« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
NATIONAL 'ENGLISH FOR SPEAKERS OF OTHER LANGUAGES' (ESOL) STRATEGY
MAPPING EXERCISE AND SCOPING STUDY
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
ESOL RESEARCH IN SCOTLAND
1.1 ESOL in Scotland has been little studied. The "Glasgow ESOL 2000 Survey Report" (Irvine and Rice, 2000) gives a brief overview of the development of ESOL, from ad hoc schemes largely based in community organisations and often staffed by volunteers in the 1960s and 1970s to more formal provision run by Further Education Colleges in the 1990s. A parallel curricular change evolved, from a focus on "survival English", which for many carried implications of limited horizons for ESOL learners, to a focus on English language as an access route into mainstream education or employment (Irvine and Rice, 2000).
1.2 In a Scotland-wide study of ESOL provision in 80 voluntary and statutory institutions Weir and Matheson (1989) concluded that ESOL learners were poorly served by available examinations (a necessary concomitant of access into mainstream education), even where these were on offer, and that linking ESOL with ABE (Adult Basic Education) was often more problematic than helpful.
1.3 By the 21 st century, in spite of expanded provision in the FE sector, ESOL was still lacking a co-ordinated strategy at national and local level. A multiplicity of agencies offered classes, differing widely in resourcing. While in Edinburgh, home tuition, community and college classes run by Stevenson College have long been co-ordinated, in Glasgow both learners and teachers were more often ignorant of the range of classes and tuition on offer (Irvine and Rice, 2000). The Glasgow ESOL 2000 Survey Report found considerable evidence of demand among learners for more and smaller classes (especially in FE Colleges) and easier access to mainstream education, even at low levels of English proficiency.
1.4 ESOL teachers, paid and volunteer, are today more likely to have had training and/or qualifications than 20 years ago. In-service and continuing Professional Development (CPD), particularly related to the specific needs of asylum-seekers and refugees is still inadequate for this growing and constantly changing subject (Irvine and Rice 2000).
RECENT CHANGES IN ESOL
1.5 ESOL provision in Scotland has undergone some of the most significant changes in its history in the last few years. A significant influx of asylum seekers, primarily resettled in Glasgow, and an increase in migrant workers from non-English speaking countries have completely changed both the character and the prominence of ESOL. Moreover, across Scotland, existing provision is expanding, largely funded by local authorities (e.g. Fife ESOL Service): with more classes, delivered by more trained teachers.
1.6 In Glasgow FE Colleges, up to 80% of students in ESOL classes may be asylum-seekers. This has meant that EFL/ESOL departments (often set up to attract fee-payers into Colleges) do not have sufficient resources to run enough classes for asylum-seekers, resulting in waiting lists. At the same time, learners who can enrol are able to attend full-time where in the recent past part-time provision was almost universal.
Other sites are also overstretched. At the Dungavel Immigration Removal Centre, for example, while accredited vocational courses leading to SQA certificates were on offer to adult inmates with sufficient English, the 2003 HMIE Report observed that "[staffing] in English language teaching was insufficient to cope with high numbers of learners who were at an early stage in learning English.".
1.7 As the 2003 "Scottish Refugee Integration Forum Action Plan" notes,
"...there is an urgent need for adequate resources to be made available to support the provision of English language tuition (both on a stand-alone basis and in conjunction with vocational courses) for those asylum seekers and refugees who require it…Given the current zero growth in overall funding for further education, this will require the Scottish Executive to provide additional monies to colleges to support this work. The increased resources will be required not only in teaching, but also in support services and childcare."
Since 2001, the Scottish Executive has started to fund ESOL provision, including ESOL literacy provision, via Communities Scotland's Learning Connections and Literacies partnerships. In addition, the Executive has, over the period 2003-2006, committed an additional £1.7m annually to meet the demand for more ESOL in Scottish FE colleges, particularly in Glasgow. This has subsequently increased to £2m in 2004-06. Furthermore, the Executive has also funded a new Professional Development Award in Teaching Adult ESOL Literacies aimed at qualified teachers and developed by the Glasgow ESOL Forum. This award was prompted by recommendations in the Glasgow ESOL Survey Report (Irvine and Rice 2000) and follows a national consultation conducted by the Glasgow ESOL Forum in 2003.
