French and English together: an 'additive' experience.

Wiltshire, Jessica ; Harbon, Lesley

Abstract

This paper examines the nature of the 'additive' experience of a bilingual French-English curriculum at Killarney Heights Public School in New South Wales. Predictably, the well-supported 'additive' nature of the languages program model elicited positive reactions regarding educational success. The paper also explores issues for administration, implementation, and teacher professionalism in regard to such a curriculum offering.

Keywords

bilingual education, immersion programs, languages in the primary school, French language and culture

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Introduction

On first glance, Killarney Heights Public School in the northern suburbs of Sydney looks no different to many other primary schools in the area. A low steel fence surrounds a group of brick buildings, natural Australian bush vegetation softens the austerity of the buildings and some medium-sized flowering shrubs line pathways. Large ovals surrounded by shady gums provide a boundary between the primary school and the high school next door. Cars are parked both inside and outside the school gates. Signs warn motorists to slow down and heed the School Zone speed limits. On any given day at school drop-off and pick-up times, streets are busy with cars, buses, students, and parents. This might be any primary school in Sydney's northern suburbs, or in fact, Australia.

On approach to the Main Office however, visitors might start to guess that Killarney Heights Public offers something different. A sign on the wall outside the Reception Area is written in English and French (Welcome/Bienvenue), and smaller signs in the entry veranda remind parents in English and French about the events for the coming weeks. Killarney Heights Public School has indeed 'added' something to what it offers--another language.

This paper examines the nature of the 'additive' experience of a bilingual French-English curriculum at Killarney Heights Public School from the perspectives of the principal and four teachers, and examination of publicly available documents about the program. The 'additive' nature of the model is well supported by all stakeholder groups. While positive perceptions of the educational value of this program is evident. our data suggest that there are issues for administration, implementation, and teacher professionalism.

The paper is structured as follows. Initially, we describe the nature of the Killarney Heights Public bilingual program. We then discuss our data which explores aspects of the 'additive' nature of the program.

Background and context

Since 1999, Killarney Heights Public School has offered a French-English curriculum to students from Kindergarten to Year 6. The program evolved chiefly due to the efforts of a group of parents who wanted their children to receive instruction in French and who formed the French Association of the North Shore (F.A.N.S.). The F.A.N.S. brochure explains the history of the group: To organise the appropriate support, families with a French-speaking background (French, Belgian, Swiss, Canadian, North African, Mauritian, etc.) created the French-speaking Association of the North Shore ... in June 1998. Its purpose is the promotion of the French language and culture among the French-speaking families located in the area ... For children to truly progress in French as a native language, it was necessary to integrate it in their daffy program.

Needing a venue in which to conduct their programs, RAN.& applied to the NSW Department of Education to find 'an empty classroom' in which their educational programs might proceed in after-school mode. Killarney Heights Public School had, at that stage, an empty classroom and with the principal's support, the program began embedded in the school curriculum rather than outside it.

F.A.N.S recruits teachers for French-speaking teacher positions. Advertisements for teaching positions variously seek suitably qualified individuals with both native speaker French proficiency and primary teacher training qualifications (although in a small number of instances secondary-qualified teachers have been employed).

In 2009, according to the principal, 30 languages were spoken by almost 60% of the families in the Killarney Heights Public School community. Parents often enrol their children specifically because of the French bilingual program, and the local real-estate guides now refer to the bilingual program to catch buyers' attention. Families are known to move to the area from other areas in Sydney and even overseas to seek a place for their child.

Killarney Heights Public School advertises for its teachers within Australia and via overseas avenues. Since the program's inception, the school has employed French native speaking teachers from France, Belgium, New Caledonia, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Guadeloupe, and Canada.

The curriculum model sees the New South Wales primary curriculum delivered to all students at the school. The curriculum is delivered in both French and English in a team-teaching context. Of the 595 students in 2009, 160 are from French-speaking backgrounds. According to the principal, these students can be classified as background speakers, very recent arrivals, and heritage background speakers. To be enrolled in the intensive component of the bilingual program students need to demonstrate basic listening and speaking skills in French.

