A Lived Curriculum in Two Languages
Simone Smala, Lecturer in Education, The University of Queensland and Kate Sutherland, Deputy
Principal, Telopea Park School, Canberra
Abstract
The 21st century will require skills and dispositions of Australian students that allow them to
participate in working towards global solutions for global challenges. Language skills and a positive
disposition to engage with other cultures will be central to such participation. This article argues that
bilingual immersion programs which deliver curriculum content in two languages are amongst the
most promising designs to achieve global competencies. These competencies include linguistic skills,
positive intercultural dispositions and deep knowledge of world issues. The authors present two
examples of successful second language immersion programs in Queensland and the Australian
Capital Territory, examined under the lens of globalisation discourses. The findings show that
immersion programs offer many opportunities to engage with people, resources and ideals in
transnational social fields, and are a viable local alternative to mainstream monolingual schooling in
times of economic and cultural globalisation.
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
2
A Lived Curriculum in Two Languages
Introduction
Contemporary discourses in education include a focus on globalisation and an
internationalisation of curriculum. The preamble of the Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals
for Young Australians states that “in the 21st century Australia’s capacity to provide a high quality of
life for all will depend on the ability to compete in the global economy on knowledge and innovation”
(Ministerial Council of Education, 2008, p. 4). Such a statement presupposes that curricular initiatives
must create the conditions for Australian students to become ‘global players’. This paper argues that
second language immersion programs present a potential site for preparing students to engage
globally. The authors contribute to the research on content and language integrated learning (CLIL,
the most widely used term for immersion programs) by comparing and contrasting variables of
context and curriculum in two examples of immersion education in Australia. While the research on
globalisation and internationalisation covers a wide variety of issues, the focus here will be on the
significance of immersion programs in the provision of flexible pathways of schooling in Australia,
recognising diverse linguistic, cultural and personal life-worlds and acknowledging the importance of
engaging with global linguistic and cultural competencies for all Australian students.
The analysis is set in globalisation and internationalisation discourses. The term
‘internationalisation’ was most popular until the mid-1990s and focuses more on border-crossing
activities from one national context to the next; ‘globalisation’ discourses incorporate worldwide
economic, social and cultural maps which are not bound to national contexts (Rivza & Teichler, 2007,
p. 458). Transnationalism is the logical next step in this conceptualisation, defined as the “sustained
linkages and ongoing exchanges among non-state actors based across national borders” and
characterised by religious beliefs, common cultural and geographical origins and business interests
(Vertovec, 2009, p. 3). Key theorist of cultural globalisation Arjun Appadurai proposes five
dimensions through which globalisation movements flow: ethnoscapes, mediascapes, technoscapes,
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
3
finance-scapes and ideoscapes (Appadurai, 1996). While the scope of this paper does not allow for an
in-depth discussion of these “flows along which cultural material may be seen to be moving across
national boundaries” (Appadurai, 1996, p. 33), we will revisit some of the concepts when they
become relevant for our analysis.
More specifically for our argument, discourses in globalisation and education include foci on
contested legitimacy to inculcate values into the process of educational globalisation (e.g.Spring,
2008), as well as questions surrounding the accessibility of global learning experiences, for example
through the use of e-portfolios (e.g. Cooper, 2008). New forms of cultural identities as results of
transcultural flows of global media are explored (e.g. Lam, 2006), in particular the 21st century need
to prepare students for transnational/transcultural citizenship (e.g. Abowitz & Harnish, 2006; Guerra,
2008). An increased global student mobility comes into focus (Brooks & Waters, 2009; Rivza &
Teichler, 2007), and new identity spaces occupied in transnational social fields or third places
(Gargano, 2009; Lo Bianco, Liddicoat, & Crozet, 1999). Comparative education research includes
potentials to construct new meanings in these international exchanges (Fox, 2007).
Many of the theoretical considerations on globalisation issues in education lack practical
examples (Aldridge & Christensen, 2008, p. 66). Our paper provides an analysis of two practical
examples of how globalisation in education is addressed in Australian settings through curricula in
second language immersion programs. For Bourdieu (1991), the curriculum as a reflection of power is
an example of an active construction of ‘knowledges’ to be set in concrete institutional settings and
wider contextualisation of power. From his perspective, subjects compete for the right to define
legitimate knowledge, comprising strategies in a field of struggles. We argue that strategies used in
merging and extending curricula in second language immersion programs lead to the emergence of
new subject possibilities for Australian students, legitimized by internal criteria that prioritize
transnational social fields and ‘third places’.
While taking into account comparative measures such as numbers, the makeup of the student
and teaching body, and (hidden) values, beliefs and assumptions (Tikly & Crossley, 2002), the
analysis follows the proposal of Burawoy et al. (2000) for a ‘global ethnography’ in which global
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
4
forces, global connections, and global imaginations guide the local lens applied by the researchers.
Reimers’ (2009) three interdependent dimensions for global competencies in the 21st century were
chosen as specific lenses: 1. A positive disposition towards cultural differences; 2. The ability to
