Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Official Languages
Issue 19 - Evidence - Meeting of May 6, 2013
OTTAWA, Monday, May 6, 2013
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met this day at 5 p.m. to continue its study on best practices for language policies and second-language learning.
Senator Maria Chaput (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Honourable senators, welcome to this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages. I am Senator Maria Chaput, from Manitoba, chair of the committee.
Before introducing the witnesses appearing today, I would invite the members of the committee to introduce themselves.
Senator Mockler: Hello, I am Senator Percy Mockler from New Brunswick.
Senator Poirier: Welcome. I am Senator Rose-May Poirier from New Brunswick.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I look forward to hearing from you. I am Senator Suzanne Fortin-Duplessis from Quebec City.
Senator Dawson: Senator Dennis Dawson also from Quebec City. We are practically neighbours.
Senator Tardif: Hello, I am Senator Claudette Tardif, from Alberta.
The Chair: Thank you. Today, the committee is continuing its study on the best practices for language policies and second-language learning in the context of linguistic duality or plurality. The committee is pleased to welcome representatives of the Canadian Association of Immersion Teachers.
We are very pleased to welcome Mr. Philippe Le Dorze, President of the Canadian Association of Immersion Teachers, and Ms. Chantal Bourbonnais, Director General. Welcome to you both.
On behalf of the committee members, thank you for taking the time to join us today to share your perspective as it relates to our study and to answer our questions. The committee has asked you to give a presentation of no more than seven minutes, and senators will follow with questions. You have the floor.
Philippe Le Dorze, President, Canadian Association of Immersion Teachers: Honourable senators, we are very pleased to take part in this afternoon's proceedings. We are delighted to be able to share our perspectives on learning French as a second language in Canada. I am President of the Canadian Association of Immersion Teachers and Coordinator of second language programs at the Pembina Trails School Division in Winnipeg.
I would like to begin by sharing a few facts about French immersion. What progress we have made in 45 years! With regard to learning French as a second language, approximately 350,000 young anglophone Canadians are enrolled in French immersion. Never before have there been so many Canadians able to express themselves in English and French as today, with 5.4 million Canadians able to speak both English and French, compared to just 2.8 million in 1971. That is almost double.
Learning a second language even contributes to health. Recent studies have shown that bilingual individuals are less affected by cognitive illnesses such as Alzheimer's disease.
[English]
Immersion is and will remain the best program to learn French as a second language. Students achieve a high level of competency in French and do so without affecting competency in their first language. It is therefore essential to maintain and expand access to immersion programs because demand is increasing in many areas of the country.
[Translation]
Despite immersion's popularity, much remains to be done to ensure that everyone has equal access. Immersion has proven its worth, and Canada is renowned worldwide for its immersion programs. However, each province and territory delivers its immersion programs differently. Some institutions limit the number of enrolments, while others charge extra fees to cover transportation costs. Accessibility is not guaranteed for all Canadians. The CAIT firmly believes that all students should have access to a French immersion program, regardless of where in Canada they live.
In some provinces such as British Columbia, for example, immersion is like a lottery: only the lucky ones get in. We object to this state of affairs. Every parent who chooses immersion for their children should have access to it, in both urban and rural areas.
[English]
Many school boards do not provide transportation to students enrolled in immersion programs. Transportation should be provided at no extra cost for both urban and rural students.
[Translation]
Lastly, the provinces and territories need to establish policies to ensure equal access to immersion, and in that regard, Manitoba sets an excellent example. Allophones have a strong interest in learning both official languages since they see it as a valuable asset in the labour market. Many studies have shown that the children of immigrants do very well in immersion programs. According to a study by Canadian Parents for French, 80 per cent of allophone parents did not receive any information about French immersion programs.
[English]
In the Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality, we should be thinking of establishing goals and strategies to boost the learning of French as a second or third language for allophones.
[Translation]
Furthermore, targets should be set to increase accessibility to immersion programs for all Canadians. Immersion should also be accessible for students with learning disabilities. Our first instinct is often to keep students with learning disabilities out of immersion programs. Many people mistakenly think that immersion is for gifted students. However, research has shown that students with learning difficulties are no more at risk in an immersion classroom than they are in an English classroom. Having students start immersion in kindergarten and providing students experiencing difficulties with support measures ensure the greatest diversity within the immersion program.
However, this does not mean that access should be limited to early immersion. We also need to encourage jurisdictions to offer a variety of entry points so that everyone has access to French immersion and so that we have sufficient numbers to offer the full range of courses at the secondary level. Each parent should be informed about immersion programs and entry points, as well as the level of language proficiency associated with each option.
Offering rewarding secondary and postsecondary programs also presents certain challenges. In some cases, students leave immersion programs in high school to prepare for postsecondary studies, citing the lack of courses in certain subjects, timetable conflicts or simply a generally weariness. Continuing French as a second language studies at university is therefore important to the success of immersion at the high school level.
[English]
The Canadian Association of Immersion Teachers firmly believes that universities have an important role to play in the training of young bilinguals to help the public service recruit some 5,000 bilingual employees per year needed over the next little while.
[Translation]
Immersion teachers are proud to contribute to Canada's linguistic duality. Always looking to improve the quality of education, they are concerned about the shortage of bilingual teachers. Given that immersion teachers work for anglophone school boards, professional development in French for immersion teachers is not as widely available as we would like. A number of things could be done to help teachers develop their skills, such as supporting organizations like CAIT that specialize in such matters.
I would like to briefly talk about the fact that, in Canada, there are no common, national tools used by all institutions to assess bilingualism levels. This is a problem, and creating such a tool would do a great deal to help advance bilingualism among English-speaking Canadians.
Lastly, educating young Canadians through French immersion helps guarantee a bilingual future for our country, a future where recognizing the value of English and French also makes us value the other languages spoken in Canada. We believe that the federal government has a critical and important role to play in promoting immersion. At the end of our document, you will find some recommendations that we have prepared in that regard, and they read as follows: share the success of immersion programs across the country; set targets for immersion access; encourage and facilitate the creation of a national French-language skills assessment tool that is recognized and used by all provinces, governments, universities and the private sector; encourage universities to create bilingual programs in other faculties.
This would take into account all the bilingual young people graduating high school, who, when they get to university, have nothing to encourage them to choose programs that allow them to continue to learn the second language; support associations that offer professional development to second-language teachers; fund research in language acquisition, specifically for children with learning challenges and bi-literacy; increase support for linguistic and cultural exchanges for students and teachers; and strengthen accountability for funds transferred to the provinces and territories to support second-language learning.
I think I managed to say everything in seven minutes, so now I can catch my breath.
The Chair: Thank you. In any case, we each have a copy of your presentation, which we can read later. Would you like to add anything, Ms. Bourbonnais?
Chantal Bourbonnais, Executive Director, Canadian Association of Immersion Teachers: No, thank you.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Have you noticed that some Canadian provinces do better than others when it comes to second-language teaching, whether by immersion or other means?
Mr. Le Dorze: At what level?
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: When it comes to bottom-line results, for instance, statistics that might illustrate the success rates in each province.
Mr. Le Dorze: I think Manitoba is doing a good job, considering that it has high schools that are immersion centres. Typically, more or less across the country at the high school level, there are dual track schools, and French immersion accounts for only a very small part. In Manitoba, however, there are a few schools that are entirely immersion schools. This definitely increases the success of immersion and helps keep students in immersion programs, which is a good thing. This definitely makes the program less elitist, because it keeps all students in the program, which is very positive.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I am particularly concerned about what is happening in Quebec. The previous government had decided that young francophones would begin learning English in grade 2. The new government does not exactly agree with that. I would like to know what the ideal age is to begin learning a second language.
