:
Good morning, and thank you for inviting Canadian Parents for French to participate in the Standing Committee on Official Languages.
I have been an active advocate for French second-language education throughout my professional career, and now as CPF's sitting president I'm honoured to stand here before this distinguished panel to give a voice to the many students hoping to commence or continue French education in their post-secondary academic careers.
CPF will provide this committee with an objective, non-partisan perspective on the realm of post-secondary French second-language education in Canada. Our research initiatives of particular relevance to this brief are surveys of over 500 undergraduates who provided retrospective information about their secondary and post-secondary FSL experiences; FSL teacher shortage and guidance counsellor surveys; and an inventory of post-secondary opportunities and supports for anglophone students to study in their second official language.
CPF currently sits on a steering committee for a joint post-secondary initiative led by the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages and the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada.
What is the situation, from our view? Over 70% of students in Canada are enrolled in post-secondary programs, but despite the fact that young people are more supportive of linguistic duality and bilingualism than older generations, and despite the fact that they recognize the academic and employment benefits of official-language bilingualism, secondary and post-secondary French second-language programs are characterized by low enrolment and retention.
To resolve this situation, we feel it is necessary for the Government of Canada to put in place measures to increase the proportion of students who complete high school core French and French immersion programs, to increase the number of opportunities to continue studying in French at the post-secondary level.
We advance a number of notions and suggestions for enhancing recruitment and retention in high school French second-language programs. First is to ensure equitable access to core and immersion programs--and the operative word here is equitable. The increasingly multicultural Canadian population, and in particular the growing immigrant population, provide opportunities for the government to implement strategies that capitalize on the strong support for and acceptance of multilingualism that is characteristic of this population. Currently, no federal or provincial policies explicitly ensure allophone students access to French second-language education. Such gaps in policy have led to the possible exclusion of allophone students from French second-language studies and language planning.
Federal government policies and practices should ensure that English second-language graduates are expected and encouraged to enrol in French second-language programs; ensure that multiple entry points to French second-language immersion programs are established and maintained to accommodate the FSL goals of English second-language graduates without prior French experience; and revise official-language acquisition planning to include allophone students.
Extending French immersion programming to students with a wide range of academic abilities is important. High school French immersion programming is essentially delivered primarily via advanced-level courses geared to university-bound students, despite the fact that general-level students will enter service sector jobs in greater numbers. While only 13% of Canadians hold university degrees, a full 30% hold post-secondary diplomas or certificates granted by community colleges.
Students of lesser academic ability and those requiring remedial or special education supports are often counselled out of immersion programs because few school districts provide special education support services for immersion students. This is particularly unfortunate because we know that research shows us, tells us, that these students are not further handicapped in immersion programs. They do as well in immersion as they do in the English stream, and if they choose immersion, they have the added employment advantage of bilingualism.
With this backdrop, the Government of Canada, in our view, should extend immersion programming to general-level programs and courses in secondary schools; ensure that early French immersion programming, which is unique in its suitability for the widest range of student abilities, is maintained, supported, and expanded in all jurisdictions; fund longitudinal research studies to identify the types of learning disabilities, if any, that would make students poor candidates for immersion programs; and finally, ensure that education specialist support services are available to students in French immersion.
In terms of providing factual information about the benefits of bilingualism and French second-language education, in our work and in the studies that we have commissioned, we find that students and parents often lack sufficient information to make informed decisions about French second-language education. Many assume that French immersion in elementary school is enough to master the language, while others remain convinced that high school students cannot achieve the level of French proficiency required to work or to continue French second-language studies at the post-secondary level.
The federal government should, in our view, establish national comparable standards of French proficiency outcomes for graduates from various elementary and secondary French second-language programs to assist parents and students in making informed program choices and to ensure that high school graduates are aware of their French abilities; develop and fund effective promotional materials to encourage youth in Canada to turn their support for bilingualism into action; ensure that guidance counsellors and teachers are informed of post-secondary opportunities and supports; fund promotional campaigns informing students of post-secondary opportunities and emphasizing the academic and employment benefits of bilingualism at a time when, in our view, there is a great need, as there will be in the foreseeable future; and finally, fund the research and development of an inventory describing the number and nature of bilingual job opportunities in Canada to encourage greater enrolment in elementary, secondary, and post-secondary French second-language programs and to assist students, guidance counsellors, and post-secondary institutions to locate appropriate job opportunities for students entering the workforce.
