LINC to What?

by Karen Charnow Lior

In the last year there has been a drastic change in the way language training is delivered through federal government funding. In January of 1992, the federal government introduced Language Instruction for Newcomers to Canada, LINC, and its complementary program, Labour Market Language Training, LMLT. Both initiatives mark a significant change in the policy direction of the federal government with respect to official languages instruction.

Before this policy was implemented, ESL language training was an integral part of many skills training programs. Combining skills training with language training and job search skills, such as resume writing and interview preparation, was an effective way of teaching language skills in an applicable, useful context. This training was delivered by community-based training programs often in partnership with school boards or colleges. The labour movement, public sector and community-based training deliverers and educators have long considered language training an essential bridge to job-related training. The policy changes have fundamentally altered the role of the federal government in the area of ESL programming with respect to purpose and program delivery.

The 1992 policy dramatically
changed second language training delivery in Canada.

From the late 1960s to 1990, the federal government funded, in Ontario, language training at the community colleges. This funding came primarily through Canada Employment and was directed to those destined for the labour market. In the program's early years, women, as well as immigrants identified as family-class immigrants and refugee claimants, were often excluded. One estimate is that "only 28% of immigrants received federally funded language training" through this program.

In Ontario, the federal programs in the community colleges trained many fewer learners than other federally funded community-based programs or provincially funded ESL classes offered by local school boards. The 1992 restructuring dramatically changed second language training delivery. The rationale was to make language training both more cost-effective and more accessible, which were legitimate concerns. The previous programs all catered to various populations but the delivery of language training was not well-coordinated nor equitably funded.


L'échec des programmes de langues

par Karen Charnow Lior

Les nouveaux programmes de langues que finance le gouvernement fédéral, soit le Cours de langue pour les immigrants au Canada (CLIC) et le Programme de formation linguistique reliée au travail (PFLRT), tous deux présentés en 1992, posent de nombreux problèmes. CLIC n'aide pas les gens à avoir accès au marché du travail, comme c'était le cas des anciens programmes d'anglais langue seconde, car il n'allie pas une formation linguistique à l'acquisition de compétences professionnelles et de méthodes de recherche d'emploi. De plus, il se peut que les immigrants qui ont obtenu leur citoyenneté canadienne, mais parlent encore mal l'anglais, ne puissent être admissibles à des cours de perfectionnement de langue lorsqu'ils n'ont pas de travail, car les citoyens canadiens ne sont pas admissibles à CLIC.

CLIC ne dispose d'aucunes lignes directrices sur l'équité en matière d'emploi, d'aucune indemnité de déplacement, et les contrats sont souvent passés avec ceux qui offrent de former le plus d'étudiants au prix le plus bas, ce qui stimule la concurrence et l'élaboration de programmes inférieurs. Quelques subventions ont été prévues pour la garde des enfants, mais aucune clause ne stipule que le personnel doive avoir de l'expérience pour s'occuper des enfants des nouveaux venus ou détienne un diplôme en éducation des jeunes enfants. L'enseignement de l'anglais langue seconde aux adultes constitue un service unique qui exige une structure administrative unique. Pourtant, CLIC est un système de formation linguistique décentralisé, désorienté qui perpétue les problèmes existants au lieu de les surmonter.


Back Contents Next