The first steps in immersion learning were taken here in Canada. While Canada is an excellent example, it is not the only country to have policies promoting languages and second-language learning. In Europe, many countries are showing that they are open to linguistic duality and are becoming welcome centres for new arrivals. They have implemented education programs to promote the learning of other languages.
Do you know if some countries in Europe are performing better than others when it comes to learning a second language?
Mr. Le Dorze: I will begin by answering the last question. It is clear that Scandinavian countries like Sweden and Finland are doing very well in second-language teaching. I think the context of Europe definitely makes it easier to learn languages in general, given that there are so many languages, and not just two. They have adopted the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages, so that everyone is on a level playing field when it comes time to describe second-language learning. The fact that this tool exists allows for a clearer discussion on language learning there. It has been studied here in Canada, and I am sure my colleague, Mr. Leclair, will discuss this later. As I said, it has been studied here in Canada, and implementing such a framework to describe our results in second-language learning would be a useful tool here in Canada, too.
In Sweden and Finland, countries that I have had the pleasure of visiting, American television programs are subtitled in Finish or Swedish. Young children who watch television are reading at the same time. Depending on where they learn English, they have either a British accent, because their teachers learned English in England, or an American accent, from watching television.
Here in Canada, we should be encouraging people to use subtitles while watching television. A school principal told me that one of her students once said to her, ``I know I should practice reading more, so I think I will watch more television.'' That is how young people are learning English; they are reading while they watch television.
You asked about the situation in Quebec, and what is the best age to begin learning a second language. The earlier, the better. The best time would be as soon as children start school. Children are well-equipped to learn languages naturally from a very young age. We should be starting as early as possible, if our goal is to make them bilingual.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: And with your association, you promote immersion.
Mr. Le Dorze: Yes.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Is it harder for young people to learn a second language? Teaching really young students at age five or six can be good, too, but how does immersion work? To my mind, immersion is when a group of young people go and stay in another province for three weeks. That is how immersion is seen in Quebec.
Mr. Le Dorze: It is somewhat like that, but at school. They go to school where they have a teacher from Quebec or France or Saint-Boniface who speaks French. The students are totally immersed in this French space. Of course, when they go home, it is not the same thing, but at school, they are in an environment where they practise speaking French so they can learn the language.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: And do they speak French in the school yard at recess?
Mr. Le Dorze: Ideally, we want them speaking French at all times, but the reality is that, at recess, they often play in English, in their mother tongue. However, the more they learn, the more comfortable they feel speaking French while they play.
Senator Tardif: We are pleased to welcome you to our committee. I agree that a great deal of progress has been made in implementing immersion programs since 1968, when the first program was offered in Saint-Lambert, Quebec. Since then, registration in French immersion programs has gone up in every province in Canada, even in western Canada in my province of Alberta. However, you indicated — or perhaps you did not, but regardless I have noticed — that the percentage never exceeds 20 per cent. In most provinces, the percentage is about 10 per cent or sometimes less than that at 5 per cent or 6 per cent of young people and their parents since it is often the parents who make the decision of whether or not to register their children in French immersion. Why can we not get beyond that threshold of parents and children who want to become bilingual?
Mr. Le Dorze: I think that one of the difficulties encountered by immersion programs, particularly in Western Canada, is the number of teachers who are able to teach in French.
For example, in my region, there are not quite enough teachers to meet the demand. A colleague told me that, when she posted a job for a French immersion teacher, she got six applications. Had an equivalent job been posted for an English school, 50 to 75 people would have applied. Of the six applications she received for the French immersion teaching job, three of the applicants did not speak French. So, there is not much choice when it comes to making French immersion more available to students.
We should therefore be letting our French immersion students know that there are opportunities for them to become French immersion teachers if that is the career choice they want to make. That is something we should be promoting.
We must also let allophone parents who arrive in Canada know that they can register their children in French immersion. As we know, the French immersion program was created to meet the demands of parents. School divisions did not offer to create the French immersion program. Parents insisted upon it. Likely, this is still how things are done. The school divisions do not actively offer their immersion programs. They often set registration quotas. There could be more parents who want to enrol their children in French immersion, but their children are not registered. They have been put on a waiting list and end up not getting into the program.
This is a problem, and it is clearly much easier for school divisions not to create new French immersion classes. I think that some of this prevents French immersion programs in certain areas of the country from evolving.
Ms. Bourbonnais: To add to that, I would like to say that some parents who have children with learning difficulties hesitate to enrol their children in French immersion. However, research has proven that, on the contrary, a child who has problems in an immersion program will have just as many problems in an English program. When it comes right down to it, it is advantageous to the child to enrol him in French immersion because then, at least, he will know a second language.
Senator Tardif: You are right in saying that parents have always taken the initiative and demanded immersion programs for their children. However, it is a small number of parents, and people often think that French immersion is only for the elite, for a socio-demographic group that is fairly well off.
I would like to come back to the issue of training teachers. In your opinion, how many universities currently offer a French immersion education program? What success have you had with getting more universities to offer such training programs or courses for students graduating from French immersion programs?
Mr. Le Dorze: In my opinion, there are a number of universities that offer such a program. There is probably at least one in every province. A program is offered at the University of Alberta's Campus Saint-Jean and at various UBC campuses, namely, those in Kelowna and Vancouver. There are also programs offered at Simon Fraser University, Université de Saint-Boniface, the University of Regina and Western University. There are many programs. Are there enough? I do not know. I know that Université de Saint-Boniface does not have many students registered in their program. There could be more students registered in order to give schools in Manitoba more graduates who could fill positions.
I think that the situation is stable in Ontario, but it varies from one region to another. What must be done to increase the number of students who choose to go into teaching? We certainly need to enhance the public image of the profession. If you have been watching the news recently, you will know that things are not going so well in that regard. The public is demanding more and more from teachers across the country, except perhaps in Manitoba.
The perception that the profession is not valued by the existing governments does not support or ennoble the profession.
Ms. Bourbonnais: We also have to support these teachers. They are in anglophone school boards, so workshops on teaching French as a second language are not all that common. National associations, such as CAIT or AQEFLS, can provide training for these teachers who are often alone in their school with a principal who does not speak French. Educational resources are not always available.
It is therefore essential to support these teachers so that they will continue on rather than giving up after three years because they do not have the support they need and they feel alone.
Senator Dawson: I am a bit surprised. I am very pleased with the statistics that you provided with regard to the growth of bilingualism. I think that there is a Statistics Canada report that is supposed to be released this week that would show us whether the trend is continuing or whether the situation has changed.
If we break down these numbers, do you know which areas of Canada are having the most success and which areas have lower levels of participation?
You mentioned that there has been a considerable amount of growth from 1971 until now. Is this growth seen in certain locations in particular? We regularly hear about how British Columbia is having great success with its French immersion program, but are there other provinces where things are not going as well or where the same effort is not being made?
Mr. Le Dorze: In terms of percentages, approximately 11 per cent of school-aged young people in Manitoba are enrolled in an immersion program. That number is growing. There are over 21,000 students registered in French immersion. While the total number of students in Manitoba is going down, the number of students in the immersion program continues to grow by 0.5 per cent to 1 per cent per year and was over 20,000 two years ago.
The number is growing. We are not going to see a jump from 11 per cent to 20 per cent from one year to the next. Parents are no longer making demands. They are happy with what the school systems are offering.
