DELIVERABLE 9

ROADMAP FOR THE INTEGRATION

OF LANGUAGE LEARNING IN SOCIAL INCLUSION POLICIES

IN EUROPE

2

DOCUMENT SUMMARY Deliverable Title Roadmap for integration of language learning in inclusion policies in

Europe Version 1 Deliverable Lead P1- IRS Related Work package WP 4 Author(s) Nicola Orlando, Joe Cullen Contributor(s) Reviewer(s) Marie-Christine Deyrich, Véronique Maes Dissemination level PU Public

PP Restricted to other programme participants (including the Commission Services)

RE Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the Commission Services)

CO Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission Services)

Project Number 530938-LLP-1-2012-1-IT-KA2-KA2NW Grant Agreement Number 2012-4255 Instrument LLP KA2 Networks Start date of Project 01/01/2013 Duration 36 months Project coordinator IRS Document Summary The already existing ‘heritage’ of EU policy recommendations to promote language learning and to strengthen the role of language learning in fostering social inclusion should not be ignored, but should be built on, systematised and valorised. The INCLUDE Roadmap aims to support the achievement of this goal by integrating what has already been done in the field of language learning and social inclusion in the light of specifically identified existing gaps and needs. Actions to promote social inclusion through language learning are presented in the Roadmap, addressed to three different types of stakeholders: policy makers, practitioners, and researchers. These three groups can play a pivotal role in enhancing the contribution of language learning to reach the key social inclusion goals of EU2020 (particularly: increasing employment, reducing early school leaving and reducing the number of people at risk of poverty and social exclusion) and – more generally -- to promote active social inclusion. The INCLUDE Roadmap provides a coherent, holistic blueprint and a ‘logic of intervention’ for achieving key policy targets set out in EU2020, the ‘Charter’ on linguistic diversity and the Commission’s ‘Action Plan’ and related initiatives that support better language learning, mobility, educational attainment, increased employment and social cohesion. The Roadmap is underpinned by a grounded theoretical framework that draws on state of the art evidence in the field of language learning and social inclusion.

This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.

This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

3

QUALITY CONTROL CHECKLIST Quality Control Check Y/N Reviewer

recommendations/comments

Generic Minimum Quality Standards

Document Summary provided (with adequate synopsis

of contents)

Y

INCLUDE format standards complied with Y

Language, grammar and spelling acceptable Y

Objectives of Description of Work covered Y

Work deliverable relates to adequately covered Y

Quality of text is acceptable (organisation and

structure; diagrams; readability)

Y

Comprehensiveness is acceptable (no missing

sections; missing references; unexplained arguments)

Y

Usability is acceptable (deliverable provides clear

information in a form that is useful to the reader)

Y

Deliverable specific quality criteria

Deliverable meets the 'acceptance Criteria' set out in

the Quality Register (see Table 4)

Y

For Supplementary Review Deliverables only

Deliverable approved by external reviewers NA

Checklist completed by

Name: Marie-Christine Deyrich Signature:

Date: 24/02/2016

4

DOCUMENT REVIEW HISTORY Version Name Status * Date Summary of changes

1. Marie-Christine

Deyrich

PIR 22/02/2016 some proofreading in English

2. Véronique Maes SIR 24/02/2016 Addition of target group NEET and the private sector in the practitioners

3. Nicola Orlando A 25/02/2016 EN proofreading and incorporation of remarks by SIR

*Status: Indicate if:

A - Author (including author of revised deliverable);

PIR – Primary internal reviewer;

SIR – Second internal reviewer;

ER – External Reviewer (note: external reviewer refers to a supplementary review carried out for D.4, 5, 6)

5

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 6   1.   WHY LANGUAGES ARE IMPORTANT FOR ACTIVE SOCIAL INCLUSION................................... 7  

1.1   Language policies/learning in Europe: an overview ............................................................. 7  1.2   The affinity between language policies/learning and social inclusion objectives in Europe ......... 10  

2.   LANGUAGE POLICIES/ LANGUAGE LEARNING PROMOTING SOCIAL INCLUSION: GAPS AND

NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED ............................................................................................. 13  2.1   EU2020 strategy: status and implementation ................................................................... 14  2.2   Evidence about gaps in the role of EU language policies/learning in promoting social inclusion .. 16  2.3   Needs to be addressed by the Roadmap ........................................................................ 18  

3.   PRINCIPLES ON WHICH THE ROADMAP IS BASED ............................................................. 20   4.   ROADMAP: ACTIONS TO PROMOTE SOCIAL INCLUSION THROUGH LANGUAGE LEARNING... 22  

4.1   Policy makers............................................................................................................ 23  4.2   Practitioners.............................................................................................................. 25  4.3   Researchers: monitoring and evaluating the promotion of social inclusion through language

learning.................................................................................................................... 26  4.4   Roadmap Summary and its Theory of Change ................................................................. 30   REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 32  

6

INTRODUCTION

Multilingualism and social inclusion are key objectives of Europe, unanimously pursued

by Member States. They underline common concerns of European countries –

employability, mobility, active citizenship and full participation of citizens, regardless of

nationality, age, gender, social and economic background. Local, regional and national

initiatives in the field have already been carried out, and yet achieving limited goals at a

small scale. However, to move forward, European action is needed to contribute to

policy cohesion: the issue is widely recognized as common to all European states, and

requires a common vision and an agreed roadmap for the future.

The Roadmap for integration of language learning in inclusion policies in Europe is the

result of the wide consultation and analysis which has taken place during the networking

activities about language policies for inclusion. Its aim is to provide inspiration to the

multiple stakeholders, including the European Commission, that play a role in language

learning, in defining future strategies and approaches, and in setting priorities in the

language policy development processes for social inclusion purposes.

Within its overall purpose of promoting integration of language learning in inclusion

policies in Europe, the Roadmap is set out in four chapters:

• The first chapter, after briefly presenting the current landscape of language policies

and language learning in Europe and briefly discussing their affinity with social

inclusion objectives, explains the reasons why a ‘roadmap for the integration of

language learning in inclusion policies in Europe’ is needed;

• In the second chapter, the focus is on existing gaps and needs -- in terms of

language learning and social inclusion objectives and targets -- that the Roadmap

aims to address in order to foster social inclusion through language learning;

• Chapter three presents the values and principles on which the Roadmap is based,

which essentially come down to multilingualism as a crucial factor to enhance social

cohesion and inter-cultural dialogue;

• Finally, chapter four presents the actions -- addressed to three different kinds of

stakeholders (policy makers, practitioners and researchers) – that are needed to

define the pathway to integrate language learning in inclusion policies in Europe.