speak, understand, and think in languages foreign to the dominant language of one’s native country;
and 3. Deep and critical knowledge and understanding of world history, geography, and global topics
such as health, climate and economics and their challenges (p.25).
These sample themes in the vast array of globalisation literature were selected for their
relevance to the research contexts here presented. Simone Smala will present her research findings on
the eleven existing second language immersion programs in Queensland middle school settings, with
particular reference to a research project that focussed on transcultural curriculum experiences for
students in a German immersion program. Kate Sutherland will present her ethnographic study of
merging the French and ACT curricula in the French immersion school Telopea Park in Canberra,
with a focus on the transnational flows of curriculum cultures. Our paper aims to outline some of the
local challenges in implementing a program that teaches curriculum content in a language other than
English, but also some of the possibilities such programs present for global citizens of the 21st
century.
The CLIL Context in Australia
Over the past twenty-five years, a growing number of second language immersion programs
have been developed in Australian schools. This was in part a response to a growing awareness in
Australia that the context of globalisation requires “effectively using multiple languages, multiple
Englishes, and communication patterns that more frequently cross cultural, community and national
boundaries” (Cope & Kalantzis, 2000, p. 5). In immersion programs, a language other than English is
used as the medium to teach curriculum for a variety of year levels, age groups and settings. Due to
migration flows and globalisation discourses, bilingual or immersion education plays an increasing
role in imagining mass schooling models in many settings worldwide (Garcia, 2009).
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
5
Australia is beginning to enter this discourse as well. The current project of developing a
National Curriculum for Languages prompted the Modern Language Teachers Association of Victoria
(MLTAV) to include questions about immersion teaching as preferred second language teaching
option in a recent online survey. 71% of the 386 respondents assigned a medium to very high
importance to the inclusion of immersion models for a National Languages Curriculum (Modern
Language Teachers Association of Victoria, 2009, p. 12). In the recent Australian Council for
Educational Research review on Second Languages and Australian Schooling, the author Jo Lo
Bianco dedicates several sub-sections to immersion pedagogies and declares them as amongst the
most promising design developments in the area (Joseph LoBianco & Slaughter, 2009). In
Queensland, a formal evaluation of all Education Queensland Language Immersion Programs was
conducted in 2006, finding that “the immersion program model of language education is extremely
effective” (cited in Education Queensland, 2007, p. 3).
Literature on global competence emphasizes the central role of learning a second language in
order to engage deeply with diverse cultures (Hunter, 2004; Lambert, 1996; Reimers, 2009). We
argue in this paper that at least some of the envisaged global competencies are inherent in the
structural vision of immersion programs. However, globally attractive ideals such as bilingualism and
bilingual education “on the ground” involve a multitude of players with a multitude of positionalites
to be considered. Delivery of curriculum in a second language necessitates more planning, more
scaffolding and the inclusion of additional language elements in the Science, History or Maths
classroom. This requires supports from the Heads of several departments, teachers who are willing to
take on the extra burden of planning for such lessons and students who are ready for such a challenge.
The following sections therefore look further into concepts of global competence, for example second
language proficiency and intercultural engagement, and local implementations of such concepts
within second language immersion programs at two Australian sites.
Context of immersion teaching in Queensland
CLIL programs can be seen in many different incarnations around the world, reflecting
migration flows, the pressures of perceived global economic forces and time/space connections across
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
6
cultures. In bilingual societies, programs often start very early at pre-school level. In the vast TESOL
field, CLIL is known as “English as the medium of instruction” and is the major teaching form in
hundred of International Schools worldwide, often also frequented by local (wealthy) students whose
parents construct an English-medium education based on an American, English or Australian
curriculum as added value for their children’s chances in a global economy. In Queensland, the
concept of immersion teaching usually refers to a late onset partial program of offering approximately
half the key learning areas in a language other than English in Years 8-10 (Berthold, 1995; de Courcy,
1997, 2002; Dobrenov-Major, 1998; Tisdell, 1999). At present, there are 12 schools in Queensland
that feature immersion programs in French, German, Spanish, Italian, Japanese (including the only
primary program), Indonesian and Chinese.
Table 1.
Immersion programs in Queensland
Name of School and Location
Language
Start Year Of
Program
Benowa SHS (Gold Coast)
French
1985
Mansfield SHS (Brisbane)
French
1991
Kenmore SHS (Brisbane)
German
1992
Park Ridge SHS (Brisbane)
Indonesian
1993
Stanthorpe SHS (Stanthorpe)
Italian
1995
Crescent Lagoon SS (Rockhampton)
Japanese
1995
(primary program)
The Glennie School (Toowoomba)
French
1998
Ferny Grove SHS (Brisbane)
German
2003
Varsity College, (Gold Coast)
Chinese
2005
Robina SHS (Gold Coast)
Japanese
2008
North Lakes College (North
Brisbane/Sunshine Coast)
Italian
2008
Indooroopilly SHS (Brisbane)
Spanish
2008
(Data collected Queensland immersion teachers and LOTE Heads of Departments in an email survey,
February 2010. Additional data from Education Queensland (Queensland Department of Education
and Training, 2010)
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
7
As part of increasing globalisation and internationalisation discourses from the 1980s onwards, these