In Manitoba, there is no limit on how many students can register. The number is therefore increasing steadily, and things are going well. With regard to Western Canada, I think that the honourable senator would be in a better position to talk about the percentage of students in the immersion program in Alberta, for example.
Senator Tardif: It is 5 per cent.
Mr. Le Dorze: So, the percentage is not very high. I do not think that British Columbia has hit 10 per cent yet either. The numbers are high enough, but they are not that high in terms of percentages.
Senator Dawson: They have not been more successful than Manitoba?
Mr. Le Dorze: There are more people in French immersion because the province is four times bigger.
Senator Dawson: There are more people.
Mr. Le Dorze: In terms of percentages, I think that it is slightly less than 10 per cent.
Senator Dawson: In some of the documentation, I noticed the concept of comparative assessment between French immersion in Quebec, French immersion in Alberta and French immersion in British Columbia. Are there national standards? When the provincial education ministers meet, do they discuss this subject?
Ms. Bourbonnais: Right now, there is no national assessment tool. Every province has its own way of assessing the young people who graduate from high school.
There are no national standards, but we think that they would be good to have, much like Europe has the European framework. Europe has a framework with different levels, and so if someone has a B2 in German, Spanish, French or any other language, you know that that person can function in that language.
In Canada, there are a myriad of tests. Is Newfoundland and Labrador's level of bilingualism the same as that of Quebec or British Columbia? We do not know. Are students bilingual enough to work at Tim Hortons or to work for the public service? Right now, it is hard to say because there are no national standards.
The Council of Ministers discussed this issue and a potential common framework was presented, but no consensus was reached. Some provinces are starting to do things based on that framework, for example, British Columbia, Ontario, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador. They are doing things based on that framework and they are starting to talk about the same proficiency levels set out in the framework.
There is also an exam called the DELF. It is a French language diploma awarded by France that is calibrated with the framework or the six levels of the framework. This exam is becoming increasingly popular in Canada. Its popularity increases exponentially from one year to the next. There are now approximately 6,000 young people who take the DELF exam, which rates them according to the levels in the framework. Young people can then see where they stand compared to others and get an idea of their level of bilingualism. It would be a good thing for us to have.
Mr. Le Dorze: Given that French immersion is a provincial responsibility, the program varies from province to province. There are no national standards for what a French immersion program should entail. In some provinces, students can start French immersion in kindergarten, while in others they do not start until grade 1 or grade 3. Some students are taught in French 100 per cent of the time in the first few years, while others are taught in French 75 per cent or 50 per cent of the time. This varies greatly from one province to another. When we talk about French immersion, we have an idea of what it is in our minds, but it really varies depending on location. French immersion is about teaching strategies and philosophies, but the program is implemented very differently across the country.
Senator Dawson: Thank you, Madam Chair.
The Chair: I have a follow-up question to those asked by Senator Dawson. Earlier, you mentioned the total lack of support, so to speak, for teachers in immersion schools. It is rare that professional development days for teachers are held in French since these teachers are part of an anglophone school division. I assume that there is not much support for parents who have decided to have their child learn Canada's other official language either. Are there days when parents can meet and discuss difficulties? Is there anything for parents?
Mr. Le Dorze: There are organizations such as Canadian Parents for French that work to meet the needs of parents, but all communication with parents who have children in school is done only in English since most of the parents do not speak French. When it comes time for kindergarten registration, information nights are held at the schools that offer French immersion in order to promote those schools. However, I do not think that it is very common to have meetings where parents can get together to discuss the French immersion program.
There may be parent committees in the schools that take care of certain issues. In that case, they would certainly talk about the school but not just about French immersion or learning French.
The Chair: As we all know, Canadian Parents for French is limited in terms of funding. They do what they can with very little.
Mr. Le Dorze: Yes.
Senator Mockler: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I commend you on your statement. I have a question about page 5 of your document. I would like you to comment on the changes and on what should be reviewed. You said that in New Brunswick, for example, the early immersion program was eliminated despite all the studies that show that immersion does not have a negative impact on English skills. Could you elaborate on that?
Mr. Le Dorze: As you know, the immersion program was offered in grade 1 in New Brunswick. Studies were conducted under a previous government and that government decided to change the entry point. That is what happened in New Brunswick. The system was set up in such a way that all the young people who were able to succeed ended up in the French immersion program. Those who were unable to succeed were systematically sent to an English class. That is what happened in New Brunswick, and it created a two-tiered system: the French immersion system for those who could succeed and the English system for the others. The government decided to resolve this problem. Unfortunately, the way it chose to do so will not solve the problem, quite the contrary. The parents who will choose to put their child in French immersion in grade 3 are certainly not going to be those who think that their child is having difficulty in school. From the outset, this system will favour more capable young people to the detriment of those with completely normal skill levels who should be enrolled in French immersion. I think that that is what happened in New Brunswick.
When a French immersion program starts really early, there is more chance of including young people of all skill levels, and that is what we want. French immersion should not be an elitists program because that goes against our values in education. Immersion needs to be accessible to all learners, and it can be if we provide those learners with the help they need to succeed. Studies have shown that children are just as successful in immersion as they are in an English program. Not everyone knows that. People should be told and parents should be encouraged to keep their child in immersion because, in the end, the program will benefit their child.
Senator Mockler: I would like to ask a supplementary question. Based on your experience, what would you recommend that New Brunswick do?
Mr. Le Dorze: It would be a good idea for the entry point to be as early as possible for everyone.
Senator Mockler: Okay.
We have been looking at a number of documents for a long time now, and I would like to focus on some criteria that should enhance the value of bilingualism: Canada, bilingualism and trade.
From the most recent reading I have done in preparing for this committee, I do not think that there is enough emphasis on that. You spoke about the federal government's role in particular. I would go as far as to say the role of governments in supporting the teaching and learning of the second language. You also provided a number of recommendations.
However, I noticed that not one of the nine recommendations deals specifically with finding ways to value bilingualism in Canada. Yet, that is something that we need to emphasize more.
I know that a study is going to be published in the near future. I would like to quote an excerpt from that study, but I am first going to ask you this: What should be done to inform Canadians of the advantages of being bilingual?
I quote:
The results show that language plays a key role in trade relations. In 2011, exports from Quebec, New Brunswick and francophone countries were twice as high as expected given their share of Canada's total exports.
I believe that the government has a role to play in making people aware of the advantages of bilingualism. Last weekend, I spoke to various people who had learned another language. They all told me that they had learned a second language in order to be able to do business and to earn a better salary. Languages are a work tool that expedites trade.
Have you considered this issue?
Mr. Le Dorze: Statistics Canada has done studies that clearly show that bilingual Canadians have higher salaries than unilingual Canadians, whether they are francophone or anglophone. Jim Shea, from the Quebec Community Groups Network, said that, in Quebec, unilingual anglophones have lower incomes than bilingual anglophones.
Often young Canadians learn a third language, such as Mandarin, Japanese, Korean or Spanish. These young people have already learned the country's other official language. Often young people in French immersion are the ones who learn a third language.
To respond to your first comment, our first recommendation was to value and promote official languages and the learning of these languages. That is our advertising campaign. We are well aware that it is important for everyone, the federal government in particular, to identify themselves as being bilingual, to be proud of it and to let people know that. This encourages young learners, and it encourages school boards to offer such programs.
With regard to trade, it would be beneficial for university business schools to incorporate intercultural and language components into their programs in order to develop their learners' abilities to communicate with other cultures in their language. We support that 100 per cent. It is good for trade. It is good for Canada.
