teaching minority languages: the case of arabic in the netherlands

7/31/2019 Teaching Minority Languages: The case of Arabic in the Netherlands

1/37

With the support of the Lifelong Learning Programme (Key Activity 2 Languages \ Multilateral Project) of the EuropeanUnion.

This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication reflects the views only of theauthor, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information containedtherein.

Partner P3

Work package 2

Deliverable 6

Teaching Minority Languages:

The case of Arabic in the Netherlands

Jan Jaap de Ruiter & Massimiliano Spotti

Tilburg University

2010


2/37

2


3/37

3

The Plusvalor Project

This booklet on Arabic language teaching in Europe has been produced in the context of the PLUSVALOR Project

(144368-2008-IT-KA2-KA2MP;www.plusvalor.eu) which started on 1st December 2008 and it is due to end 30th

November 2010. Here follows a short description of the project.

Partners:

Universit Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Italy coordinator

Fondazione Iniziative e Studi sulla Multietnicit (Ismu), Italy

Stichting Katholieke Universiteit Brabant, Netherlands

Societatea Romana pentru Educatie Permanenta, Romania

Ec-Pec Foundation, Hungary

Main aims:

to spread the aim of multilingualism into primary and secondary school in partner countries;

to develop innovative methodologies for valorization of the language of origin in migratory context, in

constant reference to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages;

to spread the use of Common European Framework of Reference for Languages to all the partner countries;

to develop a model of citizenship education for adults in migratory situations and in the new European

contexts (Romania, Hungary) in order to foster the migrated families social inclusion, supporting parents

role in the new contexts of migration.

Target groups:

primary and secondary schools students and adults in Romania, Hungary and Italy who will participate to

Italian, Arabic and intercultural education courses;

primary and secondary teachers in Romania, Hungary and Italy who will attend teacher training courses;

European citizens by means of the awareness-raising activities on intercultural issues and European

integration.

Main results:

Research and booklets on multilingualism, the valorization of first language and the relationship between

the first and second language;

Training courses for teachers;

Language and citizenship courses for children and adults;

Didactic materials for language teaching and intercultural education;

Project website;

International conference and other dissemination activities


4/37

4

Teaching Minority Languages: The case of Arabic in the Netherlands

Table of contents

1. Introduction 5

2. Home Language Instruction: the case of Arabic in the Netherlands 5

A short overview of its history 5

Issues at stake in Arabic HLI 7

Relationship between Arabic HLI and regular education 7

Position of HLI teachers 8

HLI teachers recruitment 9

Legal status of HLI teachers 11

Debate on the status of HLI and Arabic HLI in particular 13Teaching materials 16

Numbers of pupils in HLI and Arabic HLI 17

Motivation to follow HLI 18

Level variability 18

3 Mastering Arabic 20

4 Teaching Arabic: methods developed in the Netherlands 30

Summary in Arabic 31

References 33


5/37

5

1. Introduction

In the context of the aforementioned Plusvalor project, this booklet deals with the issue of teaching minority

languages and adopts as case the teaching of Arabic in European migration contexts, the Dutch context in

particular. Since large migrant groups have been settling in Europe since the sixties and seventies of the last

century, the issue of teaching their children their mother tongues has become pertinent. In most westernEuropean countries the so called Home Language Instruction (HLI) was installed in primary schools and, to a

lesser extent, in secondary schools as well. Primary languages taught were Arabic and Turkish, but also lesser

used languages like Vietnamese, Urdu and Somalian as well. Since its implementation Home Language

Instruction has been the subject of debates and discussions. One of the important questions was if HLI should

serve the integration processes of the pupils at stake or should HLI be given as an independent subject? Also the

concept of multilingualism plays a role: should mother tongues or languages of the country of origin be taught in

an intercultural and multilingual context, that is, in combination with the language of the country of settlement,

or not? Different views existed and exist on these questions. Concerning the case of Arabic questions rose such as

to the variety to be taught: should it be the classical or literary variety that should be taught, the dialectal variety

or a combination of both? The Netherlands have known in the fourth quarter of the last century an intensive

debate on HLI and an enormously rich experience in the actual teaching of home languages, among which Arabic

and Turkish, has been developed. This book focuses on the case and developments of Arabic language teaching

in the Netherlands.

Jan Jaap de Ruiter and Massimiliano Spotti are responsible for the text. Jasmijn Hattinga Verschure and Jan

Jaap de Ruiter took care of the Dutch version of this publication and Mohammadi Laghzaoui translated the

summary of the booklet into Arabic. We owe lots of thanks to Karin Berkhout, secretary of Babylon, Centre for

Studies of the Multicultural Society, at Tilburg University to take care of the lay-out and formatting of this book.

There is also a Dutch version of the book.

2. Home Language Instruction: the case of Arabic in the Netherlands

There is a plethora of reports, management projects and laws regarding the development of (Arabic) Home

Language Instruction (HLI) and its implementation. In the following sections, an overview is given of the

developments involved, starting with a historical perspective.

A short overview of its history

1960-1974

Discussions on HLI started in the 1960s. The first community involved was that of the Moluccans, an immigrant

minority group from the former Dutch colonies in the Indies, which once hoped to return to the home country

and wanted, therefore, a type of HLI for their children. The Dutch Ministry of Education had insisted nonetheless

to organize education in Dutch only, both for those children and the children of all the immigrant minority

communities involved. In 1967, Spanish parents took the first initiative to organize lessons of the language and

culture of the childrens home country. Their project was immediately supported by the Spanish Embassy along

with the Ministry of Culture. Only the Ministry of Culture at that time was aware of the fact that some form of

HLI was essential for immigrant minority children. The Dutch government policy vis--vis HLI was always focused

on a return to the home country.

1974-1980

For the school year 1974-1975, the Ministry of Education officially supported HLI, then, labelled bicultural

education. That year, the Ministry made funds available for hiring teaching assistants for this form of minority

education. Within the schools and during regular classes, immigrant minority pupils received up to 5 hours of

lessons in their own language, that is to say, the language of the home country. In order for such lessons to be

organised, there was to be a minimum of 8 pupils wishing to follow HLI lessons. According to the Ministry, the


6/37

6

target group should be composed of children who would return to their country of origin in the near future on

the one hand, and children who would remain longer in the host country on the other. It was clearly a double-

pronged form of HLI implementation, seeking the return of some children and the integration of others. No

initiative was taken for teachers training or for the development of the didactic materials for HLI. School

directors and Dutch teachers did not consider this form of education as of a back-home-return order, causing a

more significant segregation within the schools. It was mostly the Turkish and Moroccan pupils who benefitedfrom the internal organization of the HLI, while children from southern Europe continued to prefer the HLI

organised outside school hours.

1980-1989

In 1980, the Minister of Education at the time Mr. Pais formulated three goals for the HLI in his project of

implementing minority cultures within the framework of education and he promised that HLI would have a

legal basis. But, this would not take place until 1985, when the Law on Elementary Education was adopted. This

law stipulated that the competent school management can decide whether they adopt HLI within the regular

school curriculum. The organization of the HLI was therefore not compulsory. It also stated that HLI could be

provided only for a maximum of 2:30 hours within the regular school hours, while another maximum 2:30 could

be arranged outside these hours, which meant that generally only 2:30 hour-lessons should take place during

the regular school hours. Schools wishing to obtain funds for the organization of the HLI had to have at least 8

pupils interested in the language. HLI lessons were not compulsory. The school was the sole responsible for the

choice of programs, materials and teachers, provided that the teachers must be qualified to give HLI lessons.

Teachers were paid by the Dutch authorities, except when HLI was organized by the embassy of the respective

countries (as was the case for the Spanish HLI). Teachers recruitment was done in consultation with the

authorities of the country of origin.

On February 24, 1983, a cultural agreement was concluded between the Dutch and the Moroccan authorities

as regard the language and culture provisions identified above. While the Dutch authorities organized and

financed the HLI program, the Moroccan authorities recruited the teachers. The schools concerned made their

choices with respect to the candidates to recruit. There were no further bilateral agreements with the Moroccanauthorities.

