agenda of ED–must be understood in light of the emergence of the Norwegian unitary school, which was founded by the Liberal Party government in 1889, with the aim to grant equal rights and equal possibilities for all students, irrespective of their background. This ambition was realised by opening equal access for all students to the same institution, but at the same time school was also given the nation-building mission of transcending ethnic diversity in the student population through

6

Chapter One

cultural homogenisation, i.e. Norwegianising (cf. national literacy teaching) (Nes et al. 2002; Engen 2010a). Hence, it is hardly surprising that it had a discriminatory impact on students of Sami and Kven backgrounds, as Fokstad pointed out. As implied by Hoëm’s socialization theory, it had similar consequences for all underprivileged groups who did not share the school’s value basis, for example students of Forrest Finn, Romani and Roma backgrounds and children from the working class (Engen 1979; Engen 2010b). By identifying the central discriminatory mechanisms involved, Hoëm’s theory of socialisation influenced school authorities to formalise the educational rights of Sami students in the National Curriculum of 1973, and to expand them even further by granting them the right to mother tongue education, together with Norwegian as second language instruction and bilingual teaching in the National Curriculum of 1987 (NC87).

The National Curriculum of 1987 and the education of linguistic minority children In the 1970s and 1980s it gradually became obvious that children of newly arrived immigrant workers from countries like Pakistan, India and Turkey (in the 1970s), and children of refugees with Vietnamese, Chilean and Iranian backgrounds (in the 1980s) fell behind in the Norwegian school (Engen, Sand, and Kulbrandstad 1996; Sætersdal 1979–1985). With the National Curriculum of 1987, these groups of students were granted similar rights as the Sami and the Kvens. For the new language minorities, however, the justification for a new approach was just as much influenced by international experiences with bilingual programmes, like the transition, the maintenance or enrichment models and the immersion and submersion programmes (Baker 2011; Skutnabb-Kangas 1981, 1985; Øzerk 2006). Further, Cummins’ hypotheses as to what psychological mechanisms are involved in successful bilingual education, and his identification of the more precise conditions under which certain bilingual education programmes are successful (cf. Cummins, Baker, and Hornberger 2001), were influential (for a detailed discussion, see Engen’s chapter in this volume).

The Research activities of the Education and Diversity group The influence of these international impulses is demonstrated by the previously mentioned edited volume from 1985 (Engen ed. 1985). And as the international theories were interpreted through the lenses of Hoëm’s

Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group

7

theory of socialisation, they proved to be well suited also to define an interdisciplinary research agenda. Engen (ed. 1985) not only collected but also indirectly contrasted articles on topics such as migration and culture, racism, bilingualism and bilingual education, and Norwegian language teacher education for diverse classrooms. In the following years, new theoretical ideas partly rooted in Hoëm’s work, partly in international research, were developed. The new ideas were strongly related to the distinctive historical experiences associated with Norway’s transition from a semi-colony to an independent state. The ideas also proved to be powerful in substantiating a new multicultural religious study subject in teacher education, as well as in primary and secondary school.

The Christianity, Religion and Philosophy subject As pointed out in the above quote from the Convention on Civil and Political Rights’, persons belonging to minorities should not be denied the right to profess and practise their own religion. Although this principle traditionally had been respected in Norwegian schools, the National Curriculum of 1997 took its implementation one step further, by introducing a new subject called Christianity, Religion and Philosophy (CRP). As in the case of the nation building school, one justification for the new subject was to offer all students in the same classroom the same content programme about different religions and beliefs. But in contrast to the nation-building school, the concept of mainstreaming was, within this subject, given a meaning more in line with the principle of inclusion, so that the CRP subject’s cultural context was no longer monocultural. On the one hand, all students should be taught about the life interpretation they were familiar with from their home backgrounds; on the other hand they should also be introduced to those world views they met through their schoolmates. The argument for placing all students in the same mainstream classroom, and for including Christianity, other world religions, beliefs as well as philosophy and ethics in the same curriculum was at one level aimed to facilitate a face-to-face dialogue between representatives of different life view backgrounds within the context of formal socialisation, and to stimulate contact between the groups in the context of informal socialisation. At another level, the CRP subject was constructed to put into practice the OECD assumption (2005) that knowledge about both one’s own and the culture of others is a precondition for openness, tolerance and dialogue (for extended discussions, see Engen and Lied 2011; Gravem 2004). Thus, even the CRP subject may be seen as a distinctive contribution to multi- or intercultural education.

8

Chapter One

In any case, the introduction of the subject in schools motivated colleagues with a background in religious studies and education to join the ED group, bringing with them new research ideas and expanding the space of multidisciplinarity. Through several publications, Sidsel Lied gained a central position in the national discourse on the new CRP subject (Lied 2004, 2005, 2009a, b), and also introduced an approach where students were engaged in research work (Lied 2012). Her colleague Ingebjørg Stubø (2012, 2005) published work on the aesthetical dimension of religious art, while Ole Kolbjørn Kjørven (2014), as demonstrated in this volume, has investigated religion teachers’ perspectives on literacy. Around the turn of the millennium, it was by no means obvious that a group dominated by educationalists and linguists should welcome as members researchers with a religion studies background. However, the fundamental principles behind the CRP subject had been prepared by Engen in his book on double qualification and culture comparison (1989, cf. Engen 2009a), and thus a common theoretical ground was found. Not only was the assumption that knowledge about one’s own culture and the one of others is a precondition for openness, tolerance and dialogue fundamental to the double qualification framework, with a reference to Park’s 1928 article on the marginal man (cf. Engen 1989). The insight that knowledge about the whole is enhanced by increased cognitive awareness and creativity through comparison and contrasting of the parts, was also made familiar through research on bilingual education models and their aims for additive bilingualism, pluralism and enrichment (cf. Cummins in Cummins, Baker, and Hornberger 2001; Baker 1996; Skutnabb-Kangas 1981), and the approaches of contrastive grammar (see Hvenkilde ed. 1980) as well as the theoretical work of Vygotsky. Within the framework of double qualification, ED members also published work specifically related to diversity questions in kindergartens (Skoug 1992; Sand and Skoug 2002, 2003; Skoug and Sand 2003).

The historical roots of the Double Qualification concept The Double Qualification approach was inspired also by Stein Rokkan’s identification of the importance of resistance of peripheral actors belonging to loosely organised counter-cultures to centrally initiated cultural standardisation through the nation-building efforts (Rokkan 1987). This turned out to be central for the emergence of the unitary school. As had been pointed out by Fokstad and Hoëm, the Norwegianising literacy teaching strategy had serious discriminatory consequences for minority students, as it was based on the dominant written language rooted in

Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group

9

Danish. On the other hand, however, the nation building strategy was ambiguous, as literacy teaching in school also occurred in a written variety of Norwegian constructed in the 1850s on the basis of linguistic material collected from regional Norwegian dialects, initially named Landsmål (literally: country language), later Nynorsk (New Norwegian). In addition, in 1878, the Parliament decided that teachers should adapt their instructional language to the oral language of students when NorwegianDanish was the medium of instruction, not the other way around. Due to its strong democratic basis, the counter-cultural dimension of the curriculum had to be accepted by the former hegemonic groups. However, the counter-cultural representatives on their side also had to accept a shared central position in the curriculum for the traditionally dominant Danish rooted culture, to which the former hegemonic groups saw no alternative but to build a parallel privately funded school (Engen 2010a). As New Norwegian right from the start was adopted by influential counter-culture authors, scientists and journalists as their preferred written language form, New Norwegian appeared in the school textbooks as early as in the 1860s and to an even greater extent from the 1890s (Vikør 2006; Walton 2006). Through a historical compromise, then, the traditionally dominant strategy of national literacy teaching was complemented by a parallel – and in many ways also contradictory – strategy with many of the characteristics of critical literacy teaching (cf. Baker 2001), making a formally accepted dual strategy the foundation for the actual national literacy teaching strategy. In his chapter on language attitudes in this volume, Lars Anders Kulbrandstad demonstrates that this dual impulse is still influential. The dual strategy gave literacy teaching a strong potential for awareness raising, identity confirmation and cultural liberation for children of certain underprivileged Norwegian ethnic backgrounds (Slagstad 1998, Hodne 1994), described originally by Höem as reinforcing socialisation. More importantly, however, by contrasting local and central cultural elements in the curriculum, students from local as well as central cultural and linguistic backgrounds also had their perspectives expanded, by being exposed to knowledge reflecting other cultures (described by Höem as resocialisation). In addition, the dual process occurred within a context which opened opportunities for cultural comparison in formal as well as informal situations and thus constituted a process which Engen (1989) called integrating socialisation. This kind of socialisation anticipated on most important criteria the CRP subject. Integrating socialisation, Engen argued, would be favourable for the development of openness, tolerance and dialogue, as well as for language learning, awareness raising and

10

Chapter One

cognitive development. Based on such arguments, Engen suggested that Double Qualification with an inherent potential for Culture Comparison appeared to be a suitable conceptual framework for designing curricula for diverse student groups. In the early 2000s, the Norwegian nation-building experiences also inspired a comprehensive interdisciplinary research project on multicultural nation building, funded by the Research Council of Norway, with researchers from pedagogy, Norwegian language, literature and CRP (see Skaret 2011; Skrefsrud 2016; Kulbrandstad 2009, 2011; Lied 2009a,b, 2012; Engen and Lied 2011; Engen 2009a,b, 2010a,b).

Local and central cultures In the 1980s and 90s the historically dual strategy argument was reactualised by the so called Local Communities Pedagogy (Solstad 1978; Høgmo, Solstad and Tiller 1981), which was rooted in the counter cultural tradition and reinterpreted in Hoëm’s socialisation theory. These ideas contributed later to the strong position of local cultural curriculum planning introduced in the National Curriculum of 1987. However, the implication of the Local Communities Pedagogy’s concept of local culture was that students with the same place of residence also shared a common cultural background. According to Hoëm’s theory this was hardly the case either in bi- or trilingual communities, or in communities with a diverse socio-economic composition (cf. also Engen 1975, 1989, 2003). Thus, the local cultural concept of the NC87 might be described as biased, in the sense that it gave some children the advantage of being recognised, based on the (concealed) assumption that their local cultural backgrounds were (inherently) more appropriate or suitable, while others were in danger of being ignored or even suppressed by the school. In his ”content integration” approach, James Banks (2009) suggested that teachers should use examples and content elements from different cultures in their classrooms to illustrate key concepts, principles, generalisations and theories in a subject or a discipline, an idea that has been adopted by several researcher at the university, like Anne Skaret (2011), Eva Marie Syversen (2014), Sidsel Karlsen (2014), and Dyndahl et al (2014). It was along the same line of reasoning as Bank’s that Engen (1989) suggested that an axis from central to local cultures would be a productive analytical variable when it comes to identifying and selecting relevant curriculum material, provided, however, that the concepts of local and central were expanded to include also (under)privileged positions on variables such as ethnic, social, linguistic and religious background and

Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group

11

gender. However, if majority and minority persons are perceived as representing central or local cultural positions, judged by their ethnicity alone, teachers are invited to ignore the probability that majority persons may well have a local cultural position on variables such as education, religion and gender, and the other way around for persons with a minority background. Admittedly, social and ethnic backgrounds and gender are important independent predictors of school achievement, but as much research demonstrates, they also covariate internally, and in various ways in different contexts. Like Walby, Armstrong, & Strid (2012), Engen therefore argued that retaining the distinction between different forms of inequality is more important than emphasising each variable independently. Furthermore, like Vertovec (2007), he argued that it was necessary to take sufficient account of the conjunction of ethnicity with a range of other variables and to explore the complexity of the multi-ethnic group context, in order to be able to creatively consider the interaction of multiple axes of differentiation. While Vertovec primarily argued on behalf of researchers, Engen’s point was that schools and teachers are faced with the same kind of challenges when they are expected to balance local and central cultural influences in their curriculum work. He therefore recommended curriculum analyses according to the principle of intersectionality (cf. McCall 2005; Walby, Armstrong, and Strid 2012). In superdiversity, the situation for teachers is even more challenging. As curriculum planning according to influential voices has to be liberated from tradition as well as the prescriptive bonds of authorities, and be delegated to the individual teacher and headmaster, within the framework of common national goals (Krejsler 2007; Qvortrup 2001), it is considered extremely demanding to reach a broad consensus about what the content of school should be.

The recognition of peripheral voices As mentioned earlier, indigenous peoples and ethnic groups have worked hard to get their histories and cultures – their local (peripheral or marginal) voices – recognised in national cultures and schools (Banks 2004). Today, Brossard Børhaug (2015), with a reference to Lévinas’ ethics, argues that peripheral voices should be recognised as a contribution to the definition of an equal human existence (cf. Engen 1989). However, this can be done in different ways, as discussed for example by Cummins and Early (2011), and by ED members Gunhild Alstad (2013), Anne Marit Danbolt and Bente Hugo (2012) and Sidsel Karlsen (2014). How the Double Qualification approach can be helpful in this context has been discussed

12

Chapter One

by Joke Dewilde and Thor-André Skrefsrud (2015) in a transcultural and translanguaging perspective. As mentioned above, a person from the majority group may be perceived as representing a central cultural position if he or she is judged by his or her ethnicity alone, overlooking that they may have a local cultural position on variables such as education, religion and gender. For minority persons, it may in some cases be the other way around. The implication of this is that both a central and a local cultural position is related to the cultural or economic power of the groups in question, as pointed out by Bourdieu and Passeron (1964, 1970). Thus, it may be taken for given that Norwegian history represents the central cultural position in the curriculum, while for example African history – at best – will be considered as representing a local cultural position, if present at all. The historian Morten Løtveit (this volume) discusses the peripheral position – or even absence – of non-western issues in recent curricula for the History subject in the Norwegian compulsory school. This relates to the struggle of indigenous peoples and ethnic minority groups within Western societies trying to have their histories and cultures reflected in the school, college and university curricula (cf. Banks 2004). Together with his colleague Liv Susanne Bugge, Løtveit has also carried out research on multicultural awareness among student teachers (Løtveit and Bugge 2015; Bugge and Løtveit 2015). Other ED members like Jørgen Klein and Gerd Wikan from the Social Science department have also been preoccupied with research questions related to the North – South dimension, or more generally with the influence of globalisation on student teachers’ competence. Recently, they have conducted a project to gain insight into student teachers’ experiences and learning outcomes in international practicum programmes (Wikan and Klein 2015). Dewilde and Skrefsrud (2016), with a reference to Cummins & Early (2011) and Pratt (1991), have argued that a room for marginal or local voices in the mainstream central cultural classroom may also be opened by including alternative stories. This point has been developed further by Eva Marie Syversen in her chapter in this volume, based on her 2014 doctoral thesis on novels and short stories by Forest Finn writers. Syversen points out that literature of local colour, minor literature (local culture), has often been marginalised or left invisible by the hegemonic criticism of high modernity (central culture), as they are considered as mundane, conservative and retrospective. For students of Finn Forrest ancestry, however, this literature, provided it is made available to teachers through research, may have the same awareness raising, identity confirming and culturally liberating function in schools as regional literature had for children of

Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group

13

underprivileged Norwegian backgrounds in the 20th century. In addition also minor literature may stimulate majority and other minority readers to see through stereotypes and become aware of people who are invisible to them in their everyday life (Nussbaum 1997), an argument that is articulated also in Engen (1989). Thus, reading can help develop a deeper understanding of what life can do to human beings and in that way challenge our empathy.

Multilingualism and the teaching and learning of Norwegian as a second language As indicated earlier, ED members were from the outset influenced by international research on second language learning and bilingual education. This applies to research group members from language studies as well as educational studies, and is exemplified by the fact that the first Norwegian text book on bilingualism and minority education was cowritten by the two founding members of the group, Thor Ola Engen and Lars Anders Kulbrandstad (1998). As ‘minority education’ in the title indicates, Sami, national minorities as well as immigrants were discussed in the book. In the 1990s there was a heavy political debate about mother tongue education in Norway, and some researchers from the departments of sociology and social anthropology at the University of Oslo expressed their disbelief in bilingual education. Hence, the Research Council of Norway in 1996 invited experts to a consensus conference on language minority education–inspired by conferences used to achieve consensus among researchers of medicine. Engen and Kulbrandstad took an active part in this conference, which succeeded in reaching agreements concerning immigrant students’ need for competence in both their first and second languages as well as the need for both formal and informal second language education for an extended period of time (Hyltenstam et al eds. 1996). Bilingualism, followed by multilingualism and later plurilingualism have been key concepts for the research group’s exploration of language issues. An early work is Lars Anders Kulbrandstad’s (1997) study of students with immigrant family backgrounds from Vietnam and Iran and their first and second language use in the context of bilingual language practices and attitudes. The results were presented in the form of language portraits: six of third graders and six of eight graders. In 2013 Gunhild Randen studied language assessment of school beginners by analysing test results in the students’ first and second languages, Russian and Norwegian, claiming that schools need to analyse the whole language repertoire of the

14

Chapter One

children, not only Norwegian, in order to use test results to plan adaptive teaching (see Randen’s chapter in the book). In recent years, Cummins and Early’s (2011) concept of ‘identity texts’ has been another important key concept and inspiration to explore different ways the student’s first languages can be used as a resource in schools and kindergartens although the teacher does not know the language and although the curriculum stresses the teaching of Norwegian. In an action research project working together with second grade teachers Anne Marit V. Danbolt and Lise I. Kulbrandstad (2013) explored how teachers invented a play language together with the students (the polar bear language) as a new way of teaching language awareness in a linguistically diverse classroom. Danbolt (2011) and Danbolt and Hugo (2012) used self-made bilingual word lists as a bridge between home and school in the teaching of literacy, while Gunhild Tomter Alstad (2013) analysed pre-school teachers’ work with both formal and informal second language learning, as well as the teachers’ different ways of using children’s first languages as resources in kindergarten. One of the teachers used Norwegian in teaching all children English, and one organised minority mother tongue teaching in pull-out groups. The kindergarten teacher studied in the third case used a more dynamic approach. She took several opportunities during the day to show interest in all children’s language resources and used the resources both to strengthen linguistic minority children’s multilingual identities and to stimulate all children’s language interest and language awareness (see Alstad’s chapter in this book). In an ongoing project Joke Dewilde (see chapter in this book) applies a translingual approach in analysing a young refugees’ writing in and out of school. Multilingual teaching practices are a common theme also for different ongoing studies involving teachers. Monsen and Randen for example are studying teachers’ Internet discussions on what linguistic competence is needed to qualify as a teacher in Norway, while Alstad, Danbolt and Randen analyse teacher beliefs on language learning in diverse kindergartens. To have a good command of the official language(s) of society is important not only to get access to work life and social life, but also to succeed in schools and for democratic participation. Globally, Norwegian of course is a minority language, spoken by approximately 5.2 million. In Norway it is the majority language, and as such an important learning object for immigrants. As an independent research area Norwegian as a second language was developed nationally in the early 1980s, at the same time as the need for second language teaching increased. At the time, few teachers and teacher educators had experience in taking an outsider’s

Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group

15

perspective on the Norwegian language. Although teachers observed that for example children with Vietnamese and Turkish as first languages struggled with different parts of Norwegian, they were uncertain as to how to adapt the teaching to the different needs. Thus, textbooks describing languages contrastively were written (Hvenekilde ed. 1980; L.A. Kulbrandstad and Harder 1982), alongside with research on learner language (e.g. Hvenekilde 1986). Since Norway, Sweden and Denmark were characterised by more or less the same immigration profile, research from Sweden (Hyltenstam ed. 1979; Tingbjörn 1981) and Denmark (SkutnabbKangas 1981) constituted important points of departure for the emerging Norwegian research, together with international second language research (e.g. Selinker 1974), research on bilingualism (e.g. Cummins 1984), and on bilingual education (e.g. Baker 1988). The Nordic approach to second language research, as for example promoted by the Nordic journal, Nordand,3 builds on a long tradition of including multilingual perspectives and of using both cognitive and sociocultural theories. Research in Norwegian as a second language has been described as following three developmental lines: research on learners’ language, research on language and culture contact, and educationally oriented research (Golden, L.I. Kulbrandstad, and Tenfjord 2007). As the second language researchers in ED work interdisciplinary and within a teacher education institution, it is the educationally oriented language research which best describes the overall research profile. In addition to multilingual teaching practices, three broad themes can be identified: literacy and assessment, language and culture contact, and classroom studies of learning opportunities. The themes of teacher beliefs and professional development of teachers are connecting threads through most projects. Literacy has been an important topic for a long time. Lise Iversen Kulbrandstad’s PhD dissertation (1996) was the first study to explore second language reading by immigrant adolescents in the Nordic countries, analysing linguistic aspects of their lack of understanding, using different test methods and a combination of theories of second language learning and first language reading. The teaching of second language literacy was later studied in the already mentioned action research project in mainstream classrooms in Oslo (Danbolt and Kulbrandstad 2008, 2012, 2013). Emergent literacy is studied in kindergarten by Alstad and L. I. Kulbrandstad (2017), and in 1st grade by Danbolt (2011). An ongoing 3

ED group member L. I. Kulbrandstad was one of the founders and editors of the first five volumes of Nordand. Nordic journal of second language research.

16

Chapter One

project, Encounter with texts in the 5th grade, involving L. I. Kulbrandstad and Anne Golden, University of Oslo, is addressing the well-documented achievement gap in reading between first and second language students. Here teaching and learning in different subject areas are studied: textbook vocabulary, students’ textbook reading, and different scaffolding strategiesused by teachers. Literacy also is important for the research groups’ cooperation with colleagues at the universities of Zambia and Namibia. Danbolt and Dennis Banta are currently working on a project exploring the use of different languages in home-school cooperation in Zambia, and Emma Kirchner’s PhD project at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences is centred on reading engagement of 7th graders in Namibian schools who read in their second language. The assessment of language skills, both for children and adults, is becoming increasingly more important in political discussions in Norway. Gunhild Randen’s 2013 PhD on bilingual assessment of school beginners has already been mentioned. Marte Monsen in her 2014 PhD, conducted in-depth-interviews with teachers in lower secondary school about their experiences with reading tests in their multicultural classrooms (see Monsen and Laberg’s chapter in this book). Two ongoing projects are addressing the assessment of adult immigrants’ writing (Golden and Monsen 2015; Golden, L. A. Kulbrandstad and Tenfjord 2017). Language and culture contact is another main topic studied by the ED group. Lars Anders Kulbrandstad’s folk linguistic work on attitudes towards new language varieties, i.e. attitudes towards foreign-accented speech in digital newspaper articles (2002a), among adolescents (2006), student teachers (2009), and in the general public (2011), marked an opening of this field in Norwegian and Nordic second language research. L.A. Kulbrandstad has also conducted several interdisciplinary studies together with ED colleagues, for example, the first Norwegian quantitative study of minority students’ school results (Engen, Kulbrandstad, and Sand 1996). Since 2013, he also has been the Norwegian project leader of the interdisciplinary NordForsk-funded project: Learning Spaces for Inclusion and Social Justice: Success Stories from Immigrant Students and School Communities in Four Nordic Countries which includes classroom studies of learning opportunities (Ragnarsdóttir and Kulbrandstad 2015). In this book, the chapters by Skrefsrud and Dewilde report from the project. Globalisation and the recent migration to Norway also call for changes in the different school subjects in compulsory school, as well as in teacher education. Such changes are also studied by the research group (e.g. L.A. Kulbrandstad 2001, 2008; L.1. Kulbrandstad 2001; Randen, Danbolt, and Palm 2015). In addition, several members have had the opportunity to

Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group

17

contribute with their research-based knowledge in national school and teacher education reforms, since they have been appointed by the Ministry of Education and Research to serve on different committees. Another perspective related to the influence of linguistic and cultural encounters in mainstream teaching, is the study of cultural encounters in fiction. In Anne Skaret’s 2011 PhD, literary cultural encounters in picture books and children’s reception of these books are explored. L.I. Kulbrandstad (1997) analysed how authors of children books addressed second language learning and multilingualism when they formed lines and described the use of languages other than Norwegian, while L.A. Kulbrandstad (2002b) studied the use of Finnish and Norwegian by a national minority, the Forrest Finns, in a trilogy by an author representing the minority.

Research and professional development for teachers The relationship between researchers and teachers is, and has been, of special importance for ED. It started in the 1980s when the counties of Hedmark and Oppland asked the university to develop courses in Norwegian as a second language and courses for mother tongue teachers from language minorities. Ten years later, the interplay with school authorities developed into a combination of courses and intervention projects conducted by teachers. With supervision from ED researchers teachers used research as an inspiration to change teaching practices (L.A. Kulbrandstad 1999). This way of promoting research-based language teaching was further developed when the university in 2005 was engaged to conduct a research and professional development project in Oslo. While around 100 teachers and school leaders attended the courses, four teachers were chosen to make changes in their literacy teaching in an action research approach (Danbolt and Kulbrandstad 2008, 2012). In 2013, HUAS again worked in Oslo, this time on professional development in kindergarten aiming at strengthening research-based practices. One thousand seven hundred employees have so far been involved. In a national program of competence development for teachers, Competence for Quality, HUAS was appointed as one of two teacher education institutions to offer a one year in-service-program for second language teachers in compulsory school, and has from the school year 2016-2017 also offered such national programmes for kindergarten teachers and for teachers in adult education. In the last decade the importance of offering research-based initial teacher education programmes has been acknowledged in Norway (see L. I. Kulbrandstad’s chapter in the book). Inland Norway University of

18

Chapter One

Applied Sciences is a large teacher education institution in the Norwegian context, offering most initial teacher education programmes, a wide range of in-service-programs as well as four master programmes and a PhD in Teaching and Teacher education. Questions of diversity in preparing teachers for future generations have been addressed by ED group members, e.g. Kulbrandstad (2010), Engen (2011), Skrefsrud (2016), and also in projects with student involvement (Kulbrandstad 2009; Lied 2012). More recently also teacher educators themselves have been studied (Randen et al. 2015). When the Masters’ programme in Adapted education was developed in 2005, the Double Qualification and Culture Comparison model played a central role. The programme combines and contrasts the research approaches of special education and multicultural education in one dual approach. The dual perspectives, informed by new theoretical and methodological impulses from Walby, Armstrong, & Strid (2012), Vertovec (2007), Garcia (2011), Creese and Blackledge (2010), Cummins and Early (2011), Bhabha (2004), Deleuze and Félix (1983) and Deleuze and Guattari (1987), resulted in fresh approaches to research themes in school and kindergarten; like inclusion (Nes 2003, 2014,), adaptive education and differentiation (Engen 2009b; Engen and Lied 2011), classroom management (Zachrisen 2009; Andersen 2010), racialisation (Andersen 2015), play in an intercultural perspective (Zachrisen 2015), kindergarten programmes for diversity in rural areas (Andersen et al. 2011), cooperation between school, kindergarten and parents (Sand 1996, 2008) and cooperation between mother tongue and mainstream teachers (Dewilde 2013). The ED research group has also been strongly engaged in qualifying teachers from language minority groups. For several years the Hedmark University of Applied Sciences offered a bachelor program for bilingual teachers and kindergarten teachers, and was also appointed by the Ministry of Education to chair the group of Norwegian teacher education institutions offering these programmes (Ringen and Kjørven 2009). As part of this programme, the university offered Somali. This engagement led to participation in an international research network, Diverse teachers for diverse schools (Kjørven, Ringen and Gagné eds. 2009). A promising development is the stronger focus on partnerships between teacher education institutions and schools and kindergartens which are emerging in Norway. In recent years the university has entered partnership with several kindergartens, compulsory schools and upper secondary schools in the region. The partnership entails the possibilities of research collaboration, and several ED projects are now being conducted or planned in cooperation with these partner schools and partner

Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group

19

kindergartens. Such partnerships offer a new form of double qualification which is of importance to teacher education since both university campuses and schools and kindergartens are considered teacher education arenas. Traditionally the two arenas’ contribution to teacher education has been specialised - either research based theories or practical knowledge. Today a development towards more practically oriented research and more research-based practices are encouraged. Thus, the schools can use the partnership to get access to research-based knowledge in their work on improving teaching and learning for all students as well as professional development of teachers. The teacher education institutions for their part can use the partnership to stay close to students’ learning and development and to learn from the current challenges teachers meet in their increasingly diverse classrooms.

Presentation of the book This introductory chapter has pointed to circumstances that make Norway an interesting case when it comes to multicultural and multilingual perspectives on education in Europe. We have also argued that the multidisciplinary group Education of Diversity is of particular interest in the Norwegian context, given the significant contributions from this group to research and policy making in the country over a period of more than three decades. The articles in the anthology reflect the quite diverse research interests of the group members, but we have shown that there are important linking threads between the research activities of the members, not least the close connections to teacher education and to kindergarten and school. In line with the main areas of ED’s research activities, the authors of the remaining 13 chapters present diversity, culture and education in different ways. In section one, Lise I. Kulbrandstad, Thor-André Skrefsrud, Kari Nes, Joke Dewilde, and Thor Ola Engen discuss diversity with an emphasis on literacy, minority students and inclusion, all in the frame of Norwegian school and teacher education. In section two Lars Anders Kulbrandstad, Gunhild Tomter Alstad, Marte Monsen and Steinar Laberg, and Gunhild Tveit Randen put diversity in focus in the light of language and assessment. In the last section Morten Løtveit, Eva Marie Syversen, Ole Kolbjørn Kjørven, and Sidsel Lied approach diversity through the lenses of the school subjects literature, history and religion, or more precisely, by means of historical and value-based perspectives. In the following, we will present each of the chapters in more detail.

20

Chapter One

Section one: Diversity, literacy and inclusion Lise Iversen Kulbrandstad opens this section with a chapter on teacher education. Her point of departure is that Norwegian teacher education for the compulsory school is facing a comprehensive reform. In 2017, all programmes were developed into five years integrated master’s studies with a stronger emphasis on research-based knowledge. One of the purposes is to qualify prospective teachers for research-based teaching practices. This article looks into the background of the reform and also explores different roles that teachers might be given or take in research. Examples in the discussion are taken from literacy teaching in linguistically diverse schools. Literacy competence in the school language is essential to learning in all school subjects. Hence, seeking new knowledge about how to adapt literacy teaching to new student groups and new contexts must be considered important teacher qualifications. The discussion in the article draws upon research conducted at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, as well as the author’s experiences from holding central positions in the last reforms. The development of Norwegian teacher education is also discussed in light of international trends. In his chapter, Thor-André Skrefsrud discusses the possible strengths and weaknesses of two different organisational models with regard to the inclusion of newly arrived immigrant students found in the context of attending two primary schools in Norway. Researching the underlying factors that these successful yet different schools have in common, Skrefsrud states that both the use of direct integration and separate reception classes may be effective, depending on the flexible use of the models. Both models are positioned within the framework of inclusive education and social justice, using theoretical perspectives from Rawls, Benhabib and Nussbaum as a theoretical lens. The article contributes to research on newly arrived students by exploring different ways the schools may provide inclusive education for newly arrived students, seeing the students as a heterogeneous group with a variety of needs. Kari Nes’ chapter is in two parts, one exploring the concept of inclusive education, in particular where language minority students are concerned, and one empirical part. Recent survey data from Norway on the education of cultural and linguistic minority students with a nonWestern heritage are discussed in an inclusion perspective. Teachers in the study regard non-Western linguistic minority group as far less academically successful and less dedicated to school work than the majority students. Teachers also judge the social skills of this minority group of students to be poorer than the majority’s, while the non-Western

Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group

21

students themselves generally report that they like it at school – they like the teacher, their fellow students and even the school subjects better than the Norwegian speaking majority. Joke Dewilde investigates the young student Khushi as a writer of poetry in and outside of school. The study is a linguistic ethnography of a reception class for late arrivals to Norwegian schools, and includes participant observation, interviews, audio-recordings and the collection of texts. Dewilde applies a translingual understanding of literacy that challenges conventional ways of constructing language as bounded entities and writing as individual products. The analyses of the poems Khushi writes at home show that these are recontextualisations of Bollywood songs, rather than texts she has produced herself. Further, the analyses of the poem written in school show that translation and translingual practices contribute to Khushi’s empowerment as a writer of poems in Norwegian. The article concludes by emphasizing the importance of safe writing spaces in school. Thor Ola Engen’s starting point is two recent publications by the Norwegian researchers Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg in which the authors conclude that knowledge and skills acquired in the first language only to a very limited extent can be transferred to the second language. Thus, competence in the first language will hardly be of any help for second language learners’ academic learning in the majority school. The findings are contradictory to a comprehensive theoretical framework in the field of bilingual education, developed by Jim Cummins in the 1970s. Through a critical examination Engen demonstrates that the theoretical foundation for their analysis is too weak to give any conclusive evidence as to how home language knowledge affects second language learners’ school performance through transfer of knowledge and skills.

Section two: Diversity, language and assessment The background for Lars Anders Kulbrandstad’s chapter is the changes in the demographic composition of Norway brought about by the considerable increase in immigration over the past few decades. Because of this a society that traditionally has been quite uniform linguistically is becoming more and more diverse. The article presents two studies of attitudes to and reflections over this growing diversity, based on a survey and follow-up qualitative interviews. The main research questions is to what extent the positive attitude to the use of dialects for which Norway is known, is extended to Norwegian with a foreign accent and to immigrant minority languages. Whereas foreign accented speech appears to be met

22

Chapter One

with considerable tolerance, there seems to be skepticism to the prospect of immigration leading to new permanent minority languages in the country. The findings are discussed with reference to the concept monolingual ethos. In general, there has been little research on informal educational language environments involving very young emergent bilinguals. Gunhild Tomter Alstad’s chapter highlights the issues and complexities which are currently emerging in language pedagogy in kindergarten, drawing on qualitative data from a study of second language practices and beliefs. Illustrated by the pedagogical choices of one Norwegian kindergarten teacher, the chapter demonstrates how informal settings and activities in play are used to promote linguistically and cognitively challenging second language learning opportunities, challenging a view on second language teaching and learning as undemanding and straightforward. In addition, the chapter explores the teacher’s recognition of the children’s cognitive, social, and educational resources in fostering their multilingual identities, without being proficient in their home languages. It is acknowledged among test researchers that standardised testing in diverse settings entails threats to the validity of test results and test consequences. Based on an analysis of the National reading tests in Norway and a case study of three teacher teams’ beliefs and knowledge about standardised reading tests, Marte Monsen and Steinar Laberg investigate bias in standardised testing of minority students. The authors suggest that the Norwegian system of standardised testing is characterised by low awareness of certain aspects of validity, such as negative bias towards bilingual students. They highlight the fact that the national reports from the tests only reveal that the average bilingual student scores lower than the overall average. The authors claim that this information is not only limited and in many ways common sense, but that it may also cause negative attitudes toward bilingual students and their aptitude for learning. Gunhild Tveit Randen bases her chapter on her PhD study where she investigates the assessment of language awareness in three bilingual students in first grade. The research questions consider how a test made for L1 Norwegian students will work when used on L2 students, and to what extent the results from such a test can be considered valid/useful as a basis for educational planning. Test results in language awareness indicate that the minority students are in danger of developing reading difficulties, while supplementary data show that their reading and writing skills are adequate. Tveit Randen explains this contradiction by illustrating how native-like proficiency in Norwegian is required to perform the test. She then discusses how the nature of language awareness makes it crucial to be

Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group

23

assessed in relation to language proficiency, and how assessments based on a Norwegian monolingual norm may mislead teachers to make wrong interpretations of the students’ proficiency.

Section three: Diversity, history and religion The historian Morten Løtveit takes as his point of departure the fact that there are now many children with non-Western family backgrounds in Norwegian schools. Løtveit asks whether this and other related developments may have affected History curricula for primary and lower secondary schools. He finds that the topic is poorly studied and that there is no clear consensus on the matter. He then presents a quantitative study of specific learning components in three curricula for primary and lower secondary schools in Norway between 1974 and 2006 focusing on the degree to which they pay attention to Western and non-Western topics. Perhaps contrary to what many would expect, he finds that non-Western history became less rather than more important from the 1970s onwards. At the end of his paper, he discusses how these findings may be understood. In the chapter “Memory of Diversity” Eva Marie Syversen investigates literature from the region of Inner Scandinavia in the 1920s and 1930s, namely Finn Forest literature, affiliated with the long-standing minority group Forest Finns. At the time this literature was published, governmental policy focused on obliterating cultural diversity, thus constraining the conditions for openly cultivating and celebrating diverse cultural memory. In the first part of the chapter Syversen reviews some theoretical reflections on modern memory, cultural memory, and the relation between memory and literature. In the second part these theoretical perspectives combine to facilitate a textual analysis of cultural memory in literary texts by three authors from the Finn Forest literature. Syversen concludes that diverse cultural memory seems to prevail in the dynamic network of narrative and rhetorical elements of the texts. The backdrop of Ole Kolbjørn Kjørven’s chapter is the current theory- and normative-dominated discourse on literacy in religious education research and in education research in general, which, he argues, reflects an instrumentalist view of learning and of the actors involved. In the article he presents some of the key findings from a qualitative empirical study on RE teachers’ religious literacy practices. The analyses show that religious education teachers become involved and engaged in many different ways. The critical issue, therefore, is not so much what they brought to the classroom of personal bias or formal knowledge, but

24

Chapter One

the decisions made, the application of it all. Central hermeneutical aspects, therefore, need to be highlighted as critical skills and hence incorporated into the theoretical discourse on religious literacy. In her article, Sidsel Lied has a focus on values in children’s messages from spontaneous memorial places after the terror of July 22nd 2011 in Oslo and on Utøya island. The messages show that many children were in affirmative dialogue with values like love, human worth and life in the days after the terror. But some messages also show that this very support sometimes puts these same values under pressure: the terrorist was dehumanised, deprived his human worth and wanted dead. Lied points out that in spite of–or: because of–the legitimacy of this reaction, it may be seen as a signal for the school to put its statement of purposes and values in focus; not as a defence for the terrorist, but as an awakening to how we think and talk about those who are easy to blame.

References Alstad, Gunhild Tomter. 2013. Barnehagen som språklæringsarena. En kasusstudie av tre barnehagelæreres andrespråksdidaktiske praksiser. [Kindergarten as second language learning environment. A case study of three preschool teachers’ second language teaching practices]. Doctoral dissertation. Oslo: University of Oslo. Alstad, Gunhild Tomter, and Lise Iversen Kulbrandstad. 2017. “Linguistic diversity and literacy practices in early childhood education in Norway”. In Literacy in the Early Years; Reflections on International Research and Practice, edited by Claire J McLachlan and Alison W. Arrow,43–62. Singapore: Springer. Andersen, Camilla Eline. 2015. Mot en mindre profesjonalitet : "rase", tidlig barndom og Deleuzeoguattariske blivelser. [Towards less professionality. ‘Race’, early childhood and Deleuzoguattarian becomings]. Doctoral Dissertation. Stockhom: Stockholm University. Andersen, Camilla Eline, Thor Ola Engen, Thomas Gitz-Johansen, Chamilla Strædet Kristoffersen, Lise Skoug Obel, Sigrun Sand, and Berit Zachrisen. 2011. Den flerkulturelle barnehagen i rurale områder: Nasjonal surveyundersøkelse om minoritetsspråklige barn i barnehager utenfor de store byene. [The multicultural kindergarten in rural areas. A national survey of minority langague children in kindergartens outside the larger cities]. Retrieved from https://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/handle/11250/133970. Baker, Colin. 1988. Key Issues in Bilingualism and Bilingual Education. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group

25

—. 1996. Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. 2nd ed. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. —. 2001. Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. 3rd ed. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. —. 2011. Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Banks, James A. 2004. "Teaching for Social Justice, Diversity, and Citizenship in a Global World”. The Educational Forum. 68 (4), 296– 305. Doi: 10.1080/00131720408984645 —. 2009. Multicultural education. Dimensions and paradigms. In The Routledge International Companion to Multicultural Education, edited by Banks, James, 9–32. New York: Routledge. Beck, Christian W., Thor Ola Engen, Svein Østerud, Kamil Øzerk, and Joar Aasen. 2010. "Sosialiseringsteoretikeren Anton Hoëm - en internasjonal plassering". [The socialisation theorist Anton Hoëm – an international positioning]. In Höem, Anton. Sosialisering – Kunnskap – Identitet [Socialisation – Knowledge – Identity], 1–28. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Bhabha, Homi K. 2004. The location of culture. London: Routledge. Bourdieu, Pierre, and Jean-Claude Passeron. 1964. Les héritiers: les étudiants et la culture. Paris: Les Éditions de Minuit. Bourdieu, Pierre, and Jean-Claude Passeron. 1970. La reproduction: éléments pour une théorie du système d'enseignement. Paris: Minuit. Bugge, Liv Susanne, and Morten Løtveit. 2015. "Investigating student teachers' understanding of multicultural society." ATEE annual conference 2014 - Transitions in teacher education and Professional identities, Braga: University of Minho/Association for Teacher Education in Europe. Børhaug, Frédérique. 2015. "Når periferien utfordrer sentrum : interkulturell oppbygging som inkluderer minoritetsungdommer i skolen." [When the periphery challenges the centre: intercultural construction that includes minority adolescents in school]. In Eksistens og pedagogikk: En samtale om pedagogikkens oppgave, [Existence and pedagogy: A conversation on the role of pedagogy], edited by Paul Otto Brunstad, Solveig M. Reindal, and Herner Sæverot, 58–72. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Creese, Angela, and Adrian Blackledge. 2010. "Translanguaging in the Bilingual Classroom: A Pedagogy for Learning and Teaching?". Modern Language Journal 94 (1): 103-115. doi: 10.1111/j.15404781.2009.00986.x.

26

Chapter One

Cummins, Jim. 1984. Bilingualism and Special Education. Issues in Assessment and Pedagogy. San Diego: Multilingual Matters. Cummins, Jim, Colin Baker, and Nancy H. Hornberger. 2001. An introductory reader to the writings of Jim Cummins. Clevedon: Multilingual matters. Cummins, Jim, and Margaret Early. 2011. Identity Texts: the collaborative creation of power in multilingual schools. Stoke on Trent: Trentham Books. Danbolt, Anne Marit Vesteraas. 2011. "Bilingual Home-made Dictionaries as Bridges between Home and School." Journal of Teacher Education and Teachers’ Work 2 (1): 7–17. Danbolt, Anne Marit Vesteraas, and Lise Iversen Kulbrandstad. 2008. Klasseromskulturer for språklæring. Didaktisk fornying i den flerkulturelle skolen, [Classroom cultures for language learning. Didactic development in multicultural schools.] Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Danbolt, Anne Marit Vesteraas, and Bente Booth Hugo. 2012. "Flerspråklighet som ressurs. Interaksjon og samarbeid i flerspråklige elevgrupper." [Multilingualism as a resource. Interaction and cooperation in multilingual groups of students]. In I klasserommet [In the classroom], edited by Engen, Thor Ola, and Peder Haug, 83–101. Oslo: Abstrakt forlag. Danbolt, Anne Marit Vesteraas, and Lise Iversen Kulbrandstad. 2012. "Teacher Reflections under Changing Conditions for Literacy Learning in Multicultural Schools in Oslo." In Literacy Practices in Transition. Perspectives from the Nordic Countries, edited by Anne PitkänenHuhta, and Lars Holm, 209–227. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Danbolt, Anne Marit Vesteraas, and Lise Iversen Kulbrandstad. 2013. “’Säl er kaka på spanska’–arbete med litteracitet och flerspråkighet i norska klassrum” [‘Seal is cookie in Spanish’ – working on literacy and multilingualism in Norwegian classrooms]. In Flerspråkighet, litteracitet och multimodalitet. [Multilingualism, Literacy and Multimodality], edited by Åsa Wedin, and Christina Hedman, 19–44. Lund: Studentlitteratur. Darnell, Frank, and Anton Hoëm. 1996. Taken to extremes. Education in the Far North. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press. Deleuze, Gilles, and Guattari Félix. 1983. Anti-Oedipus : capitalism and schizophrenia, L'anti-Oedipe. Minneapolis, Minn: University of Minnesota Press. Deleuze, Gilles, and Félix Guattari. 1987. A thousand plateaus : capitalism and schizophrenia, Mille plateaux. Minneapolis, Minn: University of Minnesota Press.

Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group

27

Dewilde, Joke. 2013. Ambulating teachers. A case study of bilingual teachers and teacher collaboration. Doctoral dissertation. Oslo: University of Oslo, Faculty of Education. Dewilde, Joke Ingrid, and Thor-André Skrefsrud. 2015. “Kvalifisering i det flerkulturelle samfunnet. Dobbeltkvalifiseringsbegrepet sett i lys av et transkulturelt og transspråklig perspektiv” [Qualification for a multicultural society. The concept of double qualification in the light of a transcultural and translingual perspective]. In Dobbeltkvalifisering - Perspektiver på kultur, utdanning og identitet [Double qualification – Perspectives on culture, education and identity], edited by Steven Dobson, Lars Anders Kulbrandstad, Sigrun Sand, and Thor-André Skrefsrud, 61–82. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget. Dewilde, Joke, and Thor-André Skrefsrud. 2016. "Including alternative stories in the mainstream. How transcultural young people in Norway perform creative cultural resistance in and outside of school." International Journal of Inclusive Education. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2016.1145263. Dyndahl, Petter, Sidsel Karlsen, Odd Skårberg, and Siw Graabraek Nielsen. 2014. "Cultural Omnivorousness and Musical Gentrification: An Outline of a Sociological Framework and Its Applications for Music Education Research." Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education 13 (1): 40–69. Engen, Thor Ola. 1975. Avvikende atferd som sosialt fenomen. [Deviant behaviour as a social phenomenon]. Oslo: University of Oslo, Pedagogisk forskningsinstitutt. —. 1979. "Avvikende atferd og sosial bakgrunn." [Deviant behvoiour and social background]. In Samfunnsrettet pedagogikk [Pedagogy oriented towards society], edited by A. Hoëm, Chr. Beck and A. Tjeldvoll. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Engen, Thor Ola (ed.). 1985. Migrasjonspedagogikk. [Migration pedagogy]. Oslo: Gyldendal. Engen, Thor Ola. 1989. Dobbeltkvalifisering og kultursammenlikning. Utkast til en oppdragelses-, læreplan- og planleggingsmodell. [Double qualification and culture comparison. Draft of a model for education, curriculum design and planning]. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. —. 1994. "Intergrating Socialization in the Majority's School?". Migration. A European Journal of International and Ethnic Relations (3/4): 63–86. —. 2003. "Den gjenstridige allmues opera. Alf Prøysen og de undertryktes pedagogikk." [The opera of the recalcitrant people]. In Det Gjenstridige [The recalcitrant], edited by Jens-Ivar Nergård and Sigmund Nesset, 175–202. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag.

28

Chapter One

—. 2009a. "Socialization, literacy, and empowerment." In The Routledge international companion to multicultural education, edited by James A. Banks, 252–262. New York: Routledge. —. 2009b. "Three major strategies of adaptive instruction for LMistudents." In Teacher Diversity in Diverse Schools – Challenges and Opportunities for Teacher Education, edited by Bjørg-Karin Ringen, and Ole Kolbjørn Kjørven, 353–370. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. —. 2010a. "Literacy Instruction and Integration: The Case of Norway." Intercultural Education (European Journal of Intercultural studies) (1): 171-183. —. 2010b. “Enhetsskolen og minoritetene” [The unitary school and the minorities]. In Nasjonale minoriteter i det flerkulturelle Norge [National minorities in multicultural Norway], edited by Anne Bonnevie Lund , and Bente Bolme Moen, 121–139. Trondheim: Tapir. —. 2011. "Pedagogikk – fra basisfag til lærerutdanningsfag. En prosjektreise i tid og rom." [Pedagogy – from basic subject to teacer education subject]. In Lærerutdanningsfag, forskning og forskerutdanning. Bidrag til forskningsområder i endring [Teacher education subjects, research and PhD studies. Contributions to research areaes in change], edited by Petter Dyndahl, Thor Ola Engen, and Lise Iversen Kulbrandstad, 15–49. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Engen, Thor Ola, Sigrun Sand, and Lars Anders Kulbrandstad. 1996. Til keiseren hva keiserens er? Om minoritetselevenes utdanningsstrategier og skoleprestasjoner. Sluttrapport fra prosjektet "Minoritetselevers skoleprestasjoner". [To the emperor what belong to the emperor? On educational strategies and school achievements of minority students]. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Engen, Thor Ola, and Lars Anders Kulbrandstad. 1998. Tospråklighet og minoritetsundervisning. [Bilingualism and minority education]. Oslo: Ad Notam Gyldendal. Engen, Thor Ola, and Sidsel Lied. 2011. "Strategies of Differentiation in a multi-linguistic, multi-religious and multi-cultural school." Journal of Teacher Education and Teachers' Work 2 (1): 55–67. Fokstad, Per. 1917. "Hvordan fornorskningen i barneskolen grep ind i mit liv [How the Norwegianisation affected my life]." In Fornorskningen i Finmarken [The Norwegianisation of Finnmark], edited by Johannes Hidle, and Jens Otterbech. Kristiania: Lutherstiftelsens Boghandel. García, Ofelia. 2011. Bilingual Education in the 21st Century. Chicester: John Wiley & Sons.

Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group

29

Golden, Anne, Lise Iversen Kulbrandstad, and Kari Tenfjord. 2007. "Norsk andrespråksforskning – utviklingslinjer fra 1980 til 2005." [Second language research in Norway, lines of development from 1980 to 2005]. Nordand. Nordisk tidsskrift for andrespråksforskning 2 (1): 5–41. Golden, Anne, and Marte Monsen. 2015. "Vurdering av tekster skrevet til norskprøvene for voksne." [Assessment of texts written for the tests in Norwegian for adult immigrants]. In Skriving på norsk som andrespråk. Vurdering, opplæring og elevenes stemmer [Writing in Norwegian as a Second Language], edited by Anne Golden, and Elisabeth Selj, 201–216. Oslo: Cappelen Damm. Golden, Anne, Lars Anders Kulbrandstad, and Kari Tenfjord. 2017. "Evaluation of texts in test – or where is the dog buried?" In Crosslinguistic Influence and Distinctive Patterns of Language Learning. Findings and Insights from ASK Learner Corpus, edited by Anne Golden, Scott Jarvis, and Kari Tenfjord, 231–27. Cleavedon: Multlingual Matters. Gravem, Peder. 2004. KRL – et fag for alle?: KRL-faget som svar på utfordringer i en flerkulturell enhetsskole. [KRL – a subject for all? The KRL subject as an answer to challenges in a multicultural common school]. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Hodne, Bjarne. 1994. Norsk nasjonalkultur : en kulturpolitisk oversikt [Norwegian national culture – a culture-political overview]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Hoëm, Anton. 1978. Sosialisering: en teoretisk og empirisk modellutvikling [Socialisation: a theoretical and empirical model for development]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Hvenekilde, Anne ed. 1980. Mellom to språk : 4 kontrastive språkstudier for lærere. [Between two languages: 4 contrastive language studies for teachers]. Oslo: Cappelen. Hvenekilde, Anne. 1986. "Ordformer i norske stiler skrevet av tyrkiske og vietnamesiske elever." [Word forms in Norwegian texts written by Turkish and Vietnamese students]. NOA. Norsk som andrespråk. 1 (1):17–76. Hyltenstam, Kenneth, ed. 1979. Svenska i invandrarperspektiv. Kontrastiv analys och språktypologi. [Swedish as seen from the immigrants’ point of view: contrastive analyses and language typology]. Lund: Liber Läromedel. Hyltenstam, Kenneth, Ottar Brox, Thor Ola Engen, and Anne Hvenekilde (eds.). Tilpasset språkopplæring for minoritetselever. Rapport fra konsensuskonferanse. [Adaptive language teaching for language minority students. Report from a consensus conference]. Oslo: Research Council of Norway.

30

Chapter One

Høgmo, Asle, Karl Jan Solstad, and Tom Tiller. 1981. Skolen og den lokale utfordring. En sluttrapport fra Lofotenprosjektet. [School and the local challenge. A final report from the Lofoten projcet]. Tromsø: University of Tromsø. Karlsen, Sidsel. 2014. "Exploring democracy: Nordic music teachers’ approaches to the development of immigrant students’ musical agency." International Journal of Music Education 32 (4): 422–436. doi: 10.1177/0255761413515806. Kjørven, Ole Kolbjørn. 2014. RE teachers' religious literacy : a qualitative analysis of RE teachers' interpretations of the biblical narrative The Prodigal Son. Doctoral disseratiation. Oslo: MF Norwegian School of Theology. Kjørven, Ole Kolbjørn, Bjørg Karin Ringen and Antoinette Gagné, eds. 2009. Teacher Diversity in Diverse Schools – Challenges and Opportunities for Teacher Education. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Krejsler, John 2007. "Skolereform, livslang læring og individualisering." [School reform. Life long learning and individualisation]. Norsk Pedagogisk Tidsskrift 91 (4): 277–289. Kulbrandstad, Lars Anders. 1997. Språkportretter. Studier av tolv minoritetselevers språkbruksmønstre, språkholdninger og språkferdigheter. [Language portraits. Studies of twelve minority students’ patterns of langauge use, language attitudes and language skills].Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. —. 1999. Kurs + utviklingsprosjekter. [Courses and developmental work]. Elverum: Høgskolen i Hedmark, Rapportserien. —. 2001. "Samfunnsvirkelighet og lærebokvirkelighet - nye former for språkvariasjon i samfunnet og lærebøkene." [Societal reality and textbook reality]. In Fokus på pedagogiske tekster 3, edited by Staffan Selander, and Dagrun Skjelbred, 67–84. Tønsberg: Høgskolen i Vestfold. —. 2002a. "Omtale av innvandreres måte å snakke norsk på. En studie av et avismateriale fra Internett." [Reference to immigrants’ ways of speaking Norwegian. A study of a newpaper material from the Internet]. In Forskning i nordiske sprog som andet- og fremmedsprog. Rapport fra konference i Reykjavík 23.-25. maj 2001 edited by Audur Hauksdóttir, et al. Reykjavik: Háskóli Íslands. —. 2002b. "Skjønnlitteraturen som vindu - Åsta Holths finnskogtrilogi lest med sosiolingvistiske briller." [Fiction as a window – Åsta Holt’s Finn Forest trilogy read through sociolinguistic glasses] In Kulturell identitet og regional utvikling. Rapport fra en forskningskonferanse, edited by Thor Ola Engen. Elverum: Høgskolen i Hedmark.

Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group

31

—. 2006. "Det va' jo norsk da, men det va' kje norsk : Ungdommer møter andrespråkspreget norsk." [‘It was Norwegian, all right, but it wasn’t Norwegian’: Adolescents meet second language accented Norwegian]. In Den nye norsken?, edited by Helge Sandøy, and Kari Tenfjord. Oslo: Novus. —. 2008. "På jakt etter Shakeel og Duyen blant kløyvd infinitiv og tjukk l framstillingen av språklig variasjon i norskbøker for ungdomstrinnet." [Looking for Shakeel and Duyen among slit infinitive and thick l- the presentation of language variation in textbooks for Norwegian at middle school level]. In Andrespråk, tospråklighet, norsk, edited by Anne Golden, and Helene Uri, 92-104. Oslo: Unipub. —. 2009. "’Det finnes det vel ikke noe forskning på?’ Et eksempel på studentinvolvering i forskning." [‘Do we have any research about this?’An example of student involvement in research]. Acta Didactica Norge 3 (1): 1–21. —. 2011. "National or general tolerance for variation? Attitudes to dialect and foreign accent in the media." In Applied Linguistics, Global and Local. Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the British Association for Applied Linguistics 9-11 September 2010 University of Aberdeen edited by Robert McColl Millar and Mercedes Durham, 173–181. London: Scitsiugnil Press. Kulbrandstad, Lars Anders, and Peter Harder. 1982. Tverrspråklig grammatikk. [Multilingual grammar]. Oslo: Gyldendal. Kulbrandstad, Lise Iversen. 1996. Lesing på et andrespråk. En studie av fire innvandrerungdommers lesing av læreboktekster på norsk. [Reading in a second language. A study on four immigrant students reading text books in Norwegian.] Doctoral dissertation University of Oslo, printed in 1998 at Universitetsforlaget, Oslo. —. 1997. "Hvilket bilde gir norsk barne- og ungdomslitteratur av innvandrere som språkbrukere? " [What kind of picture do Norwegian children books paint of immigrants as langauge users?]. Norsklæreren (2): 38–49. —. 2001. "Grunnskolefaget norsk og målet om ‘innblikk i andre kulturer’".[Norwegian in compulsory school and the learning goal ‘insight in other cultures’]. In Fokus på pedagogiske tekster 3, edited by Staffan Selander, and Dagrun Skjelbred, 85–104. Tønsberg: Høgskolen i Vestfold. —. 2010. "Forskningsbasert profesjonsutøvelse, lærerutdanning og andrespråksforskning." [Research based professional practice, teacher education and second language research]. In Systematisk, variert, men ikke tilfeldig. [Systematic, varied, but not arbitrary.], edited by Hilde Johansen, Anne Golden, and Jon Erik Hagen, 13–23. Oslo: Novus.

32

Chapter One

Kulbrandstad, Lise Iversen, and Anne Lillevold Jacobsen. 2005. "Leseløft med lesekvarteret." [Promotion of reading by fifteen minutes of reading each morning.] In Årboka. Litteratur for barn og unge 2005, edited by Per Olav Kaldestad, and Karin Beate Vold, 138–145. Oslo: Det Norske Samlaget. Lied, Sidsel. 2004. Elever og livstolkingspluralitet i KRL-faget : mellomtrinnselever i møte med fortellinger fra ulike religioner og livssyn. [Students and a plurality of philosophies of life: Intermediate stage students meeting stories from different religions and philosophies of life]. Elverum: Høgskolen i Hedmark. —. 2005. "Forholdet mellom elev og lærer i KRL-faget: et asymmetrisk eller dialogisk forhold." [The relation between student and teacher in the KRL subject: an asymmetrical or dialogical relation]. In Prismet: pedagogisk tidsskrift, [5]–21. Oslo: Institutt for kristen oppseding. —. 2009a. "The Norwegian Christianity, Religion and Philosophy subject KRL in Strasbourg." British Journal of Religious Education 31 (3): 263–275. doi: 10.1080/01416200903112474. —. 2009b. "Sheltered from plurality." In Religious Diversity and Education - Nordic Perspectives edited by Geir Skeie, 161–180. Münster: Waxman Verlag. —. 2012. Studenter i forskning : ett svar på utfordringer fra det flerkulturelle og livstolkingsplurale klasserommet [Students in research: one answer to the challenges from the classroom marked by multiculturality and a plurality of philosohpies of life]. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Løtveit, Morten, and Liv Susanne Bugge. 2015 "What do we mean by multicultural awareness?" ATEE annual conference 2014 - Transitions in teacher education and Professional identities, Braga: University of Minho/Association for Teacher Education in Europe. McCall, Leslie. 2005. "The complexity of intersectionality." Signs 30 (3): 1771–1800. Monsen, Marte. 2014. Store forventninger? Læreroppfatninger om eksterne leseprøver. [Great expectations? Teachers’ beliefs and knowledge about standardized reading tests]. Doctoral dissertation. Oslo: University of Oslo. Nes, Kari. 2003. "Why does education for all have to be inclusive education?" In. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. —. 2014. "The professional knowledge of inclusive special educators". In The SAGE Handbook of Special Education, 859–872. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group

33

Nes, Kari, Tony Booth, Mel Ainscow, Julie Allan, Keith Ballard, Marit Strømstad, Thor Ola Engen, Morten Fleischer, and Berit H. Johnsen. 2002. Unitary School - inclusive School : a conference report / elektronisk ressurs, Rapport / Høgskolen i Hedmark. Elverum: Høgskolen i Hedmark. Niemi, Einar. 2003. "Kvenene i nord – ressurs eller trussel?" [The Kvens in the North – resource or threat?] In Norsk innvandringshistorie [Norwegian immigration history], edited by Åsta Brenna, Trond Bjorli, and Knut Kjeldstadli, 128–146. Oslo: PAX. Nussbaum, Martha C. 1997. Cultivating humanity : a classical defense of reform in liberal education. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. OECD. 2005. The Definition and Selection of Key Competences. Executive Summary. Paris. Pratt, Mary Louise. 1991. "Arts of the Contact Zone." Profession: 33–40. Qvortrup, Lars. 2001. Det lærende samfund: hyperkompleksitet og viden [Hypercomplexity and knowlegde]. København: Gyldendal. Ragnarsdóttir Hanna, and Lars Anders Kulbrandstad. 2015. “Læringsrum for integration og social retfærdighed. Succeshistorier fra elever med indvandrerbaggrund og skolesamfund i fire nordiske lande.” [Learning spaces for inclusion and social justice: Success stories from immigrant students and school communtites in four Nordic countries]. Språk i Norden, 61–70. Randen, Gunhild Tveit. 2013. Tilstrekkelige ferdigheter i norsk? Kartlegging av minoritetsspråklige skolebegynneres språkferdigheter. [Sufficient proficiency in Norwegian? Assessment of minority students who start school.] Doctoral dissertation. University of Bergen. Randen, Gunhild, Inger Marie Lindboe, Thor-André Skrefsrud, and Sissel Østberg (eds.). 2015. Refleksjon og relevans. Språklig og kulturelt mangfold i lærerutdanningene [Reflection and relevance. Linguistic and cultural diversity in teacher education]. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Randen, Gunhild Tveit, Anne Marit Vesteraas Danbolt, and Kirsten Palm. 2015. "Refleksjoner om flerspråklighet og språklig mangfold i lærerutdanningen." [Reflections on multilingualism and linguistic diversity in teacher education]. In Randen et al. eds. 2015, 65–95. Ringen, Bjørg-Karin, and Ole Kolbjørn Kjørven. 2009. "The design of a teacher education program for bilingual teachers in Norway." In Teacher Diversity in Diverse Schools – Chlenges and Opportunities for Teacher Education, edited by Ole Kolbjørn Kjørven, Bjørg Karin Ringen and Antoinette Gagné, 131–144. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag.

34

Chapter One

Rokkan, Stein. 1987. "Geografi, religion og samfunnsklasse: Kryssende konfliktlinjer i norsk politikk." [Geography, religion and social class]. In Stein Rokkan. Stat, nasjon, klasse [State, nation and class], 111– 205. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Sand, Sigrun. 1996. Integrering eller assimilering? Flyktningeforeldrenes syn på det pedagogiske tilbudet i barnehagen og grunnskolen [Integration or assimilation? Minority parents’ views on the education offered to children and students in kindergarten and basic school]. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. —. 2008. Ulikhet og fellesskap: flerkulturell pedagogikk i barnehagen. [Inequality and community: Multicultural education in kindergarten]. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. —. 2009. Samarbeid hjem - skole : blir alle foreldrene inkludert? [Home – school cooperation]. In Skolen og elevenes forutsetninger: om tilpasset opplæring i pedagogisk praksis og forskning [The school and the students’ background: on adapted education in pedagogical practice and research], edited by Thomas Nordahl, and Steven Dobson, 177– 191. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Sand, Sigrun, and Tove Skoug. 2002. Integrering - sprik mellom intensjon og realitet? Evaluering av prosjekt med gratis korttidsplass i barnehage for alle femåringer i bydel Gamle Oslo. [Integration – a gap between intention and reality? Evaluation of a project with free shorttime kindergarten for all five year olds in the city district Gamle Oslo]. Elverum: Høgskolen i Hedmark, rapportserien. Sand, Sigrun, and Tove Skoug. 2003. Prosjektbarnehagen og 4-åringene : evaluering av prosjekt med gratis korttidsplass i barnehage for alle 4og 5-åringer i bydel Gamle Oslo.[The project kindergarten and the four year olds: evaluation of a project with free short-time kindergarten for all four and five year olds in the city district Gamle Oslo]. Elverum: Høgskolen i Hedmark, rapportserien. Selinker, Larry. 1974. "Interlanguage." In Error Analysis. Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition, edited by Jack C Richards, 31–54. Essex, England: Longman. Skaret, Anne. 2011. Litterære kulturmøter : en studie av bildebøker og barns resepsjon. [Cultural encounters in literature. A study of pircture books and children’s reception]. Doctoral dissertation. Oslo: University of Oslo. Skoug, Tove 1992. "Slik tar vi vare på de yngste flyktningene" [This is the way we should take care of the young refugees]. In Unge flyktninger i Norge [Young refugees in Norway], edited by O. Kristoffersen. Oslo: Kommuneforlaget AS.

Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group

35

Skoug, Tove, and Sigrun Sand. 2003. Med Madhia og Akbar fra barnehage til skole : en oppfølging av prosjekt med gratis korttidsplass i barnehage for alle femåringer i bydel Gamle Oslo. [With Madhia and Akbar from kindergarten to school – a follow-up on the project with free short-time kindergarten for all five year olds in the city district Gamle Oslo]. Elverum: Høgskolen i Hedmark, rapportserien. Skrefsrud, Thor-Andre. 2016. The Intercultural Dialogue - Preparing Teachers for Diversity: Münster: Waxmann Verlag. Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove. 1981. Tvåspråkighet. [Bilingualism]. Lund: Liber Läromedel. Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove. 1985. "Tvåspråkighet. Begreppets status och konsekvenser för undervisning av invandrare och minoriteter." [Bilingualism. The status of the concepts and consequences for the education of immigrants and minorities] In Migrasjonspedagogikk [Migration pedagogy], edited by Thor Ola Engen. Oslo: Gyldendal. Slagstad, Rune. 1998. De nasjonale strateger [National strategists]. Oslo: Pax. Solstad, Karl Jan. 1978. Riksskole i utkantstrok. [National school in remote areas]. Tromsø: Universitetsforlaget. Statistics Norway. 1996. “Innvandrerbefolkningen er på 220 000”. [220 000 immigrants.] Ukens statistikk nr.1. www.ssb.no —. 2016. Immigrants and Norwegian-born to immigrant parents. 1 January 2016. www.ssb.no Stubø, Ingebjørg. 2005. "Ord og bilde i samspill : bibelfortellinger og illustrasjoner i det flerkulturelle klasserommet." [Word and picture in interplay: biblical stories and illustrations in the multicultural classroom], Prismet (3), 215- 230. —. 2012. "”Det i sig selv værdifulde” Om skjønnhetserfaringens relevans i den norske grunnskolens RLE-fag." Nordidactica : Journal of Humanities and Social Science Education (2):31-53. Syversen, Eva Marie. 2014. Skogen, hjemmet og veien : kulturelle erindringssteder i finnskoglitteraturen 1920-1940. [The forest, the home and the road: cultural places of memory in the Finn Forest literature 1920–1940]. Doctoral dissertation. Kristiansand: University of Agder. Sætersdal, Ulla. 1979-1985. Fremmedspråklige elever i grunnskolen i Bergen (Fana).[Foreign language students in the basic school of Bergen]. In Fem rapporter fra PP-kontoret i Bergen til skolestyret. nr. 1-1979, nr. 2-1981, nr.3-1982 (om barnehage), nr.4-1984, nr.5-1985. [Five reports from the pedagogical-psychologial office to the Bergen school board]. Bergen: Bergen kommune, Pedagogisk-psykologisk tjeneste.

36

Chapter One

Tingbjörn, Gunnar. 1981. Invandrarbarnen och tvåspråkigheten : rapport från ett forskningsprojekt om hur invandrarbarn med olika förstaspråk lär sig svenska. [Immigrant children and bilingualism. Report from a study on how immigrant students with different first languages learn Swedish]. Stockholm: Liber UtbildningsFörlaget. United Nations. 1966. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 19 December 1966. https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume %20999/volume-999-I-14668-English.pdf. Accessed 28.06.2016 Vertovec, Steven. 2007. "Super-diversity and its implications." Ethnic and Racial Studies 30 (6): 1024–1054. Vikør, Lars S. 2006. "Perspektiv på språkutviklinga i Noreg: internasjonalt, nasjonalt og regionalt." [Perspectives on the language development in Norway: international, national and regional] In Monokultur og multikultur. Nasjonsbyggende diskurser 1905–2005 [Monoculture and multiculture: nation building discourses 1905– 2005], edited by Thor Ola Engen, Lars Anders Kulbrandstad, and Eva Marie Syversen, 73–92. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Walby, Sylvia, Jo Armstrong, and Sofia Strid. 2012. "Intersectionality: Multiple Inequalities in Social Theory." Sociology 46 (2): 224–240. Walton, S. 2006. "Fleirtalsmålet med eit minoritetsproblem. Nynorsk skriftkultur i det fleirkulturelle samfunnet." [The majority language as a minority problem. Nynorsk written culture in the multicultural society]. In Monokultur og multikultur. Nasjonsbyggende diskurser 1995–2005 [Monoculture and multiculture: nation building discourses 1905–2005], edited by Thor Ola Engen, Lars Anders Kulbrandstad, and Eva Marie Syversen, 92–106. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Wikan, Gerd, and Jørgen Klein. 2015. "Global perspectives in teacher education: a study of international practicum". ATEE annual conference 2014 - Transitions in teacher education and Professional identities. Proceedings, 27–36. ATEE - Association for Teacher Education in Europe. Zachariassen, Ketil 2012. Samiske nasjonale strateger. Samepolitikk og nasjonsbygging 1900–1940. Isak Saba, Anders Larsen og Per Fokstad, Karasjok: alliidLagadus. Zachrisen, Berit. 2009. "Klasseledelse på grunnlag av elevenes forutsetninger." [Classroom management based on students’ background]. In Skolen og elevenes forutsetninger: om tilpasset opplæring i pedagogisk praksis og forskning [The school and the students’ background: on adapted education in pedagogical practice and research], edited by Thomas Nordahl, and Steven Dobson, 39–57. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag.

Education and Diversity: Introduction of a Multidisciplinary Research Group

37

—. 2015. Like muligheter i lek? Interetniske møter i barnehagen. [Equal opportunities in play? Interethnic encounters in kindergarten]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Øzerk, Kamil Z. 2006. Tospråklig opplæring : utdanningspolitiske og pedagogiske perspektiver. [Bilingual education: perspectives from educational policy and pedagogy]. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag.

SECTION TWO: DIVERSITY, LITERACY AND INCLUSION

CHAPTER TWO DEVELOPING RESEARCH-BASED LITERACY TEACHING PRACTICES FOR DIVERSE SCHOOLS IN NORWAY LISE IVERSEN KULBRANDSTAD

Change, and rapid change, will characterize the next millennium. —Hoffmann & Pearson (2000, 42)

Norwegian teacher education for compulsory schools is facing comprehensive reform. In 2017 all programs were developed into fiveyear integrated master’s studies with a stronger emphasis on researchbased knowledge. One of the purposes is to qualify new teachers for using research-based teaching practices. This article looks into the background of the reform and also explores different roles teachers might be given or take on in research. Examples in the discussion are taken from literacy teaching in linguistically diverse schools. The changing streams of global migration have altered the composition of students in Norwegian kindergartens and classrooms. In 1987 only 2.3% of students in compulsory schools were registered as language minority students. Today 16% of the Norwegian population have a migrant family background, which means that they themselves or their parents were born outside of Norway (Statistics Norway 2016a). In compulsory schools around 14% belong to this group, up from 10% in 2009 (Utdanningsdirektoratet 2014). These changing demographics have challenged the provision of equal educational opportunities since an achievement gap between linguistic majority and minority students is now well documented, for example in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA; e.g., Kjærnsli and Roe 2010), the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS; Van Dal, Solheim, and Gabrielsen 2012), and in national tests in reading (Steinkellner 2014; Statistics Norway 2016b). Given the importance of literacy for learning, these results call for a

Developing Research-based Literacy Teaching Practices

41

special focus on language and literacy teaching in diverse settings. Following the Norwegian so-called PISA-chock in 2001, when politicians were surprised by low national scores (Bergesen 2006), reading and writing were introduced across the content areas in the curriculum guidelines for compulsory and upper-secondary school (KD 2006), a reform aimed at making all teachers aware of their role as literacy teachers when teaching their usual subject. As reading competence is also increasingly used as a measure of school achievement, there has been a growing interest in literacy teaching beyond the initial phase. Teachers who are qualified to use as well as take part in research, and at the same time are interested in developing new knowledge about their own teaching and their students’ learning, develop what has been called “research literacy” (BERA 2014, 40). In this term, “literacy” refers to “competence or knowledge in a specified area” and not to “ability to read and write” (Oxford Dictionary of English). Such competence in research is increasingly seen as an important teaching qualification (Eurydice 2013; Feyerer et al. 2014; OECD 2014; Sundberg and Adolfsson 2015; Venkat and Osman 2014). Traditionally, however, Norwegian teachers report little use of research. For example, in a survey from 2008 few teachers agreed that seeking new knowledge from research was important for their professional work (TNS Gallup 2008). In sharp contrast with these results are the recommendations from an evaluation of Norwegian teacher education for compulsory schools from 2006, in which the evaluation panel included research in its understanding of professional teaching. The panel emphasized that practice, theory, and research should be seen as an integrated whole, both in developing the teaching profession and in teacher education (NOKUT 2006, 24). The evaluation, which was somewhat critical with regard to the models used for teacher education at the time, was headed by the Finnish Professor Sven-Erik Hansén.1 In Norway, Finnish educational policy and Finnish teacher education have been met with great interest in light of the high Finnish scores on PISA. While Norway reformed teacher education in the 1970s by expanding the length of programs from two to three years and by abandoning earlier four-year programs that did not build on exams from upper-secondary school, Finland at the same time decided to base their teacher education on

1

The evaluation panel also included a Swedish professor, Berit Askling, a Norwegian professor, Lars Monsen, a Norwegian associate professor, Lisbeth Halse Ytreberg, two students, Hallvard Lavoll Nylenna and Anne Marte Klubbenes, as well as one school leader, Bjørn Indrelid, and County Governor Inger Lise Gjørv.