Ms. Bourbonnais: Our first recommendation involved valuing and promoting official languages. That is what we meant by that recommendation, to promote all the advantages of being bilingual, whether it is for the purpose of travel or trade. Our first recommendation centred on valuing and promoting official languages.
Senator Mockler: So we agree.
Ms. Bourbonnais: Yes.
Senator Mockler: I would like to make a comment. Perhaps you should add to your recommendations that, for Canada, this means being bilingual or trilingual. There is clear evidence to show that bilingual people earn more money.
Senator Poirier: Thank you for being here this evening to share your ideas. When I was at home this morning, I tried to find a newspaper article that I had read, but I did not have any luck, so instead I will summarize it for you. The article was written by a professor at Université de Moncton who did a study on the way in which French immersion is taught in schools and how the teaching methods could be improved in order to attract more students. The article was really interesting. The professor proposed changing the teaching methods. She asked students in Winnipeg what they thought of their French courses and most of them said that they preferred to take courses in English rather than in French. She asked them why and this is what they said:
[English]
The English classes are more fun. We do more things; we learn more things; we exchange things.
[Translation]
In French, all we learn is verbs.
The future is about encouraging people to learn a second language through French immersion schools. Perhaps it is time for teachers in Canada to change their teaching methods in order to attract young people.
What do you think of these ideas?
Mr. Le Dorze: With regard to education, we really need to get young people interested, regardless of the language in which they are being taught. One of the main focuses in French immersion is learning oral French. Since these students are learning a second language, there has to be an oral component and they have to have the opportunity to speak in French. Of course, young people must be allowed to practise speaking the language. Learning verbs was done in the time of our grandparents. They could often read French, but they had never spoken it. French immersion uses another model — a communicative approach — and learning oral French is part of that.
In high school, teachers often feel torn because they see themselves as teachers of a certain subject. I am a chemistry teacher. I am a math teacher. I am a Canadian history teacher. As French immersion teachers, they often fail to say, ``I am also a language teacher.'' Immersion teachers are always teaching language. In our workshops, we are often reminded of this. We are always looking for teachers who can do both, those who can teach a language while teaching physics or chemistry. Obviously, it is a challenge.
Senator Poirier: Are there provinces whose courses are much more advanced? One of our witnesses said that he learned a second language when participating in a student summer exchange program. That is more interesting than sitting in a classroom.
Are there provinces where the students are much more advanced because they do exchanges rather than just learning the language for an hour a day in the classroom?
Mr. Le Dorze: We know that cultural experiences often help young people understand why they are learning the second language, whether it is through student exchanges or visits to Parliament in Ottawa in French.
I once had a student who was training to be a language teacher at Université de Saint-Boniface who told me that she learned the value of mastering another language while on an exchange trip to Ottawa. Obviously, our education programs that give young people the opportunity to visit places where people talk and live in French motivate them and help them to understand that learning the second language is not just an academic exercise. Clearly, cultural experiences help learners understand many things.
Senator Poirier: Canadian Parents for French quotes many studies that indicate that teachers and school principals advise parents not to register their children in French immersion. Do you agree with that statement?
Mr. Le Dorze: There is probably a great deal of truth in that since, in some cases, things are easier to manage if there are fewer French immersion students. That is why limits are placed on enrolment. If there is a class of 25 students, the first 25 to register will have access to French immersion. However, if 35 students register, it becomes more complicated for the school administration to create one and a half classes.
Ms. Bourbonnais: That should not be happening.
Senator Poirier: Do the provinces control the number of students that the school system has to accept?
Ms. Bourbonnais: It depends on the province. Sometimes the school boards set quotas.
Mr. Le Dorze: There are prejudices against immersion. For example, if a newcomer who does not speak English settles in Winnipeg, everyone's first reaction is to say that the person needs to learn English. However, often, newcomers want to learn both languages, and they do not know that they have access to a French immersion program. A few years later, they realize that they could have put their children in French immersion.
In my school division, when we do public speaking contests, the newcomers are the ones who participate. They already speak another language. They speak their mother tongue when they arrive in Canada and then they learn English and French. It comes naturally to them.
Often, our unilingual English colleagues do not understand the added value of learning French. They do not always understand that these young people could do very well in French immersion.
Senator Poirier: Thank you.
Senator Tardif: Do you think that one of the reasons why school boards, principals and perhaps even some teachers do not advise parents to register their children in immersion programs is that these teachers and principals are members of the anglophone community? Often immersion programs are found in schools that are a combination of both the immersion program and the regular program. It is therefore a two-track system. In such cases, principals may not be in the habit of advising parents to enrol their children in French immersion, which is problematic. Often, parents are advised to register their children in the regular anglophone program.
Would you agree that this is part of the problem? There is no critical mass, and often school boards do not like to have centres devoted exclusively to French immersion. They prefer to have two-track schools rather than schools that are made up exclusively of French immersion classes.
Mr. Le Dorze: The fact that there are entry points for French immersion is also problematic. In some provinces, children start French immersion in kindergarten, while in others, such as New Brunswick, they do not start French immersion until grade 3 or even grade 6 or grade 7.
Multiple entry points allow us to recruit newcomers. When they arrive with a child who is 8, 9 or 10 years old, the child is put in the appropriate class. However, the practice changes somewhat when it comes to French immersion since people are less open to placing a child who does not speak French into a grade 3 immersion class.
In my region, we make exceptions, but the policy is not clear about whether that is permitted. The school authorities all manage this situation on a case-per-case basis. This could be problematic for immersion, but in theory, if the child does not speak English, he is placed in an English class. French immersion teachers are language teachers. It seems to me that, if there is room for these children in French immersion, then they should be placed somewhere with language teachers. The profession needs to manage this.
Senator McIntyre: I see that your associations were founded in the 1970s — in 1976, for French immersion teachers and in 1970 for second language teachers. You have come a long way in that time. I commend your associations for the great work that they do.
Under section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, teaching in the minority language is protected under the Constitution while second-language teaching is not.
However, I understand that the Government of Canada can, in accordance with other powers granted to it by the Constitution, provide complementary funding to support the learning of languages. In your opinion, does the fact that learning the second language is not constitutionally protected raise a problem for the teachers in your associations?
Mr. Le Dorze: I will answer that in two ways. We are aware of the fact that we are not protected and that this is not a right; however, if it were, it would make things easier in many ways. We manage to function. Teachers do their job within the existing legal framework. They are not overly concerned about what might be. However, clearly, if they could have that recognition or if that recognition existed, it would help to solve many problems, and there would no doubt be a significant rise in the number of people who choose French immersion and bilingualism for their children.
Senator McIntyre: We know that there are different approaches to teaching the second language, such as core programs, intensive programs and immersion programs. I understand that immersion programs are not only the most popular but also the most effective. What is your opinion of the other approaches?
Mr. Le Dorze: The other approaches are also very worthwhile. I would say that your statement is not quite accurate. There are more people learning French in core programs than in immersion programs. There are more Canadian youth enrolled in core French than in immersion programs, even though that is the opposite of what one might expect.
Senator McIntyre: Is immersion still more popular?
Mr. Le Dorze: Enrolment in immersion is growing, but there are fewer young people in French immersion than in core French.
Such is the case in Manitoba at least, even though the number of students enrolled in immersion is on the rise and the number in core French is falling. The approach to teaching core French has been revamped, and it is now much more focused on oral French, which is producing good results. The results are definitely better than they were before. The challenge for the core French program is finding people who are competent enough in the second language to teach it. It does not make sense to have an anglophone who does not speak French teach it.
