Abstract
A founding principle of the European Community has been the free circulation of people. This important feature brought about a new migration phenomenon that required pragmatic responses, namely the need for language learning and teaching. With the European Community’s development, the need for language learning continued to gain momentum, and between 1989 and 1996, the Council of Europe (COE) developed the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching and Assessment (CEFR) as part of a larger project ‘Language Learning for European Citizenship’. This chapter explores the significance of language learning for the European Community and details the CEFR, which provides a common basis for developing language syllabi, curriculum guidelines, examinations, textbooks and so on across Europe, and defines six levels of language proficiency, the use of which the COE recommended in a Resolution in November 2001.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
‘Education in the European Community’, Commission of the European Communities, doc. COM(74) 253 final/2, Brussels, 14 March 1974 (CES/1974-20.63.01, HAEU).
- 2.
‘Action Programme in favour of migrant workers and their families’, COM (74) 2250, 14 December 1974 (European Communities).
- 3.
‘Education in the European Community’, Commission of the European Communities, doc. COM(74) 253 final/2, Brussels, 14 March 1974 (CES/1974-20.63.01, HAEU).
- 4.
Not within the European Community.
- 5.
‘Action Programme in favour of migrant workers and their families’, COM (74) 2250, 14 December 1974 (European Communities). Migrants of third countries have restricted rights and require work permits and visas from the host country, which are usually on the basis of secured employment.
- 6.
OJ L257 (19.10.1968) and L295 (07.12.1968).
- 7.
‘Education in the European Community’, Commission of the European Communities, doc. COM(74) 253 final/2, Brussels, 14 March 1974 (CES/1974-20.63.01, HAEU).
- 8.
‘Action Programme in favour of migrant workers and their families’, COM (74) 2250, 14 December 1974 (European Communities).
- 9.
Council ‘Resolution’ of 21 January 1974 concerning a Social Action Programme, ‘Official Journal of the European Communities’, No. C 13/1, 12.2.1974.
- 10.
Official Journal, C 038, 19/02/1976 p. 0001–0005.
- 11.
‘Resolution of the Council and of the Ministers of Education, meeting within the Council of 9 February 1976 comprising an action programme in the field of education’, Official Journal of the European Communities, No. C 38/1, 19.2.1976.
- 12.
‘Opinion’ of the Section for Social Questions on the Education of the European Community, Economic and Social Committee, dossier 71/SOC, doc. CES367/75 fin pk, Brussels, 17 April 1975 (CES/1974-60.23.04, HAEU).
- 13.
‘Education in the European Community’, Commission of the European Communities, doc. COM(74) 253 final/2, Brussels, 14 March 1974 (CES/1974-20.63.01, HAEU).
- 14.
‘Communication’ from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – Multilingualism: an asset for Europe and a shared commitment (COM(2008) 566 final of 18.9.2008).
- 15.
From here onwards, for reasons of synthesis, indicated with the CEFR acronym with which it is known in all the countries that adopted it since 2001.
- 16.
From here onwards, for similar reasons of synthesis, this fundamental organism of intergovernmental cooperation, namely the Council of Europe, will be indicated with the acronym COE.
- 17.
- 18.
The ‘European Cultural Convention’ was adopted on 19 December 1954 in Paris (France) and came into force on 5 May 1955 (Council of Europe Treaty Series no. 018). It is open for signature by member states and for accession by non-member states and the European Community. The purpose of this Convention is to develop mutual understanding among the peoples of Europe and reciprocal appreciation of their cultural diversity, to safeguard European culture, to promote national contributions to Europe’s common cultural heritage respecting the same fundamental values and to encourage in particular the study of the languages, history and civilization of the Parties to the Convention. The Convention contributes to concerted action by encouraging cultural activities of European interest. See https://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/treaty/018
- 19.
Beacco, J-C., Byram, M. (2003), Guide for the Development of Language Education Policies in Europe, Strasbourg: Council of Europe (revised in 2007); Cavalli, M., Coste, D., Egli Cuenat, M., Goullier, F., Panthier, J. (2016), Guide for the development and implementation of curricula for plurilingual and intercultural education, Strasbourg: Council of Europe; and Beacco, J-C., Fleming, M., Goullier, F., Thürmann, E., Vollmer, H., and Sheils J. (2016), A Handbook for Curriculum Development and Teacher Training. The Language Dimension in all Subjects, Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
- 20.