In terms of enhancing enrolment and program quality by ensuring an adequate supply of qualified French second-language teachers, we know that shortages of teachers with appropriate pedagogical, French language, and discipline or subject qualifications continue to plague French second-language programs across the country. Government and post-secondary institutions should continue current promotional efforts to recruit and retain qualified French second-language teachers in order to maintain and increase the availability of high school French second-language programs, including core French, integrated French, late French immersion, early French immersion, and any of the variants.
In terms of developing and implementing a national strategy to increase the number of post-secondary institutions offering opportunities for students to study in their second official language, we offer the comments that follow.
Canada is one of the few highly industrialized countries without a national strategy for post-secondary education. Indeed, we are currently unable to determine post-secondary enrolment rates for French immersion graduates within Canada, and reports of the testing done by the international program for international student assessment, or PISA, do not distinguish immersion student outcomes from those of English and French first-language programs.
We strongly encourage the Government of Canada to act on findings and adopt recommendations from a joint post-secondary initiative by the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages and the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada, in order to develop and implement a strategy to provide more post-secondary opportunities for students in Canada to study in their second official language.
Such a strategy should do the following: encourage and support the development of a coalition of post-secondary institutions tasked with coordinating pan-Canadian efforts; gather French second-language educational data at the elementary, secondary, and post-secondary levels to inform national and post-secondary language planning; establish more university courses and programs taught in French beyond French language and literature courses, courses that would provide appropriate supports for anglophone students studying in their second language; encourage and assist francophone community colleges to recruit and support students studying French as their second official language; develop and implement policies to allow anglophone community colleges to offer programs taught in French; implement lifelong French second-language learning opportunities that include second-language acquisition, maintenance, and enhancement.
Language training should be available at little or no cost.
In terms of recruiting and retaining students by enhancing the relevance and appeal of French-language courses and programs for anglophone students, we suggest the provision of a wide range of courses and programs related to students' diverse fields of study, not just language and literature options. We also suggest adopting immersion pedagogical methods and building on the research that we know is associated with French second-language teaching and learning, which are associated with higher proficiency levels than the more traditional foreign-language approach. Those of us involved in French second-language teaching and learning know that the use of the “foreign” connotes a certain approach to language teaching and learning, one that might be based on grammar and translation.
We would suggest accommodating the wide range of French-language proficiency levels presented by core and immersion graduates. We would suggest the provision of academic and social supports to anglophone students studying in their second official language, as identified by a CPF survey of over 500 undergraduates that I referenced earlier.
Examples of such supports are subject-based language tutorials and organized opportunities for students to interact with native French-speaking Canadians. We would also suggest very strongly the implementation of the common European framework of reference for languages to ensure national proficiency standards and to provide marketable second-language accreditation for post-secondary graduates seeking employment.
With respect to French second-language teacher recruitment and retention, we offer the following suggestions: develop and implement pan-Canadian standards for teacher education and teacher qualifications; encourage and assist the Council of Ministers of Education to implement pan-Canadian teacher mobility agreements, similar to the one recently developed by Alberta and British Columbia; and finally, conduct promotional campaigns to encourage high school graduates to consider French second-language teaching careers.
In conclusion, by ensuring equitable access to French second-language programs for all students in Canada; by enhancing enrolment and retention in high school French second-language programs; by reassuring parents, students, and teachers of the second-language abilities of FSL graduates; and by establishing more post-secondary opportunities for French second-language graduates to study in French, the Government of Canada, in our view, will be well placed to enhance support for linguistic duality and to meet both public service and labour force demands for bilingual staff.
Thank you for affording Canadian Parents for French the opportunity to contribute to your deliberations today.
Thank you. Merci.
[English]
As you will probably hear by my accent, neither French nor English is my mother tongue. As soon as I start speaking you will realize that my mother tongue is Spanish, but I will address you in French, since there is terminology involved. That is easier for us right now.