1989-1995

A reaction of the HLI implementation project appeared in response to the report entitled Minorities policy of

1989. It was observed that the school results of immigrant minority children were actually very low, and that HLI

left much to be desired. It was decided that HLI was to remain within the range of the school curriculum, while

other objectives should be formulated. In 1991, the Secretary of Education Mr. Wallage recommended in his

report that HLI was to become an integral part of language teaching. He suggested that the primary function of

minority language use is to operate as language learning supportive to the learning of Dutch and to the Dutch

education as a whole. HLI should also have an independent function, in acting as a catalyst to childrens identity

development. In 1991, Mr. Wallage composed a commission in response to the 1989 report, which should make

proposals for the development of policies in favour of immigrant minority children. Mr. van Kemenade

Committee published the Cedars in the garden report in 1992. A whole new perspective on HLI was proposed:

immigrant community languages should no more be regarded as a means to redress immigrant minority

childrens school deficit, but rather as a subject with independent objectives. In this context, HLI should have

cultural rather than deficit objectives.

This new perspective had obvious implications for the choice of objectives, target groups, target languages

and the evaluation of HLI. HLI had a new label, since for many members of the target group (generally the

second or the third generation of an ethnic minority), it was no longer own language but a foreign language

(e.g., Modern Standard Arabic) or the language of their parents. This is why HLI was labelled at the time

Education in Modern Native Languages (EMNL). In the same report, a distinction was proposed between two

perspectives: deficit vs. cultural perspectives, which implied the concept whereby immigrant minority children

were automatically categorised as children whose deficit should be eliminated. To replace this perspective,


7/37

7

specific facilities should be provided for children in deficit situations in terms of both Dutch as a second language

(NT2) and Education in Modern Native Language (EMNL).

One of the major recommendations of the Cedars in the garden report was to allow for the opportunity to

organise lessons of the actual language of origin of the children, as part and parcel of HLI, and not only lessons of

the official language of the home country. This would mean that Moroccan children could not only follow

lessons in Modern Standard Arabic, but also in Moroccan Arabic or Berber. Courses in Education in ModernNative Languages (EMNL) should stand on equal footing with other courses in primary schools; and immigrant

minority children should also be able to follow EMNL lessons. These EMNL lessons should not be organized at

the expense of other courses. Otherwise, extending the school day is highly recommended.

Transferring the EMNL organisational responsibilities from the state to municipal authorities which, after

consultation with parents, should determine which language would be proposed, was the last major

recommendation of the report. From 1995 until now, the government agreed on the Van Kemenade Committees

guidelines, though the suggestion to increase the autonomous function of HLI was included, assuming that HLI

might jointly support both functions and autonomy.

The EMNL report of 1995 formulated by the Secretary of Education Mrs. Netelenbos caused quite a stir in the

education sector, especially within the EMNL circles. The main points of this report were:

the organization of EMNL was the responsibility of municipalities;

in principle all mother tongues may be proposed;

EMNL should be offered as an independent subject outside school-time. This last point was the most

important.

A form of EMNL was proposed as part of the school activities, but in this case, it would have a supportive

function (improving the school results in another way) and it would require highly qualified EMNL teachers. The

last two paragraphs of this report were severely critical, because they had deviated from the Van Kemenade

Committees opinion: taking the EMNL outside the school hours and using it as support subject. Moreover, the

Moroccan authorities expressed their concern about Arabic within the framework of the EMNL if provided

outside school hours. They worried that the quality of education would become uncontrollable and a large

number of Moroccan children would not follow this instruction anymore. The aim was to start new EMNL on

August 1, 1997, but its launch had been delayed for a year and was rescheduled for August 1, 1998, with a

transitional period of one year (until August 1, 1999).

Debates going on in society and parliament led to new legislation on HLI in the Netherlands, namely its

abolishment from September 1, 2004. The basic idea was that pupils with a migrant minority background had

better invest in Dutch and Dutch culture, in order to better integrate and that if they wish they can learn their

own languages in self organized teaching sessions. The effects of this law were that until today many Moroccan

and Turkish children follow Arabic and Turkish lessons in mosques not covered by the educational inspection

services and in many cases following the authoritative antiquated teaching methods of the countries of origin.

On top of that those mosque schools are strongly influenced by orthodox Islamic streams (cf. the teaching of the

Fethlla Glen movement in Europe).

Issues at stake in Arabic HLI

At the time of the existence of Arabic HLI in the Netherlands, different issues were tackled but never actually

solved. We mention the weak relation between Arabic HLI and regular education, the training and status of the

Arabic teachers, the (lack of) teaching materials, and the general effects of this type of education: What was the

level in Arabic of the children following this type of education at the end? These issues are discussed in the

following sections.

Relationship between Arabic HLI and regular education

A review of the NT2 Group Project, published in 1992 (Werken aan Taalbeleid, Working on Language policy)called for better coordination between HLI and the teaching of Dutch as a second language (NT2) in elementary

education. The choice of the group was geared toward a bilingual model, where both languages were taught in a


8/37

8

coordinated method. In short, the group wished that the mother tongue would play a role during the

kindergarten phase (i.e., groups 1 and 2). At this level, the language still needed to be developed; it should serve

as a lingua franca for teaching and fostering childrens development, serving as a catalyst to the acquisition of

Dutch. With respect to Arabic, they advocated the use of the actual mother tongue of the Moroccan children. To

cope with these tasks, HLI teachers should receive additional training. In elementary education (i.e., groups 3-8),

HLI should, according to the group, have a supportive function to NT2. In groups 3, 4 and 5, greater importancewould be given to further develop childrens knowledge of the reading and writing skills in the (standard)

language. But starting from groups 5/6, HLI should be more linked to the core of the NT2. The group knows that

this orientation would require greater spirit of cooperation from immigrant minority language teachers and their

Dutch colleagues, which is lacking nowadays. While HLI teachers were generally isolated, they should still be able

to follow further training. The group project also knew that words are easy, but deeds are difficult. Teachers

often worked in different schools, and they had little time for consultation with the teachers teams of the

respective schools. As was stated above, the organization and content of HLI would undergo significant changes

on 1 August 1998. National authorities would no more be responsible for HLI legislation and funding, HLI

organization of appropriate teachers training, and the development of objectives, programs, exams and

teaching materials. The organization of HLI was decentralized towards the municipalities: from now on, they

would decide on the languages to provide in the HLI program, after consultation with parents of the pupils. This

offer should not be limited to the official languages of the countries of origin. For Moroccan pupils, this meant

they would also follow lessons in Moroccan Arabic or Berber. It was still thought that parents, mostly

Moroccans, would cling to Modern Standard Arabic for HLI. Besides this, new problems arose to teach the

language, since there was virtually no teaching material available at this level.

Another question concerned what form will take parents consultation: through independent organizations

(which by far do not represent all the parents), through parents surveys (and how?). All this was not yet clear.

Another modification in the HLI organisation was that the municipalities could decide about the number of

pupils to follow HLI lessons and the number of hours they would spend there. Schools were to be responsible for

the organization and quality of HLI, and the appointment and training of HLI teachers. However, the need to

organise HLI outside the school hours caused much stir. The argument for this decision was that HLI could nottake place at the expense of the regular curriculum. Yet there was a catch herein: if HLI was to have a supportive

function, it had to be held during the school hours. However, if its function was independent (the acquisition of

Arabic (Modern Standard)), it had to be done outside the school hours. How was this possible in schools with

more that 75% of children with immigrant minority backgrounds (mostly Turks and Moroccans)? If the total of

HLI hours had to be given outside the school curriculum, the school day may either be overloaded and longer or

children must return to school just for a HLI lesson. Many parents feared an overload of their children and a

stigmatizing effect of seeing HLI placed outside school hours.

We must note here that the minorities of southern Europe have long organized their courses outside school

hours, Wednesday afternoon or Saturday. The implementation of HLI as support to NT2 caused many problems

for teachers who were in charge: they should be qualified for such teaching; they should be able to follow

training and should have a better command of the Dutch language. All the signatures collected and protests

from both parents and teachers could not prevent this new form of HLI be implemented from 1 August 1998.