See also Alderson, J. C. (ed.) (2002) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment: Case Studies, Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Available at: http://www.coe.int/T/DG4/Portfolio/documents/case_studies_CEF.doc
- 21.
In organizing this fundamental conference which would have set in motion the process then resulted in the CEFR in exactly ten years’ time, the Swiss federal authorities were assisted by the ‘Swiss Conference of Cantonal Directors of Education’ (EDK), the ‘Eurocentres Foundation’, ‘Migros Club Schools’, and the ‘Interuniversity Commission for Applied Linguistics’ (CILA).
- 22.
The purpose of the conference, suggested by the COE, was twofold: (a) Introduce a CEFR that would allow to describe objectives and methods of language teaching and learning, construction of courses and curricula, production of materials and evaluation criteria; (b) Introduce a ‘European Language Portfolio’ (ELP) in which individuals could record not only the courses attended and the certifications obtained, but also much broader experiences in the field of European cultures and languages. For a presentation of the ELP and its nature, see below.
- 23.
Thanks to the support of the ‘Swiss National Science Foundation’, the four experts were assisted in the hard work of preparing the first CEFR draft by a group of Swiss researchers.
- 24.
In January 1999, the COE established that 2001 would be the ‘European Year of Language’ and the EU joined the initiative in June of the following year. The primary purpose of the initiative—which was attended by millions of people in over 45 different countries with 15 conferences organized during the year—was to emphasize the European linguistic heritage and openness to different languages and cultures, inviting the citizens of the European continent to develop the concept of plurilingualism .
- 25.
The full text of the English version published in print is available here: https://rm.coe.int/1680459f97. For versions in the other 39 languages in which the document is available today, see instead https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=09000016806d8893. In February 2018, a new version of CEFR was presented with new analytical descriptors: Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Companion Volume with New Descriptors, Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
- 26.
- 27.
That is a language passport (in which the linguistic identity of the owner, the number of foreign languages learned as L2, the formal language qualifications eventually achieved, significant experiences of using L2, and the assessment by the owner of his current competence are summarized in the languages learned as L2); a language biography (used to set language-learning objectives, monitor progress, record and reflect on particularly important linguistic and intercultural experiences); and finally a personal file (i.e., a sort of archive containing a selection of works that, in the opinion of the owner, better represent his competence in L2).
- 28.
One of the five components that are a key part of ‘Europass’ is the Curriculum Vitae, where citizens are invited to indicate their language skills in terms of CEFR levels. See at: https://europass.cedefop.europa.eu/documents/curriculum-vitae
- 29.
See Coste, D. (2007), Contextualising uses of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages, Strasbourg: Council of Europe; Goullier, F. (2007) Impact of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages and the Council of Europe’s work on the new European educational area, Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Both available at: https://www.coe.int/en/web/language-policy/events
- 30.
Better known as Comenius, the Latin version of his surname, this Moravian thinker, philosopher, theologist and intellectual devoted much of his impressive work of theoretical reflection to the teaching of languages and to the socio-cultural foundations that must be its constitutive pillars. He argued that education’s main goal was the shaping of a human being both in spiritual and in civil life. Educating is living, and before acting we must learn. Just as for educating, it is necessary to have a clear vision of the goals to be pursued and of the method by which teaching is to be imparted. In key works such as Janua Linguarum Reserata of 1631 (starting from which he drew eight years after the famous Orbis sensualium Pictus, the first illustrated book for children whose focus was the learning of languages through images), Didactica Magna (1638) and, above all, Novissima linguarum methodus (1646), Comenius elaborated his complex theoretical vision on language teaching and learning. A vision that started from the belief that everything should be taught to everyone and therefore education has to be extended to all social classes, without, however, overloading the mind, but on the contrary stimulating it to ‘the search for knowledge destined to last for the whole life’ (thus anticipating the modern concept of lifelong learning). A process in which no one ought to be excluded. Included not only women but also disabled ones, as they were also provided with a soul in need of progress through learning.
- 31.
The ‘International Phonetic Association’ was founded precisely in 1886 in Paris and one of the main purposes of its existence was the cogent need to reform the antiquated language teaching systems. It is no coincidence that its bulletin—meaningfully entitled Le Maître Phonétique—contained a section entitled Pour nos élèves in which there were always phonetic transcriptions of texts to be used in class during authentic activities. See Macmahon, M.K.C., ‘The International Phonetic Association: the first 100 years’, Journal of the International Phonetic Association, Vol 16, 1986, pp. 30–38 and Journal of the International Phonetic Association, Vol 40, 3, 2010 pp. 299–358 for examples of articles taken from Le Maître Phonétique.
- 32.
In Great Britain, for example, this new approach was introduced on a large scale at middle school level but not at high school or university ones. And since the issuing of terminal certificates was in the hands of university commissions whose approach remained invariably old fashioned, the penetration of new methodologies struggled a lot even in those areas (which would have been more predisposed precisely because they were directly exposed to teaching English as L2).
- 33.
Over the years, the name of this COE unit responsible for the most important projects launched by the COE on language teaching and learning has changed its name more than once (as well as the sphere of action and levels of responsibility). Known in the years following its creation as ‘Modern Languages Section’ and then ‘Modern Languages Division’, the institution has now taken the name of ‘Language Policy Unit’.
- 34.
COE (1998) Recommendation n° R(98)6 of the Committee of Ministers to member states concerning modern languages, Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
- 35.
- 36.
‘Major Project was pursued with energy and achieved considerable progress towards its major goal, to break down the traditional barriers which fragmented the language teaching profession in Europe and to promote its coherence and effectiveness as a major force for European integration, whilst preserving linguistic and cultural diversity. This meant bringing together those performing similar tasks in different member states. That was perhaps less difficult than getting teachers of different foreign languages to see themselves as partners rather than as competitors and to persuade teachers of mother tongues and foreign language teachers to see any relevance of the one to the other. It meant also breaking down the barriers to communication between teachers and administrators concerned with successive sectors in the educational process, separated by accommodation, curricula, methods, training and status. Finally, it meant bridging the gap between theory and practice, persuading governments and institutions, especially universities, almost exclusively concerned with literary and philological research, to accept and promote research into language as such and its use, learning, teaching and assessment’ (Trim 2002, p. 10).
- 37.
The foundation of AILA was agreed upon at the ‘International Colloquium of Applied Linguistics’ at the University of Nancy, France (hence AILA’s French name), in 1964. This decision was a result of two years of preparatory work and discussion, with the financial support of the COE. At that time, the clientele to be served by this new international association was restricted mainly to linguists and language teachers in Europe. The founding congress of AILA in Nancy was almost exclusively run in French, and the main strands into which the contributions were organized were automatic translation, language teaching and research cooperation in Europe. In 1969, during the ‘Second International Congress of Applied Linguistics’ at the University of Cambridge, AILA was virtually re-founded. It was from then on that AILA got a constant organizational structure and that AILA Congresses were held on a triennial basis. Originally a European initiative, AILA has become truly global over the past 40 years, including now affiliates from Africa, Asia, Latin America and North America.
- 38.
- 39.
Cfr. Doc. CCC/EES (7) 135, six-page document containing the important conclusions of the conference and a substantial number of recommendations for actions to be put into effect from the end of the works.
- 40.
See: Coste, D., Courtillon, J., Ferenczi, V., Martins-Baltar, M., Papo, E., and Roulet, E. (1976) Un Niveau Seuil, Conseil de l’Europe/Hatier.
- 41.
In the 1990s, two texts were developed that dealt with advanced levels. See van Ek J.A., Trim J.L.M. (1991) Waystage, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; van Ek J.A., Trim J.L.M. (1996), Vantage level, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. For a very accurate analysis of the whole question, see Trim, J.L.M. (2010) ‘The Modern Languages Program of the Council of Europe’, English Profile Journal, 1, 2010, pp. 1–12.
- 42.
Project 4: Modern languages: improving and intensifying language learning as factors making for European understanding, co-operation and mobility e Project 12: Learning and teaching modern languages for communication. See TRIM J. (2002), Modern languages in the Council of Europe. 1954–1997, Strasbourg: Language Policy Division, pp. 23–34.