 

 

 

7

1. WHY LANGUAGES ARE IMPORTANT FOR ACTIVE SOCIAL INCLUSION

Linguistic diversity in Europe is a de facto situation: 28 Member States, 500 million

citizens, 3 alphabets and 24 official languages with some 60 other languages spoken in

specific regions or by specific groups. In addition, immigrants have brought a wide

range of languages with them. As a consequence, in a EU founded on ‘unity in

diversity’, the ability to communicate in several languages is a must for individuals,

organisations and companies alike. The EU has thus designated language learning as

an important priority in order to promote mobility and intercultural understanding.

1.1 Language policies/learning in Europe: an overview

In order to give a general overview about language policies / learning in Europe on the

basis of the main EU provisions (Charters, Communications, Resolutions, Plans, etc.),

the following ‘key elements’ -- without claiming to be exhaustive -- can be identified:

• Linguistic diversity is supported by the European Charter of Fundamental Rights1

(Article 22: ‘The Union respects cultural, religious and linguistic diversity’), as well as

by the Treaty on European Union2 (Article 3: ‘It shall respect its rich cultural and

linguistic diversity, and shall ensure that Europe’s cultural heritage is safeguarded

and enhanced’).

• Regional and minority languages are protected and promoted by the European

Charter for Regional or Minority Language3. Within the scope of the European

Charter for Regional or Minority Language are the languages traditionally used

within a given territory of a state by nationals of that state who form a group

numerically smaller than the rest of the state’s population, but it does not cover

those connected with recent migratory movements or dialects of the official

language.

• Promotion of linguistic diversity in education and training is relevant for planning the

successful construction of Europe. In this context, several initiatives have been

launched by the EU in the field of Content and Language Integrated Learning 1 Proclaimed in 2000, the Charter has become legally binding on the EU with the entry into force of the Treaty of

Lisbon, in December 2009. 2 Official Journal C 326 , 26/10/2012. Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the

Functioning of the European Union - Consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union - Protocols - Declarations annexed to the Final Act of the Intergovernmental Conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon, signed on 13 December 2007.

3 It was drawn up on the basis of a text put forward by the Standing Conference of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe, was adopted as a convention on 25 June 1992 by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, and was opened for signature in Strasbourg on 5 November 1992. It entered into force on 1 March 1998.

8

(CLIL)4, which is described as: an approach concerning languages or intercultural

knowledge and understanding (Marsh, 2002)5; a meaning-focused learning method

(Van de Craen, 2006)6 and an “umbrella” term used to talk about bilingual education

situations (Gajo, 2007)7.

• Knowledge of languages is one of the basic skills each citizen needs in order to take

part effectively in the European knowledge society. and therefore facilitates both

integration into society and social cohesion8.

• An Action plan on ‘Promoting language learning and linguistic diversity’9 was

adopted for the period 2004-2006, setting out three areas in which it would be

providing funding for short-term action to support measures taken by Member States

under existing Community programmes: i) lifelong language learning; ii) improving

the teaching of foreign languages; iii) creating a language-friendly environment.

• The Commission's multilingualism policy has three aims: i) to encourage language

learning and promote linguistic diversity in society; ii) to promote a healthy

multilingual economy; iii) to give citizens access to European Union legislation,

procedures and information in their own languages10.

• Within the framework of education and vocational training policy, the EU’s objective

is for every citizen to master two languages in addition to his or her mother tongue.

In order to achieve this objective, children are to be taught two foreign languages at

school from an early age11.

• Multilingualism policy is relevant to strengthen life chances of EU citizens: in

particular, to increase their employability, facilitate access to services and rights and

4 The Council Resolution of 31 March 1995 on improving and diversifying language learning and teaching within the

education systems of the European Union represents one of first pieces of legislation regarding European cooperation in CLIL.

5 Marsh, D (Ed) (2002) CLIL/EMILE- The European Dimension: Actions, Trends and Foresight Potential Public Services Contract DG EAC: European Commission.

6 Van de Craen, P. (2006), “Content and Language Integrated Learning, Culture of Education and Learning Theories”. Brussels: Vrije University Brussels, Department of Germanic Languages.

7 Gajo, L. 2007, “Linguistic knowledge and Subject knowledge: how does bilingualism contribute to subject development?” International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10:5,563-581.

8 Council Resolution of 14 February 2002 on the promotion of linguistic diversity and language learning in the framework of the implementation of the objectives of the European Year of Languages 2001” (2002/C 50/01).

9 COM(2003) 449 final. 10 The Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and

Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - A New Framework Strategy for Multilingualism (COM/2005/0596 final).

11 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - Multilingualism: an asset for Europe and a shared commitment {SEC(2008) 2443} {SEC(2008) 2444} {SEC(2008) 2445} /* COM/2008/0566 final */

9

contribute to solidarity through enhanced intercultural dialogue and social

cohesion12.

• Sign languages are an important part of Europe’s multilingual diversity. Each spoken

language in the European Union (EU) has a counterpart sign language, based on

gesture and rich in terms of grammar, structure, syntax, and lexicon.

• With the financial support of the Education and Culture DG of the European

Commission, projects looking into how languages can be taught most effectively to

visually impaired adults have been realised (e.g. The Languages project - blind and

partially sighted adults learning languages, lead by EBU - the European Blind

Union).

• Policy responses are provided to the challenge represented by the increasing

number -- in schools in the past years -- of children from a migrant background, who

face linguistic and cultural differences and are in a weak socio-economic position.

The educational disadvantage experienced by children from a migrant background is

related to several factors, including the lack of proficiency in the host language which

Member States try to counteract – among other policy approaches adopted -- by

promoting the learning of the host and heritage languages and intercultural

education13.

• The ‘Education and Training 2020’ strategic framework identifies language learning

as a priority. Communication in foreign languages is one of eight key competences

needed to improve the quality and efficiency of education and training. In addition to

the main skill dimensions of communication in the mother tongue, this includes

mediation and intercultural understanding.

• Guidance is provided to Member States to enhance the effectiveness of their

measures to achieve Roma integration and strengthen the implementation of their

national Roma integration strategies or to integrate sets of policy measures within

broader social inclusion policies aimed at improving the situation of Roma and at

closing any gaps between Roma and the general population14.

• European Structural Funds (in particular, the European Social Fund) as well as

direct management funds (managed directly by the European Commission, for

12 Communication adopted in September 2008 by the European Commission -- titled ‘Multilingualism: an asset for

Europe and a shared commitment’ (COM(2008) 566 final. Council Resolution on a European strategy for multilingualism (2008/C 320/01)

13 Green Paper of 3 July 2008 – Migration and mobility: challenges and opportunities for EU education systems [COM(2008) 423 final.

14 2013/C 378/01.

10

example Erasmus+) put in place further opportunities to offer linguistic support in

order to improve learning performance, to increase employability, to make mobility

more efficient and effective.