Position of HLI teachers

To give an overview of the overall situation of HLI teachers, particularly within the framework of the HLI in the

Netherlands, the focus was put on the findings of Driessen, Louvenberg and Jungbluth (1987), who in their

investigation of the HLI in the Netherlands examined the origins of 63 teachers in HLI in the Netherlands. The HLI

teachers examined in this survey were overwhelmingly male (81%), less than 40 years and lived in the

Netherlands for over 5 years. In general, they had benefited from good training, they were qualified Moroccan

teachers, and they had completed courses/training in the Netherlands. They also had several years of teaching

experience in both their country of origin and the Netherlands. The Moroccan teachers legal status could be

best described as weak. More than one third of these teachers were active in many schools. Nearly 90% of the

Moroccan HLI teachers had a full-time schedule. Their tasks were really heavy, which was the prime cause of


9/37

9

their high frequency of absenteeism, while a replacement teacher was rarely available. In fact, there was

particularly a stark shortage of Moroccan teachers, which was the main reason for the non-organization of HLI in

numerous schools. The main problems cited by these teachers include:

teaching heterogeneous groups;

teaching in several schools (3/4 teachers work in more than one school and have full schedules);

too many social and educational activities (interpretation, translation, interviews with parents);

problems of teaching materials;

a combination of all of the above-mentioned reasons.

All these teachers had one or many additional tasks in addition to their teaching tasks:

guiding pupils;

supervising homework;

collaborating with the school director;

coordinating with pupils of other languages;

developing content;

providing for other courses than those of HLI

Establishing contacts with the Dutch colleagues was often difficult. The main causes were:

teaching in several schools;

providing for courses outside the school hours;

part-time schedules;

remoteness of the localities;

language barriers;

lack of interest from Dutch colleagues.

According to various reports, neither did HLI teachers make efforts to have and maintain contact with Dutchcolleagues. Driessen, Louvenberg and Jungbluth (1987) noted that most HLI teachers did not attend school team

meetings (in 50% of cases, they did not attend) or parents meetings, partly because they worked in several

schools. Still, they wrote reports on the childrens progress. Contact with Dutch teachers generally focused on

pupils and their parents, but rarely on educational issues and coordination. With their fellow HLI teachers they

discussed these topics and others related to the didactic materials. In the following table, an overview is given of

the numbers of hours of the HLI teachers involved. A full-time schedule consists of 40 hours. Most teachers had

a full-time schedule.

Table 2.1 Number of hours per full-time schedule in the school years 1985-1991;

Source: Ministry of Education, PO/IAE section.

School year Number of hours per full-time schedule

19851986 263,4

19861987 274,1

19871988 332,3

19881989 363,6

19891990 384,7

19901991 412,0

HLI teachers recruitment

In the Netherlands, the Moroccan teachers recruitment was done in a different way than in the rest of Europe.

The Moroccan authorities could only propose seemingly valid candidates, but ultimately it was the schools or the

municipal authorities which had the last word on their appointments. To better understand the reasons behind

this situation, reference should be made to historical developments. When HLI was still under the auspices of


10/37

10

the Ministry of Culture of the time, no specific qualifications were required from HLI teachers. When HLI was

transferred to the Ministry of Education in 1974, the teachers so far paid by the Ministry of Culture had been

maintained, notwithstanding their lack of qualifications. Also later, the exemption policy had always been fairly

flexible. Since 1980, HLI organisation adhered to strictly defined criteria. Therefore, since 1990 no exemption

was granted with respect to the required HLI teachers qualification. Only those granted temporary exemptions

have been renewed or replaced by permanent exemption at the authorities request. This happened especiallywhen the concerned teacher had been in office as such since at least one year; and that the authority had

declared that the teacher worked with the general satisfaction of all parties involved. A number of municipalities

and schools issued major objections against the appointment of teachers sent officially by recruiters in the

country of origin. As a result, the choice was very restricted and political indoctrination, especially by the

organizations of the extreme right, was mostly feared. At first, coordinators of the Ministry of Education had no

objection against the teachers recruitment by the embassies. Any criticism could be levelled against other

parties involved. In addition, it was long estimated that HLI education was the responsibility of the country of

origin. It was generally thought that this latter should be more aware of transmitting the language and the

culture involved. The Ministrys sole requirement was the teachers qualification. Such behaviour was widely

criticised by the municipalities who sometimes even escaped regulations in appointing migrant workers living in

the Netherlands. As it was often about illegal people or people with temporary residence permits, Social Affairs

and Justice began to intervene. The Director of the Nursery and Elementary Education of the Ministry of

Education proposed a solution whereby the qualification of teachers hired officially was verified by the

coordinators. When composing the list of candidates, a representative of the municipalities should also play a

part.

The same director then proposed to appoint a recruitment body (officially teaching attachs) in the

respective embassies in Rabat and Ankara to serve the Ministry of Education, which should try to limit the direct

intervention of the embassies. In practice, this was limited to the composition of a pool by the recruitment body,

satisfying the wishes of municipal administrations. After interviewing the candidates in the concerned country,

representatives of the school directors could then compose from this pool the final list of the available teachers

on call. Despite these regulations, the lack of teachers increased sharply in the early 1980s, while the situationwas complicated by the sudden rejection by Minister Pais of the Cultural Agreement with Morocco signed in

February 1980. He explained his decision as follows: according to this agreement, the Moroccan authorities

recruit teachers. In the context of the academic freedom, he considered it unacceptable. Due to these

differences regarding recruitment, the lack of thirty Moroccan teachers in the 1980s was a serious structural

challenge. The intervention of Minister Pais also contributed to an almost complete halt of recruitment in

Morocco. The relations only resumed with the successor to the Minister. The Ministry wanted to quickly clarify

this situation, because many posts were vacant, and the functions were employed only many years later. The

municipal authorities insisted that exemption be granted to teachers with no teaching qualification. The case of

recruitments in Morocco had been reopened only after the signing of the Cultural Agreement in February 24,

1983.

Many teachers associations, directions of four large municipalities, political parties and interested

associations tried to mobilize public opinion and the parliament to prevent ratification. According to them, the

way would be open to the infiltration of associations and teachers who are politically indoctrinated into the

Dutch education system. To counter this criticism, the Secretary of Education Mrs. van Leijenhorst composed a

Joint Committee with a representation of the directions league to establish selection criteria in 1983. It was

decided to act in the following way: the education attach at the embassy in Rabat was to ensure that all

potential applicants be informed of the opportunity to come to the Netherlands. Following the reactions, she

made a list and forwarded the names of the appointed candidates to the Moroccan Ministry of Education, which,

in turn, decides whether an immigration visa will be issued. The selection was in the hands of the attachs, but

authorities influence was more pronounced compared to the ways selection procedures were carried out in

Turkey. The Joint Commission could not prevent a boycott of the list by the four major municipalities and the

teachers union. Therefore, recruitment took place in Morocco outside official channels; a procedure to which

also education attachs participated. These candidates were still in a bad legal situation, because they could no


11/37

11

longer claim back their old jobs. Moreover, indoctrination among teachers was not visible. Despite the

disagreements, the recruitment process was relatively successful. In three years, 59 teachers arrived in the

Netherlands, most of who were recruited outside the official list, with the tacit agreement of the Moroccan

authorities. The control for assistants qualification, largely ensured by attachs, underwent a number of

problems, due to different causes. There was, for instance, no such influence on uncontrolled or free recruitment

organized by the school directors who would not collaborate with the attachs for reasons of principle. TheMinistry assumed that many people were recruited, though with questionable qualification or no qualification at

all. It was striking how the media had highlighted the danger of political indoctrination, which had the effect of

underestimating the qualification of the teachers coming directly from Morocco, which was as fundamental as

the issue just mentioned. This holds true especially for those who had been recruited directly in Morocco,

without the intervention of the attach. Their recruitment took place without the least control, while their

teaching quality was assumed execrable.