- 43.
Recommendation N° R (82) 18 of the Committee of Ministers to member states concerning modern languages.
- 44.
At the beginning of November 1991, Rüschlikon organized the aforementioned international conference entitled Transparency and coherence in language learning in Europe: objectives, assessment and certification. The aim—as we know—was twofold: on the one hand, to develop a common reference framework for the learning and teaching of foreign languages that would allow professionals to describe objectives and methods; on the other hand, encouraging the construction of courses and curricula, but also the production of materials and evaluation criteria; on the other hand, to introduce an ELP in which individuals could record not only the courses attended and the certifications obtained, but also experiences of a much wider range in the field of European cultures and languages with which they had come into contact. The basic idea behind these two projects advocated by the participants in the 1991 Swiss symposium was quite simple: as free movement within the EU is guaranteed for both study and work reasons, it would have been in the interest of both students and workers and universities and entrepreneurs that the certifications in linguistics issued by a given authority were recognized and easily assessed everywhere.
- 45.
Language learning and democratic citizenship. That period was also characterized by a rapid expansion of the COE, whose new members—mostly from Central and Eastern Europe—contributed significantly to the enrichment of the programme. See Trim (2002), pp. 34–38.
- 46.
This period was also marked by the institution in 1994—at the initiative of the governments of Austria and the Netherlands—of a new body, the ‘European Center for Modern Languages’ (ECML), founded in Graz in response to the needs of the new member states of the COE and with the specific mission to implement the language policies developed by the ‘Language Policy Unit’ in Strasbourg and the promotion of innovative approaches to teaching and learning modern languages. The complementarity of the two bodies is particularly evident in the example of the CEFR: if the ‘Language Policy Unit’ developed the CEFR and its practical guides, the ECML offered and still offers assistance to the member states in the use of those valuable operational tools with the aim of creating a link between the examiners of the individual countries and the CEFR itself, thus obtaining comparable results at European level.
- 47.
- 48.
However, to be distinguished from multilingualism: if the latter concept refers to the presence of a certain variety of languages in a given geographical area without any distinction of status, the concept of plurilingualism refers instead to the repertoire of linguistic varieties that individuals are able to use, regardless of their level of competence and their social status. See Coste, D., Moore, D., Zarate, G. (1997) Plurilingual and intercultural competence, Strasbourg, Language Policy Unit, Council of Europe.
- 49.
- 50.
- 51.
In the late 1980s, a natural result of European barriers coming down was increased international mobility, with society needing to become more multilingual. This in turn spurred on a need for better language teaching and language assessment that would be fit for purpose for individual test takers as well as for other stakeholders (employers, educational institutions or government bodies). It was particularly important that language qualifications should be a fair and accurate reflection of what a test taker could do in a language and how well she/he could do it. In addition, as individuals frequently needed to be proficient in more than one language, there was a growing need for levels of attainment to be accurately compared to those in other languages and for certification to be recognized around the world. When ALTE was established, there were no recognized international frameworks, and language certification was variable in terms of the levels to which it referred. However, examination developers and other users were beginning to become aware that they needed a mechanism to understand levels and what they meant, and how exams in different languages related to each other in relation to both content and level. It was in this context that ALTE was formed and its objectives articulated. The ALTE framework, together with the ‘can-do’ project, which provided definitions of what language learners can actually do within several categories, helped form the basis of the CEFR. In April 1998, at ALTE’s 16th meeting, the COE recorded its appreciation for ALTE’s important contribution to the trialling and further development of the CEFR. There were 19 full members representing 16 languages by the end of the 1990s. ALTE welcomed associate members outside of the EU or European Economic Area (EEA) and the formation agreement was re-drafted in 1999 to take account for this. May 2000 marked the first three-day ALTE meeting and included the first ALTE open-to-all Conference Day, with over 100 participants. During the ‘European Year of Languages’ in 2001 ALTE held its first international conference to mark the initiative. The conference in Barcelona was the largest one ever held in Europe on language testing, with over 350 delegates from more than 35 countries attending. ALTE’s second international conference was held in 2005 in Berlin, with international conferences being held every three years after that: 2008 (Cambridge), 2011 (Kraków), 2014 (Paris) and 2017 (Bologna).
