Accueil
Actualités
La Gazette européenne des langues
Qui sommes-nous ?
Aperçu
Structure du CELV
Etats membres
Représentation des Etats membres
Autorités de nomination nationales
Comité de direction
Points de contact nationaux
Presse et informations
Forum pour le réseau professionnel
Membres
2010 - Fondation
PFN 2011 - réunion
PFN 2012 - réunion
PFN 2013 - réunion
PNF 2014 - réunion
PNF 2015 - réunion
Personnel
Consultants
Contact
Stages au CELV
Send request
Mettre le plurilinguisme en pratique
Thèmes
Aperçu
Competences des enseignants et des apprenants
Langues des signes
Education plurilingue et pluriculturelle
Nouveaux médias dans l'éducation aux langues
Éducation et insertion professionnelle des migrants
Curricula et évaluation
Apprentissage des langues dès le plus jeune âge
Enseignement d’une matière intégré à une langue étrangère
Langues de scolarisation
Programme
Aperçu
Calendrier du CELV
Programme 2024-2027
L'IA pour l’éducation aux langues
Deeper learning in the foreign language classroom: pluriliteracies for global citizenship
Developing competences for democratic culture for young learners through language education
Unlocking educational opportunities in sign languages in Europe
Matériels didactiques EMILE pour développer les compétences-clés du 21e siècle
Favoriser le bien-être plurilingue des enseignant·es de langues
Une boîte à outils pour la mise en œuvre de la didactique intégrée dans l’éducation aux langues
Ressources du CELV pour une culture de la démocratie
Programme 2020-2023
FORMATION ET CONSEIL
Compétences en langues familiales
EMILE dans des langues autres que l’anglais
Boîte à outils pour la mise en œuvre du Volume complémentaire du CECR
Compétences enseignantes pour les approches plurielles
Citoyenneté numérique par la formation en langues
Formation professionnelle transfrontalière
Parcours linguistiques des jeunes enfants
Médiation dans l’enseignement, l’apprentissage et l’évaluation des langues
Blocs modulaires pour une formation enseignante sensible à la dimension linguistique
Initiative : L’avenir de l’éducation aux langues
Groupe de réflexion : Compétences transversales
Summer academy
Programme 2016-2019
Programme 2012-2015
Programme 2008-2011
Programme 2004-2007
Programme 2000-2003
Gestion de projet
Formation et conseil
Aperçu
Langue de scolarisation et apprentissages disciplinaires
Les approches plurielles des langues et des cultures (CARAP)
Promouvoir la/les langue(s) de scolarisation (FEUILLE DE ROUTE)
Environnements d’apprentissage optimisés pour et par les langues vivantes (EOL)
Les TIC dans l’enseignement et l’apprentissage des langues (ICT-REV)
Communautés de recherche-action (ARC)
Une éducation de qualité pour le romani (QualiRom)
La langue pour le travail
EMILE et au-délà (plurilittératies)
Compétences enseignantes pour les langues dans l'éducation
Jeunes migrants - Valoriser les classes multilingues
Tester et évaluer - Relier les curricula, les tests et les examens de langues au CECR
Coopération CE
Ressources
Ressources du CELV
Glossaires du CELV
Webinaires du CELV
Experts en langues du CELV
Calendrier international
Ajouter un événement
Catalogue en ligne
La collection John Trim
Articles publiés sur le CELV
Malle aux trésors
Language associations
Nouvelles versions linguistiques
Supporting the linguistic integration of refugees from the Ukraine
Council of Europe recommendation
en
fr
de
Accueil
>
Programme
>
Programme 2012-2015
>
LACS
>
Q6
Using ECML resources in different contexts
Guidelines and practical examples
How do projects relate to existing priorities and developments?
How can a project be used on a stand-alone basis or be integrated into other activities?
Which aspects of an activity or project might be used? Which might need to be adapted first?
How might implementation take place? How might it be carried out in stages?
What is the potential impact of a project?
How might this be assessed/ evaluated?
What possible challenges might we face?
How might we address them?
How can project outcomes be mediated and/or communicated with others?
What possible challenges might we face? How might we address them?