Senator Champagne: You spoke about your student who really understood the importance of speaking a second language when she came to Ottawa. When I was about seven years old, I had an aunt and uncle who did not have any children. They would occasionally come and borrow me from my parents for a weekend or so. When they did not want me to understand what they were saying, they spoke to each other in English. It made me furious.
It did not take long for me to catch on once I was able to start learning English in school. I began in grade 5 and I believe it was for 15 minutes a day to start, in my small town in Quebec, but in high school, it went up to 45 minutes or an hour a day. I wanted to learn so badly because I told myself that, the next time I went to my aunt and uncle's house, they would no longer be able to slip anything past me. That is why I learned English quickly.
It is the same thing for people who know a little bit of French but are not immersed in the language. That is one thing that upsets me about Quebec. Too often, learning English is put on the back burner. We talked a lot about it two years ago. We wanted children to have the opportunity to learn English as early as grade 1, even if it was for only 15 minutes a day. It is not pretty to hear Quebecers trying to learn English. People tend to learn to speak English as they go, in the street, and they speak the language terribly. They do not have a good vocabulary in French or in English. No one is taught about the soft and hard pronunciation of ``th''. However, there are school boards that are making an effort to bring together young people from different language schools so that they can share their respective knowledge. There are no intensive English programs in Quebec. English courses and English immersion schools are basically non-existent. I could be wrong, but I know that there are not many. The former Prime Minister even tried to implement English classes.
Quebecers fear that the French language will be lost if people learn English, even though successfully learning another language helps people to learn a third or even a fourth language.
How can we make it easier to learn? We spoke a lot about making it easier for anglophones to learn French, but how can we make it easier for francophones, particularly those in Quebec, to learn English using proper grammar and phonetics? As people who constantly live in both languages, what do you think is the easiest way for children to learn another language when neither of their parents speaks that language?
Mr. Le Dorze: I think that exchanges are a good way to do this. Teachers from Western Canada could go to Quebec and teach intensive English and Quebec teachers could go out west and teach French immersion. These exchanges would benefit both areas of the country.
With regard to teaching English in Quebec, people who grow up in a minority community — such as that in Manitoba, where I took English immersion in school because there was no French school at the time — clearly understand that there are concerns about being assimilated by the English majority in North America. I would not venture to comment on the best way for Quebec to manage that issue.
Senator Champagne: In any case, it is important to have good teachers.
Mr. Le Dorze: Absolutely.
Senator Champagne: I remember when my daughter was nine and she said to me, ``Mom, it's strange. Today, the teacher was pronouncing `vegetables' as `vej-tai-beulz' and Wednesday as `wed-nes-day.' That isn't how you and Dad say it.'' My daughter did not understand why she was not learning the same thing at school as she was at home. The quality of teachers is important.
Ms. Bourbonnais: In response to Quebecers' concerns about losing their mother tongue if they were required to take an intensive English course, a lot of research has been done over the past 40 years that shows that learning a second language does not have a detrimental effect on the first language. The effect of learning another language is additive. The second language people learn does not take the place of their first language in their heart or in their mind. The effect is additive. We still do not understand exactly how it works. We must make people aware of all the research that has been done on immersion. If an anglophone parent registers his child in an English program in kindergarten or grade 1, obviously that child will speak English.
A great deal of research shows that children in immersion programs are able to function just fine in their first language. If this research were updated, it would be easier to justify the learning of a second language.
Senator Champagne: My assistant speaks three languages. She sometimes asks me what a word is in French or English, but learning those two languages did not cause her to lose her Spanish, her mother tongue.
Ms. Bourbonnais: Exactly.
Senator Champagne: Once a person has learned to speak those languages, then they just have to learn to write them, but that is another story.
The Chair: We will begin the second round with Senator Tardif.
Senator Tardif: You mentioned that one of the problems was related to the shortage of immersion teachers. I also think that there is another problem: the provincial and federal governments' political leadership.
We now have a new Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality, which was just announced in late March and which covers the period from 2013-18. Do you think that the investments set out in that roadmap will be sufficient to meet the growing demand for immersion programs?
Ms. Bourbonnais: There are still so many things to do that there can always be more investments. We are pleased that the roadmap has been renewed and that money has been reinvested in this program. However, there is still room for improvement in several areas, such as the many challenges we have discussed.
Mr. Le Dorze: Obviously, we would not say no to more money.
Senator Champagne: That would be a first.
Mr. Le Dorze: Yes. Our organization, which depends on funding from Canadian Heritage, is pleased with the way things are going. There could be more targeted investments in certain areas, such as in the creation of a tool to assess second-language skills that would be used by everyone. That would help with a lot of things.
Ms. Bourbonnais: Investing in a campaign to value and promote bilingualism could help on a number of levels.
Senator Tardif: You spoke about the need to set targets and made a recommendation to that effect. What would those targets be and what would you recommend?
Mr. Le Dorze: We should try to increase the number of students in immersion programs. It would be wonderful if we could increase the number of registrants in immersion programs by 7 per cent per year.
Senator Tardif: So your recommendation would be to increase registration in immersion programs by 7 per cent per year?
Mr. Le Dorze: Yes.
Senator Tardif: Neither the 2008 nor the 2013 roadmap set a specific target.
Mr. Le Dorze: It is true. I also think that a common measurement tool would be helpful in setting targets. For example, if we set a target of level B2 for bilingualism, we could use the test scores to determine how much progress we have made. I think that that would take us in the right direction.
Ms. Bourbonnais: A number of senators asked questions about which provinces had the best success rates, but since we do not have a national assessment tool, it is very hard to answer which province is doing better than the others. There are so many different measurements that it is very difficult to measure success.
Senator Tardif: Success can vary not just from one province to another but also from one region to another within the same province and from one school to another within the same city. It mostly depends on the quality of teachers and on the school environment.
Ms. Bourbonnais: Yes.
The Chair: On behalf of the committee members, I sincerely thank you for coming to answer our many questions. I would like to commend you for the work that you do and wish you all the best.
[English]
The Chair: The committee will now hear from the Canadian Association of Second Language Teachers. We are pleased to welcome Michael Salvatori, President of the Canadian Association of Second Language Teachers, and Guy Leclair, Executive Director.
[Translation]
On behalf of the committee members, I thank you for taking the time to help us with our study by sharing your opinions and answering our questions. The committee has asked you to make a presentation of a maximum of seven minutes and the senators will then ask questions.
[English]
I now invite Mr. Salvatori to start with his introductory remarks.
[Translation]
Michael Salvatori, President, Canadian Association of Second Language Teachers: We are pleased to speak about our views on the question you have posed.
[English]
I will do most of my presentation in English, because we are an association that represents language teachers of several languages: English and French, but also many other languages. I will make reference to some of those.
The mission of the Canadian Association of Second Language Teachers, an association with a 43-year history, is to foster professional excellence in the teaching of second languages in Canada. It is composed of over 3,000 members and has an organizational structure representative of all of the Canadian provinces and territories and allows us to support members and the second and additional communities at large through professional learning, the development of pedagogical resources and the dissemination of research, and advocacy for language teaching and learning.
One of the greatest challenges, as you well know, in developing and assessing language policies is the challenge of speaking with one voice on issues when perspectives across the country are diverse. However, a strong core message that values language learning and its many benefits, which is endorsed at the federal level, can assist significantly to promote, advance, encourage and inform additional language education programs.