[Translation]
On behalf of the rector of our university, Mr. Denis Brière, I thank the committee for welcoming Laval University's testimony.
I was introduced as a professor in the Department of Languages, Linguistics and Translation, which is true, but have no fear, I will not be making a purely academic presentation, devoid of pragmatism. I have been sent to appear before your committee because up until a month ago I had been the Director, for eight years, of the School of Languages at Laval University.
Allow me to give you some history in terms of language teaching at Laval University. It does relate somewhat to Mr. Brennick's presentation; Mr. Brennick is correct. In fact, the School of Languages at Laval University is a partner of—
An honourable member: Canadian Parents for French.
Ms. Silvia Faitelson-Weiser: Yes.
Language training at Laval University, oddly enough, began in 1937 with French-language training for Americans. There was the Junior Year Abroad program which was quite trendy at the time. Quickly we steered away from the traditional model criticized by students today and which is no longer being used at Laval University, at least in general, and which was the strictly literature and linguistics model.
As of the 1940s the university developed a host of new and modern methods eventually leading to the use of the communicative method. Today they apply to e-learning courses, to new and not-so-new IT methods and to communications.
In the late 1980s, the university felt compelled to develop a policy on training in an era of globalization. Obviously, Laval University being a francophone university in a francophone environment, it felt it had to develop very advanced training in English, due to market requirements. In Quebec City, as you know, the second language is English. The university had to rise up to the challenge of ensuring its students were as bilingual as possible.
However, being a francophone university, Laval's challenge was to get students to learn English. So, through the Language School, it put ESL and FSL training on parallel tracks.
Contrary to what may have been said, the challenge for us is to see how we can really improve English-language skills among our student population.
At the same time, we continue to welcome students from all over the world to come and learn French. Over the last few years we have noticed some changes, mainly with respect to Canadians. Canadian students only come to Laval in the summertime, through the Explore program. It is the only government assistance we receive for bilingualism.
Moreover, with respect to Explore, we have noted this year that there has been a drop in the number of scholarships, unfortunately. Sometimes we do not manage to reach our quota. In fact in the summertime, our students, and I think this is a generalized trend in Canada, prefer to or need to work. And spending five weeks doing nothing but learning the other language or visiting another province is a problem for them.
All provinces now have Explore and there are still thousands of students travelling through this program, which must certainly improve interprovincial communications. Perhaps it would be advisable to find other ways to encourage students to practise, learn and improve their knowledge of a second language.
At the university we are developing, among other things, e-learning courses within microprograms. Now, we believe that we could probably get students to acquire three skills, certainly at a distance, such as oral comprehension, writing comprehension and writing practice.
With respect to oral practice, perhaps they could take short immersion programs. As we have seen, many students cannot travel, they cannot or they do not want to. Regardless, they are not prepared to travel, not even for the five weeks duration of the Explore program.
We are therefore looking into developing shorter training courses, either during reading weeks, or two-week courses. They could certainly help improve students' knowledge and keep it up to date.
To do this there will need to be far clearer agreements between universities on recognition of credits. We deal with some fairly traditional universities that are unwilling to recognize credits acquired by students for courses other than literature courses. That is the traditional approach much criticized by students, but there is nothing that we can do about. At times we have to improperly classify our students, otherwise the credits we award them are not recognized by other universities.
I agree with Mr. Brennick: there is probably a dearth of standards in Canada today. We all discuss bilingualism, and perhaps it is clear for everyone what is meant by bilingualism in each institution. However, I am not so sure there is a pragmatic and applicable definition of the term.
To me, pragmatic and applicable would involve obtaining a given score on a given test, for instance. I do not want to oversimplify things, but the question we ask is whether young people know what is expected of them when we refer to bilingualism. What are they expected to do? Speak, understand, and say a few words, read?
We believe that the federal government could greatly contribute to a solution by helping universities to come up with a pragmatic accessible and coordinated definition of the required degree of bilingualism, perhaps by field of expertise or for given positions. We have looked for a definition. If one does exist we have not seen it.
