An additional part or version of this document is available.

CM(2008)64addrevE  / 23 June 2008 

Ministers’ Deputies
CM Documents

CM(2008)64 23 April 20081
——————————————

1029 Meeting, 11 June 2008
7 Education and culture


7.2 Steering Committee for Education (CDED)

a. Abridged Report of the 7th plenary meeting (Strasbourg, 10-12 March 2008)
b. Draft Recommendation CM/Rec(2008)…of the Committee of Ministers to member states
on the use of the Council of Europe’s Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) and the promotion of plurilingualism
c. Draft Terms of Reference of the Ad hoc Advisory Group on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights (ED-EDCHR)
d. Draft Terms of Reference of the Ad hoc Advisory Group on History Teaching (ED-HIST)
e. Draft Terms of Reference of the European Language Portfolio Validation Committee (ED-EVC)

Item to be prepared by the GR-C
——————————————

1. The 7th annual plenary session of the Steering Committee for Education (CDED) was held at Council of Europe headquarters in Strasbourg from 10 to 12 March 2008 with Mr César Bîrzéa (Romania) in the Chair. Forty-five delegations from States Parties to the European Cultural Convention participated in it. The CDED adopted its agenda as set out in Appendix 1. The list of participants can be obtained from the Secretariat. This abridged report contains a list of the items discussed and decisions taken at the meeting.

Statements by the Chair and the Secretariat

2. The CDED noted with interest the statement by the Chair concerning his participation in:

- the intersectoral meeting organised by the Secretary General as part of the Council of Europe’s activities in the fight against terrorism (Strasbourg, April 2007);
- the 22nd session of the Council of Europe Conference of Ministers of Education (Istanbul, May 2007);
- the meeting of a group of experts on the relaunch of activities relating to media education (Strasbourg, June 2007);
- the meeting of the European Union’s Education Committee (Dresden, June 2007);
- the conference jointly organised with UNESCO on the education of Roma children (Paris, September 2007);
- the debate organised by the Co-ordinator for Intercultural Dialogue, Ms Gabriella Battaini-Dragoni, Director General, in September concerning the White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue (Strasbourg, September 2007);
- the regional conference organised by the Latvian National Commission for UNESCO, on inclusive education (Riga, February 2008).

3. The CDED noted with interest the statement by Mr Gabriele Mazza, Director of School, Out-of-School and Higher Education, concerning:

    - The increased importance of activities relating to Intercultural Dialogue, which was currently a cross-sectoral theme in the Council of Europe’s intergovernmental programme.
    - The reorganisation of the programme of activities for the period 2010-2014. The new programme, like previous ones, would have to be consistent with the Organisation’s priority objectives while demonstrating more clearly and explicitly its added value;
    - The recent reorganisation of the Secretariat and the placing of the Secretariat of the Charter for Regional or Minority Languages under the responsibility of the Directorate of Education. This should create new synergies in work on the development of language policies.

Texts of the Committee of Ministers and the Parliamentary Assembly

4. The CDED took note of the renewal of its terms of reference for the period 2008-2009 by the Committee of Ministers and the adoption by the Ministers’ Deputies of Recommendation CM/Rec(2007)13 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on gender mainstreaming in education. It decided to give a concrete follow-up to the principles of the recommendation by incorporating them into its programme of activities and in particular in its future projects.

5. The CDED took note of the adoption by the Ministers’ Deputies of Recommendation CM/Rec(2008)4 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on strengthening the integration of children of migrants and of immigrant background. The CDED pointed out that issues relating to improved integration of children of migrants in school systems formed part of several projects in its programme of activities.

6. The CDED took note of the adoption by the Ministers’ Deputies of Recommendation CM/Rec(2008)5 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on policies for Roma and/or travellers in Europe and asked for further co-operation with the CDMG on this topic.

22nd session of the Standing Conference of European Ministers of Education, Istanbul, 4-5 May 2007

7. The CDED took note of the Secretariat report on the results of the 22nd Session of the Standing Conference of Ministers of Education, held in Istanbul from 4 to 5 May 2007, and in particular the final declaration on “Building a more humane and inclusive Europe: the role of education policies”, and the resolutions relating to the programme of activities. The CDED thanked the Turkish authorities for their hospitality and for the excellent organisation of the ministerial session and took note of the Ministers’ decision to hold the next ministerial session in 2010 in Ljubljana at the invitation of the Slovenian authorities.

5th Prague Forum 20-22 November 2008

8. The CDED considered the preliminary draft programme of the 5th Prague Forum which will focus on “The Right to quality Education” and will be organised in Prague at the invitation of the Czech authorities from 20 to 22 November 2008.

Implementation of the 2007 Programme of Activities

Project: “Education for democratic citizenship and Human Rights”

9. The CDED took note of information on the progress of the project in 2007 and of the main activities scheduled for 2008, in particular the preparation of core competences for teachers in EDC/HRE. The results of the feasibility study on a framework policy document on education for democratic citizenship and human rights education were discussed. The CDED emphasised the importance of such a policy framework document for consolidating the project’s impact in the member states, ensuring sustainability of results and bridging the gap between the theory and practice of the learning of democracy and human rights in the school environment. The CDED decided to continue the debate on the framework policy document by preparing a draft document comprising two variants: one binding, the other not and taking into account, when drafting the document, the work going on in the Ad hoc Advisory Group on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights (ED-EDCHR). The CDED mandated its Bureau to continue the discussions in order to finalise the draft documents and submit them to the CDED members by the end of 2008 for consideration and then at the March plenary session in 2009.

10. The CDED decided to renew the group’s terms of reference as set out in Appendix 2 in order to carry out the last phase of the project in the period January 2009-June 2010, subject to their final adoption by the Committee of Ministers.

Project: “Policies and practices for teaching sociocultural diversity”

11. The CDED took note of the progress of work on the project, of the main results obtained in 2007 and of the aims and timetable of activities for 2008. The CDED noted in particular the group’s activities to develop a competencies framework for young teachers to help them to manage and enhance sociocultural diversity.

Project: “Education of Roma children in Europe”

12. The CDED took note of the progress of work on the project and welcomed the establishment of closer co-operation with the partner international organisations. The CDED noted with satisfaction the “Roma remembrance” activities, and in particular the launch of the Council of Europe/OSCE website devoted to this theme.

Project: “Day of Remembrance of the Holocaust and for the prevention of crimes against humanity”

13. When reviewing the progress of this project the CDED wished to stress the educational importance of the project activities in the member states, particularly in the history teaching and teacher training field. The CDED welcomed the co-operation established by the Secretariat with other organisations working in this field, in particular, the Task Force on the Holocaust. The CDED noted that the 4th ministerial seminar “Teaching remembrance: for a Europe of freedom and rule of law” was to be held in Nuremberg from 5 to 7 November 2008 at the invitation of the German authorities.

“Pestalozzi” Programme for teacher trainers and education professionals

14. When reviewing the progress report of this programme the CDED stressed the importance of strengthening the programme as an essential tool for translating the Council of Europe’s values and standards into practice. The CDED welcomed the main conclusions of the evaluation of the pilot phase of the European Modules for trainer training and of the 12th Plenary Meeting of National Liaison Officers. The CDED approved several recommendations for short-term adaptations of the programme.

Project: “The Image of the Other in History Teaching”

15. The CDED took note of the main results obtained in 2007, as well as of the main lines of work for 2008 and noted with interest the Declaration adopted at the Symposium on “Learning history to understand and experience cultural diversity today” (Strasbourg, 29-30 October 2007). The CDED approved the renewal of the terms of reference of the ad hoc advisory group on history teaching (ED-HIST) as set out in
Appendix 3, subject to their final adoption by the Committee of Ministers.

Project: “Language Policies for Democratic Citizenship and Social Inclusion”

16. The CDED approved Ukraine’s application for a Language Education Policy Profile (16th application) and took note of the progress of the project and in particular of the following activities: the “Languages of School Education”, the “Manual for relating language examinations to the CEFR”, the “Autobiography of Intercultural Encounters”, the “Language education policy for adult migrants” and the Curriculum Framework for Romani.