The implementation model may be termed a 'bilingual program', and in particular a dual language/immersion hybrid bilingual French and English program. The 'hybrid' here relates to Deumert's notions about two languages existing alongside one another in an individual's linguistic repertoire. She says

[b]ilingual mixed languages typically arise in two-language contact situations characterized by widespread community and individual bilingualism ... Their function is to affirm the speaker's hybrid bilingual and bicultural identity, i.e. an identity which is distinct from both cultures whose languages are spoken by the community. (Deumert, 2005, p. 130)

De Courcy (2002, p. 3) states that 'if the children have more than 50% of their timetable in the new language, the program is said to be a bilingual program'--as 'immersion bilingual' programs are characterised by the program being taught by one 'competent bilingual' teacher (Baker, 2006, p. 246). The Killarney Heights Public model involves students undertaking 'half of their normal, day-to-day lessons in both French and English' (Palmer, 2006, p. 30) facilitated by two teachers. Consequently the term 'bilingual program' perhaps better describes the Killarney context.

The model in practice sees regular primary school classrooms with two teachers present.

The teaching method involves two teachers within each class working in a team-teaching style. One teacher in each class is a native English speaking teacher and one is a native French speaking teacher. (Fielding, 2009, p. 2)

Teachers work together to plan and deliver the New South Wales primary curriculum with its six learning areas: English, Mathematics, Human Society and Its Environment, Science and Technology, Creative Arts, and PDHPE (Personal Development, Health, and Physical Education). Both the Anglophone teacher and the Francophone teacher work with students in their class, and can variously be found either out the front of the classroom during direct instruction time, or sitting with groups of students, or moving around the classroom helping individuals.

Their collegial planning presumes that both teachers will together present the curriculum. Depending on the individual teachers, and depending on the subject being taught, one teacher might take the lead at a particular point in the day. Each teacher complements the other's work by contributing to instructions, answering questions, or making comment as required. The context does not see direct translation of what one teacher has said. Issues that have existed in the 'folkwisdoms' of this field concerning students waiting until the content is delivered in their stronger language are not realised in this context, as there are no repetitions by the Francophone teacher of what the Anglophone teacher has said.

Research questions

The research reported here has been guided by two research questions:

1 What are the characteristics of the additive bilingual model at Killarney Heights Public School?

2 What are the perceptions of key stakeholders as to the success or otherwise of the program?

We have gathered data from two sources: the principal and four teachers, as well as descriptive data from publicly available documents. The project is the result of collaboration between the school principal and a colleague from The University of Sydney. Permission to conduct this research was sought through both the NSW Department of Education and Training and The University of Sydney's Human Research Ethics Committee.

Team-teaching

The concept of team-teaching grew and developed in the research literature in the second half of the twentieth century (see Bench, 1967; Boren, 1969; McDaniel & Colarulli, 1997). Team-teaching heralded notions of heightened teacher professionalism and benefits to students such as individualised learning. Various types of team-teaching have been described over the years, and one type actually involves two teachers not only planning the curriculum together, but also delivering the curriculum together in the same classroom.

The team-teaching which best describes the Killarney Heights Public context would be where there is 'increased sharing of ideas and styles, higher demands to learn and teach outside one's discipline, and the challenge to model active learning to students' (McDaniel & Colarulli, 1997, p. 22). The teachers 'develop the course, plan and participate in all aspects of the program; coordinate themes, connections and questions; and offer the course in large- and small-group instructional arrangements' (McDaniel & Colarulli, 1997, p. 23). In 2009, all of the 23 classes except three--one of the Year 3/4 classes and two of the Year 5/6 classes--offer a bilingual curriculum. There are eleven French-speaking teachers in the school as shown in table 1.

The team-teaching approach for curriculum delivery emanated from the personal professional experiences of the principal during an earlier period of her teaching history that she explained were 'very powerful' experiences. She explained during interview that in the 1970s she had been involved with experimental programs for children learning in their mother tongue in inner city Sydney schools.

These Infant Transition Bilingual Education (ITBE) child migrant programs, located in the Multicultural Unit of the Department of Education were set up and informed by research that had been undertaken in Sweden. Teams of teachers prepared and delivered the curriculum for students receiving mother-tongue instruction in these programs, which were, according to the principal, very successful for both teachers and students. Consequently, when the EA.N.S. group was negotiating use of the classroom at Killarney Heights Public School, the principal was able to provide advice about a team-teaching model which had been successful in her own past professional experience. As the French-English program began in a small number of the younger year-level groups in the first years of implementation, the F.A.N.S. group were able to prepare to fund the payment of teachers in a modest way from the start.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

A particularly interesting notion about the teachers and the two languages is the possible outsiders' perception of the asymmetry of the bilingual context: that is, that there is a bilingual teacher with French and English and a monolingual teacher with English and both are sharing the task of offering the primary curriculum. This is discussed in light of some of the findings reported in the data below.