programs were designed to reach high levels of proficiency for second language learners who were
native English speakers. Early research into Queensland immersion programs focussing on a narrowly
conceived selection of immersion participants revealed that the conditions (no or little initial second
language skills of many participants) were, however, often not favourable for language proficiency,
particularly in the productive language skills (Dobrenov-Major, 1998). The 21st century, however,
has also seen an increase in “Third Culture” or “Global Nomad” (Langford, 2001) students who spend
their schooling in international schools provided by the language community of their country of
origin, or only part of their schooling in their home countries. Globalisation discourses that emphasize
economic development are generating these major migration flows, and are followed by issues
pertinent to multicultural societies and language planning (LoBianco, 2003). Students with diffracted
‘global’ identities (and their parents) are increasingly looking for connections and a ‘home’ for their
experiences. Preliminary results from my current large study into immersion programs in Queensland
have shown that native, background and heritage speakers are often attracted to immersion programs,
across all languages. A typical immersion classroom in Queensland includes native English speakers,
native bilingual speakers, global nomad native speakers, with diverse language skills and a variety of
support structures at home. At this stage, no final conclusion can be drawn from these phenomena, but
the heterogenous nature of immersion program participants in Queensland certainly contributes to the
demands on teachers to produce relevant curriculum delivery for immersion cohorts, both in terms of
language level and contents.
The decision to offer the Queensland immersion programs in three key learning areas,
Mathematics, Science and Studies of Society and the Environment (SOSE) reveals a desire to demarginalize second languages. Occasionally, subjects such as Music, Sport or Art may also be offered
in addition to these KLAs if suitable teachers are available. Australia cannot be classified as a
bilingual or multilingual society similar to countries like Canada, Belgium or Switzerland and does
not have an abundant supply of proficient speakers of other languages with teaching degrees.
However, our times of global migration and employment movements create the conditions for schools
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
8
to employ mostly native or near-native speaker teachers, qualified in their subject area as well as
being bilingual speakers. The need to find or develop suitable materials to deliver the local
curriculum in a second language often steers these immersion teachers towards contemporary
mediascapes, engaging in the possibilities afforded by the web, satellite television and classroom
hardware like interactive whiteboards. Immersion teachers in Queensland are often at the forefront of
new media usage in their schools, developing new literacy skills in their search for authentic language
materials (Smala, 2009).
The context in Queensland therefore emerges as a hybridized version of international schooling,
intensive second language teaching and a site of global competence focus, both in terms of language
and intercultural skills, and the use of new media literacy skills. The following section presents a
closer look at one sample site, and research findings from interviews with students and teachers
involved in this selected immersion program in Queensland. The outcomes of the programs include an
increased engagement with selected global competencies, which are constructed as identifiers by
students positioning themselves as more globally aware than their mainstream cohort.
A Sample Site
The research took place at a German immersion program in Brisbane and involved interviews
with five teachers (Teacher 1-5) and 15 students (Student 1-15) in Year 10 in June 2009. The
interviews took place in informal settings between lessons, at lunchtime and in one designated lesson.
An analysis of the interview data revealed that students created an identity around being immersion
participants that can best be described as advancing Reimers’ (2009) knowledge of world issues as
one dimension of global competencies. One student put it this way:
Sometimes, we learn a lot more about world issues, also German issues; we chat about what
we did in class afterwards in the playground and often notice that the other students don’t
really know anything about these topics. (Student 1)
This general impression was supported by other students’ statements, for example by saying
“We seem to talk more about stuff happening in Germany, in Europe” (Student 2). In this German
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
9
immersion program, students singled out several obvious topics: “Things about the war”, “The Berlin
Wall” (Students 7,8 and 9), “German films”, the international film festival “Berlinale” in Berlin
(Student 2). This data not only supports Kramsch’s argument that in and through another language
students discover subjectivities that will shape their lives (2009, p. 3), but also Pinar’s call for
curriculum as an intellectual project of understanding (2003, p. 30). In response to terrorism threats
and a focus on risk avoidance (Beck, 1992), the 21st century has seen a retreat from pluralism and
ambivalence. Curriculum needs to re-establish spaces for pluralist and intellectually challenging
perspectives, and the cultural differences that surface in immersion programs might just be such a
space.
It also became clear in the interviews that there was a substantial degree of interdisciplinarity
and language and content-faculty collaboration. Students and teachers reported that they often cover
the same topic in German language studies and the SOSE classroom, in particular when outside
events like the Festival of German Film prompted an engagement with a specific topic. As part of an
excursion to see a suitable film at the film festival, students would be engaged in topical explorations
around the film, often involving topics such as the Berlin Wall or life after the reunification (popular
German film themes).
As part of their deeper engagement with world issues, some students constructed a new identity