42

Chapter Two

research and converted all programs into university-based master’s programs (Sahlberg 2012; Westbury et al. 2005). The recommendations from the evaluation of Norwegian teacher education in 2006 have been especially influential in designing the succeeding teacher education reforms that have all sought to strengthen the research orientation. Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences2 has played a crucial role in the preparation of these reforms, since the Ministry of Education and Research located the secretariat responsible for both the kindergarten teacher education reform (KD 2012) and the master’s reform in teacher education for compulsory school (KD 2015a) at this university. I was appointed leader of the committee responsible for producing a proposal for the new master’s programs (Rammeplanutvalget 2015),3 and also served as a member of the committee for both kindergarten teacher education reform and the previous reform of teacher education for compulsory school in 2010 (KD 2010a,b). When discussing these reforms in light of the challenge of preparing teachers for research-based literacy teaching in linguistically diverse classrooms, I will lean on the experiences from my work on these committees. When I look into different roles teachers take, or are given, when they come into contact with research, I will lean on research conducted at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences.

2

Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences was established January 1, 2017, as a merger between Hedmark University of Applied Sciences and Lillehammer University College. Teacher education was part of the former Hedmark University of Applied Sciences. 3 Rammeplanutvalget was a committee appointed by the Ministry of Education and Research in February 2015 with the mission of developing a proposal for the regulations of the master’s reform. Professor Lise Iversen Kulbrandstad was appointed leader of the committee. Appointed members were Norwegian teacher educators (Professor Frode Rønning, Associate Professors Rachel Jakhelln, Hilde Afdahl, Magne Rogne, Rector Rasmus Stokke), student teachers (Anders K. Langseth and Tine Borg), school leaders (Eva Belboe and Hilde Gran), and one professor from Finland, Jari Lavonen, head of the Department of Teacher Education, University of Helsinki. A detailed mandate was given by the Ministry (KD 2015a). The secretariat at Hedmark University of Applied Sciences was headed by Associate Professor Anne Marit V. Danbolt, while Professor ThorAndré Skrefsrud and senior adviser Ragnhild Narum served as staff. The committee delivered its proposal to the Ministry of Education and Research in October 2015 (Rammeplanutvalget 2015).

Developing Research-based Literacy Teaching Practices

43

Addressing Challenges in Schools Challenges in schools are increasingly met by changes in teacher education. This is easy to observe in a country like Norway where the politicians, not the higher education institutions themselves, decide on objectives, learning outcomes, and structure of teacher education programs. Changes thus mean national reforms. As an example, Norwegian teacher education for compulsory school has been reformed four times in the period 1992–2010, and again in 2017 as existing programs were developed into five-year integrated master’s programs with a stronger emphasis on research-based knowledge (KD 2014a). These reforms have all been part of politicians’ ambitions to create high-quality schools (e.g., KUF 2002; KD 2009a, 2014a). As a political strategy this is not unique to Norway. An important trendsetter in this respect is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), with its recommendations to governments based on international studies and reviews. In one of the reviews, Education at a Glance (2014 edition), the strategy in question is, for example, described in the following way: The far-reaching economic and social changes in recent years have made high-quality schooling more important than ever before. Countries are no longer interested in merely getting an adequate supply of teachers, but also in raising the quality of learning for all. The latter can only be achieved if all students receive high-quality instruction. (OECD 2014, 496)

The Norwegian reforms indicate a permanent dissatisfaction with the state of the art. This dissatisfaction is nurtured by the growing importance of national evaluations and international comparisons of school performance, like PISA and PIRLS, where the politicians expect better results than those achieved earlier (KD 2013a; Røe Isaksen 2015). To close the achievement gap and fulfill the goals of equal educational opportunities and high-quality instruction for all children and adolescents, several steps are being taken. Changes in teacher education are important for the long-term investments in capacity-building, but intensifying continuing education for teachers working in schools and kindergartens is also required since too few teachers have special qualifications for teaching linguistically diverse student groups (e.g., Danbolt et al. 2010; Rambøll Management 2006; Taguma et al. 2009; Vibe 2012). The Norwegian Government has addressed this challenge through several major ongoing projects for improving teacher qualifications, such as Competence for Quality (KD 2015b) and Competence for Diversity. One of the principles of the latter project is school-based competence

44

Chapter Two

development in which whole school communities are invited to take part (Lødding 2015).

Research-Rich Schools Strengthening the research orientation and the research base of teacher education and of teaching practices in schools is on the agenda in Norway, as well as at the OECD and the European Union (EU). For example, in 2007 the European Commission stressed the importance of acquiring knowledge and skills in educational research in initial teacher education, arguing that future teachers need to be able to “incorporate classroom and academic research results into their teaching” (Eurydice 2013, 30). In 2013 the British Educational Research Association (BERA) together with the Royal Society for the Encouragement of the Arts launched an inquiry where they mobilized several researchers to write review articles on what kinds of research contributions might possibly lead to the improvement of teacher education, and teaching and learning in schools (BERA 2013, 4; BERA 2014, 3). What these reviews showed was “[s]ubstantial evidence (both empirical and philosophical) that research has a major contribution to make to effective teacher education,” and that there is “also some robust evidence that doing so improves the quality of students’ learning in schools” (BERA 2013, 4). According to the reviews, research can inform teacher education in four main ways: developing the content of the programs, designing and structuring teacher education, equipping future teachers to engage with and “be discerning consumers of research,” and equipping future teachers to conduct research themselves (BERA, 2014, 6). “Research-rich schools” is understood as schools where “innovation, creativity and enquiry-based practice” are encouraged and where teachers themselves are qualified to “drive change, rather than have it ‘done’ to them” (BERA 2014, 40). “Research literacy” is further described as: the extent to which teachers and school and college leaders are familiar with a range of research methods, with the latest research findings and with the implications of this research for their day-to-day practice, and for education policy and practice more broadly. (40)

At the same time, the report stresses that research literacy is not to be regarded as an isolated quality but as a quality that underpins subject and pedagogical knowledge as well as classroom practice (BERA 2014, 10). Consequently, the competence in research described by the concept is seen as a “key dimension of professional teacher identity” (BERA 2014, 40), a

Developing Research-based Literacy Teaching Practices

45

parallel to the previously quoted definition of the teaching profession used by the panel who evaluated Norwegian teacher education (NOKUT 2006). The concept of research literacy is also central to the BERA reports’ vision of an educational system which is both research-rich and self-improving. Research-literate teachers working in research-rich schools are more likely to be able to have “the capacity, motivation and opportunity to use research-related skills to investigate what is working well and what isn’t fully effective in their own practice” (BERA 2014, 18). While the BERA reports cover teaching of all subjects, we also find that the use of research is advocated when literacy teaching specifically is addressed. The International Literacy Association (ILA), for example, refers both to the increasing number of English language learners and to new modes of learning and teaching driven by digital technologies when the association emphasizes the strong need for “research-validated approaches to literacy advancement” (ILA 2016, 3).

Research-Based Teaching Practices Research is traditionally associated with theory more than practice. However, as we have seen, research-based teaching practices are receiving more and more attention. Thus, in teacher education programs aimed at developing professionals in teaching, research-based education cannot only be understood as research-based theory taught at teacher education institutions; research-based practice in schools must also be addressed. In the proposals for the Norwegian master’s reform published in November 2015, the progression in the teaching practicum was inspired by the program at the University of Helsinki, going from observation and analysis to the development of a research perspective on teaching as well as teaching practices based on research and experience (Rammeplanutvalget 2015). In the Norwegian context, the perspective of fostering researchbased professional practices is in fact also inspired by official research policy, where research-based welfare policy and professional practice have been promoted among long-term priorities and strategic objectives since 2009 (KD 2009b, 2013b). The teachers’ unions in Norway have traditionally been more reluctant with regard to the use of research, leaning more heavily on experiencedbased approaches to knowledge development. In recent years, however, this has been changing. In 2009 the national congress of the largest teachers’ union discussed research-based teaching and agreed on the following statement: “Increasingly, it will be demanded of us that we can explain and argue our teaching practices on the basis of research results [. . .];

46

Chapter Two

professional knowledge is grounded in research and in experience” (Utdanningsforbundet 2009, author’s translation). Results from an OECD study of teachers from 24 countries working in lower-secondary schools (the first TALIS study from 2008) also point toward increasing acceptance by teachers internationally of the need to participate in research. Teachers chose “qualification programs” and “individual and collaborative research,” as well as “informal dialog to improve teaching” as the professional development activities that have the most impact on their work. When reporting their current professional development activities, they noted that they frequently participated in informal dialogs but seldom took part in research and qualification programs (Schleicher 2011, 206). In the second TALIS study from 2013, the average international score for participation in research was 31%, while the average score for Norwegian lower-secondary teachers was 15% (Caspersen et al. 2014). For Swedish teachers it was only 10% (Skolverket 2014).

Teachers’ Different Roles in Research The collaboration between teacher educators and teachers in schools is an important foundation for developing teacher education programs. The results from the TALIS study quoted above are interesting because the teachers who took part in the study considered participation in research as being important to professional development. Before focusing on the changes in Norwegian teacher education more closely, I will look at examples of different roles teachers may be given or take on in research projects. I will address three roles in particular: teachers as users of research, teachers as participants in research, and teachers as researchers. When teachers are users of research, they develop research-based teaching practices, read books and articles, search for new knowledge, take courses, use and/or develop materials and methods based on research, and use research to discuss, reflect, evaluate, and make changes in their teaching practice, among other activities. This is probably the teachers’ main involvement with research. Of importance here is the contact between researchers and teachers. At Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, we have included teachers’ development of their own teaching practices in diverse schools and kindergartens as part of professional development courses since the late 1990s (Kulbrandstad 1999). During an in-service course in 2015, for example, the participants developed and tested research-based teaching practices in linguistically diverse kindergartens, inspired by a research project by one of the teacher

Developing Research-based Literacy Teaching Practices

47

educators in which second-language teaching practices in three kindergartens were analyzed (Alstad 2013). When teachers are participants in research, they can play very different roles. Normally, the roles are allocated by the researcher. Teachers are oftentimes the objects of study themselves (being observed, videoed, interviewed, answering surveys, trying out different methods, etc.). In some studies, efforts are made to alter the focus so that teachers themselves can bring in more of their own experiences. To “give teachers a voice” is an expression used to describe such approaches. In a qualitative interview study, ten experienced teachers of Norwegian were asked to present a text that had functioned well in their classes. The narrative of this text-based literacy teaching practice filled the first phase of the interview, resulting not only in interesting data but also in a more dialogic atmosphere than normally the case in interview situations (Kulbrandstad et al. 2005). Another way teachers can be participants in research is to be facilitators, for example by helping researchers in doing classroom studies. They can assist in recruiting informants, finding rooms, placing students at the researcher’s disposal, helping find material, and so forth. Such help has for a long time been taken for granted. However, in some municipalities it is now becoming harder to get access to classrooms. School leaders and/or teachers feel too busy to assist researchers. This is reported as a possible challenge for the new master’s programs, when several student teachers will approach schools to collect data for their theses. On the other hand, teachers might also agree to have more active roles in collaboration with researchers. Mostly, this kind of cooperation is initiated by researchers, but there are also examples of teachers contacting researchers to try out changes. Kulbrandstad and Jacobsen (2005) describe a project in a lower-secondary school based on a teacher initiative. Being a teacher and also part of the school’s leadership team, Jacobsen was engaged in promoting reading engagement for all students. Together with the researcher, she suggested altering the time schedule for the whole school. Her proposal was that each school day should start with 15 minutes of silent reading. After one semester, the evaluation was deemed very positive, both by teachers and students. In all, 83% of the students reported that they enjoyed the reading time; several added that they enjoyed a quiet start in the morning and that this organization of the day prompted them to read more. Another example of active collaboration, this time initiated by researchers, is a project aimed at developing literacy teaching practices in diverse schools in Oslo with between 40 and 60% students with immigrant

48

Chapter Two

family backgrounds (Danbolt and Kulbrandstad 2008, 2012). Here an action-research approach was used. The collaboration was divided into different phases, each of which assigned different roles to the researchers and the teachers, an approach inspired by Laursen (2006). In the preparation phase of the classroom interventions, teachers and researchers collaborated. The teachers chose an area of teaching they wanted to improve, such as teaching language awareness in multilingual classes, or the teaching of vocabulary as part of literacy teaching. The researchers carried out observations in the classroom and brought research articles and ideas to be discussed with the teachers. The teachers then decided on the teaching program and were responsible for its implementation. The next phase of reflection was a collaborative responsibility, and then finally in the reporting phase the teachers shared their experiences on course days with other teachers while the researchers analyzed and wrote the research report. This kind of collaboration in an action-research project corresponds to Tiller’s (1999) use of “action learning” to characterize the role of the teachers. In English-speaking countries action research more often is used to describe the last role I will look at: teachers as researchers (see e.g., Ellis 2012). Although action research is one approach used by teacher researchers, their range of methods is, of course, broader (e.g., CochranSmith and Lyle 2009). Teacher education organized as master’s programs is intended to give teachers the competence to conduct research projects of different kinds. Other driving forces have come from teachers experiencing challenges they want to explore from an insider perspective. Cochran-Smith and Lyle (2009, viii) use the phrase “practitioner research” as an umbrella term to describe different kinds of research “where the practitioner is simultaneously a researcher who is continuously engaged in inquiry with the ultimate purpose of enriching students’ learning and life chances.” Issues of equity and diverse classrooms are often explored in practitioner research, according to Cochran-Smith and Lyle, reporting from the US. In Norway, we find a parallel in the way the research area of Norwegian as a second language has been established. The first generations of researchers were teachers who tried to understand how to teach new groups of students with immigrant family backgrounds entering Norwegian schools in the early 1980s (Golden, Kulbrandstad, and Tenfjord 2007). My own way into research was exactly this. I taught Norwegian as a second language to students in lower-secondary school and observed how the students struggled with reading the texts they were faced with. To explore ways to improve my literacy teaching, I sought research from the English-speaking world since there was no interest in teaching reading in lower-secondary

Developing Research-based Literacy Teaching Practices

49

school at the time in Norway. I published my work (Bjørkavåg 1990) and afterwards received the opportunity to enter a PhD fellowship to continue exploring the topic. In Norwegian as a second language research the tradition of choosing practically oriented research questions has remained strong and has in turn led to a close relationship between theory and practice, and also to an inclusive attitude both toward teacher researchers and student teachers’ research projects. In the scientific journal of research, NOA. Norsk som andrespråk, 20% of the articles published originate from master’s program students (Kulbrandstad 2015). This, of course, is an important experience to build on when student teachers from 2017 come to write practically oriented theses.

Research-Based Integration of Theory and Practice in Norwegian Teacher Education Following up on the NOKUT evaluation from 2006, the government presented a reform in a white paper called Læreren. Rollen og utdanningen (The teacher. The role and the education) (KD 2009a). The reform, which was approved by parliament in March 2009, puts stronger emphasis on student teachers’ professional development by strengthening both pedagogical studies and content areas with subject-specific didactics as well as teaching practicum. The previous program had qualified teachers to operate in all subjects areas in all ten grades of compulsory school. This was replaced by a specialization in fewer subject areas and by the choice between specialization either for grades 1–7 or grades 5–10. Strengthening the research orientation and putting stronger emphasis on teaching students with diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds were promoted as part of the reforms. These changes were in line with the changes in the objectives for compulsory school decided upon by parliament in 2008, when the following statement was included in the Educational Act: “Education and training shall provide insight into cultural diversity and show respect for the individual’s convictions. They are to promote democracy, equality and scientific thinking” (The Education Act, § 1-1). In 2010 the Ministry of Education and Research presented the reform details. The regulations state that teacher education institutions are to provide “integrated, professionally oriented and research-based” programs (KD 2010a, 1). Teacher education institutions are supposed to have active research groups of teacher educators, to strengthen practically oriented research and to establish meeting places for the two central learning arenas: university campuses and schools.

50

Chapter Two

In an analysis of the content of teacher education programs, the OECD (2014, 500) found that only half of the countries included in the study had introduced the development of research skills as part of their programs. In Eurydice (2013, 30–31), which concentrates on European countries, 74% had included training in educational research. The different aspects of research-based education that were part of this last review were: theoretical instruction of methods, end-of-study dissertation based on students’ own research, ability to use educational research in teaching listed as a required competence for the program, and practical educational research work during studies. The Norwegian reform of 2010 was part of the study. It is described as a reform entailing all parts except the last one – practical research work during studies. Although practical research work is not mandatory, several teacher educators have integrated students in their ongoing projects, and thus given them such practice. Examples from projects on teaching in diverse classrooms are those by Lied (2012), who worked with student teachers of religion, and Kulbrandstad (2009) who worked with student teachers of Norwegian. In both projects, teaching in culturally and linguistically diverse classrooms was the point of departure. An evaluation of the 2010 reform gave credit to teacher education institutions for their work on implementing a stronger research orientation and research base (Følgjegruppa 2015). At the same time, the evaluation group concluded that there is still more work to be done. In a survey presented in the report, teacher educators and student teachers agreed that research methods useful for students’ future work as teachers are now an integrated part of the program. The students indicated they feel especially well prepared for using observation as a method to improve their own teaching. Both groups, however, agreed that too little time has been spent on developing student teachers’ abilities to find relevant research articles in databases (Følgjegruppa 2015, 75f). When teachers are tasked with developing research literacy, being equipped with knowledge and experience in how to find relevant research results is a necessary qualification. In a Norwegian study on candidates from four different professions entering working life in 2005 and 2006, Jensen and her colleagues found that teachers differed from computer engineers, nurses, and accountants in that they were locally oriented in their ways of seeking new knowledge (Jensen 2008). Informal knowledge exchange with colleagues was a typical local approach used by the teachers, while they rarely drew “from a shared empirical and theorydriven knowledge base to improve their practice” (Klette and Carlsten 2012, 74). The research group argues that the ability to connect to a broader knowledge network in a systematic and strategic way seems to be

Developing Research-based Literacy Teaching Practices

51

a prerequisite for developing the necessary drive toward successful learning in a knowledge society characterized by rapid change. In its analyses the group found continuity between initial higher education programs and working life when it came to attitudes towards seeking new knowledge. The ways students learn to search for new knowledge as part of their education are reflected in the strategies they use to search for new knowledge when they start working. Thus, not only the content of different initial education programs is important; of equal interest are the ways students are trained to search for and treat new knowledge (Jensen 2008, 15f). As the more recent evaluation of the 2010 reform showed, these are still topics that need to be worked on (Følgjegruppa 2015, 83). An even stronger emphasis has been put on this part of research literacy in the upcoming master’s reform (Rammeplanutvalget 2015). The introduction of master’s degrees as the main model for teacher education in Norway is presented in the government’s strategy Lærerløftet. På lag for kunnskapsskolen (Promotion of the status and quality of teachers. Joint effort for a modern school of knowledge). A master’s degree is expected to “strengthen the understanding of research and development work” and “the integration of theory and practice,” as well as “the understanding of scientific method” (KD 2014a, 43, author’s translation). As part of the work on their master’s theses, students are supposed to study scientific theory and research methods. The master’s program aims to produce candidates who have qualifications in seeking new knowledge from national and international research literature. They should be able to read, discuss, and learn from research and to use research-based knowledge and research methods in their own theses as well as in developing research-based teaching practices and future contributions to innovations in classrooms and schools.

Preparing for Diversity In a comparison of teacher education in different countries across Europe, the Americas, and Asia, Darling-Hammond and Lieberman (2012, 159) found that “[r]ecurring themes for improvement [. . .] include strengthening connection between theory and practice and developing teachers’ capacities to teach diverse learners.” Teacher education in Norway is not included in this comparison; however, in the Norwegian context the same themes have been addressed. The previously mentioned national evaluation (NOKUT 2006) highlighted the need to strengthen the research base and the research orientation of the program, while also identifying lack of integration of theory and practice as a major challenge. The report

52

Chapter Two

also concluded that neither multilingualism nor multiculturalism is treated well. More recent evaluations (Følgjegruppa 2013, 2015) also place teaching in diverse classrooms on the list of elements that still need to be improved. Of special concern is the fact that there seems to be little awareness of the importance of implementing a second-language perspective in subject areas other than Norwegian. This is highlighted as especially important in two influential reports. The Official Norwegian Report from 2010 about multilingual children, young people, and adults in the education and training system (NOU 2010, 7) underscores the value of multilingual development; as part of this it promotes longitudinal secondlanguage teaching across subject areas. A country-specific review on minority education from the OECD (Tagoma et al. 2009, 8) recommends politicians to give priority to “training all teachers to be able to teach second language learners; integrating language and subject learning; and advancing research on effective language support.” Currently, this is also a question of great concern in several other countries including Sweden (Taguma et al. 2010), Denmark (Nusche et al. 2010), Germany (e.g., Baumann and Becker-Mrotzek 2014), Ireland (Murtagh and Francis 2012), Scotland (Foley, Sangster, and Anderson 2013), and the US (Aarbaugh et al. 2015). In Norwegian teacher education, reading, writing, and teaching in diverse schools are currently not taught as separate courses but are supposed to be integrated across all subjects. After having completed the subject of Norwegian (30 ECTS) for grades 1–7, the student teachers should, for example, have knowledge about multilingualism, multilingual practices, and the learning of Norwegian as a second language. They should also be able to work with language and texts in diverse classrooms, develop students’ language and cultural awareness, and evaluate and use different methods in literacy teaching for students with Norwegian as first and second languages (KD 2010b). In other school subjects the language dimension is seldom highlighted as a curriculum goal. Most subjects have, however, thematic goals like knowledge about the symbolic function of food and meals in different cultures, knowledge about how art representing different cultures can be used as a resource for creative processes and organized learning, and knowledge about the role of music as identity, a medium of communication and cultural expression, in schools in a multicultural society (KD 2010b). A recent study on diversity in teacher education points out that there is a growing awareness of the importance of addressing language issues among teacher educators in several different subject areas, for instance in the teaching and learning of science (Lindboe et al. 2015).

Developing Research-based Literacy Teaching Practices

53

Preparing for Change and Development Norwegian teacher education reforms have placed an increased focus on change and development competence as an important teacher qualification. It was introduced as a required competence in 1999 as a reply to expectations of a stronger need for new teachers to be prepared for change and to take part in what was then called “tasks of development and renewing” (utviklings- og fornyingsoppgåver) (KUF 1999, 23). In the study of candidates entering the workforce in 2005 and 2006 mentioned above, Jensen (2008) found that teachers appeared to be the only group who did not expect great changes in their work situation within the next five years. As this is one of the research projects referred to in the white paper introducing the 2010 reform (KD 2009a), one might have expected that the importance of change and development of competence would be more strongly emphasized in this reform. The words used to describe the competence are, however, almost the same as ten years earlier. A teacher graduating from a program designed after the 2010 reform is supposed to have “change and development competence as a basis for his/her encounter with the school of the future” (KD 2010a, 4). One difference, however, is that the learning outcomes of the program now appear on the candidates’ diploma. As we have seen, perspectives of development and change are also a foundation for the concepts of research-rich schools and research-literate teachers. Words used to explain these concepts in the BERA reports (2013, 2014) are “innovative, creativity, enquiry-based, self-improving, to conduct research,” and, last but not least, “to drive change.” Accentuating change and development of competence can also be seen as reflecting an emerging understanding, both internationally and in Norway, of the importance of seeing teacher education as the start, not the end, of professional development. Cochran-Smith (2005, 220), for example, uses expressions like “the life-long process of learning to teach,” while Donaldson (2011, 9) stresses that “becoming a teacher should be seen as a gradual process, including initial education, the induction phase and continuing professional development.” When the OECD addresses teacher education, it connects the need for lifelong learning with the changing composition of the classroom population: No matter how high the quality of pre-service training, initial training cannot be expected to prepare staff for all the challenges they will face throughout their careers. Given the changes in student demographics, the length of the careers that many teachers have, and the need to update knowledge and competencies, initial teacher education must be viewed as

54

Chapter Two only the starting point for teachers’ ongoing development. (OECD 2014, 496)

Another connection is between diversity and change. This is, for example, the case in the 2010 reform when the future society for which the programs prepare teachers is described as a “society marked by diversity and change” (KD 2010a, 1).

Preparing for Literacy Teaching Deciding on master’s degrees as the main model for teacher education marks the final break with the former traditions of a teacher training model emphasizing methodological courses. In Norway reading and writing were taught as methodological courses until 1992 when these were replaced by reading theories and subject specific didactics (KUF 1994). Slowly, the subject area studies have developed into what since 2010 have been called “professionally oriented teacher education subjects,” comprising subject didactics, work on basic skills (including reading and writing), and teaching practice (KD 2010a, 4–5), thus integrating theory and practice in a new way. Although pure methodological courses were taken out of teacher education programs from the early 1990s, one might say that the new emphasis on research-based master’s education and development of student teachers’ research competence as part of the program has definitely made isolated methodological courses passé. Hoffman and Pearson (2000) describe a parallel development when they analyze reading teacher education in the US. Traditionally, reading teachers were trained in a given set of skills, putting focus more on the teacher than on the different needs of the learners. Although recognizing that some training still needs to be part of programs, Hoffman and Pearson (2000) see Donald Schön’s model of teaching as reflective practice (see, e.g., Schön 1987) as a “more powerful and compelling vision for a future in which teachers are more likely to encounter change, not routine” (40). They explain the difference between a teacher training model and a teacher education model in this way: It [training] may get teachers through some of the basic routines and procedures they need for classroom survival, but it will not help teachers develop the personal and professional commitment to lifelong learning required by those teachers who want to confront the complexities and contradictions of teaching. (Hoffman and Pearson 2000, 36)

Developing Research-based Literacy Teaching Practices

55

While in the past reading was primarily studied as a cognitive process, adding “sociocultural theories” and the concepts of “literacies” as research perspectives (e.g., Rand 2002) has made the contexts of teaching and learning, and different learners, more central to the understanding of both reading and literacy teaching and learning. Hoffman and Pearson connect to this development when they underline the complexities and contradictions of literacy teaching. When they call for a research agenda to support developments in teacher education, issues of diversity are placed on top of the list. Diversity is characterized as the most challenging, but also as the most important issue (Hoffman and Pearson 2000, 40). The rapid increase in diversity is also used to remind us of the importance of teachers being able to handle change; in their words: “Change, and rapid change, will characterize the next millennium” (42). Acknowledging how complex it is to teach literacy in diverse classrooms, encouraging more than one perspective on how to approach teaching becomes important in teacher education programs. A researchbased educational approach aims to promote this, qualifying teaching candidates for “research-based professional performance and continuous professional development” (KD 2010a, 1). Teachers with these qualifications are in a position to continue developing their research literacy when they start their careers. The way in which they are handled at their first school is, of course, also important for further professional development. Having a research focus on what is happening on the university campus is thus only a start: a stronger partnership between schools and higher education institutions is required (Lillejord and Børte 2014). Partnership agreements were initiated in the 2010 reform, and are intended to grow even stronger in master’s programs, such as through student teachers’ master’s theses (KD 2014a, 2015a). In several countries, the political ambitions to improve school results have not only resulted in less trust in teacher education programs but also less trust in teachers. When the concepts of “research-based” or “evidencebased” teaching practices are heavily used by politicians to prescribe the methods teachers should use in their classrooms to achieve better results on reading tests, this calls for “empowerment” as another key word in developing teaching. Pearson (2007) lists faith in “teacher prerogative” as an “endangered species for literacy education.” He continues: “I fear that the right of teachers to exercise professional knowledge, along with the responsibility for possessing the most up-to-date knowledge possible, is threatened seriously” (150). In Norway, “teacher autonomy” is a topical issue connected to the Norwegian version of the same phenomenon. For example, Mausethagen (2015, 105) discusses a study in which teachers

56

Chapter Two

claim they do not find it hard to accept the fact that politicians decide on the content of the curriculum. However, they themselves want to have the flexibility to decide on how to work on the different topics and how to adapt teaching to different students. In August 2015, following a longlasting conflict between the teachers’ union and employers, the minister of education appointed an expert group to explore issues related to the changing roles of teachers (KD 2015c). While some meet the political context of accountability with withdrawal, Cummins et al. (2011) alternately describe “a pedagogy of choice.” Their point of departure is the context of literacy teaching in diverse classrooms, which is often changed when new politicians enter the scene with new ideas on how to organize the teaching of minority students. A point made by Cummins et al. is that “regardless of top-down policies and mandates that may be operating in different contexts, the teacher remains a powerful agent of change in the classroom” (2011, 153). A first step for the teachers is to “articulate and reflect critically on the instructional choices that we make on a routine daily basis and to examine alternative possibilities” (155). These thoughts may be connected to the ideas of research-literate teachers and research-rich schools, where teachers are supposed to be qualified to “drive change, rather than have it done to them” (BERA 2014, 40).

References Alstad, Gunhild Tomter. 2013. Barnehagen som språlæringsarena. En kasusstudie av tre barnehagelæreres andrespråksdidaktiske praksiser [Kindergarten as second language learning environment. A case study of three preschool teachers’ second language teaching practices]. Doctoral dissertation, University of Oslo. Arbaugh, Fran, Deborah L. Ball, Pam Grossman, Donald E. Heller, and David Monk. 2015. “Deans’ Corner: Views on the State of Teacher Education in 2015.” Journal of Teacher Education 66(5): 435–45. Baumann, Barbara, and Michael Becker-Mrotzek. 2014. Sprachförderung und Deutsch als Zweitsprache an deutschen Schulen: Was leistet die Lehrerbildung? [Language promotion and German as a second language in German schools. In which ways does the teacher education contribute?] Köln: Meractor-Institut für Sprchförderung und Deutsch als Zweitsprache. BERA. 2013. The Role of Research in Teacher Education: Reviewing the Evidence. Interim Report of the BERA-RSA Inquiry. Accessed March 30, 2016. https://www.bera.ac.uk/project/research-and-teacher-education.

Developing Research-based Literacy Teaching Practices

57

—. 2014. Research and the Teaching Profession. Building the Capacity for a Self-Improving Education System. Accessed March 30, 2016. Retrieved from https://www.bera.ac.uk/project/research-and-teachereducation. Bergesen, Helge Ole. 2006. Kampen om kunnskapsskolen [The struggle for a knowledge-based school]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Bjørakvåg, Lise Iversen. 1990. “Videreutvikling av leseferdigheter. Undervisning i lesing for grunnskolens mellom- og ungdomstrinn” [“Developing reading. Literacy teaching for grades 4–9”]. In “Men hva betyr det, lærer?” Norsk som andrespråk. Fagdidaktiske bidrag [“But, what does it mean, teacher?” Norwegian as a second language. Subject didactics], edited by Lise I. Bjørkavåg, Anne Hvenekilde, and Else Ryen, 127–55. Oslo: LNU/Cappelen. Caspersen, Joakim, Per Olaf Aamodt, Nils Vibe, and Tone Cecilie Carlsten. 2014. Kompetanse og praksis blant norske lærere. Resultater fra TALIS-undersøkelsen i 2013 [Competence and practices among Norwegian teachers. Results from TALIS 2013] , Report 41. Oslo: NIFU. Cochran-Smith, Marilyn. 2005. “Teacher Educators as Researchers: Multiple Perspectives.” Teaching and Teacher Education 21: 219–25. Cochran-Smith, Marilyn, and Susan L. Lytle, eds. 2009. Inquiry as Stance. Practitioner Research for the Next Generation. New York: Teachers College Press. Cummins, Jim, Margaret Early, Lisa Leoni, and Saskia Stille. 2011. “‘It Really Comes Down to the Teachers, I Think’: Pedagogies of Choice in Multilingual Classrooms.” In Identity Texts. The Collaborative Creation of Power in Multilingual Schools, edited by Jim Cummins and Margaret Early, 153–63. Stoke on Trent: Trentham Books. Danbolt, Anne Marit V., and Lise Iversen Kulbrandstad. 2008. Klasseromskulturer for språklæring. Didaktisk fornying i den flerkulturelle skolen [Classroom cultures for language learning. Didactic development in multicultural schools]. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Danbolt, Anne Marit V., and Lise Iversen Kulbrandstad. 2012. “Teacher Reflections under Changing Conditions for Literacy Learning in Multicultural Schools in Oslo.” In Literacy Practices in Transition. Perspectives from the Nordic Countries, edited by Anne PitkänenHuhta and Lars Holm, 209–27. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Danbolt, Anne Marit V. et al. 2010. Opplæringstibudet til minoritetsspråklige innen barnehage og grunnopplæring [Teaching

58

Chapter Two

programs for minority language students in kindergartens and schools], Reports 1–10. Notodden: Telemarksforsking. Darling-Hammond, Linda, and Ann Lieberman. 2012. “Teacher Education around the World. What Can We Learn from International Practice?” In Teacher Education around the World. Changing Policies and Practices, edited by Linda Darling-Hammond and Ann Lieberman, 151–69. London, New York: Routledge. Donaldson, Graham. 2011. Teaching Scotland’s Future. Report of a Review of Teacher Education in Scotland. Edinburgh: Scottish Government. Ellis, Rod R. 2012. Language Teaching Research & Language Pedagogy. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. Eurydice. 2013. Key Data on Teachers and School Leaders in Europe. 2013 Edition. Doi: 10.2797/9178. Feyerer, Ewald, Katharina Hirschenhauser, and Katharina SoukupAltrichter, eds. 2014. Last oder Lust? Forschung und Lehrer_ innenbildung [Research and teacher education]. Münster: Waxmann. Foley, Yvonne, Pauline Sangster, and Charles Anderson. 2013. “Examining EAL Policy and Practice in Mainstream Schools.” Language and Education 27(3): 191–206. Doi: 10.1080/09500782.2012.687747. Følgjegruppa. 2013. Drivkraft i utviklinga av lærarprofesjonen? Framsteg og utfordringar for grunnskulelærarutdanningane [Driving forces in the development of the teacher profession? Progress and challenges in teacher education for compulsory school], Report 3. Stavanger: University of Stavanger. —. 2015. Grunnskulelærarutdanningane etter fem år. Status, utfordringar og vegar vidare [Teacher education for compulsory school after five years. State of the art, challenges and ways ahead]. Report 5. Stavanger: University of Stavanger. Golden, Anne, Lise Iversen Kulbrandstad, and Kari Tenfjord. 2007. “Norsk andrespråksforskning – utviklingslinjer fra 1980 til 2005” [“Second language research in Norway, lines of development from 1980 to 2005”]. Nordand. Nordisk tidsskrift for andrespråksforskning 2(1): 5–41. Hoffman, James, and P. David Pearson. 2000. “Reading Teacher Education in the Next Millennium: What Your Grandmother’s Teacher Didn’t Know that Your Granddaughter’s Teacher Should.” Reading Research Quarterly 35(1): 28–44.

Developing Research-based Literacy Teaching Practices

59

Jensen, Karen. 2008. ProLearn: Profesjonslæring i endring [ProLearn. Professional learning, changing perspectives]. Oslo: Norges forskningsråd. ILA [International Literacy Association]. 2016. Frameworks for Literacy Education Reform [white paper]. Accessed April 15, 2016. Retrieved from http://literacyworldwide.org. KD [Kunnskapsdepartementet]. 2006. Læreplanverket for Kunnskapsløftet. Midlertidig utgave juni 2006 [Curriculum guidelines for the Knowledge Promotion. Contemporary edition, June 2006]. Oslo: Ministry of Education and Research. —. 2009a. St. meld. nr. 11. (2008–2009). Læreren. Rollen og utdanningen [White Paper no. 11 (2008–2009) to the Storting: The teacher. The role and the education]. Oslo: Ministry of Education and Research. —. 2009b. St. meld. nr. 30 (2008–2009). Klima for forskning [White Paper no. 30 (2008–2009) to the Storting: Climate for research]. Oslo: Ministry of Education and Research. —. 2010a. National Curriculum Regulations for Differentiated Primary and Lower Secondary Teacher Education Programmes for Years 1–7 and Years 5–10. Accessed April 20, 2016. Retrieved from https://www.regjeringen.no/en/dokumenter/national-curriculumregulations-for-diff/id594357/. —. 2010b. Nasjonale retningslinjer for grunnskolelærerutdanningen 1.–7. trinn [National guidelines for primary teacher education for grades 1– 7]. Oslo: Ministry of Education and Research. —. 2012. Nasjonal forskrift om rammeplan for barnehagelærerutdanning [National curriculum regulations for kindergarten teacher education]. Oslo: Ministry of Education and Research. —. 2013a. PISA 2012: Svakere resultater i matematikk og naturfag [PISA 2012: Lower achievement in Mathematics and Natural Science, press release December 3, 2013]. Accessed November 25, 2015. Retrieved from http://www.regjeringen.no. —. 2013b. St. meld. nr. 18 (2012–2013). Lange Linjer – kunnskap gir muligheter [White paper no. 18 (2012–2013) to the Storting: Longterm perspectives – knowledge provides opportunity]. Oslo: Ministry of Education and Research. —. 2014a. Lærerløftet. På lag for kunnskapsskolen [Promotion of the status and quality of the teachers]. Oslo: Ministry of Education and Research. —. 2015a. Mandat for rammeplanutvalg for femårige, integrerte grunnskolelærerutdanninger på masternivå [Mandate for the

60

Chapter Two

committee on five-years integrated teacher education for compulsory school on master’s level]. Oslo: Ministry of Education and Research. —. 2015b. Kompetanse for kvalitet. Strategi for etter- og videreutdanning 2012–2015 [Competence for Quality. Strategy for professional development 2012–2015]. Oslo: Ministry of Education and Research. —. 2015c. Ekspertgruppe skal se på lærerrollen [Expert group will explore the teacher role, press release July 27, 2015]. Oslo: Ministry of Education and Research. Kjærnsli, Marit, and Astrid Roe, eds. 2010. På rett spor. Norske elevers kompetanse i lesing, matematikk og naturfag i PISA 2009 [On the right track. Norwegian students’ competence in Reading literacy, Mathematics and Natural science in PISA 2009]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Klette, Kirsti, and Tone Cecilie Carlsten. 2012. “Knowledge in Teacher Learning: New Professional Challenges.” In Professional Learning in the Knowledge Society, edited by Karen Jensen et al., 69–84. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. KUF [Kirke,- utdannings- og forskningsdepartementet]. 1994. Rammeplan for 4-årig allmennlærerutdanning [National Curriculum for four-year teacher education for compulsory school]. Oslo: Ministry of Church, Education and Research. —. 1999. Rammeplan og forskrift. Allmennlærerutdanningen [National Curriculum Regulations for teacher education for compulsory school]. Oslo: Ministry of Church, Education and Research. —. 2002. St. meld. nr. 16 (2001-2002) Kvalitetsreformen Om ny lærerutdanning Mangfoldig – krevende – relevant [White Paper no. 16 (2001–2002) to the Storting: The quality reform. About new teacher education. Diverse – challenging – relevant]. Oslo: Ministry of Church, Education and Research. Kulbrandstad, Lars Anders. 1999a. Kurs + utviklingsprosjekter [Courses + Developmental work]. Report 9. Elverum: Hedmark University of Applied Sciences. —. 2009. “‘Det finnes det vel ikke noe forskning på?’ Et eksempel på studentinvolvering i forskning” [“‘Do we have research-based knowledge on this topic?’ An example of student involvement in research”]. Acta Didactica Norge - tidsskrift for fagdidaktisk forsknings- og utviklingsarbeid i Norge 3(1): 1–21. Retrieved from https://www.journals.uio.no/index.php/adno/index. Kulbrandstad, Lise Iversen, Anne Marit V. Danbolt, Tove Sommervold, and Eva Marie Syversen. 2005. Tekstsamtaler. Arbeid med lesing, skriving og litteratur i ungdomstrinnets norskfag – slik lærere ser det

Developing Research-based Literacy Teaching Practices

61

[Dialogues about texts. Working on reading, writing, and literature in the subject Norwegian at lower secondary school—according to teachers]. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Kulbrandstad, Lise Iversen, and Anne Jacobsen. 2005. “Leseløft med lesekvarteret” [“Promotion of reading by fifteen minutes of reading each morning”]. In Årboka. Litteratur for barn og unge 2005 [Year book. Literature for children and adolescent 2005], edited by Per Olav Kaldestad and Karin Beate Vold, 138–45. Oslo: Det norske Samlaget. Kulbrandstad, Lise Iversen. 2015. “Fra arbeidsskrift til tidsskrift. En analyse av de tretti første årene av NOA” [“From working paper to research journal. An analysis of the first thirty years of NOA. Norwegian as a second language”]. NOA. Norsk som andrespråk 30(1– 2): 10–39. Lied, Sidsel. 2012. Studenter i forskning. Ett svar på utfordringer fra det flerkulturelle og livstolkingsplurale klasserommet [Students in research. One answer to the challenges in classrooms with multicultural and religious diversity]. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Lindboe, Inger Marie, Gunhild Tveit Randen, Thor-André Skrefsrud, and Sissel Østberg, eds. 2015. Refleksjon & relevans. Språklig og kulturelt mangfold i lærerutdanningene [Reflection and relevance. Linguistic and cultural diversity in teacher education]. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Lillejord, Sølvi, and Kristin Børte. 2014. Partnerskap i lærerutdanningen. En forskningskartlegging [Partnership in teacher education. A review of research], KSU 3/2014. Oslo: Norges forskningsråd: Kunnskapssenter for utdanning. Retrieved from http://www.kunnskapssenter.no. Lødding, Berit. 2015. Mobilisering for mangfold [Mobilizing for diversity]. Report 4/2015. Oslo: NIFU. Mausethagen, Sølvi. 2015. Læreren i endring? Om nye forventninger til lærerprofesjonen og lærerarbeidet [Changes in the role of teachers? New expectations of the teacher profession and teachers’ work]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Ministry of Education and Research, Norway. 2007. The Education Act. Accessed November 19, 2015. Retrieved from https://www.regjeringen.no/en/dokumenter/education-act/id213315/. In Norwegian: https://www.lovdata.no. Murtagh, Lelia, and Tracy Francis. 2012. “Supporting Pupils with EAL and Their Teachers in Ireland: The Need for a Co-ordinated Strategy.” Language and Education 26(3): 201–12. Doi: 10.1080/09500782.2011.629052.

62

Chapter Two

NOKUT [Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education]. 2006. Evaluering av allmennlærerutdanningen i Norge 2006. Del 1: Hovedrapport [Evaluation of teacher education for compulsory school in Norway 2006. Part 1: The main report]. Oslo: NOKUT. NOU 2010. Mangfold og mestring – Flerspråklige barn, unge og voksne i opplæringssystemet [Diversity and mastery—multilingual children, young people and adults in the education and training system]. Oslo: Ministry of Education and Research. Nusche, Deborah, Gregory Wurzburg, and Breda Naughton. 2010. OECD Reviews of Migrant Education. Denmark. Paris: OECD. OECD. 2014. Education at a Glance 2014. OECD Indicators. Paris: OECD. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/eag-2014-en. Pearson, P. David. 2007. “An Endangered Species Act for Literacy Education.” Journal of Literacy Research 39(2): 145–62. Rambøll Management. 2006b. Evaluering av praktisering av norsk som andrespråk for språklige minoriteter i grunnskolen [Evaluation of Norwegian as a second language in compulsory school]. Oslo: Rambøll Management. Rammeplanutvalget. 2015. Forslag til rammeplaner for femårige integrerte grunnskolelærerutdanninger på masternivå [Proposals to national curriculum regulations for five year integrated master’s programs for compulsory school, sent to the Minister of Education and Research, October 29, 2015]. Retrieved from http://www.hihm.no/glumaster. RAND. 2002. Reading for understanding. Toward and R & D Program in Reading Comprehension. Accessed April 20, 2016. Retrieved from http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/2005/ MR1465.pdf. Røe Isaksen, Torbjørn. 2015. “Slik skal forskjellsskolen bekjempes” [“In this way we will fight against the unequal school,” newspaper article by the Minister of Education and Research], Aftenposten (August 16, 2015). Accessed November 25, 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.aftenposten.no. Sahlberg, Pasi. 2012. “The Most Wanted: Teachers and Teacher Education in Finland.” In Teacher Educaton around the World. Changing Policies and Practices, edited by Linda Darling-Hammond and Ann Lieberman, 1–21. London, New York: Routledge. Schleicher, Andreas. 2011. “Lessons from the World on Effective Teaching and Learning Environments.” Journal of Teacher Education 62(2): 202–21. Doi: 10.1177/0022487110386966.

Developing Research-based Literacy Teaching Practices

63

Schön, Donald A. 1987. Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Skoleverket. 2014. TALIS 2013. En studie av undervisnings- och lärmiljöer i årskurs 7–9 [TALIS 2013. A study of teaching and learning environments in grades 7–9]. Report 408. Stockholm: Skolverket. Statistics Norway. 2016a. Immigrants and Norwegian-born to Immigrant Parents, 1 January 2016. Accessed March 30, 2016. Retrieved from http://www.ssb.no/en/befolkning/statistikker/innvbef. —. 2016b. National Tests, 2015. Accessed March 30, 2016. Retrieved from http://www.ssb.no/en/utdanning/statistikker/nasjprov. Steinkellner, Alice. 2014. Innvandrere og norskfødte med innvandrerforeldre i grunnskolen. En analyse av karakterdata og resultater fra nasjonale prøver i 2012 [Immigrants and Norwegian-born to immigrant parents in compulsory school. An analysis of grades and results from national tests in 2012]. Accessed March 30, 2016. Retrieved from http://www.ssb.no/utdanning/artikler-og-publikasjoner/ innvandrereog-norskfodte-med-innvandrerforeldre-i-grunnskolen. Sundberg, Daniel, and Carl-Henrik Adolfsson. 2015. Att forskningsbasera skolan. – en analys av utbildnigspolitiska frågeställningar och initiativ över en 20 års period [To research-base schools. An analysis of policy issues in education during a period of 20 years]. Stockholm: Vetenskapsrådet. Accessed April 20, 2016. Retrieved from: https://publikationer.vr.se. Taguma, Miho, Claire Shewbridge, Jana Huttova, and Nancy Hoffman. 2009. OECD Reviews of Migrant Education. Norway. Paris: OECD. Taguma, Miho, Moonhee Kim, Satya Brink and Janna Teltemann. 2010. OECD Reviews of Migrant Education. Sweden. Paris: OECD. Tiller, Tom. 1999. Aksjonslæring. Forskende partnerskap i skolen [Action learning. Researching partners in schools]. Kristiansand: Høyskoleforlaget. TNS Gallup. 2008. Lærere og forskning. Resultater fra en undersøkelse blant lærere i grunnskolen og videregående skole [Teachers and Research. Results from a study on teachers in compulsory and upper secondary school]. Oslo: TNS Gallup. Utdanningsdirektoratet. 2014. Barn, unge og voksne med innvandrerbakgrunn i grunnopplæringen [Children, teenagers, and adults with immigrant background in compulsory and upper secondary school]. Accessed November 19, 2015. Retrieved from http://www.udir.no. Utdanningsforbundet. 2009. Landsmøtet 2009. Vedtak, sak 3.2. Morgendagens barnehage og skole [Annual Meeting of the Teacher

64

Chapter Two

Union of Norway. Resolution about kindergartens and schools of tomorrow]. Accessed April 4, 2010. Retrieved from http://www.utdanningsforbundet.no. Van Dal, Victor, Ragnar Gees Solheim, and Nina N. Gabrielsen. 2012. Godt nok? Norske elevers leseferdigheter på 4. og 5. trinn. PIRLS 2011 [Good enough? Norwegian students’ reading skills in 4th and 5th grade. PIRLS 2011]. Stavanger: University of Stavanger, Lesesenteret. Venkat, Hamsa, and Ruksana Osman. 2014. “Research-Led Teacher Education: New Tasks and Challenges.” Education as Change 18(1): 1–4. Doi: 10.1080/16823206.2014.884686. Vibe, Nils. 2012. Spørsmål til Skole-Norge 2011 [Questions to teachers and school leaders in Norway 2011]. Report 5/12. Oslo: NIFU. Westbury, Ian, Sven-Erik Hansén, Pertti Kansanen, and Ole Bjørkvist. 2007. “Teacher Education for Research-Based Practice in Expanded Roles: Finland’s Experience.” Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 49(5): 475–85. Doi: 10.1080/00313830500267937.

CHAPTER THREE INCLUSION OF NEWLY ARRIVED STUDENTS: WHY DIFFERENT INTRODUCTORY MODELS CAN BE SUCCESSFUL MODELS THOR-ANDRÉ SKREFSRUD

…effective schools do not simply adopt formulaic and decontextualized notions of ‘best practice’ handed down by the educational authorities or ‘experts’ (Cummins 2008, 17)

This article discusses the possible strengths and weaknesses of two different organisational models with regard to the inclusion of newly arrived immigrant students found in the context of two primary schools in Norway. Researching on the underlying factors that these successful yet different schools have in common, the chapter states that both the use of direct integration and separate reception classes may be effective, depending on the flexible use of the model. Both models are positioned within the framework of a theory on inclusive education and social justice.

Introduction Norwegian schools experience a demographic shift with regard to the composition of students. Driven by changing patterns of migration and processes of globalisation many schools are now characterised by superdiversity (Meissner and Vertovec 2015; Vertovec 2007) in which not only ethnicity, but a growing cultural, linguistic and religious complexity influences teachers’ work. Newly arrived immigrant students – who are in the focus of this article – add to this complexity as these students represent different immigration histories and statuses, variations in prior education and school background and time of arrival, among other factors. Thus, despite the fact that the term ‘newly arrived’ refers to students arriving to Norway during primary or secondary school without sufficient skills in the

66

Chapter Three

language of instruction (The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training 2012), the heterogeneity of the group reveals a number of different social and pedagogical needs which the teaching of these students has to take into account. The organisational models to support the wide spectre of educational needs of the newcomer students vary among municipalities and schools. This is the case both for Norway as well as many other countries (Bunar 2015, 14; Nilsson and Axelsson 2013, 138; OECD 2010, 36). In the Norwegian context, the Ministry of Education has provided guidelines to municipalities and school leaders on how to best support newcomer students (Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training 2012). Thus, local councils are able to organise tuition for newly arrivals in separate groups, classes or schools with a maximum of two years stay in the separate program. However, the content, length and organisational design of the introductory programs depend on the capacity of local schools and municipalities, which has been claimed to lead to uneven quality in the educational support for this target group (Nilsson and Axelsson 2013, 138; OECD 2010, 40; Rambøll 2013, 21). The newcomer students may stay too long in the separate preparation classes, and only get tuition in the Norwegian language, which means that they may fall behind in other subjects. Segregation from the main student body may also have a negative effect on the students’ possibilities for making friends outside the introductory program. On the other hand, the transition to the mainstream school program may also be made too early, which means that the newly arrived students are physically included in the regular class, but excluded from the social and pedagogical processes. This may also be the case when newcomer students are placed directly in mainstream classes. From this point of departure, this article draws on data from two primary schools in Norway which offer different introduction models for newly arrived students.1 Both schools are located in diverse areas in Norway and have a relatively large number of immigrant students, also newly arrived students. One school is located in a rural area in South East Norway. Currently the school hosts 34 different nationalities, while 27 languages other than Norwegian are spoken at the school. The school has 560 pupils (age 6-13, grade 1-7) and approximately 100 employees of which two bilingual teachers are employed full time, and eight are employed part time. The other school is situated in a medium-sized town in South East Norway. The school has 430 pupils from grade 1 to 7 (age 61

The article reports from the Nordic Project Learning Spaces for Inclusion and Social Justice. Success Stories from Immigrant Students and School Communities in Four Nordic Countries, financed by NordForsk, 2013-2015.

Inclusion of Newly Arrived Students

67

13) and approximately 100 employees. Ninety students/parents speak a language other than Norwegian at home, and 39 different languages in all are spoken at the school. Also this school has a diverse staff of teachers as thirteen bilingual teachers are employed part time. Although the schools have many similarities with regard to a culturally and linguistically diverse student population, the schools practise very different introduction models for newly arrived students. While the town school is one of two schools in the municipality which offers a separate reception class at primary school level, the rural school offers a model of direct integration into the mainstream class. However, both schools are recognised by the Norwegian National Centre for Multicultural Education as schools that have worked systematically towards inclusive and equal education for linguistic minorities and have succeeded in bridging the gap between newcomer students’ needs and regular education. One of the schools has also been awarded H. M. Queen Sonja’s School Award, an annual national prize to a school that has demonstrated excellence in its efforts to promote inclusion and equality. Thus, both schools work effectively towards the inclusion of newly- arrived students, but from different approaches. My aim then, is to present and discuss the possible strengths and weaknesses of the two different introductory models for newcomer students found in the context of two primary schools in Norway. Based on interviews with the school management and teachers, I discuss how the two schools’ flexible use of the different models produces opportunities for the newly arrived students to perform successful learner identities. Overall, I argue that the schools’ way of addressing both the advantages and the disadvantages of the models contributes to the developing of inclusive learning spaces for the students within the different introductory programs. Moreover, the belief in one optimal program design seems to be subordinate to teachers’ and school leaders’ competence in responding to learner diversity and the various needs of the newcomer students.

Newcomer programs According to section 2-8 of the Education Act (Opplæringslova [Education Act] 1998), all students in primary and lower secondary school in Norway who have a mother tongue other than Norwegian or Sami have the right to adapted education in Norwegian until they are sufficiently proficient in Norwegian to follow the regular instruction in school. Furthermore, as already mentioned, the municipalities are free to organise the tuition for newly arrived students offering separate introductory

68

Chapter Three

schemes, but enrolment is limited to the maximum of 4 semesters of instruction. A decision for providing education in a specially organised facility may only be made for one year at a time and must be based on the needs of the student. Such a decision also requires the consent of the student or from the parents or guardians. Based on these directives, a variety of local introductory programs are offered to newly arrived students (NOU 2010: 7; Rambøll 2013; Rambøll 2016; Sletten and Engebrigtsen 2011). In general the local introductory models can be classified as separate introductory schools, separate introductory classes and direct integration into the regular class (ibid.). In separate introductory schools, the newly arrived students follow an adapted program at a school designed to meet the needs of students from a diverse range of cultural and linguistic backgrounds, including various psychological experiences and previous educational background. According to a new report from Rambøll (2016), these schools, in order to adapt the education to needs of the students as much as possible, often offer separate classes for newly arrived students without prior education. Separate introductory classes – which one of the schools in my study offers – is the most common way of organising schooling for new arrivals (Rambøll 2016). According to Deborah Short (2002, 179), the separate learning groups model may include both a program-within-a-school model and separate-site models. In the first model the newly arrived students are given intensive tuition in e.g. Norwegian as a second language in separated groups at their local school. Although the newcomer students are separated from the mainstream class, the students often interact with the mainstream students and participate in activities outside of the newcomer program, such as music lessons, art lessons, school trips and whole school arrangements. A separate-side model – which is the model that the one school in my study uses – means that newly arrived students from the whole of the municipality attend the school’s reception classes, even though it may not be the students’ home school. Also within the separatesite model, the newcomer students usually interact with the mainstream students for part of the week and have a formal belonging to a mainstream class. A third model is the direct integration of newcomers into the mainstream. This model has gained a foothold in the Norwegian context and is represented by the second school in my study (Dewilde, Kulbrandstad and Skrefsrud 2014; Rambøll 2016; Wal Pastoor 2015). Within this model the newly arrived students receive regular education – along with the other children – at their local school. Special Norwegian language tuition and bilingual subject teaching may be given either outside

Inclusion of Newly Arrived Students

69

or within the regular classroom. The school in my study organises tuition so that each grade level has its own teacher providing special Norwegian language training for the newcomer students, sometimes within the mainstream and sometimes outside the regular class in separate learning groups. Similar to the other models, the goal also of this program is to accelerate the newcomer students’ learning and prepare them for the transition to the mainstream curriculum and the literacy and contents demands of the mainstream.

Theoretical framework In this section I provide a brief overview of what I regard as the main theoretical ideas related to how schools may create an inclusive learning space for newly arrived students. Within this framework I understand inclusion as an extension of the comprehensive ideal in education: namely that school should provide equal opportunities and participation for all students (Thomas and Loxley 2001; UNESCO 1994).2 Moreover, the interconnectedness between inclusion and social justice is elaborated in light of John Rawls’ (1971) understanding of ‘justice as fairness’ and Seyla Benhabib’s (1992) notion of ‘interactive universalism’. While Rawls’ work may help us to better understand how the notion of social justice entails an interrogation of individual preferences in light of a broader perspective on values, principles and ethics, Benhabib reminds us that discursive processes are always contingent on the social contexts in which they occur. Thus, Benhabib does not only address a philosophical problem with Rawls’ approach, but one that might have practical implications as well. Finally, I draw on Martha C. Nussbaum’s (1997) elaboration on three essential capacities to the cultivation of humanity and their significance for inclusion in a culturally diverse educational setting. In considering inclusive school policies in this article, I move beyond notions of inclusion understood as integration – or assimilation – of outsiders into an already existing community. According to Gary Thomas and Andrew Loxley (2001) the notion of inclusion is rather about “providing a framework within which all children – regardless of ability, gender, language, ethnic or cultural origin – can be valued equally, treated with respect and provided with real opportunities at school” (119). Thus,

2

In Norway the Education Act establishes the link between inclusion and social justice as the Norwegian school system is founded on the principle of equity and adapted education (Opplæringslova [Education Act] 1998).

70

Chapter Three

inclusive education is not a claim to incorporate or be incorporated in an existing order, but a claim for a different order. This way of understanding inclusive education corresponds with Rawls’ notion of justice as fairness, which, since it was introduced forty years ago, has proven to be a well-established way of approaching the concept of justice. For Rawls, the concept of justice is about a deliberative transformation of preferences towards a fair society – from what is individually desired, to what can collectively be desirable. Conceptions of the right are prior to conceptions of the good: “In a well-ordered society citizens’ conceptions of their good conform to the principles of right publicly recognized and include an appropriate place for the various primary goods” (Rawls 1971, 395). According to Rawls, conceptions of the good are coloured by people’s contexts and individual lives and are therefore not suitable as a starting point for creating a fair society (ibid., 449). Therefore, a discussion of justice as fairness based on individual conceptions of the good, will only lead to competition between people’s interests and must therefore be interpreted in light of a broader perspective on what is right. Rawls thus reminds us that a socially just community – and we could say an inclusive community – presupposes an interrogation of personal desires and preferences. According to Rawls, the interrogation is possible when we imagine ourselves in what he frames as ‘the original position’. From this position – which is designed to be an impartial and moral point of view – the rationality of human beings “guarantees that ethical principles and conceptions of justice have this general content” (1971, 141). As human beings we are able to take on what he calls “the veil of ignorance” (ibid., 141), which means that we are able to dispose of all prior knowledge about social and historical circumstances and the different interests the parties have. The original position insures impartiality of judgment and – interpreted in an educational context – underpins the understanding of inclusive education as the creation of a new community, and not an incorporation of someone or something into a community that already exists. As we can see, Rawls presupposes the abilities for human beings to rise above their contexts and agree on universal principles. For many critics, however, included Benhabib, such a position has proven to be highly problematic as it presents what must be regarded as an inescapable contextual viewpoint as universal and general. According to Benhabib, deliberative models of justice – like Rawls’ model – are not sensitive enough towards context and situation. Instead they have “…overstated the case by insisting that the purpose of universalisability procedures in ethics

Inclusion of Newly Arrived Students

71

must be the uncovering or discovering of some general interest to which all could consent” (1992, 9). As a result, what might seem like the promotion of a socially just and inclusive community actually turns out to be a hidden assimilation. Understood as inclusion, those on the outside are included by those on the inside according to standards set by those on the inside. According to Benhabib, the alternative is not a communitarian or particularised position. Instead she argues for what she calls an interactive universalism: Interactive universalism acknowledges the plurality of modes of being human, and differences among humans, without endorsing all these pluralities as morally and politically valid […] In this sense ‘universality’ is a regulative ideal that does not deny our embodied and embedded identity, but aims at developing moral attitudes and encouraging political transformations that can yield a point of view acceptable to all. (1992, 153)

The above quote poses an alternative to Rawls’ non-articulated (and hidden) universalism. According to Benhabib, conceptions of the right are closely connected to individuals’ conceptions of the good. The solution is therefore not to neglect context, but to “[…] situate reason and the moral self more decisively in contexts of gender and community” (Benhabib 1992, 8), while at the same time “[…] insisting upon the discursive power of individuals to challenge such situatedness in the name of universalistic principles” (ibid., 8). Thus, Benhabib offers what I see as an important corrective to Rawls’ theory. The weakness of Rawls’ model is, to put it briefly, that those who set the standards are not open about it. This is why, with Benhabib, I would suggest that the justice-as-fairness approach of Rawls needs to be approached in a more context-sensitive way. The educational significance of Rawls’ and Benhabib’s theories is first and foremost to be found in the understanding of what it means to speak of an inclusive community in a plural context. Together they may provide a foundation for seeing inclusive education, not as recognition of a predefined identity or cultural background or an invitation to join an already existing community, but as a call for a new order. An inclusive and socially just community allows the possibility for different ways of being. Thus, Rawls’ and Benhabib’s notions help us see that inclusive education is about creating and developing a whole school community and an educational system “[…] in which tolerance, diversity and equity are striven for” (Thomas and Loxley 2001, vii). Thinking about the formation of community in the way I have outlined, leads to the recognition that what Nussbaum calls ‘essential capacities’ is a

72

Chapter Three

key factor for establishing inclusive learning spaces. First, Nussbaum emphasises the capacity for critical examination of oneself and one’s own traditions (1997, 9). According to Nussbaum this means “[…] a life that accepts no belief as authoritative simply because it has been handed down by tradition or become familiar through habit” (ibid., 9). Second, citizens who cultivate their humanity need an ability to see themselves not only as citizens of a local group, but also as bound to other human beings through mutual responsibilities and concerns (ibid., 9). Nussbaum sees this as a “[…] call to our imaginations to venture beyond narrow group loyalties and to consider the reality of distant lives” (ibid., 10). The third capacity is closely related to the two others and involves the ability to think what it might be like to be in the shoes of another person (ibid., 11). Nussbaum calls it to be an intelligent reader of a person’s story (ibid., 11), which involves a narrative, empathetic imagination of what that distant person’s wishes, emotions and desires might be. From these perspectives we recognise the links between inclusion, justice and transformation. In order to establish an inclusive and socially just learning community, it is important to see one’s own preferences, habits and familiar practices in light of a broader perspective, which presupposes the cultivation of certain abilities. In an educational context this is a challenge for teachers, students and the school community as a whole.

Methodology and Material As referred to in the introduction, the study reported on in this article is part of the Nordforsk project Learning Spaces for Inclusion and Social Justice: Success Stories from Immigrant Students and School Communities in Four Nordic Countries. The project is a collaborative project between researchers from Iceland, Finland, Norway and Sweden and has as its main objective to draw lessons from success stories of immigrant students and whole school communities at different levels which have succeeded in developing learning contexts that are equitable and socially just. In this article I report on a study from the Norwegian part of the project on different organisational models for newly arrived students. In the study I conducted a year-long ethnographically inspired study (cf. Hammersley and Atkinson 2007) in two primary schools in Norway (School A and school B), which organise the tuition of newly arrived students in radically different ways. The total amount of data consists of interviews with the school leaders and teachers as well as fieldnotes from participant observations in the two schools, observation of school activities during the

Inclusion of Newly Arrived Students

73

international mother tongue day, and participant observations in a yearlong course on home-school cooperation with families from language minorities, which the two schools were involved in with together with two pre-schools. In this article I draw on selected parts of the material: two interviews with six school leaders, three at each school, as well as informal interviews with six teachers, three at each school. At school B, one of the school leaders also works as a basic Norwegian language teacher, drawing on her experiences both as leader and as a teacher. The interviews with the school management were recorded and later transcribed, while the interviews with the teachers were documented through fieldnotes.

Findings and Analysis According to the schools: what makes respectively the reception model and the direct integration model a success? In the interviews both the school management and the teachers identify advantages of their choice of model, but also possible weaknesses and disadvantages. First, I present the findings from the school which offers separate introductory classes (School A), and second from the school with direct integration (School B). The findings are interpreted in light of the theoretical framework on inclusion and social justice and reflect upon the fact that the two schools – despite their different choice of inclusion model – seems to offer a socially just and inclusive learning environment for newly arrived students.

Academic and social support Both the school leaders and the teachers emphasise the possibilities the reception class gives for academic support and learning development for the newly arrived students. In the introductory class the migrant students get intensive support from a teacher who is specialised in giving tuition in basic Norwegian and to work with concepts and academic knowledge in accordance with the students’ proficiency in Norwegian: Extract 1: Interviewer: What do you consider as the main strength of the separate induction programme? School leader 2: The strength is that the students are given basic Norwegian by teachers who have worked with migrant students for several years and have the formal cultural and linguistic competence. School leader 1: It is a kind of adapted education. The special thing about the reception class is that it offers the opportunity for students to learn by

74

Chapter Three doing. The students do not only stay in classroom, but they go skating, swimming, bicycling – these are activities for language learning.

According to the school leaders, the variety of learning activities the reception class provides is not only an academic advantage for the newly arrived students, but also benefits the students’ social integration, as can be seen in Extract 2: Extract 2: School leader 1: The students are given the opportunity to build a relation to one of the teachers, instead of adhering to several teachers. School leader 2: We see that the migrant students are very close to the introductory class teacher. They establish a good relation and establish a safe foundation for going out to meet the things they don’t understand.

The issue of social integration is also emphasised by the teachers, who focus on the possibility for a close student-teacher relation and the safeness that the reception class as such provides. In the fieldnotes during one of the teacher interviews, I recorded the following: Extract 3: The teacher tells me that it is easier for the newly arrived student to practise Norwegian in a smaller class – it is less frightening and gives a better opportunity to learn the language by trying and failing. The introduction class offers a supportive and comforting learning environment. The students feel safe and are given the opportunity to form positive relationships in a smaller group of learners.

Benhabib (1992, 8) emphasises that social justice is made possible when citizens are able to shape and create community in light of their contextual-based experiences. For the migrant learners in the reception class, the teachers and school leaders report that the students’ cultural and linguistic resources are not measured against the ‘mainstream’, who more or less intentionally see their home culture and home languages as dysfunctional compared to the national culture. Instead, as the extracts above indicate, the school is aware that these students have different needs and establishes a safe environment for the students where they are able to express their social and pedagogical needs within a learning environment that acknowledges their specific situation. The school allows for different ways of being (Benhabib 1992, 153). Thus, these voices from the school leaders and teachers correspond with research conducted by Jenny Nilsson and Monica Axelsson (2013), who have interviewed newly arrived Swedish migrant students on their

Inclusion of Newly Arrived Students

75

experiences of attending introductory classes. According to Nilsson and Axelsson “[t]he general picture emerging […] is that introductory classes offer an environment in which the newly arrived students can form positive relationships with peers and teachers” (2013, 152). Moreover, the students report that the reception class “[…] is a place where they can be themselves and where they experience support from fellow students and teachers (ibid., 152). Together with the student voices from Nilsson and Axelsson, the extracts above thus speak of the importance for newly arrived students to learn Norwegian and other subjects in a safe and supportive environment as a way to prepare for further participation in the mainstream. In the words of Benhabib the school “acknowledges the plurality of modes of being human, and differences among humans” (1992, 153) and takes their need for intensive tuition within a smaller and safe learning community seriously.

Social networks and teacher collaboration While the informants emphasise the social and academic possibilities within the reception model, they also are aware of the possible negative sides of the model, a self-critical and transformative approach which Rawls and Nussbaum see as a prerequisite for inclusion social justice (Rawls 1971, 395; Nussbaum 1997, 15). First, the informants point out the students’ needs for a broader social network, as can be seen in Extract 4 from the interview with the school management: Extract 4: Interviewer: What do you see as possible weaknesses of this way of organising tuition for the students? School leader 1: Perhaps the lack of contact with their regular class. Interviewer: Yes? School leader 2: Yes, their sense of belonging is often directed more towards the reception class than to their regular class. However, the idea has always been that the students should have their main belonging in a regular class and not be separated from their native peers.

This concern is confirmed by one of the regular teachers. In the interview she emphasises that separation into reception groups obviously makes it more difficult for the newly arrived students to relate to and make friendships with other children in the regular class. But also academically the reception class may be a hindrance for participation and development. In my fieldnotes from the interview I have recorded:

76

Chapter Three Extract 5: Although they meet the other students in class during the week and also during break time, it does not seem enough. Moreover, some of the parents are sceptical, believing that the introductory class is a career put on hold. In order to learn the language, important subjects like mathematics and natural science are not given the priority that these parents believe they should have had. So, they are concerned that their children are being more left behind academically, than if they had attended the regular class.

Furthermore, for such a model to provide opportunities for academic and social development and avoid segregation, the informants emphasise the importance of collaboration between the different groups of teachers. While the reception teacher is usually trained in providing adapted education for this group of students, the regular teachers are often subject teachers without the same experience of adapting their teaching strategies to the various needs of newly arrivals (cf. Taguma, Shewbridge, Huttova and Hoffman 2009, 44). Thus, the responsibility for language learning and academic fluency for the newly arrived students might thus be taken for granted and is – more or less unspoken – taken to be the reception teacher’s domain. However, as can be seen in the following extract, the informants signalise the importance of all teachers taking part: Extract 6: Interviewer: What are your experiences with the transition from reception to regular class? Do all teachers take responsibility? School leader 2: In this case I think there has been a change of attitudes. Interviewer: Yes? School leader 2: Before, there could be real conflicts between the regular teacher and the introductory class teacher […] It was not clear who had the responsibility. But it is different now. It is more flexible. The reception students spend no more than ten hours in the introductory class, and attend school trips, practical-esthetical subjects etc. […]. Their individual working plans are coordinated when possible – content which is on the timetable in the regular class, is thematised beforehand in the reception class.

The concern of teacher collaboration is also emphasised by the OECD (2009), who indicate that successful implementation of a separate induction programme will “[…] require additional investment in measures to ensure that subject and classroom teachers provide continued language support in regular classrooms” (Taguma, Shewbridge, Huttova and Hoffman, 2009, 44). Often, OECD continues, subject teachers are not trained to teach second-language learners and may be unable or even unwilling to adapt their teaching (ibid., 44). According to the school leaders in this study,

Inclusion of Newly Arrived Students

77

they seem to be aware of this risk, and address this possible weakness of the model actively. In the interview they report on a growing multicultural awareness among the staff due to an active recruitment policy: Extract 7: School leader 1: Multicultural competency is one of the questions when recruiting new staff. School leader 2: […] We need visionaries in every classroom. We are looking for those who are willing to build the cathedral, not only breaking the rocks.