• On the basis of available data sources, the European Commission monitors the

progress of language teaching and learning to ensure the development of relevant

policies and effective initiatives (evidence based policy).

1.2 The affinity between language policies/learning and social inclusion objectives in Europe

The context of language policies and language learning in Europe shows that EU

language policies and language learning have a strong affinity with social inclusion

objectives. Languages/language skills already play or could play a relevant role in

promoting (active) social inclusion to:

• fight any form of discrimination by promoting and protecting linguistic diversity as

well as regional and minority languages, by reinforcing the learning at school of the

host and heritage languages for children from a migrant background, by removing

language barriers between migrant families and the school, by strengthening Roma

integration measures;

• promote the teaching and learning of foreign languages in the EU to create an

environment that is friendly towards all Member State languages;

• improve the quality and efficiency of education and training by promoting and

adopting innovative methods in language learning (e.g. CLIL used to teach classes

in a foreign language for disciplines other than languages, thus providing bilingual

teaching; providing high quality training for language teachers; etc.);

• improve EU citizens’ educational and employment opportunities within the European

learning society, in particular by making use of the right to freedom of movement of

(young… but not only young!) persons;

• enhance intercultural dialogue and social cohesion, with regard especially to the

most disadvantaged groups (NEET, migrants; Roma people; people with disabilities:

people with hearing and sight loss in particular).

It is also evident that policy structures exist to promote social inclusion through

language learning. Nevertheless, according to the analysis of the most relevant EU

11

language policies as well as to the existing studies about the degree of

implementation15, they are not well implemented in practice:

• With regard to the Action Plan ‘Promoting language learning and linguistic diversity’,

only one of the sixteen elements embedded in the three Strategy Areas of the Action

Plan (Lifelong Language Learning; Better Language Teaching; Building a Language-

Friendly Environment) directly refers to social inclusion (‘Building an inclusive

approach to linguistic diversity’ in the ‘Strategic Area 3: Building a Language-

Friendly Environment’).

• As regards the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, most of the

EU28 countries signed it, but fewer EU Member States ratified it and implemented it.

In conclusion, multilingualism and social inclusion are key objectives of Europe,

unanimously pursued by Member States. They underline common concerns of

European countries – employability, mobility, active citizenship and full participation of

citizens, regardless of nationality, age, gender, social and economic background.

However, to move forward, European action is needed to contribute to policy cohesion,

in which language learning can play a relevant role. Although the respect of cultural and

linguistic diversity in Europe is ensured by the main existing EU legislative and

normative provisions, the effective implications of the EU approach in language policies

and learning based on multilingualism for inclusion and intercultural communication are

not properly developed. Promoting social inclusion through language learning is an

issue common to all European states, and requires a common vision and an agreed

roadmap for the future in order to support:

• policy makers in defining targets, future strategies and approaches, and in setting

priorities in the language policy development processes for social inclusion

purposes;

• practitioners in adopting already existing (ad hoc improved) practices and/or

innovative practices in language teaching and learning to spread language

knowledge among the EU citizens, with particular care to the most vulnerable social

groups, and in cooperating to promote social inclusion;

15 COM(2007) 554 final/2. Commission Working Document - Report on the implementation of the Action Plan

’Promoting language learning and linguistic diversity’. Doc. 13436, 03 March 2014, Application of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, Biennial Report by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe to the Parliamentary Assembly.

12

• researchers, in developing an evidence-based approach to the role of language in

order to assess the intersection between language learning and social inclusion, and

in particular to evaluate existing or new policy approaches to linguistic and cultural

diversity to assess whether (or not) they promote social inclusion and whether social

inclusion is construed primarily in terms of enhancing intercultural communication, or

of assimilation to the mainstream.

The development of an evidence based approach to the role of language in

promoting social inclusion can also play a significant role in supporting policy makers

to ensure the development of relevant policies and effective initiatives as well as the

adoption by practitioners of language learning and teaching practices that are

effective in supporting the social inclusion of target groups at a higher risk of social

exclusion.

13

2. LANGUAGE POLICIES / LANGUAGE LEARNING PROMOTING SOCIAL INCLUSION: GAPS AND NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED

In early 2010, the European Commission launched a ten-year growth strategy (Europe

2020 Strategy) which was conceived as a partnership between the EU and its Member

States, with a set of goals focused around the priorities of smart, sustainable and

inclusive growth, with five interrelated headline targets for the EU to be achieved by

2020 in the areas of employment, research and development (R&D), climate change

and energy, education, and the fight against poverty and social exclusion (Fig. 1).16 The

strategy objectives and targets are further supported by thematic flagship initiatives (Fig.

2).

Fig. 1 - Europe 2020 strategy headline targets and their interlinkages.17

16 Although these are not exhaustive of the strategy objectives, they reflect the kind of dynamic change the strategy

calls for. 17 Source: Eurostat, “Europe 2020 indicators – introduction” [http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-

explained/index.php/Europe_2020_indicators_-_introduction].

14

Fig. 2 - The Europe 2020 strategy's key priorities, EU overall headline targets and flagship initiatives.18

2.1 The EU2020 strategy: status and implementation

The Communication of the EU Commission “Taking stock of the Europe 2020 strategy

for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth”19 shows that experience with the targets

and flagships of the Europe 2020 strategy has been mixed (Tab. 1). Despite the crisis,

there have been more positive structural trends, for instance in education levels,

building a more sustainable energy mix and the reduction in the carbon intensity of the

economy; on the other hand the crisis has had a clearly negative impact in particular on

employment and levels of poverty, increasing the differences in performance between

Member States (also according to the different degree of policy response to face the

crisis across the EU).

18 Source: Eurostat, “Europe 2020 indicators – introduction” [http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-

explained/index.php/Europe_2020_indicators_-_introduction ] 19 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and

Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, COM(2014) 130 final/2.

15

UNIT REFERENCE PERIOD TARGET

2008 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

75% of the population aged 20-64 should be employed

Employment rate - age group 20-64 % of population aged 20-64 70.3 68.6 68.4 68.4 69.2 (:) 75

3% of the EU's GDP should be invested in R&D

Gross domestic expenditure on R&D % of GDP 1.85 1.97 2.01 2.03 2.03(p) (:) 3

Greenhouse gas emissions should be reduced by 20% compared to 1990 The share of renewable energy sources in final energy consumption should be increased to 20% Energy efficiency should improve by 20%

Greenhouse gas emissions Index 1990 = 100 90.16 82.9 81.69 80.2 (:) (:) 80

Share of renewable energy in gross final energy consumption

% 10.5 12.9 14.3 15.0 (:) (:) 20

The share of early school leavers should be under 10% and at least 40% of 30-34 years old should have completed a tertiary or equivalent education

Early leavers from education and training % of population aged 18-24 14.6 13.4 12.7 11.9 11.2(b) (:) 10

Tertiary educational attainment % of population aged 30-34 31.2 34.8 36.0 37.1 37.9(b) (:) 40

Poverty should be reduced by lifting at least 20 million people out of the risk of poverty or social exclusion

People at risk of poverty or social exclusion(1)

Cumulative difference from 2008 in thousand

(:) 3426 6173 5009 4382 (:) (:)

(1) People are counted only once even if they are present in more than one sub-indicator

Table 1 – EU28, EU2020 Headline Indicators (source: Eurostat).