Universities all have goodwill and they are all convinced that what they do is of the utmost top calibre, that they do better work than all the other universities. Perhaps we all need somebody to help us conclude that our best is equivalent to that of others, and help us come to some agreement on the way to proceed. I think the government is in a position to do that.
Our university is quite pleased to address some of the issues raised and to say that we regularly offer training courses each summer for FSL teachers.
However, as I have stated, aside from the Explore Scholarships, Canadian students are no longer coming to Laval University to learn French. Over the course of the year we have three, four or perhaps five Canadian students. Are they going to France? Obviously, when there were year-long scholarships, we used to get 300, 400 or 500 students over the fall and winter sessions. There is no longer any support, so Canadian students no longer really come to Quebec City to learn French.
I think I have shared the gist of my notes with you. Obviously, we believe the government could support teacher training courses and could perhaps implement a program of short-term summer courses for students wanting to maintain their level of bilingualism.
I thank you.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Blaney.
Welcome to our guests.
First of all, I would like to point out that there is a Franco-Ontarian fund, the Jean-Robert-Gauthier Fund, and there is in this context a yearly literary essay competition. This year, a Laval University student, Mr. Melkevik, won the prize. In his essay, published last April 21 in Le Droit, he writes something I would subscribe to. It applies to you all. He says that the state must grant special consideration to francophone minorities: francophone communities outside Quebec must be protected, encouraged and supported.
I personally come from Ontario. I was born in Hawkesbury. I worked for a long time and with great interest among French-speaking communities in a minority setting in Canada. One of the positions I held involved Franco-Saskatchewanian school management. It was a very rewarding experience. We all know that in 1931, the Conservative government in Saskatchewan abolished French-language schools. It was not until 1995 that they were allowed to reopen. In 1968, immersion schools were created in the province, but there had not yet been talk of creating schools where French was the first language of instruction.
I have the following question for Canadian Parents for French. I would like it to be perceived as a possible solution and not so much as an attack or condemnation. I'm giving you the example of Saskatchewan because of the French fact and because your activities cover the entire country. Of the 10,000 students who could be registered in French-language schools in Saskatchewan, only 1,000 are. The other 9,000 mainly go to English-language schools or immersion schools.
The problem we had at the time and which remains, was to convince people in immersion schools to redirect FL1 students, in other words those who speak French as a mother tongue, to schools where French was the primary language rather than keep them in immersion schools. We believe, and I'm going to say a bad word now, that that amounts to total assimilation, given that these young people end up serving as models for young anglophones learning French. I do not object to anglophones learning French, but that should not happen on the backs of French-Canadian or minority French-Canadian communities.
I know that you have established a partnership with the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne, and that is very good. Partnerships lead to solutions. I would like to know whether you, at Canadian Parents for French, are prepared to tell people within provincial school boards to redirect these students towards schools where French is the first language of instruction rather than to keep them in their own school boards despite the fact that one student represents $5,400 in income? Are you prepared to do that much to support the French fact?
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Brennick. It will be easier for me to address my remarks to Ms. Faitelson-Weiser. I am pleased to see you here with us today.
You say that the families are the ones who should make the decisions, and I agree with you on that point, but if the tools they use to make the right decision are not sufficient, we have a problem.
We toured the country, and we went everywhere, from Newfoundland to Vancouver. In some French-speaking communities, there was no French day care centre. So the children went to an English-speaking day care, and finally wound up in an English school. Thanks to the new program and the new action plan established in 2002, money was available to help the communities in this regard. And so, day care centres were established within the schools. Parents could send their children to a French day care and then a French school.
As we have seen in New Brunswick, anglophones want their children to go to a French immersion school at a very young age. The minister wanted to send them to French immersion in grade 5. That was the first time I saw 350 anglophones demonstrate in the street because they wanted to speak French. You remember this, it happened last year.
To get back to the topic of our study, earlier you were saying that people choose English, French or Spanish, depending on their job and what is best for them. The federal government must send a message to the provinces and the universities, who represent some of the biggest employers in the country. The government must tell them that they must offer services in both languages since we are living in a bilingual country.