From these extracts we can see that the teachers and school leaders express that the use of introductory classes has advantages, but also disadvantages. The newly arrived students win a lot, but they also lose something within the model. However, although the reception model has some disadvantages with regard to social and academic development, the school works actively towards addressing these weak points. From the perspectives of Rawls and Nussbaum one could say that the school examines its own practice in light of new experiences with new students groups and the broader needs among the student body (Nussbaum 1997, 15; Rawls 1971, 141). The school’s flexible use of the reception model is characterised by the will and ability to critically question and adapt existing practice (Nussbaum 1997, 10; Rawls 1971, 395), and through this attitude allowing the classroom – and the whole school environment – to be a location of possibilities and transformation (Thomas and Lockley 2001, 119). As will be clear from the following, the will to critically reflect on one’s own practices and to address the weak sides of the model through a flexible and non-stringent use, is the same for the school which offers direct integration into mainstream.

Responsibility, high-status and social resources In School B, tuition of newly arrived students is organised so that each grade level has its own teacher who provides basic Norwegian language training. These teachers are highly-qualified second language teachers and are specialised in multicultural education and teaching. He or she is part of the team and collaborates closely with the regular teachers at the grade level. It is worth noticing however, that even though this model provides instruction in regular class, the newly arrived students in my study were given language instruction in basic Norwegian outside the regular class for three hours per week. The rest of the time the students were in the regular class, working with their individually adapted work plans, sometimes with

78

Chapter Three

support from their regular teacher, and sometimes with support from the teacher in basic Norwegian as well. What advantages do the teachers and the school leaders see for this way of organising tuition? First, both groups of informants report that all of the teachers seem to feel more responsible for all students than earlier. Until 2009, the school was offering separate reception classes and made the same experiences as the first school. Newly arrived students could sometimes be neglected or overlooked due to the pulverisation of responsibility. Within the direct integration model, however, the newly arrived students are not only the basic Norwegian teachers’ students, but also the regular teachers’ students: Extract 8: School leader 3: When we decided to reorganise and use teachers in basic Norwegian at every grade level, it has affected the whole organisation in a positive way. The interest for multicultural education is growing among the teachers. School leader 2: The regular teachers say: this is now my student […] so, it becomes more natural for all teachers to take leadership.

Second, the informants report that they experience a more positive attention towards the position of the basic Norwegian teacher from the regular teachers. Several of the teachers express that they see this as an interesting position and would be willing to qualify themselves for such a work. One of the school leaders emphasises that this position has changed from low-status to high-status: Extract 9: School leader 3: Earlier – and this is also raised as a concern in recent reports – it was often those with signs of teacher burnout who ended up with teaching second language users. And they didn’t have the competence or the strength or endurance to accommodate learning for the migrant students. Interviewer: Yes? School leader 3: Yes, but our experience is that – as long as this specific teacher does not function in his or her role – it’s not working. So, several of these teachers have masters in adapted education. And some have teacher education from their home countries. In our school the role of the basic language teacher is an assertive position.

From the extracts we can see a growing interest among the teachers with regard to multicultural education. Moreover, the informants report on a new awareness towards newly arrived students and their academic and social needs, not as a separate challenge for a group of teachers, but as a

Inclusion of Newly Arrived Students

79

common responsibility for the whole school. Interpreted in light of Rawls and Benhabib’s notion of social justice, the school seems to have established a new order. Experiences of the newly arrived students – their pedagogical and social needs – are now more in the forefront of every teacher’s mind. Based on this increased interest, they emphasise that the students benefit from working more thoroughly with concepts in the regular class. Similar to the school A, also this school is aware of the variety of different needs among the newly arrived students. The school “acknowledges the plurality of modes of being human, and differences among humans” (Benhabib 1992, 153) and facilitate teaching so that the newly arrived students are met in accordance with their various needs for adaptive education. In my fieldnotes after the interview with one of the basic Norwegian teachers and observing her together with a group of three newly arrived students, giving tuition outside of the regular classroom, I recorded the following: Extract 10: Teacher: We experience that the newly arrived students’ have access to social resources to a larger extent than before. They establish easier friendship-relations with the other children and express the sense of belonging to a larger group. Interviewer: But you still take the children out of the regular class for some hours per week? Teacher: Yes, but we mix them. So that all students who need to work more thoroughly with concepts get the opportunity. And they continue the work on concepts in the regular class together with the teacher in basic Norwegian and the regular teacher. I would say that all students – also the majority students – benefit from this tuition.

However, the school leaders and the teachers also see some weak spots regarding the direct integration model. To attend the regular class without sufficient language proficiency is obviously demanding for the newly arrived students. For some of the students it may even be overwhelming, leading to silence due to experiences of unsafeness. In order to counteract these experiences, however, and establish the classroom as a safe space, the school work actively with the regular teachers. This includes participation in developing projects, for example on home-school cooperation with migrant families. In 2014, the school (together with school A) initiated a project together with the County Council, the University and two kindergartens on how to improve the interaction between migrant parents and school/preschool. The school also aims to employ regular teachers with competencies within multicultural pedagogy.

80

Chapter Three

Furthermore, in the interview one of the teachers in basic Norwegian expresses that the migrant learners sometimes are left alone in the regular class. This may happen when new students with different needs arrive in the middle of the semester, which often means that the teacher must direct more of her resources towards the newcomers. For some of the older newly arrived students, they could thus be more passive in the class – listening without understanding – because the regular teacher is not able to support them as intensively as the teacher in basic Norwegian is able to do. The school, however, has altered the model in order to face this challenge. All the newly arrived students are given tuition in basic Norwegian for 3 hours per week outside of class. In this way, the students’ variations with regard to accessing pedagogical resources in the regular classroom are met on an individual level. The students are given the opportunity to use their linguistic resources more actively in a smaller group and still interact with their peers in the regular class. From this we can see that also school B uses the organisational model in a dynamic way.

Conclusions In the contemporary context of migration, schools need to meet the needs and issues related to educating newly arrived students in ways that improve educational outcomes and social and emotional development. In this study I have presented data from two different multilingual and multicultural school which offer different models of inclusion for newly arrived students. Both schools show an attentiveness and responsiveness towards the variety of needs of migrant learners and respect the students’ particular circumstances and contexts (Nussbaum 1997, 34). According to Jim Cummins (2008), “[…] effective schools do not simply adopt formulaic and decontextualized notions of ‘best practice’ handed down by the educational authorities or ‘experts’” (17). Instead they “[…] engage collectively in an ongoing process of creating spaces within their classrooms and schools that nourish the growth of knowledge, intelligence, and identities” (ibid., 17). As Cummins suggests, the schools use the models in a flexible way. The schools are characterised by a strong school management who work systematically towards raising the newly arrived students’ sense of belonging and their educational achievements. In the material presented above we can see that the schools acknowledge the newly arrived students as a heterogeneous group with a variety of needs. By adapting the models and actively counteracting its weak sides, the schools provide inclusion. Precisely this self-reflection seems to be a key to success.

Inclusion of Newly Arrived Students

81

References Benhabib, Seyla. 1992. Situating the Self. Gender, Community and Postmodernism in Contemporary Ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press. Bunar, Nihad. 2010. Nyanlända och lärande. En forskningsöversikt om nyanlända elever i den svenska skolan [Newly Arrived Students and Learning. A Review of Research on Newly Arrived Students in the Swedish school]. Stockholm: Vetenskapsrådet. —. 2015. Nyanlända och läranda – mottagande och inkludering [Newly Arrived Students and Learning – Reception and Inclusion]. Stockholm: Natur & Kultur. Cummins, Jim. 2008. “Introduction.” In Teacher Diversity in Diverse Schools – Challenges and Opportunities for Teacher Education, edited by Ole K. Kjørven, Bjørg-Karin Ringen and Antoinette Gagné, 11–19. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Dewilde, Joke, Lars Anders Kulbrandstad, and Thor-André Skrefsrud. 2014. “Suksess med integrering i skolen.” [Success with Integration in School]. Hamar Arbeiderblad, November 15. Education Act, LOV-1998-07-17-61. §1. 2013. http://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/1998-07-17-61 Hammersley, Martyn and Paul Atkinson. 2007. Ethnography: Principles in Practice (3 ed.). London: Routledge. Meissner, Fran and Steven Vertovec. 2015. “Comparing Super-Diversity.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 38 (4):541–555. Nilsson, Jenny and Monica Axelsson. 2013. “‘Welcome to Sweden…’ Newly Arrived Students’ Experiences of Pedagogical and Social Provision in Introductory and Regular Classes.” IEJEE. 6 (1):137–164. Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. 2012. Veileder. Innføringstilbud til nyankomne minoritetsspråklige elever [Guidelines. Introduction for Newly Arrived Minority Language Students]. Oslo: Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. —. 2014. The Education Mirror. Facts and Analysis of Kindergarten, Primary and Secondary Education in Norway. Oslo: Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. NOU 2010: 7 Mangfold og mestring. Flerspråklige barn, unge og voksne i opplæringssystemet [Diversity and Mastering. Multilingual Children, Young People and Grown-ups in the Educational System]. Oslo: The Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research. Nussbaum, Martha C. 1997. Cultivating Humanity. A Classical Defence of Reform in Liberal Education. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

82

Chapter Three

Pinson, Halleli, Madeleine Arnot, and Mano Candappa. 2010. Education, Asylum and the ‘Non-Citizen’ Child. The Politics of Compassion and Belonging. Basinstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Rambøll. 2013. Kartlegging av innføringstilbud til elever som kommer til Norge i ungdomsskolealder og som har få års skolegang før ankomst [Mapping of Introduction Offers for Students Who Arrive to Norway During Lower-secondary Age with Few Years of Schooling Before Arrival]. http://www.udir.no/globalassets/upload/rapporter/2013/kartlegging-av innforingstilbud_sluttrapport.pdf —. 2016. Evaluering av særskilt norskopplæring og innføringstilbud [Evaluation of Special Education in Norwegian and Introduction Offers]. http://www.udir.no/globalassets/filer/tall-og-forskning/forskning srapporter/evaluering-av-sarskilt-sprakopplaring-2016.pdf Rawls, John. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Short, Deborah J. 2002. “Newcomer Programs: An Educational Alternative for Secondary Immigrant Students.” Education and Urban Society, 34 (2):173–198. Sletten, Mira and Ada I. Engebrigtsen. 2011. Kartlegging av opplæringstilbudet til enslige mindreårige asylsøkere og barn av asylsøkere [Mapping of the Educational Provision for Single, Minor Asylumseekers and Children of Asylumseekers]. NOVA-rapport nr 20/2011. Oslo: Norsk institutt for forskning om oppvekst, velferd og aldring. Taguma, Miho, Claire Shewbridge, Jana Huttova, and Nancy Hoffman. 2009. OECD Reviews of Migrant Education. Paris: OECD. Thomas, Gary and Andrew Loxley. 2001. Deconstructing Special Education and Constructing Inclusion. Philadelphia: Open University Press. UNESCO. 1994. The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. Paris: UNESCO. Vertovec, Steven. 2007. “Super-diversity and its Implications.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 30 (6):1024–1054. de Wal Pastoor, Lutine. 2015. “The Mediational Role of Schools in Supporting Psychosocial Transitions Among Unaccompanied Young Refugees Upon Resettlement in Norway.” International Journal of Educational Development. 41:245–254.

CHAPTER FOUR MISSING RECOGNITION? INCLUSIVE EDUCATION AND LANGUAGE MINORITY STUDENTS IN NORWEGIAN SCHOOLS KARI NES

This chapter has two parts, one exploring the concept of inclusive education, in particular where language minority students are concerned, and one empirical part. In the empirical part of the chapter recent survey data from Norway on the education of cultural and linguistic minority students with a nonWestern heritage will be analysed and discussed in an inclusion perspective.

I. Inclusion The inclusion concept The concept of inclusion in education is used in a variety of ways. The understanding applied here is a wide one, not restricted to mean placement in ordinary schools and classes of children who are seen to deviate from average, which is the most common perception. The concept is not new, even if the use of it has become widespread only during the last two-three decades. Renato Opertti, Zachary Walker and Yi Zhang (2014) identify four core ideas about inclusion in education from the last 60-70 years: (1) Inclusion within a human rights perspective The right to education as basic is reflected in key documents such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights from 1948 and the Convention on the Rights of the Child from 1989.

84

Chapter Four

(2) Inclusion as a response to students with special needs One of the key documents underpinning this core idea is the so-called ‘Salamanca statement’ from 1994, a UNESCO document which has had a great impact worldwide on seeing students with disabilities as the responsibility of regular educational settings. (3) Inclusion as a response to marginalised groups The third core idea refers to inclusive education for groups of learners who particularly risk exclusion, marginalisation or underachievement. A discriminated ethnic minority is an example. The Education for All-efforts (UN) from 1990 onward represent key international initiatives within this perspective (UNESCO 2000). The Salamanca statement mentioned above is not only concerned with the inclusion of children with special needs, but the inclusion of all, notably “children from linguistic, ethnic and cultural minorities and children from other disadvantaged or marginalised areas or groups” (UNESCO 1994, 6). (4) Inclusion as transforming the education system at large The last and youngest core idea listed by Opertti & al (2014) does not focus on certain groups of learners, but on the educational system as such. It is the responsibility of the system on different levels to offer equitable and inclusive education, responding to the diversity of the learners (ex UNESCO, 2005; 2008).

A language for inclusion As we saw above in point 3, cultural minorities may be referred to as disadvantaged or marginalised, in need of being included into something. Consequently, in a traditional democratic spirit increasing inclusion is understood as a matter of increasing access and justice for discriminated groups (Iris Marion Young 2000). But we have to go a step further and ask, included into what? As long as we think of inclusion as a process of bringing those who are on the ’outside’ into the ‘inside’, we run the risk of reproducing the very social and political structures that label some as insiders and others as outsiders in the first place (Gert Biesta 2014). This is assimilation, a colonial understanding in the sense that those who are already inside, incorporate others into their sphere (Biesta 2007). “In this image of inclusion, the particular interests, experiences and ways of looking at things that the formerly excluded bring to politics make little difference to its processes or outcomes” (Young 2000, p 11). If we use the verb form of inclusion - include someone - the implication might easily be that the school/ group/organisation to be included into is taken for granted, as something unquestioned to be implemented into.

Missing Recognition?

85

Therefore, in an ‘inclusion grammar’ in addition to the noun a more adequate form of the word is the adjective - inclusive - used about actions, processes and systems, not persons. The verb include used about people easily leaves them as objects for actions. But, of course from a subjective point of view, a person may feel more or less included. Biesta (2014) goes further concerning a language for inclusion and suggests a new word instead –‘transclusion’: ‘Transclusion’ thus hints at an inclusive ‘gesture’ that moves in two directions at the same time. It helps to see that inclusive ambitions not only require that ‘we’ become more open and welcoming for ‘others,’ but that, at the very same time, it is acknowledged that there is a need for a redefinition and repositioning of the very ‘we’ that seek to be inclusive (Biesta 2014, p. 22).

Implementing inclusion Getting down to a more specific operational definition of inclusion meant for supporting implementation of it in schools, I will lean on the approach by Tony Booth and Mel Ainscow (2011). The subtitle of their Index for Inclusion is Developing learning and participation in schools, which is what inclusion is about, as they see it, and which is also in coherence with Norwegian policy documents. Developing learning means aiming at high educational benefits for all students which requires equitable opportunities to utilise their learning potential. Developing participation …means learning alongside others and collaborating with them in shared learning experiences. It requires active engagement with learning and having a say in how education is experienced. More deeply it is about being recognized, accepted and valued for oneself (p. 3).

Participation is about being a part of the social community at school too, as well as the learning community. Identifying barriers to developing learning and participation and finding ways to overcoming or reducing the barriers is what the Index encourages schools to do (Booth & Ainscow, 2011). The barriers may occur in the educational practices of the school and in the cultures and policies on different levels, put together below in an overview. Challenges in implementing inclusion may be addressed on each level (cf Peder Haug, 2014).

Chapter Four

86

Table 1. Levels of inclusion, seen in relation to different aspects of inclusion.

Aspects of inclusion Levels of inclusion

LEARNING Developing learning/ removing barriers to learning

PARTICIPATION Developing participation/ removing barriers to participation

IV. NATIONAL level: Legislation, values, ideologies and policies. III. MUNICIPALITY/school owner level: Organisation and funding II. SCHOOL and classroom level: Teaching and learning I. STUDENT level: Does (s)he learn and participate? Starting at the top of the model, on level IV are the legal prerequisites and national policies for inclusive education (Booth & Ainscow, 2001; Norwegian directorate, 2006). Since 1975, when students with disabilities legally speaking were ‘integrated’ in regular schools, there has been one Education Act for all and at least in theory one school for all. But, ‘all’ rarely has meant all, even if the history of the unitary school can be traced back to the 19th century. Sacrificed on the historic altar of nation building and ‘the school for all’ are/were the linguistic and cultural minorities and the indigenous Sami population (Thor-Ola Engen, 2010). But since the nineties full educational rights for these groups in the common school have been established. On a formulation level the Norwegian government expresses recognition for the identity of persons with a linguistic and cultural minority heritage. The Education Act (1998) also states certain rights to adapted language education in Norwegian for pupils from language minorities, and mother tongue instruction and/or bilingual subject teaching if considered necessary. As an indigenous group, Sami students enjoy particular rights to education completely in their own language. Other linguistic rights include teaching in sign language if that is the student’s

Missing Recognition?

87

first language, and in Finnish for the Kven-Finnish national minority (§§ 2.6-2.8). On the national level not only policies but also the values and principles on which inclusion rests, are addressed: “Equitable, adapted and inclusive education should be the overarching principles in the common school” (Norwegian directorate, 2006). Along with equity, valuing diversity is another ‘inclusion value’ articulated in the curriculum. Rather than referring to disadvantaged groups, policy formulations increasingly emphasise student diversity as an enrichment for the learning of all (Edvard Befring,1997), attempting for instance to recognise “the particular interests, experiences and ways of looking at things that the formerly excluded bring” (Young 2000, p.11). Inclusion means moving beyond deficit thinking, “challenging the construction of difference as deficit” (Cummins, 2003, p 39). Which differences or diversities are we talking about? Cultural, linguistic, intellectual, physical, socio-economic, religious… and perhaps sexual orientation? Various suggestions of relevant dimensions exist, for instance OECD (2010) and council of Europe (2011). But the point is hardly to list diversities, it is rather to address necessary qualities of the education that all students are exposed to, for instance as put by UNESCO (2008): Inclusive education is an ongoing process aimed at offering quality education for all while respecting diversity and the different needs and abilities, characteristics and learning expectations of the students and communities, eliminating all forms of discrimination (UNESCO, 2008).

Level III in the model is about policies too, but on a regional or local level, for instance about who is employed, and whose voices are heard in decisions about the funding and organising of the schools. Level II refers to what is going on at each school and in each classroom. This is where the political intentions and values are to be realised. In Norway the desired learning outcomes are decided nationally, while decisions about how and what to teach to a large extent are made locally. The classroom is where the prescribed ‘adapted education’ first and foremost is meant to happen. Methods and content have to be differentiated according to the needs of the diverse student group. Successful educational programmes require, among other things, a relevant curriculum that can be taught and learned in an appropriate language, and which build upon the knowledge and experience of teachers and learners (UNESCO 2000). On level I in the model is the individual student. Does he or she learn and participate, as the school sees it, or first and foremost as the students

88

Chapter Four

themselves see it? Are their identities respected and do they feel as equal participants in the communities at school? Data in the study presented below are from levels I and II.

II. A study of non-Western linguistic minority students. Sample and methods As part of an ongoing national research project a survey was conducted in 95 Norwegian schools in spring 20131. The schools are situated in 14 municipalities spread over Southern Norway. The respondents were students from all levels in compulsory education and their class teachers. In the survey in total 15907 students and their class teachers were invited to participate. The response rate was 91% for students (a little lower for immigrant students) and 93% for teachers. The study allows us to compare the Norwegian speaking majority and the non-Western minority students on some ‘inclusion variables’. The use of the term ‘non-Western’ has been criticised as being potentially stereotyping. Even Høydahl (2008) recommends to replace it by naming the parts of the world in question, which more specifically are often Asia, Africa, Latin-America, Oceania except Australia and New Zealand, and Europe outside EU/EEA. Still, in order to simplify we have chosen to keep the notion non-Western (cf. Lars-Anders Kulbrandstad in this volume for further details about the group). Criteria for categorisation are that the students or their parents were not born in Norway. The term ‘Norwegian speaking students’ refers in this study to students whose parents were born in Norway. The percentage of non-Western minorities in the sample is 7,5%. In the inquiry only 1,9 % had a ‘Western’ immigrant background, meaning other countries than those mentioned as non-Western above. These students were not included in the analysis because of their low numbers. In the country now in total 14% of the students in compulsory education have a linguistic minority background, while the figure was 9,4% in our study (Norwegian directorate, 2014). The lower figure is due to the fact that cities like Oslo with the highest proportion of linguistic minorities did not take part. Oslo has about 40% students with immigrant background in compulsory education.

1

The name of study is The function of special education (SPEED), http://www.hivolda.no/speed. It is funded by the Norwegian Research Council. All students in the chosen cohorts have taken part in the survey, not only those identified as having special educational needs.

Missing Recognition?

89

The sample group in our inquiry are from grade 5-9 (age 10-14) omitting the youngest children. This leaves us with around 8000 Norwegian speaking students and 600 with a non-Western heritage. The design allows linking up teacher replies to the individual students/ groups of students. The digital survey instruments mostly consisted of statements for the respondents to evaluate on a Likert scale from 1-4, 1-5 or 1-6. Translations of the questions into 15 languages including for instance Arabic, Tamil and Thai were available. The questions are based on welltested instruments with high reliability and validity scores (Anne Randi Festøy and Peder Haug, 2014). Through the operationalisation procedures efforts were made to ensure content validity, an operationalisation reflecting the distinction of inclusion as developing academic learning on the one hand and as developing social participation on the other. Students’ replies and teachers’ opinions on each student have been collected. Variable groups based on several items within each topic were constructed and scales developed. They satisfy statistical demands on scale construction, which is high Cronbach’s alfa and medium inter item correlation (Haug, 2014). The questions are specified along with the results below.

III. Results In the statistical analyses, frequency analyses and calculations of average score and standard deviation (std) were made, as well as variance analyses. Differences between the groups are expressed through differences in standard deviation, the so-called Cohen’s d (Lewis Cohen, Lawrence Manion and Keith Morrison, 2011). Results are shown in a 500 scale where 500 is average2, and 100 is one std. In this way the average as well as the spread between the groups will show (Kari Nes and Thomas Nordahl, 2015). Numbers of non-Western respondents is +/- 600, while the Norwegian speaking group is +/- 8000, varying a little from question to question.

2

Due to their large number, the Norwegian speaking group tends to be close to average. It is the difference between the groups that is of interest here.

90

Chapter Four

Results, academic aspects /Inclusion as developing learning The first diagram is about aspects of academic learning, based on four variable groups, two answered by the teacher, the next two by the student. In our approach to inclusion, these data will illuminate some of the learning issues in developing inclusion. The variable groups are: 1. Learning outcome: The academic achievements of the student evaluated by teacher on a scale from 1 (very low competence) to 6 (very high competence) o in the subject Norwegian o in mathematics o in the subject English 2. Motivation and work effort rated by the teacher on a scale from 1 (very low) to 5 (very high): o The student’s motivation to succeed in school o The abilities of the student compared to others in the class o The work efforts of the student at school o The engagement of the student to learn in the lessons 3. Perception of the subject Norwegian (student response): Indicate on a scale from 1 (no, never) to 5 (yes, always) on 7 items including: o I like the subject Norwegian o I get my tasks done in the Norwegian lessons o I enjoy reading o I enjoy writing o I find the subject Norwegian difficult (reversed) 4. Collaboration with peers (student response): Indicate on a scale from 1 (totally disagree) to 4 (totally agree): o It is easy to form working groups in the lessons o Students in this class enjoy helping each other with tasks o The students work hard in the lessons o We usually do what is expected in the lessons o My class mates help me if there is something I do not understand

Missing Recognition?

91

Figure 1. Ressults, academic aspects /Inclusiion as developiing learning

Consideringg the learning aspects of incclusion the waay it is operattionalised here, one fiinds a gap beetween the no on-Western m minority group p and the Norwegian speaking grooup, not surp prisingly in fa favour of the majority group (cf figure 1). The difference in learning outccome accordiing to the teachers is 555 points, i.e.. 0,55 std, wh hich is a lot w when a differeence of a school year is consideredd by Robert Marzano, M Tina Boogren and al (2012) to be 0,4 stdd. However, the t way studeents regard th e school subjects does not reflect tthis gap, sincee the non-Weestern minoritty students lo ook at the main subjeccts in a more positive p way than their peerrs, here exemp plified by Norwegian (0,27 std diffference). The same is true for mathemattics (0,31 std differencce, not shownn in the diagraam) and on quuestions aboutt how the teacher in N Norwegian is regarded (0,2 27 std). In thhe two latter areas, a the non-Westernn students scoored a lot bettter than theirr peers on th he highest entries. (The Norwegian teacher that some of the students had in mind, probably w would have been b the teaacher of Norrwegian as a second language). T The non-Wesstern group also a report goood collaborattion with other studennts in the lesssons, a slightly better scorre than the Norwegian N speaking grroup. While achievementss may differ due to the linguistic background,, the reason why w teachers should evaluaate the motivation and work effort of the minoority students as clearly loower than th hat of the Norwegian sstudents (0,266 std), is more surprising.

92

Chapter Four

In our material there are an unknown number of students who have not been very long in the country who will naturally achieve less than others in the Norwegian school. We also know that some in the whole group of students have reading difficulties or experience other learning problems. Whether being in the early stages of learning Norwegian or having reading difficulties, accessing the text of the inquiry may have caused problems, even if some students were offered the questionnaire in their first language. In total the percentage of students referred to special education in the sample is 6,8% for Norwegian speaking and 10,3% for non-Western students, figures that reflect the familiar pattern of overrepresentation of students with an immigrant background in special education (Beth Harry, 2014). Another barrier when asked to respond may be mental strains on students, for instance caused by traumatic refugee experiences in the past for some of the immigrants (Fafo, 2016).

Results, social aspects/ Inclusion as developing participation The second diagram (Figure 2) is about social aspects, based on four variable groups, one answered by the teacher, three by the student. In our approach to inclusion, these data will illuminate some of the participation issues in developing inclusive education. The variable groups are: 5. Student’s adherence to norms (teacher response): Indicate for each student on a scale from 1 (never) to 5 (very often) on the dimension. 9 items in all, for instance that the student: o keeps things tidy without being told o is attentive o completes his/her work on time o listens to other students’ talk in class o ignores other students making a noise 6. My relation to the teacher (student response): Indicate on a scale from 1 (totally disagree) to 4 (totally agree) on 14 items, for instance: o My contact with the teacher is good o The teacher likes me o I can talk to the teacher when I am in trouble o The teacher does everything to make me learn

Missing Recognition?

93

7. My soocial relation to peers (stu udent responsee): Indicate on o a scale from 1 (totally disagree) d to 4 (totally agrree) on 10 ittems, for instannce: o Iff someone in class c is sad orr in trouble, thhe other studen nts talk to hiim/her o Inn this class yoou are accepteed even if youu are not as go ood as the otthers or a bit different d o I have become friends with many m studentss in class 8. Well- being (studennt response): Indicate I YES – yes – no or NO on 7 itemss including thee following: o I usually like going g to schoo ol o I think it is impportant to go to school in orrder to learn o I often think lessons are boriing (reversed)) o Itt is important for me to get good grades

Figure 2. Ressults, social aspeects/ Inclusion as developing pparticipation

Regarding tthe social com mmunity with h peers and adults – an aspect of participationn - we see inn figure 2 on the t one hand that teachers consider the adherennce of the nonn-Western lin nguistic minorrity students to t school norms to bee distinctly low wer than that of the Norweggian speaking g students

94

Chapter Four

(27 points difference, i.e. 0,27 std). The difference is not very big, but clear. On the other hand, the minority group informants regard themselves to be socially well included in the sense that they have a good relationship to the teacher, they have friends and thrive at least as well as the Norwegian students in these respects.

IV. Discussion Before discussing the results in detail, let us consider some limitations of the study. I will argue that the data offer indications about important aspects of inclusion/exclusion in school, although the picture that it is possible to draw is limited, not least since information about what is actually happening in the classroom is missing. Classroom observations or interviews with students and teachers would have added to the picture. Another piece of information that is not collected here is number and organisation of linguistic support lessons for the non-Western learners, in or out of regular classes. But we know generally that half of the linguistic minority children receive some kind of additional linguistic support, for instance for a couple of hours per week, and more if their knowledge of Norwegian is poor. Some of this instruction takes place out of class or after school hours, and for less than 0,7% of all students in separate reception classes (Norwegian directorate, 2014). The most common form of support is bilingual help in the school subjects (cf Thor André Skrefsrud in this volume). When it comes to the specific qualifications of teachers for exerting bilingual or intercultural teaching, figures are not known for this particular study, but recent statistics show that only 1 out of 4 teachers in this field has relevant further education (Norwegian directorate, 2016). General limitations of survey studies include uncertainties as to how questions are interpreted by the respondents (Asbjørn Johannessen, Per Arne Tufte & Line Christoffersen, 2010), particularly when very young persons and second language learners are concerned. We do not know exactly what any of the students have had in mind when they answer questions such as these. For instance, what is meant when students say that they have a good relationship to peers and teachers? Are some respondents for instance being polite, or perhaps the opposite? And, in what way do the very different cultural heritages of the students play a part in the way they respond to the questions? (cf Svein Lie, 2011). I will comment on two main characteristics of the findings, the first being that teachers regard non-Western immigrants as far less included academically than Norwegian students; they achieve less and work less. But the non-Western students themselves seem enthusiastic about the main

Missing Recognition?

95

school subjects. Regarding achievements, the underachievement of immigrant students as a group is well documented internationally and nationally (for instance Tove Skutnagg-Kangas & Jim Cummins 1988; Ministry of Education, 2010). But when you adjust for social background like parents’ educational level, several Norwegian studies show little difference between groups with immigrant heritage and others in school achievements (Anders Bakken, 2009; Hans Bonesrønning and Jon Marius Iversen, 2008; Jens B. Grøgaard, Håvard Helland and Jon Lauglo, 2008). However, even if parents’ educational level is taken into account, more recent national data from grades 8 and 10 do show a persistent picture of underachievement for linguistic minority students (Agnes Steinkellner, 2013). These results do not account for the discrepancy between teachers and students in our data. When students in our inquiry are seen as neither motivated nor hard-working, as well as low achieving, you may ask to what extent the instruction has been well adapted, in other words if our target group have experienced the lessons as accessible, interesting and relevant. Instead the students are seen to be at fault. In this way the school may reproduce social and cultural differences in society (Bakken, 2003). As a group Norwegian speaking students do better in national tests, PISA tests and in final exams in compulsory education than students with immigrant backgrounds (Ministry of Education, 2010; Marit Kjærnsli and Rolf Vegar Olsen, 2013). But differences within these two student groups are huge when gender, ethnicity and socio-economic background are taken into consideration. For instance, students with Western background do better than students with non-Western, and students with immigrant backgrounds who were born in the country do better than students who themselves immigrated (Bente Christine Gravaas, Torbjørn Hægeland, Lars J. Kirkebøen and Kjartan Steffensen, 2008). On average linguistic minority students spend more time on home work than the majority. In secondary school students with an immigrant heritage are found to be more motivated for further studies than the Norwegian speaking (Bakken, 2003; Ministry of Education, 2010). In fact, Norwegian-born young women to immigrant parents are most inclined of all groups in the country to go to university/tertiary education (Statistics Norway, 2016). Another interesting characteristic of the findings in our study is that non-Western minority students view themselves as socially well included at school, slightly better than students with Norwegian family background view themselves, whilst the non-Western group is regarded by the teacher as clearly less socially included in the sense that they do not abide as well to school norms. So, in the field of social participation, as in the field of

96

Chapter Four

academic learning, there is a discrepancy between teacher and student views. When we have noted this clear discrepancy in the way the teachers and the non-Western linguistic minority students describe the situation, how should we understand these results, notably the teachers’ answers? They probably confirm what Line Torbjørnsen Hilt (2015) suggests, that this group of students in the Norwegian policy context is still associated with educational failure. Being non-Western is one of the categories that in particular is associated with such failure, according to her. Cummins (2015a) also states that in addition to language and low socio-economic status, marginalisation of a group in the broader society may result in discriminatory educational practices. Such practices represent the opposite of recognition. Respect is a value referred to in §1 of the Education Act. Respecting students may mean to recognise their identity3. In his work ‘Struggle for recognition’ Axel Honneth (1992) identifies three spheres of recognition – love, rights and solidarity - all necessary for a positive self-development. Looking at the rights’ sphere, recognising rights demands a mutual atmosphere “in which the individual learns to see himself from the perspective of his (or her) partner in interaction as a bearer of equal rights” (Honneth, 1992, p.194). But sometimes recognition is absent or violated. For instance, exclusion from participation in learning and social communities at school is a denial of rights that are fundamental for a person’s perception of being an equal and respected member of society. With reference to Honneth, Kari Spernes (2014) analysed her interviews with 18 year old immigrant students about their years in Norwegian compulsory education. Not one of them could recollect any example where their linguistic or cultural heritage had influenced what was going on in the lessons. Students’ chances of experiencing recognition for their forms of life, their history and language etc. seemed to have been very small. A consequence of recognition in the classroom is to communicate high expectations for all students. According to the Index for Inclusion, having high expectations is one of the indicators of inclusive education. To specify the indicator about expectations in a given context, the Index suggests that questions should be phrased for instance in the following way: 3

With his notion ‘transclusion’ Biesta (2014) moves beyond the question of recognition of identity to a question of living together in plurality (a democratic political agency), which always by necessity interrupts identity. A further discussion of this perspective is not included here.

Missing Recognition?

97

a) Does every adult and child feel that the highest achievements are possible in their school? b) Do all children and adults understand that there is no limit to what they can achieve? c) Do staff recognise efforts that must be made to counter any low expectations for children, including those living in poverty, children in care, Travellers, those learning English as an additional language and children categorized as ‘having special educational needs’? (Booth & Ainscow 2011, p. 91)

There is reason to believe that the answers would be close to ‘no’ to these or similar questions in some of the classrooms represented in the study. Likewise, Cummins (2015b) asks what image of the child we are sketching in our instruction of bilingual students: Capable of becoming bilingual and biliterate? Capable of higher-order thinking and intellectual accomplishments? Capable of creative and imaginative thinking? Capable of creating literature and art? Capable of generating new knowledge? Capable of thinking about and finding solutions to social issues?

V. Concluding remarks To sum up the findings, teachers in this study regard non-Western linguistic minority students as a group as achieving far less academically and being less dedicated to school work than the Norwegian speaking students. Teachers also judge the social skills (here in the sense of adherence to school norms) of this minority group of students to be poorer than the majority’s, while the non-Western students themselves generally report that they like it at school and that they have a slightly better relationship to fellow students and to the teachers than other students say. The non-Western group even enjoy the core school subjects more than their peers. Looking at the bigger picture, what support and barriers to taking inclusion forward for students with a non-Western heritage are identified in this study? Referring to our four-level-model of (barriers to) inclusion in table 1, we can state that on the national level rights and ideologies seem to be in place where formulations are concerned. But the suspicion is that values are not sufficiently internalised, leading to some students being seen as ‘other’. Roger Slee (2011) asks if some exclusions are seen as ’natural’. On the realisation levels I and II in the model, inclusion means

98

Chapter Four

developing learning and participation in practice. Students thrive, according to our data, but are they sufficiently challenged to use their learning potential and to participate in the school environment? If not, may lack of respect be part of the explanation? According to Richard Sennet, “lack of respect, though less aggressive than an outright insult, can take an equally wounding form. No insult is offered another person, but neither is recognition extended: he or she is not seen – as a full human being whose presence matters” (here from Slee, 2011, p.38). In addition to addressing possible lack of respect and recognition, the specific competences needed for teachers in diverse classrooms should be paid attention to (cf Spernes, 2014). When looking into inclusion in the classroom on levels I and II in our model where teachers and students actually are, good examples exist, showing the way forward; some are described in other chapters in this volume. The ‘Identity text’ project is another example (Jim Cummins & Margaret Early 2011): Over the years many ideas from different school subjects and form many places are developed and collected to show how bilingual students’ home language is seen as a cognitive and social asset in education, rather than a problem. Most of the examples show how dual language texts, or ‘identity texts’, are produced and used in creative ways, including drama and multimedia. In any case, all students deserve to be met with respect and high expectations, rooted in teachers’ values and intercultural didactic competence. According to Booth & Ainscow (2016) “the process of putting inclusive values into action involves connecting our actions to inclusive values and disconnecting them from excluding values. We call this a process of acquiring ‘values literacy’…” (p. 11). Being literate in this sense involves meeting the students with knowledge, respect and high expectations: If you want students to emerge from schooling after 12 years as intelligent, imaginative, and linguistically talented, then treat them as intelligent, imaginative, and linguistically talented from the first day they arrive in school (Cummins 2015b).

References Bakken, Anders. 2003. Minoritetsspråklig ungdom i skolen. Reproduksjon av ulikhet eller sosial mobilitet? [Minority youth at school. Reproduction of inequlity or social mobility?] NOVA-rapport 15/03. —. 2009. Ulikhet på tvers: har foreldres utdanning, kjønn og minoritetsstatus like stor betydning for elevers karakterer på alle skoler? [Inequality across: Do gender, minoirty stus or parents’ education play the same part for learning outcome in all schools?], Vol.

Missing Recognition?

99

8/2009. Oslo: Norsk institutt for forskning om oppvekst, velferd og aldring. Befring, Edvard. 1997. The Enrichment Perspective. Remedial and Special Education, Volume 18 (3) 182-187. Biesta, G. 2007. “Don’t count me in”. Democracy, education and the question of inclusion. Nordic Studies in Education (1) 19-31. —. 2014. Transclusion: Overcoming the tension between inclusion and exclusion in the discourse on democracy and democratisation. Institute of Education and Society, University of Luxembourg. Unpubl. Bonesrønning, Hans, and Jon Marius Vaag Iversen. 2008. Suksessfaktorer i grunnskolen: analyse av nasjonale prøver 2007. (Success factors in compulsory education: an analysis of national tests 2007]. Vol. nr. 05/08. Trondheim: Senter for økonomisk forskning. Booth, Tony and Mel Ainscow. 2011. Index for Inclusion. Developing Learning and Participation in Schools. (3rd ed.). Bristol: Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education (CSIE) Booth, Tony and Mel Ainscow. 2016. Index for Inclusion: a guide to school development led by inclusive values. (4th ed.) Cambridge: Index for Inclusion Network. Cohen, Lewis, Lawrence Manion and Keith Morrison. 2011. Research methods in education. London: Routledge. Council of Europe. 2009. Policies and practices for teaching sociocultural diversity. http://book.coe.int/EN/catalogue.php?PAGEID=48&lang=EN&theme_ catalogue=100045 Cummins, Jim. 2003. Challenging The Construction of Difference as Deficit: Where are Identity, Intellect, Imagination, and Power in the New Regime of Truth? In Pedagogies of Differerence. Rethinking Education for Social Change, edited by Peter Pericles Trifonas. Routledge Falmer. Cummins, Jim and Margaret Early. 2011. Identity Texts: the collaborative Creation of Power in Multilingual Schools. London: Trentham books. —. 2015a. Intercultural education and academic achievement: a framework for school-based policies in multilingual schools, Intercultural Education, 26:6, 455-468, DOI: 10.1080/14675986.2015.1103539 —. 2015b. Identity Texts: the collaborative creation of power in multilingual schools, seen in relation to the principle of adaptive education. Presentation, seminar at Hedmark University College, September 3. Education Act (1998) Primary and Secondary Education and Training

100

Chapter Four

https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/b3b9e92cce6742c39581b661 a019e504/education-act-norway-with-amendments-entered-2014-2.pdf (Act of 17 July 1998 no. 61) Engen, Thor Ola. 2010. Literacy instruction and integration: the case of Norway, I Intercultural Education, Vol. 21, No. 2, 171–183. ISBN 1467-5986 Festøy, Anne Randi Fagerlid and Peder Haug. 2014. The function of special Education. SPEED-prosjektet. Rapport til kommunar og skular. Høgskulen i Volda/ Høgskolen i Hedmark. Gravaas, Bente Christine, Torbjørn Hægeland, Lars J. Kirkebøen and Kjartan Steffensen. 2008. Skoleresultater 2007. En kartlegging av karakterer fra grunn- og videregående skoler i Norge. [School results 2007. Results from compulsory and upper secondary education in Norway]. (SSB-notat 2008/24). Oslo: Statistisk sentralbyrå. Fafo. 2016. Kostnader ved mangelfull utdanning av asylsøkere og flyktninger [Costs by missing education for asylum seekers and refugees] (Rapport 32-2016). Oslo: Fafo. Grøgaard, Jens B., Håvard Helland and Jon Lauglo (2008). Elevenes læringsutbytte: Hvor stor betydning har skolen?: en analyse av ulikhet i elevers prestasjonsnivå i fjerde, syvende og tiende trinn i grunnskolen og i grunnkurset i videregående [Students’ learning outcome: What is the impact of school? Analysing students’ achivement differences in grade 4, 7 and 10 in compulsory school and first year in upper secondary] in (Vol. 45/2008). Oslo: NIFU STEP. Haug, Peder. (2014). Er inkludering i skulen gjennomførleg? [Is inclusion in education possible?] In Germeten, s. (ed.) De utenfor. Forskning om spesialpedagogikk og spesialundervisning. Fagbokforlaget, pp15-39. Harry, Beth. (2014). The Disproportionate Placement of Ethnic Minorities in Special Education. In L. Florian (Red.), The SAGE Handbook of Special Education (2nd utg., Vol. 1, 73-95). Los Angeles, Hilt, Line Torbjørnsen. (2015) Included as excluded and excluded as included: minority language students in Norwegian inclusion policy. In International Journal of Inclusive Education, Vol. 19, no 2, 11, 165182. Honneth, Axel. 1995. The Struggle for Recognition: The Grammar of Social Conflicts. Cambridge: Polity Høydahl, Even. 2008. Vestlig og ikke vestlig – ord som ble for store og gikk ut på dato [Western and non-Western – words that grew too big and became outdated] Samfunnsspeilet nr. 4/2008, Statistisk sentralbyrå.

Missing Recognition?

101

Johannessen, Asbjørn, Per Arne Tufte and Line Christoffersen. 2010. Introduksjon til samfunnsvitenskapelige metoder (Introduction to research methods in social science]. Oslo: Abstrakt forlag. Kjærnsli, Marit and Rolf Vegar Olsen (eds.). 2013. Fortsatt en vei å gå: norske elevers kompetanse i matematikk, naturfag og lesing i PISA 2012. [Still not there: the competence of Norwegian students in mathematics, natural science and reading in PISA 2012]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget Lie, Svein. 2010. Måling av kunnskaper og holdninger i et krysskulturelt perspektiv. [Measuring knowledge and attitudes in a cross cultural perspective]. In Martinussen, Monica (ed.) Kvantitativ forskningsmetodologi i samfunns- og helsefag. Oslo: Fagbokforlaget, 121-150.s Marzano, Robert J., Tina Boogren, Heflebower, T., Kanold-McIntyre, J., and Pickering, D. 2012. Becoming a reflective teacher. Bloomington, Ind.: Marzano Research Laboratory. Ministry of Education. 2010. Mangfold og mestring— Flerspråklige barn, unge og voksne i opplæringssystemet [Diversity and achievement multilingual children, youth and adults in education]. (NOU 2010: 7). Oslo: Public report. Nes, Kari and Thomas Nordahl. (2015): En inkluderende skole for elever med minoritetsspråklig bakgrunn? [An inclusive school for students with a minority language background?] In Dobson, S., Kulbrandstad, L.A., Sand, S. og Skrefsrud, T.-A. (red.): Dobbeltkvalifisering. Perspektiver på kultur, utdanning og identitet. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget, pp 151-172 Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training 2006. Læreplanverket for Kunnskapsløftet. [The Knowledge Promotion curriculum]. Oslo: Utdanningsdirektoratet —. 2014. The Education Mirror. Facts and analysis of kindergarten, primary and secondary education in Norway. Report. Oslo. —. 2016. Evaluering av særskilt språkopplæring og innføringstilbud. [Evaluating adapted language tuition and introduction classes.] Report. Oslo. OECD. 2010. Centre for Education, Research and Innovation (CERI): Teacher Education for Diversity. www.oecd.org/edu/ted Opertti, Renato, Zachary Walker, and Yi Zhang. 2014. Inclusive Education: From Targeting Groups and Schools to Achieving Quality Education as the Core of EFA. In The SAGE Handbook of Special Education, edited by Lani Florian, 149-169. Los Angeles, London, New Dehli, Singapore, Washington DC: SAGE.

102

Chapter Four

Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove and Jim Cummins. 1988. Minority education: from shame to struggle. Clevedon, Avon, England: Multilingual Matters. Slee, R. (2011): The irregular school - exclusion, schooling and inclusive education. Routledge. Spernes, Kari. 2014. En anerkjennende skole? Elever med innvandrerbakgrunn og deres skoleerfaringer [A recognising school? Students with immigrant background and their school experiences] in Afdal, Geir, Åse Røthing, and Espen Schjetne (eds.). 2014. Empirisk etikk i pedagogiske praksiser: artikulasjon, forstyrrelse, ekspansjon. Oslo: Cappelen Damm akademisk: 177-199. Statistics Norway. 2016. Key figures for immigration and immigrants. https://www.ssb.no/innvandring-oginnvandrere/nokkeltall/innvandring-og-innvandrere Steinkellner, Agnes. 2013. Innvandrere og norskfødte med innvandrerforeldre i grunnskolen: en analyse av karakterdata og resultater fra nasjonale prøver i 2012 (Vol. 65/2013). Oslo: SSB. UNESCO. 1994. The Salamanca statement and framework for action on special needs education. Paris: UNESCO. —. 2000. Education for all; the Dakar Framework for Action. Paris: UNESCO. —. 2008. International Bureau of Education (IBE). Inclusive education – the way of the future. http://www.ibe.unesco.org/en/ice/48th-ice2008/conclusions-and-recommendations.html Young, Iris Marion. 2000. Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford, GBR: Oxford University Press, UK, 2000. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 18 August 2015.

CHAPTER FIVE «IT’S JUST IN MY HEART»: A PORTRAIT OF A TRANSLINGUAL YOUNG PERSON AS A WRITER OF POETRY1 JOKE DEWILDE

This chapter presents a portrait of Khushi, a young writer of poetry. A translanguaging understanding of literacy is used to challenge conventional understandings of languages as bounded entities and writing as products. The analyses show that the Hindi poems Khushi writes at home are recontextualisations of Bollywood songs rather than her own productions. She expresses fear about writing a poem in Norwegian at school, but finds support in translation and translanguaging practices which empower her as a poet in Norwegian.

Introduction The aim of this chapter is to write a portrait of 18-year-old Khushi as a writer of poetry in and outside of school. The material is from my postdoctoral project Multilingual Pupils as Writers in and Outside of School, which is a linguistic ethnography of late arrivals to Norwegian school.2 At the time of data collect, Khushi attended a reception class for late arrivals to Norway at an upper secondary school in eastern Norway. She was born into a Somali-speaking family in Somalia, moved to Kenya to live with her grandmother when she was 7, and came to Norway at the age of 15 through family reunification. It was while Khushi lived in Kenya 1

This article is a close translation of “‘Det er bare i hjertet mitt’: Portrett av en transspråklig ungdom som diktskriver,” which appeared in Norwegian in the journal Skandinaviske sprogstudier in 2016. 2 The project is funded by Department of Teacher Education and School Research at the University of Oslo, Norway, and runs from 2015 to 2018.

104

Chapter Five

that she started writing poetry in Hindi, a language she learnt from watching Bollywood films during her spare time. In general, she was very concerned with everything related to India, such as language, clothes, jewellery, food, films, and songs. The aim of the study is to conduct close analyses of writing events by a late arrival, which again may contribute to asking questions and challenging our way of understanding multilingual writers and their writings. In this article, I understand writing as translingual literacy practices (Canagarajah 2013b, 2013c). The prefix trans moves us away from an understanding of language as a bounded and stable system. Literacy as “practices” puts emphasis on the individual’s usage of language situated in a social, political, and historical context (Barton 2007). In other words, this understanding of literacy draws attention to multilingual writers as actors in interaction with prevailing discourses in different writing spaces. Even though Khushi’s poems appear to be ‘monolingual’ in Hindi at home and in Norwegian at school, respectively, the translingual analyses help bring out the richness and dynamics of the writing practices, which again challenge the way we understand writing. The analyses of the writing practices outside of school also contribute with important insights into the analyses of the writing practices in school and thus highlight the importance of studying connections between writing in different spaces. I argue that Khushi’s writing practices challenge dominating understandings of literacy, and conclude that there is a need for more research on how these practices are interpreted by readers to further develop translanguaging understandings of writing and accordingly the possibilities to strengthen the late arrivals as actors.

Writing as translanguaging and transnational practice Multilingual writing is an ancient phenomenon and can be traced back to cultures such as Roman antiquity where several languages were used (Adams 2003). As a field of research, however, it is relatively new. A commonly used definition of multilingual writing is “any and all instances in which communication occurs in two (or more) languages in or around writing” (Hornberger 1990, 213). In recent times, concepts like bilingual and multilingual literacy has been challenged by concepts like translanguaging (García 2009; Creese and Blackledge 2010) and translingual practices (Canagarajah 2013a). The latter terms signal boundary crossing understandings of multilingualism where individuals’ languages are perceived as repertoires with bits and pieces rather than separate (national) languages which can be counted and which are to be used in specific ways

A Portrait of a Translingual Young Person as a Writer of Poetry

105

in certain situations. This understanding harmonises well with understandings of literacy as a social practice (Barton 2007) since translanguaging practices always have an ideological side which situates them in time and space. Studies of how multilingual individuals draw on their entire repertoires often provide new understandings of larger power structures which stimulate or block certain language practices. Canagarajah (2013c, 1–2) noted that hybrid language use in written language challenges our expectations that a text is written in one language at a time and that meaning is transparent. These assumptions are part of larger discourses about communication which assume that common monolingual practices lead to the most effective communication. Canagarajah called these assumptions a monolingual orientation to communication. At the same time, Canagarajah reminded us that hybrid practices in writing have received new relevance in today’s global world. Technological development has made it possible to experiment with practices that challenge boundaries between languages and other symbol systems (such as emoticons and graphics) and modalities (such as images, video, and sound). Several studies have shown how global writers exploit these possibilities in new and creative ways in communication with each other as they construct their voices (see, for example, Dewilde and Skrefsrud 2016; Dewilde and Igland 2015). This does not mean that translanguaging practices are a new phenomenon in Western writing, but rather that these have not receive much attention in dominating discourses (Canagarajah 2013c, 35–55). In a translingual orientation to writing, the language user is a central actor. The meaning of a text is never given, but is continuously under negotiation. Even though language patterns sediment over time, they can always be renegotiated and reconstructed by language users in new situations. Similarly, Creese, Blackledge, and Hu (2016) argued that a translanguaging perspective on language contributes with new understandings of translation. Whereas translation used to be perceived as a process where existing knowledge was transferred from one language to another, newer understandings take seriously the ideological dimension of translation by emphasising that the process continuously contributes to the creation of new knowledge. The translingual paradigm does not reject language use which sticks to certain norms in specific situations, as is, for example, the case when Standard English is used in an English assignment. What is more important is that these actions are looked upon as strategic negotiations. Li Wei’s (2011) notion of translanguaging space underlines precisely the

106

Chapter Five

tension between following or challenging norms. He argued that a translanguaging act creates a social space for the multilingual user by bringing together different dimensions of their personal history, experience and environment, their attitude, belief and ideology, their cognitive and physical capacity into one coordinated and meaningful performance. (Li Wei 2011, 1223)

This social space has its own transformative power because new identities, attitudes, and practices are put in play. Translanguaging practices comprise both creativity and criticality; creativity in the sense of norms being followed or discarded, and criticality when norms are questioned, problematised, or expressed. Wei underlined that a creative language practice is necessarily critical, and a critical language practice is necessarily creative. Li Wei’s (2011) concept also highlighted the importance of the situated and biographical dimension of language practices. Similarly, Busch (2015) introduced the concept of Spracherleben to extend our understanding of the notion linguistic repertoires as it draws attention to the bodily and emotional prerequisite of using and experiencing languages when individuals move from one space where they are familiar with the social rules and language practices to a space where these are unfamiliar. Busch asked how linguistic variation can construct belonging or difference and, more importantly, how these constructions can be experienced by the individual as excluding or including due to language. This focus enables us to draw attention to the biographical dimension of individuals’ communicative repertoires and how these develop and change throughout life. Another interesting development in the field is the interest in how literacy practices, identity constructions, and education are affected by different forms of mobility, for example of people, ideas, goods, and practices (Warriner 2007, 2012). Studies that apply a transnational understanding of literacy have investigated multilingual children’s and young people’s literacy practices across home, school, and other community contexts. At a more overarching level, transnationalism challenges bounded understandings of nations and national identities (Ong 1999). Instead, attention focuses on people’s cultural practices and how these build on experiences from different places and therefore need to be understood across national cultures. In another publication (Dewilde, 2017), I have shown how multilingual pupils’ writing can be understood as creative and critical expressions where familiar genres and conventional language use by drawing upon previous literacy experiences in new

A Portrait of a Translingual Young Person as a Writer of Poetry

107

contexts. An earlier study also used a transnational view of literacy to extend their understanding of translanguaging (Dewilde and Igland 2015). More precisely, we argued that practices which may be monolingual at first sight may contain transnational traces, such as a reflection text written in Norwegian by a late arrival who is inspired by the Quran which he read during his spare time in Arabic. Connections between home and community practices are also an important point for Canagarajah (2013b). He noted that translingual practices in literacy are “widely practiced in communities and everyday communicative contexts, though ignored or suppressed in classrooms” (Canagarajah 2013a, 2). By opening the classroom for hidden literacy practices, teachers should be able to help pupils use them in a critical and reflected manner which may challenge contemporary (monolingual) power discourses (Nergård and Nicolaisen 2015, 45–6). Canagarajah (2013c, 11) argued for more research that goes beyond the written product where form and characteristics are described, and which contributes with “insights into the production, reception, and circulation of these texts, and the implication of these processes for the meanings that are co-constructed in spatio-temporal context”. This article is a contribution to this knowledge gap.

Songs in Bollywood films As mentioned in the introduction, Khushi wrote Bollywood-inspired poems. “Bollywood” is the folk name for the Hindi language film industry based in Mumbai (called “Bombay” before 1995) in India, with reference to Hollywood in the USA. Even though Bollywood films have their cultural and aesthetic characteristics, the industry is as productive and extensive as the Hollywood film industry. In this study, Bollywood films play a crucial role in youth culture, especially amongst girls with Somali and Afghan roots. Some of the characteristics of Bollywood films are their preference for “song-dance” (dance with singing), melodrama, and extravagant productions, as well as a focus on stars and pageantry (Ganti 2013, 2–3). In this article, it is particularly interesting to go deeper into the usage and meaning of songs, which several researchers have described as perhaps the most defining and characteristic feature of popular film in India (Ganti 2013; Gopal and Moorti 2008). The central role of music in Indian film has roots in older performance forms such as classical Sanskrit drama, folk theatre, and Parsi theatre, where music, song, and dance were basic elements. Film music is also of great importance in the Indian society of today (Ganti 2013, 90). The

108

Chapter Five

songs are played at wedding ceremonies, election meetings, and religious festivals, as well as in teahouses, taxis, and rickshaws. Playlists on the radio include the latest, most popular songs, and people engage in competitions to test their skills in recognising and remembering songs. Ganti (2013, 92) noted that, for people who do not know Hindi film, the songs may be experienced as disturbances and as something that harms the film’s credibility. On the contrary, the songs define the film to a large extent, drive the plot forward, and create coherence. Ganti described the songs as dramatic moments where “all action stops and the song takes over, expressing every shade of emotional reverberation and doing it far more effectively than the spoken word or the studied gesture” (Ganti 2013, 92). Love and romance are two central themes in Hindi films, and the industry believes that these are best portrayed through music.

A study of late arrivals as writers The study of Khushi is part of a linguistic ethnography and builds on my previous research on late arrivals to Norwegian school, which was part of a larger Nordic study (Dewilde 2016a, 2017; Dewilde and Skrefsrud 2016; Dewilde and Igland 2015).3 Linguistic ethnography is a relatively new interpretive tradition where individuals’ actions are investigated from their own point of view and seen in the light of larger societal discourses (Copland and Creese 2015). My fieldwork lasted from August 2015 to June 2016. In this period, I had 34 days with open observation in school (during both lessons and breaks) and wrote in total approximately 30 000 words of field notes. I collected 7 sets of school texts in Norwegian by 12 pupils as well as 6 poems written in Hindi by Khushi during her spare time at home. A research assistant with competence in Hindi, Norwegian, and English, as well as knowledge of the Bollywood industry and text message poetry in Hindi, was engaged to translate and contextualise the Hindi poems. During the study, I conducted 8 individual interviews with 7 young people and a group interview with the two Norwegian teachers of the class. All interviews were in Norwegian, except for the interviews with Khushi, where we both also drew on English. I also gathered 76 minutes of audio recordings of naturally occurring conversations in the classroom.

3

Learning Spaces for Inclusion and Social Justice. Success Stories from Immigrant Students and School Communities in Four Nordic Countries, financed by NordForsk under the programme Education for Tomorrow in the period 2013– 2015 [grant 53704].

A Portrait of a Translingual Young Person as a Writer of Poetry

109

In addition, I took 20 pictures, half of them in school and the other half during an excursion at a culture house near the school. The primary data for this article are six poems which Khushi wrote in her diary during her spare time and a poem she wrote in school in response to a photo exhibition the class visited. I draw on the field notes from my school observations with accompanying field conversations, particularly those on writing in connection to the photo exhibition and the Bollywood films as well as writing during her spare time. In addition, I use transcripts of two semi-structured interviews with Khushi, one which concentrated on her life, writing, and other literacy experience and the other where she showed me her diary with Hindi poems and commented and reflected upon them. The young person’s written texts and my field notes and interview transcripts have equal status in the material. The analyses of these materials happened in a continuous interplay, which is an acknowledged strategy of analysis and reminds us of the importance of contextualising text analysis (Copland and Creese 2015, 57). Research with young people demands high ethical consciousness from the researcher in all phases (Brooks 2013). Youth research invariably involves a clear power asymmetry, which gets amplified in a project with newly arrived young people. My main concern has always been to put the young people at the centre of attention by adopting a listening and humble attitude and to continuously negotiate access to them and their work. I have also tried to lift their work out of the classroom and school context, helping to make them more visible. A large roll-up with their poems has been exhibited in several public places (Dewilde 2016b), in addition to their poems being published in magazines (Sabora 2016; Khushi 2016) and recited at open events (University of Oslo a, b). In the evaluation, the young people have highlighted the importance of sharing their views on matters such as long-term asylum seeking children who have been sent out of the country, and they have expressed pride in having their poems made accessible to others than their teachers.

Khushi’s writing practices outside of school In this part of the article, I will study Khushi as a writer during her spare time, more precisely at home. I perceive the home as a space where certain ideologies dominate and where language users interact to reproduce or challenge them. As mentioned in the introduction, Khushi grew up in a Somali-speaking home with her mother and many younger brothers and sisters. Whenever she had the opportunity, she went to her bedroom to watch Hindi-spoken Bollywood films on her computer, a

110

Chapter Five

practice she began when living in Kenya. Khushi explained that, as a Muslim girl, she often stayed indoors after school, and the films allowed her to get to know a world with romance, dance, and drama, which she did not have access to otherwise. From a traditional view of language, Hindi has no immediate roots in a Somali-speaking home in Norway or in Kenya. Nevertheless, the language became part of Khushi’s linguistic biography from watching Bollywood films in Kenya. The space Khushi created at home can therefore be said to be a space within a space; that is, she created a space where she felt safe to experiment with her belonging to the Hindi community (cf. Busch 2015). Khushi not only watched Hindi films, but she also extended this social practice by writing poems during her spare time based on the films and the songs in particular. She wrote with the Latin alphabet, but expressed a wish to learn to write Hindi with the Devanagari script, which is an alphabet used in many Indian languages. This wish echoes Busch’s (2015) view of linguistic repertoires as Spracherleben. Being able to write Hindi with the Devanagari script would contribute to Khushi’s construction of her belonging to the linguistic and cultural community of the Hindi language she participated in and appreciated. She regularly wrote poems in her diary. When her friends asked if she could “use my fantasy and make a song in Hindi,” Khushi told them, “I can do that”.4 In other words, she also wrote on behalf of her friends. On those occasions, she would send her poems via Viber (an instant messaging app which makes it possible to phone and send text, audio, or video messages over the Internet), either as text or audio message. During my fieldwork, I wrote several times in my notes that peers acknowledged Khushi’s writing practices in Hindi, and that this practice contributed to her status, particularly amongst the girls. Some of her peers also expressed envy and wished they could understand Hindi and therefore the content of the songs. Before I study Khushi’s writing practice more in detail, I will present two of the poems she shared with me. They were originally writing by hand with a red pen in her diary; apart from that, I have not changed the language or the line section. 1. Kushiya aur gam seheti hai, bhir bhi yeh chup reheti hai aptak kisineh najanah zidagi kya keheti hai. [Withstanding happiness and sadness, yet 4

I have translated all dialogue in this article from Norwegian to English. Please see the Norwegian version of the article for the original.

A Portrait of a Translingual Young Person as a Writer of Poetry

111

it is silent, for until now no one has understood what life is saying.] 2. Dekho meri ankhon mein khwab kiske hai. Dekho mere Dil mein Toofan kiske hai Tum kehte ho. mere Dil ke raaste se koi nahin Gaya To bhir yeh pairon ke nishan kiske hai [The dreams that you see in my eyes belong to whom? The wind that you see in my heart belongs to whom? You say no one has walked out from my heart; Those footprints belong to whom?]

Thematically, the poems deal with romance and dreams, which are also central themes in Bollywood films and songs. As mentioned earlier, Khushi stated she had never experienced romance; however, like many young people, she was concerned with the theme. In field conversations, she explained that she, as a Somali girl, did not have a lot of freedom, which limited her possibilities to fall in love. The films gave her the opportunity to explore this feeling. Like the extract below shows, her writing did not necessarily have to be based on her own life, something she elaborated on in the second interview. 1 J: So, this isn’t about you? 2 K: No, it isn’t about me. 3 J: No. 4 K: It isn’t- I never had a boyfriend. 5 J: No. 6 K: Never had- I don’t know much about life. [side sequence omitted] 7 J: Yes. Do you think that when you watch Hindi films that they teach you about life? 8 K: Yes. Many people who- Many people say that if you watch a lot of Hindi 9 J: Yes. 10 K: you’ll fall in love. 11 J: Yes. [side sequence omitted] 12 J: Do you think that, when you fall in love, you will write about your own love, or don’t you think so? 13 K: Yes, I think so. 14 J: Yes. 15 K: Like, how you met him, if it’s ((incomprehensible)). I won’t say yes very quickly.

Chapter Five

112

16 17 18 19

J: K: J: K:

20 21 22 23

J: K: J: K:

You won’t? No. You know, in the films I have learntYes. If the boy says, “I love you, I love you,” and you just don’t care about it, care, but you don’t show, No. Then the boys will do many things to impress you. Right? Then you play a bit hard to get. Yes, right.

The extract gives some insight into how Khushi was socialised into an unknown romantic world through Bollywood films (lines 15–23). Even though she was writing about others’ love (as portrayed in the films; lines 1–6), she expressed a belief that she would continue the writing practice when she should fall in love one day. In the extract, Khushi also described how she learnt from watching the films and indicated that her own dreams would come through (lines 7–11). In this way, she made the poems and songs relevant to her own life. In lines 17–23, she gave an example of something concrete she has learnt: to play hard to get so that the boy is very sure he wants to be with her. When I sent the poems to my translator, she pointed out to me that Khushi’s poems were taken directly from Bollywood songs and other text message poems in Hindi. The first poem shown above is an extract from a Bollywood song, more precisely from the romantic Hindi film ˜“ (Mann) produced by Indra Kumar in 1999. The second poem exists on a Pakistani SMS site (TausEFF n.d.) where people post poems, which then can be shared with friends as text messages by scanning in a QR code. This practice is not unlike the practice by Khushi and her friends, who sent each other poems, and it shares similarities with words of wisdom that circulate on social media. Khushi’s writing process started from when she watched Bollywood films repeatedly and memorised (fragments of) songs and lines, which she then used on appropriate occasions. In the gathered data, she did not produce poems in a conventional way, but recontextualised poems and songs that already existed so that they would give meaning to her (in her diary) and to her friends (via Viber). In the first interview, Khushi described the process of poetry writing as follows: she said she writes down “what my brain finds”. The content may have been taken from a film she had just seen or from films she had seen earlier. At the same time as the poems and songs were in Khushi’s brain, they also existed in her heart: “So I just wrote- It’s just in my heart” (cf. the first part of the title of this chapter). Accordingly, it was the fragments

A Portrait of a Translingual Young Person as a Writer of Poetry

113

that meant something to her, that were in her heart and that she wrote down. In the reception end of the process, the poems meant something to Khushi and her friends. This recontextualisation can nevertheless be said to challenge a conventional way of understanding literacy, particularly when we understand literature as literacy practice (Barton 2007, 167–8), where individuality is a requirement. Khushi’s writing practice can therefore be said to shape a translingual space, which implies creativity and criticality in the way that she challenged the norm of individuality when she recontextualised fragments of Hindi songs and thereby gave them a new meaning (cf. Li Wei 2011). The fact that she stuck to Hindi contributes, as mentioned earlier, to her wish to belong to the Indian community. To sum up Khushi’s writing practice during her spare time, we can say that Bollywood films and songs inspired her to recontextualise poems in Hindi in her diary or to friends via Viber. She learnt the Hindi language while living in Kenya, and she drew on it in a writing practice that had emotional meaning for her. This writing practice is transnational in the sense Khushi crossed national boundaries by transferring the Bollywood industry with roots in India, which she became familiar with in Kenya, to her home in Norway. In the next section, I will discuss in detail how she drew on this writing practice in Hindi when she decided to write a poem in Norwegian in answer to a school assignment.

Khushi’s writing practices in school Khushi’s Norwegian teachers heavily emphasised writing in Norwegian. During my fieldwork, the pupils wrote an interview, a personal letter, a news story, and a report, in addition to answering short questions, for example linked to a text. The pupils were not especially encouraged to draw on their previous literacy experiences in other languages. One of the teachers also joked that the pupils had to pay for each time they used their home language. One day during my fieldwork, the class went on an excursion to a culture house which exhibited a photographic coverage called Return by the Norwegian documentary photographer Andrea Gjestvang (n.d.). The photos portrayed long-term asylum children who had been sent out of Norway and their stories. The pupils walked around, looked at the pictures, read the small signs which told a bit more about each picture, and listened to the audio recordings the photographer had made with the children. The atmosphere was subdued, and several of the pupils described

114

Chapter Five

the coverage as “sad”, both to me and to their teachers (see Figure 1 in colour centrefold). Two days after the excursion, the pupils were given a writing assignment. One of the Norwegian teachers had prepared an envelope for each pupil with words and expressions from the exhibition signs. The pupils were allowed to use the small pieces of paper if they wished to do so, and all pupils chose to do so. They could decide on the genre themselves. Some wrote a letter, five a poem, and one a diary text. When the pupils started to work on their own, Khushi called on me. She told me that she wanted to write a poem, but wondered how one might write Norwegian poems. I answered that she could do as she did when writing in Hindi. Khushi explained that writing in Hindi is different: “more direct, you start more direct”. I repeated that she could just write in the same way in Norwegian. “I am afraid”, she replied. Again, I suggested that she try and offered to look at it after she started. It is interesting to reflect upon Khushi’s fear. Perhaps she was afraid to draw on a spare-time practice which she considered as private, that is, either in her diary or to good friends. It is also possible that she was afraid to write more independently instead of recontextualising poems from films or SMS sites as described in the previous section. Busch (2015) has noted that people who move into unknown spaces may feel that their linguistic repertoire does not fit in. In Khushi’s case, this feeling may be expanded to a feeling that her writing practices could not be simply transferred, but that they needed to be adapted to the requirements she met in the subject Norwegian and in the Norwegian classroom. By encouraging Khushi to adapt a spare-time writing practice in Hindi, I tried to make connections in her linguistic repertoire and between different writing spaces. This connection came to the fore in her writing practices in several ways. First, Khushi put together the words the teacher had cut out in a way that made it possible for her to make a poetry line. She first wrote this poetry line with her red pen in Hindi on a small sheet of paper at hand. Following from this, she called on me, and explained what she was trying to say. She did this by writing a translation of the Hindi line in Norwegian or English with grey pencil above the Hindi line. Together, we negotiated what she wished to express, a process which is at the heart of a translanguaging orientation to literacy (cf. Canagarajah 2013a, 2013c; Creese, Blackledge, and Hu 2016). When she was satisfied, she wrote down the line on her computer, where she wrote the poem. What may appear as a poem in Norwegian bears traces of Hindi. I understand traces and dynamic switches between linguistic resources as an expression of creativity in the translanguaging space that is created. In this case,

A Portrait of a Translingual Young Person as a Writer of Poetry

115

criticality needs to be seen in the light of the other languages that infiltrate the Norwegian classroom and in the writing process of this poem (cf. Li Wei 2011). As we have seen in Khushi’s writing during her spare time, she often drew on others’ romantic experiences in her diary writing. She did the same when she wrote a poem in school based on the stories of asylum children who had been sent out of the country. In doing so, she acquainted herself with their feelings and wrote in the first person. Below, I present my translation of her poem: Asylum seeker to Norway I dream that I can stay. Before I was free; now I feel displaced. Waiting at an asylum centre is tiring. I thought I was one of those starry skies. I want a good life where one feels peace and quiet. Dancing makes me happy, and forget everything that is around me. To be with my family is the best gift in the world. Houses are built by families, not by stones. Between my real life and my dreams is a bridge. A life without dreams is like a life without colours. Being denied is like coming into a black hole without a key. To appeal is like getting your hopes up. My future prospects are to become OL champion. I accepted this country, but it seems like this country didn’t accept me. Therefore, the police want to return me. But if this country thinks I will become depressed, Then it is wrong. I don’t give up so easily. I want to change destiny. No matter if I’m asylum seeker, I will fight for my right. Every time I sleep, I get a dream. It’s with a lot of happiness. I sit together with the king of Norway, and he and I eat my favourite soft ice cream. I hope that one day life will give me a hug and a lot of happiness and a boyfriend with whom I can share compassion.

