4.6 LAS MÁSCARAS DE LA BARBARIE
4.6.1 Chile
PRIORITY GIVEN TO I, S, NL (p), A (p), ORAL SKILLS CZ, PL, RO (s) LI (p), CY, RO (p), PRIORITY GIVEN TO WRITTEN SKILLS O RAL / WRITTEN SKILLS p = primary s = secondary
Grammar
Less than half of the curricula do not explicitly formulate grammatical objectives/teaching content. When they do state this type of objective, the majority of curricula contain lists of grammatical struc- tures. It is noteworthy that all the pre-accession countries fall into this category, except Lithuania. Those that do not present a list have curricula that are expressed exclusively in terms of attainment objectives, or have a minimalist curriculum due to the great degree of decentralisation of educational matters.
Figure 5.8: Grammatical items in the curricula
B de B fr B nl DK D EL E F IRL I L NL A P FIN S IS LI NO BG CZ EE CY LV LT HU PL RO SI SK B de B fr B nl DK D EL E F IRL I L NL A P FIN S UK UK IS LI NO BG CZ EE CY LV LT HU PL RO SI SK SC _____ __ E/W/NI UK UK SC _____ __ E/W/NI
Primary level only Secondary level only Primary + secondary levels or single structure
NO EXPLICIT INFORMATION ON GRAMMATICAL OBJECTIVES
EXPLICIT INFORMATION ON GRAMMATICAL OBJECTIVES
List(s) of grammatical items
No list(s) of grammatical items
Source: Eurydice.
Additional note
Germany: This information shows the situation as described in the curricula of all Länder and not as it is presented in the national table, which draws
on the standards defined by the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs of the Länder (Standards für den Mittleren
Schulabschluss in den Fächern Deutsch, Mathematik und erste Fremdsprache).
Following the same logic, the teaching recommendations of numerous curricula encourage teachers to present grammatical items in terms of communication skills to be acquired. In Belgium (French and German-speaking Communities), Austria and Finland for example, teachers are advised to confront pupils with points of grammar, in order to get them to work out for themselves how grammar oper- ates in the language. Some curricula (e.g. in Bulgaria) also indicate that at the beginning of the learn- ing process, grammar should be presented in an implicit manner, while it can be taught more explicitly at a later stage. The Italian curriculum recommends that mother tongue and foreign language teachers should agree to use the same grammatical terminology.
Pronunciation
As with grammar, the Irish, Italian, Dutch (secondary) and Swedish curricula, along with those of Liechtenstein, do not explicitly refer to any teaching content related to pronunciation. In the other cur- ricula, the accent, rhythm and intonation of the language together with the identification of links, spe- cific to each idiom, between phonemes and graphemes, are the main phonetic and prosodic aspects to be taught. Many curricula insist that pupils’ pronunciation should be as correct as possible, and even approach standard pronunciation (e.g. in Austria), be understood by the greatest possible number of people, and avoid misunderstandings (e.g. in Germany, Iceland, and Hungary). Slovenia emphasises that pupils are not expected to be able to pronounce the foreign language like native speakers. Some cur- ricula (e.g. in Norway, Bulgaria, and Latvia) stress the importance of being able to distinguish (rather than reproduce) regional or national variations in the foreign language studied. Finally, being able to use the international phonetic alphabet constitutes an objective in several curricula, as in the case of Austria, Latvia, and Lithuania. In Norway, teachers are encouraged to acquaint pupils with this alpha- bet but not to use it.
The teaching recommendations pertaining to pronunciation insist on the importance of frequently exposing pupils to authentic language. As (for example) the Finnish curriculum suggests, teachers are also encouraged to make them listen to a variety of accents. Many curricula make it clear that training in the acquisition of a good pronunciation must begin at the outset of the learning process and remain consistent throughout (as mentioned in Austria, Sweden and the Czech Republic). Furthermore, teach- ers are encouraged to set up different types of activities that target a particular aspect of pronunciation (exercises in articulation, discrimination, etc.) or practise pronunciation as a whole (reading out loud, imitation, etc.). According to some curricula (e.g. in Bulgaria and the Czech Republic), it is useful to compare sounds characteristic of the foreign language with those of the mother tongue – so as to bring out the idiosyncrasies of the former.