- 52.
The DIALANG project for the development of diagnostic language tests in 14 European languages on the Internet was carried out with the support of the EU (Socrates-Lingua 2) in the period December 1996–June 2004. The DIALANG system, officially launched in March 2004 and based on the proficiency scales of the CEFR, offers tests in reading, writing, listening, vocabulary and grammar. DIALANG’s 14 languages are Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Icelandic, Irish, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish and Swedish.
- 53.
See Van Den Akker, J., Fasoglio, D., and Mulder, H. (2008), A curriculum perspective on plurilingual education, Strasbourg: Council of Europe; Lenz, P., and Berthele, R. (2010) Assessment in Plurilingual and Intercultural Education, Strasbourg: Council of Europe; Beacco, J-C., Byram, M., Cavalli, M., Coste, D., Egli Cuenat, M., Goullier, F., and Panthier, J. (2016) Guide for the development and implementation of curricula for plurilingual and intercultural education, Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
- 54.
See Figueras, N., North, B., Takala, S., Van Avermaet, P., and Verhelst, N. (2009) Relating Examinations to the ‘Common European framework of Reference for Languages’, Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
- 55.
A Manual for Language test development and examining for use with the CEFR, (2011), Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
- 56.
EU Council’s Resolution N. 14,757/01 of 2002.
- 57.
‘Action Programme in favour of migrant workers and their families’, COM (74) 2250, 14 December 1974 (European Communities).
Bibliography
Agirdag, O. (2009). All Languages Welcomed Here. Educational Leadership, 66(7), 20–25.
Alderson, J. C. (Ed.). (2002). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment: Case Studies. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Baetens-Beardsmore, H. (1986). Bilingualism: Basic Principles. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Balboni, P. (1998). Tecniche didattiche per l’educazione linguistica. Torino: UTET Libreria.
Balboni, P. (1999). Parole comuni culture diverse. Guida alla comunicazione interculturale. Venezia: Marsilio.
Beacco, J.-C., & Byram, M. (2003). Guide for the Development of Language Education Policies in Europe. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Beacco, J.-C., & Byram, M. (2007). Guide for the Development of Language Education Policies in Europe. From Linguistic Diversity to Plurilingual Education. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Beacco, J.-C., Fleming, M., Goullier, F., Thürmann, E., Vollmer, H., & Sheils, J. (2016). A Handbook for Curriculum Development and Teacher Training. The Language Dimension in All Subjects. Council of Europe: Strasbourg.
Beacco, J.-C., Krumm, H.-J., Little, D., & Thalgott, P. (2017). The Linguistic Integration of Adult Migrants. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Begotti, P. (2006). L’insegnamento dell’italiano ad adulti stranieri (pp. 3–138). Perugia: Guerra.
Begotti, P. (2010). Imparare da adulti, insegnare ad adulti le lingue (pp. 1–166). Perugia/Welland: Guerra-Soleil.
Byram, M. (1988). Cultural Studies in Foreign Language Education. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Byram, M., & Parmenter, L. (Eds.). (2012). The Common European Framework of Reference. The Globalisation of Language Education Policy. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Byram, M., & Risager, K. (1999). Language Teachers, Politics and Cultures. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Byram, M., & Zarate, G. (1997). The Social and Intercultural Dimension of Language Learning and Teaching. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Byram, M., Esarte-Sarries, V., & Taylor, S. (1990). Cultural Studies and Language Learning: A Research Report. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Byram, M., Murphy, E., & Zarate, G. (Eds.). (1995). Cultural Representations in Language Teaching and Teacher Training. Dublin: Language Culture and Curriculum, Special Issue.
Cavalli, M., Coste, D., Egli Cuenat, M., Goullier, F., & Panthier, J. (2016). Guide for the Development and Implementation of Curricula for Plurilingual and Intercultural Education. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Coste, D. (2007). A European Reference Document for Languages of Education? Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Coste, D., & Cavalli, M. (2015). Education, Mobility, Otherness. The Mediation Functions of Schools. Council of Europe: Strasbourg.