A pan-Canadian framework or guidelines would advance the learning of official and additional languages which, as we know, confers numerous benefits on learners such as enhanced self-esteem, access to broader employment opportunities, the knowledge industry, culture, travel and personal relationships. Language learning also enhances intercultural understanding, strengthens the learner's first language and, through communication, provides access to higher learning, employment and enriched perspectives.
In the short time we have with you this evening we would like to highlight three important elements that could form the basis of a national language education policy or framework. We will follow up with a formal written submission that will complement my remarks this evening and provide greater depth in the areas I will outline. I would also like to add that throughout this information I share with you this evening, and in our written submission, when we use the term ``additional,'' it is used to define any language other than the learner's first language or mother tongue.
First, I would like to emphasize the role that a framework of reference for languages, based on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages, or the CEFR, can play in establishing a common terminology and benchmark for all Canadian language learners. The CEFR has become an international standard and provides clear, neutral and common language for understanding language competencies and is being used in almost every country in the world, many of which are our close economic or educational partners and friends. The implementation and use of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages in Canada has been to varying degrees and requires coordination and a national impetus.
Our association has played a major role in the work related to using the CEFR in Canada and for learning, teaching and evaluation of languages and will continue to collaborate with the federal government and support its members with the implementation.
The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages is not only a tool for elementary and secondary levels, but also for post-secondary, the labour market, immigration, Canada's own international education market and national and international mobilization.
The framework also emphasizes learner autonomy by providing a pathway for language learning, thus accentuating the fact that language learning does not stop after grade 12 but is a lifelong skill to be maintained.
In our view, the time is right for Canada to adopt the use of one tool to define language competencies for all citizens, immigrants, international students at any age and for all languages in the world and used in the international and national workplace in Canada. The CEFR offers this kind of tool. It is the only tool or framework of its kind that is flexible enough for all language learners and language users, regardless of age or language-learning status.
Second, I would like to turn to the supply and demand for official second-language programs, such as French immersion, intensive French, core French, core English and intensive English. It is vital that we have a pan-Canadian language policy that encourages, supports and requires learning of the two official languages at all education levels that allows learners to establish a solid understanding and grasp of the second official language.
Additional language education should be promoted and valued as being essential in the 21st century for interpersonal and intercultural development, long-term brain health and dexterity and for responding to the needs and demands of the global economy.
Organizations such as the Canadian Association of Second Language Teachers, which advance excellence in language teaching and learning with a broad focus on additional languages including English, French, First Nations languages, Spanish, German, Japanese and so on, articulate the importance of pluri-lingualism in the Canadian context.
The value of learning Canada's official languages within our pluri-lingual context is unparalleled. A focus on the ways in which languages can support and inform the learning of English or French is important. The focus on the integral relationship between language and culture also needs greater emphasis but, more importantly, the focus on developing a strong Canada, populated by pluri-lingual, pluri-cultural citizens who are prepared to participate in the global community that our world has become. Our association is well placed to work with the federal government in informing its policy and advancing it.
Although education is a provincial and territorial responsibility, a broad pan-Canadian policy on language learning would assist Canadian jurisdictions in establishing local policies and guidelines that would foster additional language learning. For example, a pan-Canadian statement could emphasize the benefit to Canadian society, greater appreciation of different cultures, valuing our multicultural society, the value to the learner, for example, of communication skills, reinforcing one's first language, broadening perspectives and the need for language learning opportunities for all, including new Canadian students and students with special learning needs.
Third, innovative, research-based approaches must be developed and studied. For example, virtual language classes and virtual language passports and portfolios should be accessible to all Canadian students and all Canadians. The work, for example, of the Centre for Distance Learning and Innovation in Newfoundland and Labrador and that of CAMET, the Council of Atlantic Ministers of Education and Training, are demonstrations of innovative approaches to second-language education.
Universities, research institutes and second-language associations should be funded to support research in second- language acquisition, learning, assessment and teaching, to know what works best, how to improve and what to improve. They must also be supported in disseminating to the second-language education communities their research findings and best practices. Researchers and other pedagogical leaders and practitioners should be given a forum and resources to continue their good work in this regard.
Our written submission will elaborate on these three points that I have made briefly and will also offer some specific recommendations for your consideration, related to the three broad themes that I have outlined.
On behalf of the Canadian Association of Second Language Teachers and our members, I offer my gratitude for your invitation and your interest in our views on these important matters that are integral to the continued development of our vibrant Canadian society.
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Welcome. The lack of second-language teachers and educational resources were among the issues you raised before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages. You also mentioned that the profession is not valued enough. Could you tell us how you would recommend dealing with these issues?
Mr. Salvatori: Our recommendations are based on research that was conducted in Ontario and Canada — two studies in particular that focused on enhancing the prestige of the profession of second-language teacher.
We did not necessarily focus on those three issues in the recommendations that we made today, but in general, as an association, we work to develop resources based on the European framework, as well as other educational resources, to help train teachers and to help teachers who are at the halfway mark of their careers.
The shortage of French as a second language or English as second-language teachers is a more difficult problem to resolve, but the recommendations that we are going to share with you involve cultural and language exchanges for teachers. It is also important to give French as a second language teachers the opportunity to go and live in a community where French is used so that they can continue to develop their own language skills. Those strategies could help to remedy this problem.
Guy Leclair, Executive Director, Canadian Association of Second Language Teachers: There are also problems with regard to the professional training for second-language teachers. It is mainly a structural problem, or lack of programs.
When demand exceeds supply, we should develop and support all of the infrastructure, in other words, more teachers, teachers with better training, more educational resources and professional training, and so on. That is what we determined based on the studies and surveys that we conducted.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Could you tell us more about the practices, policies and systems in place in other parts of the world, particularly in Europe since that was the place you mentioned?
Mr. Salvatori: The European Framework of Reference for Languages is widely used in Europe, where young people learn not just their mother tongue but also a second and third language. The framework sets out terminology or language that the students can use. It involves ``can-do'' statements that show what students are able to do. These statements do not focus on students' shortcomings, but rather on the skills that they have already acquired and on the steps that they need to take to improve their second language. I know that there are policies that are strongly based on the common framework and that the positive language helps.
Europe's geographic situation also helps. When travelling in Europe, you do not have to go far before you hear another language. In Canada, we should provide young people with more opportunities to go and live in French or in English so that they learn the second language better, gain a stronger understanding of the culture and the usefulness of learning that language, and get to know other young people.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Do you have anything to add?
Mr. Leclair: The common framework is a fairly comprehensive approach. It provides positive reinforcement for students when they are told that they can do something. Often we hear, ``Je ne peux pas parler anglais'' or ``I do not speak French.'' These ``can-do'' statements help to encourage a positive attitude about teaching. The framework focuses on learning as a lifelong task and on self-directed learning. Students are given a passport in which they document everything they achieve throughout their lives. It is part of a fairly comprehensive approach that provides reinforcement at multiple levels and that has produced successful results in Europe. We believe that, if we adopted this framework, it could also produce successful results here in Canada.
Senator Tardif: Welcome and congratulations on the great work that your association is doing. You spoke about the need for a national policy on language education here in Canada that is based on the Common European Framework of Reference. I completely agree with you.
What reaction do you get when you make this recommendation to your provinces, to the Council of Ministers of Education, for example? Do they have a positive reaction to this recommendation? What reaction do you get?
Mr. Salvatori: I would say that the reaction has been positive from the outset. What we need now is the energy to move forward and adopt the European framework in Canada.
I think that it has been adopted in western and eastern Canada. There are some provinces and territories that refer to the framework and use its terminology as part of their curriculum.