Another problem concerned teachers who had completed their studies and were contractually bound to the

state for a period of eight years. If they left their posts without official permission, they would be guilty of

contract breach, compromising thereby their reintegration in the Moroccan education system if they would

return. The method applied by the attachs gave further guarantees of qualification. It did not only take into

account the candidates teaching experience and fluency in Arabic and French, but their knowledge of the

Western society and Dutch as well. In addition, a kind of fundamentalism scale applied to crowd out orthodox

candidates. All these conditions did not automatically qualify candidates for teaching in the Netherlands, which

was often reported to the Ministry by the attachs. In practice, many people were appointed, though they not

only had a simplistic idea of the status of education in the Netherlands, but they, according to the selection

criteria, lacked the necessary qualification as well. In addition, as the Ministry paid little attention, the newly

arrived HLI teachers were abandoned to their fate. Therefore, they could not expect to make strenuous efforts, in

the short run, to contribute to an integral definition of the HLI objectives. According to alarming inspection

reports from 1982 and 1988, an intensive course of six months had not changed much. Afterward Mrs. van

Leijenhorst admitted that she was mistaken about the quality of the teachers recruited in Morocco.

The legal status of HLI teachers

The legal status decree of the teaching staff governed the legal situation of the staff generally operating within

the ambit of education. Since the application of the Law on Elementary Education, all teachers of elementary

education were included in the same salary regulation, regardless of whether the teacher was a regular school

teacher or a HLI teacher. In actual practice, however, there remained the issue of delay in regulating the situation

of HLI teachers. This delay was said to be the result of regulation procedures based on the situation of teachers

who were both Dutch nationals and Dutch-born. The teachers leave was not regulated according to the Islamic

holiday calendar. This meant that the teacher depended on his employers goodwill. A number of definitions for

special leaves were difficult to apply to the situation of Moroccan teachers. Consider, for example, the case of a

leave for family reasons. The time was too short for cases where such events took place in the country of origin.

The appointment of a HLI teacher was temporary-based. The teacher had first to follow HLI application courses

before being considered for final appointment. When temporary appointment expired, the staying permit was at

risk as it might expire. Return fees reimbursement was not regulated. Legally, teaching in primary school could

only be given by qualified teachers. Additionally, the decree underlying the legal status made it clear that

temporary appointment was not to exceed one year, unless the Ministry allowed extension in few exceptional

individual cases and for good reason.

All of the newly appointed HLI teachers were considered temporarily appointed during the HLI application

course, under the pretext that they did not yet show the regularly required qualification. Regardless of the

regulation at play, many HLI teachers had not yet been permanently appointed, notwithstanding their right. In

the executive EMNL report, the Secretary of Education Mrs. Netelenbos guaranteed that teachers posts in the

Dutch education were maintained. Municipalities had the obligation of integrating all these teachers into the new

situation. The Education Act stated that the HLI teachers pay was regulated by the Dutch authorities; the

Moroccan authorities had nothing to do with this matter. In the new situation of EMNL, the HLI finances were to


12/37

12

be transferred to the municipalities, which would be, accordingly, responsible for the remuneration of HLI

teachers to start from August 1, 1998. From the moment the Ministry of Education took over the HLI

responsibility from the Ministry of Culture, teacher retraining courses were organized for HLI teachers. In 1975,

this course focused on pedagogical training, where knowledge of Dutch vehicled not only information on the

Dutch society and education but on pedagogical and didactic topics as well. The organization of these courses

was given to the Dutch Centre for Foreigners. The mere fact of following this course did not allow for aqualification or any other rights whatsoever. Rather, only a certificate was obtained, proving that courses were

followed regularly.

As soon as HLI became less focused on a return to the home country but rather on the integration of pupils,

the requirements of the immigrant minority teachers changed accordingly. Integration turned into the main

objective. It was conceived of as an orientation of the Dutch teacher towards education in general: the program

requirements were not defined for the HLI modified objectives. The teachers training course was compulsory for

teachers with a temporary exemption from qualification, but teachers with final exemption from qualification

were also entitled to participate. This course designation was confusing. Its content focused only on the skills and

knowledge to improve the role of teachers within the teaching team, and, then, in Dutch education. There were

three subjects involved: the Dutch language first, then an orientation towards the Dutch culture and society, and

finally knowledge of the Dutch education system. The course was organized in six Training Centres enjoying

greater freedom to organize it the way they want. At the end of the training cycle, a certificate was granted

thereby providing the qualification essential for the HLI program. The course lasted one year, with an average of

two days per week. An application course for the fully qualified teacher was available for teachers who obtained

qualification in the country of origin. Fully qualified means qualified for teaching in a Dutch school. The program

also focused on the pedagogical and didactic aspects currently at use in the Dutch elementary education. It was

important that access to this course was not possible unless the candidate passed an entrance examination in

Dutch. No help was provided for reaching this level of access.

Later, there were lessons of Dutch, a one-week course, whereby trainees learned to work in a kindergarten: a

course in Turkish/Arabic (Modern Standard), and an intensive course for Moroccan teachers. Daily courses of

Dutch were provided in the Training Centres, generally for foreign pupils who planned to continue theireducation in the Netherlands. Starting from the month of August 1985, the kindergarten children also had the

possibility to follow HLI lessons. Apart from Italians, no foreign teacher achieved the qualification required for

this form of education in the country. The position advocated by the municipalities was to retrain teachers during

the effective course, so they were able to work in a kindergarten when school started in 1986. The course

focused on mixed classes according to nationality. These courses did not lead to any certificate. These courses

were also available in the same six Training Centres organizing application courses for fully qualified teachers.

In secondary education, second-level Arabic and Turkish part-time trainings were available for the immigrant

minority members who were proficient in the languages concerned and wished to obtain a second-level

qualification. Secondary education Dutch teachers had the possibility to take these courses if they had a

sufficient level in Arabic or Turkish. It involved four-year training with an average of 8 hours per week. The

intensive course for Moroccan teachers was a temporary solution with respect to the lack of teachers in this

category. It was being organized by a number of Training Centres. It was a full-time training lasting three months,

after which it was possible for Moroccan teachers to teach and follow the HLI courses. When this cycle was

completed, teachers were qualified for HLI. This course was intended only to Moroccans having followed prior

training equivalent to the higher level of secondary education.

The criteria of qualification and the mastery of Dutch by Moroccan teachers were always a source of concern,

despite all the efforts of retraining. In 1982, the education inspectorate found that 50% of teachers did not

sufficiently master Dutch, in 1986/1987 the inspectorate concluded that half of the Arabic teachers not only

lacked the required qualification, but also they did not follow any qualification training. In 1988, the inspectorate

concluded for the first time that the mastery of Dutch had improved (60% of the Moroccan teachers mastered

Dutch well), the teaching experience and quality had improved compared to the year 1982 and the HLI teachers

encountered no problem in teaching pupils of groups 1 and 2 in particular. In the Eigen Taal (Own Language)

report of 1991, the Secretary of Education Wallage predicted an imminent lack of teachers in HLI since the


13/37

13

number of pupils participating in HLI kept on growing. He preferred in-country teachers training rather than

hiring teachers from abroad. In this context, he proposed a short term HLI teaching qualification training for

elementary education offered to teachers of Arabic and Turkish. This training was actually taking place in

Amsterdam. In addition, he wanted to establish an intensive training program to reinforce HLI teachers

knowledge of Dutch. To cater for the future need for HLI teachers, Wallage conducted a survey to see whether

HLI teacher training could possibly be launched. He obviously intended to link this training to a teachers trainingfor elementary education.