for themselves. Based on being immersion students and the extended issues they discussed, some
students made comments like “Sometimes I feel smarter”(Student 4) or “I think we are more mature”
(Student 8) or “The kids in the class are a bit smarter” (Student 7). This interesting synergy of
individual and collective identities, this “We” that many immersion students subscribe to, indicates a
new space, a ‘third culture’ almost, based on language skills, intercultural knowledge or at least
interest, and a global engagement not understood as ‘mainstream’.
The Melbourne Declaration of Educational Goals for Young Australians states that “global
integration and international mobility have increased rapidly in the past decade (Ministerial Council
of Education, 2008), and that these developments heighten the need to nurture a sense of global
citizenship among young Australians. One concrete measure towards such a goal are school exchange
programs, often a staple part of immersion programs. Indeed, one of the biggest areas of curriculum
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
10
extension for the interviewed cohort seems to have been their engagement with student exchange
partners from Germany. On the one hand, this took place in a very practical way, by being exposed to
German rock and pop music through sharing mp3-files and other electronic sources, on the other hand
this extension was a longer process based on German students inviting their Australian counterparts to
join in a social networking site called “Schülerverzeichnis” which is administered by and only open to
school students by invitation. This once exclusively German site is now being used amongst
Australian students who invite each other to join. The site is only available in German. In a truly
globalised networking practice, Australian immersion students are engaging with the possibilities and
repertoires of new technologies, while building up communication skills across cultures and
languages.
This extracurricular engagement with new media tools was also prevalent when interviewees
talked about the use of websites as a source of information. Both teachers and students mentioned a
large number of German-speaking websites which they frequently use. “The decision to use (or not to
use) textbooks” (Stoller, 2004, p. 267) is often taken out of teachers’ hands, as the Queensland
curriculum specifies content that is not available in predetermined target language textbooks.
Teachers therefore choose to engage with online resources as the only way to plan and develop
appropriate materials.
Amongst the online resources mentioned in the present research were translation sites such as
LEO (most students) and Blinde Kuh (most students) but also the German versions of familiar online
sites such as Youtube, Google and Wikipedia (most students and teachers). The data suggest that
within this sample immersion program the use of new media in a second language is a necessary
activity for the whole cohort. Given their engagement with German social networking sites and their
regular access to websites in German, these students have become ‘produsers’ (producers and
consumers) (Bruns, 2008) of texts as emerging bilinguals, thereby approaching global competencies
in language skills and engagement with social and cultural phenomena beyond their own immediate
discursive environments.
While this section has only presented a small section of the investigation and analysis of this
immersion program and immersion education in Queensland, the scope and focus of the paper limits
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
11
the extent that can be covered here. A full report and analysis will follow in a future publication. The
next section will now investigate possibilities and challenges if the whole immersion cohort is indeed
the whole school, with a new and unique curriculum, merged from a local and an international
curriculum. This section is based on Kate Sutherland’s ethnographic reflections on processes involved
in merging the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) with the French primary curriculum in her role as
Deputy Principal at Telopea Park School (TPS) in Canberra.
Telopea Park
In our capital city, by nature a destination for global nomads, a bilingual immersion program
exists at Telopea Park School / Lycée franco-australien de Canberra (TPS) where English and French
are the languages of instruction in the primary school bilingual program, with an option to continue in
the high school (Lycée). Similar to the Middle Years programs in Queensland, the program utilises
the curriculum to develop second language capabilities at the same time as delivering content, but is
based on an inter-government ‘Cultural Agreement’ to meet the educational requirements of both the
French and Australian Governments. While this particular agreement only concerns one Australian
school, supranational agreements about schooling, for example within the OECD member countries,
are one manifestation of globalisation (Henry, Lingard, Taylor, & Rizvi, 2001). There are therefore
significant differences from the Queensland model which is based on only one state curriculum and
does not respond to the interests of other national or sub-national systems.
An examination of the design and articulation of the curriculum here sheds light on the reasons
for the successful integration of TPS’s bilingual immersion program into the educational landscape of
the ACT (ACT Government, 2004). The analysis draws on qualitative data and document analysis.
Personal reflections from my extended experience in a leadership position in this setting, with
particular responsibility for ‘harmonising’ the French and Australian curricula, along with document
analysis are the major data sources. Documents created via bicultural collaboration and co-operation
are germane to understanding this bilingual immersion program‘s curriculum and global imagination.
The Context and the Cultural Agreement
Aligning with the goals of the Agence pour l’Enseignement du Français à l’Etranger (French
Agency for the Teaching of French Overseas), TPS is a binational and bicultural government school
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
12
established through an intergovernment agreement in 1983 (Commonwealth of Australia, 1983).
France, like many other nations, competes in a language and culture ‘market’ often constructed as