Because of the economic and financial crisis, the EU needs to strengthen and review its

smart, sustainable and inclusive growth strategy so that the right post-crisis policy

priorities can be set for the EU in the second half of the decade leading to 2020. In

particular, policy interventions are still necessary to ensure that the key social inclusion

objectives and targets of EU2020 will be reached.

• Millions of additional workers (of both genders) would be needed to meet the

EU2020 employment target: young and well-educated people would be needed to

participate in the labour market as well as a much larger representation of women,

older people, inactive adults and migrants: the latter (except for women) tend to be

less educated than the rest of the labour force on average and are therefore would

be likely to join the less-skilled part of the workforce. Active labour market policies,

coupled with lifelong learning strategies and comprehensive integration policies, thus

remain essential for the achievement of employment goals.

• The EU has diverged from its employment target (96.4 million people by 2020)20 and

the situation has worsened particularly in certain Member States, with a sharp

20 The number of people at risk of poverty and social exclusion (comprising people at risk of financial poverty,

experiencing material deprivation or living in jobless households) increased from 114 million in 2009 to 123 million

16

increase in severe material deprivation and in the share of jobless households.

Some groups are at higher risk of poverty and social exclusion compared with the

EU average. The most affected groups are women, children, young people, people

living in single-parent households, lower educated people, ethnic minorities, and

migrants. EU policies aim at reducing the number of people at risk, therefore tend to

focus on these groups.

2.2 Evidence about gaps in the role of EU language policies/learning in promoting social inclusion

The lack or scarcity of language knowledge can exacerbate the risk of more vulnerable

targets to be excluded from the labour market and / or to be socially excluded. If on the

one hand European language policies aim to promote: • multilingualism (i.e., all are entitled to develop a degree of communicative ability in

a number of languages over their lifetime in accordance with their needs),

• linguistic diversity (i.e., Europe is multilingual and all its languages are equally

valuable modes of communication and expressions of identity; the right to use and to

learn one’s language(s) is protected in Council of Europe Conventions),

• mutual understanding (i.e., the opportunity to learn other languages is an essential

condition for intercultural communication and acceptance of cultural differences),

• democratic citizenship (i.e., participation in democratic and social processes in

multilingual societies is facilitated by the multilingual competence of individuals),

• social cohesion (i.e., equality of opportunity for personal development, education,

employment, mobility, access to information and cultural enrichment depends on

access to lifelong language learning),

on the other hand descriptive statistics -- based on existing data and information --

provide evidence about gaps in language policies and language learning in Europe,

which lower their effective contribution to achieve key social inclusion goals of EU2020

(particularly increasing employment, reducing early school leaving and reducing the

number of people at risk of poverty and social exclusion) and -- generally -- to promote

active social inclusion:

• The average number of foreign languages learned per pupil at upper secondary

general education students (ISCED level 3 general) in EU28 decreased to 1.4 in

2013, from 1.6 in 2008, and just over half (50.8 %) of upper secondary general

in 2012 and then slightly decreased to 121 million in 2014 in the EU27 and rose from 118 million in 2010 to 124million in 2012 and then declined somewhat to 122million in the EU28.

17

education students (at ISCED level 3 general) in the EU-28 studied two or more

languages in 2013, down from 53.1 % in 2008.21

• Most of the (general) upper secondary education students in Europe – in 2013 --

studied English (93.7%), followed by French (24.1 %) and German (19.5 %), while

the average share of upper secondary education students not learning any foreign

language was about 10%.22

• Between 2008 and 2013, the proportion of students at ISCED level 3 (general) in the

EU-28 studying English increased (up 2.3 percentage points), while the proportions

studying French and German fell 2.5 and 4.0 percentage points respectively.23

• Foreign-born and ethnic minorities leave education and training earlier and

languages24 play a relevant role in early school leaving:

o Young foreign-born residents have a higher tendency to abandon formal education

prematurely. In the EU, the share of early leavers among migrants in 2014 was

much higher than for natives (20.3 % compared with 10.4%). Language difficulties,

leading to underachievement and lack of motivation, are possible reasons. Lower

socioeconomic status of foreign-born residents increasing the risk of social

exclusion is another.

o Ethnic minorities are likely to be excluded from education due to a combination of

factors including parental choices, poverty, discriminatory practices, residential

segregation and language barriers.

• The share of European adults speaking 2 or more foreign languages is still low

(29.9% in 2011) and over one third (34.3 %) of working-age adults (defined here as

25–64 year-olds) in the EU-28 reported that they did not know any foreign languages.

The share of adult individuals who do not know any foreign language is particularly

high for the most disadvantaged adults, because less educated (61.1% for ISCED 0-

2), not employed (43.6% among unemployed and 46.7% among inactive people) or

less skilled (45.5% among skilled manual workers and 49% among elementary

occupations).25

21 Eurostat and Unesco Institute for Statistics (UIS), OECD 22 Eurostat and Unesco Institute for Statistics (UIS), OECD 23 Eurostat and Unesco Institute for Statistics (UIS), OECD 24 Early leaver from education and training, generally refers to a person aged 18 to 24 who has finished no more

than a lower secondary education and is not involved in further education or training; their number can be expressed as a percentage of the total population aged 18 to 24. For Eurostat statistical purposes, an early leaver from education and training is operationally defined as a person aged 18 to 24 recorded in the Labour force survey (LFS).

25 Adult Education Survey, 2011. The Adult Education Survey (AES) is a household survey which is part of the EU Statistics on lifelong learning.

18

• On average only few foreign-language immigrants in the EU (25.9%) speak the host-

country language at home,26 and 33.9% of foreign-language immigrants do not speak

the host-country language at home.