Moreover, after a couple of years of practice, a part-time training was expected to be followed by a regular-

school-teachers training, leading ultimately to full qualification. The NT2 Group Project did not only go much

further in its proposals to improve the level of training of HLI teachers, but it gave a critical feedback on

proposals and previous courses as well. According to this group, the biggest problem lied in the lack of teaching

expertise in the HLI teachers work, particularly at the kindergarten level. The limited mastery of Dutch defined

further retraining opportunities. The teacher alone should not be held responsible for this poor mastery of the

host country dominant language (i.e., Dutch), retraining courses, already listed, were also of very low intensity

and quality. In addition, the HLI teacher had generally too little contact with the Dutch colleagues at schools. The

group hoped that new training was put into practice to socialize HLI teachers in the Netherlands and this within

the framework of existing teachers training programs for elementary education. For secondary schools, new

teachers had also to be trained in the Netherlands, and teachers already in service should be retrained. While

secondary school teachers training programs for Turkish and Arabic (Modern Standard) already existed for years,

there was still no such foundation for the HLI teachers in primary education. However, the Minister would, over

two years, train teachers for language teaching to work as a support for the teaching staff (in, among other

tasks, receiving bilingual groups, groups 1 and 2 included), next to and under the responsibility of a regular

school teacher. The Ministrys goal was that these support teachers were transferred, after some years of

practice, to a teacher training group in the Training Centres or to the HLI application course for one year, where

he/she could obtain HLI teacher qualification. By this detour, the Ministry wanted to train HLI teachers, instead of

real initial training. This proposal for assistance entitled Support Pillars was actually a return to the situation

before 1985, where HLI teachers were also called teaching assistants, and used to have a lower status comparedto their Dutch colleagues.

Since April 19, 1993, new teachers were needed. In addition to the qualification for primary education in the

country of origin, an adequate command of Dutch was a prime requirement (A Certificate of Dutch State Exam as

a Second Language, level II). Without certification it was impossible to obtain a temporary appointment as a HLI

teacher. This regulation led to a growing shortage of teachers and an overload of the teachers already in office. In

the new situation EMNL, there was to be, on the one hand, more demand on teachers, and less demand on the

other: a HLI teacher who would give HLI lessons as a support to the regular school program was to have a good

command of Dutch and finally teacher qualification. In the case of HLI as an autonomous subject, taking place

therefore outside the school hours, it was considered that, at certain levels, one just had to be a native speaker

of a language to teach it. The proposals of the Secretary of Education Netelenbos were strongly criticized.

Debate on the status of HLI and Arabic HLI in particular

Since its inception, HLI always was at the heart of a strong debate. It was about legitimizing the subject and its

place in the curriculum. This place was fixed since the application of the EMNL report of August 1, 1998. The

question to legitimize HLI was mainly concerned with its objectives. These had often been modified and

amended by various laws and reports: starting from a perspective of a possible return to the country through

integration while maintaining the original culture, and reaching a point of identity development and struggle

against deficit. Two major perspectives could be distinguished in this main debate during the years 1993-1998:

cultural vs. deficit perspectives on HLI. The first perspective defended the immigrant minorities rights for HLI as

an autonomous subject. The second perspective called for a consideration of HLI as a catalyst to the

improvement of immigrant minority childrens general cognitive development, through, among other things,

greater affinity between HLI and NT2 education. To promote this, the Group Project recommended in 1994 the

development of a new HLI curriculum formula where HLI was equipped with a clearly defined supportive


14/37

14

function. Although the government at the time reproduced in its broad outlines the opinions of the Van

Kemenade Committee, it appeared that the State Secretary in the last report was still wavering between two

options: she spoke of HLI as having a supportive function, which may be proposed within the school curriculum

on the one hand, and as an autonomous subject which were only to be offered outside school hours on the

other. Accordingly, it seemed that only the supportive function had the right to be included in the teaching

program of the elementary schools. Language teaching was at the heart of the Dutch HLI education. In 1989, theSecretary of Education of the time, Mrs. Ginjaar Maas, removed the letter C from the label of Education in

Language and Culture (ELC) as she believed that it was not up to the school to vehicle the culture of origin.

According to the education inspectorate, HLI was mainly focused on the teaching of the language, although

culture was touched on through the history and the geography of the home country. And although this was not

the purpose of HLI, 60% of Moroccan teachers sometimes or even often gave religious lessons during HLI

lessons. They responded well to a majority of Moroccan parents wish regarding HLI contents. In practice, HLI

lessons had no affinities whatsoever with the religious program. In general, HLI target attainment levels have

never been clearly defined, particularly in the case of Arabic HLI. Most schools organised HLI with a partial work

plan for HLI. In general it was formulated by the only HLI teacher, possibly in collaboration with colleagues from

other schools. In these work plans, objectives were formulated in terms of very broad lines (these were often

merely copies of some sketchy implementation notes), while didactic work programs were very rarely drafted.

The plans were rarely responsive to emerging developments in the implementation program and there were

very few research affinities with the regular education. These plans contained little information regarding how

tests (exams) and teachers reports were elaborated. In HLI, the potential level of attainment was relatively low,

and it was, therefore, advisable not to set the bar too high.

In 1993, the Centre for Curriculum Development (Stichting Ontwikkeling LeerplanOntwikkeling, SLO) tried

to find common grounds in the HLI teachers curricula; an opinion on this matter was communicated to the

teachers union (Algemene Bond Onderwijzend Personeel, ABOP). It is noteworthy to mention that the authors

started from the viewpoint that Arabic should be considered as an autonomous subject and not just a supportive

topic to other subjects on the curriculum. According to them, the main function of HLI was to contribute to

Moroccan childrens identity development. The result of their advice led to the same goal of HLI as the oneformulated a year earlier by the NT2 Group Project, notably: to give lessons to kindergarten children in their

mother tongue (Berber or Arabic Morocco), and to use Modern Standard Arabic starting from group 3. The

overlap between the two opinions is even clearer when we talk about the motivations of language use: to

maintain contact with family in Morocco, and to develop NT2 on the one hand and to learn Modern Standard

Arabic on the other. The objectives of Modern Standard Arabic use were twofold: obtaining access to the basic-

level written resources of the Arab world; and developing affinities with other subjects such as NT2, while

teaching general concepts and skills. This was summarised by the authors themselves in the following fashion: to

focus the subject primarily on childrens language and identity development, while ensuring that the concepts

taught had close relationships with other subjects. Finally, the objectives of the different course components

should be clearly defined (such skills as listening, writing, culture, language). In this perspective, it was estimated

that the HLI supportive function was at least as important as its independent function.

The debate surrounding the HLI effects was at least as vehement as that focusing on its objectives. Anything

that related to scholastic achievements was kept by the teachers, but their way of evaluating the results did not

really correspond to that of the other teachers at the school. The school direction was also often misinformed

about how teachers formulate their assessment. So far, it was not compulsory to register the mark the child had

obtained for HLI on the school report. For people who were not directly involved in HLI, it was therefore very

difficult to get an idea of the individual pupils results. However, the views were known of the parents and the

children who attend HLI lessons. For parents, it goes without saying that Modern Standard Arabic was the

language taught within the framework of HLI. Arabic was indeed the language of Islam. They appreciate HLI

insofar as it allows for the maintenance of their culture and their religion as part and parcel of their childrens

education in the migration context. However, they were unhappy with the results and insisted that the courses

be more intensive. They wanted better results in Arabic to ensure the maintenance of their language and culture,

mainly for cultural and ethnic motives. In addition, they wanted better results with respect to the teaching of


15/37

15

Islam. Finally, parents wanted HLI to focus on subjects of real cultural load such as Islam, geography and the

history of Morocco to establish a link between children and their country of origin.

As for the pupils, they considered it necessary to devote sufficient time to achieve interesting results with

regard to language, knowledge of religion and culture. The pupils were disappointed with their unsatisfactory

results. They also argued that the content of the course was too high for their actual level. They believed that

religion, geography, history and songs were obviously part and parcel of HLI. At this level, they agreed with theirparents and they rejected the governments plan to eliminate these subjects in particular.

The effects of HLI have long been evaluated in terms of other subjects such as Dutch and arithmetic.

Specifically in these subjects, the results of the children following HLI were generally disappointing, compared

with their Dutch classmates. Still, the main question was whether this underachievement had anything to do

with HLI classes. In 1988, the Ministry requested an investigation of the HLI effects on language acquisition and

language maintenance, cultural awareness, academic achievement in other school subjects, the learning

situation of Dutch pupils at schools and on the overall school-based educational activities. In this regard, a report

published in 1989 contains answers to the following questions. What was the relationship between following HLI

and:

the written language skills in the mother tongue; knowledge of key elements of the original culture;

results in Dutch and arithmetic;

the situation of pupils in school;

characteristics of the school organization.