I am from Ontario, and I would say that Ontario has some work to do. The problem is not that people do not accept the framework or that they do not think that it is valuable. I think that the word ``European'' or ``Europe'' is problematic and that people wonder why we are using a common European framework rather than a Canadian one. However, I think that it is possible to adapt the framework to our needs.
I would say that the reaction has been very positive. This gives us a tool that is widely accepted throughout the world and that allows us to use the same language, the same references, to help learners.
Senator Tardif: You spoke about the energy that it will take to adopt this framework. What does that mean? Energy from whom? Is energy the only thing required, or are there other needs or criteria?
Mr. Salvatori: When I say ``energy,'' I mean money and support. However, I think that a coordination effort is also required. Some provinces have adopted the European framework, while others have not. Some teachers are very familiar with the tools, while others are less familiar with them. It will really take a coordination effort. An association such as the CASLT could help to coordinate a nationwide effort to familiarize teachers with the tools.
We recently developed a language portfolio for teachers based on the common framework. We are in the process of developing other framework-based tools to familiarize teachers with it. When I say ``energy,'' I really mean that a nationwide coordination effort is needed.
Senator Tardif: In the requests for funding that you make, do you ask for money to coordinate the implementation of a common framework? If so, have you received any such funding?
Mr. Leclair: We have made requests to promote the implementation of the framework, and we receive funding for that, but we have never made requests for funding for coordination. That would be a fairly big job since we would have to work with the provinces and likely with the Council of Ministers of Education. As representatives of teachers, we are not in the best position to do this coordination work alone. I think that the Council of Ministers of Education, Canadian Heritage and the CASLT would have to work together to put something like the framework in place.
Senator Tardif: What organization do you think could best coordinate this?
Mr. Leclair: In our humble opinion, it would be the CASLT, with support from government. With support from federal, provincial and territorial governments, that would certainly be possible. But that requires coordination and a concerted effort.
Mr. Salvatori: We are able to coordinate the efforts, and we often work with other national organizations across the country. We would be prepared to work with other organizations that are familiar with the framework and who have an interest in keeping it going in Canada.
Senator Champagne: Mr. Salvatori, the most important thing you said in your presentation — and you said it two different ways — is that learning a second language does not have a detrimental effect on the first language.
The Minister of Canadian Heritage should advertise that fact in the media and repeat that message over and over. I know that people in Quebec worry that if children learn English they will lose their French. That is something we hear all the time. One thing is for sure: if you learn a second language, it is much easier to learn other languages in the future.
You mentioned the situation in Europe. I am thinking about Switzerland, where students completing high school must know French, English, Italian, German and, in some cases, even Romansh. Our students are no less smart than Swiss students.
The popular belief in Quebec is that if you learn English, you will lose your French. That is absolutely ridiculous. We must find a way to take that statement, to create a logo, a tune, a song, whatever. We must find some way to hammer that into the heads of parents. We must find a way.
[English]
It has to be a must in everyone's head and heart. If you learn a second language, you will not lose the first one.
[Translation]
Senator Champagne: We must find a way to get the word out, to make everyone understand, as they do in ads for beer or liquor.
Mr. Salvatori: I completely agree.
[English]
Much research has been done on what Ms. Bourbonnais was talking about, that is, additive bilingualism, that earning a second, third or fourth language does not take away from the one that you are learning or already know but rather adds to it. It reinforces your first language. You become aware of vocabulary, grammatical structures or cultures that cause you to think more deeply about your own language and culture.
One of the objectives of CASLT is to disseminate research. This year we had researchers share one of their papers in accessible languages for teachers. They did a podcast on our website where they invited teachers to listen to their description of the research and to pose questions. One researcher talked about English language learners; new Canadians who come to Canada and are very interested in learning, in the Ontario context, French as a second language while learning English. In fact, those who did that outperformed their unilingual or native Canadian classmates, because they have a second or third language.
There is much research supporting that. I am 100 per cent in agreement that we do need to find a way to promote and popularize the idea that learning a second or third language reinforces your first and is not a threat to your first language.
[Translation]
Senator Champagne: Your best advertisement right now would have to be for Rosetta Stone. Their ads do not say that, but it would not be a bad idea to get across the message that you do not lose your first language if you learn a second one. That is an argument we could include in our recommendations to the government. We have ads for all kinds of things, and somewhere in our files I will suggest ads for learning a language.
Mr. Salvatori: One of the strategies used in classrooms for new arrivals is to not prohibit children from using their first language, and even to encourage it in the classroom and let the others ask how to say a particular word in Arabic or Italian, to encourage the child's development.
Senator McIntyre: Thank you for your presentations. The memorandum of understanding that the Council of Ministers of Education signed with the federal government expired on March 31. Are you happy with the results achieved under the last memorandum of understanding with respect to learning a second language? Do you know when negotiations will get underway for a new memorandum of understanding?
Mr. Salvatori: I will start with the second question. I do not know when discussions will get underway. As for the first question, I do not think we should ever be satisfied with the results. We must always try to do more. In Canada, bilingualism is tough to define. What does it mean to be bilingual? Is it the ability to speak one language just as well as the other? Is it the ability to communicate or transmit a message? That is one of the challenges of evaluating the results of a language policy. But we are always working to improve the situation for children, by helping teachers with resources and professional development.
Senator McIntyre: At the end of March 2013, the federal government announced the new Roadmap for Canada's Official Languages 2013-18. Are you satisfied by the funding set aside in Canada's Official Languages 2013-18 for learning a second language?
Mr. Salvatori: If I am not mistaken, the funding is maintained and the reduction of budgets or funding does not affect programs for children or teachers. It affects mostly the administrative side. We are happy to see that funding is maintained and that we will be able to continue doing what we do.
Mr. Leclair: That was what we noticed. We were happy that the funding was being maintained at a similar level. We would have preferred more funding, since the cost of living keeps increasing and there are more and more students. Costs are increasing, so we are always doing a bit more or trying to maintain with less, but essentially, as I mentioned earlier, there is a job to do, and we do our best with the money we have. It would obviously help if we had more money.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: We held hearings in Quebec and went to see how things are for anglophones. We looked at institutions, schools and health care services. One thing we kept hearing from English speakers was that they were not able to find out how much money the government invests for anglophones in the province of Quebec.
Mr. Salvatori, you come from Ontario. Are you able to find out exactly where the money goes? We heard that a lot and it stuck with us.
Mr. Salvatori: In Ontario, based on my experience as a teacher and principal, I would have the same kind of problem, if we are talking about primary and secondary school education. Money is sent to the school boards for second-language programs, but it is very difficult to find out exactly how much money is sent, how the schools receive the money and how it is used.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: It would be the same everywhere?
Mr. Salvatori: Yes.
Senator Poirier: Thank you for your presentations. Earlier you talked about the challenge of finding qualified teachers to teach a second language. I would imagine that is the case with French more so than English.
New Brunswick is an officially bilingual province. Many people are bilingual and many are not. Last year, call centres started opening in our province, since we are an officially bilingual province. Over time, they discovered that a third language could really help people — Spanish, in particular, since that is the third-most requested language at call centres. Spanish classes were offered at night. We were surprised by the number of people who signed up. Most of them were probably adults who were interested in the language for personal reasons or for job opportunities.
Is it the same challenge to find teachers for strictly French or English, or to find someone who speaks a third or fourth language, whether it be Chinese, Spanish, Japanese or German? Is that also a challenge?