Lexis
On the subject of lexis, only three countries present curricula that do not contain any explicit objec-
tives/teaching content. The vast majority of curricula in other countries enumerate lexical fields that
pupils are supposed to learn. All the curricula of the pre-accession countries present such lists. Among those that do not mention them, many do not contain explicitly formulated grammatical objectives or lists of grammatical structures.
Figure 5.9: Lexical fields in the curricula
B de B fr B nl DK D EL E F IRL I L NL A P FIN S IS LI NO BG CZ EE CY LV LT HU PL RO SI SK B de B fr B nl DK D EL E F IRL I L NL A P FIN S UK UK IS LI NO BG CZ EE CY LV LT HU PL RO SI SK SC _____ __ E/W/NI UK UK SC _____ __ E/W/NI
Primary level only Secondary level only Primary + secondary levels or single structure
NO EXPLICIT INFORMATION ON LEXICAL OBJECTIVES
EXPLICIT INFORMATION ON LEXICAL OBJECTIVES
List(s) of lexical fields
No list(s) of lexical fields
Source: Eurydice.
Additional note
Germany: This information shows the situation as described in the curricula of all Länder and not as it is presented in the national table, which draws
on the standards defined by the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs of the Länder (Standards für den Mittleren
Schulabschluss in den Fächern Deutsch, Mathematik und erste Fremdsprache).
The curricula that explicitly contain lexical objectives insist on the necessity of acquiring a basic vocab- ulary relevant to the pupils’ personal interests, which can be used in real-life communication situations (home, family, leisure, food, etc.). The basic corpus of knowledge broadens as pupils progress through school until it finally incorporates a rich variety of synonyms, antonyms, homonyms and special terms. Some countries (such as the French and German-speaking Communities of Belgium, and the Czech Republic) set a precise number of words pupils should have in their vocabulary. Belgium (French and German-speaking Communities) and Luxembourg also make a distinction between elements of vocab- ulary to be known actively and those for which passive knowledge will suffice.
Many curricula insist on the fact that lexis should not be learnt in an isolated way, but rather in a com- munication context or situation. However, none of them discourage targeted exercises that enable pupils to consolidate or reactivate their knowledge. The activities presented must be varied, including games (e.g. in Hungary and Slovenia), or more traditional activities that draw on reading or the study of texts (e.g. in France and Luxembourg). Several curricula give teachers advice on the vocabulary they
should teach. They are encouraged to make sure it corresponds to the topics and communication situ- ations pupils are required to master (e.g. in the French and German-speaking Communities of Belgium), to distinguish what has to be known actively and passively (e.g. in France), and to build on terms that resemble those of the pupils’ mother tongue (e.g. in Greece). The Austrian and Bulgarian curricula insist on the fact that translation should never be the only means by which the meaning of a word is con- veyed (use of synonyms, gestures, etc. are recommended).
Reflecting on language
In addition to these three fields connected to the structure of the language, a majority of curricula for- mulate objectives that invite reflection on language. Separate curricula at the primary level rarely have specific objectives concerned with reflecting on language. However, this does not apply to the French, Italian, and Luxembourg curricula.
Figure 5.10: Explicit objectives in the curricula, which are related to reflecting on language
B de
B fr B nl DK D EL E F IRL I L NL A P FIN S UK UK IS LI NO BG CZ EE CY LV LT HU PL RO SI SK
SC
_____ __
E/W/NI
Primary level only Secondary level only Primary + secondary levels or single structure
Explicit objectives mentioned
No explicit objectives mentioned
Source: Eurydice.
Additional note
Germany: This information shows the situation as described in the curricula of all Länder and not as it is presented in the national table, which draws
on the standards defined by the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs of the Länder (Standards für den Mittleren
Schulabschluss in den Fächern Deutsch, Mathematik und erste Fremdsprache).
Reflecting on the language should enable pupils to better understand how the foreign language func- tions, to consolidate their knowledge of the mother tongue and in a more general way, to develop lin- guistic and communication skills. Comparing the linguistic features of two languages is an excellent means of stimulating this reflection process. In this way, the Icelandic curriculum encourages pupils learning Danish to become aware of the closeness of Swedish, Norwegian, and Icelandic.