With Service Canada, people can go work everywhere and do not have to restrict themselves to one particular place. Someone can find a job just as easily in Alberta or Nova Scotia as in Toronto. The government must send a clear message and help the communities so that they can send the university professors... The government must clearly state that the employer wants to hire certain people and should start preparing them for these jobs. As Mr. Shea said, we must start preparing people in the field so that they can hold these jobs. It is not an insult to be told that you need to learn two or three languages. We have to put an end to this silliness.
I would like to hear your opinion.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to thank our witnesses for being here this morning.
A little earlier, you touched on the issue of languages. With respect to what my colleague opposite, Ms. Glover, was saying, I think perhaps society as a whole has to make a decision about French. I live in northern New Brunswick, in a community that is 98% francophone. I took classes in English at the polyvalente, and the teacher—and I will not give any more detail so as to avoid targeting anyone—talked to us in French. And yet it was an English course. That is the opposite of what usually happens. At some point, people have to decide whether they want to be unilingual or bilingual. The question applies equally to francophones and anglophones regarding the other language. It is ironic to realize that this English course was being taught in French. How do you learn English in a community that is 98% francophone, and where the few anglophones living there, most from birth, all speak French in the community. That makes things even more difficult.
You raised the issue of the two languages, Ms. Faitelson-Weiser. The problem does not affect the public service only: it is everyone. Businesses or other private companies have no obligations. Often only one language is used, and that is the one spoken in the community. Everywhere else, or at least in most other countries, people do not mind learning three, four or sometimes more languages. Elsewhere, this seems totally natural, yet here in Canada it is seen as a burden. As you mentioned, a requirement could be introduced forcing people who want jobs with the federal government to be bilingual at the outset. However, that would not fix the problem regarding private companies.
Does Canadian society have a problem in this regard? Let us take the example of my English classes being taught in French. The same thing happens in anglophone communities, where it is not easy to speak French. Why should people not be learning three or four languages? As my colleague demonstrated earlier, he knows at least three languages. Of course, I do not know how well he was doing, because I could not understand a word he was saying.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to thank the witnesses for their presentations. My questions are for Mr. Brennick.
I'm the member of Parliament for a riding located right next to Ottawa, in Eastern Ontario. I can certainly say that bilingualism is very important in my area. There are 65,000 francophones in my riding. I myself am a Franco-Ontarian, so I understand how important it is to be bilingual, to be able to speak the other language. Here in Ontario, the community is really anglophone, so we are talking about the ability to speak French. People must be competent when they speak in French.
I will ask you several questions at once, and then give you an opportunity to answer. I would like to know whether you work with French schools in Ontario, or if you work with English schools regarding immersion programs. The reason I ask the question is that in my riding, French is the minority official language.
Second, one of the assets of immersion programs is that our children are more open to their second language. However, people must be able to communicate well in their second language, in this case French. The public service is looking for young people who can speak French and English.
Do you work with the universities? What messages do you give our universities? Committee members are doing this study because they would like young people to be bilingual, to be open to the second language, but also able to speak and communicate well in their second language. We are looking at the universities to determine if they will introduce measures to encourage students to learn the other language. I would like to know whether you are working with the universities. If so, what messages are you passing on to our universities and colleges to encourage students to learn the other language?
:
The point I want to make is that we very clearly respect jurisdictional boundaries. When it comes to first language, second language, educational...we don't go there.
What we do have are partnerships with many francophone-interested bodies and entities. We look for the common ground. We think there is enough mutual interest that our children who are studying French as a second language have the opportunity to engage with, to mingle with, to learn, and to profit from....
There are some very functional and pragmatic reasons for that. For example, on the east coast, when there are touring groups from the arts and cultural organizations, we often get together with francophone groups to split the cost. It's a very pragmatic, practical thing. We both benefit.
We encourage that. We think that's very beneficial for our parents and our families that there are those opportunities. We think francophone bodies benefit as well.
On the university side, we have been actively spending time with universities to encourage them to provide a wider range of course offerings for students. If we take that one variant of French second-language immersion, we have 350,000 students across the country enrolled in immersion. The question is what happens to these students when they leave public school? They are not all going to the University of Ottawa. They are not all going to Université du Québec en Outaouais, Université de Moncton, or Faculté Saint-Jean at the University of Alberta. They are going into anglophone universities. Our question to anglophone universities is what are they doing for this population?