Mr. Salvatori: You are talking about the challenge of finding a teacher qualified to teach a third or fourth language. I can only speak for my experience in Ontario, and I would say it is difficult. It is the word ``qualified'' that poses a challenge. We can always find people who speak French, Mandarin or German, and who speak it well, but to be able to teach a language, you must have not only language skills but also pedagogical skills to be able to transmit this knowledge. When we are talking about second-language acquisition, cultural knowledge goes along with all of that research and pedagogy. Therein lays the challenge.
In Ontario, for example, we know that the vast majority of French as a second language teachers learned French as a second language themselves, and that this cultural component is very difficult for them, since they did not experience francophone culture firsthand. I think that the same challenge exists for those who teach other languages that are not their first language, whether it is German, Mandarin or Chinese.
It is always a challenge to find qualified people with a skill, but who also have the skills needed to teach the language and maintain the level of language proficiency. That is often a problem. Adults or teachers do not have other adults or other experts with whom they can speak French or German to maintain their language proficiency. That is also a problem for teachers of other international languages.
Senator Poirier: In your opinion, do people who are able to learn another language tend to be francophone Canadians, anglophone Canadians or new arrivals to Canada?
Mr. Salvatori: That is an interesting question. There is some research, but I cannot say one way or another. I do know that an increasing number of new arrivals enrol their children in immersion programs or in international modern language programs. There is already an interest, since these people arrive speaking a language such as Italian, Mandarin or Arabic, and they either learn English or French in school and the second language. In my experience, these people tell us that it is just as easy to learn two other languages as it is to learn one language. They know that learning a second and third language is easier since they already have the structures, syntaxes and terminology to understand a language. But I could not say whether the people enrolling in language programs are primarily anglophones, francophones or new arrivals who speak a third language.
Senator Poirier: In your opinion, for an immigrant who arrives in Canada and wants to learn one or both of the official languages, are there programs that provide financial assistance for them to do so?
Mr. Salvatori: For children?
Senator Poirier: For adults, either at a community college, a university or some type of night class.
Mr. Salvatori: There are support services for new arrivals and I think that there is federal funding to support these services. I think that they also offer language services or language lessons. I would say yes, but I am not sure.
Senator Poirier: Do you know whether a Canadian would have access to the same resources or financial opportunities as a new arrival to learn a second language?
Mr. Salvatori: I am not sure, but most of the agencies are geared towards new arrivals who want to learn French or English and not to Canadians who already speak one of the official languages.
Senator Poirier: I do not know whether this is the case in all of the provinces, but in New Brunswick, the Department of Training and Employment Development has an initiative. If anyone wants to learn a second language because they are struggling to find a job as a result of bilingualism requirements, there are programs and the department receives federal funding that is transferred to the provinces and that could help them. That is why I wanted to know whether all the provinces had such programs. They exist in New Brunswick, but I do not know if they exist everywhere.
Senator De Bané: Senator Champagne's comments remind me of two things. First, is a statement by Jacques Parizeau, a former sovereignist premier of Quebec who said that it was clear that a small people like Quebec must learn English. He added that when we become independent, he would give a good kick up the backside to anyone who did not learn English.
But independence is necessary to get past that mental block. I take some comfort in the fact that despite that, polls in Quebec show that the vast majority of francophones want their children to be able to speak both North American languages.
Senator Champagne: Mr. Parizeau spoke excellent English.
Senator De Bané: Indeed, and he studied in England. He told me that his father, Gérard, sent his three sons to study in England and not France.
Madam Chair, before I ask my questions for our distinguished guests, I would like to know whether the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure could look at the possibility of inviting a senior official from each of the 10 provinces to answer some of the questions we asked our distinguished guests. I think it would be worth having the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure look at the possibility of inviting a senior official from each of the 10 provinces to explain to us what they do and do not do. That would help us understand.
What boggles my mind is that we are not faced with the same problem as in Belgium. In Belgium, a francophone can be convinced to learn Flemish or Dutch, since they know that there are not many of them, outside of Belgium and the Netherlands. Here, we have the two most popular languages in the western world. What is more, these are the two main languages.
What is happening that we do not realize what a tremendous asset it would be to know the two most important languages in the western world? Are we spending more energy on remaining unilingual than on learning the two languages? As has been said, someone who speaks two languages is doubly valuable. Why do people here not see that this is a tremendous asset? You have certainly thought about that a lot. Could you share your thoughts?
Mr. Salvatori: That is something I have been wondering for 25 years — since I became a French as a second language teacher — and I unfortunately do not have an answer. We continue to communicate and to talk about the advantages of learning French and English, of knowing both languages in a bilingual country like Canada. But I do not understand why the vast majority — if we are talking about Ontario and our young people — do not speak both languages. I am still holding out hope, because the previous witnesses spoke about the growth of immersion programs. I think that parents, that Canadians, are starting to better understand the value of knowing both languages.
Mr. Leclair: In the 1970s and 1980s, people collectively decided that immersion was something that was needed in Canada. Do we need another boost and need promotional campaigns that promote teaching and learning languages? Absolutely.
As we heard earlier, parents often influence the school board. I think that if we gave more information to new arrivals, to parents who are not always aware that they can demand or try to enrol their children in French immersion or core French programs, it would help. Core French is the cornerstone of teaching French and English as a second language.
More information, more recognition and promotion would help get parents the information they often lack, in the sense that yes, you can send your child to a French immersion or core French class. That could help. I am not sure. There is no coordination at the moment, and I hope that eventually everything will align.
Senator De Bané: There is one thing I am sure of. If one of the six senators you see here were responsible for this issue, I can assure you that it would change.
The Chair: Thank you, senator. Now for the second round.
Senator Tardif: Thank you, Madam Chair. In several provinces, learning a second language is not mandatory. Do you think that learning a second language, whether it is French — one of the country's official languages — and perhaps also a third language should be mandatory?
Mr. Salvatori: Absolutely, and I was going to add that I do not have an answer to your question, but one of the reasons why most children do not speak both languages is that the classes are not mandatory. In high school, students choose from elective courses and sometimes decide to drop out or not continue classes in their second language.
Senator De Bané: Is it mandatory in New Brunswick?
Senator Poirier: No, it is not mandatory. The province is officially bilingual, but people still have a choice.
Senator Tardif: Is that one of the factors? To respond to Senator De Bané, is the fact that learning French is not mandatory in all Canadian provinces an important factor?
Mr. Salvatori: It is certainly an important factor. The second official language does not have a presence in many communities, so children do not know why they should learn it. If the courses were mandatory, the second language would be more visible in the community, at theatres or malls where the young people go. They would understand why they should learn the second language.
I often ask people why they would not continue to learn French. The response is often that they will not use it, that they are going to an English-speaking university or that they are going into a career in which they will use English or another language other than French. Making the classes mandatory would help the situation in Canada.
Senator Tardif: That is where I am always talking about political leadership, whether we are talking about school boards, municipalities, or the provincial or federal government promoting the importance of French, in this case, or English in Quebec, and for us as a Canadian society.
Mr. Salvatori: I agree.
Senator Tardif: But investments are needed.
Mr. Salvatori: I agree.
Senator Tardif: Thank you.
The Chair: Since there are no other questions, I want to sincerely thank our witnesses for coming today, for answering our questions and for sharing their opinions. Thank you and congratulations on the work you are doing. We wish you well.
Mr. Salvatori: Thank you.
The Chair: Honourable senators, I want to remind you that we have four meetings left before summer. If our agendas appear to be full in the coming weeks, there may be good reason. Four meetings, and the next will be held on May 27. Thank you very much.
(The committee adjourned.)