Moroccan pupils of group 8 participated in this investigation. The main conclusions were:

Mastery of the written Arabic was poor. This was not surprising, given the limited number of hours allotted

to the learning of HLI Arabic by Moroccan children;

A surprising conclusion was that participation in school-based HLI had a beneficial effect on Moroccan

pupils exam results and their own views on language proficiency. The results were even better than thoseof pupils taking lessons of Arabic outside the school;

Moroccan pupils had poor test scores of Dutch and arithmetic, where the extramural HLI had negative

effects. Investigators expressed their doubt regarding the negative results, as being related to HLI

participation. According to them, the explanation lied rather in the number of years pupils had followed

Dutch lessons;

Moroccan pupils enjoyed more pleasure in education than their Dutch peers, which corresponds to their

participation in other curriculum courses;

Moroccan pupils, by participating in HLI, generally missed classes of cognitive subjects; but they usually

manage to catch up;

In practice, there was very little affinity between HLI and the regular Dutch education (20%).

Although often suggested, no relationship was found between HLI participation and the relatively less

satisfactory results of immigrant minority children in Dutch, a number of investigators conclude. In a subsequent

survey, it was concluded that Moroccan childrens mother tongue influences examination results in Arabic:

children whose mother tongue was Berber achieve significantly lower in Arabic exams, compared to Moroccan-

Arabic speaking children. Another survey by Aarts, De Ruiter & Verhoeven (1993), focusing exclusively on the

effect of HLI on mastering the language of Turkish and Moroccan children, provided a more positive picture than

Driessens. The results were poor on the Arabic writing test at the end of elementary school, but better than the

results in Driessens research. Also, HLI participation and parental stimulation had a positive effect. Pupils seemed

to lag behind their peers in Morocco both in spelling and vocabulary, which was quite normal. They obtained

acceptable results during oral tests in Arabic (Moroccan) and technical reading in Modern Standard Arabic. The

pupils socio-cultural orientation appeared to be a determinant factor. Meanwhile, Aarts and De Ruiter

developed tests for the Citogroup (see below) for determining the proficiency level in Arabic at the end of


16/37

16

elementary school. A bilingual test of Arabic was also elaborated for the elementary school entry to measure

Moroccan childrens degrees of bilingualism.

Teaching materials

A stark lack of HLI teaching materials has always been observed. Several methods were imported from the

countries of origin (25% of the methods for kindergartens and 60% of the methods for groups 3 to 8) or fromother countries (20% from Germany). These methods were not adapted to the Dutch situation. They did not

reflect the situation of immigrant minorities in the Netherlands. The pace of the didactic work involved was not

adapted too. The acquisition pace of Arabic (Modern Standard) by children in the Netherlands was lower than

that in Morocco. The environment in the Moroccan methods did not match the profile of the Moroccan children

living in a Western culture. In addition, the vocabulary of older pupils was insufficient for them to understand

texts taken from textbooks of the country of origin. In other words, it was very difficult in practice to use the

existing teaching materials. Being abandoned to their fate regarding the materials to be used, HLI teachers often

had to rely on self-made materials. A third of the teachers reported that HLI did not have sufficient teaching

materials. The one they had was used very intensively and it was quickly worn out. In 30% of the cases, pupils

did not have their own textbook. In 1992, a list was published which proposed elementary teaching materials in

Arabic. The NT2 Group project described a number of methods primarily developed for regular education and

issued advice on ways to further develop the methods in use. In the NBLC catalogue, a list was provided of the

HLI materials available in the Netherlands, and that focused on language. The following is an overview of the

methods for Arabic:

Reading for Beginners: Often, there was no manual. When there was one, it was entirely in Modern

Standard Arabic. The didactic form was generally intended for global use, but sometimes it could be

individualised. There was never any indication for an evaluation and/or testing.

Linguistic Approach: Most of the methods were written exclusively in Arabic. While the teachers book was

missing, the method could be broadly used and did not provide information on evaluation.

Other materials: they followed the same outline. Only in rare cases, there was a teachers book and even a

student introduction.

Supporting materials and types of games.

Music.

A number of Moroccan teachers opposed the projects of developing new HLI materials. They found that these

projects had not been sufficiently adapted to their teaching practice. People who develop new materials were

rarely connected with the concerned teachers and never asked about the opinions of experts. The collaborating

actors involved often lacked the necessary skills and often represented, to a large extent, the interests of the

Dutch parties. The SCO-Kohnstamm Institute evaluated three methods for Arabic developed in the Netherlands,

following a number of criteria, including social criterion, contemporariness criterion and teaching quality

criterion. While two methods met with these criteria, the third one was estimated execrable. After examining

several methods of Arabic, the school inspectorate, financially supported by the authorities, concluded that

these methods were designed primarily to develop oral and written skills in Arabic. No method was in harmony

with the regular education, particularly education in the Netherlands. In less than half of the methods,

contemporariness criteria were met with. But the teaching quality was low in more than half of the methods (no

possibility of distinctness and evaluation).

An inventory survey on the use of materials in HLI revealed that out of all the available methods, only 11

were used regularly, including 5 developed in the Netherlands. Teachers combined two-thirds of the materials

used with another material, often self-made. The investigator noted that teachers had no overview of the

materials developed in the Netherlands, and that many materials were still insufficiently adapted to the living

world of immigrant minority children and Dutch lessons.

According to a survey conducted for the ABOP with 129 HLI teachers, the issue of the didactic material wasstill on the agenda. On the question of the teaching materials used, eight different answers were obtained. 26%

of these responses referred to self-made materials. The impact of HLI was considered satisfactory by only 30


17/37

17

Moroccan teachers. It could therefore be concluded that the situation regarding the teaching materials was still

unsatisfactory. Apparently, the teachers did not know about the existence of other material available in the

Netherlands. Broadly speaking, they operated with self-made materials.

Numbers of pupils in HLI and Arabic HLI

Over the years, the number of Moroccan pupils participating in HLI increased steadily (see Table 2.2). Since 1989,the number of Moroccan pupils in HLI was still relatively stable, that is, about 70% of Moroccan children in

elementary school. This percentage was relatively high compared to other ethnic groups living in the

Netherlands. Nothing suggests that there was a difference between boys and girls or between Arabophone or

Berberophone children with respect to HLI results. Driessen examined whether there was any relationship

between the first language of pupils (Moroccan Arabic or Berber) and degrees of HLI participation.

Table 2.2 Number of Moroccan pupils participating in HLI from 1978 to 1992;

Sources: Van de Wetering (1990) and Lucassen & Kbben (1992)

School year Number of Moroccan pupils within HLI

19781979 3.11419791980 4.531

19801981 6.522

19811982 8.605

19821983 9.778

19831984 11.138

19841985 17.346

19851986 17.405

19861987 18.270

19871988 22.316

19881989 23.944

19891990 27.398

19901991 27.50619911992 28.266

One could indeed expect that Berberophone children were less inclined to follow HLI where a different language

was used. There was, however, no relation between HLI participation and the childrens first language, whereby

Berber-speaking children showed generally lower degrees of HLI participation compared to their Arabophone

peers. He also inquired about the important features of Moroccan pupils with respect to HLI participation within

the school context:

they originate from relatively higher social environments;

they find themselves in classes with fewer Dutch children and fewer Moroccan children;

they find themselves in classes of children with higher social status;

they find themselves in classes with better averages in Dutch and arithmetic exams.

Regarding HLI participation outside the school context, it could be stated that children who did not participate in

this variant of HLI spoke a little more Dutch with their brothers and sisters as they had been living for a longer

period in the Netherlands. In summary, it was stated that Moroccan pupils with lower degrees of school-based

HLI participation found themselves (somewhat) less often in classes with relatively many children of an

immigrant minority background. Perhaps they had less opportunity due to organizational problems to

participate in the school-based HLI. The Moroccan children who did not participate in HLI at school seemed more

integrated into the Dutch education system than those who did.