overrun by an Americanisation and Mcdonaldisation (Rizvi & Lingard, 2000) of social and cultural
values. One of the goals of the French Agency and TPS is therefore to provide a progressive bilingual
immersion program fostering French language and culture from kindergarten level onwards. Unique
as a vision for education in Australia, students are expected to be literate and numerate in both
languages at the conclusion of Year 6, based on a harmonisation or merging of French and Australian
curricula requirements, Kindergarten to Year 6 / Grand Section à Sixième (Telopea Park School,
2009).
Australian families accessing such a school model respond to global forces which individualise
economic chances and often suggest linguistic capital as an important part of staying competitive
worldwide (English, 2009). Campbell et al. (2009, p. 27) have pointed out that school choice is clearly
influenced by such global forces:
Emerging from the old and new middle class, there is a group of cosmopolitan parents who
believe that they understand the changing nature of Australian and global society and economy.
They are preparing their offspring to be adaptable and flexible along with inculcating new skills
and humanist values.
Students who attend the primary school are mainly from Australian families, but within these
there is an increasing minority where English is not the first language in the home. The school
enrolment policy stipulates that French nationals have priority enrolment status. Consequently, there
are growing numbers of French nationals, resident in Australia, who are opting to enrol their children.
Francophone families and students who have had exposure to the French curriculum or French
immersion programs elsewhere are enrolled if spaces permit. Economic or diplomatic ‘Global
nomad’ families, many of whom utilise the global system of French School Abroad, seek to enrol
their children. Therefore, the K-6 student population is a rich linguistic amalgam in an international
setting, providing a dynamic and developing space for ‘third cultures’ and transnational social fields.
The current whole school student population (Kindergarten to Year 10) is approximately 1100
students, with over 400 in the K-6 program. The teaching staff of 100 includes 35 French nationals
staffed by the French Agency, in an explicit attempt to foster collaboration and a merging of expertise
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
13
across teachers from Australia and France (ACT Department of Education, 2007a; Collard &
Noremore, 2009; Department of Education Science and Training, 2005). As part of the Cultural
Agreement, these teachers from France are recruited for up to four years to work with their Australian
counterparts to plan and deliver the merged program. Therefore, each class has an Australian and a
French teacher, both of whom are responsible for the children’s welfare and their learning. French
national curriculum documentation is available for teacher reference, including online resources. As
well as extensive access to English resources, French student texts, workbooks and exercise books are
imported from France to support the delivery of the French components of the curriculum, including
cursive handwriting. A professional translator undertakes day-to-day translations such as newsletters,
parent correspondence, and student welfare and management documents. Both the ACT curriculum
framework Every Chance to Learn (ACT Department of Education, 2007b)) and the French
curriculum framework are available in French/English translations to support the curriculum merging
process.
The widespread use of common print languages has been identified by Benedict Anderson as
instrumental in establishing a sense of belonging to an imagined community (Anderson, 1983), here a
‘third space’ imagined community of French speakers in Australia. The maintenance of such an
institutionalised cultural and linguistic transnational field requires sustained time and resource
commitment. To maximise the early development of French language in an English speaking
community, students in Kindergarten, Year 1 and Year 2 have four days in French instruction and one
in English (80:20 split). By Year 3, students have developed basic French literacy. They then have
50:50 English/French instruction from Year 3 to Year 6, including bilingual lessons, when teachers
and students are expected to switch from one language to the other.
Design of the Harmonised Curriculum
The concept of harmonisation describes the merging of Australian and French curricula to
facilitate the delivery of a bilingual curriculum as well as requirements of both governments.
Curriculum harmonisation is completed within the school and involves the whole teaching team but
principally myself, as the Australian Deputy Principal, the French Conseiller pédagogique and an
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
14
Australian executive teacher. These meetings develop a new form of habitus (Bourdieu & Passeron,
1977), allowing the participants to cope with a range of cultural differences inherent in two different
curriculum visions. At Telopea Park, this active participation in creating a transnational space often
results in the “cosmopolitanization of attitudes and values” (Mau, Mewes, & Zimmermann, 2008, p.
17) and an acknowledgment of commonalities previously unknown.
Appadurai’s “flows along which cultural material may be seen to be moving across national
boundaries” (Appadurai, 1996, p. 33) takes shape in this ‘harmonisation’ of French and Australian
curricula with the help of people, resources and educational ideals. Both the French and ACT
governments have renewed curricula in recent years. In the ACT, the Every Chance to Learn
curriculum framework identified new requirements around essential content and 25 Essential
Learning Achievements (ELAs) or overarching outcomes. The French government set out broad new
curricula directions in Common Base of Knowledge and Skills (c) and in Le BO Numéro Hors Série
Horaires et programmes d’enseignement de l’école primaire (French Department of Education
Official Bulletin, 2008). From these major documents, the merged curriculum structure has been
designed around ACT curriculum policy requirements but, using colour coding, identifies both French
and Australian requirements, as well as content taught bilingually.
Both frameworks