Lack of support for teachers in view of:
- motivation
- time
- technical support
- funding
- lack of understanding from the authorities
Complementing the ECML publication European Portfolio for Student Teachers of Languages (
EPOSTL
), a set of tools is available to facilitate the implementation of the EPOSTL in teacher education, including the challenges faced and ways of overcoming them. In the first
video
, David Newby presents these tools, which can be found on the
EPOSTL2
website.
An Irish participant in
CEF-ESTIM
(
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages - level estimation grid for teachers
) revealed that the main challenges included teachers' attitudes towards the CEFR in an exam dominated system which is not yet aligned to the CEFR, and lack of collaboration between teacher educators from different universities.
These had been addressed through the following:
(1) developing contacts between language teacher educators through the new national forum for languages (One Voice for languages)
(2) emphasising the advantages of the CEFR "can do" approach as complementary to the new national curricular emphasis on 'key skills'.
What is CEF-ESTIM? See here for a short
video description
.
Challenges in implementing
DOTS
(
Developing Online Teaching Skills
) in Bosnia-Herzegovina include:
•
Low level of ICT knowledge;
•
Lack of technical support (rooms, materials and skilled people, e.g. ICT technicians).
Suggestions made to address the problems:
•
Involving ICT teachers in the project;
•
Convincing the principals about the usefulness of the projects for the whole school;
•
Presenting to the principals an effective way of how to equip the school;
•
Convincing the financing authority about the benefits of the project.
Some of the
materials
available on the website can support these actions.
The challenges of using
EPOSTL
(
Using the European Portfolio for Student Teachers of Languages
) in a teacher education programme in the Czech Republic can be found
here
(page 19).
Sometimes teachers are interested in developing a project in a context where they are the only ones convinced of its value. Here is an example of one such teacher of English in a school that was interested in developing portfolio approaches across the curriculum but was not using the
ELP
on a whole-school basis. The teacher interviewed was herself using the ELP, but she was an exception. She used „I can‟ checklists to make comparisons between English and German in classes where pupils were learning both languages. She identified a number of problems in the school’s use of portfolios, including lack of coordination and lack of training/support for teachers. She also mentioned that some of the older pupils could see no point in working with a portfolio because it had no official status and thus could not be used to support their progress from one educational level to the next. This
ELP-WSU
(
The European Language Portfolio in whole-school use
)
case study
from the Czech Republic showed how she managed to use part of the ELP whilst also raising some awareness of it in the school.
One challenge is shortage of funds, but this does not mean that nothing can be achieved; it may be that changes need to be more gradual, with small steps and over a longer period, and that partial success needs to be appreciated. In this case study from Iceland, the school’s application for funding to support its whole-school ELP project was rejected. It made sense to proceed on a voluntary basis, however, because there is a close connection between the ELP and the new curriculum. Also, teachers who had already worked with the ELP were keen to promote its use across the school. Using selected parts of the Icelandic ELP for learners in upper secondary education, the project had two principal aims: (i) to introduce the ELP to teachers who had not already worked with it, and (ii) to encourage teachers who were already familiar with the ELP to use it more extensively. In both cases the intention was to take small steps that over time would lead to full implementation of the ELP. Two teachers sought their students’ opinions on working with the ELP. Although a few students were unenthusiastic, most of them acknowledged the advantages of peer and self-assessment based on the ELP checklists. At the end of the reporting period the co-ordinator judged that the project had been a modest success and was confident that use of the ELP would continue. See Icelandic
ELP-WSU
(
The European Language Portfolio in whole-school use
)
case study
.
A similar challenge with regard to official funding was faced in this
ELP-WSU
(
The European Language Portfolio in whole-school use
)
case study in Lithuania. Here alternative sources of funding were obtained. The project originally hoped to develop and pilot a version of the ELP for use in Lithuanian primary schools, involving teachers of English, German and French. When lack of funding made this impossible, the Lithuanian Association of Teachers of English (
LAKMA
) agreed to support the project in developing and piloting ELP-related approaches to the teaching of English at primary level. Project events were supported by Vilnius Pedagogical University. The project had three principal pedagogical aims: to foster the development of learner autonomy, to make learners aware of their plurilingual repertoires, and to explore the intercultural dimension of language learning. By the end of the reporting period the project had produced and piloted a range of portfolio activities for Grades 2–4, some hints for teachers, and an inventory of ‘I can’ descriptors. Project meetings allowed participating teachers to share their experience and discuss some of the practical questions posed by portfolio learning. See Lithuanian
case study
.