2.3 Needs to be addressed by the Roadmap

In conclusion, Europe is multicultural and multilingual. Multilingualism, already prevailing

in some EU countries and regions, is increasing further due to the high number of

migrants, the EU principle of free mobility of citizens and the increased focus on

mobility. Yet, in this context and according to different sources of information,27 there is

still much work to do to foster multilingualism and its social inclusion perspective. In

particular, some specific needs which should be addressed by the Roadmap can be

identified according to the evidence highlighted above, provided by descriptive statistics

and by the implementation level of EU language policies:

• the share of upper secondary general education students studying two or more

foreign languages should be increased and there should not be any upper

secondary education students not learning any foreign language;

• the range of foreign languages (offered and chosen) in upper secondary general

education should be wider and not only focussed on traditionally most widespread

languages like, English, German and French;

• the acquisition of the language of the host country is fundamental for integration,

social inclusion and citizenship or nationality purposes, in the case of asylum

seekers, refugees, and immigrants;

• promotion and protection of regional or minority languages is relevant for legal and

administrative purposes, but should be made more relevant in socio-economic

activities (for example, awareness of one’s citizen rights; ability to engage with public

administrations);

• adult foreign language learning should be strengthened, with particular focus on

individuals most disadvantaged because less educated, not employed or less skilled

in order to encourage and assist them in acquiring language skills;

26 According to the Survey of Adult Skills -- conducted in 2012 in 33 countries as part of the OECD Programme for

the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC). 27 Such as the conclusions of the latest Eurobarometer on language use and competence in Europe (Special

Eurobarometer 386, Europeans and their Languages, February – March 2012)

19

• adult language learning should be addressed with particular focus among non-native

speakers in order to spread official (state and regional) languages learning and

stimulate their active inclusion in the host country;

• although the main aim of CLIL is to achieve communicative competence in second

and foreign languages across the educational curriculum, it would be advantageous

to consider extending the adoption of CLIL to the social inclusion of specific target

groups who are actually socially excluded;

• language learning should be particularly targeted to low-educated and low-skilled

workers in order to increase their skills and to improve their chances of finding a

(better) job. Furthermore, language learning can facilitate education and

employment of (young) European citizens across Europe;

• further research is necessary (e.g. counterfactual analyses to evaluate the effects of

language learning on social inclusion) in order to verify the extent to which language

learning influence social inclusion outcomes of groups at higher risk of social

exclusion (young people, lower educated people, migrants, ethnic minorities, etc.) as

well as to plan policy interventions to promote their effective integration into society.

20

3. PRINCIPLES ON WHICH THE ROADMAP IS BASED

Linguistic diversity is part of the European landscape and languages are a basic

element for Europeans who wish to work, study and live together.

Multilingualism is thus a fundamental value of the European Union because (Civil

Society Platform on Multilingualism, 2011):

• facilitating intercultural dialogue -- through learning other languages -- is a key factor

in the promotion of social inclusion;

• creating better learning opportunities and making language learning affordable, in

particular for marginalised groups, is crucial to enhance social cohesion and inter-

cultural dialogue;

• knowing languages improves competitiveness and mobility of companies and

citizens, thus leading to better working conditions and job opportunities;

• language knowledge is relevant for developing European political dialogue.

In other words, multilingualism provides the necessary conditions for mobility within

Europe for leisure and work purposes, is vital for social and political inclusion of all

Europeans whatever their linguistic competences, and for the creation of a sense of

European identity.

Language learning in Europe should therefore enable individuals to be multilingual

either by maintaining and developing their existing multilingualism or by helping them to

develop from monolingualism (or, as is often the case for members of minorities,

bilingualism) into multilingualism (COE, 2007).

The principles on which the Roadmap is based can therefore be summarised as follows:

• language rights are part of human rights: to facilitate the use of all the languages

spoken by European citizens as well as the recognition of other people’s language

rights may contribute to solve social conflict and recognize human rights;

• social inclusion depends also on language knowledge: full linguistic knowledge is

essential to participate in social processes and therefore to support policies for social

inclusion;

• economic/employment opportunities for the individual and the development of human

capital in a society depend also on language knowledge: individual mobility for

21

economic purposes is facilitated by multilingualism; the multilingualism of a workforce

is a relevant part of human capital in a multilingual marketplace, and a condition for

the free circulation of goods, information and knowledge;

• multilingualism has a significant influence on the evolution of a European identity:

since Europe is a multilingual area, the sense of belonging to Europe and the

acceptance of a European identity is dependent on the ability to interact and

communicate with other Europeans using the full range of linguistic knowledge;

• multilingualism is multiple, because the multilingualism of EU citizens may change

with mobility and throughout life and it is not only a matter of competence but also an

attitude of interest in and openness towards languages and language varieties of all

kinds;

• multilingualism is possible: the technical capacity for developing multilingualism is

available in language teaching methodology, and already achieved in practice even

though it is still not widespread; the Common European Framework of Reference for

Languages, the European Language Portfolio, the Content and Language Integrated

Learning and other technical as well as legal instruments already provide the basis

required; the chance to develop multilingualism should and can be made available to

citizens by European education and lifelong learning;

• multilingualism is practical: education policies, curriculum patterns, teaching methods

exist and permit the re-consideration of existing concepts of first, second, third ....

language, and the development of a multilingual competence which enables EU

citizens to acquire whatever language they need or are interested in at a given point

in time.

The purpose of this Roadmap is to convert these principles into concrete actions, thus

providing the means of developing a common approach to promote social inclusion

through language learning, taking into account that every situation needs its particular

policy.

22

 

 

4. ROADMAP: RECOMMENDED ACTIONS TO PROMOTE SOCIAL INCLUSION THROUGH LANGUAGE LEARNING

Numerous studies, action plans, guidelines, policy recommendations, roadmaps, etc.

have been produced over the past decade tracing pathways to promote language

learning and linguistic diversity in Europe and -- in some cases -- to enhance the role of

language learning and linguistic diversity in promoting social inclusion. Among the most

relevant documents, the following ones are of particular relevance:

• The ‘Action plan on language learning and linguistic diversity’ (COM(2003) 449 final)

defined specific objectives and a set of actions to be implemented between 2004

and 2006. The ‘Action plan’ identified three broad areas (lifelong language learning,

improving language teaching and creating a language-friendly environment) for

action and defined specific objectives for each of them. In order to achieve these

objectives, the Action plan proposed actions to be taken -- between 2004 and 2006 -

- at European level for each of them, aimed at supplementing Member States’

initiatives.

• The ‘Guide for the Development of Language Education Policies in Europe’ (Council

of Europe, 2007) whose purpose was to consider:

i) the necessity of formulating and implementing language education policies

coherent with the promotion of social inclusion and the development of

democratic citizenship in Europe;

ii) how policies of language education could be developed and maintained whose

outcomes would be in accord with the pursuit of linguistic diversity in societies

and plurilingualism for citizens of Europe.

• ‘Policy Recommendations for the Promotion of Multilingualism in the European

Union’ (Civil Society Platform on Multilingualism, 2011) in which the highlighted key

priorities are:

i) to promote multilingualism for social cohesion and intercultural dialogue;

ii) to provide opportunities for migrants to learn the language of the host country

and to cultivate their own native language at the same time;

iii) to take advantage of the media which have the potential to open channels for

intercultural dialogue;

23

iv) to enhance multilingualism policy to secure the rights of all European languages

(official, regional, minority, and migrant languages);

v) to secure lifelong language learning opportunities for all citizens.