1.8 The last few years have also seen a change in the perceived nature and status of ESOL within education in the UK as a whole. The term itself is replacing EFL (English as a foreign language) and ELT (English language teaching) in titles of departments and names of examinations (e.g. Cambridge ESOL). Asylum-seekers and refugees have raised the salience of English language teaching for migrants. More recently, English language requirements for applicants for citizenship - demand is as yet unknown - are likely to have an impact both on numbers of learners being assessed and on numbers in classes as well as on the syllabus for these classes. These trends may however not yet stretch to appreciation of the situation of ESOL learners themselves.
1.9 The number of migrant workers from EU Accession States arriving in the UK is expected to increase, which may place further burdens on the existing infrastructure. Refugee resettlement, directed by government agencies, has had most significant impact on Glasgow, less so on Edinburgh and relatively little elsewhere. Future arrivals may choose other cities and towns to settle in, perhaps temporarily. The character of the demand is likely therefore to change yet again.
KEY ISSUES FOR ESOL IN SCOTLAND
1.10 The following have been identified as representing the key issues for ESOL in Scotland and, therefore, represent the main areas covered in the current study:
COVERAGE: current and future needs for coverage (geographical, gender, level of ability)
QUALITY OF PROVISION: the kinds of classes that are needed; teaching and learning resources most appropriate for ESOL learners; the level of training and development teachers require to prepare for the specific requirements of ESOL learners.
LEARNER NEEDS: the learners' needs as perceived by themselves, their teachers and other stakeholders, including the wider community.
TEACHER NEEDS: the specific training and CPD needs of teachers involved in ESOL; the extent to which teachers are and should be concerned with welfare, race and cultural issues in connection with their students, and the kind of preparation they need for coping with these issues.
FUNDING: types and levels of funding that are available, funding to sustain provision, and respond to changing demand.
SUSTAINABILITY : structuring provision across Scotland to ensure flexibility and sustainability in the face of predictable and unpredictable change: future arrivals, such as migrant workers from EU Accession States or refugees from new conflict zones; political changes such as the Government's plans for English tests for naturalization.
ROUTES TO EMPLOYMENT AND/OR FURTHER AND HIGHER EDUCATION: the assistance learners get and what they need in order to be eligible for further and higher education and training, or to enter the labour market (at the point they may have left it in their country of origin).
ASSESSMENT: appropriate assessment instruments and their availability.
METHODOLOGY
1.11 The research methodology involved data and other evidence gathering from four main sources:
- Retrieval and analysis of national data from secondary sources (e.g. 2001 Census)
- Quantitative analysis of questionnaires surveying samples of learners, "non-learners" 1 and teachers in four cluster areas: Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen and Dumfriesshire.
- Analysis of qualitative data from interviews and focus groups involving stakeholders, learners and teachers in the cluster areas.
- Investigation of secondary sources dealing with relevant issues and with the experience of other countries with comparable ESOL learning profiles.
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH
1.12 Secondary sources, including SFEFC returns, data from Community Learning partnerships and data from voluntary agencies, were accessed to map the number and level of classes across Scotland, where they take place and the number of enrolments. The 2001 Census was also examined to determine areas of settlement by ethnic minority and, as far as possible, asylum seeker and refugee communities.
1.13 The research tool for the primary quantitative research was the survey questionnaire. Teacher and Learner questionnaires were devised and piloted in Dundee in May 2004. Highly structured self-completion questionnaires (utilising closed questions with Likert scales) were sent out to FE Colleges and CE and Voluntary Centres for approximately 4,500 learners and over 300 teachers in 2 population clusters in the Central Belt - in and around Glasgow (including Lanarkshire, Renfrewshire and Dunbartonshire); in and around Edinburgh (including Fife and the Lothians); and two areas outwith the Central Belt, Aberdeenshire and Dumfriesshire. Most questionnaires were mailed in the first two weeks of June, although some were sent out as late as July, as a few classes were found to be running over the summer. Every effort was made to ensure that the questionnaires reached every type of ESOL class. Each site was requested to administer the questionnaire to 2-5 classes (representing different levels of proficiency, from beginner to advanced. As was expected, tracing learners in less formal (e.g. voluntary) settings was difficult and while strenuous attempts were made to identify such learners and their teachers, it is likely that these classes and their students are underrepresented in the final data.
1.14 Translations were included, along with protocols for teachers for the administration of the questionnaires in class time. Learner questionnaires were administered via class teachers, as the most efficient method 2, although measures were taken to ensure that response bias was minimised (e.g. via "interference" by teachers). In an accompanying letter there was a brief explanation of the purpose of the questionnaire. Assurances about anonymity and confidentiality were included in the letters. In addition respondents were asked to place their completed questionnaires in sealed envelopes, which were then placed in sealed bags or boxes (this procedure overseen by a college/centre administrator or other third party).
