 |
 |
Well argued! I particularly like the reference to Ruth Kelly saying unless you learn as soon as you arrive you are unlikely ever to do so, when so many spouses for example, have to wait a year before they are allowed to attend classes; 6 months for asylum seekers!
The narrowing of future ESOL provision to a selected few is another concern of mine: the focus I understand is soon to be ESOL specifically for Work, which will exclude many women who are very motivated to learn English in order to communicate when using local and national education, health, support services rather than relying on interpreters, husbands who have to come out of work or children who should be in school.
Once again, a good article: why not try to get it published in an appropriate newspaper?
Isabel Arnold
Hello all
The Translation issue has reared its head again on the BBC. And again a minor matter seems to be drawing attention away from the main concern.
The government's communities secretary Ruth Kelly laid into translation services on the BBC Politics Show yesterday. Having information translated into English, says Kelly, means that people have no reason to learn English. She is quoted on the BBC website as saying: "So, for example, it's quite possible for someone to come here from Pakistan and elsewhere in the world and to find that materials are routinely translated into their mother tongue and therefore not have the incentive to learn English." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6738603.stm <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6738603.stm>
Following this argument, Kelly seems to be making two contentions: (a) that translation services are pointless and redundant; and (b) migrants to the UK are not motivated to learn English because everything they need is done for them in translation. On the first point, and given Kelly's concern with 'integration', surely there should be more, not less, translation of important information for new arrivals to help them integrate? But the matter of translation is - in my view - a red herring. The second point raises a far deeper issue.
A government minister is yet again commenting on people's lack of English and a perception that they are unwilling to learn (this time because material they need is already translated). But the connection between the availability of information on housing, health etc in peoples' expert languages and their incentives - motivation would be a better word - to learn English is a very tenuous one. Where exactly is the evidence that people don't want to learn English because translation services exist? Has any migrant to the UK ever said that they are not motivated to learn English because someone has already translated everything they need into their own language? I'd guess not. The main problem for migrants when they are trying to learn English is surely the lack of freely available, good quality ESOL lessons. Migrants to the UK are crying out for English classes: most ESOL providers have long waiting lists, and provision doesn't come close to meeting demand. Blaming the over-use of translation services for a perceived lack of willingness to learn English deflects attention away from this.
Yet Ruth Kelly acknowledges the importance of learning English, as this quote from the same BBC report suggests: "Ms Kelly said evidence suggested that if someone did not try to learn English in their first six months in the UK, they were unlikely ever to learn the language." I can't imagine where Kelly got this information. But even so, the missing link in this argument is provision of ESOL. To try to learn a language, most people need lessons. The irony of Kelly's comment will not be lost on those involved in the Save ESOL campaign. Many groups are not entitled to free ESOL lessons until they have been in the country for a certain amount of time, regardless of waiting lists. For example, someone coming to join their husband or wife is not allowed to enrol onto an ESOL class until they have been in the UK for a year. And asylum seekers are not entitled to English lessons until they have been in the country for six months. By this time they will be unlikely ever to learn the language, according to Kelly. It's a good job for them she is wrong, I suppose.
Ruth Kelly is a member of a government which seems happy to restrict provision for ESOL, while explicitly and insistently recognising its importance in community building. Back in August last year, at the launch of the Commission on Integration and Cohesion, she described one of the aims of the Commission being to 'encourage local authorities and community organization to play a greater role in ensuring new migrants better integrate into our communities and fill labour market shortages.' She gave as an example of such an enterprise: 'increasing the availability of English teaching'. www.communities.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1502280 <http://www.communities.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1502280>
The government has plenty of research evidence on which to base a judgement about the importance of ESOL provision. A research project I was involved in, the NRDC ESOL Effective Practice Project, stressed in its findings the importance of English language classes for new arrivals, and recommended that these classes should be available as soon as people arrive in the country. The same project also pointed out what many will know anyway: that current ESOL students are hungry for more provision. And this was research instigated to inform the Skills for Life policy. But it just doesn't square with the current government position on ESOL provision.
As for migrants themselves, they are acutely aware of the importance of learning English, and to suggest otherwise is risible. Here is a quote from an ESOL student in Huddersfield, which I've taken from an excellent short film produced last month by students and tutors at Huddersfield Technical College: "English classes are very important for asylum seekers and refugees because it's like water and you can't live without water and you can't live without English language in this country."
It is paradoxical indeed that migrants to the UK are castigated by government ministers for not learning English, when the very same government instigates policies which deny potential learners access to freely available English lessons. This should be the focus of debate, not the presence or absence of translation services.
James
***********************************
ESOL-Research is a forum for researchers and practitioners with an interest in research into teaching and learning ESOL. ESOL-Research is managed by James Simpson at the Centre for Language Education Research, School of Education, University of Leeds.
To join or leave ESOL-Research, visit
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ESOL-RESEARCH.html
A quick guide to using Jiscmail lists can be found at:
http://jiscmail.ac.uk/help/using/quickuser.htm
To contact the list owner, send an email to
[log in to unmask]
Email from Bradford College is subject to a disclaimer, the full
contents of which are available for viewing at the following link: