Diversités culturelles et enseignement du français dans le monde: le projet CECA ed. by Emmanuelle Carette, Francis Carton, Monica Vlad

Abstract

Défense et illustration” but “celui d’une polyphonie des langues, ou [...] d’une intercompr éhension des langues à l’échelle européenne” (127–28). Part 3 discusses specialized uses of the languages of Europe. Keywords here are terminology, neologisms , norm, and plurilinguisme. Part 4 takes a quick look at literary French in Europe, retranslation, and la litérarité des traductions, with attention paid, inter alia, to translating Latin poets into French and to bandes dessinées (even those without text). The translator should aim to produce culturally identical effects, not text successful in and for itself, nor a simple mise à plat in the target language (322). While few of the contributors’ names were immediately recognizable to this reviewer , the overall impression left from these contributions is certainly constructive . One wonders how the fruits of these debates might influence official French government policy. One is left to hope that, in this case at least, plus ça change, plus ce n’est plus la même chose. University of Hawai‘i, Ma -noa Kathryn Klingebiel CARETTE, EMMANUELLE, FRANCIS CARTON, et MONICA VLAD, éd. Diversités culturelles et enseignement du français dans le monde: le projet CECA. Grenoble: PU de Grenoble. 2011. ISBN 978-2-7061-1703-9. Pp. 263. 33 a. Scholars know well the French propensity for acronyms. Examples abound in this volume, starting with the subtitle, le projet CECA, which stands for “Cultures d’enseignement, cultures d’apprentissage” and refers to an ambitious research project, carried out simultaneously in twenty countries in Europe, North and South America, Africa, and Asia over a period of five years (2006–11). This volume presents the project and features preliminary findings from ten research teams. The opening chapters, written by the project directors, present the research question, explain the methodology and experimental protocols used by all teams, and reflect on the ethnographic perspective encouraged. One quibble with these early chapters is that each reads as a stand-alone piece and hence includes a significant amount of repetition. On the positive side, after this introduction, the reader emerges with a clear picture of the research. The teams collected a variety of data from second-year French classes in three elementary or secondary schools per country, chosen to represent a diverse sample of socio-economic and geographic (urban versus rural) backgrounds. The data collected include official statistics about each country (for example, population , educational system); information about each school (for example, size, number of teachers, class size, and curriculum); interviews with teachers and students ; classroom observations; and classroom video-recordings. To guide the research and ensure uniformity across countries/teams, seven protocol questions were elaborated. They directed each team to collect and analyze the following: official statistics and demographic information; languages used by students and teachers; the relative importance accorded to oral and written language in class; the representation of the roles of teacher/learner and teaching/ learning; classroom materials and textbooks; observed practices of teacher and students; and an ethnographic study. One of the most interesting features of this project is what the researchers term “les regards croisés.” After the local interpretation and analysis of the data by those familiar with the context and culture, each team’s Reviews 1235 data was examined by teams from two other countries. Each team receiving data was asked to reflect on the practices they observed and relate them to what occurs in their own context. This feedback was then sent back to the originating team of researchers. One chapter, “Des actes de langage dans les classes de FLE/FLS à Suceava, Roumanie: comparaison avec Marseille et Sao Paolo” illustrates les regards croisés by presenting what the Romanian team learned about their own pedagogical practices after reviewing and reflecting upon their data, as well as the explicit reflections that they received from their partner teams. In addition to the introductory chapters, the book features articles from five teams presenting a synthesis of their individual research findings and articles from five additional teams exploring in greater depth one particular aspect of their research. It concludes with an article by Carton highlighting the difficulties encountered in directly comparing the results from one country to another, even with the explicit...