17. The CDED approved draft Recommendation CM/Rec(2008)… of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the use of the Council of Europe’s Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) and the promotion of plurilingualism as set out at Appendix 4 and decided to forward it to the Committee of Ministers for adoption. It also took note of the Explanatory Memorandum of the draft recommendation as set out in document CM(2008)64 add and decided to forward it to the Committee of Ministers so that it could take note of it.

18. The CDED examined and approved the new proposals for the development of the “European Language Portfolio” (ELP) project outlined in the document “The European Language Portfolio: towards a strategy for the future” as set out in Appendix 5 and decided to forward it to the Committee of Ministers for information.

19. The CDED approved the renewal of the terms of reference of ED-EVC for the period 2009-2010 as set out in Appendix 6 subject to their final adoption by the Committee of Ministers.

20. The CDED took note of the information provided by the Secretariat of the European Centre for Modern Languages concerning the objectives of the centre’s 3rd medium-term programme and the implementation of tools developed within the CDED programme.

European Resource Centre on education for intercultural understanding democratic citizenship and human rights2

21. The CDED welcomed the Norwegian initiative in establishing a European Resource Centre on education for democratic citizenship and intercultural understanding, which will co-operate closely with the Council of Europe. The CDED stressed that the centre’s future activity programme should complement the current activity programme of the Council of Europe’s education sector and reflect an added value in relation to it. It expressed the wish that the centre would preserve the multilateral character of co-operation and create real possibilities of participation for all the Council of Europe member states.

Intercultural Education and Exchanges - A conceptual framework

22. The CDED took note of the results of the work by the group of experts on the development of a conceptual framework on intercultural education and exchanges and decided to continue this work.

Co-operation with other bodies of the Council of Europe, other international organisations and observers

23. The CDED took note of the information provided by the Secretariat on the main outcomes of the work programme of CDESR.

24. The CDED took note of the presentation by the Secretariat of the North-South Centre of the present state of its work on global education, and in particular the guidelines on global education which have just been finalized. The committee supported the proposal to launch a process aiming at preparing a Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers on global education, on the basis of the principles contained in the Maastricht Conference declaration and the concrete orientations presented in the North-South Centre guidelines on this subject.

Election

25. The CDED proceeded to the partial renewal of its Bureau. It re-elected Mr César Bîrzéa as Chair, for the 2008-2009 period, Ms Roy Chourdaki as Vice-Chair, for the 2008-2009 period and Mr Jorma Kauppinen as member of the Bureau, for the 2008-2010 period.

Dates of meetings of Bureau and of the 8th plenary session of the Steering Committee for Education

26. The CDED decided to hold its 8th plenary session from 18 to 20 March 2009 and noted that the 13th and 14th meetings of its Bureau will be held from 15 to 16 September and from 11 to 12 December, 2008.

Any other business – Working Group discussions

27. The CDED held informal discussions in three working groups on the following topics:

      · New programme 2009-2014: How to strengthen the “Education Programme” with a view to achieving the objectives of the organisation;
      · Evaluation of projects and programs: How to improve the impact of projects and programmes;
      · Implementation of the results of projects and programmes: What are the implications for member states?

28. During the group discussions, the CDED members stressed the key role played by education in the consolidation of democratic societies and the rule of law and insisted that the positive role education can play in the framework of democratic functioning of European societies and the development of sustainable democratic systems must be clearly recognised, supported and introduced as an integral part of the programme of activities of the Council of Europe.

29. The CDED welcomed the active participation of all members of the CDED during the group discussions and made recommendations about increased involvement of all the representatives of states in the initiation and development of new projects of the programme of activities.

30. The CDED requested that in major projects and multilateral programmes, separate components be devoted to the specific needs of certain member states, and assist them in their reforms.

31. It called for the strengthening of communication links between the Secretariat and representatives of the member states throughout the year. Furthermore, the CDED expressed the wish to see a reform of the form and content of reports of activities, as well as the reorganisation of the website of the Directorate of Education and its restricted site and asked that adequate resources be devoted to the work of dissemination, translation and publication of results of activities in the member states.

Appendix 1

Agenda

1. Opening of the meeting

2. Adoption of the agenda

3. Statements by the Chair and the Secretariat

4. Texts of the Committee of Ministers and the Parliamentary Assembly

5. 22nd session of the Council of Europe Conference of Ministers of Education, Istanbul, 4-5 May 2007

6. 5th Prague Forum

7. Implementation of the 2007 Programme of Activities

7.1. Project: “Education for democratic citizenship and Human Rights”

7.2. Project: “Policies and practices for teaching sociocultural diversity”

7.3. Project: “Education of Roma children in Europe”

7.4. Project: “Day of Remembrance of the Holocaust and for the prevention of crimes against humanity”

7.5. “Pestalozzi” Programme for teacher trainers and education professionals

7.6. Project: “The Image of the Other in History Teaching”

7.7. Project: “Language Policies for Democratic Citizenship and Social Inclusion”

7.7.1. Draft Recommendation CM/Rec(2008)… on the use of the Council of Europe’s Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) and the promotion of plurilingualism

7.8. European Resource Centre on education for democratic citizenship and intercultural understanding

7.9 Intercultural education and exchanges – A conceptual framework

8. Co-operation with other bodies of the Council of Europe, other international organisations and observers

8.1. Co-operation with the CDESR

8.2. Co-operation with the European Centre for Global Interdependence and Solidarity – North-South Centre

9. Election

10. Dates of meetings of Bureau and of the 8th plenary session of the Steering Committee for Education

11. Any other business: Working Group discussions

12. Adoption of decisions

Appendix 2

Draft terms of reference of the Ad hoc Advisory Group on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights (ED-EDCHR)

« Fact sheet »

Name of Group:

Ad hoc Advisory Group on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights (ED-EDCHR)

Conformity with Resolution
Res(2005)47:

YES

Programme of Activities: Project(s)

2002/DG4/94 – “Linking policy and practice in citizenship and human rights education”

Project relevance:

1. Summit Action Plan Chapter:
III – Building a more humane and inclusive Europe, 3. Education: promoting democratic citizenship in Europe.
2. Contribution to core values:
The aim of the project is to promote human rights, participative democracy and the rule of law through education.
3. Committee of Ministers’ decisions.
4. Consolidation, promotion, implementation of Council of Europe standards:

    § Follow up to the CM Recommendation Rec (2002) 12 on Education for Democratic Citizenship;
    § Follow up to the CM Recommendation R (85) 7 on teaching and learning about human rights in schools;
    § The project contributes to the effective implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights and other Council of Europe instruments by promoting culture of human rights and democracy.

5. Relevance to Council of Europe country strategies and country-specific needs:

    § Bilateral programmes are run in Bosnia and Herzegovina and UNMIK/Kosovo;
    § Ad hoc bilateral and regional initiatives are supported upon request (e.g., South East Europe network, Baltic and Black Sea countries network, Nordic countries network, Project on Quality Assurance in Education for Democratic Citizenship in Ukraine).

6. Timeliness of project(s):

    § Information received from EDC/HRE coordinators in December 2007 shows that the Council of Europe EDC/HRE Project has had considerable impact in more than one third of member states, and that sustainability is increasing through introduction of legislative and curricular reforms. Further support is required to build on this acquis;
    § The EDC/HRE Programme “Learning and living Democracy for All” 2006-2009 is a European contribution to the UN First Phase of the World Programme for Human Rights Education (2005-2009).

Project added value:

1. Council of Europe as leading agency, most important facilitator in this field:
With its 11 years of experience in EDC/HRE and with its excellence in the field of democracy and human rights the Council of Europe is the best placed for a leading role in EDC/HRE. This has been recognised by other organisations, and this recognition was clearly demonstrated at the Regional European Meeting on the World Programme for Human Rights Education jointly organised by UNHCHR, UNESCO, OSCE/ODIHR and the Council of Europe in Strasbourg on 5-6 November 2007.

 

2. Project covering ‘new ground’:
Citizenship and human rights education is still a relatively new area and the Council of Europe has played a pioneering role in this field so far.
3. Strong opportunities of partnerships with other international organisations:
The Council of Europe has been asked by UNESCO and UNHCHR to co-ordinate the World Programme on Human Rights Education at the European level. A project on indicators for active citizenship and education and training for active citizenship is run currently in co-operation with the European Commission. Co-operation with the OSCE/ODIHR has been developed.
4. Reasons for entrusting the Group with these terms of reference:

    § There is a need for specific expertise in EDC/HRE, especially considering the innovating character of the project;
    § Interdisciplinary nature of the project (specialists in the field of youth, social cohesion and higher education are invited with voting rights);
    § The tasks described in the terms of reference are time-consuming and cannot be dealt with within the timeframe of the Steering Committee for Education.