Key stakeholders

The major stakeholders at Killarney Heights Public School include the students themselves, the teachers (Francophone and Anglophone), the F.A.N.S group, the larger parent body, and the principal.

The principal's role is integral to the success of the program. The Management Group, which informs the funning of the bilingual classes, describes the principal's role as working with aspects such as teacher supervision, family orientation, chairing interview panels, reviewing material concerning the program and marketing/ advocacy. During interview, the principal described her role as a 'delicate balancing act'. She remains very positive about the curriculum model, however, and 'revel[s] in the way [they] do it'.

Additive bilingualism

The literature on bilingual education is substantial and much of it is relevant to this project. Johnson and Swain's (1997)'eight core features' of bilingual programs describe programs where the second language is the medium of instruction, where there are parallels with the immersion curriculum and the local, first language curriculum, and where overt support exists for the first language. Students are said to enter bilingual programs with similar (and limited) levels of second language proficiency, and such contexts usually involve exposure to the second language, largely confined to the classroom. The teachers are bilingual and the classroom culture is that of the local first language community.

Much has been written about the 'additive' nature of bilingualism in the literature in the past 40 years (Francis, 1998). 'Additive' bilingual learning environments have been considered for some time (Lambert & Tucker, 1972) to be of benefit to student learning. 'Additive' programs have been compared to 'subtractive' models. H. Douglas Brown (2001) advises that an 'additive' program is where the second language learned 'adds to' (additive) rather than replaces (subtractive) first language. Notably, Brisk (1998) says that 'having to learn and differentiate between two languages can be an educational and linguistic advantage and not an impediment' (Brisk, 1998, p. 9).

Australia has a sound history of bilingual or immersion programs in schools.

... programs in Australia include those at Bayswater South (German, 1981), Benowa (French, 1985), Mt Scopus (1990), Mansfield (French, 1991) and Kenmore (German, 1992). (Commonwealth of Australia, 1999, p. 26).

A range of scholars have studied such programs (Berthold ,1990; Clyne, Jenkins, Chen, Tsokalidou, & Wallner, 1995; de Courcy, 2002, 2006; de Courcy, Burston, & Warren, 1999; Fernandez, 1992; Fielding, 2009; Molyneux, 2009). Baetens Beardsmore maintains that additive bilingual education evolves in a society which 'attributes positive values to both languages and considers the acquisition of a second language as an extra tool for thought and communication' (Baetens Beardsmore, 1982, p. 19). In contexts where the student's home language is highly valued, the students' language knowledge is considered a resource (Christian, 1994). May, Hill, and Tiakiwai suggest that 'an additive approach to bilingualism presupposes that bilingualism is a benefit and a resource, both for individuals and the wider society, which should be maintained and fostered' (May, Hill, & Tiakiwai 2004, p. 1).

What has been discussed in the scholarly literature about 'additive' programs is further summarised in the work of Cummins and Swain (1986) and Genesee (1994). Essentially, an additive program involves students 'adding a second language to their repertory of skills at no cost to the development of their first language' (Cummins, 1998, p. 34), and developing a fluency and literacy in both languages (for academic and intellectual benefits) (Cummins, 1998, p. 34), and an authentic communication strategy (Genesee, 1994).

May, Hill, and Tiakiwai's (2004, p. 1) conclude that

non-bilingual programmes are unequivocally less effective than bilingual programmes for bilingual students. This is because they not only atrophy students" bilingualism but also result in the most delimited educational outcomes for such students. (May et al., 2004, p. 1)

Furthermore, 'maintenance and enrichment programmes, which are additive programmes that aim to foster bilingualism and biliteracy, are the most effective' (May et al., 2004, p. 2).

Particularly characteristic of the findings of research on additive and enrichment programs are findings that students develop cognitive flexibility (divergent and convergent thinking) and metalinguistic awareness (May et al., 2004, pp. 25-26).This is similar to the ideas of Cummins (1991) about students transferring knowledge and skills from one language into another. The research studies of Toukomaa and Skutnabb-Kangas (1977), and Cummins and Swain (1986) are two studies that support positive effects for students in additive programs and describe the benefits for second language literacy of programs that acknowledge first language literacy.