define the scope of what is to be learnt in compulsory years of schooling

identify what the nation sees as important to learn for the 21st Century

have overarching outcomes to be achieved (The French “Pillars” and ACT Essential Learning
Achievements)

prioritise literacy and numeracy, science, civics, and information and communication
technology

highlight the importance of understanding French and Australian cultures

have a focus on developing lifelong learning skills and competencies

believe in the development of the affective domain

recognise that our countries exist in interrelationship with others
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
15
The curriculum includes all the ACT Essential Learning Achievements (ELA) and French
competencies. In this merged curriculum, there is no Language Other Than English (LOTE)
organiser because French is a medium of instruction and the bilingual program itself is seen as
meeting the requirements for ELA 15 -The student communicates with intercultural understanding.
In addition, since students develop literacy in both French and English there is a combined Literacy
curriculum organiser. A summary of the curriculum organisation and the language of instruction
follows:

Literacy (via both French and English)

Numeracy (the majority of content is via French with about 25% via English)

Social Science (via English) or Histoire / géographie et éducation civique (via French)

Science and Technology (via English with some French)

Physical Education (via French) and Health (via English)

Arts – Music (via English), Visual (via French and English), Dance (via English)
The following diagram provides an overview of the articulation of the curriculum with classroom
processes at TPS. The diagram illuminates how the envisaged global competencies of linguistic skills
and cross-cultural engagement must necessarily be structured by (two) strong local requirements for
standardized testing and benchmarking. This ‘formalization’ of bilingual education, however, seems
to secure successful implementation and delivery of such an ambitious transnational project:
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
16
Articulation of the Curriculum with the Classroom (see Figure 1)

Articulation of the K-6 Curriculum



Preamble
This describes the K-6 context, the relationship between Every Chance to Learn & Le socle commun de
connaissances et de compétences, bilingualism, harmonisation .

It includes the K-6 curriculum ‘organiser’ and the French- Australian class structures.
Scope and
Sequence
Documents
Social Science
Literacy
Science and
(French and
Numeracy
Technology
The Arts
English)
(including
histoire
géographie et
éducation
civique)
Physical
Education &
Health


Interdisciplinary ELAs 1-6 and French competences are integrated across organisers


Overviews

Overviews are the articulation of the scope and sequence documents at year level, K-6.

Overviews are created by year teams each semester to meet the needs of the students.

They include agreed elements such as: differentiation of curriculum, bilingual and harmonised activities, LA, ESL
and gifted and talented.



Units of Work
Each teacher designs a learning program for their class(-es). They will decide on pedagogical approaches and
assessment tasks for their students. Results of Evaluations Nationales, PIPS and NAPLAN inform planning to
meet the needs of all students.



Assessment and Reporting
Teachers assess according to the outcomes identified in the overview. They use several tools to assess the
students. Work samples assist teachers in year teams to establish standards across classes. Student achievement is
reported through the year via Learning Journeys, Parent-Teacher Interviews, Outcome and A-E Reports, PIPs and
NAPLAN reports.
Articulation of the Curriculum, K-6, Figure 1
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
17
The dynamic nature of new transnational practices results in classroom activities being a mix of
French and Australian approaches, dependent on situations, resources and the teachers’ own
subjectivities. In French classrooms the activities tend to follow French guidelines as stipulated by the
French Inspector, and in Australian classrooms activities are constructed towards Australian
guidelines, namely, the ACT Quality Teaching model which was adopted from the NSW model
(NSW Department of Education and Training, 2006). In general, the curriculum is delivered through
integrated units by Australian staff where one component of the organiser, for example Social
Science, would be used as a vehicle to deliver Literacy, Numeracy and other essential content.
In bilingual classrooms and specific projects, where both teachers are present, activities are an
agreed blend of the two approaches, creating transnational pedagogical fields. The need for outside
classroom use of the two languages (LoBianco, 2009, p. 34) to enable transnational social fields for
the bilingual students at TPS is met in several different ways. Students are provided with many
opportunities to use each language away from the classroom. School-wide, there are bilingual signs,
teachers speak their mother tongue to students, and correspondence is regularly bilingual. Other
opportunities include bilingual assemblies, sports days, public speaking competition, camps, library
and the annual concert. Examples are:

Year 4 Thinking Carnival / Festival de la Pensée

Kindergarten’s Teddy Bears’ Picnic at the Australian National Botanic Gardens

Francophonie Week activities

French exhibitions at Alliance Française de Canberra
These activities are part of Telopea Park’s desire to create a new imagined transnational
community for the whole school. The Thinking Carnival, for example, is an annual Year 4 event that
uses constructivist theories of learning, including cooperative learning techniques, in a bilingual
environment. In a highly structured day, students are set challenges to which they have to propose a
creative solution. In an out-of-classroom environment, students are expected to read, write and speak
in both French and English. Teacher preparation notes from the Thinking Carnival organisers were
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
18
translated into French, which allowed French staff also to add their positionalities to its rationale and
educational purpose, resulting in transnational repertoires unique for the Telopea Park setting.
Conclusion
In Appadurai’s vision of modernity, the nation-state is dissolved and cultural landscapes are
instead characterised by a fragmented, imaginary world (Appadurai, 1996). We have come to the
conclusion that immersion education in Australia begins to appropriate this new vision of modernity
and create a new public sphere that unites diasporic, ‘native’ and transitory cultures in new sites for
global imagination. The call for global linguistic and intercultural competencies can only be embodied
in such local policies and initiatives. As Burawoy points out, these global “connections and flows are
not autonomous, are not arbitrary patterns crossing in the sky, but are shaped by the strong magnetic
field of nation states” (2000, p. 34).
The analysis of the two case studies has pointed to potentials for this teaching approach
beyond isolated and small-scale programs, envisaging bilingual education as a widespread approach
to encourage the engagement of Australian students (both local tribes and global nomads) with
sustained transnational social fields. Globalisation flows produce students who have diverse
affiliations with the language they are learning and the schooling cultures they are attached to
(Mitchell & Parker, 2008). Their diverse linguistic, cultural and personal life-worlds need to be
recognised in the provision of flexible pathways of schooling in Australia, acknowledging the
importance of their lived experiences. One aspect that emerges in both Queensland and at Telopea
Park is the role of bilingual immersion for ‘third culture’ or ‘global nomads’ students with a heritage
or background language other than English. Telopea Park clearly identifies French native speakers as
part of its intended cohort. However, native, heritage or background speakers seem to be drawn to
some of the second language immersion programs in Queensland as well. A further step would be to
investigate a potential role for immersion programs as a provision for heritage speakers to receive part
of their education in their home language. This study is therefore significant for policy makers and
school administrators who are interested in responding to global connections and global imaginations
by providing visionary pathways of schooling locally.
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
19
There is a ‘whiff’ of the Big Wide World discernible in immersion programs, an engagement
with transnational social fields often muted in monolingual settings. The 21st century will require
skills and dispositions of Australian students that allow them to participate in working towards global
solutions for global challenges. Language skills and a positive disposition to engage with other
cultures will be central to such participation. We believe that engaging with curriculum through the
lens of two different languages presents one way towards cosmopolitan cultural competences,
including “openness towards difference and otherness” (Roudometof, 2005, p. 122).
Immersion programs allow for new subject possibilities for all Australian students, based on
their engagement with transnational social fields through shared mediascapes on social networking
sites and ‘third places’ in their own cultural positionalities. Finally, it is also important not to lose
sight of one of the main aims of bilingual or immersion education in Australia. These programs are
amongst the most promising designs to address the marginalized position of second language learning
in Australia. Their bond to key learning areas, their ability to slot into existing mainstream school
structures and their stated interest in other cultures and languages is one of Australia’s best
opportunities not to miss the ‘globalisation train’ in terms of linguistic and intercultural skills.
References
Abowitz, K. K., & Harnish, J. (2006). Contemporary Discourses of Citizenship. Review of
Educational Research, 76(4), 653-690.
ACT Department of Education. (2007a). ACT Educational Leadership Framework. Canberra: ACT
Department of Education.
ACT Department of Education. (2007b). Every Chance to Learn. Canberra: ACT Department of
Education.
ACT Government. (2004). ACT Education Bill. Canberra: ACT Government.
Aldridge, J., & Christensen, L. (2008). Globalization and Education. Childhood Education,
85(1), 64-66.
Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined Communities - Reflections on the Origins and Spread of
Nationalism. London: Verso.
Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at Large. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
20
Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage.
Berthold, M. (1995). Rising to the bilingual challenge. Melbourne: NLLIA.
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and Symbolic Power (G. Raymond & M. Adamson, Trans.).
Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture.
London: Sage.
Brooks, R., & Waters, J. (2009). International higher education and the mobility of UK
students. Journal of Research in International Education, 8(2), 191-209.
Bruns, A. (2008). The Future Is User-Led: The Path towards Widespread Produsage.
Fibreculture (11) Retrieved March 5, 2010, from
http://eleven.fibreculturejournal.org/fcj-066-the-future-is-user-led-the-path-towardswidespread-produsage/.
Burawoy, M., Blum, J. A., George, S., Gille, Z., Gowan, T., Haney, L., et al. (2000). Global
Ethnography: Forces, Connections, and Imaginations in a Postmodern World.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Campbell, C., Proctor, H., & Sherington, G. (2009). School Choice: How Parents Negotiate