Since 1987, it has been possible to take Arabic (Modern Standard), among other subjects, in the lower grades

of secondary education. These subjects could either replace another or constitute by themselves an additionalsubject. In 1987, 31 schools participated in this form of education, with 2,000 pupils. For the school year 1990-

1991, the number of pupils participating in these disciplines ranged as follows:


18/37

18

First year: 1391 Second year: 1075

Third year: 731 Fourth year: 297

In Table 2.3, the total number is mentioned of secondary education (Moroccan) pupils who choose Arabic as a

subject at the end of their study in the years 1991-1995. The number of pupils opting for Arabic in secondary

education was and still is relatively low.

Table 2.3 Number of secondary school pupils having chosen Arabic as school exam from 1991 to 1995;

Source: Ministry of Education

School year Number of pupils

19911992 3.966

19921993 3.354

19931994 3.321

19941995 3.667

Motivation to follow HLIAs was said above, Moroccan parents had a role in their childrens participation in HLI. When HLI was offered at

schools, then it was up to the parents to decide whether their children participated or not. Participation was, at

any rate, optional. Since 1998, the role of the parents was even more important in the organization of the Arabic

HLI: they had to consult the municipalities to plead for the organisation of HLI in the language of their wish.

Parents attached a lot of importance to HLI. For them, cultural and ethnic motivations were of paramount

importance (for the maintenance and for the practice of religion and culture). Moroccan parents considered HLI

as a means to support the cultural values and patterns of behaviour, while their children were growing up in the

migration context. In addition to the cultural and ethnic motives, most Moroccan parents interviewed point to

practical and instrumental reasons: a possible emigration, the links with the homeland and communication with

family and acquaintances back home. The Moroccan parents did not want to assimilate. They wanted to keep

their children within the Moroccan community. Most children said their parents supported their HLI

participation. They themselves were also motivated to participate in HLI, regardless of the opinions of their

parents. They also said they felt that it was very important to learn Arabic. As a reason, they mentioned that

Arabic was ultimately their mother tongue and had to maintain contact with family and friends in the country of

origin. But they find Arabic a difficult language. The difficulty was that the school, the teachers, the parents and

the children often had different motivations, even opposite, for HLI, causing stagnation in the HLI enterprise:

parents considered primarily the transmission of language and culture, along with religion as an important

focus;

Dutch teachers assigned a mediating role to HLI, a student could more easily integrate into the school

context and the Dutch society, he or she could enhance the mastery of Dutch, and the HLI teacher could

play a mediating role between school and parents; HLI teachers had set as a goal: to learn the language and to gear the teaching of culture towards parents

original culture rather than teaching religion. For them, a sense of identity awareness and the migration

situation was very important;

Pupils had many practical reasons: they wanted to learn Arabic for holidays in Morocco.

Level variability

Another problem in the HLI was the different levels involved within the target groups. In the early phases of HLI,

there was an obligation to bring together pupils of different groups, and even different schools, who received

collective rather than adequate individualised instruction. These groups consisted of about ten pupils. The

teacher stood before a group of pupils with lower language proficiency than their expected linguistic level, their

general education level or their age. The criteria for the groups composition were based mainly on the number

of pupils available and the schedule of the school providing for HLI. Groups could be composed according to age


19/37

19

only when a teacher was assigned to an elementary school with, for instance, 70 HLI pupils. But here also, the

school program defined the school hours when HLI could possibly take place. The age of the pupil was not even

necessarily a guarantee for comparable language levels. In 1988, HLI had not (yet) been organized for pupils in

groups 1 and 2 in about 20% of the schools. Besides the reasons already stated above, the following could be

added:

The HLI teachers had not yet developed the necessary didactic skills;

Parents wanted first their children to have reasonable oral skills in Dutch.

In 1988, the average group consisted of 6 pupils. In 1997, several different groups were present in the same class

in 43% of the schools; the number of pupils varied from 5 to 10. Besides, differences in level from 2 to 5 levels

were sometimes represented in a single HLI class. Differences in the language level also played a role in the

Arabic HLI. It was, therefore, impossible to form homogeneous classes with respect to the level and the mother

tongue, especially when taking into account that the teacher was limited in time because he also worked in

several schools. In the Netherlands, the Arabic-speaking Moroccans represent 40% of the Moroccan community

against 60% of Amazighophones. The numbers of Arabophone and Amazighophone pupils in elementary

education were supposed to be approximately of the same proportions. The Moroccan pupils participating atthe time in HLI were generally part of the second or third generation of immigrants. This implies that Modern

Standard Arabic was for them a real foreign language; while for Amazigh children Moroccan Arabic was a foreign

language too. Linguists and educators often advocated the teaching of Moroccan childrens mother tongues.

Most Moroccan parents preferred Modern Standard Arabic as the target language, for cultural and religious

reasons. Many teachers had difficulties in accepting the idea of teaching actual mother tongues. This would

cause problems for teachers of Arabic since the majority of their pupils speak Amazigh. Starting from a negative

argument, Driessen (1990) argued for education in the mother tongues of Moroccan children. According to him,

Moroccan children mastery of Modern Standard Arabic as taught in HLI was so weak that it would not make

sense to teach it any longer. He proposed to concentrate on the oral mastery of the mother tongues.

Otten & De Ruiter (1991) proposed to consider the linguistic aspects common to the three languages of

Morocco (Modern Standard Arabic, Moroccan Arabic and Amazigh), and to take them as a starting point to

develop childrens vocabulary. In practice, teachers already used Moroccan Arabic or Amazigh effectively to

ensure that children understand. In the various reports and reviews the use of mother tongues in HLI was also

discussed at length. In most cases this was limited to courses in nursery classes: in elementary education the

creation of a bilingual situation (Dutch and Moroccan Arabic or Amazigh) was advocated for the reception of

young Moroccan children who still did not speak Dutch. Here, the HLI teacher would also not work

independently, but rather under the responsibility of the regular school teacher. In other classes, there should

be a shift towards Modern Standard Arabic, taking account of the parents wishes. In Utrecht, such a method

was already at work in some schools: in groups 1 to 3, pupils were taught in Amazigh and Moroccan Arabic; the

introduction of Modern Standard Arabic was relegated to group 4. Amazigh, Moroccan Arabic or Dutch were

used as a lingua franca. Courses for groups from 1 to 3 ran parallel to the Dutch course. This method had some

success: Moroccan children performed better in Dutch and arithmetic than before. The Van Kemenade

commission was the first to propose Moroccan childrens mother tongue to be taught as the target language of

the autonomous HLI (EMNL). According to the commission, the choice of one of the three languages fell neatly

within parental decision. Obviously, the main problem lied in that there were no standardised writing systems

for both Moroccan Arabic and Amazigh at the time. It was needless to mention the lack of the materials relevant

for the teaching of these language varieties. The choice of the Moroccan mother tongues would be a fait

accompli on August 1, 1998. But the question was to what extent this option was right. In their survey, Broeder,

Geertsema and Gerritsen (1997) also asked which language Moroccan teachers felt they had to use in the new

EMNL: for nursery classes, 50% of the teachers felt that this should be the language spoken at home. For the

other classes, the vast majority was in favour of Modern Standard Arabic (84%). It was striking to note that the

majority of the school directors were for the use of Modern Standard Arabic in all classes. Little was know as yetabout the unofficial HLI. According to surveys, Moroccan pupils often followed lessons in Modern Standard

Arabic after the school hours, very often in mosques. Shadid & Van Koningsveld (1990) reported that in


20/37

20

Rotterdam, about 40% of Moroccan children between 6 and 14 were taught in mosques. Similarly, Van de

Wetering (1990) mentioned this fact. In his investigation, Driessen (1990) registered 44% of Moroccan children

who followed this type of education.