For the Killarney model, the literature about 'two-way instruction' is relevant. Dual language or 'two way' instruction is where 'approximately equal numbers of language minority and language majority students are in the same classroom and both languages are used for instruction' (Baker, 2006, p. 228). Thomas and Collier's (1997) six critical features of successful two-way instruction bilingual programs describe programs which involve student participation for at least six years, where there is a balanced ratio of speakers of each language, a separation of languages for instructional purposes (the two languages do not integrate during instructional time), where emphasis is on the minority language in the early grades, and where parents have a positive relationship with the program. Indeed, what is crucial in the conceptualisations of bilingualism in this study is the understanding that there are both background speaker, heritage speaker, and non-background students all receiving the dual language curriculum. The primary curriculum is the curriculum being taught and assessed. Yet, for some students the language of the delivery of the curriculum is one way they maintain their background/ heritage language, for some students it is a third or fourth language and for others, the language is a completely new code.

Teachers in bilingual language programs

Regarding the key role of qualified teachers in bilingual programs, the literature variously reports that

* 'the minimum requirements should be a reasonable fluency in the target language and a formal background in the subject in question' (Hellekjaer, 1999)

* an ideal teacher in this context is a 'native or near-native speaker' (Veque, 2005).

Snow, Met, and Genesee (1989) proposed a conceptual framework for integrating second language and content instruction in which language and content teachers work collaboratively to determine language teaching objectives. This links to the team-teaching model at Killarney.

Creating optimal conditions for successful operationalisation of a bilingual program is an intricate process. Crucial to the success of bilingual programs is effective leadership support, high quality teachers, and other administrative staff, parental support, wider community support, and ongoing staff development (Lindholm-Leary, 2001; Met, 1987). Embedding such programs in primary schools allows this level of cognitive academic learning to go on for a significantly long period of time--five to seven years (Collier, 1992; Cummins, 1991).

In the following section, we discuss data sources and methodology of the research, followed by a discussion of the research findings answering the two research questions.

Methodology

Data were gathered in the first phase of the research through these strategies:

* an interview with the principal which allowed all relevant aspects of the program to be investigated, along with particular notions of what is additive about the program

* a document analysis (school documents, program support documents, management group guidelines, media reports)

* classroom observation notes taken by the researcher in a reflective journal

* interviews with four teaching staff of the school: two Anglophone and two Francophone teachers.

These qualitative data sets were analysed with content/thematic analysis once interviews had been transcribed and transcripts read and re-read to identify themes.

Teacher 1, a native speaker of English, had taught in the bilingual programme for more than seven years at the time of the interview. He has worked with Years 3 to 6. Teacher 2 is a native speaker of Belgian French and has been at the school around six years. Prior to that she had taught in Belgium and Bolivia. Her work at the school to this point has been with Kindergarten through to Year 3.Teacher 3 is an English native speaker teacher and teaches Kindergarten. Teacher 4 is a native speaker of French and at the time of interview had only been in Australia for several months. She has been involved with the Kindergarten to Year 2 program.

What is the additive nature of the bilingual program at Killarney Heights public school?

Our findings indicate seven key aspects of what makes the Killarney Heights program 'additive' (unless otherwise noted, quotes below come from our data sets).

1. A second teacher in the classroom with an additional language

According to the principal, the most obvious aspect of the program's additive nature is the fact that there is a second teacher in these classrooms. Put simply--'there is an extra person in there'. Teacher 3 noted that her colleague French teacher speaks purely in French to the children, 'so in terms of 'additive' the children are getting extra language and extra vocab that they wouldn't have normally had ...' Such a context offering two teachers in the classroom is viewed positively. Teacher 2, a Francophone teacher, is of the opinion that with two teachers in the classroom 'you have the balance of two different characters, two different, sometimes, ways of teaching. That could be very beneficial for the children.'

On a visit to see the classes in action, the researcher's journal notes state: What I see is a classroom full of children and two teachers who appear to be well planned and who are working through their daily programme. I hear two languages and I see evidence of two languages in the materials and student work samples around the classroom.

With the addition of another teacher the implementation model is clearly different to other bilingual programs where it is just one teacher who speaks the two languages.

2. Adding opportunities for comparing languages and cultures, thereby enabling further metalinguistic and cognitive development in students

The additive bilingual French-English curriculum is enriched to stimulate students' cognitive development because there is an official second language in the classroom activities. The two-languages context provides points of comparison between the two languages and, therefore, potentially provides a rich situation for teachers and students to talk about language and language learning processes. One parent, published in a media statement, says:

as well as learning French through the course of their daily studies, students are getting to know the ins and outs of English better; for example, learning more about grammar and sentence construction. (Palmer, 2006, p. 31)

Teacher 1 is convinced that the two languages in the curriculum allow the children to look deeper into how language is structured, how language is formed ... I've always said that the whole literacy aspects of their learning is heightened by the fact that they're making these comparisons ... they're questioning why language is formed in the way it is. They're questioning spelling, they're questioning ... sentence structure, they're questioning a whole range of different things ... they're so used to talking about language.