Coste, D., & Simon, D. L. (2009). The Plurilingual Social Actor. Language, Citizenship, Education. International Journal of Multilingualism, 6(2), 168–185.
Coste, D., Moore, D., & Zarate, G. (1997). Plurilingual and Intercultural Competence. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Coste, D., Cavalli, M., Crisan, A., & Van De Ven, P.-H. (2009). Plurilingual and Intercultural Education as a Right. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Council of Europe. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Strasbourg/Cambridge: Council of Europe-Cambridge University Press.
Council of Europe. (2006). Plurilingual Education in Europe. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Council of Europe. (2014). Languages for Democracy and Social Cohesion. Diversity, Equity and Quality. Sixty Years of European Co-Operation. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Council of Europe. (2018). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Companion Volume with New Descriptors. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Cummins, J. (2000). Language, Power and Pedagogy. Bilingual Children in the Crossfire. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Dabene, L., & Moore, D. (1995). Bilingual Speech of Migrant People. In L. Milroy & P. Muysken (Eds.), One Speaker, Two Languages: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Code-Switching (pp. 17–44). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
European Commission. (1995). White Paper on Education and Training. Available at https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/d0a8aa7a-5311-4eee-904c-98fa541108d8/language-en.
European Commission. (2003). Promoting Language Learning and Linguistic Diversity: An Action Plan 2004–2006, COM (2003) 449.
European Commission. (2005). A New Framework Strategy for Multilingualism, COM (2005) 596.
European Commission. (2007, February 23). A Political Agenda for Multilingualism, MEMO/07/80, Brussels.
European Commission. (2008, September 18). Multilingualism: An Asset for Europe and a Shared Commitment, COM(2008) 566, Brussels.
Figueras, N. (2012). The Impact of the CEFR. ELT Journal, 66(4), 477–485.
Figueras, N., North, B., Takala, S., Van Avermaet, P., & Verhelst, N. (2009). Relating Examinations to the “Common European Framework of Reference for Languages”. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind. The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Grosjean, F. (1982). Life with Two Languages, an Introduction to Bilingualism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Grosjean, F. (2008). Studying Bilinguals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hennebry, M. (2011). Modern Foreign Language Learning and European Citizenship in the Irish Context. Irish Educational Studies, 30(1), 83–112.
Heyworth, F. (2006). The Common European Framework. ELT Journal, 60(2), 181–183.
Johnson, E. J. (2012). Arbitrating Repression: Language Policy and Education in Arizona. Language and Education, 26, 53–76.
Johnson, F. L. (2013). Underlying Paradox in the European Union’s Multilingualism Policies. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 10(4), 288–310.
Komorowska, H. (2004). The CEF in the Pre- and In-Service Teacher Education. In K. Morrow (Ed.), Insights into the Common European Framework. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lanvers, U. (2012). The Danish Speak So Many Languages It’s Really Embarrassing. The Impact of L1 English on Adult Language Students’ Motivation. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 6(2), 157–175.
Lanvers, U., Hultgren, K., & Mary Gayton, A. (2016). People Can Be Smarter With Two Languages: Changing Anglophone Students’ Attitudes to Language Learning Through Teaching Linguistics. The Language Learning Journal. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: “Multilingualism: An Asset for Europe and a Shared Commitment”, COM(2008) 566, 18.09.2008, Brussels.
Little, D. (2012). The Linguistic Integration of Adult Migrants and the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Little, D., & King, L. (2014). Three Decades of Work for the Council of Europe. Language Teaching, 47, 118–132.
Little, D., & Perclová, R. (2001). European Language Portfolio: Guide for Teachers and Teacher Trainers. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Little, D., Gouiller, F., & Hughes, G. (2012). The European Language Portfolio: The Story So Far (1991–2011). A History of the ELP. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Love, S. V. (2015). Language Testing, Integration and Subtractive Multilingualism in Italy: Challenges for Adult Immigrant Second Language and Literacy Education. Current Issues in Language Planning, 16(1–2), 26–42.
Macmahon, M. K. C. (1986). The International Phonetic Association: The First 100 Years. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 16, 30–38.