• ‘Languages for Jobs. Providing multilingual communication skills for the labour

market’ (Report from the thematic working group "Languages for Jobs" - European

Strategic Framework for Education and Training), providing policy recommendations

for a better match between demand and supply of language and communication

skills on the European labour market.

The already existing ‘heritage’ of policy recommendations to promote language learning

and to strengthen the role of language learning in fostering social inclusion -- derived

from previous studies and analyses – should not be ignored but should be built on,

systematised and valorised. The INCLUDE Roadmap aims to support this goal by

integrating what has already been done in the field of language learning and social

inclusion in the light of the gaps and needs identified in section 2 above. Actions to

promote social inclusion through language learning are thus presented below,

addressing them to three different types of stakeholders: policy makers, practitioners

and researchers. These three groups can play a pivotal role in enhancing the

contribution of language learning to reach the key social inclusion goals of EU2020

(particularly increasing employment, reducing early school leaving and reducing the

number of people at risk of poverty and social exclusion) and -- generally -- to promote

active social inclusion.

4.1 Policy makers

• Although multilingualism is protected and promoted by many different and

chronological subsequent EU provisions, the European Commission should develop

a unique and comprehensive ‘EU language plan’ to protect, promote and develop all

the languages regularly used in Europe which should be:

o comprehensive and inclusive, focusing not only on the official working languages

of the European Union but also on less widely used languages, languages of

immigrant communities, regional and minority languages, in order to guarantee

Europe’s cultural diversity;

o individual-centred, informed by the needs, requirements, goals, and social

context of EU citizens as well as of asylum seekers, refugees, immigrants,

coming to Europe in high and increasing numbers;

24

o integrated with other EU policies, including language learning in all the EU

policies, where appropriate, such as economic competitiveness, social cohesion,

lifelong learning, mobility, and employment.

• A coordinated public information campaign to raise awareness of the benefits of

multilingualism amongst European institutions and citizens is still needed.

• Acquisition from a very young age of intercultural and multilingual competences

should be promoted in preschool and school curricula, because knowing foreign

languages and cultures is a key tool to fight any form of discrimination based on

linguistic differences.

• Use of CLIL should be promoted in VET, where training is usually monolingual and

mono-subject. Guidelines for incorporating CLIL in VET training funded under the

ESF for instance, or other public funds, would be relevant.

• Promotion of social inclusion through language learning should be implemented at

EU, national, regional and local level, to benefit disadvantaged groups (NEETs, early

school leavers, low-skilled workers, migrants, illiterate citizen, people with

disabilities, etc.), for example through new EU programmes related to the promotion

of multilingualism and through other existing programmes in the field of employment

and social innovation (EaSI) and regional policy (e.g. ESF) as well as through policy

strategies for candidate and potential candidate countries.

• In addressing language policies for social inclusion, policy makers should take into

account the more socially vulnerable groups (migrants; Roma; low-skilled workers or

workers with obsolete skills; people belonging to regional or minority language

communities; people with communicative handicaps such as deafness, blindness,

dyslexia, etc.; citizens with low motivation due to their special economic or social

situation, and/or low schooling, NEET, especially illiterate persons, etc. for whom

language learning is not only a goal to be reached but also an instrument to ensure

their social empowerment and assure competences to allow their full participation

and integration in society. In doing so, policy makers should consider that these

target groups are not mutually exclusive (some people can be affected by different

kind of vulnerabilities) and could often be affected by additional roadblocks to

language learning (e.g. low or defective competence level even in their own

language, poor writing ability, negative school experience, etc.). As a consequence,

any policy aiming at successful social inclusion of these most social vulnerable

25

targets -- through language learning -- should pay particular attention to how to

overcome these multiple and additional barriers.

• Particular attention should be devoted to asylum seekers, refugees, immigrants,

because lack of language skills hampers their integration. This should be addressed

with a twofold aim: i) to improve asylum seekers, refugees, immigrants’ language

skills; ii) to develop an inclusive multilingual society, which values all languages and

cultures equally. Integration of asylum seekers, refugees, immigrants through

language learning should always take into account their linguistic and cultural

background.

4.2 Practitioners28

• A bottom-up approach to foreign language learning should be encouraged. Although

the primary responsibility for educational and cultural services lies with Member

States, cooperation with the civil society (NGOs, trade unions, foundations,

associations, private sector etc.) should be implemented at community level.

• Cooperation and partnerships with international, regional and national organisations

working in the field of integration and social inclusion of vulnerable groups as well as

in the promotion of intercultural dialogue should be promoted.

• Initiatives, best practices and projects taking place across Europe -- such as CLIL

(Content Language Integrated Learning) -- should be widely supported, shared and

disseminated. Networks should play a vital role in this respect, by gathering

information, raising awareness and disseminating knowledge on social and

economic advantages of languages as well as on new methodologies and

approaches to language learning and teaching.

• The supply of languages taught and learned in upper secondary education should

be widened by promoting new methods of teaching languages in order to motivate

learners to keep languages in their study programmes and by fostering the

collaboration between education authorities and organisations as well as individuals

offering education and career guidance.

• Opportunities for young people in Europe to learn languages while on international

and cultural exchange programmes, or as participants in art education programmes

28 Language practitioners such as language teachers, teachers associations, unions, trainers, facilitators,

interpreters in the provision of public services (health & social services, police, justice administration…) and social practitioners mainly such as social mediators and inter-cultural mediators, etc.

26

also aiming at language learning should be increasingly provided, because they offer

access to cultural diversity and to resources which are beyond linguistic barriers.

• Good practice in teaching languages to learners with disabilities can be further

developed and new methods and approaches need to be developed for the teaching

of foreign languages to such learners.

• Appropriate methodologies (e.g. distance learning, help with the funding of staff and

teacher training and development) for adult language learning should be developed,

in order to foster the awareness that language learning is a lifelong task and is not

an exclusive task of schools, examining bodies and teachers. Furthermore,

promoting lifelong learning in foreign languages is fundamental to achieve the

Barcelona goal (mother tongue plus two foreign languages for all Europeans).

• Teachers and trainers – in particular in VET - should be encouraged to acquire high

quality language competences and should have access to high quality teaching

resources.

• Specialised language training modules and methodology for teachers and trainers in

Vocational Educational Training (VET) should be developed by encouraging

collaboration between language teachers and teachers of other subjects who may

lack adequate language skills.

