The other sections have shown the connections between language and education policies, the policies as processes, the influence of English and educational narratives, and the pressures that can be caused by these through linguistic practices and choices. Many scholars state no one-size-fits all global Language Policy is possible, yet Immersion schools and Multilingual Education (see Dual Language Immersion, Multilingual Education), the lessening of pressures and excuses to justify learning English, and cultural rights could be a better ‘metanarrative’. These may be much more feasible than individually studying each situation including even each individual or family (see Social Justice and Practice, Domains, Research Implications.)

At the same time, a consensus on the research for a theoretical framework to understand global and local language ecology and educational language policies is needed along with flexible language-in-education systems. A multilingual world may be possible!

Language issues are almost always tied to the teaching of English and standardization of education and job training according to world norms. The fallacies of monolingualism and English as a global lingua franca could be solved with Foreign Language Learning, Deep Education, Multilingual Schooling (See Monolingualism, Deep Education, English as a Lingua Franca). 

The dynamic multilingualism of societies is not usually supported by the state through education (See National Frameworks). Because of the global financial pressures and elite hegemony, schools are often places where students lose the rights to traditional cultural ways and knowledge. This section will look at studies of language-in-education policies by region or country. Many of the pages are written by students in a course givey by Prof. Francois V. Tochon on Linguistic Human Rights in Education at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

A FEW REFERENCES

Bastardas, A. (2002b). World language policy in the era of globalization. Diversity and intercommunication from the perspective of ‘complexity’. Noves SL. Revista de Sociolinguistica/Journal on Sociolinguistics (online journal).

Bastardas Boada, A. (2007). Linguistic sustainability for a multilingual humanity. Glossa- an Interdiscipinary Journal, 2 (2), 1-31.

Hornberger, N. (Ed.). (2003). Continua of Biliteracy: An Ecological Framework for Educational Policy, Research, and Practice in Multilingual Settings. Tonawanda, NY: Multilingal Matters.

Marti, F. (1996). Language Education for World Peace. Global Issues in Language Education, (25), 16-17. Retrieved on 20-7-13 at http://gilesig.org/25Marti.htm

Tochon, F.V. (2009). The Key to Global Understanding: World Languages Education- Why Schools Need to Adapt. Review of Educational Research, 79 (2), 650-681.

Yusuf, S. (2011). The Importance of the Foreign Language Learning Contributing to World Peace. US-China Education Review, 8 (5), 580-588.

REFERENCE AND COPYRIGHT INFORMATION FOR THIS PAGE

This web page has a copyright. It may be referred to and quoted, or reproduced and distributed for educational purposes according to fair use legislation only if the following citation is included in the document:

This information was originally published on the website of the International Network for Language Education Policy Studies (http://www.languageeducationpolicy.org) as

Harrison, K.  M. (2013). Language Education Policy by World Regions. In F. V. Tochon (Ed.), Language Education Policy Studies (online). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin—Madison. Retrieved from: http://www.languageeducationpolicy.org (access date).