1.15 The response rate from the learner questionnaire was 37.4%. The method of distribution precluded sampling of the population. The timing of the Survey meant that questionnaires were sent to Centres in early to mid June 2004, so near the end of term for most institutions. Consequently, attendance at many classes was relatively low. In addition, beginners' classes found the 4-page questionnaire challenging, and some took an hour to complete it. There were delays in sending out some translations, and the questionnaire was translated into only 7 main languages (Chinese, Bengali, Turkish, Hindi, Urdu, Arabic and French). This has undoubtedly resulted in the under-representation of beginner level students in the data.
1.16 Biographical data was collected from this questionnaire as well as data on countries of origin and first languages, educational background and first language literacy, and length of English language learning. It also sought to uncover issues of concern to learners and non-learners, from opinions about the quality and availability of provision and their experience of obstacles to language learning to their own future plans and aspirations.
1.17 The teacher questionnaire was distributed to all ESOL teachers (paid and volunteer) at each site in the cluster areas at the same time. In an accompanying letter there was an explanation of the purpose of the questionnaire. Assurances about anonymity and confidentiality were included in the letters. Respondents were provided with stamped addressed envelopes so that they could post completed questionnaires directly to the research team.
1.18 The response rate for this questionnaire was 48.1%. Data was collected on teaching (and other) qualifications, length and nature of teaching experience (ESOL, EFL and other) and on teachers' current responsibilities. It further questioned teachers about their learners' needs, their own needs and other aspects of ESOL learning and teaching in Scotland.
1.19 A very small number of non-learners - non-native speakers of English who do not attend classes - were also surveyed with a short questionnaire. This questionnaire was distributed via Jobcentreplus in Glasgow (Springburn). Non-learners could more easily have been contacted via learners, but it was decided that this could produce very unreliable results. The small number of respondents precluded statistical analysis.
1.20 College and Centre ESOL Managers were sent an online questionnaire which aimed to collect data on numbers of students enrolled, types of courses and classes, numbers of students entered for the main ESOL examinations, staff and their qualifications, and funding. The response rate to this questionnaire was high - at 67%.
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
1.21 Qualitative data was collected via interviews with stakeholders and with classroom teachers, and from five focus groups held in Glasgow (Cardonald and Food Technology Colleges), Edinburgh (Stevenson College Community-based ESL at Duncan Place Resource Centre), Aberdeen (Linksfield Community Centre) and Dumfries (Troqueer Parish Hall). In all, 32 students took part in these discussions. CE focus groups were conducted in class time (with the teacher absent). In the FE colleges, where classes were too big to be used effectively as focus groups, we were reliant on students volunteering to attend in their own time. Participants in focus groups could not, therefore, be selected in advance. However, the Aberdeen group, all Chinese, included beginners and intermediate students and an interpreter was employed for this group; the Cardonald and Food Technology groups were mainly advanced, while the Dumfries and Edinburgh groups (the largest) included upper-intermediate to advanced, with some lower-level students. There were refugees and asylum-seekers represented in the Glasgow and Edinburgh groups.
1.22 Interviews with stakeholders - such as the Scottish Qualifications Authority, the Scottish Refugee Council, Race Equality Councils, voluntary organisations and with ESOL managers - were held throughout the survey period, in order to discuss wider issues such as employment, funding and policy. The majority of these were conducted by telephone mainly but not exclusively in the cluster areas and involved ESOL managers in educational institutions with considerable ESOL numbers, experienced ESOL practitioners (including teacher organisations such as the Glasgow ESOL Forum) and other stakeholders.
1.23 Thirteen teachers were interviewed (mainly by phone) on issues including teaching resources, assessment and professional training. These teachers represented the full range of professionals currently working in Scottish ESOL: highly qualified and experienced teachers, volunteers, adult literacy tutors without ESOL qualifications and younger teachers with minimum qualifications.
ANALYSIS OF DATA
1.24 Statistical data was collated and analysed using the SPSS statistical software package and frequency and cross-tabulation data produced. Focus group discussions were recorded and partially transcribed. Most teacher and stakeholder interviews were conducted by telephone, and notes taken. Some were recorded in face-to-face interviews. All the qualitative data was used to derive individual opinions and experiences, many of which are included in this Report.
« Previous | Contents | Next »