Similarly, Teacher 2 believes that working through both languages challenges the students. She notes that 'they have to find ways to understand me when I'm teaching them a concept.'

Teacher 1 reported to be on a similar learning journey as the students as regards this close examination of the comparison between the two languages. In his own words, I was asking things like, "Oh that's really interesting that that French word is written that way. Why do you, how do you think that compares with the English way? What do you think is different?' And we'd start to look at where the word was derived from. And you know together then as a class we'd start to work it out.

3. Adding another culture to the learning environment

With the addition of another language to the classroom experience, this necessarily involves discussing the other culture. Teacher 2 explained her thoughts on how the model allows the adding of another culture to the curriculum. She described that moving between the Australian and Francophone cultures can happen even in something as simple as riddles or songs. For example, it's raining cats and dogs, what would you say in French? In French it would be 'It's raining ropes!', and you compare those and you're playing with the language." It is, she said, 'another way of seeing thingst'.

4. The curriculum

The curriculum is impacted with the addition of the second language in the curriculum offerings. The principal is quoted as saying, '[t]he students sing, read and write in French, recite times tables and convert recipes' (Doherty, 2005). The singing, reading, writing, and times tables in both English and French is an enriching, 'additive' experience.

One parent at Killarney Heights Public School states that students 'undertake half of their normal, day-to-day lessons in both French and English' (Palmer, 2006, p. 31). She notes that the Killarney Heights Public bilingual program gives the students

the opportunity to learn a second language the same way they learned their first--by hearing and speaking the language as part of their ordinary activities ... [students] see language acquisition as an organic process, not just a subject they learned at school. (Palmer, 2006, p. 30)

The added language is not perceived to be 'crowding' the curriculum, as is often claimed. Notably, Teacher 3 reported that the curriculum delivered is the New South Wales syllabus and curriculum, adding that 'there's nothing extra or more we're trying to squeeze in'.

5. Adding to teacher professional development

Data examination shows that there are two key ways that teachers can professionally develop in this model. Firstly, English teachers can learn some French. Teacher 1 reported wanting to learn the French like the children, saying, '1 was fascinated. I was asking questions so that I could model to them what sort of questions they could ask the French teachers'. The second key way that teachers professionally develop in this model is the way they learn about team-teaching. Teacher 3 agrees that it is an opportunity for staff to professionally develop. She said, 'you bounce ideas off each other all the time. And you'll say, 'okay, hey, when we're doing art, how about we do this?' And I go, yep. And we can add this in, and we can do that! So you're constantly learning as well as the kids.'

Staff have reported their perceptions that this team-teaching has 'added' to their professionalism. 'One said it was like being 'reborn' as a teacher' (Palmer, 2006, p. 31). In an earlier media report about the program, one teacher was reported as saying that 'bilingual teaching required additional planning and collaboration, but everyone gained as teachers and students learned from each other' (Doherty, 2005)

At interview, Teacher 1 reported that team-teaching was a new phenomenon to him. He realised that what was required in the team-teaching delivery of the bilingual program was 'to be open and flexible ... to be able to embrace the program and to make sure that the children are getting something out of it too'.

Teacher 2 mentioned that having another teacher helping to deliver the curriculum is a 'relief'. She said, 'sometimes, ah, days can be very long. You get more support from another adult in the classroom'.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

6. Additions to the learning environment

The learning environment is clearly impacted by the presence of another language in the curriculum. During her formal visits through five classrooms, the researcher's reflective journal tells the story of print-rich, obviously dynamic primary classroom environments: On the whiteboards, walls, ceilings, in the bookshelves, tubs, floor spaces, actually everywhere in each classroom, there is evidence of two languages existing together in the learning environment. The coatrooms are not even exempt. Everywhere I see French and English print and images depicting the cultural identities of the children in these classrooms. Some of the material is commercially produced, but many of it is not: some comprise hanging mobiles, wall posters, poetry displays, weather and wall charts, created by the teachers and children.

Teacher 2 explained that the additional language 'gives [children] another 'place' to be doing their learning. For example, they learn their mathematics concepts in English and in French.'

The important impact that is made by creating a supporting language learning environment becomes obvious when two languages are existing together.