My questions are for Mr. Brennick or Ms. Faitelson-Weiser. I will talk to you about my own experience. I was an immigrant when I first arrived in Quebec, and my first language was not French. Therefore, I had to learn French. When I arrived in Canada, I was 10 years old. I took the classical course, wherein they taught mostly Greek and Latin. Greek is still spoken today, but Latin has become a dead language. We had access to far fewer English courses than religion courses. I was in this system for 12 years and then I attended CEGEP. CEGEPs were just being instituted, and the English courses available were still as rare as during the time I spent in classical studies.
I then entered Laval University to study law. I was surprised to see that all of my books were bilingual. In law, nothing is exclusively in French or in English. There were approximately 300 students who had graduated at the same time, since the CEGEPs had eliminated one year of study. In that class, there were anglophone students from other provinces, but the majority came from Quebec, and we all attended classes in English and in French. All of my law books, cases, federal statutes, and the Criminal Code were in both French and English.
When I left university, I went before the courts. You are undoubtedly aware that in Quebec, proceedings are in both French and English, regardless of the situation. Under its constitution, judicial proceedings are bilingual in New Brunswick. At the federal level, the same principle applies. At the Bar, an agreement was signed that allows Quebec lawyers to plead in Ontario in cases that involve federal legislation, such as the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, or the Criminal Code.
The committee would like to see you provide assistance. There seems to be a problem regarding bilingualism within the federal public service. Ms. Faitelson-Weiser said earlier that she went to go to meet a minister in a federal building. She wanted to be able to speak French, but she had to address the employees in English. As you said, Mr. Brennick, people must be sent the message that French is useful.
The situation is such that we must adopt laws that underscore the usefulness of French. In my province, there is Bill 101. The law is being used to impose a language because the situation seems to be deteriorating. Things shouldn't have to go to that extreme. The Official Languages Act was adopted in 1968, and applies to institutions.
Mr. Brennick, you addressed a subject that is particularly compelling for me. You work on both sides. We parliamentarians want to assist linguistic groups living in a minority situation in Quebec. I hope that you are familiar with Quebec, you have travelled there. How can we encourage anglophones to study French, without having to send them to study in an English environment and then lose them? Do you understand what I'm saying? There are 14,000 anglophones in Quebec.
![-](/documentviewer/assets/images/publications/arrow2_up.gif)
Ms. Faitelson-Weiser, what you have been saying corroborates the fact that Canada is a country where francophones are assimilated at a staggering rate as soon as one moves away from Quebec or areas bordering on Quebec. One has only to consider the Franco-Ontarians, the Brayons (the inhabitants of the Madawaska Valley), and the Acadians. Paradoxically, in Western Canada, there are more anglophones learning French than they are young francophones—that is to say, young people whose mother tongue is French—who have the opportunity to learn their own language. For example, throughout Saskatchewan there are eight schools where French is the first language. In a province the size of Algeria, some people do not even have the opportunity to study in their own language, in French. In our country, section 16 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms specifies that French and English are the two official languages. This is a just a put-on; this is not the way things really are. Because I come from Ontario, and because I lived in Saskatchewan for a long time, I became the best sovereignist in the world. The goal is to ensure the existence of a country in North America where we can ensure that the French fact lives on.
Hats off to Mr. Brennick and his organization for the work that they do. From what I gather, Canadian Parents for French is responsible for some of the progress that has been made. I would like to see a 100 per cent improvement, of course, but for the time being, we must encourage the parents of children whose mother tongue is French to register their children in schools where French is the first language.
I am going to ask Mr. Brennick my next question, then I will move on to Ms. Faitelson-Weiser.
Wouldn't you agree that all these efforts to produce bilingual university graduates who can speak English and French well and who are functional enough to join the federal public service should start with the school boards and the education ministries, rather than at the university level?
:
I myself would say that this is everyone's responsibility. Some people within the public education system think that we can do it all. We are involved in the initial stages of development, that is to say we sow the seeds. Yes, this is where it all begins, but we encourage people, we provide the foundation, so to speak. Certainly, people themselves must also accept their share of responsibility.