Financial information:

Two annual meetings of the Group (10 participants) immediately preceded by a Bureau meeting (3 members).

Annual budget: € 28 900, of which € 18 200 for reimbursement of participation in meetings; € 7 600 for interpretation; € 3 000 for translation and € 100 for document production.

Draft terms of reference of the Ad hoc Advisory Group on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights (ED-EDCHR)

    1. Name of Group: Ad hoc Advisory Group on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights (ED-EDCHR)

    2. Type of Group: Ad hoc Advisory Group

    3. Source of terms of reference: Committee of Ministers, following a proposal of the Steering Committee for Education (CDED)

4. Terms of reference:

      With regard to:

      - the Declaration and the Action Plan of the Council of Europe Third Summit of Heads of State and Government (Warsaw, May 2005) and in particular the chapter 3.3. – Education: promoting democratic citizenship in Europe;

      - the Declaration of the 21st Session of the Conference of European Ministers of Education (Athens, November 2003);

      - the Action Plan of the United Nations on Human Rights Education (2005-2009) and the United Nations Decade of education for sustainable development (2005-2014);

      - Recommendation Rec(2002)12 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on Education for Democratic Citizenship;

      Under the authority of the Steering Committee for Education (CDED) and in relation with the implementation of Project 2002/DG4/94 “Linking policy and practice in citizenship and human rights education” from the Programme of Activities, the Group is instructed to:

i. advise the Steering Committee for Education and the Secretariat on the implementation of its Programme of Activities 2006-2009 on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights “Living and learning democracy for all” and oversee the preparation and implementation of the activities organised in this framework;

ii. make proposals on activities to be carried out within this programme, bearing in mind the work already accomplished in this field and taking into account the results of the European Year of Citizenship through Education as well as the aims and objectives set out in the Programme EDC/HRE 2006-2009;

iii. propose activities to be organised in co-operation with the European Commission, the relevant international organisations, such as UNESCO, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, OSCE-ODIHR and OECD, and international NGOs;

iv. when requested, advise and, where appropriate, assist member states regarding the implementation of EDC/HRE policies and co-operate in this connection with the network of Council of Europe EDC/HRE co-ordinators;

v. carry out an evaluation of the work done before the end of 2008 under the Programme EDC/HRE 2006-2009 and advise the CDED on how it should be continued.

5. Composition of the Group:

5.A Members

i. The Group shall be composed of 2 members of the Steering Committee for Education (CDED) and 8 specialists from the following sectors, to be appointed by the Secretary General:

      - 5 specialists in education for democratic citizenship and human rights;
      - 1 specialist in policies for social cohesion;
      - 1 specialist in higher education and research;
      - 1 specialist in youth policies.

ii. The Council of Europe budget will cover their travel and subsistence expenses.

5.B Participants

i. The following committees may each send representatives to meetings of the Group, without the right to vote and at the expense of the corresponding Council of Europe budget sub-heads:

    - the Steering Committee for Higher Education and Research (CDESR);
    - the Joint Council on Youth (CMJ);
    - the European Committee for Social Cohesion (CDCS);
    - the Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH);
    - the North-South Centre.

ii. The Parliamentary Assembly may send a representative to meetings of the Group, without the right to vote and at the expense of its administrative budget.

iii. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe may send a representative to meetings of the Group, without the right to vote and at the expense of its administrative budget.

iv. The Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights may send a representative to meetings of the Group, without the right to vote and at the expense of its administrative budget.

v. The Conference of INGOs of the Council of Europe may send a representative to meetings of the Group, without the right to vote and at the expense of the sending body.

5.C Other participants

i. The European Commission may send a representative to meetings of the Group, without the right to vote or defrayal of expenses.

ii. The following intergovernmental organisations may send representatives to meetings of the Group, without the right to vote or defrayal of expenses:

      - United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO);
      - Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR);
      - Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR);
      - Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

6. Working methods and structures:

      Under its terms of reference and within the limits of its budgetary attributions, the ED-EDCHR shall have the opportunity to have whatever contacts or engage in whatever consultations it deems necessary with the various Council of Europe sectors, and with experts, NGO representatives and interested professionals, in particular on the occasion of hearings or by means of written consultations.

      It will hold two plenary meetings a year. A restricted Bureau, composed of the Chair, the Vice-Chair and one member, may, if need be, meet between the plenary sessions to prepare the work.

7. Duration:

      These terms of reference will expire on 30 June 2010.

Appendix 3

Draft terms of reference of the Ad hoc Advisory Group on History Teaching (ED-HIST)

“Fact sheet”

Name of Group:

Ad Hoc Advisory Group on History Teaching
(ED-HIST)

Compliance with Resolution Res(2005)47:

YES

Programme of Activities: project(s)

2006/DGIV/898 Intercultural Dialogue and The Image of The Other In History Teaching

Project relevance:

1.Summit Action Plan

    - Chapter III Building a more humane and inclusive Europe, 6. Fostering Intercultural Dialogue

2.Contribution to core values:

    - The history teaching project contributes to the development of citizenship education, tolerance, mutual respect, intercultural dialogue and social cohesion

3. CM Decisions:

    - In addition to the Action Plan, the project’s aims and objectives also refer in particular to the Faro Declaration on the Council of Europe’s Strategy for Developing Intercultural Dialogue
    - The project also refers directly to Article 2 of the European Cultural Convention

4. Consolidation, promotion, implementation of Council of Europe standards:

    - The project aims at implementation of Recommendation Rec(2001)15 on History Teaching in Europe in the 21st Century and its follow up

5. Relevance to Council of Europe country strategies and country-specific needs:

    -The intergovernmental project and bilateral and regional assistance activities are closely linked

6. Timeliness of the project:

    - The growing attention to cultural diversity and its national and international political context call for adaptation and reforms of history teaching as a contribution to citizenship education and intercultural dialogue

Project added value:

    1. CoE as leading agency, most important facilitator:
    - CoE is since 1949 the only European intergovernmental organisation active in history teaching. Rec(2001)15 is the only political text of reference in this area.

    2. Project covering new ground:
    - The issue of “The Image of the Other in History teaching” will be looked at taking into account the current situation of cultural diversity. Its consequences for curricula, teaching tools, methodology and teacher training have to be clarified and exemplified

 

    3. Possibility of partnerships with other International
    Organisations:
    - Links and co-operation with other international intergovernmental organisations (UNESCO, ALECSO, Anna Lindh Foundation…)are already established as well as with INGOs (Euroclio, European Teachers’ Association and ingos with participative status)

    4. Avoiding duplication:
    - Links and synergies have been established with projects dealing with cultural diversity in other educational frameworks and in social, cultural and youth activities. The project also contributes to the elaboration of the White paper on Intercultural Dialogue”

    5. Reasons for entrusting the Committee with
    these specific tasks (ToRs):
    - the different kinds of experience and expertise needed have to be put together at the different steps of the project including in particular when synthesis and final recommendations will be prepared

Financial information

1 meeting a year; 11 participants.
Annual budget: €16 950, of which €10 000 for reimbursement of meeting participation; €3 900 for interpretation; €3 000 for translation; € 50 for document production.