• Methodologies such as content and language-integrated learning (CLIL) in both

general education and VET should be more widely applied to support the mobility

and employability of workers. In particular, CLIL should be developed in VET, where

training is usually monolingual and mono-subject, possibly supported by digital

resources in L2 (e-learning platforms, etc.).

• Awareness raising activities at community level with the participation of the relevant

stakeholders should be promoted (in schools, media, etc.), in order to promote the

value of languages, including minority and migrants’ languages, as an integral part

of the EU cultural heritage.

4.3 Researchers: monitoring and evaluating the promotion of social inclusion through language learning

The evidence suggests that the European Commission needs to develop a sound

evidence-base to monitor the progress of language teaching and learning and to ensure

the development of relevant policies and effective initiatives. In particular, the

Directorate General for Education and Culture (DG EAC) works with

27

Eurostat, UNESCO, and the OECD to collect and analyse data on language teaching

across Europe. On this basis, sound language competence indicators and standards

are developed at European level, and some possible recommendations can be

specifically devoted to the research community in order to further improve the evidence

based approach.

• Some language observatories in the EU have been put in place – e.g.,

Poliglotti4.eu, Mercator, CLARIN. However they should be made more accessible to

stakeholder groups. A possible development could be a merge of existing

observatories into a ‘new European linguistic observatory’ dealing with social

inclusion, working with datasets and new methodologies, focusing on the new

‘immigration crisis’, in order to collect data, monitor language use throughout

Europe, numbers of people speaking the different languages used in Europe,

implementation of legislation, teaching provision and courses, develop a regularly

updated database on the use and status of the various languages as well as on the

role of languages in promoting social inclusion.

This new EU linguistic observatory should also provide the necessary empirical data

as a basis for the formulation of realistic policies and as the instrument of

measurement of the effect of policy measures.

o A specific activity of the ‘European linguistic observatory’ should be dedicated to

identify, select, describe and disseminate good - and possibly also ‘bad’ -

practices on the use of languages and promotion of multilingualism to foster

social inclusion.

o In order to improve the information flow on language skill needs on the labour

market, regular surveys of trends in the demand for languages in the labour

market should be carried out to anticipate skills needs. Such surveys should

ideally be coordinated at EU level in order to facilitate aggregation of data and

create synergy and impact. Hence these surveys could be coordinated by the ‘European linguistic observatory’.

• Research on multilingualism and social inclusion should be promoted at EU- level,

with the involvement of international multidisciplinary teams.

o More research is needed on some key pedagogical elements of

multilingualism, such as language testing; teacher training; early language

learning; new media; and the ‘qualities of various languages as a preliminary

28

instruction or as an introduction to further study, to exploit the transfer effect

of language learning skills more effectively.

o Further research is necessary in order to estimate the effects of language

learning and multilingualism on social outcomes, especially in case of the

most socially disadvantaged groups. In particular, the counterfactual

approach (see box on the following page) could be helpful to evaluate the

impact of language learning on social inclusion.

29

COUNTERFACTUAL EVALUATION APPROACH

The objective of counterfactual analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness of a public intervention, analyzing whether the change observed among beneficiaries is to be attributed to their exposure to the intervention or to other intervening factors that impact on the change irrespectively of the intervention they have been exposed to.

Counterfactual evaluations focus on external effectiveness, namely the effect of the intervention on the relevant social/economic/environmental variables. The effect is quantified as the difference ascribable in a causal way between what the evaluator observes after the implementation of the analyzed intervention and what he/she would have observed in the same period and for the same units in the absence of the intervention.

The complexity of this approach arises from isolating the effect of the intervention from the other numerous factors that impact upon collective phenomena (e.g. characteristics of the context, of the units exposed or not exposed to the intervention). In order to attribute a specific effect to the analyzed intervention, the evaluator has to identify and isolate those observable and non observable changes that would have not occurred in the absence of the intervention, estimating the situation or condition in which individuals, groups, territories or organizations might hypothetically find themselves in the absence of the intervention (the so–called “counterfactual” situation).

Two main risks should be considered when carrying out counterfactual evaluations: • The risk to attribute to the analyzed intervention effects that are actually caused by changes in the social and

economic context occurred during the implementation period of the intervention and that are totally independent from the analyzed intervention. This is especially the case in identifying the effects of an intervention from before-after comparisons of beneficiaries.

• The selection risk (bias): the risk to attribute to the analyzed intervention the effects actually produced by the individual unobservable characteristics that differentiate the units exposed to the intervention from those not exposed to it. In this case the causal interpretation depends on the nature of the selection process that make some units to be exposed to the intervention and others not. Thus, the observed difference can be considered as a sum of: the true effect of the analysed intervention and the difference created by the selection process itself. Evaluating the effects of a binary intervention is a well-studied problem in both econometrics and statistics.

Two of the most common approaches to deal with selection bias are: • Randomization, namely randomly selecting the units exposed and not exposed to the intervention from the same

target population. According to statistical theory, the difference in the change observed between the two groups is in this case attributable to the units’ exposure to the intervention. However, randomization is rarely a feasible option, especially in the policies considered in this lot (environmental, public health, food safety and employment and social policies).

• Non–experimental methods and techniques based on the assumption that controlling and treating control and treatment groups for differences in observed covariates, or pre-treatment variables, remove most biases in comparisons between treated and control units. There are different non-experimental methods that can be used: propensity score matching, which allows to observe all the relevant characteristics of both units exposed and not exposed to the intervention and to pick up the non exposed units that “look alike” those exposed to the intervention along these characteristics; sensitivity analyses, where robustness of estimates to specific limited departures from unconfoundedness are investigated; bounds analyses, where ranges of estimands consistent with the data and the limited assumptions the researcher is willing to make, are derived and estimated; regression discontinuity design, applying to settings where, in its pure form, overlap is completely absent because the assignment is a deterministic function of covariates, but comparisons can be made exploiting continuity of average outcomes as a function of covariates; difference–in–differences, feasible only when data on effects are available for both units exposed and not exposed to the intervention before and after the intervention, when the pre-post trend for units not exposed to the intervention is a good approximation of the (counterfactual) trend among units exposed to the intervention.

The selection of the appropriate method depends on the available information. Socio-economic literature has made substantial improvements to reduce, prevent or eliminate selection bias, and to estimate policy effects by comparing treated and not treated groups exploiting random assignment when feasible, and a variety of (ever developing) non experimental methods (matching, double difference, discontinuity, instrumental variables).

           

30

4.4 Roadmap Summary and its ‘Theory of Change’

Every Roadmap describes a ‘change journey’ that takes us from the present situation –

in which change is needed – to where we want to arrive at a future point in time.