Mamadouh, V. (2002). Dealing with Multilingualism in the European Union: Cultural Theory Rationalities and Language Policies. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 4(3), 327–345.
Martyniuk, W., & Noijons, J. (2007). Executive Summary of Results of a Survey on the Use of the CEFR at National Level in the Council of Europe Member States. Available at http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/Survey_CEFR_2007_EN.doc
Morrow, K. (Ed.). (2004). Insights from the Common European Framework. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
North, B. (2002). Developing Descriptor Scales of Language Proficiency for the CEF Common Reference Level. In Council of Europe (2002) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Case Studies. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Oskarsson, M. (1980). Approaches to Self-Assessment in Foreign Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon.
Richterich, R., & Chancerel, J.-L. (1980). Identifying the Needs of Adults Learning a Foreign Language. Oxford: Pergamon.
Sheils, J. (1997, April 15–18). Developing Instruments for European Co-Operation: Common European Framework and European Language Portfolio. In Final Conference of the Modern Languages Project, Strasbourg.
Sherman, T., & Strubell, M. (2013). Multilingualism in Companies: An Introduction. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 34(6), 511–514.
Spannring, R., Wallace, C., & Datler, G. (2008). What Leads Young People to Identify with Europe? An Exploration of the Impact of Exposure to Europe and Political Engagement on European Identity Among Young Europeans. Perspectives on European Politics and Society, 9(4), 480–498.
Taylor, D. S. (1988). The Meaning and Use of the Term Competence in Linguistics and Applied Linguistics. Applied Linguistics, 9(2), 148–168.
Tosi, A. (2003). Crossing Barriers and Bridging Cultures: The Challenges of Multilingual Translation for the European Union. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Trim, J. L. M. (Ed.). (2001). The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. A Guide for Users. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Trim, J. L. M. (2002). Modern Languages in the Council of Europe. 1954–1997. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Trim, J. L. M. (2003). Multilingualism and the Interpretation of Languages in Contact. In A. Tosi (Ed.), Crossing Barriers and Bridging Cultures: The Challenges of Multilingual Translation for the European Union. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Trim, J. L. M. (2010). The Modern Languages Programme of the Council of Europe as a Background to the English Profile Programme. English Profile Journal, 1, 1–12.
Trim, J. L. M., & North, B. (1991). Transparency and Coherence in Language Learning in Europe: Objectives, Assessment and Certification. General Report. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Van Avermaet, P., & Gysen, S. (2006). From Needs to Tasks: Language Learning Needs in a Task-Based Approach. In K. Van Den Branden (Ed.), Task-Based Language Education (pp. 17–46). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Der Wildt, A., Van Avermaet, P., & Van Houtte, M. (2017). Opening Up Towards Children’s Languages: Enhancing Teachers’ Tolerant Practices Towards Multilingualism. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 28(1), 136–152.
van Ek, J. A. (1975). The Threshold Level in a European Unit/Credit System for Modern Language Learning by Adults. Strasbourg: Council for Cultural Co-operation of the Council of Europe.
van Ek, J. A. (1977). Threshold Level for Modern Language Learning in Schools. London: Longman.
van Ek, J. A., & Trim, J. L. M. (1991). Waystage 1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
van Ek, J. A., & Trim, J. L. M. (1997). Vantage Level. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Vedovelli, M. (2002). Guida all’italiano per stranieri. In La prospettiva del Quadro comune europeo per le lingue (pp. 9–51). Roma: Carocci.
Williams, G., Strubell, M., & Williams, G. O. (2013). Trends in European Language Education. The Language Learning Journal, 41(1), 5–36.
Wilson, B. (2003). The Translation Service in the European Parliament. In A. Tosi (Ed.), Crossing Barriers and Bridging Cultures: The Challenges of Multilingual Translation for the European Union. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Zarate, G. (2003). Identities and Plurilingualism: Preconditions for the Recognition of Intercultural Competence. In M. Byram (Ed.), Intercultural Competence (pp. 85–117). Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Reverdito, G., St. John, S.K. (2019). Breaking the Language Barriers: Free Movement and Language Learning in the European Community. In: St. John, S., Murphy, M. (eds) Education and Public Policy in the European Union. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04230-1_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04230-1_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-04229-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-04230-1
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)