Draft terms of reference of the Ad hoc Advisory Group on History Teaching (ED-HIST)

1. Name of Group: Ad hoc Advisory Group on History Teaching (ED-HIST)
2. Type of Group: Ad Hoc Advisory Group  
3.   Source of terms of reference: Committee of Ministers following a proposal by Steering Committee for Education
4.   Terms of Reference:  

    Having regard to:

    - the Resolution Res(2005)47 concerning committees and subordinate bodies, their mandate
    and their working methods

    - the Declaration and the Action Plan adopted by the Third Summit of Heads of State

    and Government of the Council of Europe (Warsaw, May 2005) and in particular chapter III.6;

    - the Declaration on the Council of Europe’s Strategy for Developing Intercultural Dialogue adopted at the Closing Conference of the 50th Anniversary of the European Cultural Convention (Faro, October 2005);

    - Recommendation Rec(2001)15 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on history
    teaching in 21st century Europe;

    Under the authority of the Steering Committee for Education (CDED) and in relation with the implementation of the Project 2006/DG4/898 on “Intercultural dialogue and image of the other in history teaching” (2006-2009) of the Programme of Activities, the Group is instructed to:

i. advise the Steering Committee for Education on the implementation of this project;

ii. make proposals on activities to be carried out within the framework of this project;


iii. ensure the implementation of the project, in particular, with regard to the production of pedagogical material, summary reports and conclusions;


iv. take account of and contribute to the activities implemented in the framework of the intercultural dialogue and of the relevant resolutions of the Standing Conference of European Ministers of Education;

v. submit an annual report to the CDED on the progress of the project;

vi. carry out an evaluation of the work done in the framework of the project before the end of 2008 and advise the CDED on further steps to be taken.

5. Composition of the group:

5.A Members

    The Group shall be composed of 11 members to be appointed by the Secretary General:

    - 1 member from the Steering Committee on Education;
    - 3 historians with specialised experience in the areas covered by the project;
    - 2 specialists in training teachers of history and related disciplines;
    - 1 specialist in pedagogical activities carried out in museums or other historical resource centres;
    - 1 ministerial administrator with experience in history teaching;
    - 1 representative from the media having special interests in history and the learning of history;
    - 2 representatives from European teaching associations (EUROCLIO and the European Association of Teachers – AEDE).

    The Council of Europe budget will bear their travel and subsistence expenses.

5.B Participants

i. The following committees may send representatives to the meetings of the Group, without the right to vote and at the charge of the corresponding Council of Europe budget sub-heads:

    - the Steering Committee for Higher Education and Research (CDESR);
    - the Steering Committee for Culture (CDCULT);
    - the Steering Committee for Cultural Heritage (CDPAT);
    - the Joint Council on Youth (CMJ);
    - the North-South Centre.

ii. The Parliamentary Assembly may send representatives to meetings of the Group, without the right to vote and at the charge of its administrative budget.

iii. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe may send representatives to meetings of the Group, without the right to vote and at the charge of its administrative budget.

iv. The Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights may send representatives to meetings of the Group, without the right to vote and at the charge of its administrative budget.

v. The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) may send representatives to meetings of the Group, without the right to vote and at the charge of its administrative budget.

vi. The Conference of INGOs of the Council of Europe may send representatives to meetings of the Group, without the right to vote and at the charge of the sending body.

5.C Other participants

    The following intergovernmental organisations may send representatives to meetings of the Group, without the right to vote or defrayal of expenses:

      - United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO);
      - The Arab League Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organisation (ALECSO);
      - The Anna-Lindh Euro-Mediterranean Foundation for Dialogue between Cultures.

5.D Observers

The following non-governmental organisation may send representatives to the meetings of the Group, without the right to vote or defrayal of expenses:

    - Georg Eckert Institute for International Textbook Research.

6. Working Structures and Methods:

     
    Under its terms of reference and within the limit of the budget available, the ED-HIST shall have the opportunity to have whatever contacts or engage in whatever consultations it deems necessary with the various Council of Europe sectors, and with experts, NGO representatives and interested professionals, in particular on the occasion of hearings or by means of written consultations.

7. Duration:

    These terms of reference will expire on 31 December 2009.

Appendix 4

Draft Recommendation CM/Rec(2008)…
of the Committee of Ministers to member states
on the use of the Council of Europe’s Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) and the promotion of plurilingualism

(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on …
at the … meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 15.b of the Statute of the Council of Europe,

Considering that the aim of the Council of Europe is to achieve greater unity among its members and that this aim is to be pursued in particular by the adoption of common action in educational and cultural matters;

Having regard to Article 2 of the European Cultural Convention signed in Paris on 19 December 1954
(ETS No. 18);

Considering that the formulation and implementation of education and cultural policies in the language field may be facilitated through arrangements at European level for closer co-operation among member states and between their education authorities and institutions;

Acknowledging the right to quality language education as an essential part of the fundamental right to education;

Aware of the growing need to equip all Europeans for the challenges of intensified international mobility and closer co-operation not only in education, culture and science but also in trade, commerce and industry and indeed in all walks of life;

Emphasising the present and future political importance of developing specific actions and strategies to promote plurilingualism and to diversify and intensify language learning in a pan-European context;

Bearing in mind the benefits to member states of the Council of Europe’s achievements in the field of language education;

Recognising the progress which member states have made in the implementation of previous recommendations concerning modern languages, most notably Recommendation No. R (98) 6 of the Committee of Ministers to member states concerning modern languages, whose principles are today more important and more relevant than ever;

Considering:

– Recommendation 1383 (1998) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on linguistic diversification;

– the conclusions and recommendations of the 20th Session of the Standing Conference of the European Ministers of Education (Cracow, 2000), and specifically the Resolution on the European Language Portfolio;

– Recommendation 1539 (2001) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on the European Year of Languages;

– the conclusions of the Third Summit of Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe
(Warsaw, 2005);

– the Final declaration of the 22nd Session of the Standing Conference of the European Ministers of Education (Istanbul, 2007) entitled “Building a more humane and inclusive Europe: role of education policies”;

Taking into account:

– the added value of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) and of other related instruments elaborated by the Council of Europe for the development and implementation of language education policies in member states;

– the increasing significance of the CEFR as a European standard of reference for language education;

– the growing value of the CEFR as a reference instrument for the initiatives undertaken by the European Commission, such as the European Qualifications Framework (EQF), Europass and the European Indicator of Language Competence;

– the needs expressed by the member states in a recent survey on the use of the CEFR conducted by the Language Policy Division of the Council of Europe;

– the conclusions of the 2007 Intergovernmental Policy Forum entitled “The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages and the development of language policies: challenges and responsibilities”, which was organised by the Language Policy Division of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg from 6 to 8 February 2007,

Recommends that governments of member states:

– use every available means in accordance with their constitution, their national, regional or local circumstances and their education system to implement the measures set out in Appendix I to this recommendation with respect to the development of their language education policies;

– bring this recommendation, and the reference documents on which its is based and which are specified in Appendix II, to the attention of the relevant public and private bodies in their country through the appropriate national channels;

Asks the Secretary General of the Council of Europe to bring this recommendation to the attention of those States Parties to the European Cultural Convention which are not members of the Council of Europe.

Appendix I to Recommendation CM/Rec(2008)…

Measures to be implemented concerning the use of the Council of Europe’s Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) and the promotion of plurilingualism

A. General principles and measures to be implemented by authorities responsible for language education at national, regional and local level

National, regional and local education authorities are invited to:

1. create and/or maintain conditions favourable to the use of the CEFR as a tool for coherent, transparent and effective plurilingual education in such a way as to promote democratic citizenship, social cohesion and intercultural dialogue, in keeping with Council of Europe policy as reaffirmed by the Third Summit of Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe (Warsaw, 2005);

2. create and/or maintain the necessary conditions for the use of the CEFR as a basic reference tool to:

2.1. promote and facilitate co-operation among educational institutions within and between member states;

2.2. provide a sound basis for the mutual recognition of foreign/second language qualifications;

2.3. provide guidance for the diversification of language learning within educational systems in order to maintain and develop plurilingualism among citizens of Europe as a means of knowledge building and skills development, with a view to enhancing social cohesion and intercultural understanding;

2.4. encourage learners, teachers, teacher trainers, course designers, textbook authors, curriculum developers, examining bodies and education administrators to:

2.4.1. adopt a learner-focused, action-oriented, competence-based approach;

2.4.2. take into serious consideration the social and cultural values of language learning;

2.4.3. consider and treat each language in the curriculum not in isolation but as part of a coherent plurilingual education;

2.4.4. base their efforts and decisions on a balanced analysis of both the specific needs of the different (groups of) learners and the general needs of modern European societies;

2.4.5. situate their efforts concerning language teaching in relation to the CEFR in a transparent way;

2.4.6. promote the use of the European Language Portfolio (ELP), which is based on the CEFR.
3. analyse the impact of Recommendation No. R (98) 6 with a view, as appropriate, to taking further steps towards its full implementation.