In the poem’s first line, it appears that the first-person speaker dreams about being allowed to stay, and the word dream/dreams is repeated four times in the course of the poem. The fact that this dream is voiced as a poem (or a song) is also a characteristic of Bollywood films (cf. Ganti 2013). I interpret this literary means as a link between Khushi’s in- and out-of-school writing. An important difference is that Khushi’s home writing involved poems she had memorised from Bollywood films or SMS sites with Hindi poems, in contrast to her school writing where she largely

116

Chapter Five

produced her own text, by translation and translanguaging practices aided by the notes in the envelope. The notes thus became a support and an inspiration, just like the films and songs she drew on during her out-ofschool writing. Without realising, the Norwegian teacher also created a link to Khushi’s out-of-school writing practice. Until now, I have referred to Khushi as a “writer of poetry”, but she is more than that. During her spare time, she constructed an author identity. This author construction challenged a more conventional understanding based on an orientation of literacy as literature (Barton 2007, 167–8) where pupils in school early on learn that there exists some sort of canon with big writers who practice a form of literacy which is unattainable to pupils. They are, in other words, taught to become passive observers of great literature and not to become creative participants in a literary community. The power balance between the cultural elite and popular culture seems to be especially strong in this understanding. A literary view of literacy also entails a certain understanding of who can be called a writer (Barton 2007, 169–73). Specifically, a writer is a person who writes and publishes fiction, like novels, poems, and plays, and this definition does not include persons who write textbooks or journalist and speech writers. In addition, an author is recognised for his or her individuality. Such understandings of literature and authors are based on a set of practices, attitudes, and understandings of identity, and thus differ from Khushi’s construction. As mentioned in the section on the study, I distributed the pupils’ poems to a larger readership than the class through my declarations at various public events and publication of the poems in several journals. I believe this has contributed to constructing Khushi and her peers as authors in Norwegian. With regard to the journals, none of the editors requested that the poems should be “perfectionised” to Standard Norwegian, which may indicate an openness to late arrivals’ language use. I do not know how the poems were received by the readers, but when I declared them at events or exhibited the poster (see Figure 2 in colour centrefold), I received only positive feedback on how well the pupils expressed themselves in Norwegian after having resided in Norway for such a short time. Even though this may be interpreted as an openness to difference, several researchers have also pointed to the discourse where newly arrived pupils are underestimated (Dewilde 2016a; Wedin 2012). In this light, this positive response may be understood as a sign that one does not expect very good language use. An additional factor is that poetry is an art form; as such, it does not invite criticism. The pupils expressed pride over their products when answering written questions to me about their

A Portrait of a Translingual Young Person as a Writer of Poetry

117

experiences when the poster was exhibited in school as well as in individual field conversations regarding the publication of poems in the journals. The responses may be interpreted as a (nascent) belonging to the Norwegian language community (cf. Busch 2015). However, some pupils expressed a wish that I had adapted their poem to more “correct” Norwegian, which indicated that they were familiar with the discourse where correct language is preferred. To sum up Khushi’s writing practices in school, the study of the writing process shows that she drew on communicative practices during her spare time, which again enabled her to further develop her writing competence in Norwegian (cf. Canagarajah 2013b, 127–53). While doing so, she expressed both fear and pride, which Busch (2015) described as normal feelings when moving into a new space where the norms are (partly) unfamiliar. Normally, school texts are not written with the intention to make them accessible outside of the school’s four walls, but I contributed to their circulation in this case. In doing so, I identified contradictory feelings at play linked to how their texts would be experienced in the dominant monolingual setting and the discourse where correct language is valued highly.

Conclusion In this article, I have constructed a portrait of a translingual young person who wrote at home and in school. I have shown how a translingual understanding of writing contributes to make visible the writing practices in the different writing spaces, in addition to Khushi as a writer and her empowerment when she moved from the known to the unknown. The analyses show how she continuously crossed imaginary boundaries in language, genre, nations, and culture in writing processes and how, by doing so, she challenged conventional understandings of writing as (monolingual and individual) products where meaning is transparent. Khushi’s expression of fear when she chose to write a poem in Norwegian is an important reminder that crossing boundaries may lead to a feeling of fear for unknown norms and expectations in a new space. When teachers are aware of these feelings of uncertainty, they should be better able to facilitate safe writing situations in the classroom where pupils are encouraged to draw on their resources. There is a need for more research on how writing like Khushi’s is received by others, and how meaning is negotiated when the written products are ready and the writer has withdrawn. The responsibility of how the text is understood lies not only with the writer, but equally much

118

Chapter Five

with the reader. Knowledge about readers as co-creators of meaning and their willingness to engage with difference would be a contribution to the empowerment of translingual pupils, such as late arrivals, so that they dare to cross boundaries and share their (new) ways of writing with a larger audience.

References Adams, James N. 2003. Bilingualism and the Latin Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Barton, David. 2007. Literacy: An Introduction to the Ecology of Written Language. 2nd ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. Brooks, Rachel. 2013. “Ethical Challenges of Youth Research.” In Negotiating Ethical Challenges in Youth Research, edited by Kitty te Riele and Rachel Brooks, 179–90. New York: Routledge. Busch, Brigitta. 2015. “Expanding the Notion of the Linguistic Repertoire: On the Concept of Spracherleben - The Lived Experience of Language.” Applied Linguistics: 1–20. Canagarajah, Suresh. 2013a. “Introduction.” In Literacy as Translingual Practice: Between Communities and Classrooms, edited by A. Suresh Canagarajah, 1–10. New York: Routledge. Canagarajah, Suresh, ed. 2013b. Literacy as Translingual Practice: Between Communities and Classrooms. New York: Routledge. Canagarajah, Suresh. 2013c. Translingual Practice. Global Englishes and Cosmopolitan Relations. Oxon: Routledge. Copland, Fiona, and Angela Creese. 2015. Linguistic Ethnography. Collecting, Analysing and Presenting Data. Los Angeles: Sage. Creese, Angela, and Adrian Blackledge. 2010. “Translanguaging in the Bilingual Classroom: A Pedagogy for Learning and Teaching?” The Modern Language Journal 94 (i): 103–15. Creese, Angela, Adrian Blackledge, and Rachel Hu. 2016. “Noticing and Commenting on Social Difference: A Translanguaging and Translation Perspective.” Working Papers in Translanguaging and Translation WP. 10: 1–28. Dewilde, Joke. 2016a. “‘Tell Me How I Can Get to Know You.’ Negotiating Research Strategies with Late Arrivals in Norwegian Schools in Field Conversations.” SAGE Research Methods Cases 2016: 1–12. —. “‘Trist’ – En collage av responsen til nyankomne elever på Andrea Gjestvangs fotoutstilling ‘Tilbake’ om langtidsværende asylbarn som er blitt returnert” [‘Sad’ – A collage of the response by newly arrived

A Portrait of a Translingual Young Person as a Writer of Poetry

119

pupils on Andrea Gjestvang’s photo exhibition ‘Return’ on long time asylum-children who have been returned], accessed March 30, 2017. https://www.academia.edu/24146212/_Trist_plakat_. —. 2017. “Multilingual Young People as Writers in a Global Age.” In Translanguaging and Education, edited by Åsa Wedin, BethAnne Paulsrud, Jenny Rosén, and Boglárka Straszer, 56–71. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Dewilde, Joke, and Mari-Ann Igland. 2015. “‘No problem, janem.’ En transspråklig tilnærming til flerspråklige elevers skriving” [“No problem, janem.” A translingual approach to multilingual pupils' writing]. In Skriving på norsk som andrespråk. Vurdering, opplæring og elevenes stemmer, edited by Anne Golden and Elisabeth Selj, 109–26. Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Dewilde, Joke, and Thor-André Skrefsrud. 2016. “Including Alternatives Stories in the Mainstream. How Transcultural Young People in Norway Perform Creative Cultural Resistance in and Outside of School.” International Journal of Inclusive Education, 20(10), 1032– 1042. doi:10.1080/13603116.2016.1145263. Ganti, Tejaswini. 2013. Bollywood: A Guidebook to Popular Hindi Cinema. 2nd ed. Oxon: Routledge. García, Ofelia. 2009. “Education, Multilingualism and Translanguaging in the 21st Century.” In Social Justice through Multilingual Education, edited by Tove Skutnabb-Kangas, 140–58. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. García, Ofelia, and Li Wei. 2014. Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Gjestvang, Andrea. n.d. “Return.” http://andreagjestvang.com/photography-2/test-project/. Gopal, Sangita, and Sujata Moorti. 2008. “Introduction.” In Global Bollywood: Travels of Hindi Song and Dance, edited by Sangita Gopal and Sujata Moorti, 1–60. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Hornberger, Nancy H. 1990. “Creating Successful Learning Contexts for Bilingual Literacy.” Teachers College Record 92: 212–29. Khushi. 2016. “Asylsøker til Norge” [Asylum seeker to Norway]. In Pedagogisk profil 23 (1):46. Li Wei. 2011. “Moment Analysis and Translanguaging Space: Discursive Construction of Identities by Multilingual Chinese Youth in Britain.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (5): 1222–35. Nergård, Mette Elisabeth, and Tove Nicolaisen. 2015. “Om å utforske den skjulte literacy i flerspråklige klasserom” [Explore the hidden literacy in multilingual classrooms]. In Refleksjon & Relevans. Språklig og

120

Chapter Five

kulturelt mangfold i lærerutdanningene, edited by Inger Marie Lindmoe, Gunhild Tveit Randen, Thor-André Skrefsrud, and Sissel Østberg, 43–63. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Ong, Aihwa. 1999. Flexible Citizenship: The Cultural Logics of Transnationality. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Sabora. 2016. “Hver gang jeg lukker øyene mine” [Every time I close my eyes]. In Larm 17 (1):24. TausEFF. s.a. "Dekho Meri Ankhon Mein Khwab Kiske Hain Dekho [The dreams that you see in my eyes, belong to whom]." http://www.smsrule.com/urdu-poetry-sms/dekho-meri-ankhon-meinkhwab-kiske-hain-dekho.html. University of Oslo a. “På flukt: Flyktninger i skolen” [Fleeing: Refugees in school]. Accessed March 30, 2017. http://www.uio.no/om/samarbeid/akademiskdugnad/arrangementer/pa-flukt/pa-flukt-skolen.html. University of Oslo b. “På flukt: Utdannings rolle” [Fleeing: The role of education]. Accessed March 30, 2017. http://www.uio.no/om/samarbeid/akademiskdugnad/arrangementer/pa-flukt/pa-flukt-utdanningens-rolle.html. Warriner, Doris. 2007. “Transnational Literacies: Immigration, Language Learning, and Identity.” Linguistics and Education 18: 201–14. —. 2012. “Multilingual Literacies.” In The Routledge Handbook of Multilingualism, edited by Marilyn Martin-Jones, Adrian Blackledge, and Angela Creese, 508–20. Oxon: Routledge. Wedin, Åsa. 2012. “Literacy in Negotiating, Constructing and Manifesting Identities: The Case of Migrant Unaccompanied Asylum-Seeking Children in Sweden.” In Literacy Practices in Transition: Perspectives from the Nordic Countries, edited by Anne Pitkänen-Huhta and Lars Holm, 54–74. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

CHAPTER SIX JIM CUMMINS’ HYPOTHESES ON TRANSFER OF LINGUISTIC SKILLS FROM THE FIRST TO THE SECOND LANGUAGE: A REFUTATION OF A REFUTATION THOR OLA ENGEN

Why does his finding that everything does not influence everything convince him that nothing influences anything? (Vygotsky 1987, 199)

In two recent publications Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg conclude that knowledge and skills acquired in the first language only to a very limited extent can help second language learners profit academically in the second language learning. Based on a critical examination this chapter, however, demonstrates that the theoretical foundation for the analysis is too weak to give any conclusive evidence as to how native language knowledge affects second language learners’ school performance. The frequently recurring question whether the transfer of first language (L1) knowledge and skills can help second language learners profit academically through transfer, has recently been raised by the Norwegian researchers, Monica Melby-Lervåg and Arne Lervåg (2011, 2013). Based on a comprehensive metaanalysis they found that transfer from L1to L2 was quite modest as far as language comprehension was concerned, and virtually non-existent when it came to reading comprehension (MelbyLervåg and Lervåg 2013). Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg concluded by recommending that schools should concentrate on improving second language learners’ reading comprehension skills in the second language (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2013, 409). Further, they also claimed that their findings were “… of vital importance when examining theoretical

122

Chapter Six

claims in the area of literacy development among second language learners” (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2013, 409). Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg’s findings are in line with research from the first part of the last century, which reported lower cognitive and academic performance among bilingual students, but contradictory to research results beginning to appear in the 1960s, indicating that students with a language minority background more often succeeded in bilingual than in monolingual mainstream programs (Cummins, Baker, and Hornberger 2001, Skutnabb-Kangas 1985, Fokstad 1917). According to Jim Cummins, the contradictions between the more optimistic early sixties and previous results were due to the theoretical assumptions underlying research on bilingual education were often weak, sometimes even absent. In order to be able to “… account for a variety of findings from different contexts (cited from Cummins, Baker, and Hornberger 2001, 170), Cummins therefore argued that a coherent theoretical framework was needed, where the central psychological mechanisms involved in successful bilingual education, as well as the more precise conditions under which certain bilingual education programs are successful, could be clarified (Cummins, Baker, and Hornberger 2001, 170). Cummins’ own contribution to such a framework was four consecutively published hypotheses – the BICS/CALP- and The Thresholds hypothesis, The Developmental Interdependence Theory and «The Common Underlying Proficiency Theory» (Cummins, Baker, and Hornberger 2001, Cummins 1979, Cummins 1980), which taken together were able to substantiate why and how (various forms of) bilingual education (to varying degrees) had the power to optimize bilingual students’ learning opportunities. The central argument was that bilingual models – under certain more specific conditions – gave second language learners optimal opportunities to establish knowledge and skills by means of L1, and to transfer these abilities to L2 (cited from Cummins, Baker, and Hornberger 2001, 170). In this way, the four hypotheses contributed significantly to the establishment of bilingual education as a theoretically coherent field as well as to the increased acceptance of bilingual education in schools. In Norway, the hypotheses were an essential background for the introduction of bilingual education in the National Curriculum of 1987, and have never been seriously challenged as a theoretical framework (cf. Bakken 2007), although they by and large have been ignored by mainstream researchers Thus, bilingual education is still among the recommended remedies in the governing documents for kindergarten and primary schools (cf. Østberg 2010, Barne- likestillings- og

Jim Cummins’ Hypotheses on Transfer of Linguistic Skills

123

inkluderingsdepartementet 2012, KD (Kunnskapsdepartementet) 1998-0717-61, særlig § 2-8, Kunnskapsdepartementet 2007, Utdanningsdirektoratet 2012b, a). Judged by the preliminary reactions, however, Melby-Lervåg & Lervåg’s recommendations seem to have changed the agenda for accepting bilingual education, in schools as well as among educational policy makers and mainstream researchers1. The implication is that also MelbyLervåg & Lervåg’s assertion that their findings are of vital importance when examining theoretical claims in the area of literacy development among second language learners” (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2013), has been accepted, while Cummins’ theoretical framework is considered refuted, also by Melby-Lervåg & Lervåg themselves, even if this is not explicitly articulated. In line with the only critical article that has been published (Bøyesen 2014), I will argue in this chapter, however, that Melby-Lervåg & Lervåg’s recommendations should not be accepted, as the theoretical assumptions underlying – and therefore the validity of – their meta-analyses are too weak to unsettle Cummins’ theoretical framework. To elaborate this assertion, I will take the fundamental relationship between validity and reliability as my point of departure.

Reliability and validity Like Cummins thirty years earlier, Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg ascertain that findings from prior single studies of bilingual education are highly inconsistent. Contrary to Cummins, however, they suggest that “… a meta-analysis that summarizes the differences in language comprehension skills and examines factors that affect those skills in second-language learners seems crucial” (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2013, 414, 2011, 115). Few would dispute the implicit claim that the quality of research results is improved by increased samples and more sophisticated statistical procedures. Still, this kind of approach will primarily affect the reliability of research findings. If the theoretical assumptions underlying research are weak, as pointed out by Cummins, reliable results cannot clarify 1

Cf. a hot debate in Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten, based on Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg articles http://www.aftenposten.no/viten/Bred-enighet-i-internasjonalforskning-om-fordeler-ved-tospraklighet-7401410.html#.UvNhqfl5OE4. In addition, it should be mentioned that Melby-Lervåg (ISP) and Lervåg have received the prestigious «The UKLA/ Wiley-Blackwell Research in Literacy Education Award» for best publication in a British Journal of Research in Reading. http://www.uv.uio.no/forskning/aktuelt/aktuelle-saker/2012/prestisjefull-pris-tiluv-forskere.htmlawarded a prize

124

Chapter Six

academically controversial issues. To be able to “… account for a variety of findings from different contexts“, any analysis – meta or not – is therefore entirely dependent upon valid categorization, i.e. in relation to a specified topic, theory or hypothesis. And if the ambition is to examine theoretical claims in the area of literacy development among second language learners, key concepts such as bilingual education and transfer should be interpreted and operationalized in ways which make them suitable for the purpose. Of course, Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg are aware of the necessity of ensuring the validity of their study. In the 2011 article, where their research question is how skills in students’ native language affects language skills in reading, through the transfer of knowledge and skills from L1 to L2 (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2011), their approach includes four theoretical hypotheses, the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (Connor, 1996; Odlin, 1989 in Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2011, 115) , ‘The Simple View’ of Reading’ (Gough and Hoover 1990, Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2011, 115), in addition to Cummins’ Linguistic Interdependence- and CUP-hypotheses. When Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg do not also include the BICS-CALP- and Thresholds hypotheses, the implication is that they by their term theoretical claims do not refer to Cummins’ four hypotheses as an interrelated framework: This assumption is substantiated also by the motivation for their study, where, by stating that findings from prior single studies of bilingual education are highly inconsistent, they simply ignore that many of the inconsistencies have in fact been explained theoretically by Cummins. In this way, they fail to take into explicit consideration important factors related to the BIC-CALP-distinction and the two thresholds. In a “… a meta-analysis that summarizes the differences in language comprehension skills and examines factors that affect those skills in second-language” (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2013, 414, 2011, 115) this threatens the validity. Because of the influential position Cummins’ four hypotheses have had in the area of literacy development among second language learners the last thirty years, it is surprising that Melby-Lervåg & Lervåg fail to consider them as one interrelated theoretical framwork. More seriously, however, it is that this threatens to undermine the validity of their analysis. The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis and ‘The Simple View’ of Reading’ perspective cannot compensate for this, especially as these perspectives are interpreted in relation to the BIC-CALP-distinction and Thresholds Hypothesis. Neither, can the threats against validity be repaired by MelbyLervåg and Lervåg’s explicit inclusion of the Interdependence and the CUP hypothesis in their theoretical perspective, as both hypotheses are

Jim Cummins’ Hypotheses on Transfer of Linguistic Skills

125

also seriously misinterpreted, as we shall see. In the following sections I will give a brief presentation of the hypotheses of Cummins and MelbyLervåg and Lervåg, as a background for a more detailed discussion of why the validity of the metaanalysis is not satisfactory.

The Cummins’ hypotheses The assumed interrelationship between the four Cummins’ hypotheses is reflected already in their common developmental history, as they can all be traced back to a widespread observation among teachers and researchers in the 1970s (cf. Skutnabb-Kangas and Toukamaa 1976) that the conditions for transfer between the languages are influenced by the character of the learning material students are exposed to (Cummins 1976): “[…] students quickly gained conversional fluency in English but took considerably longer to catch up to grade expectations in academic aspects of language (e.g. vocabulary knowledge, reading comprehension. […] “A subsequent re-analysis of data from the Toronto Board of Education (Cummins, 1981) showed that, on average, students required 5-7 years to come within a half standard deviation of grade norms on measures of academic language (Cummins and Early 2011, 12).

Cummins’ primary conclusion based of this observation, was that the language skills required to function in informal settings, «Basic Interpersonal Communicative Skills», (BICS), have characteristics completely different from the «Cognitive/Academic Language Proficiency», CALP, presupposed by the school. BICS-skills are characterized by high frequent every day vocabulary, spontaneously acquired grammar skills and surface features like pronunciation skills, which may be well developed among second language users already after two or three years’ exposure; … one of the reasons why so little cognitive retardation has been observed in the early grades of schooling is that during these grades the child’s interaction with the world and, consequently, his cognitive development, is less dependent on the mediation of language than at later grades (Cummins 1976, 43).

The language skills required at higher stages in school are of an entirely different character, something which is illustrated by the acronym Cummins chose to designate CALP-abilities. The L refers to Language, emphasizing that the skills involved are language related, at the same time as they are also closely related to advanced thinking skills, as underlined by the C (Cognitive). The A which refers to Academic, indicate that the

126

Chapter Six

involved linguistic-cognitive competence is primarily related to (written) school language (jf. Cummins 2007), reflecting that academic knowledge is closely linked to the school subjects’ specialized language (cf. Haugen 2014). Thus, CALP primarily refers to advanced literacy skills that students are introduced to at the middle stage in school, and which it takes 5-7 years to develop (Cummins 1976). However, as such skills presuppose fluent reading (and writing) skills, these are constitutive of as well as an integrated part of CALP (for a critical discussion of the concepts, Cummins (1983, 2001, Cummins and Hornberger 2008). The distinction between CALP and BICS enabled Cummins to suggest that the contradiction between early studies and more recent studies, mentioned initially, at least partly: … could be resolved by positing two thresholds of proficiency that students needed to attain to avoid the potential negative consequences of instruction through a weaker language, and to experience the enhancement of cognitive and linguistic functioning that knowledge of two or more languages confers on the developing child (Cummins and Early 2011, 1011, italics added).

By positing of two thresholds of proficiency, The Thresholds theory on the one hand introduced an explanation for why some students (in monolingual programs) experienced negative consequences of instruction, and on the other hand also an explanation for why other students (in bilingual programs) experienced the enhancement of cognitive and linguistic functioning, so that second language learners’ academic problems at the middle stage in some cases can be prevented or even reversed through bilingual education (Collier and Thomas 2009). In this way, the conditions for transfer according to the BICS-CALP hypothesis vary with the character of the instruction program, indicating that the educational treatment interacts with students' academic language proficiency to produce positive or negative educational and cognitive outcomes, because the level of bilingual proficiency students attain, mediate the effects of bilingualism on their cognitive and academic development (Cummins and Early 2011, 10-11, italics added). One common implication of both hypotheses is that L1 academic knowledge (literacy related concepts) and skills, are transferable to a second language, provided they are sufficiently developed, i.e. as manifestations of a Common Underlying Proficiency (CUP) (Cummins, Baker, and Hornberger 2001, Cummins 2000), or what we may call linguistic deep structural phenomena. It is primarily in this perspective growth in a second language is dependent on a well-developed first

Jim Cummins’ Hypotheses on Transfer of Linguistic Skills

127

language. This rather obvious implications was not, however, articulated until The Developmental Interdependence Theory (Cummins 1979, Cummins 1980) was published, a fact that demonstrates clearly that Cummins’ hypotheses should be considered as different aspects of one overarching conceptual framework (Cummins 1980).

The hypotheses of Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg Even if the interrelationship of the Cummins’ hypotheses is articulated in the paper which is Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg’s main Cummins reference (Cummins 1979), they include only The Linguistic Interdependence and CUP-hypotheses in their own theoretical framework. This may be one reason why Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg’s interpretation of The Interdependence- and CUP-hypotheses deviates fundamentally from Cummins’ own. While Cummins’ position is that deep structural manifestations of a common underlying proficiency are the units of transfer across languages, Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg by interpreting: “… the Common underlying proficiency to mean language proficiency, thereby distinguishing it both from other knowledge systems and from underlying cognitive abilities” (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2011, 115, italics added), focus on surface structural language phenomena. This rather obvious misinterpretation weakens the validity of their meta-analysis in several ways, especially as it influences the notion of which factors affect L2 language comprehension skills by means of transfer. But the misinterpretation also weakens validity through their influence on the interpretation of the Contrastive Analysis hypothesis and The Simple View of Reading-perspective, which are both in opposition to the Thresholds and BICS-CALP hypotheses.

The Contrastive Analysis hypothesis Cummins’ position that: “… learning a general procedure that can be applied in a similar fashion for both languages should facilitate transfer between the languages” , [so that] “…the amount of structural abilities should moderate the degree of transfer between L1 and L2”, is cited by Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg (2011, 115). And as they are also concerned with: «… identifying structural similarities and differences, which can either facilitate or impede the acquisition of the L2 (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2011, 115, italics added), their interpretation of the Contrastive Analysis hypothesis, that structural similarities and differences mediate transfer between L1 and L2, seems to be in line with Cummins’ position.

128

Chapter Six

But while Cummins assumes that transfer depends upon the occurrence of common deep structural abilities, Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg focus on common cognates, phonology (phonological forms), syntax, semantic, which must be considered as surface structural phenomena. Admittedly, the category semantic may parallel Cummins’ concept meaning, but as semantic traits operationally are applied by Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg synonymously with cognates (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2013, 412), and structural similarities are restricted to «the extent to which their first and second language share cognates” (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2013, 415, 412), it seems that Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg consider even semantics to be a surface linguistic structure. Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg’s study confirms that surface structural similarities mediate transfer between languages. However, beyond common cognates, strong correlations between vocabulary in the first language and reading comprehension in the second language seldom occur (Bialystok, 2002 og Geva & Genesee, 2006, in Rydland 2007). More importantly, such relationships rarely exists between the most prevalent minority languages and the second language (Nagy, García, Durguno÷lu, & Hanein, 1993, in Rydland 2007). In Norway, linguistic minority students’ first language is often very different from the majority language (Rydland 2007). Thus, Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg’s position is of limited interest for educational purposes, as transfer based on surface structural similarities can hardly be expected to take place between languages of some difference. The reason why transfer from L1to L2 in Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg’s empirical study was quite modest as far as language comprehension was concerned and virtually non-existent when it came to reading comprehension, can therefore simply be explained by MelbyLervåg and Lervåg’s misinterpretation of the CUP hypothesis, which made them restrict the Common underlying proficiency to language proficiency, and exclude deep structural phenomena in their analysis material. If the unit of transfer is assumed to be deep structural abilities, however, as in the case of Cummins, transfer can be expected to occur between most languages, provided as predicted by the Thresholds hypothesis, that the procedures involved are established in L1.

The Simple View of Reading and structural transfer Similarly, Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg’s CUP-misinterpretation may also underlie their predictions of structural transfer within the perspectives of The Simple View of Reading. Their interpretation of this perspective is that decoding and language comprehension skills independently of each

Jim Cummins’ Hypotheses on Transfer of Linguistic Skills

129

other will affect reading comprehension negatively, if one them is weakly developed. Further, their position implies that the internal relationship between the factors changes with the course of schooling (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2013, 410, cf. 2011 p. 115). Both arguments are supported by Cummins’ BICS/CALP hypothesis, as already pointed out, but based on another interpretation of reading development than the one given by Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg. Cummins’ assumption is that linguistic minority students most easily break the reading code, and develop automatized decoding skills, abilities that later can be transferred from L1 to L2, by means of their first language (Schecter and Cummins 2003, Wagner 1998). But even if this assumption was confirmed also by Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg’s study, they disagree with Cummins when it comes to the interpretation of the findings. Both parties agree that decoding will play a main role also in reading comprehension, when the child is learning to read, and that the contribution from decoding to reading comprehension will gradually decrease, when decoding skills are mastered at a certain level and the contribution from oral language (language comprehension) gradually increases. According to Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg, however, the contribution from decoding to reading comprehension at initial stages is due to decoding being a lower-order skill, requiring only a very limited number of sounds and letter-sound combinations. Oral language on the other hand, they consider as a complex domain with a number of sub skills. Accordingly, Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg predict: “… that there is weaker transfer in complex language domains (i.e. oral language) than in simpler language domains (i.e. skills related to phonology). Further they also predict “…a stronger transfer from L1 decoding to L2 reading comprehension than from L1 oral language to L2 reading comprehension (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2011, 116, italics added), expectations that by and large are confirmed in their study. Cummins’ position, however, is that it is general procedures that can be applied in a similar fashion for both languages, which are transferred, and that it is not the skills’ complexity or degree of difficulty as such, or the skills’ relationship to more or less demanding areas of use, that are the most decisive factors for transfer. Thus, reading comprehension skills are not necessarily harder to transfer than decoding skills provided they are mastered as structural abilities in L1, in accordance with the Thresholds Hypothesis. The distinction between conditions for establishing structural skills and conditions for their transfer is therefore a crucial point. In accordance with the BICS/CALP-hypothesis, however, decoding skills are easier to establish, because ”… the child’s interaction with the world and,

130

Chapter Six

consequently, his cognitive development, in this case is less dependent on the mediation of language (Cummins 1976, 43). Accordingly, the threshold of proficiency required to avoid the potential negative consequences of instruction through a weaker language are both so low in decoding that a BICS-competence may be sufficient for establishing elementary skills. And transfer will occur more easily, because also target language BICS skills may be sufficient at the initial stage. In the next section I will elaborate this argument with regard to both elementary decoding skills and advanced reading comprehension skills.

The establishment of elementary decoding skills – a lower-order skill? From Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg’s point of view, elementary decoding is a lower-order skill, requiring only a very limited number of sounds and letter-sound combinations, requiring that students only need to be able to recognize word sounds auditorily. At the same time, however, they admit that effective decoding also presupposes phonological awareness, which normally emerges in the transition phase between pre-school and school, based on rich linguistic experiences, as well as awareness raising activities at home or in kindergarten (Vygotsky 1987, Tetzchner 1993, Bergersen 2015, Østberg 2011, Randen, this volume). Although phonological awareness can hardly be reduced to a lower order skill I will disregard the rather paradoxical argument involved. For reasons of space I prefer to emphasize that the fundamental phonological strategy involved already at an early stage of literacy teaching is first supplemented and then gradually replaced by an orthographic strategy (Høien and Lundberg 2000, 287, Kulbrandstad 2003, 22), which is based on the words’ visual (written) traits. When the reading code is broken, decoding will therefore gradually be based on “ the internal abstract image of the word's spelling” (Elbro 2001 in Kulbrandstad 2003, 22-23), and that auditory recognition is replaced by the detection of the word’s orthographic identity, which requires linguistic abilities far beyond the auditory recognition of word sounds. Usually, it takes 2-3 years from the time the reading code is broken to the time when orthographic decoding is so automatized (fluent) that the student’s comprehension of statements occurs immediately or spontaneously, without conscious awareness (Lundberg (1984) in Kulbrandstad 2003, 28). One reason for the rather slow progress of second language readers especially, may be that they according to the Thresholds theory are not sufficiently familiar with the target language. More importantly, however,

Jim Cummins’ Hypotheses on Transfer of Linguistic Skills

131

for second as well as first language readers it is the fact that fluent reading depends on the emergence of internal cognitive schemas (structures), as they both control attention, organize content facts and events and create coherence of the text information (Catts and Kamhi 2005, Samuelstuen and Bråten 2005). It is therefore these structures which through fluent decoding enable readers to give their full attention to the task of reading comprehension. And as they emerge as a result of quantity training, they require linguistic abilities far beyond the auditory recognition of word sounds (Kulbrandstad 2003, Viberg 1996). From this argument it follows that the main conditions for the transfer of decoding skills in a Cummins perspective are not satisfied until beginner readers have established cognitive structures related to orthographic decoding. And as this process takes 2-3 years, it is probably misleading to consider automatized transferable decoding as a lower-order skill, requiring a very limited number of sounds and letter-sound combinations. In such a case, we are referring to mechanical decoding, decoding without reading comprehension. But it is also misleading to consider decoding a lower-order skill even before it has become automatized, because it requires phonological awareness and because the transition process occurs so gradually that reading comprehension skills which do not detour via the phonological characteristics of the spoken language evolves quite early (Elsness 2003). From this argument it follows that, from an educational research point of view, it is essential to distinguish between the establishment of and the transfer of decoding skills. And as argued earlier, when decoding skills are established, transfer may occur even when languages have different phonetic rules, different alphabets or unequal directions of reading, because cognitive structures of decoding also in such cases will constitute a common underlying proficiency. This assumption is supported by empirical findings showing that second language readers who have broken the reading code in their first language, can establish decoding skills in L2 much faster than illiterate readers (August and Shanahan 2006, Skadberg Isaksen and Engen 2016, Kurvers, Stockmann, and Craats 2010). However, transfer will not necessarily occur spontaneously, i.e. without conscious awareness, when languages are not closely related. Due to insufficient familiarity with the target language, students may often need teaching for transfer, a strategy which is inherent to bilingual education (cf. Randen, this volume).

132

Chapter Six

Transfer of advanced reading skills As argued above, fluent decoding skills are CALP-skills in their own right, at the same time as they are constituent for more complex and advanced CALP-skills, like strategic reading comprehension, which admittedly are harder to establish than decoding. On the one hand, strategic reading skills both presuppose and include fluent decoding, on the other hand, they are also more complex in the sense that they require better language comprehension (e.g. as far as vocabulary are concerned), as well as metacognitive strategies (Samuelstuen and Bråten 2005, Elstad and Turmo 2006), like rereading parts of the text, asking questions to the text and monitoring one’s own understanding. But such reading comprehension strategies are hardly language specific. Jiménez, Garcia and Pearson (1996, Rydland 2007) found that good readers use strategies acquired in the first language to form hypotheses and draw conclusions based on the text in the second language, indicating that strategic readers in one language will transfer their skills to another language (Goldman, Reyes, & Varnhagen, 1984, in Rydland 2007). As predicted by the Thresholds hypothesis, however, Jiménez et al. also found that many weak secondlanguage readers thought it was important to keep the two languages separate. For decoding and advanced reading comprehension strategies to be transferred, they must first be established, in the sense that underlying cognitive structures must be developed. Since Melby-Lervåg do not make the distinction between conditions for establishing and transferring skills, their empirical finding that transfer occurs to a lesser extent in complex than in simpler language domains, probably only reflects that bilingual educational programs which are favourable for establishing reading skills are not systematically included in their analysis material. The distinction between the establishment and transfer must therefore be reflected in the criteria for selecting studies for a valid meta-analysis. In other words, a valid test of Cummins' hypotheses requires that didactic studies of (various forms of) bilingual training is systematically included in the material of analysis. Furthermore, the distinction between various forms of bilingualism should also be reflected in the categories of analysis. To verify whether Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg’s study satisfies these requirements, I will examine the procedures followed for selecting studies for analysis, as well as the procedures utilized to reduce the original base material to the number of studies that actually were the object of analysis. Finally, I will discuss how suitable their analysis categories were for

Jim Cummins’ Hypotheses on Transfer of Linguistic Skills

133

distinguishing didactic studies of bilingual education from other types of programs.

Criteria for the selection of studies and the categories of analysis In a first phase of selection Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg established a base material consisting of respectively 2741 (the 2011 study) and 2890 (the 2013 study) abstracts from English-language journals. Although this implies that the sample from the start was affected by which databases were selected, I will limit my investigation to the set of keywords that were utilized. In the second selection phase abstracts were "skimmed" with a view to their relevance for the meta-analysis. As the material in this phase was reduced to the 795 (823) articles, that were studied in full text, I will investigate the relevance criteria as far as their suitability for testing Cummins' hypotheses is concerned. In the third phase, the number of studies was reduced, based on what kind of data the articles reported, to the number of the final meta-analysis (cf. Melby-Lervåg 2011, 118, Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2013, 23). To verify the procedures of this phase would, however, except for one important point, exceed the scope of this chapter. In the initial stage where Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg searched for abstracts for the base material of their analysis, the following keywords were utilized: bilingual (truncation), L1 learners. L2 learners, English language learners, English L2, English additional language, language minority, limited English proficiency, limited English speaking and multilingual paired with phon** awareness, vocabulary, oral language, reading and decoding (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2011, 117), Thus, the majority of the keywords were oriented toward the student level, while cues focusing on didactics, the organization of the learning situation, and other system factors, were not represented. Therefore, it is unlikely that studies of different kinds of bilingual instruction models were included in the base material, at least in any systematic way. This represents a fundamental threat to the validity of the analysis as a test on Cummins’ hypotheses. Some such studies may nevertheless have been be captured through keywords (mainly) on student level, or indirectly via the truncated keyword bilingual**. A finding that the correlations between L1 and L2 as far as decoding was concerned, were higher in samples where children were instructed in both L1 and L2 compared with L2 only (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2011, 128) points in this direction.

134

Chapter Six

Not even in the phase where the number of studies was reduced according to their relevance, were criteria that might have ensured the inclusion of studies of didactic models for bilingual education among the options (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2011 figure 111, p. 118) . The category second language learners may illustrate this claim. This category was operationalized as “children/youth who either use or study two languages, and are exposed to each language either regularly at home with at least one parent, or in school for at least 4 hours a day” (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2011, 117). On the one hand, the expression “either regularly at home with at least one parent”, opens the probability that studies exclusively of exposure at home were included in the analysis. Further, since exposure or (informal) language practice primarily can help the development of BICSskills, the criterion use or exposed to being used as equal to study two languages, indicates that Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg as predicted have not taken into account the major implication of the BICS / CALP hypothesis that students need formal, written language (literacy) based education – over a long period, in order to develop CALP-skills like strategic reading. The implicit bias in the exposure criterion is also emphasized by the lack of operationalized requirements to the organization and duration of bilingual education at school. The assumption that quality, not just the quantity of linguistic exposure is important for students’ learning, is nonetheless confirmed indirectly in the study, since the meta-analysis shows that students who regularly use two languages at home, mainly those who have well educated parents, have the best results (MelbyLervåg and Lervåg 2013). In the third phase, where the number of studies based on what kind of data the articles reported was reduced to the number included in the final meta-analysis, one of three criteria was that the meta-analyses should include only studies where students were exposed to L2 for at least 4 hours per day. The consequences for validity of these criteria were dramatic, as 748 of 795 – or 94 % of the full-text articles on bilingual education results – were excluded from the metaanalysis. It is quite reasonable that studies were excluded because they did not contain empirical data on any of the target measures, or did not report sufficient data for effect size calculation. But why studies should be excluded because they had less than 4 hours L2 instruction a day (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2011p. 118 bottom right box), seems odd in light of the Thresholds theory, especially as the daily number of L1 instruction hours needed for transfer to occur was not specified at all.

Jim Cummins’ Hypotheses on Transfer of Linguistic Skills

135

Finally, it seems that the need to include systematically didactic studies of bilingual education in the core material is not reflected in the categories of analysis, and certainly not the criterion that the programs included should preferably be of a certain quality and duration. Even if instructional language is used as a category of analysis, it is simply coded in two alternatives, instruction in the second language or both (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2011, 120). Based on such a criterion the analysis admittedly might have captured whether students have received bilingual instruction or not, but not the quality (organization) or duration of the program, which are key criteria to ensure that the programs can be expected to establish advanced reading comprehension strategies. As a result, almost no studies of students aged 10 years or more were in fact included in the final analysis material. The fact that such studies were not included in the case of longitudinal studies either indicates, however, that they were not a priority, in any case. For the sake of validity, Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg still might have chosen to analyse the results of the oldest students, but instead they chose to analyse the youngest students, for reasons of reliability (Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg 2011, 118). Such a central analysis category for transfer as instructional language is therefore not operationalized in a way apt to ensure the validity of the meta-analysis in relation to Cummins' hypotheses. On the contrary this category confirms the bias of all the other criteria and procedures, emphasizing that Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg, as also expected from their theoretical assumptions, really have not made serious efforts to construct a valid test of the Interdependence- and CUP-hypotheses. If the analysis has been performed competently in a statistical-technical sense in relation to their own interpretation of the hypotheses, this does not alter this conclusion.

Conclusion Based on the results of their meta-analysis, Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg conclude that transfer between first and second language among linguistic minority students is quite modest when it comes to language comprehension, and virtually non-existent when it comes to reading comprehension, findings they claim to be of vital importance when examining theoretical claims in the area of literacy development, as well as for effective instruction and targeted intervention for second language learners, which they recommend, should be concentrated on improving reading comprehension skills with the second language as a medium.

136

Chapter Six

If by theoretical claims in the area of literacy development they refer to Jim Cummins’ theoretical framework, however, the discussion above shows that Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg not only misinterpret Cummins’ Interdependence and CUP-hypotheses by relating transfer exclusively to linguistic surface structures. They also totally ignore central theoretical assertions related to the BICS/CALP-, The Thresholds and the CUP hypotheses, that any linguistic skill must be established as a cognitive deep structure before transfer can be expected. Because deep structural abilities often are most easily established by means of a well mastered language, bilingual models usually provide the best conditions for the transfer of skills between L1 and L2. Accordingly, a valid empirical test of Cummins' hypotheses should take this theoretical argument into account in order to secure valid selection criteria and categories of analysis for the metaanalysis. However, neither the keywords Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg have chosen to select studies by, nor the categories they have formulated to prioritize by relevance between the studies that are included in the base material, are likely to ensure that studies which are most relevant in the light of Cummins’ theoretical framework, have been selected. In addition, the criterion that studies with less than 4 hours L2 instruction a day, was excluded, making the vast majority of available studies irrelevant. Finally, the categories used to analyze the studies selected, were not likely to capture the conditions for transfer predicted by Cummins' hypotheses. Overall, this weakens the validity of Melby-Lervåg and Lervåg’s metaanalysis to such a degree that their (implicit) claim that Cummins' hypotheses are refuted is not by any means substantiated. While MelbyLervåg and Lervåg’s meta-analytical results hardly give any valid answer to their own research question: how skills in second language learners’ native language affect language skills in reading, through the transfer of knowledge and skills from L1 to L2, the soundness of their recommendation that schools should concentrate on improving reading comprehension skills primarily by means of the second language, is also undermined. That Cummins' hypotheses are not falsified through the actual meta-analysis does not mean, however, that they are verified (Popper 1962).

Jim Cummins’ Hypotheses on Transfer of Linguistic Skills

137

References August, D., and T. Shanahan, eds. 2006. Developing Literacy in Second Language Learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Executive Summary. Mahwah, New Jersey, London: Lawernce Erlabaum Assiciates, Publishers, Center for Applied Linguistics. Bakken, Anders. 2007. Virkninger av tilpasset språkopplæring for minoritetsspråklige elever. En kunnskapsoversikt Oslo: Norsk institutt for forskning om oppvekst, velferd og aldring. NOVA Barne- likestillings- og inkluderingsdepartementet. 2012. Meld. St. 6 (2012–2013). Melding til Stortinget. En helhetlig integreringspolitikk. Mangfold og fellesskap. edited by inkluderings- og likestillingsdepartementet Det kongelige barne-. Oslo. Bergersen, Vibeke. 2015. Kan du lese for meg? En studie av elevers leserelaterte ferdigheter ved skolestart sett i sammenheng med lesemiljø i hjemmet ; A study of children`s early literacy skills at school start in relation to early home literacy activities. University of Stavanger, Norway. Bøyesen, Liv. 2014. "Betydningen av morsmålsferdigheter og sammenhengen mellom første- og andrespråket " Norsk Pedagogisk Tidskrift 98 (4):286-297. Catts, Hugh W., and Alan G. Kamhi. 2005. The connections between language and reading disabilities. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum. Collier, Virginia P., and Wayne P. Thomas. 2009. Educating english learners for a transformed world. Albuquerque: Fuente Press. Cummins, Jim. 1979. "Linguistic Interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children. ." Review of Educational Research 49:222-51. —. 1976. "The Influence of Bilingualism on Cognitive Growth: Synthesis of Research Findings and Explanatory Hypothesis." In Working papers on bilingualism, edited by Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, 143. Toronto: The Institute. —. 1980. "The Entry and Exit Fallacy in Bilingual Education." NABE Journal (4):25-60 —. 1983. "Language proficiency and academic achievement." In Issues in language testing research, edited by John W. Oller. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House. —. 2000. Language, power and pedagogy : bilingual children in the crossfire, Bilingual education and bilingualism ; 23. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

138

Chapter Six

—. 2007. Promoting Literacy in Multilingual Contexts. In What Works? Research into Practice. A research-into-practice series produced by a partnership between The Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat and the Ontario Association of Deans of Education. http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/cum mins.pdf. Cummins, Jim, Colin Baker, and Nancy H. Hornberger. 2001. An introductory reader to the writings of Jim Cummins. Edited by Colin Baker and Nancy H. Hornberger, Bilingual education and bilingualism ; 29. Clevedon: Multilingual matters. Cummins, Jim, and Margaret Early. 2011. Identity Texts: the collaborative creation of power in multilingual schools: Trentham Books. Cummins, Jim, and Nancy H. Hornberger. 2008. Encyclopedia of language and education : 5 : Bilingual education. 2nd. ed. ed. New York: Springer. Elsness, Turid Fosby. 2003. "Nytt årtusen, ny leseopplæring?" In Mening i tekst : teorier og metoder i grunnleggende lese- og skriveopplæring, edited by Ingolv Austad. Oslo: Cappelen akademisk forlag. Elstad, Eyvind, and Are Turmo. 2006. "Hva er læringsstrategier?" , idited by Elstad, Eyvind, and Are Turmo Læringsstrategier: søkelys på lærernes praksis. s. 13-26. Oslo: Universitetsforl. Fokstad, Per. 1917. "Hvordan fornorskningen i barneskolen grep ind i mit liv." In Fornorskningen i Finmarken, edited by Johannes Hidle and Jens Otterbech. Kristiania: Lutherstiftelsens Boghandel. Gough, P.B., and W.A. Hoover. 1990. "The Simple View of Reading." Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal 2:127-160 Haugen, C.R. 2014. "Hva er egentlig grunnleggende ferdigheter? ." In Pedagogikk, politikk og etikk. Demokratiske utfordringer og muligheter i norsk skole, edited by C.R. Haugen and Hestbek. T.A., 144-158 Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Høien, T., and L Lundberg. 2000. Dysleksi. Fra teori til praksis. Oslo: Gyldendal. KD (Kunnskapsdepartementet). 1998-07-17-61. Lov om grunnskolen og den vidaregåande opplæringa (Opplæringslova) edited by KD (Kunnskapsdepartementet): KD (Kunnskapsdepartementet). Kulbrandstad, Lise Iversen. 2003. Lesing i utvikling : teoretiske og didaktiske perspektiver, LNUs skriftserie ; nr 153. Bergen: Fagbokforl. Kunnskapsdepartementet. 2007. Likeverdig opplæring i praksis. Strategi for bedring læring og større deltakelse av språklige minoriteter i barnehage, skole og utdanning 2007 - 2009. Revidert utgave februar 2007. [Oslo]: Departementet.

Jim Cummins’ Hypotheses on Transfer of Linguistic Skills

139

Kurvers, Jeanne, Willemijn Stockmann, and Ineke van de Craats. 2010. "Teaching English as a second language to those who are non-litterate in their first language." In Low Educated Second Language and Literacy Acquisition: 64-79. Proceedings of the 5th Symposium, edited by Theresa Wall and Monica Leong. Calgary, Alberta, Canada: Bow Valley College. Melby-Lervåg, M. and Lervåg, A. 2011. "Cross-linguistic transfer of oral language, decoding, phonological awareness and reading comprehension: a meta-analysis of the correlational evidence." Journal of Research in Reading 34:114–135. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01477.x. Melby-Lervåg, Monica, and Arne Lervåg. 2013. "Reading Comprehension and Its Underlying Components in Second-Language Learners: A Meta-Analysis of Studies Comparing First- and Second-Language Learners." Psychological Bulletin 140 (2):409-433. Popper, Karl R. 1962. Conjectures and refutations : the growth of scientific knowledge. New York: Basic Books. Rydland, Veslemøy. 2007. "Minoritetsspråklige elevers skoleprestasjoner: Hva sier empirisk forskning?." Acta Didactica:Upaginert. Samuelstuen, M., and I. Bråten. 2005. "Decoding, knowledge, and strategies in comprehension of expository text." Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 46 (107-117). Schecter, Sandra R., and Jim Cummins, eds. 2003. Multilingual Education in practice. Using Diversity as a Resource. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Skadberg Isaksen, Unni, and Thor Ola Engen. 2016. "Litterasitetsutvikling i en tospråklig kontekst. Hvordan opplever minoritetsspråklige voksne deltakere i norskopplæringen å kunne bruke morsmålet når de skal lære å lese og skrive?" In Tilpasset norskopplæring for voksne innvandrere, edited by Marte Monsen. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove. 1985. "Tvåspråkighet. Begreppets status och konsekvenser för undervisning av invandrare och minoriteter." In Migrasjonspedagogikk, edited by Thor Ola Engen. Oslo: Gyldendal. Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove, and Perrti Toukamaa. 1976. Teaching Migrant Children Mother Tongue and Learning the Language of the Host Country in the Context of the Socio-cultural Situation of the Migrant family In Tukimuksia Researcg Reports. Tampere, Finland Tetzchner, S., J. von, Feilberg, B. Hagtvedt, H. Martinsen, P.E. Mjaavatn, H. Gram Simonsen, L. Smith. 1993. Barns språk. 2nd ed. Oslo: Ad notam Gyldendal. Utdanningsdirektoratet. 2012a. "Læreplaner for språklige minoriteter sluttrapport ". Utdanningsdirektoratet, accessed 08.08.13.

140

Chapter Six

www.udir.no/Tilstand/Forskning/.../Lareplaner-for-spakligeminoriteter/. —. 2012b. Veileder. Innføringstilbud til nyankomne minoritetsspråklige elever. Oslo: Utdanningsdirektoratet. Viberg, Åke. 1996. "Svenska som andraspråk i skolan." In Tvåspråkighet med förhinder? : invandrar- och minoritetsundervisning i Sverige, edited by Kenneth Hyltenstam. Lund: Studentlitteratur. Vygotsky, Lev S. 1987. "Thinking and Speech." In The Collected Works of L.S. Vygotsky, edited by R. W. Rieber and Aaron S. Carton, 39-243. New York: Plenum Press. Wagner, D.A. 1998. "Putting Second Language First: Language and Literacy Learning in Morocce." In Literacy development in a multilingual context: cross-cultural perspectives, edited by Ludo Verhoeven and Aydin Yücesan Durgunoglu. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. Østberg, Sissel. 2010. Mangfold og mestring: flerspråklige barn, unge og voksne i opplæringssystemet. Vol. NOU 2010:7, Norges offentlige utredninger. Oslo: Statens forvaltningstjeneste. Informasjonsforvaltning. Østberg, Sissel. 2011. Språklig innhold i norske barnehager: Tidlig innsats gir barna grunnlag for å lese.

Chapter Five Images

Figure 1. The Norwegian class for late arrivals visit the photo exhibition.

Figure 2. Collage with pupils’ texts in response to photo exhibition.

Chaapter Fourteen Imagees

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

Figure 7.

SECTION THREE: DIVERSITY, LANGUAGE AND ASSESSMENT

CHAPTER SEVEN INCREASED LINGUISTIC DIVERSITY IN NORWAY: ATTITUDES AND REFLECTIONS LARS ANDERS KULBRANDSTAD

The background for this article is the changes in the demographic composition of Norway brought about by the considerable growth of immigration over the past few decades. With this, a society that traditionally has been quite uniform linguistically is becoming more and more diverse. The article presents a study of attitudes to and reflections over this growing diversity, based on a survey and follow-up qualitative interviews. The main research question is to what extent this positive attitude to the use of dialects for which Norway is known is extended to Norwegian with a foreign accent and to immigrant minority languages.

A Changing Linguistic Make-Up With the economic upturn during the 1960s, Norway became a country with net immigration. A Halt of Immigration Act was passed in parliament in 1975, but an influx of refugees and asylum seekers in the following decades, together with family reunifications, brought a steady increase in the immigrant population. Since Norway joined the European Economic Area in 1994 there has been considerable migration to the country, not least from areas that were hit particularly hard by the financial crisis. Over the past ten years, the number of immigrants and children of immigrants has more than doubled. By January 1, 2016, 16.3% of the total population of approximately 5.2 million had either themselves immigrated (13.4%) or were born in Norway of immigrant parents (2.9%) (Statistics Norway 2016b). The largest group by country of origin came from Poland (around 110,000, or 14% of all immigrants). They were followed by Lithuanian, Somali, Swedish, and Pakistani nationals, the groups of which were almost equal in size (around 40,000 each). Another prominent community with a

Increased Linguistic Diversity in Norway: Attitudes and Reflections

143

non-European background were the Iraqi immigrants (around 30,000) (Statistics Norway 2016a). The Syrian group consisted of approximately 10,000, but Syrians in refugee reception centers (around 9,000 at the end of March 2016) are not included in this figure (Utlendingsdirektoratet 2016). We have limited research on language practices and competencies in immigrant communities, but there is no doubt that immigration has altered the linguistic make-up of Norway. Until a few decades ago, more than 95% of the population were mother-tongue speakers of Norwegian (Engen and Kulbrandstad 2004). The number of speakers of the traditional minority languages was and still is quite low. The indigenous Sámi languages are estimated to be spoken by 20,000–30,000 (Kommunal- og moderniseringsdepartementet 2014; Salminen 1996), while the national minority language Kven/Finnish is thought to have 1,500–8,000 speakers (King et al. 2008; Lewis, Simons, and Fennig 2016; Pietikäinena et al. 2010). Fewer people speak the two other national minority languages, Norwegian Romani and Romanes. Until the 1970s there were only a small number of speakers of immigrant languages, such as Hungarian and Polish. Practically all speakers of the minority languages mentioned above are bilingual, speaking a variety of Norwegian in addition to their minority language, in some cases with traits that could be characterized as ethnolectal (Eidem 2010; Kulbrandstad 2003). At present, there are approximately 850,000 persons who have an immigrant background either by having immigrated themselves or by having immigrant parents. We know from international research that language shift tends to be quite uncommon among first-generation immigrants and it is more the exception than the rule that the second generation does not have at least some knowledge of their parents’ language (Clyne 2003; Haugen 1953; Weinreich 1966). Hence, there is reason to believe that the great majority of the immigrant population in Norway use a language from the country of their origin for communication at home and within the extended family and ethnic network. Wilhelmsen et al. (2013) estimate that 300 different immigrant languages are spoken in the country, most of them admittedly having a small number of speakers. As the majority of the immigrants have come to Norway and started to learn Norwegian at an age where accent-free acquisition of a new language is unusual (Abrahamsson and Hyltenstam 2008; Singleton and Ryan 2004), it is furthermore likely that the majority of them speak the language in a way that reflects to a greater or lesser degree the fact Norwegian is not their first language. In a society marked by increasing cultural and linguistic complexity, the type of immigrant minority languages and various forms of accented

144

Chapter Seven

Norwegian are important for intergroup relations and cohesion. How tolerant is the population toward people speaking the majority language with a foreign accent? To what extent is a foreign accent a criterion for exclusion in the educational system, in the labor market, in politics, and in other central public arenas? Are immigrant languages seen as a central personal value for the individuals speaking them and as a form of cultural enrichment and a resource for society? Or are they looked upon with skepticism and as a threat to national unity? In this article, I will present and discuss research findings from two studies that are relevant in seeking to answer some of these questions. The first is an Internet-based survey that I conducted in 2009, funded by the Norwegian Public Broadcasting Association (NRK) and the Norwegian Language Council. The sample consisted of 1,043 people aged 15 and over, representative of the country’s population, who answered a questionnaire with 21 statements, mostly about dialect and accented Norwegian but also about minority languages and immigration. In addition, there were questions about the respondents’ age, gender, educational background, and so forth. The second study collected data from semi-structured interviews with teachers in which they reflect upon some of the results from the survey.

A Tradition of Acceptance for Diversity It is broadly acknowledged that there is a particularly high tolerance for the use of dialect in Norway compared with other countries, including in public contexts outside the area where the dialect is spoken. Peter Trudgill (2002, 31) talks about “an enormous social tolerance for linguistic diversity,” and it is the extent of dialect use outside local contexts that Trudgill is referring to here. In the survey previously mentioned, more than 70% of respondents disagreed completely or in part with the statement “There is too much dialect use in society” [Det er for mye dialektbruk i samfunnet]. Only 10% agreed, while 16% neither agreed nor disagreed (Kulbrandstad, 2011). Based on statements about dialect use by program hosts on national and local radio and TV channels, an index of dialect friendliness was calculated. Respondents scoring 8–10 out of 10 points were considered to be very dialect friendly, those scoring 6–7 points rather dialect friendly, and those with 3–6 points not dialect friendly. It turned out that close to 75% of the respondents appeared to respond very positively to dialect use in public, 13% rather positively, and only 12% negatively. The survey also included items about program hosts speaking Norwegian with a foreign accent, and a similar index was calculated, this

Increased Linguistic Diversity in Norway: Attitudes and Reflections

145

time one of accent friendliness. The enthusiasm was smaller than for dialect, but still 49% were very positive and 19% rather positive, with 31% responding negatively. When asked about their reaction to the statement “One cannot say that a person who speaks Norwegian with a foreign accent speaks Norwegian well” [Man kan ikke si at en person som snakker norsk med utenlandsk aksent, snakker godt norsk], 57% of the respondents disagreed completely or in part, while 28% agreed completely or in part. Interestingly, there is a clear, although not strong, correlation between attitudes towards dialects and attitudes towards foreign accented speech (Spearman’s rho .367, which is significant at 0.01 level). The relationship between the two is shown in figure 1, where each dot represents one of the 1,026 respondents covered by the index (which excludes those that responded “Don’t know”), and the placement of the dots indicates degree of dialect friendliness (x axis) and degree of accent friendliness (y axis).

Figure 1. The relationship between dialect friendliness and accent friendliness (“Don’t know” responses excluded, N = 1026).

146

Chapter Seven

These results indicate the tolerance for diversity not only covers dialectal variation but also includes non-native use of the language, and that those who are positively disposed to dialect tend to be positive to a foreign accent. Thus, it appears that there is a tendency for a general acceptance of variation, at least as far as variation within Norwegian is concerned. Different factors might be invoked to explain this mindset of acceptance for language heterogeneity in Norway. One of these has to do with how the nation-building process came about when the country gained independence from Denmark in the wake of the Napoleonic Wars at the beginning of the nineteenth century. Norwegian had long been displaced by Danish, as the written language and the oral language of the small elite were highly influenced by Danish. For the construction of a national culture, intellectuals and academics—together with some self-educated men like the linguist Ivar Aasen—turned to Old Norse literature and to the language and cultural traditions among ordinary people all around the country. As stated by Lars S. Vikør (2001): “[t]he notion that the popular dialects were a national cultural heritage continuing the tradition of the Old Norse literary language gave them a prestige dialects seldom have” (211). It is also significant that Norwegian children are not trained to speak a standard language in school. Actually, there is no officially defined oral Standard Norwegian; whether such a standard operates de facto is a matter of academic debate (see articles in Norsk Lingvistisk Tidsskrift 27(1), 2009, which is a special issue on the topic). The principle regulating the oral language form of instruction is formulated as follows in the Education Act: “In the oral instruction, pupils and teaching staff decide themselves which form of the language they will use. However, in their choice of words and expressions the teaching staff and the school leaders shall as far as possible take the spoken form used by the pupils into account” (Education Act 2013 [1998], § 2.5). The regulation goes back to a vote in 1878 by parliament decreeing that instruction in schools should as much as possible be given in the students’ own language, in other words the local dialect. The background for this decision was that the distance between the teachers’ Danish—spoken with spelling pronunciation—and the children’s Norwegian dialects was considered an impediment to successful learning. Even if there is a long tradition for the use of dialect in school—by the students themselves as well as by the teachers—and even if there is no official oral standard, there have been periods with strong informal pressure on dialect-speaking persons moving from rural areas to urban centers to adopt an oral variety close to the written standard, Bokmål. One such period in the 1950s and 1960s was met with a countercultural

Increased Linguistic Diversity in Norway: Attitudes and Reflections

147

movement, when young people endorsed green and local values, including dialects, in protest against centralization and rationalization (see, e.g., Vikør 2001). This gave increased status to regional and local varieties of the Norwegian language, and it became common to hear, for instance, members of parliament speaking dialect from the rostrum, university professors using dialect when lecturing, and prosecutors and defense attorneys pleading in dialect. A minister of finance attracted much attention when he presented the government’s budget proposal in a dialect that traditionally has had very low prestige (Hansson 2009). As we have seen, findings from the survey presented above suggest that the tolerant atmosphere in Norway regarding dialect use even outside local and informal contexts has laid the ground for considerable acceptance for foreign-accented speech. The question is whether this goodwill also encompasses immigrant minority languages.

A Tradition of Oppression In many countries of the western world there is a strong monolingual ethos (Peled 2012), a deep-rooted mindset according to which “the world is composed of discrete linguistic entities that tie with a particular territory” (85), and that having only one language is conceived as the natural situation both for the individual and for society. The idea of linguistic territoriality tends to be coupled with a standard language ideology, which is particularly evident in states like the United Kingdom, the United States, France, and Germany (Peled 2012, 86). As we have seen, there is no prevalent standard language ideology in Norway, but a monolingual dogma has certainly played a part historically. As long as people have lived in the area that now is the territory of Norway, several languages have coexisted. Germanic in its Nordic version gained dominance in the south around the beginning of our era, and Norwegian in its various regional varieties gradually became the majority language in most of the country. Sámi was the most important minority language and for a long time it was not only tolerated but also officially used for religious and educational purposes. When organized schooling first started, Sámi children were taught how to read and write in their own language. As a corollary to the monocultural nation-building that started in the mid-nineteenth century, a policy of Norwegianization was implemented “with school as the battle ground and the teachers as frontline soldiers” (Niemi 1997, 268, my translation). Progressively, teaching in Sámi was phased out; many children were sent to Norwegian-only boarding schools and a systematic strategy for marginalizing the language in all areas of

148

Chapter Seven

society began. Among the arguments for this line of action was partly a “one nation—one language” ideology, and partly a social-Darwinist view of Sámi culture and language as primitive and unsuited for the modern world (see, e.g., Baglo 2001; Berg 1995). In many Sámi communities, the language either disappeared totally from use or was reduced to an oral means of communication at home only. Organized resistance against the assimilation efforts grew little by little until in the 1960s and 1970s the policy of Norwegianization was reversed. Sámi political, educational, and cultural institutions were established, a paragraph on the protection and development of Sámi language and culture was incorporated into the Constitution, and Sámi was recognized as an official language. In many ways the situation of the Sámi population and their language has actually improved (see, e.g., Huus 1999), but ethnic discrimination and bullying is still not uncommon (Hansen et al. 2008) and “[m]uch of the legacy of Norwegianization policy lingers in people’s attitudes, even if public policy is revised” (Arbeids- og inkluderingsdepartementet 2008, my translation). Anti-Sámi sentiments surface, for instance, in the destruction or removal of boundary signs with place names (Puzey 2007) and in hate speech in online discussion forums (Equality and Anti-Discrimination Ombud 2015).

A Disturbing Scenario? One of the statements in the survey reported earlier was intended to provide data that could help establish whether there is a monolingual ethos in people’s reactions to the increasingly complex linguistic situation in Norway. The wording was: “It is OK if immigration leads to more permanent minority languages in Norway” [Det er greit om innvandringen fører til nye varige minoritetsspråk i Norge]. (Different possible interpretations of the statement will be discussed in the next section of the article.) The distribution of responses is shown in figure 2.

Increased Linguistic Diversity in Norway: Attitudes and Reflections

149

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Disagree

Agree Completely

Neither-nor

Don't know

In part

Figure 2. Responses to the statement “It is OK if immigration leads to new permanent minority languages in Norway” (N = 1043).

More than 63% disagreed completely (38%) or in part (25.1%) with the statement, while only approximately 16% agreed (6.2% completely, 17.7% in part). Of those remaining, 17.7% neither agreed nor disagreed and 2.6% did not know what to answer. If we exclude those who responded “neithernor” or “don’t know,” we are left with 831 responses, and among them 79.2% disagreed and 20.8% agreed. Hence, there seems to be an overwhelmingly negative reaction to the scenario implied by the statement: a future situation in Norway in which some of today’s immigrant languages become new minority languages. There are some group differences among the respondents. In terms of gender, the majority of both men and women disagree with the statement, but the skepticism is higher among males than among females: 70% versus 60%. Older respondents tended to be more negative than younger ones, but across all age categories the majority disagreed, with the smallest percentage among the youngest group (aged 15–29, 53.2%) and the greatest among the oldest (aged 60+, 75.4%). Eeducational background also plays a part, with the least skepticism recorded among respondents with extended university education and the most skepticism among respondents with a vocational education at secondary level (73.6%). In a linear regression analysis with gender, age, and education as independent variables, age and gender come out as almost equally strong predictors, while education is weaker.

150

Chapter Seven

The survey included the following three statements intended to assess attitudes toward immigration: 1. “When people from foreign cultures move into a town or a district, this means an enrichment for the local culture” [Når folk fra fremmede kulturer flytter inn en by eller ei bygd, er det en berikelse for lokalsamfunnet]. 2. “The less the foreigners attract your attention the better” [Jo mindre man legger merke til innvandrerne, jo bedre er det]. 3. “Immigration means a serious threat to our national culture” [Innvandringen utgjør en alvorlig trussel mot vår nasjonale kultur]. All three statements are taken from earlier surveys on attitudes to immigration in Norway (see, e.g., Blom 2004; Kolstad 1995). Based on the responses to these statements, an index of immigration friendliness with three levels was calculated: 1. Clearly positive toward immigration; 2. Rather positive toward immigration; 3. Negative toward immigration. Among respondents 59.3% came out as clearly positive, 27.7% as rather positive, and 12.3% as negative. These findings indicate that the high degree of skepticism to the prospect of new permanent minority languages cannot be explained by anti-immigration sentiments. Norwegians seem to be positive toward immigration but are disturbed by the idea that some of the languages that the immigrants bring with them should be passed on to new generations. This does not, however, mean that attitudes to immigration play no role. On the contrary, a statistical analysis with Spearman’s rho shows a relatively strong correlation between values on the immigration friendliness index and reactions to the statement about new permanent minority languages, namely -.404. In other words, the more negative the respondents felt about immigration, the less they liked the prospect that immigrant languages could establish themselves permanently in Norway. Of course, these results do not allow us to conclude that there is a monolingual ethnos operating in Norway of the same strength as in some other Western countries (Peled 2012), but they do suggest that the Norwegian tolerance for linguistic diversity first and foremost applies to the majority language. There is, however, reason to discuss the validity of the findings just reported. The statement to which the respondents reacted could be interpreted to mean something other than was originally intended, and there could also be differences between the respondents in the way they understood it. This possibility was explored in the follow-up study where six teachers were interviewed about issues from the survey.

Increased Linguistic Diversity in Norway: Attitudes and Reflections

151

Teachers working in schools with culturally and linguistically diverse students were found to be suitable informants as on a daily basis they have experiences that could serve as a basis for reflections on the topics.

Teachers’ Reflections Three teachers from a primary school were recruited strategically through an intermediary, namely the principal, who was told that the interviews would be about the changing language situation in Norway caused by immigration. Two lower secondary school teachers, former students of the researcher and known to have an interest in the topic, were asked directly to participate, and so was a present colleague of his. Here is a list of the interviewees (with fictive names): Ole Mona Kari

In his 30s, general teacher education, 9 years teaching experience Approximately 40 years old, subject teacher education, preschool teacher education, lower primary teacher education, 16 years teaching practice Approximately 50 years old, preschool teacher, leader of day care facilities for school children

Jens

Approximately 55 years old, general teacher education, some 30 years of experience in lower secondary school

Kristian

Approximately 40 years old, university-educated teacher in middle school, 12 years teaching experience

Grete

Approximately 60 years old, teacher educator (pedagogy) with long teaching practice

The teachers were interviewed individually in a semi-structured format, with one exception at their workplace during school time, and the interviews lasted between 25 and 35 minutes. This article will focus on how the interviewees interpreted the statement “It is OK if immigration leads to more permanent minority languages in Norway,” but some other topics will also be covered. All quotes will be given in their translated versions. At the beginning of the interview, the teachers were informed about the survey from which the statement was taken, and were asked how it could be understood. Ole, Mona, and Kari did not seem to find it unclear. Ole

152

Chapter Seven

answered: “Well, with this at least for me means that this [use of immigrant language] is something that will continue to be here forever and all the time immigrants keep coming here.” For Mona it means that, for instance, “many Vietnamese speak Vietnamese with each other [. . .] they have this language and live in Norway [. . .] and they just keep on using their language,” adding that “[they] maybe will not be so well integrated.” Kari directly drew a parallel to Sámi: “When you ask about more permanent minority languages I think in addition to Sami—something like that.” Grete first said she finds the statement vague and then continued: “[. . .] when I reflect a little I think that it must mean that we will get more languages than Norwegian that are permanent [. . .] that will last [. . .] over a longer period of time [. . .] over several generations.” As we see, these three teachers focus their comments on the temporal aspect of the statement, explaining what they understand by “permanent” in “permanent minority languages.” Kristian and Jens both felt that the statement could be interpreted in different ways. Kristian initially saw two possible understandings: “It might be interpreted in different ways. One way is that the minority languages as they originally were—possibly a little watered down— continue to live in Norway [. . .] or it can be a Norwegian that is more or less influenced by the original language.” According to the second reading, “new permanent minority languages” would be established ethnolects of the majority language. Later Kristian pointed to yet another alternative interpretation, namely that the statement could be taken to imply that minority persons continue to speak their language without learning Norwegian. This is the understanding of the statement that Jens first mentions: “You can interpret it [the statement] so that it means that we might get more people with only their own minority language [. . .].” The second reading, according to Jens, is that the minority “groups speak a minority language while at the same time mastering Norwegian.” So for Kristian and Jens, the notion of permanent minority language could be taken not only to mean that minority languages would continue to be used in immigrant groups over many generations, it could also carry with it the implication that the groups would not be integrated into Norwegian society and that speakers of these languages would not learn to speak Norwegian. The possibility of such understandings of the statement was expanded on when the teachers were presented with graphs showing the distribution of the respondents’ reactions to the statement and were asked to try to explain why a high percentage of them had signaled that they did not like the idea of new permanent minority languages. Ole suggested that the reason is that most people do not have the same experience with language

Increased Linguistic Diversity in Norway: Attitudes and Reflections

153

diversity that he as a teacher has: “I work at a school and I am in contact with it every day, and I do not see any reason why this should not be OK [. . .] and maybe others think: No, I don’t suggest anything about this so I actually disagree [. . .] maybe there is some kind of a xenophobia here, I don’t know.” Later Ole expanded on the last point: “[. . .] did they think that this suddenly could be a main language in Norway? Is that what they mean by minority languages, that there will be so many that they will take over everything? I don’t know.” Kari proposed a similar explanation: “People are scared to death that Norwegian will disappear.” She too mentioned that teachers have different experiences than most other people. The fear that Norwegian could be displaced by other languages was also mentioned by Mona as a possible cause for the respondents’ reactions, together with the concern that society could fall apart into “mini-countries within the country.” Grete was not surprised that so many respondents disagreed with the statement because “our knowledge is still very small [. . .] so fear and anxiety dominate,” and she suggested that what frightens people is not so much the languages themselves but the religions that are associated with the languages. Jens immediately referred to his first understanding of the statement: “Yes, I would guess it is interpretation number one, namely that they just master their own minority language— and then it seems difficult to integrate them into Norwegian society, and then we get separate groups in society.” When questioned if he really thinks this is a plausible reading, he answered: “If this is a likely interpretation [. . .] I think many people who read the sentence will interpret it in that way—that is perhaps the reason why you got those results, because you have two words here that can be stigmatizing by themselves: the words ‘immigration’ and ‘minority language.’ It is clear that you will have some dirt come out by using those words [. . .] so I would think many people have interpreted it like that—and in fact mean it. They are generally skeptical to immigration [. . .].” Kristian first suggested that a kind of practical monolingual ideology lies behind the respondents’ reactions: “If we assume that they took the statement to mean that we have parallel languages that are different from Norwegian—not only a colored Norwegian [i.e., influenced by other languages]—then it probably has to do with people thinking that it is most practical with one language.” He then presented an alternative explanation, in line with an understanding of the statement that both he and Jens mentioned earlier: “[. . .] it could also be a wish that if you come here you have to take our customs and our language—that could be an explanation— and also a well-meant wish that you should learn the language of the

154

Chapter Seven

country you come to in order to function in working life and so on, and that is a good point.” So according to the teachers, the respondents’ negative reactions to the prospect of new, long-lasting minority languages might spring out of a lack of direct experience with situations where bilingual minority members learn and use Norwegian and at the same time preserve the language of their immigrant group. Combined with this, there might by a fear that the preservation of immigrant languages could lead to a decomposition of society and the creation of parallel sociocultural units without a common language. The reactions might even be connected to xenophobia and an anxiety that Norway, with its language, culture, and religious traditions, could be taken over by immigrants.

