Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:46:47.122Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Invited colloquium: Inclusivity in French second language education

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 March 2015

Sara Kennedy
Sara Kennedy*
Affiliation:
Concordia [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The aim of this bilingual (French/English) symposium was to inform researchers and teacher educators about the specific challenges faced by second language (L2) students and teachers in creating an inclusive L2 classroom in order to encourage plurilingual, non-English-dominant students and students with learning difficulties to succeed. In the Canadian context, French is an official language and in six of the ten provinces, school districts must provide French as a second language (L2 French) instruction in elementary and secondary schools. The remaining provinces and territories typically offer L2 French instruction in many school districts. Therefore, almost all Canadian elementary and secondary school students are faced with either the obligation or the opportunity to learn L2 French.

Type
Research in Progress
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 48 , Issue 2 , April 2015 , pp. 281 - 283
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Canadian Association for Second Language Teachers (2014). Podcast series. Retrieved from www.caslt.org/what-we-do/research-podcast-series_en.phpGoogle Scholar
Canadian Parents for French (2014). The state of FSL education in Canada. Retrieved from http://cpf.ca/en/research-advocacy/research/the-state-of-fsl-education-in-canada/Google Scholar
Gombert, J-E. (2006). Epi/Méta vs implicite/explicite: Niveau de contrôle cognitif sur les traitements et apprentissage de la lecture. Langage et Pratiques 38, 1–97.Google Scholar