B. Specific measures aimed at policy making, curriculum and textbook development, teacher training, and assessment

4. The CEFR is a reference tool for the development and implementation of coherent and transparent language education policies; when national, regional and local education authorities decide to use it, they are invited to:

4.1. promote co-operation and facilitate co-ordination between education institutions and other relevant agencies at all levels, be they public or private, with a view to the most appropriate and coherent use of the CEFR, taking into account all its functions and dimensions, and specifically with regard to the common reference levels of language proficiency (A1-C2);

4.2. encourage language policy makers and education administrators at all levels to:

4.2.1. ensure that language instruction is fully integrated within the core of the educational aims,3

4.2.2. use a holistic approach, ensuring the coherence of objectives and attainments in all languages within a lifelong learning curriculum framework;

4.2.3. promote the development of the awareness and understanding of language use and competences throughout the educational process in order to create an informed public opinion on language issues in society and as a basis for autonomous language learning throughout life.

4.3. encourage all institutions responsible for pre-service and in-service education of language teachers to assist the latter in using the CEFR effectively through appropriate training programmes and support, and in particular to:

4.3.1. familiarise them with the aims, principles and possible implementation of a plurilingual education;

4.3.2. familiarise them with the full range of language use and language competences at progressive levels of proficiency as a basis for nurturing the language development of pupils and students across the entire curriculum;

4.3.3. familiarise them with the principles of good practice in language testing and assessment and the options regarding aims, types and methods, so as to inform their classroom practice and to enable them to support students in their learning process through formative assessment and to prepare them appropriately for formal examinations;

4.3.4. familiarise them with ways to transmit the CEFR-based concept of plurilingualism to learners, for example by using the European Language Portfolio, as recommended by the Committee of Ministers in its Recommendation No. R (98) 6 and by the 20th Session of the Standing Conference of the European Ministers of Education (Cracow, 2000);

4.4. encourage authors and publishers of language textbooks and other course materials, wherever appropriate (for example as a criterion for official recognition), to:

4.4.1. take full account of the aspects of language use and competences presented in the CEFR, and to situate them – in a reliable and transparent way – with reference to the common reference levels of language proficiency;

4.4.2. give due consideration to the development of the learners’ plurilingual capacities;

4.5. ensure that all tests, examinations and assessment procedures leading to officially recognised language qualifications take full account of the relevant aspects of language use and language competences as set out in the CEFR, that they are conducted in accordance with internationally recognised principles of good practice and quality management, and that the procedures to relate these tests and examinations to the common reference levels (A1-C2) of the CEFR are carried out in a reliable and transparent manner;

4.6. ensure that full information regarding the procedures applied in all tests, examinations and assessment systems leading to officially recognised language qualifications , particularly those used to relate them to the common reference levels (A1-C2) of the CEFR, is published and made freely available and readily accessible to all the interested parties;

4.7. encourage all other bodies responsible for foreign/second language assessment and certification to adopt measures that guarantee the provision of fair, transparent, valid and reliable tests and examinations in conformity with the principles set out in paragraph 4.5 above and to publish their procedures, particularly those used to relate these tests and examinations to the CEFR common reference levels (A1-C2) as outlined in paragraph 4.6 above;

4.8. extend such recognition as is appropriate to language qualifications, including those certified in other member states, which satisfy the above criteria;

4.9. encourage all bodies, official and unofficial, responsible for foreign/second language assessment and certification to adopt measures that give special attention to:

4.9.1. the evaluation and recognition of receptive and productive competences, as appropriate to the needs of learners, in all languages and at all levels, in particular at lower levels, as contributions to each individual’s developing plurilingual profile;

4.9.2. forms of assessment which value the plurilingual capacities of learners and recognise the full range of their plurilingual repertoire;

4.9.3. dimensions of language learning and use which go beyond proficiency itself ensuring that they are taken into consideration and recognised through adequate means of evaluation, such as portfolios.

Appendix II to Recommendation CM/Rec(2008)…

Some relevant Council of Europe documents:

- Language Policy Division:
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment, 2001 (Cambridge University Press for the English version – ISBN 0-521-00531-0)
Also available on the Council of Europe website:
http://www.coe.int/T/DG4/Portfolio/documents/Common%20European%20Framework%20hyperlinked.pdf

Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment:
- Guide for Users, Trim, J. (ed.), 2001
http://www.coe.int/T/DG4/Portfolio/documents/Guide-for-Users-April02.doc

- Case studies concerning the use of the CEFR, Alderson, C. (ed.), 2002
http://www.coe.int/T/DG4/Portfolio/documents/case_studies_CEF.doc

Executive summary of results of a survey on the use of the CEFR at national level in the Council of Europe member states, Martyniuk, W. & Noijons, J., 2006
http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/Survey_CEFR_2007_EN.doc

Intergovernmental Forum 2007: The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) and the development of language policies: challenges and responsibilities. (Report, Goullier, F.).
http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/SourceForum07/ForumFeb07_%20Report_0807_EN.doc

Relating Language Examinations to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment: a manual, Figueras Casanovas, N., North, B. (dir.), Takala, S., Van Avermaet, P., Verhelst, N., 2008
http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Manuel1_EN.asp#TopOfPage

European Language Portfolio (ELP):
- Guide for Developers, Lenz, P. & Schneider, G., 2001
http://www.coe.int/T/DG4/Portfolio/?L=E&M=/documents_intro/developers.html
- Guide for Teachers and Teacher Trainers, Little, D & Perclovà, R., 2001
http://www.coe.int/T/DG4/Portfolio/documents/ELPguide_teacherstrainers.pdf

From linguistic diversity to plurilingual education: Guide for the development of language education policies in Europe, Beacco, J-C. & Byram, M., 2007
http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Guide_niveau2_EN.asp

Language education policy profiles of Council of Europe member states, regions or cities
http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Profils_EN.asp

- European Centre for Modern Languages (ECML) :
IMPEL – ELP implementation support, Bosshard, H. U. (dir.), 2007
http://www.ecml.at/mtp2/impel/html/IMPEL_E_Results.htm

Preparing teachers to use the European Language Portfolio – Arguments, materials and resources, Little, D. (dir.), 2007
http://www.ecml.at/mtp2/Elp_tt/html/ELPTT_E_Results.htm

Some relevant European Commission documents:
Europass: http://europass.cedefop.europa.eu/europass/preview.action?locale_id=1

Framework for the European survey on language competences [COM (2007) 184 final]
http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/2010/doc/com184_en.pdf

Some International Codes of Practice in the field of language testing and assessment:

ALTE (Association of Language Testers in Europe – INGO enjoying with participatory status with the Council of Europe)

ILTA (International Language Testers’ Association)

EALTA (European Association for Language Testing and Assessment)

General – not specific to language testing:
The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (1999)
Developed jointly by: American Educational Research Association (AERA); American Psychological Association (APA) ; National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME)
http://www.apa.org/science/standards.html

Appendix 5

The European Language Portfolio: towards a strategy for the future

Contents: A: The European Language Portfolio and Council of Europe policy

    B: Background to the European Language Portfolio and basic documents
    C: The story so far: the European Language Portfolio project 1997–2007
    D: Considerations relevant to the development of future strategy
    E: Proposals from the European Language Portfolio Validation Committee

A. The European Language Portfolio and Council of Europe policy
The Committee of Ministers is concerned to prioritise the Council of Europe’s activities that are directly related to its three core values: human rights, democracy, and the rule of law. Education and in particular language education, is among the enabling factors that make it possible to achieve the targets associated with those core values.
The European Language Portfolio (ELP) project, launched operationally in 2000, has shown its value and usefulness in member states and at European level:

      · to date 93 ELP models have been validated, with three further validations pending;
      · the self-assessment grid and the language passport have been incorporated in the European Commission’s Europass scheme.

After seven years of development we are nearing the end of the second phase of the ELP project. The ELP Validation Committee believes that it is time to reassess the ELP in the light of its success and to identify the most effective ways in which it might continue to develop in the future.
This strategy paper outlines how the ELP project might evolve to ensure that:

      · the impact of the ELP on education systems is exploited to the full;
      · benefit to all member states is increased;
      · the ELP brings added value to the current concerns of the Council of Europe in the fields of entitlement, democratic participation, and social cohesion.