Concluding Discussion As mentioned earlier, a monolingual ethos and a standard language ideology often walk hand in hand (Peled 2012). Findings from the survey reported in this article corroborate earlier research documenting that there is no strong standard ideology among the Norwegian population (see, e.g., Norsk lingvistisk tidsskrift 27(1), 2009), and in the data there are also clear indications that oral language diversity within the majority language is largely accepted, as is accented speech. Still, judging from the responses to an item on the prospect of new permanent minority languages resulting from immigration, there seems to be a mindset that this kind of increased linguistic diversity would not be a good thing for the country. The teachers who were interviewed in the follow-up study considered different possible interpretations of the statement in the item and reflected on what might be the causes of the respondents’ negative attitudes. One possible cause mentioned was xenophobia. While the data show that the most skeptical respondents when it comes to immigration with few exceptions disagree that it would be acceptable for new minority languages to become established in Norway (96% disagree: 92% completely, 5% in part), it is also the case that only 26% of the respondents who were most positive toward immigration agree with the statement (10% completely, 16% in part). And as we saw earlier, only a small minority of respondents expressed a clearly negative stance on immigration, which is in keeping with findings in studies of attitudes to immigrants and immigration in Norway (e.g., Statistics Norway 2015). Several interviewees thought that the respondents might disagree with the statement out of fear that preservation of immigrant languages would necessarily mean a disintegration of society: many immigrants would fail

Increased Linguistic Diversity in Norway: Attitudes and Reflections

155

to learn Norwegian and they would live in segregated communities with little chance in the labor market. There are no data from the survey against which this hypothesis could be evaluated. However, we can point to factors that could support this line of reasoning. Even if there have always been minority languages in Norway, the presence of several immigrant languages in most communities in the country is a relatively recent phenomenon and the population still has limited experience with minority bilingualism. Hence, there is fertile ground for an either-or perception: either the immigrants continue to speak their minority languages or they learn Norwegian. Another potential explanation that emerged in the interviews was an anxiety that minority languages could displace Norwegian and take over the country. Here again there are no data from the survey that could help evaluate this suggestion, but we should not exclude the possibility that some respondents feel such unease. Although the strong monocultural and monolingual nation-building in Norway now belongs to the past, there is still a clear imprint of it on attitudes and ways of thinking (Engen 2009, 2010). Nevertheless, it is questionable whether the idea that there is a natural link, so to speak, between the territory and language is so prevalent that it can serve as a major explanation of the survey results under discussion. One topic that came up in the conversations with the teachers was mother-tongue teaching. All were in favor of offering minority students some hours of instruction in their first language, underlining the positive effects this teaching can have on the students’ learning and personal development. Mother-tongue Norwegian teaching for students from linguistic minorities was introduced as a subject in the national curriculum in 1987 but soon became a highly controversial issue (Bakken 2007; Hyltenstam, Hvenekilde, and Loona 1996). The position of the subject has gradually been reduced and today it is only offered as an alternative instruction outside regular school hours to students with a particularly weak knowledge of Norwegian. Various pedagogical, financial, and practical arguments have been used against mother-tongue instruction. However, explicit points of view in line with a monolingual ethos are seldom seen, and in policy documents from the government and parliament multilingualism tends to be described as something positive both for individuals and for society. The following quote from a recent report to the Storting is an example: “Multilingualism is a resource, and linguistic and cultural diversity should be considered as a natural and positive part of today’s kindergarten and school” (Melding til Stortinget 6 (2012–2013), my translation). Nonetheless, it is not far-fetched to suggest

156

Chapter Seven

that the skepticism to new minority languages found in the present study is a factor behind the fate of mother-tongue instruction for students from linguistic minorities in Norwegian schools.

References Abrahamsson, Niclas, and Kenneth Hyltenstam. 2008. “The Robustness of Aptitude Effects in Near-Native Second Language Acquisition.” Studies in Second Language Acquisition 30(4): 481–509. Arbeids- og inkluderingsdepartementet. 2008. “St. meld. nr. 28. (2007– 2008) Samepolitikken.” Baglo, Cathrine. 2001. “From Universal Homogeneity to Essential Heterogeneity: On the Visual Construction of ‘the Lappish Race’.” Acta Borealis: A Nordic Journal of Circumpolar Societies 18(2): 23– 39. Bakken, Anders. 2007. “Virkninger av tilpasset språkopplæring for minoritetsspråklige elever. En kunnskapsoversikt” [“Effecs of adapted language instruction for minority language students. An knowledge overview”]. Oslo: Norsk institutt for forskning om oppvekst, velferd og aldring. NOVA. Berg, Roald. 1995. “NationǦBuilding, State Structure, and Ethnic Groups: The Scandinavian Sámis 1905–1919.” Scandinavian Journal of History 20(1): 61–9. Blom, Svein. 2004. “Holdninger til innvandrere og innvandring.” Oslo: Statistisk sentralbyrå. Clyne, Michael. 2003. Dynamics of Language Contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Education Act. 2013 [1998]. “Education Act,” edited by Department of Training and Education. Oslo: Department of Training and Education. Eidem, Grid Haraldsdotter. 2010. “‘Altså, Ungarn er som min mor og Norge er som min kjæreste.’ Den ungarske migrasjonen til Norge i 1956/57” [“‘Thus, Hungary is like my mother and Norway is like my sweetheart.’ The Hungarian migration to Norway in 1956/57”]. Master’s thesis, University of Oslo. Engen, Thor Ola. 2009. “Socialization, literacy, and empowerment.” In The Routledge International Companion to Multicultural Education, edited by James A. Banks, 252–62. New York: Routledge. —. 2010. “Literacy Instruction and Integration: The Case of Norway.” Intercultural Education 21(2): 169–81.

Increased Linguistic Diversity in Norway: Attitudes and Reflections

157

Engen, Thor Ola, and Lars Anders Kulbrandstad. 2004. Tospråklighet, minoritetsspråk og minoritetsundervisning. 2nd ed. Oslo: Gyldendal akademisk. Equality and Anti-Discrimination Ombud. 2015. “Hate Speech and Hate Crime [Oslo].” Hansen, Ketil Lenert, Marita Melhus, Høgmo Asle, and Eiliv Lund. 2008. “Ethnic discrimination and bullying in the Sami and Non-Sami population in Norway: The Saminor study.” International Journal of Circumpolar Health 67(1):99–116. Hansson, Steinar. 2009. “Sigbjørn Johnsen.” In Norsk Biografisk Leksikon. Accessed April 2, 2016. Retrieved from: https://nbl.snl.no/Sigbjørn_Johnsen. Haugen, Einar. 1953. The Norwegian Language in America: A Study in Bilingual Behavior, Publications of the American Institute, University of Oslo. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Huus, Leena. 1999. Reversing Language Shift in the Far North. Linguistic Revitalization in Northern Scandinavia and Finland. Uppsala: Studia Uralica Upsaliensia. Hyltenstam, Kenneth, Anne Hvenekilde, and Sunil Loona, eds. 1996. Tilpasset språkopplæring for minoritetselever: rapport fra konsensuskonferanse, Leangkollen hotell- og konferansesenter, Asker 9.-10. januar 1996. Oslo: Norges forskningsråd, Området for kultur og samfunn Internasjonal migrasjon og etniske relasjoner. King, Kendell A., Natalie Schilling-Estes, Jia Jackie Lou, Lyn Fogle, and Barbara Soukup, eds. 2008. Sustaining Linguistic Diversity. Endangered and Minority Languages and Language Varieties. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press. Kolstad, Arnulf. 1995. “Lillehammer OL’s bidrag til nasjonalisme og etnosentrisme.” In OL-94 og forskningen V, edited by Roel Puijk. Lillehammer: Østlandsforskning. Kommunal- og moderniseringsdepartementet. 2014. “Fakta om samiske språk.” Kulbrandstad, Lars Anders. 2003. “Etnolekter – hva er det?” Norsklæreren 3: 5–13. Kulbrandstad, Lars Anders. 2011. “National or general tolerance for variation? Attitudes to dialect and foreign accent in the media.” In Applied Linguistics, Global and Local. Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the British Association for Applied Linguistics, 9–11 September 2010 University of Aberdeen, 173–81. London: Scitsiugnil Press.

158

Chapter Seven

Lewis, M. Paul, Gary F. Simons, and Charles D. Fennig, eds. 2016. Ethnologue: Languages of the World, Nineteenth Edition. Dallas, TX: SIL International. Melding til Stortinget 6 (2012–2013). “En helhetlig integreringspolitikk” [“A comprensive policy for integration”]. Edited by likestillings- og inkluderingsdepartementet Barne-. Niemi, Einar. 1997. “Kulturmøte, etnisitet og statlig intervensjon på Nordkalotten” [“Cultural encounter, ethnicity and state intervention on the Cap of the North”]. In Den nordiska mosaiken. Språk- och kulturmøten i gammal tid och i våra dagar [The Nordic mosaïc. Language and culture encounter in older days and in our time], edited by Rut Boström Anderson. Uppsala: Uppsala universitet. Peled, Yael. 2012. “Marching Forward into the Past. Monolingual Multilingualism in Contemporary Political Theory.” In Standard Languages and Multilingualism in European History, edited by Matthias Hüning, Ulrike Vogl and Olivier Moliner, 71–96. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Pietikäinena, Sari, Leena Huss, Sirkka Laihiala-Kankainen, Ulla AikioPuoskari, and Pia Lane. 2010. “Regulating Multilingualism in the North Calotte: The Case of Kven, Meänkieli and Sámi Languages.” Acta Borealia: A Nordic Journal of Circumpolar Societies 27(1): 1–23. Puzey, Guy. 2007. “Planning the Linguistic Landscape. A Comparative Survey of the Use of Minority Languages in the Road Signage of Norway, Scotland and Italy.” Master’s thesis, University of Edinburgh. Salminen, Tapani. 1996. “Salminen, T 1996. UNESCO Red Book on Endangered Languages: Europe.” Accessed April 16, 2016. Retrieved from: http://www.helsinkifi/~tasalmin/europe. Singleton, David, and Lisa Ryan. 2004. Language Acquisition: The Age Factor (Second Language Acquisition). 2nd ed. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Statistics Norway. 2015. “Attitudes Towards Immigrants and Immigration, 2015.” Accessed April 2, 2016. Retrieved from: https://www.ssb.no/en/befolkning/statistikker/innvhold/aar/2015-1211. Statistics Norway. 2016a. “Immigrants and Norwegian-Born to Immigrant Parents, 1 January 2016.” Accessed March 27, 2016. Retrieved from: https://www.ssb.no/en/befolkning/statistikker/innvbef/aar/2016-03-03. —. 2016b. “Key figures for immigration and immigrants.” Accessed March 27, 2016. Retrieved from: https://www.ssb.no/en/innvandringog-innvandrere/nokkeltall.

Increased Linguistic Diversity in Norway: Attitudes and Reflections

159

Trudgill, Peter. 2002. Sociolinguistic Variation and Change. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Utlendingsdirektoratet. 2016. “Beboere i asylmottak etter statsborgerskap og status i søknad (2016).” Accessed June 15, 2017. Retrieved from: https://www.udi.no/en/statistics-and-analysis/statistics/beboere-iasylmottak-etter-statsborgerskap-og-status-i-soknad-2016/. Vikør, Lars S. 2001. The Nordic Languages: Their Status and Interrelations. 3rd ed. Oslo: Novus. Weinreich, Uriel. 1966. Languages in Contact. Findings and Problems. The Hague: Mouton. Wilhelmsen, Marit, Bjørn Are Holth, Øyvin Kleven, and Terje Risberg. 2013. “Minoritetsspråk i Norge. En kartlegging av eksisterende datakilder og drøfting av ulike fremgangsmåter for statistikk.” Oslo – Konsvinger: Statistisk sentralbyrå. Accessed April 2, 2016. Retrieved from: https://www.ssb.no/utdanning/artikler-og-publikasjoner/_ attachment/100940?_ts=13d3a8c3cf0.

CHAPTER EIGHT CREATING CHALLENGING LANGUAGE LEARNING SPACES IN MULTILINGUAL EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION CONTEXTS GUNHILD TOMTER ALSTAD

“[…] children can always do more than we think they can; they have huge learning potential (Cameron 2001, xii).

This chapter draws on qualitative data from a study of second language practices and beliefs, and explores some of the issues and complexities which are currently emerging in language pedagogy involving emergent bilinguals in early childhood education. Illustrated by the pedagogical choices of one Norwegian kindergarten teacher, the chapter demonstrates how informal settings are used to promote linguistically and cognitively challenging second language learning opportunities in play, and to create multilingual spaces to foster children’s multilingual identities.

Introduction Since the turn of the millennium, there has been an increasing number of children from linguistic and cultural minorities in early childhood education in Norway. From 2006 to 2014, the proportion of children from linguistic and cultural minorities in Norwegian kindergartens rose from 6% to 14% (Statistics Norway 2015). Early childhood education (kindergarten) in Norway is traditionally characterised by informal learning (Aukrust 2007). According to the National Framework Plan (Ministry of Education and Research 2011), kindergartens “shall enhance the ability of children to learn in formal and informal learning environments” (p. 29):, which indicates the emphasis on the child-centred tradition combining upbringing and care. The curriculum also says that staff should “encourage these [multilingual] children in using their first

Creating Challenging Language Learning Spaces

161

language, whilst working actively to promote their Norwegian language skills” (p. 31). No further guidelines are given to the teachers. Within the research field of second language instruction, there is a growing body of research on alternative practices, such as translanguaging, i.e. a flexible and strategic use of languages, and building on students’ home languages and literacy practices (Canagarajah 2011; Danbolt and Kulbrandstad 2013; Franken and August 2011; García and Kleifgen 2010; Garcia and Wei 2013; Creese and Blackledge 2010). There are a few studies which focus on translanguaging in early childhood education basically in dual language settings where teachers are proficient in both languages, and where translanguaging is used as a powerful source of meaning-making (Garrity, Aquino-Sterling, and Day 2015; Schwartz and Asli 2014; Schwartz, Mor-Sommerfeld and Leikin 2010). In the Scandinavian context, the amount of research into second language teaching in kindergarten is minimal. There are some studies of second language teaching in Scandinavian kindergarten contexts, focusing mainly on the teaching of specific languages, such as Norwegian or Swedish (Aukrust 2007; 2008; Aukrust and Rydland 2011). Other studies show that kindergarten practices are based on a monolinguistic norm (Andersen et al. 2011; Axelsson 2009; Kultti 2012). These studies report that the emphasis on multilingualism is on second language pedagogy; even if the teachers and their staff are positive about multilingualism, they are often constrained by the lack of qualified staff. Studies of language teachers’ beliefs point out that both the students’ age and institutional contexts shape teachers’ beliefs and classroom practice (Breen et al. 2001). Although there are studies of teachers’ beliefs in multilingual settings (Lim and Torr 2007; 2008; Sawyer et al. 2016), little is known about early childhood education teachers’ beliefs about second language learning and teaching in Scandinavia. According to Jim Cummins (Cummins 2009), there are always degrees of freedom for educators to exercise choice in how they orchestrate classroom interactions, regardless of institutional constraints. This chapter provides examples from my doctoral thesis on kindergarten teachers’ teaching practices and beliefs (Alstad 2013; 2016) and addresses the following research question: How do teachers in early childhood education contexts respond to the pedagogical opportunities and choices in linguistically diverse settings?

162

Chapter Eight

Theoretical framework The focus of investigation in this study is the teachers’ second language teaching practices. The notion of second language refers to the particular second language, i.e., Norwegian in this context, and also to the multilingual dimension in second language teaching, as these students are emergent bilinguals (García and Kleifgen 2010, 3), i.e., recognised by their potential to become bilingual, and bilingualism is considered as a cognitive, social and educational resource. The notion of practices reflects the sociocultural understanding of practices as a social practice, with clear parallels to the notions of literacy practices (Barton and Hamilton 2000; Pennycook 2010). In line with this definition, the objects of my study were both the observable language teaching events or units of behaviour, and the values, attitudes, beliefs, and underlying assumptions of what is considered as second language teaching for such young language learners in terms of the teachers’ management of language learning, their language practices and use, and their knowledge and understanding of their second language teaching. The overall research question was: “what characterises early childhood education teachers’ second language teaching practices?” This is a fundamental question that aims to capture the teachers’ voices and perspectives about language pedagogy. One perspective concerns the teachers’ preferences with regard to language learning settings, and another focus relates to how multilingualism is expressed in their practices. One recurring issue in second language teaching research is whether, and to what extent, second language instruction promotes second language acquisition (Long 1983; Norris and Ortega 2000). The discussion applies primarily to older language learners rather than to younger children in early childhood education. Effectiveness in children’s SLA in educational contexts is related to studies of communicative approaches in language teaching, such as input and the relationship between input and vocabulary skills (Aukrust 2007; 2008; Aukrust and Rydland 2011; Verhelst 2006; Verhelst and Verheyden 2007; Wong-Fillmore 1985). Assumptions on when children are cognitively mature enough for direct and explicit teaching has not only a theoretical, psychological side, but is also linked to social and cultural values and assumptions on how children learn languages. Children in European countries receive formal language instruction earlier than children in Scandinavian countries. Second language instruction and intervention in early childhood education might differ from second language instruction in formal settings, such as school, in the combination of formal and informal learning environments.

Creating Challenging Language Learning Spaces

163

In Rod Ellis’s model (Figure 1) for types of language instruction (2009, 17), language instruction is described in terms of direct and indirect intervention in interlanguage development.

Language instruction

Indirect intervention

Implicit instruction

Direct intervention Explicit instruction

Figure 1: Types of language instruction (Ellis 2009, 17).

While indirect intervention aims to create conditions where learners can learn experientially through communication, direct intervention involves the pre-emptive specification of exactly what it is that the students are supposed to learn and, typically, draws on a structured syllabus. Implicit instruction involves creating a learning environment that is enriched with the target feature while, in explicit instruction, certain linguistic features are clearly taught. In the following analysis, I use the Ellis typology as a starting point, considering the teaching practices in a continuum along a scale with indirect intervention at one end and direct intervention in the other end. I will examine how, and to what extent, kindergarten teachers draw attention to linguistic features, not just grammatical forms but, more generally, aspects of language, which also include content, such as various types of explanations of words. However, one aspect of language teaching that this model touches upon to some extent is the complexity of the educational context and language use. It is a common assumption that children only need to learn simple language in terms of contextualised, everyday language use (Cameron 2001, xii) or a simple ‘playground language’ (Cummins 2000, 69). In his theoretical framework and model, Cummins (2000) outlines the intersection between the cognitive and linguistic demands made on students by the learning context (Figure 2). These demands are conceptualised in two continua, one relating to range of contextual support and one relating to cognitive demands and involvement in language tasks and activities.

Chapter Eight

164

Cognitively Undemanding U

Conteext-Embedded

Context-Reduced

Cognitivelly Demanding Figure 2: Coognitive and coontextual deman nds in languagge activities in education (Cummins 20000, 68).

The contexxt-embedded/ccontext-reduced continuum m is related d to the contextual ssupport providded in the actiivity. A high degree of con ntextually embedded communicatioon involves situational ccues, such as a visual support, conncrete artefactss or gestures involving conttext-sensitive language. Accordinglyy, a context-rreduced comm munication prrovides less contextual c support andd also activitiees where language use, to a much greateer extent, rests on the context alonee. The second d continuum rrelates to the cognitive complexity and required demands. Thee more difficuult a task is co ognitively speaking, i.ee., with more interpretation n and analysiss, the more deemanding the languagee use. The deggree of cognittive demand iis related to th he degree of contextuaal support, annd depends on the child’s learning abillities and language skiills at a given time. One queestion in teacching emergeent bilingualss is how the teaching relates to potential multiilingualism. Several S researrchers argue for a reexaminationn of the concceptualisation of multilinguualism in monolingual terms and, accordingly, that multilin ngual teachinng is based on o a two solitudes asssumption andd a policy of o language sseparation in teaching (Creese andd Blackledge 2010; Cummins 2007; Gar arcía and Sylv van 2011; Makoni andd Pennycook 2007; 2 May 20 014) or even silencing the language competenciees, paying liittle attention n to studentts’ first lang guage. A heteroglossiic, dynamic standard or norm recognnises the div versity of linguistic prractices and the t simultaneo ous use of diffferent kinds of forms

Creating Challenging Language Learning Spaces

165

and signs, and thus teaching strategies reflect and value such linguistic complexity, rather than silence it (Cummins 2000, 44). Recently, several researchers have pointed out that language complexity in education is related to power relations and identity: “… their [the students’] bilingualism in the classroom is not so much about which languages but which voices are engaged in identity performance” (Creese and Blackledge 2010, 110). Although learning context and social factors come into play, the teachers always have a certain autonomy and choice in how they relate to, and communicate, the children's home language and culture: Although coercive power relations between dominant and subordinated groups may occupy the social space in the wider society and directly influence pedagogical spaces created within classrooms, there are always degrees of freedom for educators to exercise choice in how they orchestrate classroom interactions (Cummins 2009, 261).

The pedagogical spaces created within classrooms are related to multilingualism in a broad sense, including the students’ home languages and school language, and also to second language teaching. In the following section, I will relate teacher practices to these pedagogical spaces created in the early childhood education and care context.

Design and methods This chapter is based on findings in my doctoral thesis (Alstad 2013). In order to explore the perspectives of the practitioner, I investigated in depth three Norwegian kindergarten teachers’ L2 teaching practices and beliefs. The data in this exploratory multiple case study consist of interviews and video-recorded observations of teacher-child interactions. In the interviews, the teachers were asked to provide examples of what they considered good language teaching and to reflect upon their choices of language learning activities. The video-recorded observations provided data regarding teacher-child interactions in settings such as play, lunchtime and circle time. Analysing the data involved an abductive approach (Alvesson and Sköldberg 2008), alternating between the transcribed interactions and interviews, in order to shed light on the many facets of second language teaching, investigating in particular language use, the kind of support provided in the interactions (e.g., visual support, linguistic support, artefacts), and the teachers’ rationale for their choices and for providing different kinds of support in the particular events. In the interviews I conducted in my study, the kindergarten teachers related to both cognitive

166

Chapter Eight

and contextual dimensions, for example, in statements concerning the level of difficulty of the tasks and activities. Instead of categorising different learning activities and tasks as such, as in previous research (i.e.Cline and Frederickson 1996, 16), I used Cummins’ model to illustrate the teachers’ understanding and use of different learning activities. In the analysis of observation and interview data, I consider both internal and external factors, based on Cummins’s operationalisation of contextual support (Cummins 2000, 72). Internal factors are associated with the teachers’ judgement of factors, such as each child’s prior experience, motivation, background, interests in participating, and involvement in the task. External factors are related to observable linguistic and non-linguistic expressions and statements, such as gestures, explanations, and visual or material support. The following text highlights one of the teachers’ practices analysed in my study (Alstad 2013). The teacher is given the pseudonym Heidi. Heidi’s beliefs and practices reflect the complexities of language learning and teaching for very young emergent bilinguals, opposed to a view on second language teaching and learning as undemanding and straightforward. Besides, she challenges the assumption that teachers need to be proficient in the emergent bilingual’s home languages in order to create a multilingual environment. Her practices imply a holistic approach to mainstream second and multilingual language teaching. Heidi is in her forties and holds an ordinary bachelor degree in preschool teacher education. In her group of 18 children, there are four emergent bilinguals aged 3,5 to 5,5 years old.

Creating second language learning spaces in play Heidi integrates L2 teaching throughout the whole day, mainly improvised and carried out in informal settings, such as playtime and meal times, and models a wide range of different language use for the children. She considers it less important to organise and plan second language teaching activities in detail, and prefers to refer to teaching as improvisation. According to her, improvisation sets high standards for her ability to look for the language learning potential of the different activities. One aspect of the teacher’s role in play is the role of language modelling: there is so much potential in play (..) that's when you really get involved in the plans with the children and when it comes to language you get opportunities to correct in a good way without saying “no” (.) you don’t sit there and point (.) it becomes so natural and it happens without children discovering that they’re wrong (.) then you’re a good language model.

Creating Challenging Language Learning Spaces

167

The way Heidi describes her role as language model; she wants corrections to happen naturally, without children noticing it and without interrupting the ongoing activity or drawing attention to the language itself. To a very large degree, she prefers play activities for second language teaching and language modelling. When drawing the children’s attention to language, Heidi prefers an implicit approach, using strategies such as repeating words and phrases, reformulations and expansions. Another less obtrusive strategy is to enrich the language environment with a rich and varied vocabulary. One such example of interactions during a child-initiated play event illustrates Heidi’s role as a language model (Extract 1). Heidi (the teacher), and four children, Julie and three emergent bilinguals (Alisha, Sara and Rebekka) are dressing up a doll in some new clothes1. Extract 1: Doll play Teacher

Julie Teacher Alisha Sara Teacher Rebekka

look at all these lovely clothes trousers (holds up the trousers) a hat (shows the hat) outdoor shoes (finds a pair of shoes) oh look, here is a skirt! (shows a skirt) let let me a jumper (shows the jumper) not a scarf look at the skirt inside here (holds her hand inside the skirt) oh these might match (matches the jumper and the trousers) yes they match

Heidi names the different clothes as she takes them out of the basket, first the hyperonym ‘clothes’, and thereafter the concrete words for ‘trousers’, ‘hat’, ‘outdoor shoes’, ‘skirt’ and ‘jumper’. The linguistic repertoire modelled is primarily related to clothing vocabulary, and the children’s attention is directed towards the dressing activity, not the vocabulary itself, and therefore implies no obtrusiveness. This kind of indirect instruction creates an environment where the linguistic support is contextualised and related to the artefacts available. A recurring theme in interviews with Heidi was the need to create a linguistically challenging play environment for the emergent bilinguals. 1

For this chapter, I have made a rough translation of the relevant extracts to English.

Chapter Eight

168

Heidi found role play to be particularly favourable for facilitating such events. Intervention in children’s play has been controversial in the Norwegian kindergarten model, especially in sociodramatic play (Vedeler 1999, 128), and the traditional view in both educational and language education research is typically that early childhood education teachers should adopt a staging role through physical or organisational adaptation of play corners or environments. Heidi challenges such assumptions, and several video-recorded events confirm her view. An example of such an observed event occurred one early morning immediately after Sara, a four year old girl, had arrived. Heidi invites Sara into a doctor-patient play, and Sara accepts. By using role play, Heidi models for Sara how to act linguistically appropriately in such events, as Extract 2 illustrates: Extract 2: Sociodramatic play Teacher Sara Teacher Sara Teacher Sara Teacher Sara Teacher

Sara, are you ill? (turns to the other children present) now it’s Sara’s turn (Lies down on a mattress) okay I’m the doctor (Lifts her arm, rolls up the sleeve) does your arm hurt? (Points at Sara’s arm) (Points at her forearm) does it hurt there? (Points at Sara’s forearm) yes yes (.) let’s see (.) let’s examine you (strokes her arm)

During the play scenario, Heidi repeats several key words such as ‘ill’, ‘doctor’, ‘hurt’ and ‘examine’. When Sara rolls up her sleeve, Heidi makes sure to name it as the ‘arm’ and confirms Sara’s gesture. In addition to providing a relevant vocabulary, she also models adequate stage utterances, such as “now it's Sara turn”, and role utterances, such as “let’s examine you”. In the interviews, Heidi underlines that, as well as relevant vocabulary, the ability to take different roles in the play is important. This ability is partly to be able to use linguistic expressions, such as stage and role utterances: To play role play you need pretty much knowledge of language and codes and to change and use grammatical tense. “And now we did that” (.) and then there is much planning, and switching of tense. It’s complex.

Taking a central role in sociodramatic play depends on a certain number of proficiencies, such as relevant vocabulary, and pragmatic knowledge, such as speech events for stage and role utterances, as well as the narrative

Creating Challenging Language Learning Spaces

169

components. Another important requirement is the ability to decentrate. Children who do not master these requirements are often assigned more passive roles in role play. As Sara barely speaks herself, Heidi models the utterances and thereby qualifies Sara to participate. Heidi points out that decentration is difficult for Sara, and therefore Heidi emphasises the importance of providing her support. A characteristic feature of role play is that the fictional level is constituted linguistically. Children need to be familiar with and master these linguistic features in order to participate. Ideas or ideas objects represent anything other than the referent, i.e., at a more symbolic level. Pellegrini and Galda call this ideational transformation and object transformation (1990, 78). In the previous extract, extract 2, we find an example of ideational transformation, when Heidi says, “I'm the doctor”, i.e., assigning herself a function in fiction other than in real life. Extract 3 below illustrates an object transformation, where a spoon becomes an injection because the participants define it as such. Extract 3: Object transformation in play Teacher

Sara Teacher

and then perhaps you should finally have an injection in your arm (Holds up a spoon) good (..) here (Rolls up Sara’s sleeve) then you’ll feel a little stick sj= (Pretends to give the injection) did it hurt? (Smiles, nods) did it hurt a bit? (…) okay (Rolls down Sara’s sleeve) now you can sit up and I will give you some medicine (Gives Sara a cup) please drink it (.) please drink it it’s medicine then you’ll get well

On several occasions Heidi demonstrates the symbol level to Sara, for example, saying “you should have an injection” and “I will give you some medicine”. By doing this, she underlines the fiction, and it seems obvious to Sara what is happening, as her answers and participation is relevant to the situation (using relevant gestures and answers). Unlike the first example of doll play, Heidi does not provide language support which can be linked to specific references in the situation, thus the transformations are only conveyed linguistically. If the participants had dressed up in their roles or if they had used any kinds of props or toys related to the play context, this might have supported the connection between spoon and the word ‘injection’, but the connection is random. Heidi would have made

170

Chapter Eight

such utterances more linguistically accessible to Sara if she had used material resources. According to Vygotsky, such symbolic representation in play is directly related to literacy skills: “[…] symbolic representation in play is essentially a particular form of speech at an early state, one which leads directly to written language” (Vygotsky 1978, 111). In comparing this sociodramatic play event with other observed events of play; Heidi displays a much larger repertoire of linguistic support. She models narratives, stage and role utterances, and an adequate vocabulary; she repeats words, phrases and whole narratives. As in the other events she remarks upon in the interviews, she calls special attention to role play as a demanding language task because it requires the ability to take on new roles. In the light of Cummins’s model (2000), her teaching is characterised by the alternation between contextualised and contextreduced language use, and cognitively demanding language use. Heidi’s way of teaching relates to Ellis’s description of indirect intervention: “[...] create conditions where learners can learn experientially through learning how to communicate in the L2” (Ellis 2009, 16). In the interviews, Heidi underlines that language teaching should be as natural as possible. This implicit way of drawing children’s attention to linguistic features is similar to strategies in child-directed speech, such as repetition, expansions and contextual support, the purposes of which are primarily to ensure comprehensible input (Ellis 2008, 212). However, there are several examples of Heidi’s modelling of context-reduced language use. Many of the activities that Heidi facilitates are not just about which specific language skills being taught, but rather how children can use such skills in other contexts, which is characteristic of scaffolding: […] the process of scaffolding is focused on helping learners develop the cognitive and linguistic resources which they can later use for their own purposes in new contexts. In other words, scaffolding is oriented towards showing students how to do (or think or say), rather than what to do, think or say (Gibbons 2006, 176).

In modelling the role play for Sara, the event can be considered in the light of the particular experiences in the actual activity, but also the cognitive and linguistic experiences that Sara potentially can make use of in other role play settings. Instead of modelling a simple, contextualised language that is common in teaching languages to young language learners, (Cameron 2001, xii), Heidi exploits all kinds of activities to mediate context-reduced and cognitively demanding language use for the children. Figure 3 below illustrates the variety in Heidi’s teaching practices in the two examples of doll play and role play:

Creating Challenging Language Learning Spaces

171

Figure 3: Heidi’s second language teaching practices related to Cummins’s model (2000).

The observed events are characterised as dynamic where Heidi alternates between degree of cognitive difficulty and degree of contextual support. Most of the observed events alternate between context-embedded and context-reduced language, in the sense that Heidi provides more or less contextual support (through gestures, utterances and material resources); it also varies within each event as to how cognitively demanding it might be, i.e., to what extent decentration is required. The location in the figure must not be regarded as static, but should rather indicate some characteristics and potential in Heidi’s practices. The two different kinds of play events demonstrate the considerable variation along the dimension context-embedded and context-reduced language, both from one event to another, but also within each event. In the role play, Heidi names Sara's body parts (‘arm’, ‘foot’, ‘tummy’) while she makes a fictional examination of her. In addition, she models the narrative of a role play and different stage and role utterances. However, the fictional level is linguistically constituted by the utterances and thus contributes to a more cognitively demanding language use. This event is thus in contrast to the doll play where Heidi provides much contextual support and where the activity itself seems to involve a lower degree of cognitive demand compared to role play. In cases where the children, especially Sara, do not have sufficient language skills to participate, Heidi

172

Chapter Eight

enables Sara’s participation through the modelling of appropriate language use in the particular situation.

A multilingual lens/approach to second language teaching The language environment is dominated by the Norwegian language, although Heidi creates multilingual spaces in various ways. Heidi does not have access to a bilingual assistant or the emergent bilinguals’ home languages, which she points out as highly desirable. Multilingualism comes to play in parent-teacher collaboration, in staff meetings and in teacher/child interactions. When Heidi facilitates multilingualism in teacher/child interactions, it is mainly about making available multilingual resources through meta-language conversations and to highlight and give voice to the various languages spoken in the group. As Heidi reports in the interviews, her main purpose is to promote and strengthen the children's multilingual identities and to create an atmosphere where multilingualism is considered as a resource. This work involves all the children, staff and parents in the group, and she actively makes use of languages other than Norwegian. There are a number of languages and dialects involved in the observed events, far more languages than the home languages of the emergent bilinguals. In addition, Heidi draws on her own and the staff’s multilingual proficiency, and the children’s multilingual experiences from popular media. In all cases we are talking about meta-language conversations.

Utilising available linguistic resources One of Heidi’s ways of highlighting the children's multilingual expertise is to highlight the children’s linguistic repertoire. Heidi has created ‘language posters’ where multilingual competencies are expressed visually through flags, pictures of the children and the word ‘hello’ written in the children’s languages. Heidi reports that these posters often lead to metalinguistic conversations with the children, especially during meal times and creative activities, which take place near to the posters. In addition, Heidi also draws on her own linguistic resources, such as English and her more limited competencies in Spanish and German. Extract 4 demonstrates an example of Heidi making use of her own resources in a metalinguistic conversation with four children speaking Norwegian as a home language. The conversation took place in December. Languages other than Norwegian are shown in red.

Creating Challenging Language Learning Spaces

173

Extract 4: Merry Christmas in several languages Preschool teacher Boy 1 Preschool teacher Boy 1 Preschool teacher Boy 2 Preschool teacher Everybody Boy 3 Preschool teacher Boy 1 Preschool teacher Children Preschool teacher Children Preschool teacher Boy 1

Do you rememeber what ‘merry Christmas’ si called in English? No? It is christmas (.) merry Christmas means merry Christmas I know how to count in Spanish (.) do you want to hear? yes uno dos tres cuatro cinco seis yes that’s correct and me too (.) uno dos tres cuatro cinco seis yes (.) I wonder if you can count to ten? uno dos tres cuatro cinco seis siete ocho nueve diez diez (.) diez is ten mm (.) do you know what merry Christmas is called in Spanish? Do you want me to teach you? count in German should we learn what merry Christmas is in Spanish? yes feliz navidad feliz navidad feliz navidad Can we count in Spanish? Can we count in Danish?

This kind of conversation is by no means unique, as the teacher refers to previous events in the first line. In the interviews, Heidi commented directly on this event and how she works systematically to promote language awareness among all children: Many of the children are very interested and this has developed to be more or less like a language play. They want to know “what’s that called” all the time. The monolingual children are interested in learning, for example, Somali. Amal [Somali girl] didn’t want to say anything in Somali, but now this has suddenly changed, so now they think it’s fun. The intention was to strengthen their self-image and pride in their own culture and identity and their status in the group of children.

She argues that, by displaying her own language resources, such as English, Spanish and German, and involving all the children, she has managed to create a positive atmosphere for languages and language learning. There are several examples of how the children value multilingualism. Extract 5 expresses how multilingualism is considered as a matter of prestige to the monolingual children.

Chapter Eight

174

Extract 5: What languages do we know? Elias (3 years old) Teacher Julie (3 years old) Elias Teacher Teacher Julie Teacher Teacher Julie Teacher Julie Teacher Elias Julie

I can speak English You can speak English? I can speak English too I can speak Scary English scary English? […] and Julie, which languages do you speak? I can speak Swedish Swedish, okay do you know anyone speaking Swedish? yes (..) Anneli and Luna oh yes [...] and Pippi speaks Swedish yes and Emil [...] have you seen him on TV? yes mm

The children talk eagerly about their fictive language proficiencies. When Julie reports that she has similar language proficiency to Elias, he quickly points out that it is not just any English he speaks, but ‘Scary English’, probably considered as a far better proficiency than ordinary English. Heidi takes all the children seriously and confirms positively their various forms of language competencies. When Julie introduces Swedish, Heidi associates this with the Swedish characters Pippi Longstocking and Emil i Lönneberga. Heidi has read the Pippi Longstocking books for the children, and she also refers to films of Pippi Longstocking and Emil i Lönneberga, which periodically appear on Norwegian television, in undubbed (Swedish) versions. By highlighting the language proficiency occurring both inside and outside the kindergarten, she acknowledges the children’s fictive multilingualism and thereby the positive associations with multilingualism. According to Heidi, this approach to language attitudes has changed the emergent bilinguals’ attitudes to their own home languages and their former embarrassment of displaying and using their language competencies in the kindergarten. Extract 6 would not, according to Heidi, have been possible without her systematic approach to the children’s language attitudes. This conversation took place while Heidi and four children were drawing and painting; the language posters were on the wall behind them, and, throughout the conversation, they discussed Norwegian dialects and words in Somali and Persian. The four children were Alisha (3 years) and Amal (5 years) with a Somali family background, Hanna (5 years) with

Creating Challenging Language Learning Spaces

175

parents from Iran, and Tobias (5 years) with Norwegian as his first language. The metalinguistic topic recurs four times in five minutes. Extract 6: Multilingual exchanges Teacher Alisha Teacher Amal Teacher Amal Teacher Amal Teacher Amal Teacher Alisha Teacher Alisha Teacher Amal Teacher Hanna Heidi Alisha Teacher Tobias

what’s that? (to Alisha who is using a spoon) spoon is it a spoon? do you use it when you eat? spoon (Turns to Amal) what’s spoon called in Somali? mudi (whispering) hey? (leans towards Amal) mudi! mudi? mudi mudi (adjusts her pronunciation) mudi she said mudi spoon is mudi spoon is mudi So you think I will remember that? (looks at Amal) yes (nods) spoon is mudi (turns to Tobias and Hanna) mudi is spoon in Somali what is spoon in Persian? (looks at Hanna) gasja gasja it sounds almost like gaffel (Norwegian word for ‘fork’) gasja gasja gasja gasja mudi gasja mudi

In the first part of the extract, Heidi takes on her ordinary role as second language teacher, wanting to know whether Alisha knows what a spoon is called in Norwegian. After a few turns, Heidi takes the role as the active language learner (“what’s spoon called in Somali?”), being interested to learn a new word and allowing Alisha and her elder sister Amal to correct her pronunciation, which she does not master. Time and again, she addresses Amal and Alisha as the language experts and the most linguistically competent, focusing their language resources and making their resources attractive and interesting. On the question as to whether language proficient children are used as language resources or models for

176

Chapter Eight

emergent bilinguals, Heidi distinctly responds that the situation is quite the opposite: …it has been more the other way around, so that the children with Norwegian as their home language have been interested in learning Somali. There has been a focus the other way.

This point is illustrated by Tobias’s utterance in the last line, repeating the words ‘muddi’ and ‘gasja’. Heidi's view is that emergent bilinguals are an asset for the whole group and all children might benefit from multilingualism. By doing this, she makes multilingualism an issue for all children. Her pedagogy is as much directed towards the whole group of children as the language minority children. She has created a room for multilingualism as such, not only a particular language, such as Somali. She makes Somali, Swedish, and ‘Scary English’ as legitimate and as interesting for the children as English and Spanish. Heidi’s way of regarding the relationship between the language learners and the larger social world is in line with theories on multilingualism and identity work (Cummins and Early 2011; Cummins and Persad 2014; Norton 2014). Cummins and Early (2011) underline the importance of affirming the students’ multilingual identities in order to invest their identities in the learning process or in the construction of themselves. Rather than focusing on proficiency and skills as cognitive dimensions, her practice relies on sociocultural dimensions of L2 development, such as identity work. Cummins (2000; 2007) makes the point that ‘technical issues’ related to instruction and achievement, such as the extent to which students’ first language should be used in second language teaching are important, but underlines that they are far from the whole story in designing effective educational contexts. Education is never neutral with respect to societal power relations, and collaborative relations of power, which is generated in interaction with others, reflects the sense of the term ‘power’ that refers to ‘being enabled’ or ‘empowered’ to achieve more. The minority children’s self-expression and sense of identity is being affirmed and extended in their interactions with the kindergarten teacher and children. The teacher enables the children to bring their linguistic resources. The languages are both approved by the teacher and the other children, as is exemplified in the other extracts. These children’s language competencies are not silenced, but rather used as a resource for the children’s identity and also a resource for all children for language awareness, which has high relevance for emergent literacy.

Creating Challenging Language Learning Spaces

177

Concluding remarks In my doctoral study, I investigated how teachers in early childhood education contexts respond to the pedagogical opportunities brought about in linguistically diverse settings. This chapter has highlighted Heidi’s practices and beliefs, as they challenge some traditional views on second language teaching to very young language learners as expressed in the curriculum. Heidi's use and understanding of different language learning situations are characterised by an organisational and linguistic flexibility, using the opportunities brought about primarily in informal activities and in activities related to play. The extracts illustrate Heidi's improvisational approach to language teaching and her efforts to use any situation that arises, even when they are not planned (Sawyer 2004; Sawyer and DeZutter 2007). Such an informal, playful approach is often associated with a contextualised and less cognitively demanding language use, while the examples demonstrated may imply the opposite. The examples also demonstrate that emergent bilingual children’s language experiences outside kindergarten are recognised and valued. Language teaching is not exclusively related to the language proficiency of the teacher, in the sense that the teacher can promote multilingual identity work. Furthermore, such hybrid language practices support all children to explore linguistic differences and build flexible identities in the global society. Both the examples of facilitating Norwegian as a second language and fostering multilingual spaces and metalinguistic conversation underline the teacher’s choices in early childhood education contexts. The curriculum gives wide terms of reference for language pedagogy in early childhood education, in a sense that it opens up different language teaching practices and a certain freedom. Cummins (2009) points out that in the pedagogical spaces created in classrooms, there are always degrees of freedom to exercise choice in how teachers orchestrate classroom interactions, regardless of institutional constraints. Such detailed case studies of language teaching and beliefs highlight the way in which institutional norms and discourses of formal teaching approaches and monolingualism are not necessarily universally accepted, and exist only in the ways in which they are reproduced continually. In recognising the complexities of emergent bilingual’s language learning, educators can also be more responsive to different language experiences and opportunities that early childhood education offers. In the last few years, the Norwegian authorities have put more emphasis on formal teaching in early childhood education (Ministry of Children and Family Affairs 1995; Ministry of Education and Research 2011; 2016). The

178

Chapter Eight

teacher’s practices and beliefs challenge the general discourse of teaching emergent bilinguals as a matter of teaching a simple, contextualised second language to children and the two solitudes assumption. As a response to this increasing linguistic diversity in kindergartens, Norwegian authorities have developed a national strategy for educating inservice kindergarten staff (Ministry of Education and Research 2013). In the discussion of how a competent teacher becomes a good teacher, Biesta (2014; 2015) underlines the importance of developing subject matter knowledge, and he also stresses the importance of developing educational virtuosity through examples, that is, through studying the virtuosity of others as embodied and situated ways of doing. This requires careful study of those who we might see as good, or for that matter, bad, examples of having become educationally wise. In order to evaluate good or bad practices, we need to address this in relation to what we aim to achieve, not only at the policy level, but also the aim and purposes of teachers’ different language pedagogy strategies and their choices.

References Alstad, Gunhild Tomter. 2013. Barnehagen som språklæringsarena: En kasusstudie av tre barnehagelæreres andrespråksdidaktiske praksiser. [Language learning environments in early childhood education. A case study of second language teaching practices in Norway]. (PhD Thesis), Universitetet i Oslo, Humanistisk fakultet. —. 2016. Andrespråk og flerspråklighet i barnehagen: Forskningsperspektiver på barnehagepraksiser [Second Language and Multilingualism in Early Childhood Education: Research on Teaching Practices]. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget. Alvesson, Mats, and Kaj Sköldberg. 2008. Tolkning och reflektion: Vetenskapsfilosofi och kvalitativ metod [Interpretation and reflection. Philosophy of science and qualitative method]. 2. ed. [Lund]: Studentlitteratur. Andersen, Camilla Eline, Thor Ola Engen, Thomas Gitz-Johansen, Chamilla Strædet Kristoffersen, Lise Skoug Obel, Sigrun Sand, and Berit Zachrisen. 2011. Den flerkulturelle barnehagen i rurale områder: Nasjonal surveyundersøkelse om minoritetsspråklige barn i barnehager utenfor de store byene [The multicultural kindergarten in rural areas. A national survey on multilingual children in kindergarten outside urban areas]. Elverum: Høgskolen i Hedmark. Aukrust, Vibeke Grøver. 2007. "Young children acquiring second language vocabulary in preschool group-time: Does amount, diversity,

Creating Challenging Language Learning Spaces

179

and discourse complexity of teacher talk matter?" Journal of Research in Childhood Education 22 (1):17-38. —. 2008. "Turkish-speaking first graders in Norway acquiring second language vocabulary, listening comprehension and literacy skills." Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 52 (3):293-314. Aukrust, Vibeke Grøver, and Veslemøy Rydland. 2011. "Preschool classroom conversations as long-term resources for second language and literacy acquisition." Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 32 (4):198-207. Axelsson, Monica. 2009. "Litteracitetshändelser och litteracitets-praxis i flerspråkiga förskolor [Literacy events and literacy practices in multilingual kindergartens]." In Teacher diversity in diverse schools: Challenges and opportunities for teacher education, edited by Ole Kolbjørn Kjørven, Bjørg-Karin Ringen and Antoinette Gagné, 251265. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Barton, David, and Mary Hamilton. 2000. "Literacy practices." In Situated literacies: Reading and writing in context, edited by David Barton, Mary Hamilton and Roz Ivanic, 7-15. London: Routledge. Biesta, Gert J. J. 2014. The beautiful risk of education, Interventions : education, philosophy, and culture. Boulder, Col.: Paradigm Publ. —. 2015. "How does a competent teacher become a good teacher?: On judgement, wisdom and virtuosity." In Philosophical perspectives on teacher education, edited by Ruth Heilbronn and Lorraine ForemanPeck, 3-22. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. Breen, Michael P., Bernard Hird, Marion Milton, Rhonda Oliver, and Anne Thwaite. 2001. "Making sense of language teaching: Teachers' principles and classroom practices." Applied Linguistics 22 (4):470501. Cameron, Lynne. 2001. Teaching languages to young learners, Cambridge language teaching library. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Canagarajah, Suresh. 2011. "Translanguaging in the classroom: Emerging issues for research and pedagogy." In Applied linguistics review, edited by Li Wei, 1-27. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Cline, Tony, and Norah Frederickson. 1996. "The development of a model of curriculum related assesement." In Curriculum related assessment: Cummins and bilingual children, edited by Tony Cline and Norah Frederickson, 2-22. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Creese, Angela, and Adrian Blackledge. 2010. "Translanguaging in the bilingual classroom: A pedagogy for learning and teaching?" Modern Language Journal 94 (1):103-115.

180

Chapter Eight

Cummins, Jim. 2000. Language, power and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire, Bilingual education and bilingualism 23. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. —. 2007. "Rethinking monolingual instructional strategies in multilingual classrooms." Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 10 (2):221-240. —. 2009. "Pedagogies of choice: Challenging coercive relations of power in classrooms and communities." International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 12 (3):261-271. Cummins, Jim, and Margaret Early, eds. 2011. Identity texts: The collaborative creation of power in multilingual schools. Stoke on Trent: Trentham Books. Cummins, Jim, and Robin Persad. 2014. "Teaching through a multilingual lens: the evolution of EAL policy and practice in Canada." Education Matters: The Journal of Teaching and Learning 2 (1):3-40. Danbolt, Anne Marit Vesteraas, and Lise Iversen Kulbrandstad. 2013. "”Säl är kaka på spanska”: Arbete med litteracitet och flerspråkighet i norska klassrum [Seal is cake in Spanish. Teaching literacy and multilingualism in Norwegian classrooms]." In Flerspråkighet, litteracitet och multimodalitet, edited by Åsa Wedin and Christina Hedman, 19-44. Lund: Studentlitteratur. Ellis, Rod. 2008. The study of second language acquisition. 2. ed, Oxford applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. —. 2009. "Implicit and explicit learning, knowledge and instruction." In Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching, edited by Rod Ellis, Shawn Loewen, Catherine Elder, Rosemary Erlam, Jenefer Philp and Hayo Reinders, 1-25. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Franken, Margaret, and Matilda August. 2011. "Language use and the instructional strategies of grade 3 teachers to support "bridging" in Papua New Guinea." Language and Education 25 (3):221-239. García, Ofelia, and Jo Anne Kleifgen. 2010. Educating emergent bilinguals: Policies, programs, and practices for English language learners, Language and literacy series. New York: Teachers College Press. García, Ofelia, and Claire E. Sylvan. 2011. "Pedagogies and Practices in Multilingual Classrooms: Singularities in Pluralities." The Modern Language Journal 95 (3):385-400. Garcia, Ofelia, and Li Wei. 2013. Translanguaging. Language, bilingualism and education. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Garrity, Sarah, Cristian R. Aquino-Sterling, and Ashley Day. 2015. "Translanguaging in an Infant Classroom: Using Multiple Languages

Creating Challenging Language Learning Spaces

181

to Make Meaning." International Multilingual Research Journal 9 (3):177-196. Gibbons, Pauline. 2006. Bridging discourses in the ESL classrom: Students, teachers and researchers. London: Continuum Books. Kultti, Anne. 2012. "Flerspråkiga barn i förskolan: Villkor för deltagande och lärande [Multilingual children in preschool: Conditions for participation and learning]."PhD Thesis, University of Gothenburg. Lim, Christina, and Jane Torr. 2007. "Singaporean early childhood teachers' beliefs about literacy development in a multilingual context." Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 35 (4):409-434. —. 2008. "Teaching literacy in English language in Singaporean preschools: Exploring teachers' beliefs about what works best." Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood 9 (2):95-106. Long, Michael H. 1983. "Does second language instruction make a difference?: A review of research." TESOL Quarterly 17 (3):359-382. Makoni, Sinfree, and Alastair Pennycook. 2007. "Disinventing and reconstituting languages." In Disinventing and reconstituting languages, edited by Sinfree Makoni and Alastair Pennycook, 1-41. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. May, Stephen. 2014. The multilingual turn : implications for SLA, TESOL and bilingual education. New York: Routledge. Ministry of Children and Family Affairs. 1995. Framework plan for the content and tasks of kindergartens. Oslo: Ministry of Children and Family Affairs. Ministry of Education and Research. 2011. Framework plan for content and tasks in kindergartens. Oslo: Ministry of Education and Research. —. 2013. Kompetanse for framtidens barnehage: Strategi for kompetanse og rekruttering 2014-2020 [Compentence for tomorrow's kindergarten. A strategy for competence and recruitment 2014-2020]. Oslo: Ministry of Education and Research, . —. 2016. Tid for lek og læring — Bedre innhold i barnehagen. Meld. St. 19 (2015-2016) [Time for play and learning. White paper 19 (20152015)]. Oslo: Ministry of Education. Norris, John M., and Lourdes Ortega. 2000. "Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis." Language Learning 50 (3):417-528. Norton, Bonny. 2014. "Identity, literacy, and the multilingual classroom." In The multilingual turn : implications for SLA, TESOL and bilingual educationT, edited by Stephen May, 103-122. New York: Routledge. Pellegrini, Anthony D., and Lee Galda. 1990. "Children's play, language and early literacy." Topics in Language Disorders 10 (3):76-88.

182

Chapter Eight

Pennycook, Alastair. 2010. Language as a local practice. London: Routledge. Sawyer, Brook E., Carol Scheffner Hammer, Lauren M. Cycyk, Lisa López, Clancy Blair, Lia Sandilos, and Eugene Komaroff. 2016. "Preschool teachers’ language and literacy practices with dual language learners." Bilingual Research Journal 39 (1):35-49. Sawyer, R. Keith. 2004. "Creative teaching: Collaborative discussion as disciplined improvisation." Educational Researcher 33 (2):12-20. Sawyer, R. Keith, and Stacy DeZutter. 2007. "Improvisation: A lens for play and literacy research." In Play and literacy in early childhood: Research from multiple perspectives, edited by James F. Christie and Kathleen A. Roskos, 21-36. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Schwartz, Mila, and Abeer Asli. 2014. "Bilingual teachers' language strategies: The case of an Arabic–Hebrew kindergarten in Israel." Teaching and Teacher education 38:22-32. Schwartz, Mila, Aura Mor-Sommerfeld, and Mark Leikin. 2010. "Facing bilingual education: kindergarten teachers’ attitudes, strategies and challenges." Language Awareness 19 (3):187-203. Statistics Norway. 2015. "Kindergartens, 2013, final figures." https://ssb.no/en/utdanning/statistikker/barnehager Vedeler, Liv. 1999. Pedagogisk bruk av lek [Educational play]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Verhelst, Machteld. 2006. "A box full of feelings: Promoting infants' second language acquisition all day long." In Task-based language education: From theory to practice, edited by Kris van den Branden, 197-216. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Verhelst, Machteld, and Lieve Verheyden. 2007. "Opportunities for taskbased language teaching in kindergarten." In Tasks in action: Taskbased language education from a classroom-based perspective, edited by Kris van den Branden, Koen Van Gorp and Machteld Verhelst, 285309. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Vygotsky, Lev Semenovic. 1978. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Wong-Fillmore, Lily. 1985. "When does teacher talk work as input?" In Input in second language acquisition: Issues in second language research, edited by Susan M. Gass and Carolyn G. Madden, 17-47. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.

CHAPTER NINE STANDARDIZED TESTING MANTLING LINGUISTIC DIVERSITY? MARTE MONSEN AND STEINAR LABERG

It is acknowledged among test researchers that standardized testing in diverse settings entails threats to the validity of test results and test consequences. Based on an analysis of the National reading tests in Norway and a case study of three teacher teams’ beliefs and knowledges about standardized reading tests, this article investigates bias in standardized testing of minority students. The authors suggest that the Norwegian system of standardized testing is characterized by low awareness of certain aspects of validity, such as negative bias towards bilingual students.

Introduction The importance of standardized reading tests has increased in Norwegian schools in the last two decades. The role of such tools for evaluation is a recurring topic for political discussion. After The OECD1 advised Norwegian school authorities to implement systems to ensure that student learning outcomes were sufficient, Norwegian schools implemented National standardized testing of so-called basic skills in 2004, that is in English, numeracy and reading (in Norwegian). The National reading tests may be perceived as a means of holding schools and teachers accountable for student results. In political discourse on education in Norway, however, the value of the tests as instruments for teachers and schools to improve student learning is widely accepted. The National reading tests are mandatory and are distributed to all students in grade five, eight and nine. However, students who already have 1

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development

184

Chapter Nine

the right to adapted education in Norwegian for linguistic minorities under § 2-8 of the Norwegian Education Act may be exempt from the tests, but only if it is obvious that the results will be of little value to the school or the teachers (Utdanningsdirektoratet 2012). Nevertheless, what constitutes “little value” is undefined, and schools interpret exemption provisions quite differently. A report evaluating the national tests as a system concludes that the exemption rules appear to be followed strictly by some schools (Seland, Vibe, and Hovdhagen 2013). The National reading tests, assumingly developed for testing reading in the first language, are also used for measuring students who speak Norwegian as their second language and often have limited Norwegian competence. As this situation may lead to bias in the interpretation of test results, this chapter investigates bias in standardized reading tests in Norwegian schools. The data are drawn from a case study of three grade-eight teacher teams (Monsen 2014), as well as a recent analysis of the 2009 and 2010 National reading tests. Susan Hopewell and Kathy Escamilla describe two different paradigms when it comes to assessing bilingual students’ competencies, namely whether they should be compared with monolingual speakers of either language or should be considered “a fundamentally distinct whole, whose language capacities are distinct yet normal” (Hopewell & Escamilla, 2014, pp. 68–69). Hopewell and Escamilla advocate assessing bilingual students’ reading abilities in both of their languages, which is not yet something that Norwegian school authorities facilitate. The case study of three gradeeight teacher teams reported on here (Monsen 2014), revealed that some teachers believe that the test results are biased, in that they represent the bilingual students unfavorably. This chapter will present the teachers’ conceptualizations of biased testing before investigating test materials and discussing the ways in which the testing could constitute negative bias towards bilingual students. Initially, it will take a look at international research into bias in language testing.

International research into validity and bias in language testing The concept of construct validity in testing essentially means that a test should measure the construct it is chosen to measure, neither more nor less, but what this concept actually entails is much-debated among test researchers and test developers. As long ago as 1989, Samuel Messick provided a broad definition of construct validity, stating that it is “an overall evaluative judgement of the degree to which evidence and

Standardized Testing Mantling Linguistic Diversity?

185

theoretical rationales support the adequacy and appropriateness of interpretations and actions based on test scores”(Messick 1989, 13). Lyle Bachman and Adrian Palmer hold a very similar view: Construct validity pertains to the meaningfulness and appropriateness of the interpretations that we make on the basis of test scores. When we interpret scores from language tests as indicators of test takers’ language ability, a crucial question is, ‘To what extent can we justify these interpretations?’ (Bachman and Palmer 1996, 21)

According to these definitions, construct validity cannot be established once and for all but depends on the interpretations and uses of the test. However, even though these definitions are well-known, test developers tend to use a much narrower definition, through which certain development procedures can ensure test validity. According to Carol A. Chapelle (2012), the reason for this is that the complexity of the broad definitions makes testing procedures difficult, as they imply that one cannot simply ensure validity by making sure that the test tools themselves are good. Even so, the view taken in this chapter is that if one does not pay attention to interpretations, uses and consequences, standardized testing can be damaging. It is in fact widely acknowledged among test researchers that standardized testing in diverse settings brings about several severe threats to the validity of test results and test consequences (1999, Hoover and Klingner 2011, García and Kleifgen 2010, August et al. 2006, Willis 2008, Holm 2006, Bachman and Palmer 2010). If school authorities’ base politics and pedagogy on standardized tests issued in the majority language for all students, this will inevitably lead to a misrepresentation of the bilingual students, and pedagogical implementations might be illinformed and inexpedient. This situation is related to linguistic and cultural bias. Jamal Abedi (2011) maintains that tests that are not intended to examine language skills directly, which is the case for many of the reading tests used in schools, will lead to construct-irrelevance when students have not acquired sufficient skills in the language of the test. The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (1999), developed by the American Educational Research Association, the American Psychological Association and the National Council on Measurement in Education, even highlight this. Since standardized reading tests possess characteristics that favor the majority language and culture, those who have a different language and cultural background tend to receive lower scores than are justified (Hoover and Klingner 2011). Bachman and Palmer (2010) stress that even test developers need to take into

186

Chapter Nine

consideration the consequences that the test results may have for students, schools and societies, while J. Charles Alderson believes that consequences are of vital importance, but that it is impossible for test developers to take responsibility for the consequences of the test (Alderson 2000, 2004). That does not mean that we should not pay attention to consequences. Alderson advocates the need of paying attention to the interpretations and use of test results among teachers: Much more attention needs to be paid to the reasons why teachers teach the way they do. We need to understand their beliefs about teaching and learning, the degree of their professionalism, the adequacy of their training and of their understanding of the nature of and rationale for the test. (Alderson 2004, XI)

In many countries, monolingual standardized testing has high stakes. Ofelia García and Joanne Kleifgen (2010) maintain that this kind of testing is detrimental to both schools and societies: Monolingual high-stakes tests for emergent bilinguals have negative consequences not only for the individual students, but also for the teachers who teach them, the leaders of the schools in which they are educated, the community in which they live, and the states in which they reside. (García and Kleifgen 2010, 117)

Research into test washback, or consequences of testing on individuals and societies, have also focused on biased testing. Sharon L. Nichols and David C. Berliner (2007) highlight that a great amount of research into test washback shows that the larger the social consequences attached to a quantitative indicator as a language test, the more likely it is that this indicator will be corrupted. So far the Norwegian reading tests are not high-stakes tests in the same way as tests in the USA or some of the other European countries, where poor test results may force children to switch schools or teachers to lose their jobs. However, many municipalities in Norway have implemented systems that increase the pressure on school leaders and teachers to make sure that test results are good. School authorities are now also making the schools’ test results public, which teachers express is creating a negative focus on low-achieving schools and increasing the pressure on teachers and students. The low-achieving schools are often located in low-income areas, and as this is also where the majority of the immigrant population live, the result is negative focus on schools with many students with immigrant backgrounds (Monsen 2014). Even though none of the Nordic countries has implemented a high-stakes testing system, several Nordic researchers have highlighted problems

Standardized Testing Mantling Linguistic Diversity?

187

associated with majority-language reading tests for bilingual students. For example, the Danish researcher Lars Holm (2006) maintains that there is a risk that students with Danish as a second language who score low on reading tests due to language problems will be considered poor readers and for that reason will not be given the specific language support they might need. When second language students do experience problems in reading comprehension, the problems might be of a different character than that of the students who struggle with reading comprehension in their first language. One way of describing the difficulties students might encounter when reading in a second language is highlighted by William Grabe (2009). He outlines two models for reading comprehension, the text model and the situation model. The former is oriented towards the understanding of what the text itself is trying to elicit, while the latter means that the reader combines background knowledge with text information to facilitate an interpretation of the text that is in line with the reader's own goals. Grabe highlights that in a second language context, it may be challenging to access or select the appropriate model. Often a text model can be most readily available, because it does not require the reader to have extensive background knowledge which can be used to create meaning in the text. However, a text model is not necessarily the most appropriate model. Moreover, readers who lack much of the vocabulary of the text often excessively rely on a situation model, and one will find that they interpret the text in a way that does not indicate text understanding (Grabe 2009, 48-49). This suggests that even if low scores on reading tests for second language readers might be described as actual reading problems, the interpretation of the cause for the reading problems might still be biased if teachers are not aware of what might affect second language reading.

Results of reading tests in Norway The PISA study reports indicate that in most countries, minority language students score below average in reading (OECD and UNESCO 2003). This is also the case for Norway. Most research is done on the PISA test results and shows that minority-language students score lower than majority-language students do even if they are born in Norway. Hvistendahl and Roe claim that this indicates that the Norwegian school system has not succeeded in providing equal opportunities to all students, regardless of social, cultural and linguistic backgrounds (Hvistendahl and Roe 2009). On the national tests in numeracy, English and reading, statistics from 2014 and 2015 show that it is on the reading tests that the

188

Chapter Nine

gaps in results are largest, in favor of majority language students (SSB). Consequentially schools with many minority background students tend to receive low scores. However, the case study reported on in this chapter (Monsen 2014) found significant differences in results on the national reading tests between two schools with many minority-background students. While students at Verket, which is located in a middle-income area, scored well above average, students at Allheimen, which is located in a low-income area, scored well below. These results are in line with research stating that many of the differences between majority and minority students disappear when socio-economic factors are controlled (OECD and UNESCO 2003, Cummins 2008). However, recent reports in Norway (Steinkellner 2014), shows that even though immigrant students with well-educated parents score higher than immigrant students with parents without higher education, they still score lower on the reading tests than majority students with similar social background. The same report shows that the national test that separates the least between minority language students and majority language students, is the National test in English. On this test, minority students with well-educated parents score at the same level as the similar group among the majority language students (Steinkellner 2014, 17-18). This may indicate that for all groups of immigrant students, language proficiency in Norwegian influence their test scores in the reading tests.

17 grade-eight teachers’ conceptualizations of biased testing Using both individual and focus group interviews, the case study (Monsen 2014) also investigated teachers’ knowledge about what was measured by standardized reading tests that they were using. In both the researchers’ view and the teachers’ own views, the teachers have poor knowledge about what the tests measure and the tests’ limitations. For example, most of them were unable to articulate what aspects of reading the national reading tests measure, even though the constructs of the national reading tests are described in three sentences in the test documents intended for the teachers as well as on the website of the National Directorate for Education: 1. Locate information in the text 2. Interpret and understand the text 3. Reflect on and evaluate the form and content of the text (Utdanningsdirektoratet 2012, authors’ translation)

Standardized Testing Mantling Linguistic Diversity?

189

Most of the teachers also did not know whether or not they were supposed to have any reservations in interpreting the test results. This should perhaps not come as a surprise because none of the test documents intended for the teachers describe topics as validity or bias, and even the descriptions of the construct of the national reading tests sited above can be described as unspecific and broad. The teachers in this study generally trust the results of the standardized reading tests. In the two schools with above-average test results, the teachers maintained that the test results matched their overall impressions of the students’ general academic skills. Even though the tests measure reading skills, the teachers did not separate reading skills, general academic skills and language skills. In fact, most believed that reading test scores quite adequately represent the academic skills of all students. In Allheimen, the school with below-average scores, the teachers did not hold the same views as the teachers at the other schools about the test’s ability to measure the reading skills of all students. On the contrary, they believed the tests have limitations when it comes to assessing minoritylanguage students. The Allheimen teachers pointed to the fact that the system at their school did not distinguish between minority background students who have almost all their schooling in Norway , and students who have only lived in Norway for a short period. One of the teachers, Lea, expressed that the vocabulary used in the tests is far too complex for newly arrived students: “Some of the students came here only a year ago, they simply haven’t got the vocabulary or the concept knowledge that is needed for these types of texts” (authors’ translation). Her colleagues Fabian and Kristian agreed with her point of view, even though Kristian underlined that it is necessary to bear in mind the difference between concept knowledge and Norwegian vocabulary. He stated that the students may have the concept knowledge, but with only limited knowledge in the Norwegian language, they do not necessarily have the vocabulary that is used in the tests yet. The teachers also pointed out that some students understood quite complex Norwegian texts outside the test situation, but usually they needed more time than the 90 minutes allocated for doing the reading tests. Lea believed she had read research reporting that second language readers might have good reading comprehension even though they were slow readers. The teachers at Allheimen also believed that many of the texts in the reading tests were culturally biased towards majority students. They especially pointed to the fictional texts in the tests. Lea believed some of these texts were “typically Norwegian” in that they dealt with topics like skiing and family traditions in Norway. Some of the stories could not have

190

Chapter Nine

happened any other place than in rural Norway: “The tests consist of sort of like short stories from the woods and valleys of Norway”. Fabian found it unreasonable testing students in skills they hardly could have aquired, due to various unhappy circumstances expressing that many "of our students come from conflict areas of the world, like Somalia and Afghanistan. They haven’t had the possibility to receive adequate teaching before they came here […] and suddenly they are supposed to understand texts about complex educational issues”. The teachers discussed whether it may be beneficial to the students that the reading tests pick up what they have not learnt, but decided that it is actually common sense that students with no academic background and only a short period of schooling in Norway will struggle when they try to read about complex issues in Norwegian. The teachers at Allheimen were pointing to three different kinds of bias in the tests. First of all they shed light on linguistic bias. Many students are in fact tested with texts having an unfamiliar vocabulary, and some students would have been able to do well if they were given sufficient time. Secondly they highlighted cultural bias in that readers would need culturally specific experiences in order to interpret and understand some of the texts in the tests. Thirdly they emphasized the bias due to lack of previous education regarding some of the students. All these three conceptions of bias will be discussed in the following, but in order to discuss cultural and linguistic bias, first we will have a closer look at the National reading tests.

Analysis of the 2009 and 2010 National reading tests Prior to the interviews of the case study, the teachers had been involved in the implementation of the National reading tests in 2009 and 2010, albeit to a varying degree. Their statements referred to one or both of these tests. The texts and tasks of the two tests have therefore been subject to analysis meant to shed light on the teachers' claims maintaining that both the texts and tasks are complex, demanding a broad and sometimes culturally specific Norwegian vocabulary and that some of the texts must be regarded as embedded in a typically Norwegian or Western doxa. First of all, the general cognitive challenge that students will face in the National reading test, must be commented upon. The test is designed as a booklet consisting of approximately 20 pages of various texts, illustrations, tables and questions. In 2009 the booklet consisted of approximately 12 pages of various texts. The questions required 10 pages. In 2010 the texts filled approximately 11 pages and the questions 8 pages.

Standardized Testing Mantling Linguistic Diversity?

191

The texts generally vary in length, genre and modality and the tasks assess various aspects of reading on different levels. As mentioned earlier the students must read all the texts and answer the matching questions within 90 minutes. This challenge is difficult for any student, but when considering that reading normally is slower in a second language than in the first language, and in addition that text types and genres vary across cultures, the tasks of the tests may be more or less insurmountable for students with limited Norwegian competence literacy. The following table is an overview of the texts in the 2009 and 2010 National reading tests for grade eight, with titles and description of text type. Table. Texts in the 2009 and 2010 National reading tests (English titles in brackets – authors’ translation)

2009 Title Informasjon til eleven (Information to the student) Haiangrep (Shark attack)

Ein tur med metroen (A trip with the metro)

Texttype Non-fiction. 1 page Multimodal non-fiction including illustrations, a world map and a diagram. 1 page.

Excerpt from a novel 1 page. Nynorsk.

2010 Title Informasjon til eleven (Information to the student) Hvorfor drømmer jeg? (Why am I dreaming?) Ålen er nesten forsvunnet (The eel is virtually gone)

Sjakkspillet (The chess game)

Texttype Non-fiction. 1 page Non-fiction. Subject spesific text. 1 page. Multimodal non-fiction including an illustration, a map and a diagram. 1 page. Short story. Approx. 4 pages.

192

Chapter Nine

Farlige høyder (Dangerous hights) Nemi

Multimodal non-fiction. 2 pages. Comic strip. 1 page

Avstandstabeller (Distance tables)

Tables. 1 page.

Fire bokomtaler (four book reports)

Short reports on novels for teenagers. 2 pages.

Adverstisement - in the shape of an essay. Incl. 1 page illustration. Text: 1 page

Hurtigruta (title of a Norwegian ship)

Multimodal non-fiction including a photo, a map and a table. 1 page. Non-fiction. Approx. one halv page.

Slaget som forandret verden eller det er utrolig hva man ikke vet (The battle that changed the world or it’s amazing what one does not know) Fanga (Caught) and Hva er du avhengig av? (What are you addicted to?)

Miljøvennlig tyggis (Environmentally friendly chewing gum) Fem leserinnlegg om stemmerett (five letters to the editor about voting rights)

Two letters to the editor by anonymous youngsters. Approx. 2 pages.

Letters to the editor. Approx. 1, 5 page.

When talking with the teachers about cultural bias, all of them refer to fictional texts as examples. Let us therefore take a closer look at the three fictional texts in the tests. They are “A trip with the metro”, which is an excerpt from a novel by Faïza Guène, Nemi, a quite famous comic strip in Norway, written and drawn by Lise Myhre and “The chess game”, a short story by the Norwegian author Roy Jacobsen.

Standardized Testing Mantling Linguistic Diversity?

193

“A trip with the metro” is an excerpt from the novel Kiffe, kiffe by the French-Moroccan author Faïza Guène. In a few introductory lines one gets to know that it tells us about the French-Moroccan Doria who lives in the outskirts of Paris. Although this seemingly diverse cultural experience is highlighted in the introduction, this information is irrelevant for the students to interpret the excerpt along the line that is suggested by the tasks following the text. None of the tasks are focusing Dorias’ experience as a second generation immigrant, they are all directed towards details without relevance for a more holistic interpretation. The excerpt is translated into ‘Nynorsk’, one of Norway´s two official written languages. Both of them are mandatory for Norwegian students to learn at school. Nynorsk is the main form for about 10 to 15 % of them, while ‘Bokmål’ is the preferred form of Norwegian for most students today. Minority language students living in areas were Bokmål is the main form, can apply for exemption from being assessed in Nynorsk. This indicates that in the Norwegian education system, it is generally assumed that minority language students will find it challenging to write both varieties of Norwegian. If this assumption bears any truth, it will also be reasonable to expect that reading a text in Nynorsk will prove difficult for many minority language students. In “A trip with the metro” words or word forms in Nynorsk differ from Bokmål in about 35 % of the words. In most of them, there are just small differences, like in the noun spelled ‘hovudet’ in Nynorsk and ‘hodet’ in Bokmål (‘the head’), and the pronoun ‘eg’ in Nynorsk, which is spelled ‘jeg’ in Bokmål (‘I’). Still, it is reasonable to expect that reading the text in Nynorsk will take longer for most students reading in their second language, and that quite a few of the words will differ so much that many students simply will not understand them at all. While "A trip with the metro" is translated into Nynorsk, the following questions to be answered by the student are represented in Bokmål - as if to increase his or her burdens. Apart from the challenging switch from Nynorsk to Bokmål, the following questions implies new and other challenges for the student being tested. The first task is a multiple choice question, asking why the protagonist enjoyed travelling with the metro. The answer to this is not stated explicitly in the text, and the correct answer not only uses different wording from that in the excerpt, but also a different concept. While the excerpt says: “I think the metro is a nice way to relax. One can see so many different people it is funny”2, the “correct” 2

“…eg synest metroen er ein fin måte å kople av på. Ein ser så mange ulike menneske det er morosamt”

194

Chapter Nine

answer to why the main character enjoyed travelling with the metro is “she found it entertaining”3. The protagonist also thinks it's fun listening to a beggar who plays accordion onboard the metro, so when one of the alternative answers to the task is that she loves to listen to music, this may seem like a plausible answer for many students. It is a quite common trait for multiple choice tasks to include these types of “almost correct” choices, and this is generally assumed to be difficult. However, there are several reasons to believe that there are even more layers of difficulty for students with less Norwegian experience than the average student. One of them is related to the difficulties one may encounter in second language reading with accessing the appropriate comprehension model (Cf. Grabe 2009). The second fictional text, Nemi, is a comic strip that appears in quite a few newspapers in Norway, as well as in comic books. The protagonist Nemi is characterized as a modern, pale goth-woman dressed in black, who enjoys rock music, beer in dark bars and prefer to socialize with handsome, tattooed boys (Gisle 2015). Although the comic takes place in an urban environment where unhealthy lifestyle and complicated relationships seems to be the normal way of life, all presented from Nemi´s appearently subversive, liberal point of view, experienced readers know that the issues at stake are typically middle class conflicts on a modern or not-so-modern young adult scene. The goth-girl Nemi is in spite of her subcultural orientation “just like the rest of us" - in the middle of the ordinary - and she is not even aware of this. The comic strip thus makes fun of life as it was or is being lived within the slightly antiquated goth culture. In particular we laugh at the conceited selfconscious and brave female protagonist who in reality behaves like any youngster today: selfish, immature and competitive on the social scene. The issues that are raised in Nemi seem to resonate best with female readers. When it has been reported from the National reading tests gender differences in results have been emphasized. Nemi is one of the texts where the results are in favor of the girls. In the particular comic strip used in the reading test, Nemi is mailing a mate of hers inviting him for a coffee. Since he responds affirmatively - but without using emoticons or exclamation marks, Nemi becomes frustrated and in the next turn expressing that he is not showing sufficient enthusiasm. This is discussed over several panels, before he picks up the phone, hoping this finally will clear away any misunderstandings. However, the misunderstandings

3

“hun syntes det var underholdende”

Standardized Testing Mantling Linguistic Diversity?

195

endure on the phone: Now she is enthusiastic while he gets the impression she is reluctant – the two seem to have switched roles. In order for the students to answer the tasks coupled to this text, they would benefit from knowing that the boy Nemi is trying to make an arrangement with is not her boyfriend. Nemi-fans are aware of this, new readers will have to guess. One of the multiple choice tasks following the comic-strip is to answer which of four alternative words best describe the topic of the comic strip: expectations, love, fear or happiness. "Fear" and "happiness" can hardly be regarded as relevant by any reader making either "expectations" or "love" the two alternatives left. The correct answer is “expectations”, though one could easily make an interpretation that points to the other plausible alternative: “love”. A second difficult multiple choice task is to find the best explanation for the behavior of Nemi and the boy she is adressing in two of the panels. The “correct” answer is that “they had hoped that the other person had answered in a different way”, while another alternative is the following: “they have not understood what the other person has tried to express” (authors’ translations). The semantic nuances between the two alternatives are quite trifling making it necessary to be familiar with the types of discourses taking place in chat or email communication. One could in fact also argue that the alternatives for answers are both equally correct, since they are somewhat linked: They had hoped that the other person had answered differently, and the reason for this is that they don’t understand that what the other person is trying to express is actually exactly what they’d hoped for. To answer the tasks following the Nemi text, the students of course also have to be familiar with the comic strip genre in general and with the Nemi-universe in particular as we have tried to characterize it. The last open ended task in connection to Nemi is to explain in writing how the author of the comic strip uses exaggeration to underline a point in panel number nine depicting Nemi mashing the keyboard on her computer. A reasonable answer would be something like this: “In panel nine the buttons are drawn as if they are jumping out of the keyboard, lines illustrating the fast pace of Nemi´s hands and fingers angrily typing in a craze. Nemi's face is also depicted excessively grumpy”. We argue that it is relatively easy to register how exaggerations have been used for as well native and second language readers in secondary school. A far more challenging task is to verbalize the rhetoric of the comic strip - especially in one´s least proficient language. Finally we will discuss the use of the short story “The chess game” which might be the story that is referred to by the teacher Lea as “short stories from the woods and valleys of Norway”. It is the longest text in the

196

Chapter Nine

reading tests from 2009 and 2010. The protagonist has received a chess set for Christmas. Since the set is new and expensive, he is not allowed to play it with his friends, so instead he goes outdoor skiing. There is almost no one outside, but he meets Arne, who is described as the last person one wants to meet. Reluctantly the protagonist continues his skiing trip together with Arne. Along the way they steal cigarettes for Arnes’ mother, but the main theme of the short story is the difficult relationship and the “game” taking place between the two boys competing in subtle ways. The reader needs to understand quite a few references to what is commonly understood as traditional Norwegian culture in order to get a good grasp of the general theme of the story. For example one would benefit from being familiar with the tradition for cross country skiing among many Norwegian families, the lack of such traditions among some (socially underprivileged) families, and also the competitiveness associated with cross country skiing. It would also benefit the interpretation if the reader were familiar with the connotations associated with rose painting, Christmas day in Norway, “invisible” skiing tracks, and other related topics. Naturally, “The chess game” - as in the excerpt A trip with Metro translated into Nynorsk - also consists of many low frequency words, like ‘bakse’ (manoeuvre, struggle), ‘kneik’ (steep hill) and ‘stabbe’ (trudge). It also consists of Norwegian slang expressions like ‘mutteren’ (slang expression for ‘the mother’), contractions like ‘ligna’n’ (‘looked like him’, but in this context meaning that it would have ‘been typically him’) and generally many idiomatical and metaphorical expressions. To answer the tasks following the text, the student will not have to understand all of the concepts that are described above, but since the tasks measure higher level reading skills, that is complex reading skills involving multiple aspects of vocabulary, cognitive skills and prior knowledge, it is not easy to single out what knowledge you don’t need in order to answer the tasks to the text. For instance the open ended task for the text reads “The short story has the title “The chess game”. What could be the reason for the authors’choice of title? State reasons for your answer.” According to the guide for the teachers this task is designed to measure students’ ability to reflect on and evaluate the content of the text. In order for the teachers to score the open ended tasks, they are provided with examples of answers that should score either two points or one. For this task, two points are scored to answers that somehow points to things that happens between the protagonist and Arne. That is, answers that demonstrates that the students have read the text allegorically. Two of the examples reads “Because the book is like a game of chess, unpredictable” and “Because he is trying to get cigarettes, and he has to be a good chess

Standardized Testing Mantling Linguistic Diversity?

197

player to win them”. If the answer only points to the fact that the protagonist received a chess set for Christmas, it is scored only one point. One of the examples that is given of this is “All of this happened because of the chess set”. To give an answer that points to the “chess game” that is going on between the two boys, demands a firmer grasp of the story as a whole, than to give an answer that points to the explicitly stated fact that the protagonist received a chess set for Christmas, which of course is why the latter receives only one point. However, students reading in their first language can be expected to understand most of the concepts and connotations referred to in the short story. The difficulty for them is to draw inferences and make sense of the complex relationship that is described, whereas for students with limited knowledge of low frequency “typically Norwegian” vocabulary and few experiences with Norwegian culture, the difficulty will be far more extensive. In this analysis the fictional texts in the Norwegian National reading tests have been the focus of attention. Many of the same aspects that have been addressed here are also present in the non-fictional texts. For instance, there are examples of texts referring to Norwegian or Western history or concepts. In addition, many of the texts are characterized by high information density and high lexical density and lexical variation, which are generally considered challenging when reading in a second language. The adverticement and the letters to the editor (see table) also consist of irony, and short and apt wording. Generally it would be reasonable to deduct that the texts and tasks of the National reading tests are chosen and designed with majority students in mind. Even though students that have the right to adapted Norwegian education for linguistic minorities are not automatically exempt from the tests, it is quite clear that these students are not in the targeted group for the tests, as far as the test design goes. The excerpt from the French-Moroccan novel Keffe-keffe “A trip with the metro” could have been made to represent a diverse cultural experience, but as we have demonstrated, the tasks following the excerpt rewards only prosaic monocultural interpretations .

Bias in the National reading test system After presenting a study of aspects of the Norwegian National reading test system, this article puts forward the claim that this system is characterized by low awareness of certain aspects of validity. It is generally assumed that the national reading tests are valid. This assumption was last published in an article investigating the Norwegian test system from the Think tank Agenda, simply stating that: “The tests are thoroughly prepared

198

Chapter Nine

and of high quality - and public and available to all schools. The information they give us is valid” (Rydje 2016, authors’ translation). The claim here is not that the tests are not thoroughly prepared. However, test researchers have since 1989, stressed that test validity not only relates to the tests themselves, but to the appropriateness and the meaningfulness of the interpretations of what the test scores entail (Messick 1989, Bachman and Palmer 1996, Alderson 2000). Whether the interpretations and consequences are the responsibility of the test developers (cf. Bachman and Palmer 2010) or not (Alderson 2004), the test system needs to ensure validity in test procedures and test washback. The data presented here suggests that such procedures are not in place. Of course there are validity aspects to consider also in this article. The teachers’ conceptions of bias are based on their subjective (but also collective) understanding of fairness, on what the reading tests are intended to test, and on their understanding of what their students are capable of outside of the test situation. As have been pointed out, the teachers are not really capable of explaining what the tests are meant to measure. Whether or not their understanding of bias in the tests is reasonable are in our study only investigated via analysis of the test materials. This analysis takes into consideration theory that presupposes what students will find difficult when reading in a second language. While the theories might be based upon empirical data from second language reading, the current study is not based on empirical data on how second language students have answered each concrete task that are analyzed, simply because this information is not available. One could therefore discuss if the article is biased in its presuppositions about the bilingual students. However, the main idea behind the analysis of the test materials is not to make assumptions about what each minority language student will find difficult. It is rather to investigate what and how the tests are actually measuring and if the teachers’ claim regarding bias, may be reasonable. Even though we don’t have statistics telling us what parts of the tests that proves most difficult for bilingual students, or what aspects of the tests that best explain the low over all scores of minority language students, the data put forward in this article do illustrate that there are no precautions that are put in place to ensure the validity of the interpretation of the scores for bilingual students. One may argue that it is beneficial for the minority language students that the National reading test results show the achievement gap between majority and minority, so that we may address this problem in our educational system. Previous research has highlighted this (Hvistendahl and Roe 2009). However, as the teachers in our study maintain, some of

Standardized Testing Mantling Linguistic Diversity?

199

the elements we may learn from the test results are actually common sense. Why would we expect that students with only a few years of Norwegian experience should score highly on tests that have been designed with majority language students in mind? Moreover, it may be that the tests do not so much reveal a gap in reading skills as that they conceal the actual underlying cause of the achievement gap, thus making it even harder for the teacher to find and make adequate steps to ensure bilingual students educational outcome. Standardized testing of reading skills may lack validity altogether, and one could discuss the overall appropriateness in the way standardized tests are used. The analysis of the texts and tasks in the National reading test that have been shown here, demonstrate some general issues that could be discussed. For example, one could discuss whether the standardization of interpretations of fictional texts that the reading tests entails, is in line with contemporary teaching of literature. However – the issue here have been the validity in the testing of bilingual students. One conclusion that can be drawn from research on bias in standardized testing may be that the exemption provisions should be less strict, so that all students who needs special language support should be exempt. If the tests are also used for measuring students with limited Norwegian competency, the least one should expect is that the test scores were used to give information as to what aspects of the tests that proves difficult for bilingual students. This could potentially add to our knowledge about second language reading. As it is today, the analysis of the test results only reveals that the average bilingual student scores lower than the overall average. This information is not only limited and in many ways common sense, but it may also cause negative attitudes toward bilingual students and their aptitude for learning. .

References 1999. Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington: American Educational Research Association. Abedi, Jamal. 2011. "Assessing english language learners." In Cultural validity in assessment: Addressing linguistic and cultural diversity, edited by Maria del Rosario Basterra, Elise Trumbull and Guillermo Solano-Flores, 49-71. New York: Routledge. Alderson, J. Charles. 2000. Assessing reading. Edited by J. Charles Alderson & Lyle F. Bachman, Cambridge Language Assessment Series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

200

Chapter Nine

Alderson, J. Charles. 2004. "Foreword." In Washback in language testing, edited by Liying Cheng and Yoshinori Watanabe, ix-xii. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. August, Diane, David J. Francis, Han-Ya A. Hsu, and Catherine E. Snow. 2006. "Assessing reading comprehension in bilinguals." Elementary School Journal no. 107 (2):221-238. Bachman, Lyle F., and Adrian Palmer. 2010. Language assessment in practice: Developing language assessments and justifying their use in the real world. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bachman, Lyle F., and Adrian S. Palmer. 1996. Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Chapelle, Carol A. 2012. "Conceptions of validity." In The Routledge handbook of language testing, edited by Glenn Fulcher and Fred Davidson, 21-33. London: Routledge. Cummins, Jim. 2008. "Where immigrant students succeed: A comparative review of performance and engagement in PISA 2003 (Petra Stanat & Gayle Christensen, eds., 2006) [Review]." Curriculum Inquiry no. 38 (4):493-497. García, Ofelia, and Jo Anne Kleifgen. 2010. Educating emergent bilinguals: policies, programs, and practices for English language learners. New York: Teachers College Press. Gisle, Jon. 2015. Nemi. Store norske leksikon. Grabe, William. 2009. Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Holm, Lars. 2006. "Sprogtests i et andetsprogsperspektiv: Med særlig henblikk på literacy." [Language tests in a second language perspective: With emphasis on literacy] Nordand: Nordisk tidsskrift for andrespråksforskning (2):57-79. Hoover, John J., and Janette Klingner. 2011. "Promoting cultural validity in the assessment of bilingual special education students." In Cultural validity in assessment: Addressing linguistic and cultural diversity, edited by Maria del Rosario Basterra, Elise Trumbull and Guillermo Solano-Flores, 143-167. New York: Routledge. Hvistendahl, Rita , and Astrid Roe. 2009. "Leseprestasjoner, lesevaner og holdninger til lesing blant elever fra språklige minoriteter." [Reading skills, reading habits and attitudes among minority language students] Norsk pedagogisk tidsskrift no. 93 (4):250-263. Messick, Samuel. 1989. "Validity." In Educational measurement, edited by Robert L. Linn, 13-103. New York: Macmillan. Monsen, Marte. 2014. Store forventninger? Læreroppfatninger om eksterne leseprøver [Great expectations? Teachers’ beliefs and

Standardized Testing Mantling Linguistic Diversity?

201

knowledge about standardized reading tests], Det utdanningsvitenskapelige fakultet, Universitetet i Oslo, Oslo. Nichols, Sharon L., and David C. Berliner. 2007. Collateral damage. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Education Press. OECD, and UNESCO. 2003. Literacy Skills for the World of Tomorrow: Further Results from PISA 2000: OECD UNESCO Institute for Statistics. Rydje, Ola Magnussen. 2016. Kan skolens kvalitet måles? [Can school quality be measured?] , http://www.tankesmienagenda.no/notater/kanskolens-kvalitet-males/. Seland, Idunn, Nils Vibe, and Elisabeth Hovdhagen. 2013. Evaluering av nasjonale prøver som system [Evaluation of national tests as a system]. NIFU. SSB. Nasjonale prøver, 2015: Elever fordelt på mestringsnivå, nasjonale prøver 8. trinn, etter kjønn og innvandringsbakgrunn [Students divided in level of skills, national tests grade 8, by sex and immigrant background].: Statistisk sentralbyrå. Steinkellner, Alice. 2014. Innvandrere og norskfødte med innvandrerforeldre i grunnskolen : en analyse av karakterdata og resultater fra nasjonale prøver i 2012 [Immigrants and Norwegian -born of immigrant parents in primary schools : an analysis of the data of school results and results from national tests in 2012]. Oslo: Statistisk sentralbyrå. Utdanningsdirektoratet [Norwegian directorate of education]. 2012. Nasjonale prøver lesing: 8. og 9. steget: Rettleiing til lærarar [National reading tests: grade 8 and 9: Guide for teachers]. Oslo: Utdanningsdirektoratet. Willis, Arlette Ingram. 2008. Reading comprehension research and testing in the U.S.: Undercurrents of race, class and power in the struggle for meaning. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

CHAPTER TEN ASSESSMENT OF LANGUAGE AWARENESS IN MULTILINGUAL FIRST GRADE STUDENTS GUNHILD TVEIT RANDEN

Test results in language awareness indicate that minority students are in danger of developing reading difficulties, while supplementary data show that their reading and writing skills are adequate. I explain this by illustrating how a native-like proficiency in Norwegian is required to perform the test. I then discuss how the nature of language awareness makes it crucial to be assessed in relation to language proficiency, and how assessments based on monolingual norms may mislead teachers and result in their incorrect interpretation of the students’ proficiency.

Introduction During recent years we have seen an increasing demand for the assessment and documentation of students’ skills in schools around the world. In the Norwegian context, national, international and local tests are performed on a regular basis and are, to a large extent, setting the agenda in educational policy. Large-scale assessment with whole classes, or representative selections which are compared to a defined norm, have increased in popularity over the years. In this setting minority students are often targeted as a group which falls short (García, Kleifgen, and Cummins 2010). Such assessment is challenging in several ways, which will be addressed in this paper. The Norwegian law of education (section 2-8) ensures language minority children’s rights to adaptive education in Norwegian until they are sufficiently proficient in Norwegian to attend mainstream schooling. This gives every child individual rights according to his or her level of language proficiency and emphasizes the need for appropriate assessment practices. In Norway today there is no standardized test for assessing

Assessment of Language Awareness in Multilingual First Grade Students 203

minority children’s language ability, and there is no consensus in the field concerning what such an assessment should include. Minority students are therefore, to a large extent, evaluated by tools developed for first language (L1) Norwegian students. This paper is based on my PhD study (Randen 2013), where I investigate the assessment of language ability in five first grade bilingual students, focusing on text competence, vocabulary and language awareness. Initially my aim was to assess the students’ language awareness in order to explain their literacy development. I used an oral language awareness test created for L1 Norwegian students. While analyzing the test results, I realized that there was a contradiction between the test scores and my impression of the student’s language awareness based on the test situation and classroom observation. This discrepancy was also confirmed by interviewing the students’ teachers about their language awareness and by assessing their reading and writing skills. I assumed that this contradiction in results could be related to the students’ status as second language learners of Norwegian. As these students were six years old, some of them “thought out loud”; they talked constantly during the individual test performance. It appeared that the students’ reflections and questions in the test situation could give me useful information about their understanding and interpretation of the tasks. This led me to carry out an explorative analysis based on these conversations, in an attempt to explain the test score. The research question is: How will a test developed for L1 Norwegian students function when used on L2 students, and to what extent can the results of such a test can be considered useful as a basis for educational planning? I will first present the theoretical background which addresses the use of language norms and the relationship between language awareness and language proficiency in the assessment of bilinguals. Further, I will present the assessment tool and the students’ test results, and discuss the results in light of the results of the explorative analysis. Finally, I will present some implications for the assessment of bilingual students

Theoretical background This section will address two issues: 1) the role of norms in testing the language of bilingual students, and 2) the relationship between language awareness and language proficiency based on norms for language testing.

204

Chapter Ten

Norms for language proficiency in bilingual students Many of the tests used in Norwegian schools are norm-based, meaning that a students’ language is compared to expectations of what is usually expected of a child at a given age. According to Glenn Fulcher, normreferenced testing remains the paradigm for externally mandated high stakes tests. (Fulcher 2010). For assessment purposes we need language norms to describe representations of acceptable language. Most tests and assessment tools used in schools are based on a norm or a standard representing the skills of a given target group which shares the same characteristics, e.g. in this case six-year-old students who speak Norwegian as their second language. According to Virginia Mueller Gathercole, Ennli Thomas & Emma Hughes, the norms provided in a standardized test represent the best attempts at a description of the normal language abilities expected of children at different ages and stages learning the language in question (2008, 678). When it comes to the assessment of bilingual students’ language, the notion of language is more complex. When second language (L2) learners’ proficiency is compared to the language norms of native speakers, the language of the second language learner will, in most cases, be considered inadequate (García 2010, 2014, Cenoz and Gorter 2011). Manfred Pineman and Jürg Kessler supports this and turn their attention to the operationalization of language used in tests saying “The measurement of bilingualism requires valid constructs for the notion of ‘language’ and ‘language acquisition’. However, there is no universally agreed and operationalizable set of concepts that can represent these two key notions” (2009, 245). One major issue in the assessment of bilingual students is therefore the selection of norms against which the individual child is evaluated. In order to define expectations for the bilingual child, we need, according to Erika Hoff (2013, 214), to know what normal bilingual development looks like. Defining normal bilingualism is a huge challenge, considering that bilingualism is a very unstable item, influenced by factors like exposure to the languages, the student’s personal experience with the language, the students’ age when exposure to the languages begins, etc. The language proficiency of native speakers is often presented as a norm against which the language of the L2 learner can be compared. Jasone Cenoz and Durk Gorter (2011) are critical about using nativeness as a goal for language learning, claiming, “Traditionally, the reference used as a goal to achieve communicative competence in a second or additional language has been the educated native speaker. However, being

Assessment of Language Awareness in Multilingual First Grade Students 205

an ‘ideal’ native speaker of two or more languages is quite exceptional” (2011, 339). Several researchers speak out against monolingual-based educational programs where bilingual students are expected to master all their languages at the same level as monolinguals master their language (Blackledge and Creese 2010, Garcia 2013, Garcia and Wei 2013, May 2014) and Brown refers to this as the monolingual native speaker benchmark (2013, 220). To date, specific norms for bilingual proficiency are not developed in Norway, and students with varied skills in Norwegian are commonly assessed against norms and with tools developed for students having the test language as their first and only language.

Language awareness and language proficiency To assess students’ language there is a need for a theoretical definition of language proficiency and an operational definition or a norm for language proficiency, in my case for bilingual first grade students. For this purpose the model must be suitable to operationalize language proficiency in general, and at the same time draw attention to aspects of language ability involved in developing reading and writing skills. An important question is whether or not language awareness should be considered a part of language proficiency. Language awareness is often described as a link between oral and written language and is defined as the ability to change perspective from meaning and semantics to linguistic form. Carl James and Peter Garrett (1992) define it as “[…] a person’s sensitivity to and conscious awareness of the nature of language and its role in human life” (1992, 8). Language awareness is generally accepted as a predisposition for the development of alphabetic print (Bialystok 2001; Snow, Burns, and Griffin 1998; Sweet and Snow 2003). My theoretical approach to children’s language ability is based on Lyle Bachman and Adrian Palmer’s model of language use (2010, 36), which involves both linguistic and non-linguistic components. The model is multicomponential, which means that it presents a set of components which together represent a norm for describing language ability as a whole (Bachman and Cohen 1998). Their category language knowledge is divided into two groups: organizational knowledge (syntax, phonology/graphology and vocabulary) and pragmatic knowledge (conversational organization and cohesion). A challenge of using this model as a framework for the assessment of bilingual first grade students was the information needed about the students’ language awareness in each of these areas. Language

206

Chapter Ten

awareness is usually not mentioned in models of language ability. A model that does consider language awareness is Ellen Bialystok’s model of Domains of language use (2001, 16) where she describes language use based on levels of cognitive demands. Her model is based on three broad domains of language proficiency: oral, written and metalinguistic. She explains language acquisition as a consequence of higher degrees of analysis of linguistic knowledge, and control of attention.

Figure 1. Domains of language use (Bialystok 2001, 16)

Bialystok explains language acquisition as a consequence of higher degrees of analysis of linguistic knowledge, and control of attention. Analysis is related to the learners’ mental representation of language, for example ability to identify linguistic units like phonemes, syllables, words and sentences. The other component, control, is related to attention. As I understand Bialystok, the ability to analyze will enable the child to recognize linguistic units, while control is necessary to reflect upon or manipulate these units, for example when playing with language. According to this model, oral language use demands lower degrees of analysis and control than written use, and the metalinguistic domain has the highest demands. Within each of these areas there will be various demands and challenges. I consider children's language awareness as belonging to the metalinguistic domain. Bialystok’s description of language ability also includes some Landmarks of Language Acquisition based on the linguistic categories: lexicon syntax, phonology and pragmatics (2001, 23-31). These categories are also considered in most multicomponential models of language ability, such as in Bachman and

Assessment of Language Awareness in Multilingual First Grade Students 207

Palmer’s, but Bialystok’s model differs from the multicomponential model by including language awareness in the model of language use. This makes it suitable as an operationalization of the topic in question. Language awareness was among the first areas where researchers claimed that bilingual children could have benefits compared to monolinguals (Peal and Lambert 1962, Vygotskij 1962) and several studies show that bilingualism promotes language awareness (Baker 2008, Bialystok 2001, 2006, Bialystok, Craik, and Luk 2008, Jessner 2008, 2006). Bialystok claims: Bilingual children have higher levels of control than monolingual children, so metalinguistic problems based primarily on control will be more easily solved by bilingual children. Some bilingual children, notably those who are biliterate, also have advanced levels of analysis, and these children will have an advantage in solving those metalinguistic problems that are expressly dependent upon that processing skill (Bialystok 1991, 134).

Most of the studies reporting advantages for bilinguals over monolinguals concerning language awareness are based on children having a balanced bilingual development. When it comes to children who have a successive bilingual development, or emergent bilinguals, there has not been as much investigation into the role of language awareness. There is reason to believe that a certain level of proficiency in both or all languages is required for the positive effects to be evident (Baker 2008, Cummins 2000, Cummins and Early 2011). See also Thor Ola Engen (in this book) for a discussion of Cummins’ Thresholds hypothesis. Colin Baker (2000) therefore underlines the need for research concerning how different types of bilingual proficiency affect the development of language awareness.

Methods The participants of this case study are three L1 Russian first grade students, learning L2 Norwegian. Their length of their exposure to Norwegian varies from three years to being born and raised in bilingual families in Norway, and they are all considered sufficiently proficient in Norwegian by their teachers. My data are test results in a language awareness test known as Ringeriksmaterialet (Lyster and Tingleff 2002), documentation of the students reading and writing skills in Norwegian and Russian, and a tape-recording and transcription of the conversations between the student and myself during the performance of the test. I also observed the students in class and interviewed their teachers. In the analysis the different types of data are compared to explain the test scores

208

Chapter Ten

and to shed light on the students’ level of language awareness and development of their literacy skills.

Results The Ringeriksmaterialet test (Lyster and Tingleff 2002) is developed for the assessment of language awareness in children aged between five and seven years old, aiming to reveal potential reading and writing difficulties. It is not developed for the assessment of bilingual students. The reason why I chose to use it in the study was my impression, based on interactions with school teachers, that this test is very much in use, also for bilingual students, together with the fact that there is no appropriate assessment tool for language awareness in bilingual students at present. Ringeriksmaterialet is adapted for students who do not have reading and writing skills. The tasks are presented by a test instructor, often the teacher, and are answered by putting an “x” on a picture representing the right answer or by counting, e.g. syllables or phonemes, and putting one line per item in a box beside the picture. In the analysis I will discuss examples illustrating the case students’ interpretations and reflections regarding the tasks in Ringeriksmaterialet, and to what extent this influences the validity of the test. Ringeriksmaterialet is not scored with a final overall result. The result in each task type is assessed independently. The test developers emphasize that if a score is more than a standard deviation below the mean value for the task, this should be considered a poor result, which can indicate that the student is at risk of developing reading and writing difficulties (1996, 21). Table 1 and 2 show the students’ results. Scores colored light grey are below the mean value of the test, and the results colored dark grey are more than a standard deviation below the mean value. Dark grey results indicate, according to the test instruction, that there is reason to be concerned about reading and writing difficulties. Table 1. Results in phonological awareness

Phonological awareness 1 Rhyme identification 2 Identification of word length 3 Syllable identification

M 9,5

M-SD Sergej Vadim 7,4 11 10 5,2 4,1 6 4 11,9 8,3 13 15

Viktor 9 6 13

Assessment of Language Awareness in Multilingual First Grade Students 209

4 Word onset

8,6

6,7

10

10

8

5 Phoneme deletion

6,3

3,8

7

5

8

6 Phoneme blending

7,7

5,8

9

10

7

7 Phoneme segmentation

3,7

2,0

2

3

1

Below mean value and standard deviation (M-SD) Below mean value (M) The scores in phonological awareness are acceptable for all the three students. Table 2. Results in awareness of words and grammar

Awareness of words and Mgrammar M SD Sergej 8 Memory for word sequences 5,8 3,6 7 9 Homophones 5,9 2,0 10 Word compounds 5,8 3,9 1 11 Analyses of compound words 5,9 3,5 12 Knowledge of compound words 10,8 8,5 8 13 Understanding of grammar 10,5 8,6 9 14 Counting words in sentences 3,1 1,4 3 15 Listening comprehension 15,0 12,5 16 16 Grammaticality judgment test 6,3 4,2 8 Below mean value and standard deviation (M-SD) Below mean value (M)

Vadim Viktor 8 8 6 8 10 4 12 2

4 6 8 9 1 10 5

When it comes to awareness of words and grammar, the scores are worryingly low and would normally indicate that the students have difficulties in acquiring the skills of reading and writing. One exception here is Task 8, Memory for word sequences. This is the only task among these where the words involved are mentioned to the student. The other tasks presuppose that the student knows the meaning of the words represented by pictures in the test. These results do not correspond with my impressions of the students’ skills, and that is why I wanted to validate the results by comparing them with other data. In addition to language awareness, the students’ literacy skills in Norwegian and Russian were assessed by asking the students to perform reading and writing tasks.

Chapter Ten

210

Table 3. Reading and writing skills in L1 and L2

Writes simple words, Norwegian Viktor Sergej Vadim

yes yes yes

Writes simple words, Russian yes yes no

Reads simple words, Norwegian yes yes yes

Reads simple words, Russian yes yes no

As shown in Table 3, the three students can all read and write simple words, adequate for their age, in Norwegian. Viktor and Sergej can also read and write simple words in Russian, using the Cyrillic alphabet. The last student, Vadim, has literacy skills only in Norwegian, but demonstrates knowledge about the Cyrillic alphabet, saying that his name is spelt differently in Russian. He also knows that that some letters in Russian look the same, but represent another ”sound” than in Norwegian, and that some letters look the same and have the same sound.

Explorative analysis Summing up, the results from the assessment of literacy skills show that the three case students are in the process of acquiring reading and writing skills, two of them in two languages with different alphabets. Based on these, the results in language awareness assessed by Ringeriksmaterialet are surprising. Taking onset in language awareness as a condition for learning to read alphabetic print, one would normally expect that lack of language awareness would hinder literacy development, which seems not to be a the case here. Considering this contradiction in results, any interpretation is uncertain.

Phonological awareness The phonological awareness tasks are different from the tasks in word and grammar. The word to be analyzed in each task is mentioned to the student, i.e. the test instructor points at the pictures representing the words while giving the instruction. The explorative analysis demonstrates that the students have very different approaches to solving the tasks in Ringeriksmaterialet, and that they also interpret the tasks differently. Several examples show that the students accomplish tasks despite the fact that they are not familiar with

Assessm ment of Languagge Awareness in n Multilingual F First Grade Stu udents 211

the words ussed. There aree also several examples in tthe material illustrating that studentts solve the tasks t correctly y despite the fact that theey do not know the meeaning of the Norwegian words w involvedd, which illusttrates that the studentss are phonologgically aware,, and that thiss awareness must m have been develloped through L1. Acco ording to Cuummins pho onological awareness hhas a great pottential for bein ng transferredd from one lan nguage to another (20007, 233). Taable 4 below shows a coonversation between a student and myself perforrming a task on o word lengthh. Table 4. Taskk on word lengthh

Researcher:

Which worrd sounds to be the longest of fyrstikkeer (matches) and a hus (house) (poointing)? Student: That one POINTS AT T THE CORR RECT ALTER RNATIVE Researcher: Yes, do youu know what fyrstikker is? Student: No Researcher: Do you knoow what it’s called c in Russian? Student: spiþki (mattches) The student is solving thee task by using g the context, pointing at th he correct picture. He can hear whiich word is th he longer, whhich is an indiication of phonologicaal awareness, but he is not n able to reeproduce the word in Norwegian. This supportss Cummins’ (2 2008) hypotheesis. Word coomprehension in Norwegian n neverthelesss affects the score s also in phonologgical awarenesss tasks, if no ot so much ass in tasks foccusing on awareness of grammarr and vocab bulary. The analysis sho ows that vocabulary knowledge iss crucial if thee student has challenges, e.g. e needs extra time oor repeats the task to himseelf. In such caases, not being g familiar with the woord in questionn will affect the t student’s likelihood off recalling it. Further, there are examples showin ng how the stuudents make their t own alternatives,, whether theyy are real word ds or nonwordds to fit the teest, like in this task on rhyme identiffication:

Chapter Ten

212

Table 5. Task on rhyme identification

Researcher Student

Here we can see mål (goal), nål (needle), ball (ball) and a mark (worm). What rhymes with mål (goal)? A bål (fire)

This strategy leads to a failed task, since the chosen word is not an alternative, nor is it represented by a picture to mark. Nevertheless, it illustrates that the student has mastered the skill in question - identifying the rhyme. Other examples show that students’ use of incorrect strategies in some cases may lead to correct answers, as illustrated by this task on onset deletion. Table 6. Task on onset deletion

Researcher Student Researcher Student

On this line you can see a brann (fire), a seng (bed) and an and (duck). Think of the word land (country) and delete /l/ [PUTS AN X ON CORRECT ANSWER] Yes, that’s an and (duck) And land

In this case the student chooses to use a rhyme strategy instead of deleting the onset. Since the word to delete onset from necessarily will be identical with the correct alternative, except from the onset, rhyming will also lead to the correct answer. This illustrates how choice of strategy can be used to facilitate tasks, which in this case affects test validity, since onset deletion is cognitively more demanding than rhyme. Another question of interest is why the students have low scores in phoneme segmentation, despite the fact that they can all decode alphabetic script and that they, as demonstrated in the task on Word onset, are able to manage identification of phonemes. Assuming phoneme analysis to be a condition for reading alphabetic script, I argue that the students obviously must be mastering the skill in question, which is also confirmed by the assessment of their reading and writing skills, and that the low scores may be caused by other factors. The explorative analysis illustrates that one major challenge here is related to the way of responding to the task. The task is solved by the student counting the number of phonemes in a word given by the test instructor, and putting one line per phoneme in the box beside the picture. The example below shows how the conversation between Vadim and myself went when performing these tasks.

Assessm ment of Languagge Awareness in n Multilingual F First Grade Stu udents 213 Table 7. Taskk on phonemes

Researcher Student

Researcher Student Researcher Student

Researcher Student

[…]then I say munn (mouth) Munn. M. u. u n . mun. I think it’s thrree [CORRECT T ANSWER] Ok, draw thhree lines then Munn. munnn. [DRAWS FIVE F LINES] The next woord is sko (shoe) Sko. Sk. S. ke. no, it’s not that! skoo. I think it is… sko. I think t it is five, I thinkk. Ok… Sko. munn. That’s the same! [DRAWS FIVE F LINES]

We can see that for the word w munn, he knows the rright answer but b draws the wrong nnumber of linees. When it co omes to the w word sko, he concludes c that there arre five sounds//phonemes in the word, butt he also conclludes that it is the sam me as in munn. As I see it, the t student’s pproblem here might be not be dividding the phonemes from eaach other, butt rather countiing them, and putting the correct nuumber of linees in the box. Based on thiss, I argue that solvingg these taskss requires skiills that do nnot concern language awareness, aand that the demand d for ad dditional skillss weakens thee test as a tool for the aassessment off language awaareness.

Awareness on word ds and gram mmar The tasks asssessing awarreness about words w and graammar deman nd higher proficiency in Norwegiaan than the tasks on phoonological aw wareness, mainly by ppresupposing comprehensio on of a huge number of words, w but also by expeecting the student to have a detailed knoowledge of Norwegian N

214

Chapterr Ten

morphologyy and syntax. See Randen 2013 (166-1772) for a discussion of linguistic aand content knowledge presumed p to solve the tasks in Ringeriksmaaterialet. The expllorative analyysis of the con nversations duuring the test confirms that these ttasks are morre challenging g to the studdents for a nu umber of reasons, nonne of which is directly reelated to langguage awaren ness, e.g. demand for word knowledge and dem mand for inteerpretation off pictures. There are hhuge differences between the tasks reggarding comp plexity of words to be analyzed. Thee tasks assessiing compoundd words (See Tasks T 10, 11 and 12 in table 2) use u low frequ uency words bbecause the task t type demands woords than can be compound d in two ways e.g. bilbrann (car fire) and brannbiil (fire truck). Since the wo ords have to bbe compound,, they are also long, w which may reppresent an exttra challenge for students who w have Norwegian aas a second laanguage. Baseed on the studeents’ reflections during the test perrformance, I am under th he impressionn that the dem mand for knowledge oof low frequeency and lingu uistically com mplex words affects the score more tthan lack of morphological m awareness.

Figure 2. Exaamples of homoophones

One of tthe tasks, whiich none of th he case study students com mpleted, is on homophoones. To solvee this task, thee student is suupposed to kno ow which two out of four pictures represent ideentical words, and to put an a “x” on them. To soolve this task, the student needs n to know w the Norweg gian word ringer in tw wo different meanings: m is rin nging (presennt participle off the verb ring) and riings (plural indefinite i of the noun ringg). None of the three students com mpleted these tasks. There were w two reassons for this. Foremost, F they did nott know the words w represen nted in the picctures. The number n of homophoness in Norwegiian is limited d, and in man any cases onee or both meanings off homophoness are low freq quency, e.g. thhe two repressentations of rive: tear and rake. Anoother reason why w these taskks represent challenges

Assessm ment of Languagge Awareness in n Multilingual F First Grade Stu udents 215

is related tto interpretattion of pictu ures. In addiition to know wing the connection bbetween the item i on the picture and thee Norwegian term, the students alsso have to interpret i pictture one aboove, not as the t noun telephone, w which can be hard enough h, consideringg how telepho ones look today, but ass the verb ringging. When iit comes to interpretation n, the syntaactic awareneess tasks involving seentences seem ms to be morre demandingg than those involving i more limitedd linguistic iteems like phon nemes or worrds. The task presented p below is in llistening com mprehension, and the studennt is supposed to put an “x” on the ppicture represeenting the utteerance Gutten skal bygge et hus (The boy will buiild a house).

Figure 3. Listtening comprehhension test

Considerring the picturres it is not ob bvious that thhe boy in pictu ure three, which is thee correct alternnative, is going to build a hoouse. It is also o possible to argue thaat picture fourr could be a possible p soluttion, dependin ng on the individual’s definition on what a completed house shhould look lik ke. An exam mple from a task t on syntactic awarenesss illustrates the t same. The studentt is supposedd to put an “x” on one picture out of four, representingg a sentence given by th he test instrucctor. The sen ntence in question herre is At guttenn knuste koppeen, gjorde mam mma sint (Tha at the boy broke the cuup made mumm my angry). Table 8. Dialoog on syntactic awareness testt

Researcher Student Researcher Student Researcher

That the boyy broke the cu up made mum mmy angry The boy brooke the cup an nd mummy maade angry. [LAUGHTE ER] But where is the boy? IIs that angry? It might be… … Because thaat is happy, an nd that is angryy and that is angry a Yes

216

Student Researcher Student

Chapterr Ten

But not thatt [POINTS AT A THE CORR RECT ALTER RNATIVE] Isn’t that anngry? No. A little angry, maybee?

As the dialoog shows, the student know ws that he is suupposed to loo ok for the boy and anggry, but he is uncertain u whicch picture reprresents angry.. You can also notice tthat angry is illustrated i diffferently in eacch of the threee pictures where mumm my is angry. When it comes to inteerpretation, thee tasks in synttactic awareneess which involve senttences are moore demanding g than those iinvolving morre limited linguistic ittems like phhonemes or words. w In a study of pictures in assessment tests, Elise Seip Tønnesssen and Mag agnhild Vollan (2010) describe thhe relationshiip between text and piccture at fou ur levels, distinguishinng between pictures representing phonnemes or grraphemes, words, utterrances or texxt. While pho onemes and graphemes are a easily definable items, it is moore demandin ng to illustratte utterances and text visually. Acccording to thhis there is reason to expecct children to interpret pictures reprresenting largger linguistic units u differenttly, and they stress the fact that in some educatiional settings the use of am mbiguous picctures can represent ann extra challeenge rather than helping. F For students who w have different life experiencces than the majority, iinterpretation can be particularly challenging. Another hallmark chharacterizing the tasks ffocusing on syntactic awareness (Tasks 13-16 in Table 2) iss that several linguistic feaatures are assessed in each task. Assessing A aw wareness of m multiple items can be useful, contr tributing to iddentifying the better studennts, but in casses where students faill, the rater wiill not have in nformation aboout which tesst unit the students doo not masteer. The folllowing task is on graammatical understandinng, and the sttudent is supp posed to replyy by putting an a “x” on the picture representing Gutten kjøper ballongen e (The boy buys the balloons).

Figure 5. Taskk on grammaticcal understandin ng

Assessment of Language Awareness in Multilingual First Grade Students 217

If the student replies incorrectly to this task, it is impossible to know which linguistic structure has caused the problem, e.g. if the student is unaware of the distinction between singular and plural, or if he or she cannot recognize the present tense of the verb. When the purpose of an assessment is to gather information about the student’s proficiency level for the purpose of adaptive education, a low score on tasks assessing multiple items will not provide detailed information about specific problem areas. The tasks assessing different kinds of syntactic awareness, apart from the tasks in grammar judgment and the task about compound words, are performed by asking the student to put an “x” on a picture representing an utterance or words read by the teacher. This process primarily demands comprehension of the sentence and, to a very small extent, analysis of linguistic knowledge and control of attention, as described in Bialystok’s definition of language awareness. According to Bialystok, paying attention to meaning is the simplest form of attention to linguistic representations (1991, 120). She accordingly defines attention to meaning as evidence of language awareness, but only at a very basic level. In my opinion these kinds of tasks have a quite distant relationship to language awareness, assessing grammatical comprehension rather than awareness, and I therefore question the value of such tasks for this purpose, in particular when the student’s comprehension of the test language has an element of uncertainty Another factor documented by the students’ task solving is the importance of the sample tasks being done together with the teacher before the tasks are performed individually. Several of the sample tasks used in Ringeriksmaterialet are more basic than those that follow, and are in some cases not suitable as examples of the challenges the students will have to overcome in the exercises. For example in the tasks on grammar judgment, the sample task uses an exercise where the sentence to judge is grammatically correct, which makes ungrammatical utterances incomparable until the students meet them in the test performance. There is reason to believe that focusing on ungrammatical utterances in the sample tasks would increase the students’ comprehension of the task type.

Conclusion I conclude that there seem to be several factors not concerning language awareness that affect the degree of success of the language minority students doing this test. What seems to affect the results most is the students’ relationship to the words used in the test: to what extent they are

218

Chapter Ten

known; if they are frequent; and if they have a complex structure. In cases where the student is supposed to manipulate or analyze a word he or she does not know the meaning of, he or she does not have access to the test item. I therefore argue that the test cannot be considered valid, because an additional task, concerning language proficiency rather than language awareness, is added. The last decade’s research on literacy, language awareness, and phonological awareness in particular, has documented a positive correlation between language awareness and literacy development (Lyster 1995, Snow, Burns, and Griffin 1998, Sweet and Snow 2003, Bialystok 2001, 2004, Baker 2008). This emphasizes the need for the assessment of students’ language awareness when attending school. My study clearly illustrates how students’ proficiency in the test language has an impact on test results in language awareness, and makes it uncertain whether the results are to be taken as a demonstrations of the students’ knowledge of the test item or proficiency in the test language. I therefore argue that a norm used for assessment of bilingual students’ language awareness must be seen in interaction with the same students’ proficiency in the test language to gain construct validity. Language awareness is a complex topic which is hard to isolate from other linguistic units. It has a close relationship to language proficiency, and must be considered as an extension of language proficiency, considering that a meta-perspective on linguistic form demands proficiency in using the form (Bialystok 2001, 123-124). An assessment of language awareness must therefore necessarily be seen in relation to the language proficiency of the student, in particular if the student is not a native user of the test language. According to Bialystok, reading will be facilitated no matter what language initial literacy instruction occurs in, if children can establish basic concepts of phonological awareness in any language (2001, 170). This corresponds with Cummins’ claim that phonological awareness is one of five major types of cross-lingual transfer that can be specified and that will operate in varying ways depending on the sociolinguistic and educational setting (2008, 69). The analysis shows that the case study students solved challenges caused by lack of language proficiency by using the context, e.g. by asking for a repetition of words or pointing at pictures without mentioning the words. This, of course, presumes that the student masters the skill in question. I assume that the number of unknown words in each of the tasks will impact the level of complexity for the individual student regardless of the student’s language awareness. This indicates that tasks demanding

Assessment of Language Awareness in Multilingual First Grade Students 219

comprehension of low frequency or complex words or whole sentences will be more demanding for students with limited skills in Norwegian. Bachman and Palmer use the term usefulness concerning assessment tools (1996, 18). By this they discount validity and reliability as stable qualities of given tools, and emphasize that any tool is developed for a specific purpose, for a specific target group, for a specific domain of language, etc. The extent to which an assessment tool is useful must therefore be determined by consideration of these factors in each situation. As my study shows, a test developed for monolingual Norwegian students may create a misleading picture of bilingual students’ proficiency. Ringeriksmaterialet is based on a monolingual norm, expecting the test taker to have Norwegian proficiency adequate to his or her age as a basis for assessing language awareness. When this expected basis is absent, this has considerable consequences for validity or usefulness. I therefore question the operationalization of language awareness expressed through these tasks. Based on Bialystok’s definition of language awareness as analysis of linguistic knowledge and control of attention (2002, 14), one may argue that the operationalization found in Ringeriksmaterialet is mainly based on language comprehension, not on awareness. Majority students who have language proficiency adequate to their age will benefit from such an operationalization, regardless of the language awareness. All this leads me to conclude that Ringeriksmaterialet is not a useful tool for assessing language awareness in second language learners, primarily because it presumes some degree of proficiency in Norwegian. Students who are not sufficiently proficient in Norwegian will not be aware of linguistic structures they have not yet mastered. This has implications for the assessment of bilinguals in general. The educational authorities’ use of monolingual language norms and views on bilingualism are crucial to explain challenges related to this topic. Since the 1970s researchers have turned their attention to the complex nature of bilingualism and called for a more general approach to bilingual proficiency. Such an approach does not consider bilingual persons’ language proficiency as two separate parts, but as interdependent language systems based on common cognitive mechanisms, an approach which is, to a large extent, inspired by the theories of Jim Cummins. More recently an alternative view of bilingualism has gained ground. In 1991 Vivian Cook (1991) introduced the term multicompetence, defined as “the coexistence of more than one language in the same mind”. This view, which supports the idea that multilingual language users are quantitatively and qualitatively different from monolingual language users (Brown 2013,

220

Chapter Ten

220), has had a great impact, particularly among researchers using a sociocultural approach to language. This shift is often referred to as the multilingual turn (Ortega 2014, May 2014). Both the approaches mentioned see bilingualism as a resource, and the bilingual language user as processing different and unique forms of proficiency, and therefore call for distinct assessment practices for bilingual students (Cenoz and Gorter 2015, Garcia 2013, García, Kleifgen, and Cummins 2010).

References Bachman, Lyle F., and Andrew D. Cohen. 1998. Interfaces between second language acquisition and language testing research, The Cambridge applied linguistics series. Cambridge, U.K. ; New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Bachman, Lyle F., and Adrian S. Palmer. 1996. Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Baker, Colin. 2008. "Knowledge about bilingualism and multilingualism." In Knowledge about language, edited by Jasone Cenoz and Nancy H. Hornberger, 315-327. New York, NY: Springer. Bialystok, Ellen. 2001. Bilingualism in development: Language, literacy, and cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. —. 2004. "The impact of bilingualism on language and literacy development." In The handbook of bilingualism, edited by Tej K. Bhatia and William C. Ritchie, 577-602. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub. —. 2006. "Bilingualism at school: Effects on the acqusition of literacy." In Childhood bilingualism: Research on infancy through school age, edited by Peggy McCardle and Erika Hoff, 107-124. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Bialystok, Ellen, Fergus Craik, and Gigi Luk. 2008. "Cognitive control and lexical access in younger and older bilinguals." Journal of experimental psychology: Learning, memory, and cognition 34 (4):859-873. Blackledge, Adrian, and Angela Creese. 2010. Multilingualism: a critical perspective. London: Continuum. Cenoz, Jasone, and Durk Gorter. 2011. "A Holistic Approach to Multilingual Education: Introduction.(Report)." Modern Language Journal 95:339. Cenoz, Jasone, and Durk Gorter. 2015. Multilingual education : between language learning and translanguaging, The Cambridge Applied Linguistics Series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Assessment of Language Awareness in Multilingual First Grade Students 221

Cummins, Jim. 2000. Language, power and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. —. 2008. "Teaching for transfer: Challenging the two solitudes assumption in bilingual education." In Bilingual education, edited by Jim Cummins and Nancy H. Hornberger, 65-76. New York: Springer. Cummins, Jim, and Margaret Early. 2011. Identity Texts : the collaborative creation of power in multilingual schools. London: Trentham Books. Garcia, Ofelia. 2013. "From diglossia to transglossia: Bilingual and multilingual classrooms in the 21. century." In Bilingul and multilingual education in the 21st century, edited by Christian AbelloContesse, Paul M. Chandler, María Dolores López-Jimenez and Rubén Chacón-Beltrán. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. —. 2014. "Multilingualism and Common Core State Standards in the United States." In The Multilingual Turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL and Bilingual Education, edited by Stephen May, 147-166. New York and London: Taylor & Francis. García, Ofelia, Jo Anne Kleifgen, and Jim Cummins. 2010. Educating emergent bilinguals: policies, programs, and practices for English language learners. New York: Teachers College Press. Garcia, Ofelia, and Li Wei. 2013. Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education: Palgrave Pivot. Hoff, Erika. 2013. "Commentary on Issues in the Assessment of Bilinguals and Solutions for the Assessment of Bilinguals." In Solutions for the assessment of bilinguals, edited by Virginia C. Mueller-Gathercole, 213-226. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. James, Carl, and Peter Garrett. 1992. Language awareness in the classroom. London: Longman. Jessner, Ulrike. 2006. Linguistic awareness in multilinguals: English as a third language. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. —. 2008. "Language awareness in multilinguals: Theorethical trends." In Knowledge about language, edited by Jasone Cenoz and Nancy H. Hornberger, 357-369. New York: Springer. Lyster, Solveig-Alma Halaas. 1995. "Preventing reading and spelling failure: the effects of early intervention promoting metalinguistic abilities." Institute for special education, University of Oslo. Lyster, Solveig -Alma H., and Heidi Tingleff. 2002. Ringeriksmaterialet. Oslo: Damm. Machin, David, and Andrea Mayr. 2012. How to do critical discourse analysis: a multimodal introduction: Sage.

222

Chapter Ten

May, Stephen. 2014. "Disciplinary divides, knowlwdge construction and the multilingual turn." In The multilingual turn: implications for SLA, TESOL and bilingual education, edited by Stephen May, 7-31. New York: Routledge. Ortega, Lourdes. 2014. "Ways foreward for a bi/multilingual turn in SLA." In The Multilingual Turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL, and Bilingual Education, edited by May Stephen, 32-53. United Kingdom: Routledge Ltd. Peal, Elizabeth, and Wallace E. Lambert. 1962. The relation of bilingualism to intelligence, Psychological monographs ;. Washington, D.C.: American psychological association. Pienemann, Manfred, and Jörg-U Kessler. 2009. Handbook of multilingualism and multilingual communication, edited by Li Wei and Peter Auer, 247-275. New York, N.Y.: Mouton de Gruyter. Randen, Gunhild Tveit. 2013. "Tilstrekkelige ferdigheter i norsk? Kartlegging av minoritetsspråklige skolebegynneres språkferdigheter. [Sufficiently proficient in Norwegian? Assessment of minority first graders’ language proficiency] "Doktorgradsavhandling, Universitetet i Bergen. Snow, Catherine E., M. Susan Burns, and Peg Griffin. 1998. Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Sweet, Anne Polselli, and Catherine E. Snow. 2003. Rethinking reading comprehension. New York: Guilford Press. Tønnessen, Elise Seip, and Magnhild Vollan. 2010. Begynneropplæring i en sammensatt tekstkultur. Kristiansand: Høyskoleforl. Vygotskij, Lev Semenovic. 1962. Thought and language. New York: Wiley.

SECTION FOUR: DIVERSITY, HISTORY AND RELIGION

CHAPTER ELEVEN A FAREWELL TO THE WORLD? NON-WESTERN HISTORY IN NORWEGIAN CURRICULA MORTEN LØTVEIT

“History teaching in the primary and lower secondary school should not only centre around the white man’s history.” (M74 1974, 179, author's translation)

There are many children with non-European family backgrounds in Norwegian schools. This paper asks whether Norwegian history curricula for primary and lower secondary schools have become more or less inclusive of non-Western topics. A quantitative study of specific learning components in three curricula between 1974 and 2006 suggests, perhaps surprisingly, that there has been a notable reduction of learning components focusing on non-Western history.

Introduction In Norway, as in many other European countries, there are many school children with non-Western family roots. Both society in general and the schools in particular have become increasingly multicultural. Are changes in the cultural backgrounds of the school children reflected in changes in the schools' history curricula? More specifically, have history curricula in Norwegian comprehensive primary and lower secondary schools become more or less focused on non-Western history since the1970s? This is the main question raised in this text. It is not only the increased number of students with non-Western family backgrounds that makes this question relevant. Like other people around the globe, Norwegians have become ever more involved in international and global affairs. Norwegians, like people elsewhere, have also become gradually more influenced by developments in distant regions of the world. It has often been said that

A Farewell to the World? Non-Western History in Norwegian Curricula 225

each new generation needs to rewrite history in order to address its own concerns about the past. In a globalising world, is it not reasonable to expect history as a discipline and as a school subject to reflect the increased global awareness of our own time? Still, and perhaps surprisingly, Norwegian school authorities can hardly be said to have promoted a globally focused history teaching over the last few decades. In order to place this discussion in context and to show how this conclusion has been reached, this text first addresses history as a school subject and as a discipline, and highlights some theoretical considerations on school curricula. Then, Norwegian curricula since the 1970s are introduced, including different viewpoints on the degree to which global and multicultural approaches have been advanced in them. Finally, the methodology and basic concepts of this study are outlined, and the results are presented and discussed. Unless otherwise noted, all translations are my own.

History as a School Subject and as a Discipline A main purpose of history teaching in the Western world from the late 19th century onwards was to develop national identities and strengthen loyalties to the national states (Soysal and Schissler 2005; Lorentzen 2005, 35-103). After World War II, a different kind of history education took shape in Norway. Nation building was in no way abandoned, but the overt nationalism of earlier times was toned down, while the development of international understanding became an additional objective. Still, the history curriculum continued to focus largely on national history, and international topics were almost entirely limited to the Western world (Kirke- og undervisningsdepartementet 1947, 1948; Lund 2016, 52). The history discipline itself has also undergone changes. From focusing largely on political history in the 19th century, social and economic history increasingly came to the fore in the 20th century. (Iggers 1997). Social and economic studies tended nonetheless to be kept within national frameworks. Even if history research on the non-Western world and transnational topics expanded significantly, history research and education around the world was and still is to a very large extent national in character (Hunt 2015). Until a few decades ago, what was called universal history was often largely a history of the West, with some incursions into other parts of the world in cases when they were seen as particularly relevant for our understanding of the West. This was not only due to cultural arrogance, but also to a lack of knowledge about the rest of the world. During the last few decades, however, there has emerged a huge

226

Chapter Eleven

scholarly literature on the history of most parts of the non-Western world. This has made the task of writing genuine world histories more manageable. At the same time, world history has become an increasingly relevant approach for many historians (Moore 1997). Global history often focuses on the interactions between different societies or different parts of the world rather than on societies or continents as discreet units (McNeill and McNeill 2003). Carefully prepared didactical tools for world history in the schools have been developed, particularly in the United States (NCHSUCLA/SDSU n.d.; Symcox 2002, 111-114). According to Peter N. Stearns (2011, 191): “The rise of world history constitutes the most significant change in history teaching for the past half century, if not more. It follows from equally important changes in the world around us.” Given the relevance of global history, would it not be more apposite to ask whether history curricula focus on cross-cultural interaction and involve global perspectives, rather than question the extent to which they involve non-Western societies? However relevant this objection may seem, it should be noted that it is possible to emphasise cross-cultural interaction without adopting a global perspective or focusing on nonWestern societies. Cross-cultural approaches as such should not be confused with global history, or with non-Western history. Furthermore, even texts which purport to be works of world history or truly global in scope, may in some instances turn out to be quite Eurocentric. The place of non-Western history in school curricula should therefore be addressed quite directly.

Curricula–Some Theoretical Considerations Ivor F. Goodson and Colin J. Marsh (1996, 1) consider school subjects as “the most quintessential of social and political constructions.” Alistair Ross (2000) believes that one of the key questions in curricular analysis is to consider how a particular selection of the culture in a given society is chosen for inclusion in the curriculum. This selection both reflects the distribution of power in society as well as its principles of social control. For Ross, however, this does not represent a simple or deterministic model of reproduction of the dominant ideology. Society, Ross underlines, no longer has a clear or unequivocal culture, if it ever did. In formulating a new national curriculum, someone must, in one way or another, decide that certain cultural artefacts shall be given attention and imparted to all children, while other cultural artefacts are excluded from formal education.

A Farewell to the World? Non-Western History in Norwegian Curricula 227

Claudia Matus and Cameron McCarthy (2003) believe that mainstream educational thinkers, confronted with globalisation and new electronic media, have tended to draw a clear line between the established school curriculum on the one hand, and the hybrid cultural expressions that young people experience in daily life outside of the school on the other hand, thereby encouraging homogeneity and normalisation. Matus and McCarthy criticize Eurocentrism in particular, but also other forms of ethnocentrism. They point out: “…mainstream theorists …propose that curriculum reform should take the form of content addition to the dominant Eurocentric core curriculum, adding selectively from the stock of knowledge and experiences associated with minority groups” (2003, 77). Matus and McCarthy, for their part, regard cultures and identities as products of “human encounters, the inventories of cross-cultural appropriation and hybridity, not the elaboration of the ancestral essence of particular groups” (2003, 77). This perspective is relevant when discussing the basic question raised in this paper, which may easily be understood as an invitation to make “content addition to the dominant Eurocentric core curriculum,” i.e. to add some more non-Western history to a curriculum which primarily is focused on Western history. This paper, however, seeks first and foremost to stimulate discussions, not to ordain ready-made remedies.

Norwegian Curricular Regulations since 1974 Since 1974, there have been four curricular regulations for primary and lower secondary schools in Norway. The Mønsterplan of 1974 (M74 in short, Curriculum Guidelines for Compulsory Education of 1974) was a so-called framework plan which gave ample freedom to teachers and local school authorities to define the curriculum within certain parameters (M74 1974; Tønnesen 2011). The revised Mønsterplan of 1987 (M87 in short) was structured in a similar way as M74. As to social studies, though, interdisciplinary integration, which had been largely voluntary in M74, now became mandatory. History, together with geography, civic life and the natural sciences were integrated into the socalled orienteringsfag (orienteering subjects) for grades 1-6. In social studies for grades 7-9, the disciplinary boundaries between history, geography and civic life were largely broken down. The basic approach was thematic rather than disciplinary (M87 1987). The National Curriculum for Primary and Lower Secondary Schools of 1997 (L97 in short) signalled a return to tighter central control and clearer

228

Chapter Eleven

disciplinary foci. It reintroduced the disciplinary divisions between social studies and natural sciences and between history, geography and civic life within the social studies. L97 gave the local school boards and teachers far less freedom with respect to both teaching content and modes of teaching (L97 1996). The Curriculum of the Knowledge Promotion Reform, implemented in 2006 (LK06 in short), was based on the notion that education should be managed by clear objectives, not by centrally prescribed procedural management. It signalled high ambitions, but implied increased local freedom with regard to teaching and learning methods. There have been a number of changes in LK06 since 2006, and this is in particular true with regard to social studies. In this text, though, LK06 refers to the original, although temporary curriculum of 2006 (LK06 2006). With the exception of L97, the curricula have afforded the school boards and teachers relatively wide margins when it comes to deciding central parts of both the content and the methods of teaching. Thus, to the extent that they have wished to pay attention to non-Western history, they have had and still have opportunities to do so. Yet, to have the opportunities to do something is quite different from being led, guided or induced to do it. As Liv Kari B. Tønnesen (2011) indicates, Norwegian local school boards and teachers have previously implemented the curricular regulations that the authorities design.

Global and Multicultural Approaches in Norwegian Curricula What have scholars written about the place of non-Western history in the abovementioned curricula? Not much indeed. Shortly before the promulgation of LK06, Halvard Eikeland (2004) wrote a research report on intercultural learning in history education, focusing on L97 and German curricula. Eikeland describes the perspective in the history curriculum of L97 as predominantly national and Eurocentric. Non-Europeans were for the most part only interesting when they interacted with Europeans. Eikeland regards both the local and the global foci of history education to have been weakened in L97 compared to M87. Knut Kjeldstadli shares Eikeland’s view on L97 in this respect: “The national history is prioritized on all levels. When referring to non-Norwegian history, the primary school curriculum follows the prevailing ‘relay race’ - from the river valley cultures to Greece and Rome, and then to Europe and the West” (1999, 283).

A Farewell to the World? Non-Western History in Norwegian Curricula 229

Other educational researchers, who address L97 as a whole, not the history curriculum as such, appear to have reached similar or concurrent conclusions. Alfred Oftedal Telhaug and Odd Asbjørn Mediås (2003) believe that Gudmund Hernes, Minister of Education, Research and Church Affairs in the early 1990s and the main architect behind L97, “established a clear program for cultural and social nation building. Protection of the Norwegian cultural heritage, a heritage which he considered as ‘glue’ in the integration process, went together with the protection and the expansion of the primary and lower secondary school as a comprehensive (unitary) school” (2003, 432). Rune Slagstad underlines that one of the central motives of Hernes’ reforms concerned the creation of identities, “to give each and every one a belonging in a larger cultural community, the national, the Christian humanistic, the European, if you like” (2006, 239). Also Tove Aarsnes Baune (2007) has underlined the significance of the cultural heritage in L97 as a tool for dannelse (education, refinement, breeding) and development of a national identity. Svein Lorentzen (2005), however, writing about nation building and text books, appears to have reached a different conclusion, even if it is not entirely clear which part or parts of L97 he is referring to: “The formerly quite conspicuous national perspective is more and more balanced against local and global perspectives, while new issues such as environmental protection, [gender] equality and knowledge about the multicultural society force their way forward” (2005, 173). LK06 does not appear to have been as hotly disputed as L97 when it comes to the balance between local, national, European/Western and global perspectives. Perhaps, as indicated by Jens Aage Poulsen (2013), LK06 is not necessarily more Western or more national in its orientation than other Northwest European history curricula. Still, in itself, that does not tell us very much. A prominent Norwegian scholar of didactics of history, Erik Lund (2016), believes curricula with a global reach are necessary in order to foster historical consciousness. Such an understanding, he maintains, is at odds with “new national curricula which meet their multinational societies and the global challenge with a stronger emphasis on national history, as is the case in England and Denmark, among others” (2016, 48). In contrast, according to Lund, “Norway has become a part of the world” with regard to history curricula. “In an international perspective, recent revisions of the curricula in primary and secondary school have not been influenced by a stronger national emphasis, as has been the case in other countries” (2016, 53). Still, Lund does not discuss the question in much detail. We should note that he contrasts national with global foci in the curricula, not Western with non-

230

Chapter Eleven

Western foci. In contrast to the discussion in this paper, he includes the curricula of the upper secondary school in his evaluation. What is the authorities' own view of how multicultural perspectives have been handled in LK06? In Norway, the Directorate for Education and Training, a central institution in developing curricula, admitted that with regard to LK06 “there was no explicit requirement that the multicultural perspective should be attended to”. Still, the Directorate pointed out: “Among the general curricula, it is the curriculum in social studies that most explicitly emphasizes cultural diversity and a multicultural perspective” in many of its parts (Norwegian Ministry of Education and Researcn 2010, 168). We should note, therefore, that the Directorate considers social studies, in which history constitutes one of three parts, as the Norwegian school subject with the most explicit emphasis on cultural diversity. What has been written above indicates that research relating to whether the perspectives of history curricula in Norwegian schools have become more or less global/multicultural during the latter decades has been quite limited, and that no consensus has been reached so far.

Methodology and Concepts Curricula are seldom, if ever, unambiguous texts. They have to be interpreted. Different curricula are, moreover, structured and formulated differently. With regard to history, we may find objectives formulated at four levels: general objectives in the general parts of the Norwegian curricula, general objectives in the introductions to the social studies curricula, general objectives in the introductions to the history subject in the curricula, and then finally, the lowest and most specific level, which contains the objectives which teachers probably most frequently consult when planning their lessons. The objectives at the different levels are not always wholly congruent. Curricula may thus often be more suitable for qualitative than for quantitative research. The best solution would perhaps in many cases be to combine qualitative and quantitative analyses. However, the space of this text does not permit such a far-reaching examination. This study is therefore limited to a quantitative analysis of the place of non-Western history in the parts of the curricula which deal with the specific topics or learning objectives of history education. As the curricula are formulated and structured differently, the parts of the curricula examined in this study are categorized as learning components. In M74 they are found under the rubric of veiledende årsplaner (guiding annual plans). They consist of subject matters,

A Farewell to the World? Non-Western History in Norwegian Curricula 231

formulated in short phrases and keywords, for example “Ancient Greece: Myths and Legends. The Olympic Games. Form of government. Art.” (M74 1974, 183, grade 5). The subject matters are divided into yearly parts. For each grade, from the 4th to the 9th grade, there are particular topics that the authorities suggest that the students should study. In M87 the learning components are organized somewhat differently. Due to its interdisciplinary character, however, it is inappropriate for the kind of quantitative study outlined here. It is therefore not included in the comparison in this text. In L97, the learning components are found under the rubric of hovudmoment (main subject elements), formulated as actions that the students should have the opportunity to take, for example to “seek information about the bronze age and the iron age in Norway ...” (L97 Eng. 1999, 193, grade 5). These learning components are divided into yearly parts, from grade 5 to grade 10. The difference between the grade 4 to grade 9 arrangement in M74 and the grade 5 to grade 10 arrangement in L97 in this study is due to the fact that from 1997 the children began their school careers at the age of six, and not at the age of seven, as before. Simultaneously, the mandatory comprehensive primary and lower secondary education was extended from nine to ten years. Thus, the 4th to 9th graders of M74 belong to the same age groups as the 5th to 10th graders of L97, and LK06. L97, certainly, has a social studies curriculum for all ten grades, while M74 only has a social studies curriculum for grades 4 to 9. Still, it is first from grade 4 in M74 and grade 5 in L97 that history is explicitly defined as a part of the social studies curriculum. In LK06, on the other hand, history is explicitly defined as a part of the curriculum from grade 1. Here, the learning components are formulated as competence aims, organized in triennial parts. They describe what students should be able to do after completing the studies, for example to “prepare visual presentations of two or more early river cultures using digital tools” (LK06, 122, grade 7, translated by Utdanningsdirektoratet 2010, 7). To have comparable sets of learning components, this study is limited to those enclosed in grade 4 to grade 9 in M74 and grade 5 to grade 10 in L97 and LK06. There are at least two challenges in making pointed comparisons. First, it is difficult to design categories which highlight all the relevant nuances and combinations of nuances in the various learning components without ending up with fragmented and possibly confusing, outcomes. Hence, a compromise has had to be reached. In this study, a model with six categories has been designed (see Figure 1), in addition to a simplified model consisting of three categories. Furthermore, a simplified model with

232

Chapter Eleven

two of the original categories left out has also been created (see Figures 2 and 3 below). Second, there may in some cases be room for discussions as to what learning components should to be placed in what categories. Here, a balanced assessment of all the learning components is necessary in order to avoid a biased distribution of them in the categories designed. Even so, there will unavoidably be a subjective element involved in the way a scholar chooses to distribute components. Another scholar with the same basic intention might end up with at a slightly different result (a few examples will be discussed below). Thus, even if quantitative, this study is not portended to be exact science. Rather, it is intended to throw light on and foment discussions about the place of non-Western history in Norwegian history curricula. The changes in the way the learning components have been formulated from M74, via L97 to LK06 are marked by both increased didactical complexity and increased ambition. During the same period, the number of learning components has been markedly reduced. Are these learning components, so different in numbers, forms, and compulsoriness, comparable? That may depend on what one compares. With regard to what societies, and what parts of the world the authorities expect or suggest that teachers highlight in their history classes, these curricula may be in fact be compared. However, as the numbers of learning components in the various curricula diverge, it is necessary to reckon, first and foremost, the shares of learning components in the various categories in the various curricula, not their absolute numbers. Non-Western in this context means the whole world except for Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Certainly, with regard to many historical periods, it is problematic to consider Eastern Europe and Russia as parts of the Western world. However, here we understand Western in a broad sense, as the European world and the most Europeanized parts of the non-European world. Another question is how Western history should be delimited temporarily (Stearns 2003). For the sake of simplicity, it is supposed that the authors of the curricula have seen Greece and Rome in Antiquity as the starting point of European and Western history. Thus, if there are no indications in the curricula that these themes should be considered otherwise, they are regarded as parts of Western history while for example old Mesopotamia and Egypt are considered parts of non-Western history. Over time, interaction between different parts of the world has increased both in scope and intensity. Interaction between Western and non-Western societies or groups raise problems with regard to how we

A Farewell to the World? Non-Western History in Norwegian Curricula 233

may distinguish Western from non-Western history. To what extent a given topic may be considered Western, non-Western, cross-cultural or global does not only depend on the topic itself, but on the perspective or perspectives applied. A history of “the great voyages” may focus on the European background, expectations, or objectives of the expeditions, or they may focus on the people and societies the Europeans met. Perhaps the intercultural encounters or the evolving structures of global interactions are in focus. Whether a topic should be considered Western, non-Western, or global/transcontinental/ cross-cultural depends on the actors, societies, structures or processes that are highlighted. In this study, topics which involve interaction between Western and non-Western societies and actors have been placed in a separate category if the curricula clearly indicate that both Western and non-Western perspectives shall apply. A division between learning components focusing on a) Western, b) non-Western, and c) Western - non-Western interactional themes will not, however, be sufficient to describe and analyse the curricula. In some cases the focus is on general themes, concepts, or questions, or on disciplinary/procedural skills, with no reference to time or space. Some learning components also offer opportunities to involve non-Western examples or topics, even though their main focus appears to be on the Western world. Therefore, based on the discussion above, the following categories of learning components have been designed in this study: A. The focus is mainly and explicitly on non-Western societies, actors and/or phenomena B. The focus is partly and explicitly on non-Western societies, actors and/or phenomena C. The focus is on Western history, on general or methodical/disciplinary topics with reference to Western history, or on institutions or phenomena usually related to Western history D. The same as C, with the exception that the topics or phenomena in question may involve some degree of attention to non-Western societies, groups or individuals E. The focus is on general or global topics and/or concepts F. The focus is on disciplinary/procedural skills and knowledge, with no reference to time and space As pointed out above, it may be open to discussion how the various learning components should be distributed in these categories. Take for example the following component: “find fundamental features and different views of imperialism as an economic and political system; consider the

234

Chapter Eleven

consequences of European, American and Japanese imperialism” (L97 Eng. 1999, 197, grade 8). Should this component be placed under the category “The focus is partly and explicitly on non-Western societies, actors and/or phenomena,” or under the category “The focus is on general and global topics and/or concepts”? This learning component may be considered both global in scope and related to a general concept imperialism. Still, it has been placed under the first category, because of its explicit reference to Japanese imperialism, and because it seems virtually impossible to approach the component seriously without addressing specific consequences of imperialism in the non-Western world.” Another example is the following: “explain technological and social changes due to the industrial revolution” (LK06, 123, grade 10, translated by Utdanningsdirektoratet 2010, 8). Is this a Western history topic, a predominantly Western history topic which may also involve some non-Western history, or is it perhaps a general topic? Many teachers may interpret this as a basically Western history topic, as the industrial revolution took place in Britain and first spread to parts of Western Europe and the USA. Still, the technological and social changes resulting from the industrial revolution were global in scope. Thus, this component is in this study regarded as a predominantly Western history topic which may also involve non-Western history.