The New School Market in Australia. Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin.
Collard, J., & Noremore, A. (2009). Leadership and Intercultural Dynamics. Charlotte:
Information Age Publishing.
Commonwealth of Australia. (1983). Australian Treaty Series 1983 No. 8. Agreement between the
Governments of Australia and the Government of the French Republic concerning the
Establishment of a French-Australian School in Canberra. Canberra: Australian
Government Publishing Service.
Cooper, G. (2008). Assessing International Learning Experiences: A Multi-Institutional
Collaboration. Phi Kappa Phi Forum, 88(1), 8-11.
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2000). Introduction: Multiliteracies: The beginnings of an idea. In
B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of
social futures (pp. 3-8). New York, NY: Routledge.
de Courcy, M. (1997). Benowa High: A decade of French immersion in Australia. In R. K. Johnson
& M. Swain (Eds.), Immersion: International Perspectives (pp. 44-62). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
de Courcy, M. (2002). Immersion Education Downunder. The American Council on
Immersion Education (ACIE) Newsletter, 5(3), 1-4.
Department of Education Science and Training. (2005). Australian Government Quality Teacher
Program Getting Started with Intercultural Language Learning: A resource for School.
Canberra: Department of Education Science and Training.
Dobrenov-Major, M. (1998). Impact on Students of the German Immersion Program at Kenmore
State High School, Brisbane and the Implications for the Development of Immersion Mode of
Teaching in Australia. Pacific-Asian Education, 10(1), 7-22.
Education Queensland. (2007). Immersion Program Information Handbook. Retrieved
March 12, 2010, from
http://education.qld.gov.au/curriculum/area/lote/immersion.html.
English, R. (2009). Selling Education Through "Culture": Responses to the Market by New,
Non-Government Schools. Australian Educational Researcher, 36(1), 89-104.
Fox, C. (2007). The Question of Identity from a Comparative Education Perspective. In R. F.
Arnove & C. A. Torres (Eds.), Comparative Education: The Dialectic of the Global
and the Local (3rd ed., pp. 117-128). Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield
French Department of Education Official Bulletin. (2008). Teaching Hours and Programs for
Primary School. Paris: French Government.
Garcia, O. (2009). Bilingual Education in the 21st Century. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
21
Gargano, T. (2009). (Re)conceptualizing International Student Mobility: The Potential of
Transnational Social Fields. Journal of Studies in International Education, 13(3),
331-346.
Guerra, J. C. (2008). Cultivating Transcultural Citizenship: A WritingAcrossCommunities
Model. Language Arts, 85(4), 296-304.
Henry, M., Lingard, B., Taylor, S., & Rizvi, F. (2001). The OECD, Globalisation and
Education Policy. Oxford: Pergamon.
Hunter, W. D. (2004). Got Global Competency? International Educator, 13(2), 6-12.
Kramsch, C. (2009). The Multilingual Subject. What language learners say about their
experience and why it matters. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lam, W. S. E. (2006). Culture and Learning in the Context of Globalization: Research
Directions. Review of Research in Education, 30, 213-237.
Lambert, R. (1996). "Parsing the Concept of Global Competence," Educational Exchange
and Global Competence. New York: Council on International Educational Exchange.
Langford, M. (2001). Global Nomads, Third Culture Kids and International Schools. In M.
Hayden & J. Thompson (Eds.), International Education: Principles and Practice (pp.
28-43). London: Kogan Page.
LoBianco, J., Liddicoat, A. J., & Crozet, C. (Eds.). (1999). Striving for the Third Place:
Intercultural Competence through Language Education. Melbourne: Language
Australia.
LoBianco, J. (2003). Culture: visible, invisible and multiple. In J. Lo Bianco & C. Crozet
(Eds.), Teaching Invisible Culture: Classroom Practice and Theory (pp. 11-38).
Melbourne: Language Australia.
LoBianco, J., & Slaughter, Y. (2009). Australian Education Review: Second Languages and
Australian Schooling. Camberwell, VIC: Australian Council for Educational
Research.
Mau, S., Mewes, J., & Zimmermann, A. (2008). Cosmopolitan attitudes through transnational
social practices? Global Networks, 8(1), 1-24.
Ministerial Council of Education, E., Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA). (2008).
Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians. Melbourne:
MCEETYA.
Mitchell, K., & Parker, W. C. (2008). I pledge allegiance to.... Flexible citizenship and
shifting scales of belonging. Teachers College Record, 110(4), 775-804.
Modern Language Teachers Association of Victoria (Producer). (2009). MLTAV 2009
National Curriculum Survey Statistical Results. Retrieved February 17, 2010, from
http://mltav.asn.au/images/documents/MLTAV_09_National_Curriculum_Survey_Re
sults%20Final.pdf
NSW Department of Education and Training. (2006). NSW Quality Teaching Model.
Retrieved February 22, 2010 from
https://www.det.nsw.edu.au/proflearn/areas/qt/qt.htm
Pinar, W. F. (Ed.). (2003). International Handbook of Curriculum Research. Mahwah, N.J. :
L. Erlbaum Associates.
Reimers, F. (2009). Global Competency: Educating the World. Harvard International
Review, 30(4), 24-27.
Rivza, B., & Teichler, U. (2007). The Changing Role of Student Mobility. Higher Education
Policy, 20, 457-475.
Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2000). Globalization and Education: Complexities and
Contigencies. Educational Theory, 50(4), 419-426.
Roudometof, V. (2005). Transnationalism, cosmopolitanism and glocalization. Current
Sociology, 53(1), 113-135.
A LIVED CURRICULUM IN TWO LANGUAGES
22
Smala, S. (2009). New literacies in a globalised world. Literacy Learning: The Middle Years,
17(3), 45-50.
Spring, J. (2008). Research on Globalization and Education. Review of Educational Research,
78(2), 330-363.
Telopea Park School. (2009). K-6 Harmonised Curriculum Preamble. Canberra: Telopea Park
School.
Tikly, L., & Crossley, M. (2001). Teaching Comparative and International Education: A
Framework for Action. Comparative Education Review, 45(4), 561-580.
Tisdell, M. (1999). German Language Production in Young Learners Taught Science and Social
Studies through Partial Immersion German. Babel, 34(2), 26-32.
Vertovec, S. (2009). Transnationalism. London: Routledge.