The strategy paper also shows how the proposed evolution of the ELP is a vital contribution to the coherence of the Languages of Education project.
B. Background to the European Language Portfolio and basic documents
The ELP and the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) were first proposed at the Rüschlikon Symposium in 1991. From the outset they were intended to complement each other. The CEFR provides tools for the development of language curricula, programmes of teaching and learning, textbooks, and assessment instruments. The ELP is designed to mediate to learners, teachers and schools, and other stakeholders the ideals that underpin the CEFR: respect for linguistic and cultural diversity, mutual understanding beyond national, institutional and social boundaries, and the promotion of plurilingual and pluricultural education. This complementarity is reflected in Paragraphs 26 and 27 of Recommendation No. R (98) 6 of the Committee of Ministers to member states concerning Modern Languages, that they should

    26. Encourage institutions to use the Council of Europe's Common European Framework of Reference to plan or review language teaching in a coherent and transparent manner in the interests of better international co-ordination and more diversified language learning.
    27. Encourage the development and use by learners in all educational sectors of a personal document (European language portfolio) in which they can record their qualifications and other significant linguistic and cultural experiences in an internationally transparent manner, thus motivating learners and acknowledging their efforts to extend and diversify their language learning at all levels in a lifelong perspective.

C. The story so far: the European Language Portfolio Project 1997-2007
In 1997 the Council of Europe published the second draft of the CEFR for consultation, together with a collection of preliminary studies that explored how the ELP might be implemented in different domains of language learning. From 1998 to 2000 ELP pilot projects were conducted in 15 Council of Europe member states and by three INGOs. In 2000 the (then) Education Committee of the Council of Europe established an ELP Validation Committee (EVC), whose task was to receive draft ELPs and determine whether or not they were in conformity with the ELP Principles and Guidelines, also established by the Education Committee. In 2001 (the European Year of Languages) the ELP was launched at the first European ELP Seminar. By November 2007 93 ELPs had been validated, from 30 Council of Europe member states and 4 INGOs.4 ELPs have been designed and implemented for all educational domains: primary, lower and upper secondary, vocational, adult and further education. In his interim report for 2006, the Rapporteur General estimated that 2.5 million language learners had received an ELP and worked with it more or less intensively for a shorter or longer period of time.5 However, sustained use of the ELP on a large scale still lies in the future.
The reports prepared by the Rapporteur General and the seven European ELP Seminars held since 20016 confirm that the ELP has proved itself an innovative and practical tool. It is based on a set of principles – reflective learning, self-assessment, learner autonomy, plurilingualism, intercultural learning – which stimulate good practice in a multitude of educational contexts and help to develop skills of life-long learning. However, these principles challenge traditional values and practices, and this helps to explain why the adoption and implementation of the ELP has still not reached the levels hoped for when it was first launched. The Rapporteur General has nevertheless identified a number of projects that promise long-term benefits (this list is not exhaustive and is included only in order to indicate the range of ELP implementation):

      · the Spanish ELP project, which covers all regions and school sectors and includes regional as well as international languages;
      · the decentralised Swiss ELP implementation project, which covers all language regions, school sectors and types;
      · the ELP implementation project of Thüringen (Germany), with a reported penetration of 40% despite reduced financial support;
      · the ELP implementation project of the Russian Federation, which uses a snowball strategy in its multilingual and multicultural territory;
      · Irish ELP projects that focus on the linguistic integration of immigrants (children; adults with refugee status);
      · the Dutch electronic ELP project, which is breaking new ground;
      · the institutional ELP projects of ALTE/EAQUALS and CercleS (in the adult and further education sectors respectively).

D. Considerations relevant to the development of future strategy

D1. The validation process. The establishment of an ELP Validation Committee marked a departure from normal Council of Europe practice, which is to develop tools and leave member states to decide how to implement them. At the end of the ELP pilot projects it was felt necessary to put procedures in place that would encourage the emergence of new ideas while guaranteeing minimum quality. Now, after seven years of ELP validation, the EVC takes the view that the Council of Europe should facilitate the development and simplify the validation of new ELPs by making available a complete set of templates from which ELPs for different learner groups can be constructed. Such templates would bring together the best design features of the ELPs validated to date.

    It is worth noting that three language passport templates are already in place, for adults/upper secondary, lower secondary, and upper primary. There are also templates that focus on learning to learn and the intercultural dimension of language learning, though they need revision and further elaboration (in the latter case benefit could be drawn from the transversal treatment of intercultural competence in the Autobiography of Intercultural Encounters). The bank of descriptors that has been available to ELP developers since 2003 focuses on the needs of adult and older adolescent learners; it should be supplemented by a bank of descriptors for young(er) learners. There should also be templates for goal-setting and self-assessment checklists and practical suggestions to enable ELP developers to take fuller account of the Council of Europe’s commitment to plurilingualism.

D2. Function of the ELP: As noted in section C above, there are contexts in which the ELP is being used to introduce significant innovation in language learning and teaching. Most projects emphasize reflective learning, self-assessment and the development of learner autonomy; far fewer are centrally concerned with the development of plurilingualism and pluriculturalism. Yet one of the needs identified at the 2007 Language Policy Forum is for more work to be done on the “plurilingual curriculum”, in which the ELP has an obvious role to play. In other words, the ELP’s role as a leader of educational innovation is by no means exhausted.
D3. Coherence of LPD activities: As we near the end of the current medium-term project, there is a need to align the ELP with the other projects of the Language Policy Division, in particular the project on the Language(s) of Education (LE). At an early stage a contradiction was noted in the ELP concept: it is concerned with the learning of second and foreign languages, yet the individual language user’s plurilingual competence is always rooted in his or her first language(s). The possibility that the LE project will eventually lead to the development of descriptors for first language proficiency suggests that the ELP concept may need to be enlarged to include first languages. Such a development will clearly pose new challenges to ELP designers and require new supports from the Council of Europe, including a validation process similar to the one that is currently in place. To begin with, it will be necessary for the EVC to consider how the ELP concept should be expanded to accommodate the insights, recommendations and tools produced by the LE project.
D4. Need for flexibility: Because it is multi-dimensional, the ELP supports ventures that differ from one another as regards context, values, focus and resources. To date it seems to have been most effective when it is used to address a specific challenge (migrant language learning, intercultural competence, learning to learn, self-assessment, etc.) If the key issue is that the ELP should now effectively be utilised on a scale that makes its survival certain, it may be necessary to accept versions that do not give equal emphasis to all ELP principles.
D5. Collaboration with ECML: The second medium-term programme of the European Centre for Modern Languages (2004–2007) included two ELP-related projects. One project developed a kit of materials and activities designed to prepare teachers to use the ELP (the kit was introduced at a central workshop and parts of it were used at national ELP events held in 17 ECML member states); the other project developed a web site to support ELP implementation. The ECML’s third medium-term programme (2008–2011) will again include two ELP-related projects. One will explore the use of the ELP as a tool for whole-school development in language and intercultural education; the other will disseminate the teacher preparation kit.

    In order to further promote collaboration between the EVC and the ECML, it was agreed in 2007 that a member of the Governing Board of the ECML should attend meetings of the EVC, and that a member of the EVC should attend meetings of the ECML Governing Board when its agenda includes ELP-related items. The EVC is strongly in favour of strengthening these links.

E. Proposals from the European Language Portfolio Validation Committee

E1. In deciding on future strategy the Council of Europe should continue to protect the fundamental principles and concepts that lie behind the CEFR and the ELP. These are fully in keeping with the Council of Europe’s core values.

E2. The Council of Europe should continue to collect and disseminate ELP know-how and good practice as a means of promoting unity in diversity.
E3. The Council of Europe should build and maintain ELP networks as a means of stimulating and supporting international co-operation. Successful ELP projects might be given some kind of advisory status vis-à-vis new projects. The possibility of collaboration with the European Union in this area should be explored.
E4. The Council of Europe should incorporate the ELP in any future guides for the development of, e.g., (i) curricula promoting plurilingualism, (ii) school textbooks that reflect the ethos and content of the CEFR, and (iii) language education policy profiles.
E5. The CDED and the Governing Board of the ECML might wish to jointly explore future measures for supporting ELP implementation and accreditation in the longer term.
E6. The Council of Europe plans to organise an intergovernmental Forum late in 2009 or early in 2010 in order to bring policy concerning modern languages and languages of schooling together within the overarching concept of Languages of Education (LE) and plurilingualism; . the Forum might provide the occasion to launch the new supports for ELP development described in this document.
E7. The mandate of the present ELP Validation Committee should be extended to the end of 2010 so that the supports described in this document can be developed.