Findings This study shows (see Figure 1) that there is a notable decrease in the share of learning components with a main focus on non-Western history, from 20% in M74 to 4% in L97 and LK06. Second, with regard to learning components in which the focus is partly on non-Western societies and/or actors, we see a reverse U-curve, from 7% in M74, via 15% in L97, to 8% in LK06. In total, there has been a relatively clear reduction in the shares of learning components focusing entirely or partly on non-Western history, from 27% in M74, via 19% in L97 to 12% in LK06. We may expect that the weakening of the focus on non-Western history is correlated with a strengthening of Western history in the curricula. However, this is not the case. Instead we see a reverse U-curve in which learning components with a main focus on Western history (C/C+D in Figure 1) have gone from 52/61% in M74 via 58/73% in L97 to 42/46% in LK06.

A Farew well to the World? Non-Western History in N Norwegian Curricula 235

70

A - Mainly non nW Western histo ory

58

60 5 52

B - Partly nonW Western histo ory

50 42 2

C - Western history

40 29

30 20 20 10

15 15 7

11 9

8

8

4

4

0

4

0

0 M M74

13

LL97

D - Western, but b may aalso involve nonW Western histo ory E - General to opics

F - Disciplinaryy focus

LK K06

o learning coomponents in Norwegian N Figure 1. Peercentage of diifferent types of history curriccula. 1

Thus, in facct, not only noon-Western, but also Westeern history has become less visible in the historyy curricula bettween 1974 aand 2006 (see Figure 1 and 2). Stilll, Western history has a faar stronger pllace than non n-Western history in all of the curricula. The reduuction of botth non-Westerrn and Westeern history to opics, but particularly the latter, muust be related to the followiing: In LK06 there are many learniing componennts focusing on o disciplinaryy/procedural skills s and knowledge, with no referrence to timee and space. T These have gone from 0% in M74 and L97 to 299% in LK06. They T highlighht significant didactical d changes in LK06 (Skram m, 2011; Lun nd, 2009). Wiith respect to o learning componentss with a focus on general orr global topiccs and/or conccepts, we

1

Absolute/reelative numberrs: M74 A=11//20, B=4/7, C= =28/52, D=5/9 9, E=6/11, F=0/0; L97 A A=1/4, B=4/15, C=15/58, D=4//15, E=2/8, F=00/0; LK06 A=1 1/4, B=2/8, C=10/42, D=1/4, E=3/13, F= =7/29.

Chapter Eleven

236

80

73

70 61

A - Mainly and partly nonWestern history

60 50

46 42

40 30

B - Mainly Western history

27 C - General and disciplinary topics

19

20 11 10

12 8

0 M74

L97

LK06

Figure 2. Percentage of non-Western, Western, and general and disciplinary topics in Norwegian history curricula.2

see a U-curve starting at 11% in M74, falling to 8% in L97, and rising to 13% in LK06, a slightly higher level than in M74 The apparent “neutrality” of the learning components focusing on disciplinary/procedural skills and knowledge may mask certain “realities on the ground.” Here it is necessary to take a short detour from the formal to the operational curriculum in Goodlads’ terms. This detour is not based on research, but on qualified guesswork. When students work with the learning components in LK06 focusing on disciplinary/procedural competence, such as for example to present a historical event from different ideological viewpoints (LK06, grade 10), these may be considered learning objectives without reference to specific historical events or processes. Still, one or more historical examples are needed to develop the competence in question. As the central objective regards historical thinking, it would seem didactically advisable to use examples that the 2

A corresponds to A+B, B to C+D, and C to E+F in Figure 1.

A Farewell to the World? Non-Western History in Norwegian Curricula 237

students are familiar with. It is reasonable to believe that these in many cases will be taken from Norwegian or Western history, as these constitute the mainstay of the non-disciplinary part of the history curriculum of LK06. Also when exploring historical sources in order to show, among other things, how they may give different information about the past (LK06, grade 7), another important competence aim, it may seem reasonable to choose sources written in Norwegian and mostly on relatively familiar Norwegian topics. Thus, the new focus on historical thinking skills and methodology in LK06 may therefore tend to strengthen the emphasis on national and Western history. This, certainly, could be a dilemma for history teachers who wish to develop both the students' historical thinking skills and their attention to the non-Western world. Furthermore, some of the learning components in Norwegian and Western history in LK06 are thematically comprehensive and potentially time-absorbing. For this reason, it would probably seem rational for many teachers to integrate the teaching of general themes, concepts and disciplinary skills with the teaching of Norwegian and Western history. Still, raising intriguing questions about one curriculum on the operational level invites similar questions about other curricula on the same level. M74, for example, have a number of learning components on non-Western history. However, the curriculum is very encompassing and in practical terms largely advisory. It was more or less taken for granted that certain parts of it had to be excluded on the operational level. Is it not likely that the parts most prone to being excluded from the history teaching were those which dealt with the non-Western world? First, the teachers' education probably made them less prepared to teach these topics than many other ones. Second, many teachers, students, as well as administrators and parents, may have felt that non-Western history lay outside of the boundaries of what history education should include. This makes it pertinent to move away from qualified guesswork about the operational curricula, and return to the formal ones. What are the signals from the educational authorities when it comes to the emphasis on Western and non-Western history? If we completely remove the general and disciplinary topics from the analysis (see Figure 3), we find the same marked reduction as noted above in non-Western history from M74 to L97 and LK06, although the reduction from M74 to L97 is, in relative terms, somewhat larger than the reduction from M74 to LK06. Learning components which partly focus on non-Western history increase in relative terms from M74 to L97, but are then somewhat reduced in LK06. In total, 31% of the learning components in M74 and 21% of the learning

Chapter Eleven

238

components in L97 and LK06 are partly or mainly concerned with nonWestern history. 90 79

80

79

69

70 60

A - Mainly nonWestern history

50

B - Partly nonWestern history

40 30

23 17

20 10

8

14

C - Mainly Western history

7

4

0 M74

L97

LK06

Figure 3. Percentage of non-western and western topics in Norwegian history curricula, excluding general and disciplinary topics.3

Likewise, 69% of the learning components in M74 and 79% of the learning components in L97 and LK06 are mainly concerned with Western history. Thus, all of the curricula are strongly focused on Western history. M74, nonetheless, affords a noteworthy place to non-Western history in its own right and irrespective of its relationship to Western history. In L97 and LK06 this sort of learning components is marginalised. There is a certain increase in components focusing partly on non-Western history, but not in any way strong enough to signal a shift towards a global history perspective. In this reckoning, in contrast to the simplified comparison 3

A is based on the same absolute numbers as in A in Figure 1 (respectively 11, 1, 1), B on the same absolute numbers as in B in Figure 1 (respectively 4, 4, 2), and C on the same absolute numbers as in C + D in Figure 1 (respectively 33, 19, 11).

A Farewell to the World? Non-Western History in Norwegian Curricula 239

above, there is a clear correlation between the decrease of learning components focusing mainly on non-Western history, and the increase of learning components focusing mainly on Western history from M74 to L97 and LK06. The greatest change came with L97, not with LK06.

Closing Remarks Does this change signal a farewell to the world in the Norwegian school history curricula? To some degree, yes, it does. On the other hand, all the curricula are strongly focused on the Western world. A study of the curriculum in force before M74, the Normalplan of 1939, would probably show that non-Western history was afforded even less place there than in L97 and LK06. Thus, perhaps we would discover a relatively continuous marginalisation of non-Western history in Norwegian history curricula, with M74 as a deviation in this respect. Nonetheless, it is worthwhile to ask why M74 did not become the beginning of a new broader outlook. To answer this question, a detailed study of the history of curricula construction in Norway during the last fifty years or so would be necessary. This goes far beyond the scope of this study. However, in order to suggest avenues for future research, a few observations may be presented. First, responses to globalisation may vary over space and time in a number of policy areas, among them education. Thus, we cannot take it for granted that curricula, without further ado, will become continuously more globally focused. In order to understand curricula, we need to understand the specific political and social processes in which they were formed. Ironically, the makers of curricula themselves may be influenced by shifting international or global trends regarding national and cultural area (e.g., Western) concerns versus global and multicultural perspectives. The 1990s in particular appear to have been a period when the political establishment in many Western societies wished to underline national and Western values and history teaching in school curricula (Buk-Berge, 2005; Dunn 2000; Symcox and Wilshut 2009). This also seems to have been the case with L97. Second, during the last few decades many scholars of history didactics have been preoccupied with integrating critical historical thinking skills into the curriculum. Even though they may largely have been in favour of a more globally oriented history education than the ones in force, the most pressing concern for them, it seems, has not been the historical content as such, but rather how students approach historical topics. They have proposed that students to some extent should emulate the procedues of professional historians. In short, students should learn how to research,

240

Chapter Eleven

analyse and discuss the past, not merely to memorise standardised texts (Symcox and Wilshut 2009). These concerned scholars appear around the turn of the millennium to have found convenient fellow travellers in the originators of LK06, who emphasised skills and competences rather than old-fashioned bookish learning. The result was a small revolution in the history curriculum of 2006 (Skram 2011; Lund 2009). These developments, however, may have overridden any concern for placing non-Western history on the table. A third observation relates to what we may term “the hidden canon” or “the tradition” of history teaching in Norwegian schools. Although the historical topics in LK06 are quite general and open, the curriculum nevertheless contains guidelines with clear Western and national foci. In the classrooms, these foci may be strengthened by senior teachers who prefer to concentrate on many of the same topics as they did while L97 was in force. The topics which the teachers themselves were familiarised with at schools and colleges may also have contributed to their understanding of the curriculum. Likewise, parents, politicians, school bureaucrats and other interested parties have, based on their own learning experiences, some notions of what they consider “normal” history topics in Norwegian schools. Certainly, even if changes have been introduced and accepted, for example as regards increased attention to social history and everyday life, “the hidden canon” or “the tradition” may still be a sticky matter. To the extent that new topics are introduced as additions rather than as replacements for other topics, they will probably leave teachers, who already have too many history topics on the table, frustrated. This, perhaps, was the case of many of the non-Western history topics in M74, and this may have been one among many reasons why so many of them were left out in later curricula.

References Baune, Tove Aarsnes. 2007. Den skal tidlig krøkes … Skolen i et historisk perspektiv. [Early Practice Makes ... The School in a Historical Perspective]. Oslo: Cappelen akademisk. Buk-Berge, Elisabeth. 2005. “History war i 1990 årene i USA - kampen mellom H og h.” [History War in the 1990s in the US - the Struggle between H and h]. Utbildning & Demokrati 14 (2): 73-98. Dunn, Ross E. 2000. “The Making of a National Curriculum: The British Case.” The History Teacher 33 (3): 395-398. Eikeland, Halvard. 2004. “Historieundervisning og interkulturell læring: En analyse av norske og tyske læreplaner, norske lærebøker og av

A Farewell to the World? Non-Western History in Norwegian Curricula 241

erfaringer fra norsk skole.” [The Teaching of History and Intercultural Learning: An Analysis of Norwegian and German Curricula, Norwegian Textbooks and of Experiences from Norwegian Schools]. Rapport 8, 2004, Tønsberg, Høgskolen i Vestfold. www-bib.hive.no/tekster/hveskrift/rapport/2004-08/rapp8_2004.pdf Goodson, Ivor F., and Colin J. Marsh. 1996. Studying School Subjects. London: The Falmer Press. Hunt, Lynn. 2015. Writing History in the Global Era. New York: W. W. Norton & Co. Iggers, George G. 1997. Historiography in the Twentieth Century: From Scientific Objectivity to the Postmodern Challenge. Middletown: Wesleyan University Press. Kirke- og undervisningdepartementet. 1947. Normalplan (Mønsterplan) for landsfolkeskulen. [Curriculum Guidelines for Compulsory Primary Schools in Rural Areas]. Utarbeidd ved Normalplannemda oppnemd av Kyrkje- og undervisningsdepartementet. Oslo: Kyrkje- og undervisningsdepartementet og Aschehoug. —. 1948. Normalplan for byfolkeskolen. [Curriculum Guidelines for Compulsory Primary Schools in Urban Areas]. Utarbeidd ved Normalplankomiteen oppnevnt av Kirke- og undervisningsdepartementet. Oslo: Kirke- og undervisningdepartementet og Aschehoug. Kjeldstadli, Knut. 1999. Fortida er ikke hva den en gang var: En innføring i historiefaget. [The Past Is Not What It Once Was: An Introduction to the Discipline of History].Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Kunnskapsdepartementet. 2010. “8.8.1 Flerkulturelt perspektiv og kulturelt mangfold i læreplanene.” In Mangfold og mestring. Norges offentlige utredninger (NOU) 2010:7. ["8.8.1 Multicultural Perspectives and Cultural Diversity in the Curricula." In Diversity and Mastering. Official Norwegian Report 2010:7.]. http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/kd/dok/nouer/2010/NOU-20107/9/8.html?id=606285 L97. Det kongelige kirke-, utdannings- og forskningsdepartement. 1996. Læreplanverket for den 10-årige grunnskolen. [See L97 Eng.]. Oslo: Det kongelige kirke-, utdannings- og forskningsdepartement. L97 Eng. The Royal Ministry of Education, Research, and Church Affairs. 1999. The Curriculum for the 10-year Compulsory School in Norway. Oslo: The Royal Ministry of Education, Research, and Church Affairs. http://www.nb.no/nbsok/nb/eeb606a971da3830a51ada32c54d2f96?ind ex=1#0

242

Chapter Eleven

LK06. Utdanningsdirektoratet. 2006. Læreplanverket for Kunnskapsløftet. [The Curriculum of the Knowledge Promotion Reform]. Midlertidig utgave juni 2006. Oslo: Utdanningsdirektoratet. Lorentzen, Svein. 2005. Ja, vi elsker … Skolebøkene som nasjonsbyggere 1814-2000. [Yes, We Love ... The Textbooks as Nation-Builders 18142000]. Oslo: Abstrakt. Lund, Erik. 2009. Historiedidaktikk: En håndbok for studenter og lærere. [History Didactics: A Handbook for Students and Teachers]. 3. utg. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. —. 2011. Historiedidaktikk: En håndbok for studenter og lærere. [History Didactics: A Handbook for Students and Teachers]. 4. utg. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. —. 2016. Historiedidaktikk: En håndbok for studenter og lærere. [History Didactics: A Handbook for Students and Teachers]. 5. utg. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. M74. Kirke- og undervisningdepartementet. 1974. Mønsterplan for grunnskolen. [Curriculum Guidelines for Compulsory Education]. Bokmål. Oslo: Kirke- og undervisningsdepartementet og Aschehoug. M87. Kirke- og undervisningsdepartementet. 1987. Mønsterplan for grunnskolen. [See M87 Eng.] Bokmål. Oslo: Kirke- og undervisningsdepartementet og Aschehoug. M87 Eng. The Ministry of Education and Research. 1990. Curriculum Guidelines for Compulsory Education in Norway M87. Oslo: The Ministry of Education and Research and Aschehoug. http://www.nb.no/nbsok/nb/49af3f8699bc5856505a550443d8308b#0 Matus, Claudia, and Cameron McCarthy. 2003. “The Triumph of Multiplicity and the Carnival of Difference: Curriculum Dilemmas in the Age of Postcolonialism and Globalization.” In International Handbook of Curriculum Research, edited by William F. Pinar, 73-82. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. McNeill, John R., and William H. McNeill. 2003. The Human Web: A Bird's-eye View of World History. New York: W. W. Norton & Co. Moore, Robert I. 1997. “World History.” In Companion to Historiography, edited by Michael Bentley, 941-959. London: Routledge. NCHS-UCLA/SDSU (The National Center for History in the Schools at UCLA in cooperation with San Diego State University). n.d. World History for Us All. Accessed February 20, 2018. http://worldhistoryforusall.ss.ucla.edu/

A Farewell to the World? Non-Western History in Norwegian Curricula 243

Poulsen, Jens Aage. 2013. “What about Global History? Dilemmas in the Selection of Content in the School Subject History.” Education Sciences 3 (4): 403-420. doi:10.3390/educsci3040403. Ross, Alistair. 2000. Curriculum: Construction and Critique. London: Falmer Press. Skram, Harald Frode 2011. "Historiefaget i Kunnskapsløftet: Dyktiggjøre og bevisstgjøre." [The History Subject in the Curriculum of the Knowledge Promotion Reform: To Prepare and Make Conscious]. Acta Didactica Norge 5 (1): 1-29. https://www.journals.uio.no/index.php/adno/article/view/1063 Slagstad, Rune. 2006. Kunnskapens hus [The House of Knowledge]. Oslo: Pax Soysal, Yasemin Nuholu, and Hanna Schissler. 2005. "Introduction: Teaching beyond the National Narrative." In The Nation, Europe, and the World: Textbooks and Curricula in Transition, edited by Hanna Schissler and Yasemin Noholu Soysal,1-9. New York: Berghahn Books. Stearns, Peter N. 2003. Western Civilization in World History. New York: Routledge. —. 2011. World History: the basics. London: Routledge. Symcox, Linda. 2002. Whose History? The Struggle for National Standards in American Classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press. Symcox, Linda, and Arie Wilshut. 2009. "Introduction." In National History Standards: The Problem of the Canon and the Future of Teaching History, edited by Linda Symcox and Arie Wilshut, 1-11. A volume in International Review of History Education. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing. Telhaug, Alfred Oftedal, and Odd Asbjørn Mediås. 2003. Grunnskolen som nasjonsbygger: Fra statspietisme til nyliberalisme. [The Primary and Lower Secondary School as Nation-Builder: From State Pietism to Neo-Liberalism]. Oslo: Abstrakt. Tønnesen, Liv Kari B. 2011. Norsk utdanningshistorie: En innføring med fokus på grunnskolens utvikling. [Norwegian History of Education: An Introduction Focusing on the Development of the Primary and Lower Secondary School]. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget. Utdanningsdirektoratet. 2010. Social studies subject curriculum (SAFI02). Established as a Regulation by the Ministry of Education and Research on 24 June 2010. Oslo: Utdanningsdirektoratet. https://www.udir.no/kl06/saf1-02/Hele/Hovedomraader/?lplang=eng

CHAPTER TWELVE MEMORY OF DIVERSITY EVA MARIE SYVERSEN

The earlier assimilation policy in school and society has today given way to a diligent unearthing of repressed cultural memory of diversity in various fields and disciplines. Accordingly, this chapter investigates how memory of diversity is inscribed in regional literatures of the 1920s and 1930s. By examining the textual network of narrative and rhetorical elements, the chapter sheds light on the workings of cultural memory in general and in the literature of the Forest Finns in Inner Scandinavia in particular.

Introduction It is no coincidence that the increasing diversity in Western societies in recent decades has been accompanied by a “memory boom.” As the literary critic Andreas Huyssen (2011, 420) observes, memory has emerged “as a key concern in Western societies, a turning toward the past that stands in stark contrast to the privileging of the future so characteristic of earlier decades of twentieth-century modernity”. Around 1960, in the wake of decolonization, a new kind of memory discourse emerged where historically new experiences of diverse communities, groups, and individuals found support in alternate accounts of the past. Of course, diverse groups and individuals created and recorded memories of their own earlier, especially in the wake of disruption and distress (Jan Assmann 1999. See also Sidsel Lied’s chapter in this book). However, during times of high modernity with its monocultural and “progressive” perception of time and space, the incompliant nature of diverse cultural memories left them more or less invisible. Nevertheless, the cultural memories of disparate communities often survived in habits, rituals, celebrations, memorials, and, last but not least, in literary texts. Literary theorist Birgit Neumann (2010, 334) suggests that literature is “mimesis of

Memory of Diversity

245

memory”. Mimesis of memory does not primarily mean that literature retells memories, though it often does. The point is rather that literary texts stage and demonstrate the workings of memory and how different forms of memory are produced. In this chapter, I will investigate how memory of diversity is represented in a marginal or “minor” literature, as Gilles Deleuze (1925– 1995) and Felix Guattari (1930–1992) (1994) call it, from the region of Inner Scandinavia in the 1920s and 1930s, namely Finn Forest literature. This literature is affiliated with the Forest Finns, who emigrated from the great forests in the old province of Savonia in eastern Finland and settled in Inner Scandinavia in the seventeenth century. The border area between Norway and Sweden became the area of choice among the Finnish settlers and was consequently named after them. Today, it is widely recognized that Norway, from the time of its formation as a state in 900 AD, has been a country of immigration (Knut Kjeldstadli et al. 2003). However, the selfperception of Norway as a multicultural society is relatively new. It was not until White Paper no. 17 (1996–1997), On Immigration and the Multicultural Norway, that parliament (Stortinget) fully acknowledged that Norway was, and historically had been, a multicultural society (Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development 1997). In 1999 Norway ratified the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities. The Forest Finns, along with Jews, Kvens, Roma, and Romani people, were declared as national minorities—that is, groups with a long-standing attachment to Norway. The recognition of long-standing as well as new minorities as an integral part of society is reflected in the 1993 Core Curriculum for Primary, Secondary and Adult Education in Norway: “Education must therefore convey knowledge about other cultures and take advantage of the potential for enrichment that minority groups and Norwegians with another cultural heritage represent” (Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training 1993, 10). However, at the beginning of the twentieth century when the Finn Forest literature featured in this article was written, the explicit goal for government policy towards minorities was assimilation into a uniform society, actively obliterating cultural diversity (Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development 1997, 24). Celebration and cultivation of diversity had to take place in realms far from mainstream culture, school, and educational curriculum. Hence, the knowledge that the current core curriculum calls for may not always exist in plain sight or in a straightforward way. Such knowledge has to be uncovered, analyzed, interpreted, and reconstructed.

246

Chapter Twelve

Regional literature from Inner Scandinavia in the 1920s and 1930s articulates in different ways how the challenges to cultural diversity in general and the Finn Forest culture in particular affect the very basis of culture itself, namely the connection between the past and the present. Perceived at the time as a more or less confined literature by the hegemonic and “progressive” criticism in high modernity, regional literature was often dismissed as mundane, retrospective, and “minor”, and thus marginalized or left invisible. However, as the literary critic Leonard Lutwack (1984, 1) observes, whenever society changes and new perspectives come to the fore, criticism may “uncover literary elements that have either escaped notice or assert themselves in newly important ways”. The new memory discourse may enable criticism to uncover such elements in the textual network of Finn Forest literature, which in turn may present sources of knowledge that school and society can take advantage of, as the core curriculum advises. In this chapter, then, I ask: How is memory of diversity embedded in the textuality of a selection of texts from the Finn Forest literature between 1920 and 1940? To answer this question, I will begin by reviewing some theoretical perspectives on the concepts of modern memory and cultural memory and the relation of memory to literature. I will then move on to give some background information about the Finn Forest literature before I take a closer look at three literary texts by three Finn Forest writers, Olaf Hofoss (1889–1968), Fredrik Persson (1880–1935), and Carl Vestaberg (1888–1936), focusing on the textual workings of cultural memory. Finally, I will conclude by summing up and commenting on the different forms of cultural memory displayed in the texts.

Modern Memory In his book Present Past: Modernity and the Memory Crisis (1993), Richard Terdiman traces the origins of modernity’s troubled relationship with the past to the changes in society around 1800. The emergence of industry, population growth, development of mass-media, standardized education, and the transition from the living, organic memory to institutionalized archives drastically altered the conditions for memory: It was the realization that nothing is natural about memories, that the past—the practices, the habits, the dates and facts and places, the very furniture of our existences—is an artifice, and one susceptible to the most varied and sometimes the most culpable manipulations. (Terdiman 1993, 31)

Memory of Diversity

247

The disintegration of tradition generated a deep and comprehensive insecurity about what the past stood for and about the connection between the past and the present. The past seemed ambiguous and unstable. The need to stabilize it made historiography the discipline of memory in the 1800s. By using “discipline” Terdiman also takes into account historiography’s associations with strictness and accuracy. The task of the historian was to preserve and “show the past as it really was,” in the words of historian Leopold von Ranke (1795–1886) (1885, VII, author’s translation). But in spite of all its merits, the emergence of modern historiography represented a dispersion of memory: “Underlying the period’s celebration of history’s new pertinence, I think we can detect a sense of the memory crisis as an historical disaster” (Terdiman 1993, 32). Historiography’s intention to uncover the past “as it really was” has, over time, become less ambitious. As the historian Geoffrey Cubitt (2007, 53) acknowledges: “[A]ny historical narrative is based on selection – that in retaining some things, it represses others”. But the recognition of the “literary nature” of narratives of the past (Hayden White 2003, 42) has in some cases led to the perception that any representation of the past must be considered as largely fictional—as merely a joint in an unstoppable semiosis or production of meaning. This perception, however, is challenged by the “determining power” of the past that becomes apparent in the individual and collective traumas that follow great upheavals (Terdiman 1993, 347). The past as it really was may be inaccessible, but the past is always at work in memory, hidden or obvious. It is not without direction or meaning just because this meaning is not univocal. Some interpretations of the past seem more plausible than others, but no interpretation alone can be exhaustive. As the cultural sociologist Fred Davies (1925–93) observes: [T]he past is never something simply there just waiting to be discovered. Rather, the remembered past like all other products of human consciousness is something that must constantly be filtered, selected, arranged, constructed and reconstructed from collective experience. And the fulcrum for this great labor can only be the present with its shared anxieties, aspirations, hopes, fears and fantasies. (Davies 2011, 450)

The way Terdiman and Davies describe memory, it appears to be a craft, a techné, or an art.

248

Chapter Twelve

Cultural Memory According to Quintus Tullius Cicero (106–43 BC) (2007, 39–40), the art of memory was invented in Greece by the poet Simonides of Ceos. Simonides was once a guest at a banquet in a nobleman’s house in the town of Krannon in Tessaly. When Simonides went outside for a moment, the roof of the banquet hall fell in, crushing all the guests. The bodies were so disfigured they were impossible to recognize, which would have caused problems for relatives who wanted to give them a proper burial. But Simonides could identify every single guest because he remembered where each of them had been sitting at the table. Commenting on this story, the Slavist and literary theorist Renate Lachmann (2010) points out that even from its mythical origin, the art of memory has been associated with a loss, a disaster, a traumatizing event where the old order has become incomprehensible for later generations. The chaotic inaccessibility of the old order represents a challenge to the living. But by the art of memory it is possible to give an account of the old order so the bereaved can bury their dead and mourn over them: “The art of memoria restores shape to the mutilated victims and makes them recognizable by establishing their place in life” (Lachmann 2010, 302). The art of memory transforms loss and despair into a technique for recollection. One such technique for recollection is embodied in the concept of “cultural memory.” The concept is coined by Assmann in his book Cultural Memory and Early Civilization. Writing, Remembrance and Political Imagination, first published in 1992. Cultural memory denotes a recollection of the past based on the needs of the present. Assmann (2011b, 213) focuses particularly on “fateful events of the past, whose memory is maintained through cultural formation”. Such formations can be symbolic and concrete institutions like calendars, rituals, and monuments, but most importantly they are formalized and ingrained in written language. Cultural disruption may cause cultures to disappear, but it may also function as a mythomoteur that generates cultural memory and provides it with a distinctive formalization (Assmann 1999, 78). Assmann gives three different examples of cultural memory from ancient history that originated from disastrous events and are instilled in written texts, namely the Egyptian relict culture after Akhenaton’s revolution, the Israelite canon culture following the forced exile in Babylon, and the Greek hypoleptic or “debating” culture after the Persian wars. In spite of the differences, Terdiman’s description of the deep rift between the past and the present in high modernity resonates with the temporal and cultural breaches in ancient history, as proposed by

Memory of Diversity

249

Lachmann and Assmann. The traumatized memory may displace the past, or it may develop into an art or a mythomoteur that gives shape and direction to formalized expressions of the past. In any case, it is the needs of the present that are the “fulcrum for this great labor,” in the words of Davies (2011, 450). For Terdiman, Lachmann, and Assmann it is primarily in written texts that cultural memory becomes manifest.

Literature and Memory Lachmann (2010, 301) considers literature as “the mnemonic art par excellence”. Both memory and literature are anchored in the ability to make mental images of that which is not present. There is reason to believe, Lachmann argues, that the image bank of memory is the same as the “image bank” of literature (Lachmann 2010, 303). She uses the concept of intertextuality, the given text’s references to other texts, to describe how memory works in literature. These references are found on many levels in the literary text: “[T]he reference can be to entire texts, to a textual paradigm, to a genre, to certain elements of a given text, to a stylistic device, to narrative techniques, to motifs, etc.” (Lachmann 2010, 304). In his introduction to Lachmann’s book Memory and Literature: Intertextuality in Russian Modernism, Wolfgang Iser (1926–2007) explains Lachmann’s position thus: “[L]iterature is not a representation of cultural memory; rather, it enacts the operations of memory, thus opening up a means of access to observing how and perhaps why culture comes about” (Iser 1997, xiii). Birgit Neumann (2010, 341) claims that, in literature, dominating forms of memory can be challenged by marginalized forms of memory and thus “keep alive conflict about what exactly the collective past stands for and how it should be remembered”. The literary critic Fredrik Thygstrup (2000, 186) argues along the same lines when claiming that the literary text can demonstrate how a culture maintains order and meaning, but that the text can also complicate this order and meaning by functioning as a cultural laboratory for alternative orders and meanings. This is accomplished by the complex network of relations between the formal elements of the text on different levels, the crisscross of explicit and implicit connections: linguistic, semantic, compositional, figurative, rhetorical, and narrative. The theories of memory and textuality reviewed above do not suggest any particular method or procedure for analyzing texts. However, they do offer a perspective, a certain kind of attention, and an objective that can hold together a wide range of observations provided by close reading of

250

Chapter Twelve

literary texts. Before I turn to the practical analyses, I will say a few more words about the Finn Forest and Finn Forest literature in general.

Finn Forest Literature When the Forest Finns settled in Inner Scandinavia in the seventeenth century, they were still pursuing their traditional slash-and-burn agriculture. This is a process of cutting down the vegetation on a particular plot of land, letting it dry, and then setting fire to it and sowing rye in the ashes. The Forest Finns shared the area with Norwegian and Swedish farmers, Romani people, and Danish and Swedish civil servants and clergy. After a while the use of slash-and-burn agriculture decreased. As a result of a long-term pressure to adapt, economic and societal modernization—as well as intermixing with the extant Scandinavian population—caused the Forest Finns to become assimilated into Norwegian and Swedish societies. However, the culture of the Forest Finns—their history, traditions, crafts, music, and literature—is much appreciated in and beyond the Finn Forest, and many aspects of this culture have been the subject of academic research (Engen 2003; Kjeldstadli et. al. 2003; Kulbrandstad 2010; Nesholen 2010; Selberg 2007; Wedin 2001). Today, the Finn Forest denotes a district or a landscape in Inner Scandinavia that covers both sides of the southern part of the border between Norway and Sweden, from the Glomma River in the west to the Klara River in the east, from Svanskog in the south to Trysil in the north. It is not an administrative unit, and the region has no clear-cut borders. The Finn Forest overlaps with Hedmark county in Norway and Värmland and Dalarne counties in Sweden. It constitutes the western part of the taiga or coniferous forests that span from Hedmark county in Norway to Primorskij county in Russia. The authors of the selected texts come from different parts of the Finn Forest. As writers they were autodidacts and amateurs in the sense that their main source of income was outside their authorship. Olaf Hofoss was a farmer and musician as well as a writer. In 1924 he emigrated to Canada and earned his living as a farmer and a journalist on Scandinavian newspapers. He is represented here with the short story Finn-Nils from the collection Finn-Tørkjell on the Keel Plateau (1922, author’s translation). Carl Vestaberg, meanwhile, worked on different farms as well as in the woods as a lumberjack. He died at the age of just 48 from injuries sustained in a fatal accident while he was working in the woods. Some of his texts were published posthumously. He is represented with the novel Fox (1929, author’s translation). While Hofoss and Vestaberg come from

Memory of Diversity

251

the Norwegian side of the border, the third writer, Fredrik Persson, is from the Swedish side. He was the son of a farmer, but as an adult he left the farm and worked as a journalist on various Swedish newspapers. In later years he moved to Denmark. Persson is represented with the novel The Chronicle of Bromark (1926, author’s translation). The selection of literary texts belongs to a group of texts often categorized as literary regionalism. The orientation toward the local and “rooted” was an international movement around 1900. European examples of this movement include the modern Provençal literature in France, the Heimatdichtung in Germany, and in Scandinavia the Jutland Movement in Denmark, the School of Scanian Literature in Sweden, and the School of Southern Literature in Norway. By exhibiting ethnic and cultural diversity within the same region, the Finn Forest literature was also marginal in its relation to literary regionalism at the time, which often emphasized diversity between regions. As a concept, Finn Forest literature has only recently been recognized in academic criticism (Bogetvedt 1998; Lindbach 2001). Though the selected texts deal with a wide range of different literary topics, they are imbued with conventional literary forms and genres. Their conventionality is precisely what makes them interesting in terms of cultural memory. When something has become a convention, it means that it is sanctioned by the surrounding community. As Pilar Greenwood (1983, 3) remarks: “Recognizing themselves as part of a series, both audiences and authors are made aware that they belong to a cultural tradition in which they actively collaborate.” It does not matter if the individual author is situated inside, on the margin of, or in opposition to his own cultural group. In a “minor” form of literature everything is potentially “political” in the sense that it is socially and culturally significant and written on behalf of a larger community (Deleuze and Guattari 1994, 49). Even if cultural memory in the selected texts is played out within literary conventions, the awareness of the abyss that has emerged between the past and the present furnishes the literary conventions with a tangible unrest, uneasiness, and instability. There is a tension in the texts between that which conforms with the hereditary literary patterns and that which does not conform. Convention comes from Latin convenire, which means “meet,” “visit,” or “talk with”. In line with the etymological implications, Greenwood (1983, 8) argues that, depending on the context, particular conventions may “represent innovation, adaptation or even subversion of earlier contexts”. In the following analyses, I will take a closer look at the dynamics of literary

252

Chapter Twelve

conventions in the Finn Forest literature. All the citations from the texts are the author’s translations.

Olaf Hofoss: Finn-Nils (1922) One night in the early spring the old farmer and hunter Ola Trøslien and the anonymous first-person narrator are out hunting grouse in the Finn Forest. While the two hunting comrades are sitting around the fire, waiting for the dawn to break at which time the wood grouse will appear, Ola tells a story that constitutes most of the text. The tableau with these two figures by the campfire depicts the archetype of storytelling. But this image is complicated by the composition of the short story. The frame narrative where one narrator features another narrator, the first scribal and the second oral, draws attention to the conditions for storytelling as cultural memory in a changing world. The camp is situated at Raadelsmyra between Lakes Trøssjøen and Fjeldsjøen, where Ola and the narrator have made their beds of fir branches around the fire. The narrator seizes the opportunity to ask Ola if he has ever seen goblins, hoping to get an amusing story out of him. Ola fiddles with his tobacco pipe and takes his time, but then answers affirmatively, though somewhat reluctantly: “[T]hey are about to die out since the earth-houses and pasture huts were abandoned” (85). Ola goes on to inform his obviously ignorant younger comrade about different types of goblins in the old days: “The mountain goblins were the worst to be confronted with; they would kidnap the girls, and usually the most vivid of them all, and cast a spell on them so they rarely or never recovered” (85). As a terrifying example, Ola mentions Turi, the daughter of Finn-Nils, who at one time found herself surrounded by goblins: “It was a wonder of God that he [Nils] managed to throw steel [a knife] over her at the last minute and save her” (85). Ola’s somewhat reserved attitude toward telling the old goblin legends shows his awareness of the disintegration of tradition and the deep divide that has emerged between the past and the present and between himself and his audience, the anonymous “I”. Ola probably realizes the goblin legends as well as the storyteller are about to become curiosities, disconnected from both the past and the present. However, being a talented storyteller, Ola turns this cultural disruption into a mythomoteur for a revisionist legend by pulling the marginal characters, namely the Forest Finns, into the center of the story: “But Finn-Nils himself was about equal to the mountain goblins as far as devilry goes” (85). Stories about man’s vulnerability to the ravages of evil goblins may have had their time,

Memory of Diversity

253

but stories about the enterprises of man are likely to hold and even strengthen their grip. With this rhetorical and narrative shift, Ola embarks on an action-packed story about the fearless frontiersman Finn-Nils, who came from the great forests of Finland, conquered the wilderness in Inner Scandinavia, and took up the fight against the malevolent goblins and— nearly—disarmed them. This story seems to resonate well with the contemporary audience: “It is as if I see the story displayed before my eyes and a chill goes through my body” (95). According to Ola, Finn-Nils was a scary scoundrel who attacked random people in the woods, stole their valuables, killed them, and dumped their bodies in mires and lakes. When Finn-Nils was attacked by a bear that was disturbed by the smoke from slash-and-burn farming, FinnNils killed the bear with an axe. Finn-Nils was also an outstanding driving hunter: “[H]e never gave up before the animal had exhausted itself in the crusted snow or was driven off a steep cliff so it broke its legs or died instantly” (90). The inside walls of his hut were covered with animal skin. Finn-Nils was also an unrivalled angler: “As soon as he had cut a hole in the ice, he got all the fish he could carry home to the hut” (90). At the time when Finn-Nils was building the hut, he encountered hard resistance from invisible goblins who beat him around. But Finn-Nils knew what to do. It was thought that goblins could not stand cowbells, so Finn-Nils told Turi to steal a cowbell from a farmer’s barn. He would not enter the cowshed himself because he claimed he was so ugly that he would scare the cows to death, and he did not want to do that. Obviously, there were some limits to his knavery. The cowbell outside the hut allowed Finn-Nils and Turi to live in peace for a while. However, Finn-Nils’ story ends with Turi’s death after a final attack by the goblins. In the end, Finn-Nils could not save her. Ola begins the story about Finn-Nils with a kind of flattery of the audience, capitatio benevolentiae, by underlining the harshness of FinnNils’ actions, making the audience feel morally superior and thus more susceptible to what he has to say. The rest of the story exposes the operations of cultural memory as it takes place in the chiastic shifts and relocations of character, motif, plot, and genre. The main characters shift from the mighty mountain goblins to the Forest Finns. Above all, FinnNils now functions as a projection screen for a new confident notion of man that was alien to the old goblin legends. The motif shifts from magical creatures as rulers of the environment to man as the ruler of the environment as well as of the magical creatures. The plot shifts from goblins victimizing man to man’s successful ousting of the goblins, and the genre shifts from tragedy to a comedy of excess, a hero story about the invincible Finn-Nils. Nevertheless, the return of the tragic at the end of the

254

Chapter Twelve

story is a baffling subversion of the conventions of the hero story. For the most part, Ola’s story about Finn-Nils mirrors modern man’s aspirations to conquer the environment, but at the same time it punctuates these aspirations with the unexpected memento mori at the end. In Finn-Nils we can observe how traditional stories are recontextualized and resemanticized to re-establish the connection between the past and present. The old order of the forest, where goblins were a deadly threat to human beings, has become unintelligible to new generations who consider the goblin legends as amusing pastimes. To bring the past in accordance with the present, Ola sets a range of formal elements in motion, changing the tendency of the old stories in a radical way to reflect the newly confident and self-reliant image of man, while at the same time challenge and complicate this image. From this reworking, filtering, selection, and reconstruction of the references and “image bank” of the old stories, the archaic Forest Finns appear to be the first humans to conquer and cultivate the realm of goblins, and as such, are forerunners of the modern era. The old story thus becomes a laboratory for a new perception of the forest, where man occupies a prominent and powerful position, as well as for a critique of the inherent hubris in this new order. There is one last point worth noting about the oral storyteller’s handling of temporality in this narrative. When Ola’s story is finished, the embers of the fire die out and the hunters can discern the break of dawn. At that moment, the wood grouse arrive: “Suddenly they are right above our heads and we hear their wings flapping and their landing on the other side of the ridge” (96). Ola has coordinated the time of the discourse with the time of the wait. The story’s content and scope are accurately adjusted to the occasion: the need to stay awake, to preserve clarity of mind, and to inspire the endeavor at the break of dawn. Ola’s handling of the story is not only conditioned by the ambition of bringing the old legends in touch with modern mentality to ensure the continuity of cultural memory, but also—or maybe above all—the demands of the concrete situation here and now, awaiting the grouse one night in the early spring. After all, mastering the fluidity of the here and now was always a merit of oral storytelling.

Fredrik Persson: The Chronicle of Bromark (1926) The Chronicle of Bromark deals with how momentous events in Swedish history are connected to local events in the small villages of Bromark and Finnsjø near the border of the Denmark-Norway union in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The novel contains many references to significant historical persons, above all Colonel Georg Adlersparre (1760–

Memory of Diversity

255

1835), commander-in-chief of the Swedish Western Army, who marched with his soldiers to Stockholm in 1809 and led a coup d’etat against the Swedish King Gustav IV Adolf (1778–1837). But this official master narrative of how a great historical figure toppled a tyrannical regime and brought peace and prosperity to Sweden is challenged and even inverted in the novel. The composition displays how a chain of events, actions, and utterings ascribed to the Forest Finns in the province elicited this epochmaking change at the center of power. Almost everything in the novel, great and small, good and evil, turns out to be part of a tightly knit web that exposes to the reader the invisible and unrecognized but crucial role of the Forest Finns in the Swedish Revolution of 1809 and the founding of modern Sweden. Before commenting further, I will give a short presentation of the main events and characters in the novel. Around the year 1600 Pekka Ronkonen and his family came from Savonia in Finland to Bromark in Sweden, where they founded the first settlement. Swedish settlers followed, and Bromark grew into a predominantly Swedish village. A day’s march into the forests to the north of Bromark lay Finnsjø, where many Finnish immigrants settled. They used the Finnish language and ran their farms in the traditional way. Around 1750 Finnsjø was attacked by some of the Swedish farmers from Bromark, who burned the farms to the ground, justifying the crime with a proclamation from the time of Queen Christina (1626–89) that banned the Finns from settling along the border. The Finns took refuge in Norway. As the decades passed, this misdeed was apparently forgotten. However, seeking an opportunity to avenge the assault on his forefathers, a Norwegian descendant of the Finnsjø Finns, Ove Oveson, bought a farm in Bromark. When the war between Sweden and the Denmark-Norway union broke out in 1808, Oveson was officially responsible for supplying food to the soldiers of the Western Army in the garrison. He confiscated food from Bromark farmers, but gave only a small portion of it to the soldiers. The soldiers, many from Bromark, were starving and diseases broke out. This misery fueled growing opposition to the war among the soldiers. Oveson’s opposite was Lars Ronkonen from Bromark, a descendant of Pekka Ronkonen and chaplain to the small congregation left in Finnsjø. Lars was a humble and modest man, living in solitude and constantly ruminating on human suffering and the meaning of life. At one point, he was called on to preach to the starving soldiers at the garrison. In this sermon, a paraphrasing of the Israelites’ delivery from slavery in Egypt, Lars vented all his repressed passion on behalf of those who suffer. The sermon inflamed the soldiers as they interpreted it as a call for rebellion

256

Chapter Twelve

against the king, and a revolutionary fervor emerged. Colonel Adlersparre seized the moment and led the march to Stockholm. In the Middle Ages the term “chronicle” denoted a historical account where the recorded events were believed to be manifestations of a divine plan. This plan, however, was only fully translucent from the omniscient point of view of divine providence. The Chronicle of Bromark similarly exposes history as the unfolding of a mysterious overarching plan where the true meaning of the events is hidden even from those who accomplish them, such as Ove and Lars, and also from the official historical records that only focus on the prominent agents of the 1809 revolution. In The Chronicle of Bromark the chronicler takes the position of the omniscient divine providence and as such is able to reveal the “big picture” to the reading public. The novel thus becomes a “meta-chronicle,” a comment on the limited scope of official historical records. It turns out that in the grand scheme of things, there is an intimate, crucial, and causal connection between the assault on the Forest Finns and the Swedish revolution 60 years later, and between the microcosms of the personal experiences and actions of Ove and Lars and the macrocosms of national and international politics. From an omniscient point of view the officially celebrated liberation hero, Colonel Georg Adlersparre, only plays a minor role in this critical point in Swedish history. The medieval chronicler’s notion of a mysterious, omniscient point of view on history, remote from the limited scope of human beings, is here turned into a rhetorical and literary device allowing the contemporary chronicler to inhabit this omniscient position. Paradoxically, or maybe accordingly, this omniscient perspective enables an account of “history from below”. Memories considered diverse, marginal, irrelevant, peripheral, or uninteresting from the perspective of official history are recycled, reconstructed, and resemanticized and take on a whole new meaning from the omniscient point of view in The Chronicle of Bromark. This way the local and inconspicuous attain a deterministic function: nothing is accidental. Everything affects everything else, no matter how large or small. Life in the local communities of Bromark and Finnsjø achieves a “butterfly effect” that gives local individuals, groups, places, and events a significance of extraordinary range. By certain arrangements and rearrangements of elements that are innate to literature, such as plot, setting, composition, and omniscient narrator, the novel tells the story of how the marginalized Forest Finns in Inner Scandinavia accomplished— unknowingly—the great task of changing the course of history to the benefit of all.

Memory of Diversity

257

The Chronicle of Bromark is, in all respects, an unverified “‘history from below,” where the fictive displacement of the Forest Finns at Finnsjø in the past becomes a confirmation and a critique of the factual displacement of the Forest Finns from history and collective memory in the present. The diverse cultural memory as recorded in The Chronicle of Bromark thus challenges the dominating forms of cultural memory in society and keeps alive “conflict about what exactly the collective past stands for and how it should be remembered,” as Neuman puts it (2010, 341).

Carl Vestaberg: Fox (1929) Fox is a novel about the Forest Finns who lived by Lake Langvatnet near the Glomma River in the southern part of the Finn Forest at the end of the 1800s. The slash-and-burn era had long passed, but the Forest Finns stayed on, making their living from what the coniferous forest could provide. They hunted and fished, kept a few chickens and goats, maybe a cow, grew vegetables, and chopped wood for heating and material from which to carve the cups and mugs they sold in the villages nearby. The forest constituted both the outer and the inner world of the Forest Finn: “The whisper of the forest is the song that surrounds him to the threshold of eternity. [. . .] Under yellow moonshine and fiery sun, pitch-black nights and heavy grey days, at all times his memories linger around out there” (6). But then something extraordinary happened that changed the traditional undertakings and pace of daily life and even the whisper of the woods. In the following, I will focus mainly on this particular aspect of the novel. Unfortunately, the amazing fox that gave its name to the novel must be left uncommented on for now. “During the season of the harvest” (133), so the story goes, hordes of lumberjacks came from near and far to the Finn Forest: “[W]hite axe handles pointed up from their back packs. / Some of the lumberjacks got board and lodging by the residents. / Morning and evening it was so crowded in the small houses that they had to take turns sitting at the table” (134). The residents themselves also did as the newcomers: “Any resident that was able to walk into the woods went to work, rheumatic old men as well as very young boys” (134). The forest underwent a profound transformation: “And now the wide pinewood hills were dancing a more dangerous dance than ever before: the lumberjacks mowed down the trees. [. . .] From dawn till dusk the steel of the axes thwacked; the saws frizzled” (134). The forest was on the move towards the Glomma River. “Up and down the ridges one could walk on white peeled timber logs without setting foot on the ground” (134). When the timber was sent down

258

Chapter Twelve

the log drive, it performed breathtaking stunts at the lumberjacks’ hands: “[The timber] accelerates at a pounding speed, bounces with a high pitched tone into the rocks and speeds up further down. Over the last heap they whistle like rifle bullets forty, fifty feet through the air before they swirl down” (26). The description of the lumber industry is in many ways a homage to the timber logs, which almost take on a life of their own, and to the lumberjacks who created this magic. But the magic turns out to be at the mercy of the abstract and volatile world of prices and markets that have caught up with the reality of the woodland in the Finn Forest. The outbreak of a new economic world order on the shores of Lake Langvatnet reveals to the forest owners the true meaning of the enigmatic whisper of the woods from time immemorial: “It was gold it had whispered about” (133). Suddenly the empty space they happened to own started to generate value. After a few years, when the prices of lumber fell on the world market, the forest returned to its previous state of empty space in the eyes of the forest owners, waiting for a new economic boom. But beneath the empty space of capitalism, there was always a full space of a fundamentally different order: the age-old culture of the Forest Finns. However, the ups and downs of modern, global economic trends hit the Finn Forest culture as a devastating break in the continuity between the past and the present, an irreversible before and after “the great years” (138). Following the decline of the lumber industry, the Forest Finns continued to sow and reap, and feed their chickens, and the “peacefulness of the hillsides returned” (138). But the peacefulness after the great years has a somewhat ironic flair to it. It is the “peace” of absence, loss, and defeat. The days of the traditional way of life in the forests by Langvatnet were numbered: “The young scraped together the last shillings and took off over the blue mire” (238). The novel documents how the break between a pre-modern and modern world, between a natural economy and money-based economy, between family farming and paid labor unfolds in these particular circumstances in this particular location. The break between the past and the present permeates every aspect of the life and culture of the Forest Finns, even the whispering of the woods. The whispering, the song of life that accompanied the Forest Finns from the cradle to the grave, is now a thing of the past. The perception of the whispering as a revelation of the forest’s market value represents the present for all, both those who have something to gain from it and those who lost everything to it. The market value turned out to be short lived, but the exploitation of it was nevertheless mortifying to the Finn Forest culture that in spite of many earlier adversities had for hundreds of years prevailed in these forests. The

Memory of Diversity

259

deep divide that now emerged between the past and present represented a disruption to the traditional Finn Forest culture that could not be recovered from. However, the novel gives a detailed account of the traditional ways of the Forest Finns as well as of the changes that occurred. The novel’s description of the last days of the coniferous culture, representing many social and cultural aspects of the life world of the Forest Finns, makes the past transparent and accessible. The novel bears witness to the everyday life of the Forest Finns as well as the spectacular powers that can be released in the cooperation between man and the woods, and also the destruction that comes with the economic exploitation of these powers. Out of the remnants of this destruction, the novel—like Simonides’ ars memoria—restores shape to the traditional Forest Finns, makes them recognizable, and establishes their place in life, thus creating and recording a textual memory of a remarkable culture that was overlooked and invisible even before it disappeared. Thus, the novel as cultural and textual memory transforms absence, loss, and defeat into a general technique for recollection, as Lachmann suggests (2010, 302).

Conclusion As Davies (2011, 450) points out, the past is “never something simply there just waiting to be discovered”. Accordingly, the chosen texts take pains to unravel the determining power of an impenetrable past and make the past accessible, comprehensible, and significant to the present. To bridge the gap and conjoin the past with the present, the texts examine different figurations of possible connections. Each of the three texts seems to elaborate a form, a techné, or an art of memory that is distinguished from the other two. In Finn-Nils cultural memory emerges from a shift in focus and values as well as a change in the course of events in old stories that have become opaque and irrelevant. The principle for creating and recounting memory in Finn-Nils seems to be that of kairos: attention to the here and now; the time, the place, and the audience. In The Chronicle of Bromark cultural memory is shaped as an alternative account of history that deviates significantly from the order of cause and effect as recorded in official history. The principle of recounting memory in the novel can be said to be that of parrhesia, a commitment to revealing the truth, even if it means taking the risk of going against established public beliefs. In Fox cultural memory is created as a transfiguration of loss, defeat, and oblivion into a poetic, animated, and colorful recollection of the past. Here the

260

Chapter Twelve

principle of creating memory may be that of enargeia, a vivid description that makes the past come to life as if it unfolds before the audience’s eyes. The selected texts from the Finn Forest and the labor of cultural recollection they represent provide a significant contribution to the body of literature dealing with diverse cultural and textual memory, to the educational curriculum by conveying knowledge of a diverse cultural heritage and how it is ingrained in writing, and to the general understanding of how cultural memory is produced in literature. The organizing principle for diverse cultural memory that predominates in the respective texts—namely kairos, parrhesia, and enargeia—is to some extent simultaneously present in all three texts, causing the forms of textual memory to proliferate beyond the scope of this chapter. Alternative approaches to the texts would surely bring additional forms of memory to light. Literature as mimesis of memory offers a vast array of entries to the workings of diverse cultural memory and allows us to observe how and, as Iser (1997, xiii) suggests, perhaps even why culture comes about.

References Assmann, Jan. 1992. Das kulturelle Gedächtnis: Schrift, Erinnerung und politische Identität in frühen Hochkulturen [Cultural Memory. Writing, Remembrance and Political Identity in Early Sivilizations]. Munich: Verlag C. H. Beck. —. 2011a. Cultural Memory and Early Civilization. Writing, Remembrance and Political Imagination. Translated by Henry Wilson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. —. 2011b. “From Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism.” In The Collective Memory Reader, edited by Jeffery K. Olick, Vered Vinitzky-Seroussi, and Daniel Levy, 209–15. New York: Oxford University Press. Originally published in Jan Assmann. 1998. Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Bogetvedt, Helena. 1998. “Kveenikirjallisuus pohjoisnorjalaisessa kirjallisuusinstituutiossa” [“Kven Literature in the North Norwegian Literary Institution”]. Master’s diss., University of Tromsø. Cicero, Quintus Tullius. [2001] 2007. “From On the Ideal Orator.” In Theories of Memory: A Reader, edited by Michael Rossington and Anne Whitehead, 39–42. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Council of Europe. 1998. Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities. Accessed April 10, 2016. Retrieved from

Memory of Diversity

261

https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCT MContent?documentId=090000168007cdac. Cubitt, Geoffrey. 2007. History and Memory. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Deleuze, Gilles, and Felix Guattari. 1994. Kafka – for en mindre litteratur [Kafka. Toward a Minor Literature]. Translated by Knut SteneJohansen. Oslo: Pax. Engen, Thor Ola. 2003. “‘Ein stad skal dei så sin rug’: Bidrag til et forskningsprogram om skogfinsk kultur og den regionale innlandskulturen i Skandinavia” [“‘Somewhere they shall sow their rye.’ Contribution to a research program on the culture of the Forest Finns and the region of Inner Scandinavia”]. Report vol. 2. Elverum: Hedmark University of Applied Sciences. Greenwood, Pilar F.-C. de. 1983. Pastoral Poetics, the Uses of Conventions in Renaissance pastoral Romances: Arcadia, la Diana, La Galatea, L’Astree. Madrid: José Porruá Turanzas. Hofoss, Olaf. 1922. “Finn-Nils.” In Finn-Tørkjell indpaa Kjølensvidden: Bygdefortællinger [Finn-Tørkjell on the Keel Plateau. Village-Stories], 82–96. Kristiania: O.A. Vindhols Forlag. Huyssen, Andreas. 2011. “From ‘Present Pasts: Media, Politics, Amnesia’.” In The Collective Memory Reader, edited by Jeffery K. Olick, Vered Vinitzky-Seroussi, and Daniel Levy, 430–436. New York: Oxford University Press. Originally published in Andreas Huyssen. 2000. “Present Pasts: Media, Politics, Amnesia.” Public Culture 12(1): 21–38. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Iser, Wolfgang. 1997. “Intertextuality: The Epitome of Culture.” Foreword to Memory and Literature: Intertextuality in Russian Modernism by Renate Lachmann, vii–xviii. Translated by Roy Sellers and Anthony Wall. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Kjeldstadli, Knut, Grete Brochmann, Jan Eivind Myhre, Einar Niemi, Erik Opsahl, Sølvi Sogner, and Halvard Tjelmeland. 2003. Norsk innvandringshistorie [History of Norwegian immigration]. Oslo: Pax. Kulbrandstad, Lars Anders. 2010. “Hva vil det si å være skogfinne i dag?” [“What does it mean to be a Forest Finn today?”]. In Nasjonale minoriteter i det flerkulturelle Norge [National Minorities in Multicultural Norway], edited by Anne Bonnevie Lund and Bente Bolme Moen, 165–177. Trondheim: Fagbokforlaget. Lachmann, Renate. 2010. “Mnemonic and Intertextual Aspects of Literature.” In A Companion to Cultural Memory Studies, edited by Astrid Erll and Ansgar Nünning, 301–310. Berlin: De Gruyter. Lindbach, Kaisa M. 2001. Kvenlitteratur i nord: Med spesielt blikk på

262

Chapter Twelve

Idar Kristiansens romaner [Kven Literature of the North. With a Special Look at the Novels of Idar Kristiansen]. PhD diss., Tromsø: University of Tromsø. Lutwack, Leonard. 1984. The Role of Place in Literature. New York: Syracuse University Press. Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development. 1997. On Immigration and the Multicultural Norway (Parliamentary report 17 (1996-1997). Accessed March 6, 2016. Retrieved from https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/stmeld-nr-17-1996-1997/id191037/. Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation. National Minorities. S. a. Accessed March 6, 2016. Retrieved from https://www.regjeringen.no/en/topics/indigenous-peoples-andminorities/national-minorities/id1404/. The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. 1993. Core Curriculum for Primary, Secondary and Adult Education in Norway. Accessed March 6, 2016. Retrieved from http://www.udir.no/upload/larerplaner/generell_del/Core_Curriculum_ English.pdf. Nesholen, Birger. 2010. “Skogfinnene i Norge – historie og kultur” [The Forest Finns in Norway – History and Culture]. In Nasjonale minoriteter i det flerkulturelle Norge [National Minorities in Multicultural Norway], edited by Anne Bonnevie Lund and Bente Bolme Moen, 55–68. Trondheim: Fagbokforlaget. Neumann, Birgit. 2010. “The Literary Representation of Memory.” In A Companion til Cultural Memory Studies, edited by Astrid Erll and Ansgar Nünning, 333–343. Berlin: De Gruyter. Persson, Fredrik. 1926. Bromarks krønike [The Chronicle of Bromark]. Trondheim: Dagsposten. Ranke, Leopold von. 1885. Geschichte der romanischen und germanischen Völker von 1494 bis 1514 [History of the Latin and Teutonic Peoples from 1494 to 1514]. Leipzig/Berlin: G. Reimer. Accessed February 14, 2016. Retrieved from https://archive.org/stream/geschichtenderro00rankuoft#page/n0/mode/ 2up. Selberg, Torunn. 2007. “Fortelling, festival, sted” [“Storytelling, festival, place”]. In Kulturelle landskap: Sted, fortelling og materiell kultur [Cultural Landscapes: Place, Story and Material Culture], edited by Torunn Selberg and Nils Gilje, 132–55. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget. Terdiman, Richard. 1993. Present Past: Modernity and the Memory Crisis. New York: Cornell University Press.

Memory of Diversity

263

Thygstrup, Fredrik. 2000. På sporet af virkeligheden [On the track to reality]. Copenhagen: Gyldendal. Vestaberg, Carl. 1929. Rev: En fortelling fra Finnskogen [Fox: A story from the Finn Forest]. Oslo: Gyldendal. Wedin, Maud, Lars-O. Herou, and Lennart Stenman, eds. 2001. Det skogfinska kulturarvet [The cultural heritage of the Forest Finns]. Falun: FINNSAM og Finnbygdens Förlag. White, Hayden. 2003. “Den historiske teksten som litterært artefakt.” [“The historical text as literary artefact”]. Translated by Kari Risvik and Kjell Risvik. In Historie og fortelling [History and story] by Hayden White, 29–54. Oslo: Pax Forlag. Originally published in Hayden White. 1978. Tropics of Discourse. Essays in Cultural Criticism, 81–100. London: The John Hopkins University Press.

CHAPTER THIRTEEN THE DISCOURSE ON RELIGIOUS LITERACY AND THE IMPLICATIONS OF EMPIRICAL RESEARCH OLE KOLBJØRN KJØRVEN

In this article I present and discuss the findings from an empirical study on RE teachers as readers and interpreters of religious narratives, in this particular case, the biblical parable The Prodigal Son. I explore and describe the role of the RE teacher and the role of this particular text, and most importantly, the transaction between the two in the process of meaning-making. The findings are discussed in relation to the current discourse on religious literacy, which is dominated by theory and normative thinking.

Introduction Literacy has become one of the most commonly used terms in education, as it has developed from designating only the ability to read and write to encompass knowledge or competencies more in general. The term has also reached the field of religious education (RE), where Stephen Prothero (2007), Diane L. Moore (2007), and Andrew Wright (2000) have been among the most prominent voices (Brömssen 2013; Kjørven 2014). What characterizes their conceptualizations of religious literacy is that they are theory-based and oriented towards normative objectives. In other words, Prothero, Moore and Wright’s primary aim is to theoretically deduce what teachers should know and teach. The result of this is that empirical research on the issue, that is, knowledge about what religious literacy practices or events look like in the field, is scarce and also hardly present in the research discourse. In this article I present some key findings from an empirical study on RE teachers’ religious literacy and relate this to dominant conceptualizations

Religious Literacy and the Implications of Empirical Research

265

of religious literacy in RE research.1 I ask: What could be the implications of empirical research on the current theory- and normative dominated discourse on religious literacy? The aim is that the answer to this question will give a better understanding of what religious literacy is and also a broader basis for discussing what religious literacy should entail in an RE context. In the first part of this article I will present the main characteristics of Prothero, Moore, and Wright’s theories. In the second part, key findings from the empirical study will be presented. These two parts, then, provide the ground for discussing the research question presented above.

Dominant conceptualizations of religious literacy Although varying considerably in form and content, Prothero, Moore, and Wright share some significant traits. First, all three start out from theoretical definitions and move towards addressing more specific arguments for what a religiously literate person should possess (Moore 2007, 56-7; Prothero 2007, 15; Wright 1993, 47). Moore puts it this way: Religious literacy entails the ability to discern and analyze the fundamental intersections of religion and social/political/cultural life through multiple lenses. Specifically, a religiously literate person will possess 1) a basic understanding of the history, central texts, beliefs, practices and contemporary manifestations of several of the world’s religious traditions as they arose out of and continue to be shaped by particular social, historical and cultural contexts; and 2) the ability to discern and explore the religious dimensions of political, social and cultural expressions across time and place (Moore 2007, 56-7).

Clearly, it is the theoretical framework of seeing religion as a multifaceted phenomenon, which gives the premises for what religious literacy should entail. The second issue, which applies mainly to Moore and Prothero, relates to how religious literacy as a concept is contextualized and also actualized. In doing so, both bring in present state analyses. However, the empirical basis for their arguments appears rather weak. And what struck me most is that their analyses paint a consistently negative picture of the current state. In Religious Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know – and Doesn’t, Prothero claims with reference to President George W. Bush Jr.’s 1

This study is based upon my PhD entitled RE Teachers’ Religious Literacy: A Qualitative Analysis of RE Teachers’ Interpretations of the Biblical Narrative The Prodigal Son (Kjørven 2014).

266

Chapter Thirteen

“war on terrorism” and use of the term “crusade” in the aftermath of 9/11, that the USA is “a nation of religious illiterates” (Prothero 2007, 2, 20). To underpin this, Prothero refers to his Boston University students and their failure to pass basic religion quizzes. This makes Prothero ask: “If things are this bad at Boston University … how is it elsewhere in the country?” (Prothero 2007, 37). Diane L. Moore introduces her book Overcoming religious illiteracy with the following statement: Though the United States is one of the most religiously diverse nations in the world, the vast majority of citizens are woefully ignorant about religion itself and the basic tenets of the world’s major religious traditions” (Moore 2007, 3).

Moore, too, uses the post-9/11 discourse as “one lens,” but elaborates further with references to the tradition of religion-based racism and to how Christian fundamentalism influences American society (Moore 2007, 3352). But Moore goes further. By claiming that there are only a few “pockets”, referring to England in particular, “where teachers and citizens are quite well educated about religion and where the academic study of religion is embedded in local and/or national curricula,” she says without much hesitation: “[R]eligious illiteracy spans the globe” (Moore 2006). Are Prothero and Moore right? Do they have data for such broad conclusions? Or do their generalizations only reproduce and strengthen stereotypical images, particularly so the growing myth formation of the naïve and religiously illiterate American? The third and last point, and this also includes Wright, is that the dominant conceptualizations of religious literacy appear instrumentalist with regard to the key agents of religious literacy in school – the RE teachers and their students. While Prothero focuses on the “basic tenets of religion” (Prothero 2007, 15), it is Wright’s ambition to make teachers and students “informed by the very best philosophical and theological thinking” (Wright, 2006, 175). Moore expands the view considerably and argues for a multidisciplinary approach. With reference to the political philosopher Amy Gutmann (Moore 2007, 10-6), Moore brings in perspectives associated with critical literacy theory (e.g. Luke 2012; Street 1997). Stating that “all knowledge claims are situated” and hence arguing for the importance of understanding literacy from the perspective or “the lens of the interpreter,” issues regarding power-structures, empowerment, and the interpreter as an agent for change, are brought to the fore (Moore 2007, 81). Clearly, and as I will show, there are corresponding links between critical literacy and the empirical findings of my study. Still, due

Religious Literacy and the Implications of Empirical Research

267

to Moore’s fundamentally theory-oriented approach, she has little substantial to say about what interpreters are doing in actual interpretive processes. It is my claim that it is essential to bring qualitative empirical research into the discourse for two reasons: First, to provide data and analyses on what religious literacy actually looks like as an educational practice. With reference to David Barton (1994) and also Shirley B. Heath, it is of importance to explore and describe the characteristic features of religious “literacy practices” or, and more preferably, religious “literacy events,” defined by Heath as “any occasion in which a piece of writing or [talk] is integral to the nature of the participants’ interactions and their interpretive processes” (Heath 1981, 93). I argue that to study religious literacy events from the perspective of the RE teachers as interpretive participants will provide a broader and more well-founded basis for discussing what religious literacy is and should entail. Second, and what follows from the first, is that a qualitative study on religious literacy events will bring the actors of religious literacy to the center of attention – in my case the RE teachers – and highlight what happens in the complex process of engaging in interpretive processes. As we will see in the following, this will challenge the consistently negative generalizations of Moore and Prothero. Most profoundly, it will illuminate the importance of looking at a religious literacy event as – in its very essence – a hermeneutical undertaking.

Religious literacy events The empirical study highlights what happens when RE teachers engage in religious literacy events. To pursue that, I asked RE teachers to interpret a religious narrative from the Bible, a subject knowledge matter which over the years has been a central part of the compulsory Norwegian RE curriculum. The research question I asked, was: What happens when RE teachers interpret the biblical parable The Prodigal Son? Leaning on the linguistic turn in the social sciences, I agree with Paul Ricoeur who says that “there is no self-understanding that is not mediated by signs, symbols, and texts; in the final analysis self-understanding coincides with the interpretation given to these mediating terms” (Ricoeur 1992, 15). The unit of analysis of the study, therefore, was RE teachers’ mediated interpretations, more precisely, their oral and written responses. This brought me to reader-oriented hermeneutics, and more precisely, reader-response theory.

268

Chapter Thirteen

To study RE teachers’ responses was not a matter of making a preference for the text or the reader, reflecting the heated debate between Wolfgang Iser (1978) and Stanley Fish (1980) in the 1980s, but to acknowledge the constitutive role of both in interpretive events. This I found in Louise M. Rosenblatt’s reader-response theory.2 At the root of Rosenblatt’s theory is the notion that a reader response reflects a creative process where reader and text transact, that is, where both are “conditioned by and conditioning the other” (Rosenblatt 1994, 17). In the following statement, clearly influenced by Charles S. Peirce, William James, and also Lev Vygotsky, who all emphasize the triadic and mutual contingent relationship between the “sign, object, interpretant” in meaning-making processes (Rosenblatt 1985, 99), Rosenblatt underlines the distinguished role of both the text and the reader, but most importantly, their mutual contingency in the process of reading and making a meaningful response. We still can distinguish the elements [i.e. the text and the reader], but we have to think of them, not as separate entities, but as aspects of phases of a dynamic process, in which all elements take on their character as part of the organically-interrelated situation (Rosenblatt 1985, 100).

