This project aims to help member states to develop inclusive language policies based on Council of Europe shared values: respect for human rights and the dignity of the person, democracy and the rule of law. Effective respect for these fundamental principles requires a coordinated and principled approach to language policy which cuts across different domains of integration policy (social, employment, health...), and an awareness of the mutual rights and responsibilities of migrants and societies. The Council of Europe has elaborated standard setting instruments and recommendations which set out the principles governing actions in the migration field. These are complemented by language policy guidelines and reference tools developed to support their effective implementation in an inclusive approach based on shared values and principles.[Ref. 1]

Drawing on these principles, agencies responsible for language policy are invited to consider the extent to which they:

• IMPLEMENT LANGUAGE PROGRAMMES THAT PROVIDE A CLEAR RESPONSE TO MIGRANTS’ LANGUAGE NEEDS FOR PERSONAL, SOCIAL AND WORKING LIFE; as migrants’ immediate and medium-term needs are identified, corresponding communicative objectives can be defined drawing on and adapting the scales of Common European Framework of Reference of Languages (CEFR) as required for eg addressing one’s children’s teachers, speaking to neighbours, writing a CV for a job, etc.;[Ref. 2]
   
• ENSURE THAT PROGRAMMES ARE SUFFICIENTLY OPEN TO ACCOMMODATE THE DIVERSITY OF MIGRANTS; there is no standard model as migrants can differ considerably in terms of their personal situation, their needs and capacities, prior educational and language learning history, time needed or available for learning the language; the form and phase of migration also varies depending, for example, on the intended duration of stay; [Ref. 3]
   
• SUPPORT MIGRANTS IN DEVELOPING INDEPENDENT LEARNING SKILLS; once the course is completed they will need to be able to manage their learning and acquire independently the competences they need to the level(s) required, at work, through building social networks, etc.; the European Language Portfolio (ELP) is designed to support the development of learning skills and can be used by migrants to relate their progress to the proficiency levels of the CEFR; [Ref. 4]
   
• MONITOR LANGUAGE AND CULTURE COURSES TO ENSURE THEY MEET INTERNATIONALLY ACCEPTED STANDARDS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE; the experience of effective tailor-made courses of a high quality, designed and delivered by properly trained professionals with the necessary facilities, may be more costly but provides value for money in terms of migrants’ attendance, motivation and learning outcomes; [Ref. 5]
   
• DEFINE REQUIRED PROFICIENCY LEVELS IN A REALISTIC AND FLEXIBLE MANNER THAT REFLECTS THE ACTUAL NEEDS AND CAPACITIES OF MIGRANTS; the CEFR can be used to define ‘profiles’ eg A2 level for spoken interaction, but A1 for reading or written interaction, rather than homogenous levels (A2 for all competences); in adapting the CEFR levels for official purposes such as residence or citizenship it is important to set realistic levels, bearing in mind that in most societies the majority of native speakers do not need to perform the tasks specified at the higher CEFR levels; the requirement to demonstrate a “sufficient” level or “good standard” in the official language is not only too vague to be useful but is based on the unproven assumption that successful integration depends on a given level of language proficiency ; [Ref. 6]
   
• ENSURE THAT FORMAL TESTS, WHERE USED, CONFORM TO ACCEPTED STANDARDS OF QUALITY AND ARE NOT MISUSED TO EXCLUDE MIGRANTS FROM SOCIETY; where tests are used for official purposes such as residence or citizenship, they should be prepared by professional bodies to ensure that they are impartial, reliable and fair; however, there is no established relationship between passing a language test and successful integration; migrants can be well integrated and yet have limited language skills; language proficiency develops through real life use over time and therefore is not a precondition for, but rather a result of, participation in society; alternative forms of assessment such as the ELP provides evidence of what a learner can do in the language, and could complement or replace a test that is linked to the CEFR; [Ref. 7]
   
• DEVISE EFFECTIVE INCENTIVES RATHER THAN INEFFECTIVE SANCTIONS; TANGIBLE REWARDS FOR LANGUAGE LEARNING, SUCH AS SPEEDIER ACCESS TO EMPLOYMENT OR SOCIAL BENEFITS, PROVIDE ENHANCED MOTIVATION; however, sanctions that attempt to force migrants to learn can result in less effective learning and negative attitudes towards integration; disproportionate measures may be discriminatory and infringe the human rights of migrants; [Ref. 8]
   
• VALUE MIGRANTS’ LANGUAGES OF ORIGIN AND THEIR UNIQUE PLURILINGUAL AND PLURICULTURAL IDENTITIES;

their languages of origin play an important role in the integration process; in a plurilingual and intercultural approach to language provision it is important to show that these languages are valued and encourage migrants to transmit them to their children in view of their importance as markers of identity and an asset for the whole of society. [Ref. 9]

Languages are an essential instrument for building intercultural understanding and social cohesion. The language or languages of the host society into which migrants are seeking to integrate, and the languages which are already part of their individual linguistic repertoire, shape their identities as active, democratic citizens. A plurilingual and intercultural approach to the teaching of the language of the host society ensures that languages become instruments of inclusion that unite rather than segregate people.

JS