Appendix 1
List of validated ELP models
1.2000 – Switzerland – Model for young people and adults.
2.2000 – France – Model for children. It is accompanied by a Guide for Users (available in French only).
3.2000 – Russian Federation – Model for learners in upper secondary education.
4.2000 – Germany – North Rhine–Westphalia – Model for learners in lower secondary education.
5.2000 – France – Model for young learners and adults.
   5.2000 (rev. 2006)

6.2000 – EAQUALS/ALTE – Model for adult learners.
  6.2000 electronic version

7.2001 – Czech Republic – Model for learners in lower secondary education (11–15 years old learners).
8.2001 – United Kingdom – Model for children.
9.2001 – United Kingdom – Model for adults (with a particular, but not exclusive, focus on the learner of languages for vocational purposes).
10.2001 – Ireland – Model for learners in post–primary education.
11.2001 – Ireland – Model for use in primary education with a specific target group: immigrants learning the language of the host country.
11.2001 (rev. 2004)

12.2001 – Ireland – Model for use in post–primary education with a specific target group: immigrants learning the language of the host country.
12.2001 (rev. 2004)

13.2001 a – Ireland – Model for adult immigrants newly arrived, learning the target language of the host country (superseded by 37.2002).
13.2001 b – Ireland – Model adult immigrants who have already spent sometime in the country and are learning the target language of the host country (superseded by 37.2002).
14.2001 – Ireland – Model for adult immigrants preparing for mainstream vocational training and employment.
15.2001 – Hungary – Model for learners in secondary education.

16.2001 – Hungary – Model for learners in primary education.
17.2001 – Hungary – Model for adults.
18.2001 – The Netherlands – Model for learners in upper secondary vocational education.
19.2001 – Sweden – Model for learners in upper secondary and adult education including vocational education.
20.2001 – Portugal – Model for learners aged 10–15 years old.
21.2001 – Portugal – Model for learners in upper–secondary education.
22.2001 – Czech Republic – Model for learners up to 11 years old.
23.2001 – Czech Republic – Model for learners in upper–secondary education.
24.2001 – Austria – Model for learners in upper secondary education.
25.2002 – Italy (Umbria) – Model for learners in lower secondary education.
26.2002 – Italy (Piedmont) – Model for learners in primary education.
27.2002 – Russian Federation – Model for language teachers, translators and interpreters.
28.2002 – Russian Federation – Model for learners in primary education.
29.2002 – CERCLES (European Association of Language Centres in Higher Education) – Model for learners in higher education.

29.2002 – CZ
29.2002 – SK
29.2002 – IT

30.2002 – Italy (Lombardia) – Model for learners in lower secondary education.
31.2002 – Russian Federation – Model for learners in lower secondary education.
32.2002 a– Germany – Thüringen –  Model for learners in primary education.
32.2002 b– Germany – Thüringen –  Model for learners in grades 5 to 9.
32.2002 c– Germany – Thüringen – Model for learners in grades 10 to 12.
33.2002 – The Netherlands – Model for learners aged 9 to 12 years old.
34.2002 a – The Netherlands – Model for learners aged 12 tp 15 years old.
34.2002 b – The Netherlands – Model for learners aged 15+.
35.2002 – European Language Council – Model for learners in higher education.

35.2002 – DE
35.2002 – DK
35.2004 – SP

36.2002 – The Netherlands (CINOP) – Model for adult second language learners.
37.2002 – Milestone – Model for learners of the host community language.
38.2003 – French speaking Community of Belgium – Model for children in primary education.
39.2003 – French speaking Community of Belgium – Model for learners in upper secondary education.
40.2003 – Italy – Model for learners in higher education.

41.2003 – Northern Ireland – Model for learners in primary school.
42.2003 – Slovak Republic Model for learners aged 11–15.
43.2003 – Greece – Model for learners aged 12–15.
44.2003  – France – Model for learners in lower secondary education.
45.2003 – Georgia – Model for learners aged 15+.
46.2003 – Germany – City of Hamburg – Model for learners in lower secondary education.
47.2003 – Turkey – Model for learners aged 15–18.
48.2003 – Model for learners in vocational sectors developed by Sofia University with partners in 5 European countries. The five linguistic versions were issued with the following numbers:
Bulgarian: 48.2003–BG
English: 48.2003–EN
Franch: 48.2003–FR
German: 48.2003–DE
Italian: 48.2003–IT

49.2003 – (8.2001– IT) – Italy – Model for learners in primary education.
50.2003 – Spain – Model for learners aged 3–7.
51.2003 – Spain – Model for learners aged 8–12.
52.2003  – SpainModel for learners aged 12–18.
53.2003 – Bulgaria – Model for learners aged 6–10.
54.2003 – Italy – Turin – Model for learners aged 15+ and adults.
55.2004 – Czech Republic – Model for adult learners.
56.2004 – Turkey – Ankara University – Model for adult learners.
57.2004 – Slovenia – Model for learners 11–15.
58.2004 – Austria – Model for learners aged 10–15.
59.2004 – Spain – Model for adult learners.
60.2004 – Sweden – Model for learners aged 6–11.
61.2004Sweden – Model for learners aged 12–16.
62.2004 – Poland Model for learners aged 10–15.
63.2004 – Austria – Cernet – Model for learners aged 10–15.
64.2004 – Italy – Puglia – Model for learners aged 14–20.
65.2004 – Italy – Bolzano – Model for learners in primary education.
66.2005 – Ireland: Model for learners in primary education.
67.2005 – Switzerland – CDIP – Model for learners in lower secondary education.
67.2005 – rev. 2007

68.2005 – Austria Pädagogische Institut Wien  – Model for learners aged 14–18.
69.2005 – Italy – Bolzano – Model for learners in lower secondary education.
70.2006 – United Kingdom – Model for junior learners.

71.2006 – Croatia – Model for learners aged 11–15.
72.2006 – Poland –  Model for learners aged 6–10.
73.2006 – Lithuania – Model for learners in upper secondary education.
74.2006 – Iceland– Model for learners in lower secondary education.
75.2006 – Iceland – Model for learners in upper secondary education.
76.2006 – Poland – National In–service Teacher Training Centre – Model for learners aged 16+
77.2006 – Germany – ThüringenThüringer Volkshochschulverband – Model for adults.
78.2006 – Croatia – Ministry of Science, Education and Sports – Model for learners aged from 15 to 19.
79.2006 – Turkey – Bilfen Schools – Model for learners aged from 10 to 14.
80.2006 – Turkey – Model for learners aged from 10 to 14
81.2006 – Croatia – Model for learners aged from 7 to 10.
82.2006 – Slovenia – Model for upper secondary school learners aged from 15 to 19.
83.2006 – Cyprus – Model for learners aged from 12 to 15.
84.2006 – Latvia – Model for adult learners.
85.2007 – Turkey – Bilfen Schools – Model for young learners in primary education (ages 5 to 9).
86.2007 – Armenia Model for young learners aged 6 to 10.
87.2007 – Poland – Model for very young learners aged 3 to 6.
88.2007 – Austria – Österreichisches sprachen kompetenz zentrum (OSZ), model for learners aged 15+
89.2007 – The Netherlands – Dutch National Bureau for Modern Languages
electronic ELP model

90.2007Germany, Hessen, Verbundprojekt ‘Sprachen lehren und lernen als Kontinuum’ Koordinierungsstelle, model for lower-secondary learners (grades 3-10)

91.2007 – Austria, Verband Österreichischer Volkshochschulen model for adult learners

92.2007 – Latvia, State Language Agency model for young learners aged 7-12

93.2007 – Estonia, lower-secondary learners 12-16

Appendix 2
ELP International Seminars
2001 Coimbra, Portugal, 28–30 June
2002 Turin, Italy, 15–17 April

      Luxembourg, 17–19 October

2003 Istanbul, Turkey, 23–25 October
2004 Madrid, Spain, 30 September–2 October
2005 Moscow, Russian Federation, 29 September–1 October
2006 Vilnius, Lithuania, 28–30 September

Reports on all these seminars are available on the Council of Europe’s ELP website, www.coe.int/portfolio.