This led me towards the following three analytical questions: 1. What is the role of The Prodigal Son as a particular text in the responses? 2. What is the role of the RE teacher as a particular reader in the responses? 3. What characterizes the transaction between The Prodigal Son and the RE teacher in the responses? The first two questions highlight the distinguished and constitutive role of the text and the reader, while the third brings the attention to the focal point in this article, namely what happens in the mutual contingent relationship between the text and the reader in interpretive events. In order to study RE teacher responses I designed a qualitative study. The informants, a total of nine RE teachers,3 are not a sample of typical or 2

Rosenblatt was one of the most influential theorists within the field of readerresponse and literary education in the USA throughout her academic life, which spanned from the early1930s with the pioneering book Literature as Exploration (1938), and to the beginning of 2000. On Rosenblatt’s influence, see for instance John Clifford (1988), Gordon M. Pradl (1996), and Norbert Elliot (2008). 3 The nine RE teachers were recruited using the partner schools of Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences (INN), that is, schools in the region that are

Religious Literacy and the Implications of Empirical Research

269

average RE teachers, but represent a sample of “intensity”, that is, “[i]nformation-rich cases that manifest the phenomenon intensely” (Miles & Huberman 1994, 28). Thus, the study does not provide any basis for generalizations, but instead in-depth insight into “[t]he qualitative character of the experience,” as Rosenblatt describes “the event” of reading and interpretation (Rosenblatt 1994, 135). Yet, based on what Robert Stake describes as “natural generalization” (Stake 1978, 7), it is my assumption that the variety and the range of the material described in the analyses should awaken recognition for many RE teachers, most likely then, for RE teachers with experience from teaching religious narratives. To get access to RE teacher responses I asked the nine teachers first to write what I refer to as individual texts of reflection. The intention was to give the teachers time and space to study the text and write argumentative interpretations (Eemeren et al. 1996, 2). To secure a material where the RE teachers emerge as interpreters of a text rather than method-oriented educators, which I experienced in a pilot study, I pointed out to them that they should concentrate on answering the question How do you interpret the Prodigal Son? This, of course, was not to avoid didactical issues. Obviously, by selecting RE teachers as particular readers, exploring the impact of school contexts, teaching experiences etc. in the responses, were of great interest. Placed within the socio-constructive hermeneutical paradigm, I understand these matters but also whatever personal factors the RE teachers brought to the scene (Rosenblatt 1994, 129), as elements that prove their impact as “participant construct” in the RE teachers’ interpretations (Van Dijk 2006, 163). In order to get more material and also access to oral responses, I conducted individual semi-structured interviews. As a method, the interview was chosen to get closer to the RE teachers’ processes of meaning-making (Fontana and Frey 2005, 705; Kvale and Brinkmann 2009, 3). Naturally, in the interview I gave the teachers the opportunity to clarify, make adjustments and also expand on their written arguments. Yet, and in principle, following both Shirley B. Heath’s understanding of literacy events and Rosenblatt’s notion of each reader-response as a unique “poem” (Heath 1981; Rosenblatt 1994), I view the interview equal to the text of reflection and as an interpretive event in its own right.

committed to contributing to INNs research and development programs. All teachers, except one, fulfilled the formal requirements of 30 credits or more in RE. They all taught in primary and/or secondary school and were responsible for at least one class in RE, which means that they taught minimum 1-2 hours RE every week.

270

Chapter Thirteen

Transactional analyses of the RE teachers’ responses Within the limited scope of this chapter, I will present analyses which highlight the potential of looking at religious literacy events in a transactional perspective. The first analysis centers the attention on what tends to be left unseen if the “dynamic process” of the text-reader transaction is ignored. The second highlights the role of the actor of interpretation, and then more specifically, the critical decisions an RE teacher has to take during an interpretive event.

Avoiding oversimplifications and challenging dominant dichotomies Generally, the analyses of the RE teachers’ responses show that to engage in literature and a religious narrative more specifically truly is a complex matter. From the teachers’ perspective, however, as seen in their responses, things looked quite simple and obvious. Two of them, whom I call Terje and Karianne, illustrate this with the following introductory statements in the interviews: Karianne: It is so apparent. There is no other way to understand this parable!

Terje: It all depends on your point of view!

At a first look, Karianne’s and Terje’s statements seem unambiguous. Karianne’s statement appears to reflect a dominant text-oriented approach based on the notion that there is one inherent meaning in The Prodigal Son to be carried out, while Terje’s seems to have a dominant reader-oriented approach, claiming that meaning has its source in each and every reader’s point of view. As such, Terje and Karianne look as opposites and hence illustrate a well-known dichotomy in literary theory more generally and also in reader-response theory more specifically: primacy for the text or primacy for the reader. For Karianne, the parable as a genre seemed to explain everything, as she emphasized that the father – God analogy cannot be overlooked and must be the basis for any interpretation. As she put it: “It is a text about a human’s encounter with God. But first of all about God’s encounter with us humans.” Terje, in contrast, seems to place all the emphasis on what a reader brings in of personal background and experiences, and particularly then, as he saw it, the powerful impact of personal religious faith.

Religious Literacy and the Implications of Empirical Research

271

To apply the text-reader dichotomy would imply, then, positioning Terje and Karianne poles apart on the text-reader continuum. This would, however, not do justice to their responses. As a matter of fact, it would not even do justice to the short statements cited above. Obviously, something more complex is going on. Karianne’s statement can certainly also be understood as an utterance that reflects a strong personal affiliation to a dominant religious “interpretive community” (Fish 1980). Later in the interview this became vividly exposed in her recurrent references to her Catholic faith. For instance, to her, the oldest son in the parable is similar to many of the saints, as one who, as she put it, “lives so close to God but still has so much doubt.” It is therefore more likely that it is both the text and her background, and then these two in a negotiating activity, which make the parable so unambiguous. Turning to Terje’s statement, it can be viewed as an utterance reflecting not only his “point of view” but also the essential impact of textual impulses. It is especially the open ending of the parable, what Wolfgang Iser refers to as a “cutting technique” (Iser 1978, 190), which triggers Terje to express and emphasize his particular point of view. As Terje sees it, the open ending represents an invitation to all readers to engage and read their own lives into the parable and also continue the story by asking: “What happened to these two boys?” “How did their lives turn out?” Influenced by his own experience as a son and a father, to him it is most probable that the family conflict continues, as he perceives the perfect reconciliation to be way beyond a realistic outcome. At a closer look, though only scratching the surface of their responses, it is apparent that the parable as a text and Karianne’s and Terje’s backgrounds and experiences, have a mutual contingent effect on one another. Thus, in order to understand their responses, it is not sufficient to take sides for the text or the reader. Instead we have to focus on what happens in the text-reader transaction. For instance, we need to ask what textual aspects are being emphasized, ignored or neglected, and how and to what degree personal and collective biases are being reflected upon and addressed. In Karianne’s and in Terje’s case it was obvious that a simplistic and dichotomist view of the matter could not catch what in fact proved constitutive in their literacy events.

272

Chapter Thirteen

On the continuum between aesthetic and efferent readings To describe in more detail what happens during a literacy event, Rosenblatt applies the ` terms “aesthetic” and “efferent” readings.4 These terms highlight, according to Rosenblatt, “what the reader does,” more precisely, “the stance that he adopts and the activities he carries out in relation to the text” (Rosenblatt 1994, 27). Is the RE teacher reflecting, to illustrate an efferent stance, the traditional biblical exegete, who stereotypically deduces the most probable and most valid interpretation based on detailed knowledge of semantics and historical origin? If that is the case, the RE teacher’s subjective involvement and the text’s potential to create a literary experience is minimal and close to zero. This does not mean that there is no transaction between text and reader but a transaction constrained merely by efferent means and purposes. One should not conclude from this that Rosenblatt simply favors and endorses the “train of free associations… and free fantasy” (Rosenblatt 1994, 29). An aesthetic reading Rosenblatt underlines, depends on the reader’s “continuing awareness of … the text” (Rosenblatt 1994, 29, italics original), more specifically, the ability to utilize renowned literary knowledge. Thus, the ability to be aware of and apply significant verbal cues is crucial, but should not be upheld as the overall and premier goal. Rosenblatt says: “Whatever knowledge or insight we might gain by nonaesthetic means will be valued if it enhances the work-as-experienced” (Rosenblatt 1994, 125, italics added). In short, the knowledge must serve to deepen and enrich the literary experience of the reader. Rosenblatt’s concept of the efferent-aesthetic continuum provides, then, a theoretical perspective on the implications of RE teachers’ attention and direction when they respond to The Prodigal Son. In the following I will give two examples which illustrate its relevance. Peter (37 years) is formally educated in RE (30 ECTS) and has more than ten years of teaching-experience. What characterizes Peter’s response is that everything he brings into the interpretive event of past and present experiences, concepts of Christianity, and concepts of RE guide his response in an ethical direction. To him, Jesus is “a Socrates, “the counselor of his time,” an ethical ideal in sayings and in deeds. He elaborates on this by saying that Christianity and the Bible are all about giving “guidelines for human conduct.” Peter’s ethical approach, therefore, is not consciously selected from a variety of options. Rather, ethics is all he sees. 4

Efferent comes from the Latin verb effere, which means to “carry away.”

Religious Literacy and the Implications of Empirical Research

273

A transactional analysis shows that a particular selection and application of verbal cues actively and decisively contributes to building up and strengthening Peter’s ethical argument. For Peter, it seems that everything in The Prodigal Son points in the direction of ethics. The most decisive verbal cue is that the parable is to be read as an example story, an illustration of morale. The second prominent verbal cue is his identification of Jesus as the indisputable historical narrator. This concurrence of Jesus as an ethical ideal and historical narrator apparently reinforced the exclusively ethical approach. The third and final central verbal cue is the role of the characters – the two sons and the father – and the way these three play out the struggle of all humans to live according to ethical ideals. These three characters challenge everyone, as Peter sees it, “to start processes of thinking in relation to what is right, what is wrong,” and to eventually understand that “equality, view of man, generosity and forgiveness are the important elements.” There is nothing in the parable that challenges Peter’s illustrative reading. Not even the sudden discovery of what he comes to acknowledge as the “all too obvious” father’s home –Church allegory makes him consider otherwise. Thus, what appears to have the potential to disturb Peter’s course of interpretation, does not challenge his ethical mindset so that it has to be pushed out onto the fringes of the interpretive framework. To illustrate, when Peter rereads the parable allegorically, it is the Church as the all-embracive community he envisions. In his own words: “to be under the wings of Jesus and God” is a place where “there is room for all … all religions [and] all ways of thinking.” An exclusively ethical approach, therefore, imposes a consistent illustrative application on all of The Prodigal Son’s verbal cues. Peter does not consciously select and omit textual structures. Instead, the verbal cues become – reflexively it seems – adapted to fit the ethical framework. The result is a highly one-theme oriented approach. Thus, what may at times look like an aesthetic response when Peter eagerly raises questions about present actuality and what to him are of great personal concern, appears rather rigidly constrained and closed. Apparently, and applying the words of Rosenblatt, the ethical approach gives little space for “rereading,” “readjustment of meaning” and a “revision of framework,” thus impeding a text-reader transaction that opens up for explorative and multiple readings (Rosenblatt, 1994, 11, 54). The second example is represented by two teachers: Karianne (63 years) and Hanne (53 years). Karianne is the one of the two formally best qualified RE teachers (90 ECTS) and has career-long experience, while Hanne, though an experienced teacher, is not formally qualified (7 ½

274

Chapter Thirteen

ECTS) and is in her first year as an RE teacher.5 In addition, Karianne came forward as a devoted Catholic in her response, while Hanne, with references to concrete personal experiences, appeared much more ambivalent to the Christian faith and also the Church (The Norwegian Church). Despite these very noticeable differences, they had a similar approach to The Prodigal Son. What characterizes Hanne and Karianne’s responses is not a powerful and constraining interpretive framework, but a more visibly shifting emphasis on the reader and the text, and also a more collaborative and equal relationship between the two. In other words, I find that there is a constant dialogue between textual elements and reader elements in their responses. Thus, I refer to Karianne and Hanne’s approaches as dialogical. The point of departure for both is the analogous structures of The Prodigal Son, and the notion that the father reveals the true nature of God and the God – man relation. If this is omitted or neglected, Hanne comments, you are left with a “flat” story, clearly indicating that an interpersonal reading of the ethical kind will miss the essential meaning of the parable. More than that, potential readings will be left undiscovered because it is the analogous structures which create space for multiple readings. Thus, Karianne’s and Hanne’s text-centeredness does not prevent them from bringing their own life-stories into the interpretive event and create multiple readings. As we will see in the following, it is rather the opposite. The two brothers and their relation to the father play an essential role in triggering a dialogical reading. The two sons enact the basic human experience that we all drift in “a condition,” as Hanne puts it, “between faith, doubt” and “disbelief,” or “between trust and mistrust.” And it is the negation and the open ending of the last paragraph that most obviously challenges and invites them to bring their own self into dialogue with the parable and place themselves somewhere on the continuum between the prodigal and the homebound son. And this is also what Hanne and Karianne are doing, as they both express emotional involvement. Hanne even bursts into tears when she speaks about the challenge of relating to God with faith and what it means to be truly home. I am very touched by it. (tears and pause) But that is about me and my life. (laughs a little, tears and sobs)

5

To teach RE in grades 1 to 10, 30 ECTS are required.

Religious Literacy and the Implications of Empirical Research

275

This personal and emotional aspect points to a prominent subjective feature in the responses. The subjectivity, however, does not determine the outcome of the dialogue but serves instead to trigger it and certainly also to give it a more personal touch. To illustrate this, I will describe how Karianne’s and Hanne’s backgrounds, their concept of Christianity, and then more specifically, their concept of Church, are brought in and affect the transactional process. Like Peter above, neither Hanne nor Karianne is a stranger to thinking of the father’s home as an allegory of the Christian community and more specifically the Church. However, it is not an ethical imagery which dominates their thinking, nor the inside – outside dichotomy which I found characterized five other RE teacher responses.6 Rather, it is their own journey in the landscape of faith and disbelief which enters the scene. This experience gives them the common thought that there are various ways of identifying with the father and the father’s home. In their argumentation, to be home with the father, as they both see it, is not about being at a specific location, having a formal affiliation, or acting according to a set of moral norms, but a matter of personal relation and faith. Hanne puts it like this: “to be home is … a state of being, an existence … a matter of trusting the father.” Again, this emphasis on personal relation and faith points toward a strong subjectivity in Hanne and Kariannes approaches. This, as said above, does not undermine their text-centeredness. I find that it is this balancing between, on the one hand, the personal and subjective, and on the other hand, reflections on key textual structures, which opens up for an aesthetic reading that “constantly vibrates between the pole of the text and the pole of his own responses to it” (Rosenblatt 1994, 129). Put differently, as dialogical readers, Hanne and Karianne continually ask questions and engage in “rereading” and “readjustment of meaning,” and also, within certain boundaries, open up for the possibility of a “revision of framework” (Rosenblatt 1994, 11, 54). In the dialogical approach,

6

The point of reference in these five responses, which I refer to as Christian responses, is the classical story of Christian conversion. In this framework the oldest brother is given little weight. He is the one who, in the words of one of the teachers, “stayed with his father, or stayed with God,” the one who was “a Christian,” “a baptized.” In short, the oldest son was perceived as an insider, one who lives a “godly life.” This “godly life,” then, is contrasted with the youngest son who, as one puts it, “was a Christian but became an apostate,” but who now asks his father’s forgiveness, to enter inside and once again live according to the Christian life.

276

Chapter Thirteen

therefore, and that in contrast to Peter’s ethical approach, there appear to be no finalized or complete readings.

Implications for the religious literacy discourse The empirical findings of my study are unequivocal about one thing: The reader plays a major role in literacy events. Independent of the many variations among the RE teachers, the findings show that religious literacy practices can hardly be understood without acknowledging the constitutive role of the reader. And obviously, the reader is much more than a codebreaker who is given the role to instrumentally carry out the most probable interpretation. Each one of the responses illuminates that the teacher and his or her personal factor “constitutes another type of limitation” (Rosenblatt 1994, 129), and thus needs to be included as an essential part of theory-building on literacy. However, I do not find sufficient support for, as Terje stated in his response, that “It all depends on your point of view!” as if personal factors determine the outcome in an essentialist way. Although the findings confirm that the teachers’ point of views have considerable impact, it is even more important to be aware of and highlight that their religious affiliation, personal background and experiences, etc. can be played out in many different ways in transaction with the text. For instance, Karianne shows that you can be devoted and belong to a powerful religious interpretive community (Catholic), but without letting this influence fully determine the course of interpretation. The defining moment, therefore, seems to be whether the RE teachers’ personal factors – intentionally or unintentionally – leave room only for the one argument and the onethemed interpretation, or if they function as a stimulus to deepen and enhance the literary experience. This also applies to the issue of formal knowledge, because what appears decisive is not the RE teachers’ linguistic and literary competence per se but how they apply this knowledge in concrete literacy events. You can draw from years of academic studies, but the essential question is how this knowledge is applied, whether it constrains the meaning-making process or serves to broaden and enhance it. Interestingly, the teacher with the highest and the one with the lowest formal competence in RE ended up on each pole on Rosenblatt’s reader continuum; the best qualified farthest out on the efferent side and the least qualified and also least experienced farthest out on the aesthetic side. Based on these findings, therefore, I present the following claim:

Religious Literacy and the Implications of Empirical Research

277

Though important, the key issue is not only what the RE teacher brings to the interpretive event of personal and collective biases, and formal knowledge, but the actual decisions made when all this is played out in the transaction with the text.

On this basis I will point to three issues and subsequent questions, which stand out as particularly significant to address: 1. The issue of textual awareness: To what degree are the RE teachers aware of various aspects of the text? What aspects of the text are emphasized and what aspects are ignored or neglected? 2. The issue of self-awareness: To what degree are the RE teachers aware of and willing to reflect critically on personal and collective biases? 3. The issue of openness: To what degree are the RE teachers willing to engage in rereading, readjustment of meaning and also to consider revision of interpretive framework when other ideas prove persuasive and more substantial? To what degree are the RE teachers open to the possibility of multiple valid interpretations? Although Diane L. Moore, more than Stephen Prothero and Andrew Wright, includes the role of the actor in interpretive activities and focuses on the partial and biased “lens of the interpretor” (Moore 2007, 81), the overall impression is that this is disregarded at the expense of promoting a set of theory-driven competencies. The result of this is that significant factors constituting religious literacy events seldom and barely reach the table of discussion. Without in-depth knowledge about the range of hermeneutical issues that permeate and affect religious literacy events, the current discourse on religious literacy will remain detached from the field of practice and too distanced from the key practitioners. Thus, I call for a field of research which recognizes the necessity of and also the potential in bringing theoretical and empirical studies into a fruitful dialogue. To challenge the discourse on religious literacy in RE research to be more practice- and actor-oriented, is also a matter of avoiding the pitfall of labelling the world as religiously illiterate, as Moore does, or, and even more critically in an educational context, to ridicule the students, as Prothero does. Rosenblatt talks about the process of turning away from theoretical and normative-oriented concepts and towards being genuinely interested in what a reader does, as a “conversion”; from only looking for traces of predefined knowledge aims in readers’ responses, towards studying them as unique “poems” which inhabit complex negotiating activities. Thus, what at first sight can appear as an ignorant response may

278

Chapter Thirteen

possess qualities of critical importance: textual awareness, self-awareness, and openness. And also vice versa, an academically advanced response may lack the same qualities. To underline the importance of these skills, Rosenblatt refers to them as “critical skills” and also “democratic skills” (John Clifford 1991). The idea, one should note, is not so much that students and teachers first and foremost should be seen as agents for change and “democratic citizenry” (Moore 2007, 178). Although Rosenblatt says that her ideas “have been fueled by the belief that it serves the purposes of education for democracy” (Karolides 1999, 169), her focus is on uncovering the essential properties of critical or democratic literacy practices. In other words, and as Gordon M. Pradl states in the article “Reading and Democracy: The Enduring Influence of Louise Rosenblatt”, Rosenblatt’s aim is to uncover “how readers … enact democratic values” in their literary experiences (Pradl 1996, 10). This, with reference to the title of her pioneering book Literature as Exploration (1938), can only be grasped by undertaking empirical studies, by exploring and understanding literacy events. In that way, Rosenblatt envisioned as early as the late 1930s, that “the study of literature can have a very real, and even central, relation to the points of growth in the social and cultural life of a democracy” (1938, v). These words, I will argue, are not only important to bring into the current religious literacy discourse, but also to the broader educational discourse on literacy.

References Barton, David. 1994. Literacy: An Introduction to the Ecology of Written Language. Oxford: Blackwell. Brömssen, Kerstin von. 2013. “Religious literacy: Är det ett användbart begrepp inom religionsdidaktisk/-pedagogisk forskning?” [Religious Literacy: Is it an Applicable Concept in RE Research?]. In Kunnskap til hva?: Om religion i skolen, edited by Bente Afset, Hildegunn. V. Kleive, and Kristin Hatlebrekke, 117-43. Trondheim: Tapir akademisk forlag. Clifford, John. 1988. “Introduction: On First Reading Rosenblatt”. Reader, 20(fall), 1-6. —. 1991. The Experience of Reading: Louise Rosenblatt and ReaderResponse Theory. Boynton/Cook Publishers. Elliot, Norbert. 2008. “A Midrash for Louise Rosenblatt”. Rhetoric Review, 27(3), 281-304. doi: 10.1080/07350190802126235

Religious Literacy and the Implications of Empirical Research

279

Eemeren, Frans H. van, Francisca S. Henkemans, and Rob Grootendorst. 1996. Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory: A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum. Fish, Stanley. E. 1980. Is There a Text in this Class?: The Authority of Interpretive Communities. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Fontana, Andrea, and James H. Frey. 2005. “The Interview: From Neutral Stance to Political Involvement." In The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, edited by Norman K. Denzin, and Yvonna S. Lincoln, 695728. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage. Heath, Shirley. B. 1981. “Protean Shapes in Literacy Events: Ever-shifting Oral and Literate Traditions”. In Spoken and Written Language: Exploring Orality and Literacy, edited by Deborah Tannen, 91-118. Norwood, N.J: ABLEX. Iser, Wolfgang. 1978. The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press. Karolides, Nicholas J. 1999. “Theory and Practice: An Interview with Louise M. Rosenblatt”. Language Arts, 77(2), 158-70. Kjørven, Ole K. 2014. RE teachers' Religious Literacy: A Qualitative Analysis of RE Teachers' Interpretations of the Biblical Narrative The Prodigal Son. [Oslo]: Det teologiske menighetsfakultet. Kvale, Steinar, and Svend Brinkmann. 2009. Interviews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing. 2nd ed. Los Angeles, Calif.: Sage. Luke, Allan. 2012. “Critical literacy: Foundational notes”. Theory Into Practice, 51(1), 4-11. doi: 10.1080/00405841.2012.636324 Moore, Diane. L. 2006. “Overcoming Religious Illiteracy: A Cultural Studies Approach. Retrieved 11.06.2013, from http://worldhistoryconnected.press.illinois.edu/4.1/moore.html —. 2007. Overcoming Religious Illiteracy: A Cultural Studies Approach to the Study of Religion in Secondary Education. New York: Palgrave MacMillan. Pradl, Gordon. M. 1996. “Reading and Democracy: The Enduring Influence of Louise Rosenblatt”. New Advocate, 9(1), 9-22. Prothero, Stephen. 2007. Religious Literacy: What Every American Needs to know - and Doesn't. New York: HarperCollins. Rosenblatt, Louise. M. 1938. Literature as Exploration. New York: D. Appleton-Century, incorporated.

280

Chapter Thirteen

—. 1985. “Viewpoints: Transaction Versus Interaction: A Terminological Rescue Operation”. Research in the Teaching of English, 19(1), 96107. —. 1994. The Reader the Text the Poem: The Transactional Theory of the Literary Work. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Street, Brian. 1997. “The Implications of the ‘New Literacy Studies’ for Literacy Education”. English in Education, 31(3), 45-59. Van Dijk, Teun A. 2006. “Discourse, Context and Cognition.” Discourse Studies, 8(1), 159-77. doi: 10.1177/1461445606059565. Wright, Andrew. 2000. “The Spiritual Education Project: Cultivating Spiritual and Religious Literacy Through a Critical Pedagogy of Religious Education”. In Pedagogies of Religious Education: Case Studies in the Research and Development of Good Pedagogic Practice in RE, edited by Michael Grimmitt, 170-87. Great Wakering: McCrimmons.

CHAPTER FOURTEEN CHILDREN’S DIALOGUE WITH VALUES: VALUES IN CHILDREN’S MEMORIAL MESSAGES IN THE AFTERMATH OF JULY 22ND 2011 SIDSEL LIED

Children’s messages from spontaneous memorial places after the terror of July 22nd 2011 in Oslo and on Utøya island show that many children were in affirmative dialogue with values like love, human worth and life in the days after this event. But some messages show that this very support sometimes put these same values under pressure: the terrorist was dehumanised, deprived his human worth and wanted dead. In spite of–or: because of–the legitimacy of this reaction, it may be seen as a signal for school to put its central values in focus; not as a defence for the terrorist, but as an awakening to how we think and talk about people who are easy to blame.

Introduction and research question On July 22nd 2011 government buildings in central Oslo were bombed by Anders B. Breivik. Eight people were killed and many wounded. Some hours later, on the very same day, Breivik shot 69 youths dead and wounded many more on Utøya island, where the Labour Movement’s youth were having their summer camp (see i.a. Stormark 2011). Professor of sociology Grace Davie says that if you want to know important rituals, belief and moral codes of societies, you could observe them “at particular moments in their evolution when ‘normal’ ways of living are, for one reason or another, suspended,” because then “something far more instinctive comes to the fore: under pressure, the implicit becomes explicit” (Davie 2007, 28; see also Eva-Marie Syversen's chapter

282

Chapter Fourteen

in this book). I see July 22nd 2011 as such a moment in the history of Norwegian society: in the days after the terror what is seen as “normal living” was suspended. This suspension came to the fore i.a. through rose parades arranged all over the country and memorial gatherings in streets and squares, in schools and city halls, in churches and mosques. In spontaneous memorial places1 candles were lit and flowers, written greetings and prayers were put down by children, youths and adults (Stormark 2011; Aagedal, Botvar, and Høeg 2013). The most prominent of these memorial places were Oslo Cathedral Square. The National Archives of Norway have gathered, preserved and digitalised 25000 documents from the memorial places in Oslo and Utvika2 (Schøien 2008; Aagedal et al. 2013) and thus made them available for research. My focus in this article is expressions of values by children3 who wrote messages and put them on spontaneous memorial places in the days after July 22nd (Lied and Undseth Bakke 2013). These messages may be seen as expressions of what values children perceived as important in the aftermath of the terror. I have studied all the memorial messages categorised by the National Archives as “drawings with and without text” from Oslo Cathedral Square and Utvika. My research question is: What do children’s memorial messages from Oslo Cathedral Square and Utvika convey about what values they were in dialogue with in the aftermath of July 22nd 2011? This question is particularly relevant for Norwegian school. The Norwegian Education Act’s statement of purpose is a value ethical statement (Stubø 2012). It puts teachers under the obligation of presenting values that are central to Norwegian society, to their students in their teaching. The research question opens for requesting if there is a connection between central values in school’s statement of purpose and the values children were in dialogue with in their utterances, and if these dialogues e.g. were affirmative, explorative or critical. To answer my research question I shall, firstly, present socio-cultural theory which is my overarching theoretical perspective when discussing the question, give a short presentation of the concept value and a short review of Gunther Kress and Theo van Leeuwen’s social semiotic approach to visual design. Secondly, I shall draw attention to memorial 1

Such spontaneous memorial places may also be called spontaneous altars or memorial places (see e.g. Gustavsson 2006; Westgaard 2001). 2 Utøya island is an island in the Tyrifjorden. Utvika is the village closest to this island on the mainland. 3 I use children as a designation of persons less than 18 years of age. This is the judicial definition of the term. Some of the messages have no age connected to them. Here I base my use of this term on discretion.

Children’s Dialogue with Values

283

messages that highlight values that children were in affirmative dialogue with, and messages that may be interpreted as pointing to values that were threatened or under pressure, in the aftermath of the terror. Lastly I shall discuss my findings in the light of values presented in the Norwegian Education Act’s statement of purpose. This discussion includes a suggestion to school to include children’s memorial messages as learning material and artefacts in its teaching about values. These messages are written in a language characteristic for the life world of school children and marked by negotiations they are used to participate in and symbols they are accustomed to use. The messages therefore may ease students’ understanding of and engagement with values, because they represent a communicative repertoire (Dewilde and Igland 2015) that they are accustomed to.

Theoretical perspectives and central concepts Socio cultural theory Socio-cultural theories see knowledge development, learning and identity formation as relational, situated, social and cultural processes. These processes take place in interactions between the individual and his/her contexts and by means of mediating artefacts such as language, activities, pictures and physical objects (Dysthe 1997, 2001; Säljö 2006; Vygotskij 2001). Thus, as every human being is an integrated part of social and cultural contexts, the individual’s values and evaluations to a large extent mirror the values that are present in the contexts of which he or she is a part (Blackburn 2001; Lied 2012; Løken 2012; Taylor 1985). This should not be understood in the way that every citizen always shares all the values present here. But due to the constant interaction between individual and context, school being one of these, every person will always be in communication with or in dialogue with the values present in his/her contexts. This communication may be accepting and/or critical, as it is values present in the contexts that must be considered and accepted, finetuned or rejected by the individual in the encounter. In this way the individual’s values mirror the values that are present in his/her contexts.

Values When I study children’s memorial messages, I ask which values are present in these messages, which of them stand forth as important and worth fighting for, and which ones may be interpreted as values that are

284

Chapter Fourteen

under pressure or threatened. Then I also, implicitly, ask which of society’s values children seemed to identify with in the days after the terror. To give a short designation of what a value is, I will refer to Jan Kåre Hummelvoll who highlights values as being about what can be good or bad, right or wrong, wanted or unwanted, praiseworthy or objectionable when it comes to human need or interest, ideals or actions. What may be labelled universal values are phenomena that may be seen as valuable in themselves, such as life, health, freedom, friendship etc. (Hummelvoll 2014). Based on Charles Taylor, Harald Løken says that values which a person identifies with show what is important for that person and what is at stake for him or her in a certain situation (Løken 2012; Taylor 1989). Regarding community values, Ivar Asheim underlines that values are positive designations of something that in a decisive way constitutes, gives basis, framework, and/or goals for ways of living together in a society (Asheim 2005, 56; Stubø 2012, 88).

A grammar of Western visual design The memorial messages which I study come forth as visual utterances either as mere drawings or as a combination of drawing and verbal text. I look for value-based dialogues that appear in these utterances and use the social semiotics Kress and van Leeuwen’s work in my analysis, as their “grammar of visual design” focusses how multimodal visual utterances communicate meaning. They underline that the grammar that they present, is a grammar of “contemporary visual design in ‘Western’ cultures […] consisting of the elements and rules underlying a culture-specific form of visual communication” (Kress and Van Leeuwen 2006, 3). In other words: with Kress and van Leeuwen, too, we meet the conviction that when communicating, one is always in dialogue with the modes of expression that are present and in use in the context or sphere of communication of which one is a part. Kress and van Leeuwen distinguish between narrative and conceptual processes in visual design. Narrative representations display social action and points to what is going on in the picture or presentation (Kress & Leeuwen 2000, 2006). Of special interest for me is children’s use of what is called actors and vectors. In the narrative processes the vectors highlight and points at those who are actors in the social action presented in the picture, relate the actors to each other and direct attention to what is happening. In this way, vectors participate in showing what is important in the presentation. Arrows, lines, glances, speech bubbles and other

Children’s Dialogue with Values

285

elements in a picture may serve as vectors. Conceptual representations display social constructs like concepts and ideas in visual design, and participate in accentuating what is central and important in the picture. Of special interest for me when analysing children’s utterances is the focus on classification (e.g. taxonomy that relates subordinate and superordinate to each other), part-whole structures (e.g. attributes or parts characterising the whole), and what symbolic processes and attributes (e.g. size, location, details, colour, symbolic meaning in the present culture) can tell about what different elements in the visual design mean or are (Kress and Leeuwen 2000; Lied 2004). Still following Kress and van Leeuwen’s grammar of visual design, the top of the composition presents “the Ideal” or “the idealized or generalized essence of the information, hence also as its, ostensibly, most salient part” (Kress and Van Leeuwen 2006, 186-187). The bottom contains “the Real” which presents “more specific information (e.g. details), more ‘down-toearth’ information (e.g. photographs as documentary evidence, or maps or charts), or more practical information (e.g. practical consequences, direction for action)”. These two parts elaborate on each other, but the upper part always plays the lead role. The left part of a composition or page contains “the Given”, something “that the reader is supposed to know already, as part of the culture”, while the right part contains “the New”, the “key information,” “what the reader must pay particular attention to,” or “the message”. In other words, Kress and van Leeuwen argue that to read Western visual design you have to read from the top downwards to the bottom and from left to the right. They describe, that is, a reading path which is typical for Western culture. However, our utterances do not always follow the strict rules of grammar, neither when talking nor writing or drawing. This is a fact that children’s memorial messages display, too.

Children’s affirmative dialogue with love and togetherness I have studied about 2700 messages written by adults, youths and children from Oslo Cathedral Square and Utvika. What I find to be the dominant values in these utterances are love (1219 or 46%) and togetherness (883 or 33%). As expressions of love I have reckoned verbal expressions of love, and drawings of hearts, huggings etc. As expressions of togetherness I have counted verbal expressions of support, togetherness and fellowship with persons and with Norway, and drawings of people holding hands, rainbows (the rainbow being a traditional symbol of unity in diversity) and

286

Chapter Fo ourteen

Norwegian flags.4 As already a stated d, though, I shall in thiis article concentrate on values in children’s c utteerances only.

L Love and tog getherness Several utterrances reveal that children,, in their dialoogue with valu ues in the aftermath off July 22nd, offten combine the t values lovve and togetheerness, as the followinng utterance deemonstrates:

Figure 1 – seee colour centreffold for this imaage in colour.

Starting on top of this uttterance, which h presents “thhe Ideal”, we see a sky filled with m multi-colouredd hearts and a Norwegian flag. It is no oteworthy that the heaarts are multi--coloured. It is possible too see this as a child’s mere play w with colours. But following g Kress and vvan Leeuwen n, looking for more speecific informaation in “the Real” R further down in the utterance, u we see a raiinbow undernneath which tw wo girls–one brown-haired d and one fair-haired–aare holding hands. h The on ne with the bbrown hair saays: “We stick togetheer here in Oslo”,5 and the fair-haired annswers: ”Yes, we stick together in O Oslo”.6 The rainbow r surrou unding the tw wo girls is serrving as a vector pointting at them as central acttors in the coomposition, a narrative representatioon of what is going on in th he picture. It iis also notewo orthy that 4

A developm ment of the notiion of the Norw wegian flag as a symbol of tog getherness, see (Lied andd Undseth Bakkke 2013) 5 «Vi holder ssammen her i Oslo» O 6 «Ja vi holdeer sammen i Osllo»

Children’s Dialogue with Values

287

this part of the composition–the two girls and the rainbow–is located under the sky with multi-coloured hearts and a flag, and in the middle of the picture. This location may be seen as a conceptual representation accentuating what is central and important: love and togetherness represented by the sky with multi-coloured hearts and by the two girls holding hands, praising togetherness underneath the rainbow. Such an interpretation is supported by the fact that the image of “children of the rainbow” is a current and well known symbol of unity in diversity in Norway. Lillebjørn Nilsen’s song “Barn av regnbuen” (Children of the rainbow) has been frequently used in Norwegian schools since its release in 1973, and it is therefore likely to assume that the song is known by most Norwegian schoolchildren. This song was also sung in all Norwegian towns on one of the days of the trial against the terrorist in April 2012: it served as a joint and explicit protest to Breivik’s message in court that this song brainwashes Norwegian schoolchildren and is propaganda for a multicultural society because of its message of unity in diversity. The notion of togetherness, diversity and a sky with a colourful rainbow was, that is, a current and well known combination of symbols in Norway before July 22nd. The eight year old girl who made this utterance may be understood as being in dialogue with the song Children of the rainbow and the values togetherness, diversity and love when making this utterance. This dialogue may also be seen as an affirmative dialogue with the society of which the girl belonged to, as these values were part of the central messages from leading Norwegian political and national representatives, mass media, social media and the royal family in the immediate aftermath of the terror attack (see e.g. Haakon 2011; Stoltenberg, 2011a, 2011b).

Unforeseen love Two of the utterances that I have studied, expressed what I would call a rather unexpected form of love: they included the terrorist’s family and friends in the community of love and togetherness which was displayed in the immediate aftermath of July 22nd. One of these two was signed by a boy of seven and two girls of 11.

288

Chapter Fo ourteen

Figure 2 – seee colour centreffold for this imaage in colour.

Again: folloowing Kress annd van Leeuv ven we find thee most salientt part of a compositionn at its top, whhile the lowerr part presentss us with moree detailed information.. These two parts p elaborate on each othher, but the upper u part plays the leaad role. The teext at the top of the page, ssays: “Our tho oughts go to the deceaased and theiir kin and An nders Breivikk’s family and d friends. Norway sticcks together.”7 The togetheerness that thiss verbal text expresses e is further em mphasized by the drawing that infiltrate s it: a map off Norway constituted by matchsticck men holdiing hands. U Under this mu ultimodal expression tthere are draw wings that giv ve more inform mation and deetails: the deceased aree presented as a two angels with haloes aand wings, th he biggest one holdingg a light and the smaller one o a rose. W We see that th he angels represent thee deceased beecause of the verbal texts oon their right hand h side and inside the heart on their left. Th he texts say: “You shall never be forgotten” aand “Rest in peeace”.8 Here, in this utterancce, the togetheerness is the essence of th he text. It includes thee deceased annd their kin, as a well as thee terrorist and d his kin. That the first ones are inncluded is no surprise. Theese were the ones that were easy too love and to feel compassion for, and thhe memorial messages exhibit thouusands of exprressions of lov ving concern ffor and sympathy with 7

«Våre tankeer går til de avddøde, pårørendee og Anders Brreiviks familie og o venner. Norge holder sammen.» 8 «Dere skal aaldri glemmes»» og «Hvil i fred d».

Chiildren’s Dialogue with Valuess

289

the victims of the terror. But the writers of this meessage are in dialogue with an exttended versioon of love, naamely love ffor one’s enemy: they managed to include in thheir compassio on not only thhose who werre easy to love, but allso those whoo were easy to t blame and hate.9 We may m see a dialogue witth an extendeed version of love l also in thhe messages presented p in the next ssection of thiss article, nameely those whicch introduced love as a weapon agaiinst evil.

Love as weapon w Some messages display the value lo ove as a weaapon against Breivik’s ideology or,, more generaalised, against evil. The foollowing messsage may represent those, visualisinng the dialogu ue with love tthat two girls of 8 and 13 respectivvely have whenn planning ho ow to fight eviil.

Figure 3 – seee colour centreffold for this imaage in colour.

The messagge has the form m of a doublee heart-shapedd card. The veerbal text on the frontt states: “Lovve is our weap pon…”10 Aroound this shorrt text 90 small red, piink and whitee hearts mark the edge of thhe card. When n opening it, we find a text on the left hand sidee, giving moree specific info ormation: “We shall ovvercome evil,, and love is our o weapon”111 the girls writte. To the 9

See also Kjeetil Stormark who w refers to wh hat he calls «thhe unique messaages» («de unike meldinngene») sent to Breivik’s e-m mail, where som me people writee that they will pray for tthe perpetrator (Stormark 2012 2, 262). 10 «Kjærligheet er vårt våpen… …» 11 «Vi skal vinnne over ondskkapen og kjærlig ghet er vårt våppen»

290

Chapter Fourteen

right of this text they have emphasised what the reader must pay attention to: there is a bow, arrows with heart-shaped heads, and a quiver filled with arrows–love’s concrete weapons. Love and weapons are usually seen as conflicting categories. But sometimes these categories blend, for instance in Mahatma Ghandi’s doctrine of non violence and in the story about Harry Potter where love is presented as the weapon in the fight against evil. We may also see this combination in the light of central texts from the Christian Bibel. Here love is said to be the greatest of all, and the word of God is recommended for use as a weapon against evil. By piecing these seeming opposites together, a room for a fight which is not violent is created. “We won’t give in! We’ll fight evil, but we’ll do it our way and choose our own weapon – namely love!” are messages that one may read out of principles and stories like these, the heart-shaped card of fig. 3 being one of them.

Children’s affirmative dialogues with values I have argued so far that the memorial messages suggest that values which children were in frequent and affirmative dialogue with in the aftermath of July 22nd 2011, were love and togetherness. These dialogues took place in the sphere of communication which the Norwegian society at that period of time, constituted. The values and responses which children were in dialogue with and which came out in their messages, may be found here–in speeches and actions. Childrens’ messages–may, in other words, be seen as mirroring some of society’s traditional values and the ways these were communicated in the aftermath of July 22nd. But the picture of love and togetherness is not the only picture from this period of time. The memorial messages also indicate that some of Norwegian society’s central values were under pressure or threatened, the double heart-card which emphasises love as a weapon against evil being one example of such an indication, as one may ask: what is the evil that love’s weapon shall fight? What is seen as evil? According to memorial messages made by children, what values are threatened or put under pressure by evil? This is the theme for the article’s next section.

Values that are threatened or under pressure As already mentioned, life and health are often pictured as universal values (see e.g. Barbosa da Silva 2006; Bøckman 1971; Heiene & Thorbjørnsen 2001; Hummelvoll 2014). These values were also the ones in focus when Professor Jan Olav Henriksen and psychologist Gry Stålsett

Chiildren’s Dialogue with Valuess

291

in 2012 werre asked to deefine evil in th he light of the terror attackss in 2011. They both eemphasised thhe will to in nflict harm annd pain on otthers and destroying their lives on o purpose, as a central asppects of thiss concept (Henriksen and Stålsett in Helmikstø øl 2012; see also Vetleseen 2014). Breivik’s teerror attacks as a a threat agaainst life is allso a central aspect of children’s m memorial messsages. Many of o these messaages include an nger with Breivik’s acctions: some of o them rebuk ke him and caall him naugh hty, some mock him, aand some exppress joy for seeing him behhind bars. On nly two of the utterancees that I have studied, wantt him dead.

T The value lifee as threaten ned by Breiviik’s actions The bombinng of the govvernment buiildings as weell as the sho ooting on Utøya islandd were focusssed in children n’s expressionns of horror and a anger in the afterm math of the terrror.

Figure 4 – seee colour centreffold for this imaage in colour.

In fig. 4, ann utterance froom a nine yeaar old boy, theere is a text on o the top part of the composition,, signalling th he essence oof its informaation: “In remembrancce of the Utøøya victims and the bom mb. We think k of you. 12 Greetings fr from NN, 9 years.” y Und der this text tthere is moree detailed information of what had happened: the explosioon in the government building is llocated in the centre of the composition, thus signallin ng what is 12

«Til minne om Utøyaofrenne og bomben. Vi tenker på deere. Hilsen NN 9 år.»

292

Chapter Fourteen

important in the picture’s narration. Here we see broken windows, some of them coloured red, most probably simulating blood. In front of the building we find dead or wounded people also covered with blood. BOMM is written in capital letters, and a ‘star of explosion’ underlines what is happening to the building and causing the bloodshed. To the left of this, containing what we as readers are supposed to know, we see a match man with his hand held high. Is he cheering, or does he want to stop what is happening? In both cases his hand is pointing to the explosion, serving as a vector directing attention to this event. Still on the left hand side of the composition, but underneath the cheering or pointing man, there is a circle surrounding blood stained matchstick men, most likely a drawing of Utøya island and its victims. Outside the island we see people in the sea. Down to the right in the composition, where we are supposed to find what to offer special attention or the composition’s message, we see a match man with a gun in his hand, several dots coming from the gun’s mouth hitting another match man, laying on the ground covered with red. “HAAA” the speech bubble coming from the gunman’s mouth says, signalling laughter or satisfaction. In other words, the nine year old boy has pictured the shooting on Utøya island as caused with delight by a laughing terrorist. If the match man on the upper left hand side of the bombed building is cheering, the events in central Oslo are pictured as done with enjoyment, too. But the boy’s utterance is not a cheerful one. The text on the top of the composition together with the drawing shows that this is a composition picturing two horrid events. Breivik bombs and shoots, doing this even with laughing delight. The boy has here contrasted Breivik’s delight in killing with the dreadfulness of the action, and used this contrast to underpin his disgust of the evil performed by the perpetrator. Doing this, he is picturing life as a value threatened by Breivik’s deeds. In other words, he may be seen as in affirmative dialogue with life as a universal value, and this dialogue, in its turn, leads him to a critical dialogue with Breivik’s deeds: his deeds are seen as evil because they are threatening the value life.

Breivik is laughed at In some utterances, though, the critical dialogue with Breivk’s actions combined with the accepting dialogue with life as a universal value, are more clear-cut. Fig. 5, covering three pages, is one of those.

Children’s Dialogue with Values

293

Figure 5 – see colour centrefold for this image in colour.

On the first page’s upper part, we see the terrorist behind a barred window with his name on top of it. The people of Oslo (“oslofolket”) are outside, laughing. Underneath it there is a swastika which is crossed out. The second page contains a flower, while the text on the third page says: “I draw this flower for the sake of the grief and for all the dead ones on Utøya island and downtown. It is SAD.”13 The drawing below this text shows a winged heart surrounding a crying face. 13 «Jeg tegner denne blomsten for sorgen å for alle de døde På Utøya å i centrum det er TRIST!»

294

Chapter Fo ourteen

This utteerance clearly mocks the terrorist by puttting him in jaail, people standing ouutside laughinng at him. Bakhtin presennts laughter as a a tool which may inactivate thee dangerous and a protect aggainst what is regarded as threateninng. Laughter is the people’s weapon aggainst a superior force: ”One plays with the friightening and d laughs at iit. The frigh htening is reduced to a scarecrow” (Bakhtin 2003, 69). But according to Bakhtin, laughter is aalso a way inn which to disstance oneselff from the preesent and make it histtory, not allow wing it to be a part of the ffuture. In otheer words: by laughingg at Breivik, thhe writer of th his utterance nneutralises him m, places him in the past, and exccludes him from influencinng the future. This he does in critiical dialogue with Breivik k and his actioons and in afffirmative dialogue wiith life as a value threateneed by him. It is because of “all the dead ones” who lost theiir lives in thee terror that thhe child enjoy ys seeing w sitting behind b bars. Breivik beinng laughed at while Anger w with the actioons and rebu uke of the terrrorist combiined with articulation of concern and a love for the victims and their family and m friends, is eexpressed in quite a few of children’ss memorial messages. Some messaages, howeverr, seem to tak ke blame and m mocking a steep further than fig. 5 ddoes, by depriving Breivik of his human dignity whilee blaming and mockinng him. The next utterance may serve as exampless of what could be undderstood as suuch a dehuman nisation.

Dehu umanising Breivik – hum man worth un nder pressurre? On the first page of fig. 6, 6 a two paged d uttering madde by an eightt year old nt is shown. B Breivik is draw wn with a girl, the horrror of the Utøøya island-even black hood over his headd. He tells the person nextt to him, the one who 14 kicks him annd calls him “Stupid” “ , nott to kick: “Doon’t kick me. If I you do, 15 I’ll shoot yoou.” This thhreat is made credible by tthe person wiith a long yellow hair, lying on the quay. She hass a red spot onn her head an nd is most probably deead. Two perssons stand on n the grass byy the quay. They T say: “You are nnaughty” andd “You are a murderer”.116 Several peeople are swimming in the sea, cryying for help. The whole sccene is so dreaadful that even the sunn looks horriffied. This–folllowing Kress and van Leeu uwen–we are supposedd to know.

14

«Dommingg» «Ikke sparkk meg. Da skyteer jeg dei» 16 «Du er slem m» og «Du er enn morder» 15

Chiildren’s Dialogue with Valuess

295

Figure 6 – seee colour centreffold for this imaage in colour.

Page two coontains the utttering’s messaage and drawss the conclusio on of this horrifying aact. The top of this page co ontains a verbbal text, preseenting the essence of iits information: “Everybod dy in Norwayy is sad becau use of the murderer. H He is a DEVIL L. The murdeerer is so nauughty that it is he who should die. Everybody inn Norway and d many other countries aree sad and everybody is coming to toown because many are deaad. He is the naughtiest n

296

Chapter Fourteen

in the whole universe. It is good that he is in prison!!!”17 Below this text, we find more specific information: a smiling face is crossed out, while an angry one is marked with a green V. This utterance may be seen as a critical dialogue with the terrorist’s deeds and a defense for the victims’ right to live – a value-based right closely connected to the state of being human. It may also be seen as a fight for the values life and human worth, values that the writer comprehends as threatened by the terrorist’s shooting and killing at Utøya island. But it is also worth noticing that in this utterance Breivik is dehumanised in the drawing as well as in the verbal text. In the drawing the hood is covering his face, making him stand forth as faceless. This reduces his humanness. The text further expands this dehumanisation by calling him a murdering devil who deserves to die. In other words, the eight year old girl justifies her call for death penalty for Breivik by portraying him as a faceless, non-human devil taking the life of defenseless young people. That is: the very defense of or fight for the values life and human worth may in this utterance also be interpreted as a putting these same two values under pressure: in the process of grieving the victims, the writer dehumanises Breivik and wants him dead. By this she questions both his humanity and his right to live. In other words, the very fight for these values puts them under pressure. In the Norwegian judicial system death penalty is no option. Here, respect for human worth and for life as an unquestioned and universal human value, are interconnected. Though Breivik was brought to court and sentenced for having killed 77 people and hurt many severely, Norwegian law granted him what here is regarded as a part of every human’s indisputable rights: the right to live. This system does not find another assassination to be the right way in which to defend the value life when a murder is committed. Therefore, Breivik was not executed. But he got the Norwegian judicial system’s strictest sentence, detention in custody. Anger and disgust are natural reactions to terrible deeds like Breivik’s. And, as Bakhtin points out, laughter may serve as a tool with which to protect oneself against a dangerous threat and a superior force. Laughter and mockery may serve as closely related actions. They can both be understood as suitable weapons in the fight against a superior force, as they play a part in the process of reducing the frightening to “a scarecrow” (Bakhtin, 2003, p. 69). In the immediate aftermath of July 22nd the need to 17

«alle i norge er lei seg bare på grunn av morderen Han er en DJEVEL Morderen er så slem at det er han som burde dø. Alle i Norge og mange andre land er lei seg og alle kommer til byen fordi mange er døe Han er den slemeste i hele universe Bra han siter i fengsel!!!»

Children’s Dialogue with Values

297

reduce Breivik to “a scarecrow” by picturing him behind bars, or dehumanising him through drawing him without a face or as a devil, may be seen as a legitimate reaction. The youths whom he killed had no weapon. They were defenseless in the meeting with him and his gun. Some children may therefore have seen him as a threatening force that deserved to be excluded from the togetherness and love that characterised the Norwegian society during those days, and to be met by mockery, dehumanisation, and death claims. Questions that these utterances actualise may, however, still be: Has a mass-murderer human worth? Is the victims’ human dignity at risk if the murderer is treated as a fellow human being? What happens when the very fight for universal values–as life and human worth–puts these same values under pressure?

Final discussion In the process of writing and drawing children seem to have been in affirmative dialogue with certain values as well as with the Norwegian society where these values became manifest through speeches and different public actions. One may, with Davie’s thoughts of the implicit becoming explicit when under pressure, in mind (Davie 2007), ask if these values may be seen as values that were implicit in Norwegian society but became explicit in the aftermath of July 22nd, e.g. through children’s memorial messages. State school is the public space where Norwegian society communicates knowledge which it finds important for every citizen to know about, to new generations. The Norwegian school’s statement of purpose from January 2009–presented in § 1-1 of the Education Act–clearly specifies a value ethical platform for school and education (Stubø 2012). Some of the central values stated here are love for one’s neighbour, respect for human worth, diversity and solidarity (Kunnskapsdepartementet 2008, § 1-1). As I have shown in this article, we do see that children were in affirmative dialogue with values comparable to these in messages from the spontaneous memorial places of Oslo Cathedral Square and Utvika, even if these messages were written outside school and during summer vacation. In other words, at least to some extent these values seem to have been internalised by the children who wrote the messages. Thus, we may argue that Norwegian society – including school – have succeeded in communicating some of its value platform to its children. But this is not the whole picture from Oslo Cathedral Square and Utvika. Children’s memorial messages also show that central values like life and human worth to some extent were threatened or under pressure in

298

Chapter Fo ourteen

the days affter the terrorr attacks: Breeivik was, inn some few messages, m dehumanised, mocked annd wanted dead. Thus one m may say that in n spite of the overwheelming supporrt for human worth, w life, loove and togeth herness in the messagees, the very figght for these values v that weere expressed here, put them under ppressure. But thesse values were under presssure in a morre concrete way w in the days after thhe terror, too. In the immed diate hours affter the bombiing of the government buildings, there were sugg gestions both in different media m and among peopple that Musliim terrorists were responssible for this bombing. b And some Norwegian Muslims M – even e Muslim m children – met this suspicion ass verbal harasssment in shop ps, on busses and on the metro m (see e.g. Arnebeerg 2011; Muurtnes 2011; Vikås V 2011; Zondag 2011 1). Fig. 7 highlights thhis. It is writteen by an imm migrant child w whose Norwegian is in progress. It says: “To eveerybody in th he whole worlld. Hi. I very sorry for what happenned downtownn Oslo and in n Utøya. He w who did it does not like Muslim. Butt I am a Musliim and I am normal. n We arre nice. Bye!!””18

Figure 7 – seee colour centreffold for this imaage in colour.

That a younng child livingg in Norway in the days aafter the terrorr found it necessary too write to the whole world that he/she, aas a Muslim, is i normal 18

«Til alle saammen i hele verden. v Hei. Jeg g veldig lei meeg med det som m skjedde i Oslo sentrum m og i Utøya. Haan som gjore deet liker ikke muuslim. Men jeg er muslim og er normal. Vi er snille. Ha det!!»

Children’s Dialogue with Values

299

and nice, should, as I see it, be a signal to Norwegian school to explicitly and consciously set its statement of purpose in focus, showing the direction for education when it comes to overarching goals and values. Respect for human worth and life as well as love for one’s neighbour and respect for people with different religions and beliefs, are crucial in this statement’s list of values. I shall conclude with a suggestion: several messages from spontaneous memorial places after the terror attacks of July 22nd were written by children and youths who were in active dialogue with values that are central for education and upbringing. In these messages teachers may therefore find actualisation for and examples of both affirmative expressions of values that are central for their teaching, and examples of expressions where values are under pressure. Children’s memorial messages may ease pupils’ understanding of values, as they were written by persons in the same age group as the pupils themselves and therefore may be expressed in a language that displays rules and routines of negotiations that the pupils are acquainted with from their everyday life (Afdal 2007, 2010; Lied 2008). I therefore suggest that teachers include some of these messages from the aftermath of July 22nd as teaching material when values are on the agenda in the classroom. In the Norwegian RE journal Prismet (2016), Associate Professor Ingebjørg Stubø and I, together with Torleif Kveset and Synnøve Markeng, two of our teacher students who have tried out children’s memorial messages as artefacts in school when teaching about values, have two articles where we present different ways of doing this.

References Afdal, G. 2007. Researching religious education as social practice. Halden: Høgskolen i Østfold. —. 2010. Researching religious education as social practice (Vol. 20). Münster: Waxmann. Arneberg, H. 2011. "Dra tilbake dit du kommer fra". ("Go back where you come from"). Retrieved from http://www.nettavisen.no/nyheter/3204556.html Asheim, I. 2005. Verdirealisering: til det gode?: studier i verdietikk. (Realising values: for the good?) Oslo: Unipub. Bakhtin, M. 2003. Latter og dialog: utvalgte skrifter. (Laughter and dialogue). Oslo: Cappelen akademisk forlag.

300

Chapter Fourteen

Barbosa da Silva, A. e. a. 2006. Etikk og menneskesyn i helsetjeneste og sosialt arbeid. (Ethics and humanity in health services and social work). Oslo: Gyldendal akademisk. Blackburn, S. 2001. Being good: a short introduction to ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bøckman, P. W. 1971. Liv, fellesskap, tjeneste: en kristen etikk. (Life, community, service: Christian ethics). (2.ed.). Oslo: Universitetsforl. Davie, G. 2007. "Vicarious Religion: A Methodological Challenge". In N. T. Ammerman (Ed.) Everyday Religion. Observing Modern Religious Lives, 21-35. New York: Oxford University Press. Dewilde, J., & Igland, M.-A. 2015. " 'No problem, janem'. Et transspråklig perspektiv på elevers skriving". (" 'No problem, janem.' A translingual perspective on pupils' writing"). In E. N. Selj & A. Golden (Eds.) Forskning på andrespråksskriving i Skandinavia, 96-111. Oslo: Cappelen Akademisk. Dysthe, O. 1997. "Skriving sett i lys av dialogisme. Teoretisk bakgrunn og konsekvensar for undervisning. ("Writing in the view of dialogism Theoretical background and consequences for teaching"). In L. S. Evensen & T. Løkensgard Hoel (Eds.) Skriveteorier og skolepraksis. Oslo: LNU/Cappelen Akademisk Forlag. —. 2001. "Sosiokulturelle teoriperspektiv på kunnskap og læring". ("Socio-cultural theoretical perspectives on knowledge and teaching"). In O. Dysthe (Ed.) Dialog, samspel og læring, 33-72. Oslo: Abstrakt forlag. Gustavsson, A. 2006. "Rituella markeringar vid momentan död i vår tid". ("Ritual celebrations at sudden deaths in our time"). In A. B. Amundsen, B. Hodne, & A. Ohrvik (Eds.) Ritualer. Kulturhistoriske studier, 199-222. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Heiene, G., & Thorbjørnsen, S. O. 2001. Fellesskap og ansvar : innføring i kristen etikk (Community and responsibility: introduction to Christian ethics) (2. ed.). Oslo: Universitetsforl. Helmikstøl, Ø. 2012. "På tide å snakke om ondskap". ("About time to talk about evil"). Tidsskrift for Norsk Psykologforening, 9(5), 471-479. Hummelvoll, J. K. 2014. Helt - ikke stykkevis og delt. Psykiatrisk sykepleie og psykisk helse. (The whole - not by pieces and parts. Psyciatric nursing and mental health) (7th ed.). Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk. Haakon. 2011. H.K.H. Kronprinsens apell på Rådhusplassen 25. juli 2011 etter tragediene i Oslo og på Utøya 22. juli. (H.R.H. the Crownprince's address on Oslo Town Council Square after the tragedies in Oslo and on Utøya July 22). Retrieved from http://www.kongehuset.no/c26947/tale/vis.html?tid=92966

Children’s Dialogue with Values

301

Kress, G., & Leeuwen, T. v. 2000. Reading images : the grammar of visual design. London: Routledge. Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. 2006. Reading images : the grammar of visual design. London: Routledge. Kunnskapsdepartementet. 2008. Lov om grunnskolen og den videregåande opplæringa (Opplæringslova). (Law on primary and secondary education). Retrieved from http://www.lovdata.no/all/tl-19980717061-001.html Lied, S. 2004. Elever og livstolkingspluralitet i KRL-faget : mellomtrinnselever i møte med fortellinger fra ulike religioner og livssyn. (Students and religious plurality: students' meetings with narratives from different religions and beliefs). Elverum: Høgskolen i Hedmark. —. 2008. "Forskningsfellesskap med aktivitetsteoretisk profil". ("Research with activity theoretical perspective"). Prismet, 3/2008, volume 59, 171-182. —. 2012. "Elever i videregående skole i møte med et etisk dilemma". ("Students in secondary school meeting an ethical dilemma"). In S. Lied & C. Osbeck (Eds.) Religionsdidaktisk arbeid pågår! Religionsdidaktikk i Hamar og Karlstad, 165-190. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Lied, S., & Undseth Bakke, S. 2013. "Canon and archive in messages from Oslo Cathedral Square in the aftermath of July 22nd 2011". Nordidactica(1), 34-56. Løken, H. 2012. "Det vurderende mennesket og den moralske virkelighet. Charles Taylor om autentisitetskultur og sterke vurderinger." In S. Lied & C. Osbeck (Eds.) Religionsdidaktisk arbeid pågår! Religionsdidaktikk i Hamar og Karlstad. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Murtnes, S. (2011). "Kadra: Muslimer ble jaget nedover gatene." ("Kadra: Muslims were chased down the streets").. Retrieved from http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/terrorangrepet-22-juli-politikk-ogsamfunn/kadra-muslimer-ble-jaget-nedover-gatene/a/10088913/ Stoltenberg, J. 2011a. Address by Prime Minister in Oslo Cathedral on July 24th 2011. Retrieved from http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/smk/Whats-new/Speeches-andarticles/statsministeren/statsminister_jens_stoltenberg/2011/addressby-prime-minister-in-oslo-cathed.html?id=651789 —. 2011b. " 'Shocking and cowardly'. Speech on July 22nd 2011". Retrieved from http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/smk/Whats-new/ Speeches-andarticles/statsministeren/statsminister_jens_stoltenberg /2011/shockingand-cowardly.html?id=673127

302

Chapter Fourteen

Stormark, K. 2011. Da terroren rammet Norge: 189 minutter som rystet verden. (When terror hit Norway). Oslo: Kagge. —. 2012. Massemorderens privat e-poster. (The massmurderer's private e-mails). Oslo: spartacus. Stubø, I. 2012. "Den norske grunnskolens formålsparagraf. Verdietikk i moralfilosofisk lys". ("The Norwegian school's statement of purpose"). In S. Lied & C. Osbeck (Eds.) Religionsdidaktisk arbeid pågår! Religionsdidaktikk i Hamar og Karlstad, 79-108. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. Säljö, R. 2006. Læring og kulturelle redskaper: om læreprosesser og den kollektive hukommelsen. (Learning and cultural artefacts: on learning processes and collective memory). Oslo: Cappelen akademisk forl. Taylor, C. 1985. Human agency and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. —. 1989. Sources of the self: the making of the modern identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vetlesen, A. J. 2014. Studier i ondskap (Studies in evil). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Vikås, M. et al. 2011. "Oppfordret hijabkledde jenter om å holde seg innendørs". ("Encouraged girls with hijab to stay at home"). Retrieved from http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/terrorangrepet-22-juli-politikkog-samfunn/oppfordret-hijabkledde-jenter-om-aa-holde-seginnendoers/a/10088956/ Vygotskij, L. S. 2001. Tenkning og tale. (Thought and language). Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk. Westgaard, H. 2001. "som eit spor": spontanalteret som moderne sorguttrykk i et kulturanalytisk perspektiv. ("like a trace": the spontaneous altar as an expression of grief in a cultural analytic perspective). Bergen: Forl. Folkekultur. Zondag, M. H. W. 2011. Muslimer ble hetset etter terroren.(Muslims were harassed after the terror). Retrieved from http://www.nrk.no/norge/meldinger-om-muslim-hets-i-oslo-1.7723535 Aagedal, O., Botvar, P. K., & Høeg, I. M. 2013. Den Offentlige sorgen: markeringer, ritualer og religion etter 22. juli. (The public grief: rituals and religion after July 22). Oslo: Universitetsforl.

AFTERWORD JIM CUMMINS UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO ÅBO AKADEMI UNIVERSITY

The invitation from the editors to write an Afterword to their book Norwegian Perspectives on Education and Diversity continues a collaboration that has extended for more than a decade between researchers in the Education and Diversity (ED) group at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences (formerly Hedmark University College) and colleagues in the Language and Literacies program at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto. This collaboration has been fuelled by the increasing linguistic, cultural, and religious diversity that characterizes both the Canadian and Norwegian contexts and the challenges that this diversity entails for education systems in both countries that until recently have operated from a largely monocultural perspective. In the Canadian context, the gradual shift away from dual monocultural/monolingual orientations (French in Quebec, English in most of the rest of Canada) was initiated by the 1971 policy of “Multiculturalism within a Bilingual Framework” and the subsequent passing of the Canadian Multiculturalism Act in 1988. However, multicultural rhetoric has been slow to translate into multicultural education practice, particularly when it comes to the multilingual realities of Canadian urban classrooms. For example, until very recently most teacher education programs in Canadian universities devoted minimal, if any, attention to ensuring that all teachers and school leaders had the knowledge base and instructional expertise to support immigrantbackground students in learning the language of instruction. It was assumed that the specialist language teacher would take responsibility for teaching the language of instruction to these students. As a consequence, many school leaders and classroom teachers (particularly at the secondary level) still have minimal knowledge of the appropriate instructional strategies required to help second language learners succeed academically. This major gap in provision is changing as more universities institute mandatory courses focused on supporting newcomer students across the

304

Afterword

curriculum. However, the fact that it has taken almost 50 years after the institution of the official multicultural policy for educational policymakers and teacher education programs to respond effectively to the reality of linguistic diversity points to the societal priorities and power relations operating even in well-intentioned jurisdictions. The problematic nature of this situation should have been immediately evident to policymakers in the fact that in cities such as Toronto and Vancouver more than 50 percent of the student population come from non-English-speaking home backgrounds and typically these students require about 5 years to catch up to grade expectations in English academic language proficiency. Mainstream teachers and school principals who are unaware of the knowledge base that exists regarding appropriate instructional strategies to support newcomer students are unlikely to provide an optimal learning environment, despite the fact that many may attempt to acquire these instructional competencies on the job. In the Norwegian context, the long-term commitment to social and educational equity is clearly documented throughout this volume. However, parallel to the Canadian context, there has been considerable debate about how to realize educational equity in a context of increasing linguistic, cultural, and religious diversity. As in Canada, sceptical voices have been raised in relation to the legitimacy of social and educational policies that value multiculturalism. Tension also exists about how education systems can foster a strong sense of national identity while, at the same time, respecting the cultures, languages, and religious beliefs of newcomer students and communities. Despite these ongoing challenges, both Norway and Canada have the distinction of being among the most equitable countries with respect to the impact of socioeconomic status (SES) on school achievement. This pattern has been evident in the OECD’s PISA results in reading, mathematics and science over the past 15 years and is again illustrated in the 2015 science results where SES accounted for only 8 percent of the difference in science scores in Norway and 9 percent in Canada, much lower than countries such as Germany (16%) and France (20%) (OECD, 2016). As the chapters in this book vividly illustrate, there has been a vigorous effort in the Norwegian context over the past 15 years to bring research on language learning and diversity into productive dialogue with educational policies and instructional practices. This has resulted in closer partnerships between teacher education institutions and schools and preschools. Similar initiatives have been undertaken in the Canadian context and these initiatives in both countries have been mutually

Norwegian Perspectives on Education and Cultural Diversity

305

supportive as a result of ongoing dialogue and collaboration (e.g., Kjørven, Ringen and Gagné 2009). In the Canadian context, collaboration between educators and researchers in the context of participatory action research has generated some of the most potent insights about how multilingual students’ home languages can be integrated into instruction with the twin goals of increasing students’ access to the curriculum and affirming their cultural and linguistic identities (e.g., Cummins and Early 2011). Several of the chapters in this volume reflect a similar orientation, marking a major shift from the role of the traditional educational researcher who typically carried out research on schools, teachers, and students to a conception of research as a collaborative process of knowledge generation with schools, teachers, and students. In their introductory chapter, Thor Ola Engen, Lise Iversen Kulbrandstad, Lars Anders Kulbrandstad and Sidsel Lied bring our attention to the notion of Local Communities Pedagogy developed by Norwegian researchers in the 1980s and 1990s (e.g., Engen 1989). This approach seeks to balance central and local cultural elements in the curriculum and has clear parallels with pedagogical arguments that instruction should build on communities’ funds of knowledge (Gonzalez, Moll, and Amanti 2005) and connect with students’ lives (Cummins 2017). But it also serves as a useful organizing concept to shift educational debates on diversity issues from a problem orientation to a resource orientation (Ruiz 2010). In a world characterized by unprecedented population mobility, I believe that educators have an ethical responsibility to provide all students with opportunities to connect with and appreciate the range of language talents, cultural perspectives, and religious orientations that exist in their schools and classrooms. This perspective is woven into most of the preceding chapters. The cognitive and cultural affirmation that students experience when their linguistic talents and cultural knowledge are integrated into the curriculum is vividly expressed by Toronto-area grade 6 student, Manaan, as he reflected on the experience of reading, retelling, and creating books in his two languages, English and Hindi: “It feels great, I feel perfect, I feel like I'm back in India. … I think it's helping my brain grow”. Recent collaborative projects in both Norway and Canada suggests that educators who pursue Local Communities Pedagogies and who explore the possibilities of teaching through a multilingual lens (Cummins and Early 2011) will also experience affirmation of their identities as educators together with expanded understanding of the intersections of education and diversity.

306

Afterword

References Cummins, Jim. 2017. Flerspråkiga elever: Effektiv undervisning i en utmanande tid. [Multilingual learners: Effective instruction in challenging times]. Stockholm: Natur & Kultur. Cummins, Jim, and Margaret Early, eds. 2011. Identity Texts: the collaborative creation of power in multilingual schools. Stoke on Trent: Trentham Books. Gonzalez, Norma, Luis C. Moll, and Cathy Amanti, eds. 2005. Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities and classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Kjørven, Ole Kolbjørn, Bjørg Karin Ringen, and Antoinette Gagné, eds. 2009. Teacher diversity in diverse schools – Challenges and opportunities for teacher education. Vallset: Oplandske Bokforlag. OECD, 2016. PISA 2015: Results in focus. Paris: OECD. Ruiz, Richard. 2010. Reorienting language-as-resource. In International perspectives on bilingual education: Policy, practice, and controversy, edited by John Petrovic,155-172. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

CONTRIBUTORS

Eva-Marie Syversen is Associate Professor working with Nordic Literature and Teacher Education at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences. Her main research focuses on regional literatures and literary memory studies, with a particular interest in literary diversity in Norway and Sweden, literary nation-building, single regional authorships, and literature didactics. Gunhild Tomter Alstad is Associate Professor in Norwegian language at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences and received her PhD in linguistics from the University of Oslo in 2014. Her research interests involve child language, emergent literacy, multilingualism, teacher language awareness and second language teaching. She is currently engaged in research projects on professional development of early childhood educations teachers in linguistically diverse contexts. Gunhild Tveit Randen is Associate Professor in Norwegian language at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences and received her PhD from the University of Bergen in 2014. She conducts research on assessment of bilinguals’ language proficiency and is interested in all aspects of educational language assessment. Other interests include second language acquisition and literacy development in bilingual students. Jim Cummins is Professor Emeritus at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto and Adjunct Professor at Åbo Akademi University, Finland. He received his PhD in Educational Psychology from the University of Alberta in 1974. Professor Cummins is a leading researcher internationally in the field of language and literacy development of second language learners. Joke Dewilde is Associate Professor of Multilingualism in Education at the University of Oslo and Adjunct Associate Professor of Education at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences. She received her PhD from the University of Oslo in 2103, with a thesis on bilingual teachers in Norway. Her recent work is on late arrivals to Norwegian school, and in particular on how they construct themselves as translingual writers in and outside of school.

308

Contributors

Lars Anders Kulbrandstad is Professor of Norwegian language at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences. He is particularly interested in multilingualism, second language acquisition and language attitudes and has published several books and articles on these topics. For a number of years, he was a member of the Expert Committee of the Language Council of Norway. Lise Iversen Kulbrandstad is Professor of Norwegian at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences. Her research interests are literacy learning and teaching, the teaching of Norwegian as a second language and teacher education. In the period 2007 –2015 she was rector at the University, and has in different ways been involved in the latest national teacher education reforms in Norway. Sidsel Lied is Professor Emerita of Religious Education (RE) at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences. Her research has focused on the teaching of religion, ethics and philosophy of life in multicultural contexts. She is currently involved in a research project the children’s memorial messages in the aftermath of July 22nd 2011. Morten Løtveit is Associate Professor of History at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences. He teaches history and didactics of history. His research areas include modern Mexican history, multicultural awareness among student teachers, and history curricula. Marte Monsen is Associate Professor in Norwegian language at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences. Her research interests are literacy, language testing, second language acquisition and bilingualism. Kari Nes is Professor Emerita of Education at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences. Before entering teacher education she worked as a teacher and an advisor in the Educational/ Psychological Support Service for schools. A main research interest is in inclusive education. She has been participating in several national research projects and international research and development projects. Ole Kolbjørn Kjørven is Associate Professor in Religious Education (RE) at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences. Kjørven’s research is oriented towards empirical studies on teachers and also on the role of religion in diverse educational practices.

Norwegian Perspectives on Education and Cultural Diversity

309

Steinar Laberg is Assistant Professor in Norwegian literature at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences s. His research interests are the teaching of Norwegian literature and art forms of digital media. Thor-André Skrefsrud works as Professor in Education at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences. His research interests include intercultural education, religious education and educational philosophy. His recent work has been related to a Nordforsk project on social justice and inclusion in teacher education. Thor Ola Engen is Professor Emeritus of Multicultural Education at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, where he has been a leader for several research programs, co-leader for the strategic research group Education and Diversity, leader of a Masters’ program in Education and member of the board for a didactics oriented PhD-program. He has published articles and books, mostly in Norwegian, but several also in English, and been a member of several national committees