Earlier, we were talking about standards, and this issue must be very clear. We mentioned the Common European Framework because at the beginning of our late immersion program, we used to issue a certificate with the word “bilingual” on it. Some students went to possible employers and said to them,
[English]
“I'm bilingual. Look, this is what it says.”
[Translation]
But they weren't truly bilingual. We changed the certificate and now it clearly states the person is a graduate of a late immersion program.
Let's talk about the Common European Framework. It shifts the responsibility onto the shoulders of the young people: They say that they want to have a B level of proficiency. What does having a B level mean?
The purpose of this framework is to allow you, as an employer, to know what you can require of a person who has a B level of proficiency. It's better this way, rather than having each person give his own interpretation of what it means. This is an example of what we mean when we talk about standards.
And what about the guidance counsellors in the schools? One of their responsibilities is to share employment information with the students and to let them know what will be available in the future on the job market. Who is requiring knowledge of our languages? Where is the demand? In the final analysis, we all share this responsibility.
I have a short comment and question for Canadian Parents for French.
There are as many Canadians now with a non-official language as their mother tongue as there are francophones living in this country. I think the rapidly changing demographic makeup of this country is something that a lot of people aren't aware of in Ottawa. For example, Chinese is taught as the first language in three of the larger provinces in this country, in Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia.
More worrisome, I think, is that the number of bilingual anglophones aged 15 to 19 has declined precipitously in the last decade, according to Statistics Canada, from about 16% in 1996 to 13% in 2006. These are very disappointing numbers, especially considering that we've had an action plan on official languages, launched by the previous government and continued by the present government, that has poured billions of dollars into trying to raise the profile of both languages, but especially French, in Canada.
My question to you is why are these numbers in decline, specifically the numbers for bilingual anglophones coming out of our education system? Why did the action plan, launched in 2003, not go anywhere in achieving its objective of doubling the number of bilingual students aged 15 to 19?
:
You ask good and difficult questions.
I would like to seat that in a larger context and say that learning is a lifelong activity, and that to expect immediate results would be premature, I think, and would not do service to the intent.
There are a couple of things. One is that you're correct in terms of the changing demographic of our country. We spoke earlier about the allophones and the changing demographic. What we know is that there is tremendous interest in French as a second language on the part of some our non-francophone non-anglophone communities, about which we are very encouraged. We know that is the case in lower mainland B.C., in Toronto, and in some of our larger centres.
Earlier we touched on a piece about the calls on the time and the interest of young people, and we find there are lots of distractions. I think that's in part a response to that. The other piece is the fact--I don't know where it is in the rest of the country, but I know it is so where I live--that we deal with declining enrollment. Whenever we look at the numbers of students, where we are today is not where we were ten years ago. I don't know if it's increasing everywhere, but I think we need to reflect that in terms of....
We are a group of volunteers. I think we need to not forget that. We're people who value and are supportive of opportunities for young Canadians to learn French as a second language, and in many different ways. That is why our involvement is oftentimes with school systems, but oftentimes in providing opportunities outside of schools, such as summer camps, which I mentioned earlier, or agreements we have with universities, with the French embassy.
At the end of the day, the take-up on this is going to be on the part of individuals and families. Ours is one of trying to encourage and say that it's great in our country, given our history, given the universality of having French in the world, and that it's a logical choice for us. We have banded around that wagon and theme. We enjoy the support. We also want to make others aware of the fact that there are many ways to achieve functional bilingualism. We have many hybrids in Canada. We're very proud of our stature worldwide, and we continue to do that.
We know there is a drop. In school systems sometimes, for example, we talk about the drop in social studies programs. We talk about the drop in some other programs that are offered, because people are drawn to math and science. So we ask: what is a balanced education?
It was mentioned earlier about acquiring French before leaving university. There was a time when the educated person, sort of a renaissance person, I suppose, would be one who did have a second language at graduation. But that has changed. What we're trying to do is to stop the tide of devaluing and rather show that there are great and wonderful personal experiences and enrichments developmentally, along with some practical ones in terms of job-related, functional, tangible reasons for one to have a second language.
We stand in front of French as a second language, but we are very supportive within that larger context of a second language.