Underlying this journey is what can be described as a ‘theory of change’. This starts

with a ‘presenting problem’ and ends with a desired solution – the expected impact the

Roadmap wants to achieve, and which changes the presenting problem. Linking the

presenting problem with the desired end solution, at different points along this change

journey, are actions that are implemented to take us further down the road, and

outcomes that occur as a result of these actions, and which together lead, in the longer

term, to the desired impacts.

Fig. 3 below illustrates the change journey and theory of change that is described by the

INCLUDE Roadmap.

PRESENTING PROBLEM ACTIONS & OUTCOMES EXPECTED IMPACT

Fig. 3. The INCLUDE theory of change.

CURRENT SITUATION

Policy structures exist to promote social inclusion through

language learning, but they are not well

implemented in practice

Low contribution of language learning to

social inclusion (and to EU2020 key inclusion

goals: particularly increasing employment, reducing early school leaving and reducing

the number of people at risk of poverty and social exclusion)

Some target groups are at a higher risk of poverty and social

exclusion

The lack or scarcity of language knowledge

can even exacerbate the risk of more vulnerable targets to be excluded

ROADMAP POLICY RECOMMANDATIONS

A comprehensive, inclusive, personalised

and integrated approach to spread language

learning and to enhance its link with social

inclusion goals (to be developed by policy

makers) Exchange of best

practices and development of

innovative practices to teach and to learn

languages in education and training (to be

learned and adopted by practitioners)

An evidence based approach to monitor the

progress of language teaching and learning

and to ensure the development of

language policies and initiatives more effective

in promoting social inclusion (to be fostered

by the research community)

FUTURE SITUATION - 2020

A higher quality education and training

system

Lowered number of early school leavers

Enhanced mobility of students and workers

Increased job opportunities and employment rate

increased language knowledge among the

targets at higher risk of social exclusion

Reduced number of people at risk of poverty

and social exclusion

Increased social cohesion

31

As Fig. 3 shows, The Roadmap begins with an initial presenting problem - language

learning is not contributing effectively to promoting social inclusion - together with a

theory of what causes this problem – policy structures exist to promote social inclusion

through language learning, but they are not well implemented in practice. The desired

impact the Roadmap hopes to achieve is focused on positive social active inclusion –

like a reduction in early school leaving, increased job opportunities and increased social

cohesion.

Following on from this initial theory of change, each step in the Roadmap then has its

own individual ‘theory of change’, for example, if it is true that language learning

supports increased social and occupational mobility then it follows that steps should be

taken to improve the policy environment to support a common EU-wide vision of

language learning as a tool for active social inclusion through, for example, exchanging

best practices and innovation between policy-makers, practitioners and other

stakeholders.

Exchange of best practices and innovation will then lead to an improvement in the

evidence base on what works, and a clear, and shared vision of what initiatives should

be supported, for example in EU-funded programmes.

Better targeted language learning programmes, combined with other measures like

increased support for language teaching and training, will in turn create a critical mass

of new policies, new innovations and new knowledge that will, in the longer term, lead to

real improvements in social inclusion and a greater likelihood of policies like EU202

meeting their targets.

Summarising: the INCLUDE Roadmap provides a coherent, holistic blueprint and a

‘logic of intervention’ for achieving key policy targets set out in EU2020, the ‘Charter’ on

linguistic diversity and the Commission’s ‘Action Plan’ and related initiatives that support

better language learning, mobility, educational attainment, increased employment and

social cohesion. The Roadmap is underpinned by a grounded theoretical framework

that draws on state of the art evidence in the field of language learning and social

inclusion as well as by the lessons learned by the INCLUDE work team through all the

activities carried out during the project.

32

REFERENCES

EU provisions • Council Resolution of 31 March 1995 on improving and diversifying language

learning and teaching within the education systems of the European Union. Official

Journal C 207 , 12/08/1995.

• Charter for Regional and Minority Languages (Chart of signatures and ratifications,

Full text of the Charter, Explanatory Report, Summary), ETS No. 148.

• Charter of the fundamental right s of the European Union. Official Journal C364/01,

10/12/2000.

• Council Resolution of 14 February 2002 on the promotion of linguistic diversity and

language learning in the framework of the implementation of the objectives of the

European Year of Languages 2001, Official Journal C 50 , 23/02/2002

• COM(2003) 449 final. Promoting Language Learning and Linguistic Diversity: An

Action Plan 2004 – 2006, Brussels, 24.07.2003.

• COM/2005/0596 final. A New Framework Strategy for Multilingualism, Brussels,

22.11.2005.

• COM(2007) 554 final/2. Commission Working Document - Report on the

implementation of the Action Plan ’Promoting language learning and linguistic

diversity’. Brussels, 25.9.2007

• COM(2008) 423 final, Green Paper - Migration & mobility: challenges and

opportunities for EU education systems, Brussels, 3.7.2008.

• COM(2008) 566 final. Multilingualism: an asset for Europe and a shared

commitment, Brussels, 18.09.2008.

• A European strategy for multilingualism. Official Journal C320, 16/12/2008.

• Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the

Functioning of the European Union - Consolidated version of the Treaty on European

Union - Protocols - Declarations annexed to the Final Act of the Intergovernmental

Conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon, signed on 13 December 2007.

Official Journal C 326 , 26/10/2012.

33

• Council recommendation of 9 December 2013 on effective Roma integration

measures in the Member States. Official Journal C378, 24/12/2013

• Application of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, Doc. 13436,

03 March 2014, Biennial Report by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe to

the Parliamentary Assembly.

• COM(2014) 130 final/2, Taking stock of the Europe 2020 strategy for smart,

sustainable and inclusive growth. Brussels, 19.3.2014.

Articles, Books, Reports, Working Papers

• Civil Society Platform on Multilingualism (2011), Policy Recommendations for the

Promotion of Multilingualism in the European Union, 09 June 2011.

• COE (2007), From linguistic diversity to plurilingual education: guide for the

development of language education policies in Europe, Exectuive version.

Language Policy Division DGIV, Council of Europe, Strasbourg

• Eurobarometer (2012), Europeans and their Languages, Special Eurobarometer

386, February – March 2012.

• Gajo, L. (2007), “Linguistic knowledge and Subject knowledge: how does

bilingualism contribute to subject development?”, International Journal of Bilingual

Education and Bilingualism, 10:5,563-581.

• Marsh, D (Ed) (2002), CLIL/EMILE- The European Dimension: Actions, Trends and

Foresight Potential, Public Services Contract DG EAC: European Commission.

• Van de Craen, P. (2006), “Content and Language Integrated Learning, Culture of

Education and Learning Theories”. Brussels: Vrije University Brussels, Department

of Germanic Languages.

• Thematic working group "Languages for Jobs" European Strategic Framework for

Education and Training Languages for Jobs (ET 2020), Providing multilingual

communication skills for the labour market, Report from the thematic working group

"Languages for Jobs" European Strategic Framework for Education and Training.