Blurb:

This chapter outlines ongoing research on a widening participation programme with particular reference to academic language development. It is organised into four parts: (1) The context of the programme; (2) the theoretical framing in terms of academic literacies, and the concepts of ‘activity frames’; ‘genres’; and ‘modes’; (3) Research Findings and (4) Focus. In the context of integrating research and practice in applied language work across Europe that is the focus of this issue of the BAAL Working Papers, the project described here will be of special interest to those working in academic literacies. A key theme is that, although the focus of the programme described here is on ‘EAL’ students, in practice much of what we have to say applies to students in general and will be relevant to colleagues in university departments working in a variety of language contexts in different countries. Students making the transition from school or work into university contexts encounter new discourse communities, new requirements on their academic language resource and new ways of being a student. The academic literacies perspective that we elaborate upon below offers a broader theoretical and practical approach to these transitions than the dominant ‘study skills’ model and when we have presented on this at European wide conferences (cf. EEAW; EAIE) there have been many points of convergence (see Jones et al., 2000).

The Academic Language Development (ALD) programme also offers some useful insights into and perhaps a critical perspective on the Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) initiative, supported by the European Commission, which likewise offers support for additional language learning across Europe (http://www.clilcompendium.com/). The five dimensions listed in the CLIL Compendium, relating to culture, environment, language, content and learning, could be taken as a basis for also analysing the ALD programme described here. For instance, the concepts of ‘academic literacies’ and of ‘genre and mode switching’ described below could be usefully linked to each of these features. However, the experience of ALD programme to date suggests that it is less directive than the CLIL initiative, the pedagogy is more interactive and the research more ethnographic in style. Such comparisons might provide a fruitful basis for further research that locates the ALD programme in the larger context of European initiatives at the same time as subjecting those initiatives to the comparative rigour of the kinds of case studies we describe here.