Appendix 6

Draft terms of reference of the European Language Portfolio Validation Committee (ED-EVC)

“Fact sheet”

Name of Committee:

European Language Portfolio Validation Committee (ED-EVC)

Compliance with Resolution Res (2005) 47:

YES

Programme of Activities: project(s)

2006/DG4/891 “Language education, social inclusion and linguistic diversity”

Project relevance:

1. Third Summit Action Plan: Chapter III – Articles 1 – 3 – 5 – 6
2. Contribution to core values: Right to quality education; democratic culture in education; intercultural dialogue; European standards; mobility
3. CM Decisions: Recommendation CM R(98) 6.
Other criteria:
1. Political justification/framework

    - European Cultural Convention (1954), Article 2
    - 19th and 20th Standing Conferences of European Ministers of Education of the CoE

2. Consolidation, promotion, implementation of CoE standards
Recommendation n° R (98)6 of the Committee of Ministers to member states
3. Relevance to CoE country strategies and country-specific needs
The European Language Portfolio (ELP) brings the standards developed by the Council of Europe in the field of foreign-language teaching within the grasp of teachers and learners and contributes to Council of Europe visibility.
4. Timeliness of project(s)]
1st ELP was launched in the European Year of Languages 2001. Since then almost 100 portfolios have been accredited. New challenges include the accreditation of electronic portfolios and the link with the Europass recently launched by the EU.

Project added value:

1. CoE as leading agency, most important facilitator;
Standards of linguistic competence elaborated by the CoE have been adopted by the member states and the European Union (European Indicator of Language Competence and Europass); the ELP carries these standards to teachers and learners;
2. Project covering ‘new ground’;
The ELP introduces standards at all levels of the education system while promoting autonomous learning.
3. Possibility of partnerships with other International Organisations;
Concrete partnership with the EU already operational:
- the European Commission funds transnational ELP projects
- the ELP Language Passport is one of the component documents of Europass.
4. Avoiding duplication;
No other international organisation has such a tool to offer citizens.
Reasons for entrusting this Committee with these specific tasks:
The ED-EVC validates ELP models on the basis of specific criteria that must respect the educational contexts and objectives of the member states while promoting common European objectives (eg. respect for linguistic/cultural diversity, mobility, lifelong learning); the analysis of a large number of ELP models at each meeting requires substantial expert work ahead of the meeting and in-depth discussion during the sessions, a task which the CDED could not undertake.
Each validated ELP model bears the Council of Europe logo and accreditation number in order to ensure that it can be recognised throughout Europe in spite of its individual characteristics; an accreditation procedure is therefore indispensable.

Financial information:

Two annual meetings of the Committee (9 members) immediately preceded by a Bureau meeting (5 members)
Annual Budget:
Annual budget: € 28 000, of which € 18 000 for reimbursement of participation in meetings; € 8 000 for interpretation, € 1 700 for translation and € 300 for production of documents.

Draft terms of reference of the European Language Portfolio Validation Committee (ED-EVC)

1. Name of Committee: European Language Portfolio Validation Committee
(ED-EVC)

2. Type of Committee: Ad hoc Advisory Group

3. Source of terms of reference: Committee of Ministers on the proposal of the Steering Committee for Education (CDED)

4. Terms of reference:

    Having regard to:

    Resolution Res(2005)47 on committees and subordinate bodies, their terms of reference and working methods

      European Cultural Convention (1954), Article 2:

      “Each Contracting Party shall, insofar as may be possible,

      a. encourage the study by its own nationals of the languages, history and civilisation of the other Contracting Parties and grant facilities to those Parties to promote such studies in its territory, and

      b. endeavour to promote the study of its language or languages, history and civilisation in the territory of the other Contracting Parties and grant facilities to the nationals of those Parties to pursue such studies in its territory.”

      Action Plan outlined by the Heads of State and Government of the Member States of the Council of Europe at their Third Summit (Warsaw, Poland, 16-17 May 2005), and in particular Section III, paragraphs 1, 3 and 6;

      Recommendation No (98) 6 of the Committee of Ministers to member states concerning Modern Languages, and in particular Article 27 of the Appendix

      Encourage the development and use by learners in all educational sectors of a personal document (European Language Portfolio) in which they can record their qualifications and other linguistic and cultural experiences in an internationally transparent manner, thus motivating learners and acknowledging their efforts to extend and diversify their language learning at all levels in a lifelong perspective.

      Resolution No.1 of the 19th Session of the Standing Conference of Ministers of Education of the Council of Europe (Kristiansand, Norway, 22-24 June 1997), and in particular Article 19:

      […] the Education Committee should concentrate on: […]
      – the European Language Portfolio – a document in which the learner can note his/her most significant intercultural experiences and achievements in language learning (both formal and informal) in relation to internationally recognised levels, as described in the Common European Framework, thus facilitating educational and professional mobility; […]

      Resolution No 2 (Resolution on the European Language Portfolio) of the 20th Session of the Standing Conference of Ministers of Education of the Council of Europe (Cracow, October 2000), and in particular Recommendation 2.1:

      […] ask a competent body (such as a national committee) to examine ELP models for compulsory education, to establish whether they meet the agreed criteria, and to forward them with a recommendation to the European Validation Committee; […]

      Under the authority of the Steering Committee for Education (CDED), and in relation with the implementation of Project 2006/DG4/891 – “Language education, social inclusion and linguistic diversity” of the Programme of Activities, the Validation Committee is instructed to:

i. ensure the availability of procedures to assist developers of European Language Portfolios (ELP) in seeking accreditation of their models;
ii. examine applications for accreditation of ELP models and grant the right to use the logo and name “European Language Portfolio” (© Council of Europe) on ELP models on the basis of the characteristics set out by the CDED in the Principles and Guidelines (text contained in the Resolution on the European Language Portfolio adopted at the 20th session of the Standing Conference of Ministers of Education of the Council of Europe). In order to do this, the Validation Committee shall:

    - receive ELP models developed by
    (a) national and regional authorities
    (b) NGOs and INGOs
    (c) independent education institutions
    (d) private commercial or non-profit-making institutions

    - consider the opinions forwarded to it by the national committee for the ELP / national authority or relevant (I)NGO;
    - confirm that a given model conforms to the agreed Principles and Guidelines;
    or
    - clarify why the model submitted has been judged not to correspond sufficiently to the Principles and Guidelines. Such a model may be resubmitted for accreditation once the designers have taken account of the Validation Committee’s recommendations;

iii. bring forward proposals for future policy and further development regarding the ELP and submit them to the CDED for decision.

The Validation Committee will not be responsible for the implementation, dissemination or use of accredited ELP models, which are the responsibility of the relevant national/regional authorities or (I)NGOs.

5. Composition of the Committee:

5.A Members:

      The Validation Committee shall be composed of nine (9) specialists in the field of language education policy for plurilingualism who are familiar with the relevant Council of Europe tools and documents, to be appointed by the Secretary General. The Council of Europe budget will bear their travel and subsistence expenses.

6. Working methods and structures:

i. The Validation Committee shall meet twice a year;

ii. the Validation Committee shall conduct its work in accordance with the Rules for the Accreditation of ELP Models adopted by the CDED;

iii. where necessary, in order to expedite the progress of its work, the Validation Committee may organise hearings and/or entrust a limited number of committee members with a specific task to be fulfilled by the next meeting;

7. Duration:

    These terms of reference will expire on 31 December 2010.

Note 1 This document has been classified restricted at the date of issue. It was declassified at the 1029th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies (11 June 2008) (see CM/Del/Dec(2008)1029/7.2).
Note 2 At the time of drafting this report, the Norwegian authorities decided to use the following title: “European Resource Centre on education for intercultural understanding, democratic citizenship and human rights”.
Note 3 1. As also suggested by the Guide for the Development of Language Education Policies in Europe and as indicated in the various Language Education Policy Profiles (see Appendix II);
Note 4 See Appendix 2
Note 5 http://www.coe.int/T/DG4/Portfolio/documents/
Note 6 See Appendix 3


 Top

 

  Related Documents
 
   Meetings
 
   Other documents