Not much was known about the content or the time-load of these courses taking place outside the regular

school education. Shadid and Van Koningsveld (1990) stated that there were no elements of Islamic

fundamentalism to fear. It was better to admit that this type of education allows for the timely and fullmembership of the children into their parents religious community. Nevertheless, these lessons took much

time: Wednesday afternoons and sometimes on Saturday and Sunday mornings. Participation in these

extracurricular courses seemed to have a positive effect on the results obtained in HLI organized in Dutch

schools. The EMNL report of the Secretary of Education at the time Mrs. Netelenbos (1995) adopted on August

1, 1998 seemed to cause a shift in HLI. Opinions diverged regarding whether HLI should continue or come to a

halt. The Secretary of Education was obviously optimistic: she found it positive to make a clear-cut difference

between the EMNL as a supportive medium for teaching and EMNL as an independent subject. In addition,

within EMNL other languages were to be offered, including the official languages of the countries of the target

groups. In principle, the choice to organize courses in Moroccan Arabic or Amazigh was entirely free, if there was

sufficient demand. Teachers and parents were much less optimistic about the survival chances of Arabic HLI.

Criticism was expressed mainly on the following issues:

a number of consequences were feared if HLI was provided outside the school hours, many parents would

not send their children to HLI or send them only to the mosque, where the content would be different;

if children had to stay longer in school, they would consider HLI as a punishment rather than a pleasurable

course;

teachers had not yet seen how they could teach the same number of pupils outside school hours, while still

having their full schedule unmodified;

in many municipalities, there were no real EMNL experts and no real concern was expressed. It was not

clear how to consult parents regarding EMNL. Broeder & Extra (1996) made valuable suggestions;

in the new formula nothing was yet defined with reference to the final terms, content, recruitment for

secondary education, teaching materials and other practical elements;

there was a good chance that the means distributed to municipalities for EMNL be quickly allocated; more

groups would receive EMNL with the same budget.

In the eyes of the pupils and HLI teachers, years of discussions about the objectives, the resources, the contents

and the teachers training have not changed much the HLI scene.

3. Mastering Arabic

During the eighties and nineties of the last century, the acquisition of Modern Standard Arabic by Moroccan

children and the acquisition of Turkish by Turkish children in the Dutch context gradually received more

attention. Most commonly, Moroccan and Turkish children were compared on the basis of similar background

variables, particularly their period of immigration and (low) socio-economic status. Results showed consistently

that Turkish children scored better at Turkish language tests than Moroccan children at Arabic ones. The Arabic

language tested in these studies is nearly always Modern Standard Arabic.

Van de Wetering (1990) reported on the proficiency of Moroccan children in Modern Standard Arabic. In a

longitudinal study from 1983-1985, she tested 447 Moroccan children from grades 3-8 in eight primary schools in

two large cities. Their age ranged between 6 and 14 years. The testing instruments used for this purpose included

a decoding test (63 words) and two reading comprehension tests based on 14 and 13 multiple choice items,

respectively. The research findings were presented in correlation with the number of years of instruction in

Arabic Moroccan children received both in Morocco and the Netherlands. Of all her subjects, 71% havingreceived three years of Arabic instruction or more, achieved at least 33 correct items in word decoding during the

first research year. In the second year, 72% of children with four years of Arabic instruction or more obtained


21/37

21

similar scores; the same applies to 76% of the children with five years of Arabic instruction or more in the third

research year. As far as the first comprehension test was concerned, 70% of the children with three years of

Arabic instruction or more got 10 out of 14 questions right in the first year. The same score was achieved by 84%

of the pupils with four years of Arabic instruction or more and in the third year by 87% of the pupils with five

years of Arabic instruction or more, respectively. As for the second reading comprehension test, 39% of the

children got 10 or more of 13 items correct in the first year; in the second and the third research years the samescores were achieved by 33% and 48% of the children, respectively. Generally speaking, the Amazighophone

children were found to be on a similar level as the Arabophone children with respect to technical reading, but

they were below average in reading comprehension. In the light of these results, Van de Wetering (1990)

concluded that most pupils who had had HLI for 5 or 6 years uninterruptedly in relatively favourable

circumstances were expected to reach a level at which they were able to read and understand a simple Arabic

text.

Opting for a survey-type of investigation, Driessen (1990) studied the effects of HLI on proficiency in Turkish,

Modern Standard Arabic and Spanish languages of children in elementary schools in the Netherlands. A total

number of 254 Moroccan children together with 368 Turkish and 46 Spanish children participated in his research.

Driessen (1990) distinguished between two types of variables: measures of language proficiency (dependent

variables) and background variables (independent variables). The reading and writing dimensions in the

proficiency test consisted of pragmatics, idioms, vocabulary, grammar and spelling. Use was made of a number of

formats including multiple-choice items, completion items and yes/no items. In the pre-test phase, it turned out

that it was impossible to maintain one measure of L1 proficiency for all the groups involved (Moroccan, Turkish

and Spanish) as the Moroccan children scored dramatically low. So it was decided to adapt the norm of Modern

Standard Arabic proficiency. The definitive test for Moroccan children consisted of a total of 53 items. The test

reliability was 0.93 (Cronbachs alpha). Since the proficiency test measures written skills only, it was envisaged to

present a self-assessment scale to the children under consideration. They were asked to indicate how they

perceived their own oral and written language proficiency. Specifically, the children were asked to assess their

skills in listening, speaking, reading and writing, using a five-point scale ranging from I am unable to do that to

I find that very easy. In addition to the global proficiency test and the L1 self-evaluation test, a questionnaire onthe childrens background was presented to teachers regarding their age, sex, home language, estimated number

of years of HLI, number of years of Dutch education, length of residence, attitudes towards their country of origin

and the Netherlands, estimated Dutch proficiency of the parents and attitudes towards HLI, the Dutch school and

Arabic teachers. Other information on individual pupils was obtained from Dutch teachers through a

questionnaire on ethnic background, support of home climate, family characteristics, parental contacts with

school, number of re-sits, school achievement, language use in different domains, estimated Dutch proficiency of

parents, number of years of HLI attendance, number of hours HLI weekly and position of HLI: within or outside

the school building. Other personal data were sought from HLI teachers, including information like qualifications

and teaching experience of the teacher, her/his length of residence in the Netherlands, cooperation with other

teachers and aims and goals of HLI. HLI teachers also provided information about individual children: their

number in HLI groups, the number of HLI hours attended and their estimated proficiency in Modern Standard

Arabic. Among the Turkish children the mean of correctly completed items of the language test was 73%. Of the

Moroccan children, 42% failed to provide answers at all. The mean of correct answers of children in the

Moroccan group that completed at least one item correctly was 33%. At group level, self-assessed ability

paralleled the scores on the language test, which indicated that children had a fairly good idea of their own

linguistic ability. For a better interpretation of the results of Moroccan children in the Netherlands, a replication

of the test took place in Morocco (1992). The testing involved primary school children in years 2, 3 and 4 in three

Moroccan cities (Marrakech, Tissa and Oujda). Second-year-children completed on average one third of the items

correctly (34.2%). Third-years completed slightly over half correctly (58.9%) and fourth-years over three quarters

(95%). The Moroccan data also showed that children made progress in results as their period of years of

schooling grows.

Aarssen, De Ruiter & Verhoeven (1992) assessed the language proficiency of Moroccan and Turkish children at

the end of primary school in Modern Standard and Moroccan Arabic and in Turkish, respectively. 81 Moroccan


22/37

22

children participated in their research, 40 boys and 41 girls. Of all the subjects, 24 started their education in

Morocco, entering Dutch elementary schools at a later stage and were referred to as higher grade entrants

(HGE). The rest were first grade entrants (FGE). All attended schools in big cities in the central and southern part

of the Netherlands. The Moroccan group of children was tested on both Moroccan Arabic and Modern Standard

Arabic proficiency. Language tasks were accordingly divided into oral and written terms. In addition to two oral

measures for vocabulary listening comprehension in Moroccan Arabic dialect (Oral Vocabulary, 60 items andInstruction Task, 30 items), five written measures on the levels of grapheme, lexicon, syntax and text were

developed in Modern Standard Arabic (Word Decoding, 46 items; Spelling, 42 items; Written Vocabulary, 54

items; Syntax, 42 items and Reading Comprehension, 18 items). While means and standard deviations on each

measure were computed, other statistical calculations were conducted to evaluate the reliability and validity of

teaching minority languages: the case of arabic in the netherlands

Documents