7. Inclusive strategies to add to the development of student confidence

The perceived impact that the program has students is described by one teacher in terms of an increase in student self-confidence. Teacher 2 states that it gives an opportunity to everyone. And we have children, who, for example, feel really really bad because they're not good at math. They're not good at sport, and suddenly they discover--'Oh, I'm good at French.'

She went on to say, 'We don't say to them, 'You need to answer me back in French'. Yeah, they feel relaxed, more relaxed. Relaxed to do mistakes, relaxed to try.' She even described the times the children comment on her English. She said, 'Because English is not my first language obviously sometimes I struggle. And they get the opportunity to correct me ... and it gives them a huge amount of confidence.'

Summary

In sum, the 'additive' model at this school means a second language teacher in the classroom, which involves extra aspects added to the curriculum, the learning environment and added staff development opportunities. As well, there is increased emphasis placed on students' cognitive development and metalinguistic awareness, added sociocultural and linguistic knowledge, and an extra way of enriching the curriculum, chiefly due to the fact that there are points of comparison between French-speaking and Australian English-speaking teachers and students as they undertake their daily tasks.

What are the perceived successes of the Killarney model?

The principal and four teachers interviewed were unanimous regarding the success of the Killarney model. In our view, teacher 3's comments encapsulate this: They [the students] think it's normal, especially in Kindy. They're just sitting there and we do the weather in French. They just go backwards and forwards and they're perfectly happy with it. If I ask a question in English, they'll answer it for me in English. And if [the other teacher] asks in French, they'll go backwards and forwards really easily ... they'd tell you they speak two languages, even though they sort of know bits and pieces--they believe they speak two.

Teacher 3 maintains that the key success aspect is for the children who need to be extended. Those children are already achieving all the outcomes, and, she says, it just gives them an extra bonus of something else that they can grasp onto and more things to learn, and you know, putting sentences together, and all those sorts of things, especially in Kindergarten. And for some of the students who are still developing some outcomes and indicators, sometimes putting it another way helps them ... you can get other kids to explain it different ways, and then another teacher explaining it and putting another language to it helps them to remember a concept.

In outlining her idea of the extent of the success of the Killarney program, Teacher 4 refers to the notion of identity. She believes that allowing French to coexist in the curriculum alongside English allows the Francophone children in the school, some 'identity time'. She said 'it's an asset, for all their life'.

However, as well as these positive perceptions, key stakeholders report a series of issues related to the implementation of such a model.

Issues in administration, implementation, and teacher professionalism

The principal mentioned in her interview that over the eight years of the program a number of administrative issues have arisen, albeit none insurmountable.

She described a number of examples staff interpersonal communications and relations, and logistics of recruiting and staffing. However, the area of teacher professionalism is seen as the most important set of issues to be solved when issues become problematic.

The principal includes a whole staff reflective session on bilingual education and team delivery within many of her staff planning days, particularly the first planning day of the school year before the students arrive. The fact that the principal is conscious of managing her staff thoroughly makes the difference here. Teacher 1, an Anglophone teacher, commented that it took some time to get used to team-teaching So when I first started in the program I really didn't know what it was like to do team-teaching--that was something brand new to me. Even though I'd worked with other teachers obviously in different sorts of capacities, I'd had teachers' aides in my room, I'd worked with ESL teachers and different things like that. But it wasn't in this sort of way. You know it wasn't the depth of programming and planning that took place, you know, that takes place now when you're working with another teacher sort of you know half the day every day. So it was a brand new experience. And you just have to be open and flexible to all those things, to be able to embrace the program and to get something out of it.

Teacher 2, a Francophone teacher, also noted that the team-teaching aspect is really the biggest challenge for her. She said, 'you know you're going to be working with someone else every year. And you're going to learn from that person. You're going to learn things from that person that you want to do, or things, you might want to say'. Teacher 2 related that every year of her six years has been different and, therefore, she has had to become accustomed to change.

Teacher 2 also related the fact that English is not her first language and she consequently makes mistakes every now and then, and this challenges her professionalism. She finds that the children comment on her English mistakes, which is another challenge. She said that 'they can see that even adults can have some difficulties, because English not being my first language obviously sometimes I struggle. And they get the opportunity to correct me.' Importantly, she has learned to get used to that feeling.

All in all, according to the principal, when issues have arisen, they have been dealt with case by case. Teachers who have not been able to adapt to the team-teaching situation have had other opportunities made available to them.

Discussion

The perception of the additive aspects of the Killarney model is supported by existing literature on the positive aspects of bilingual program implementation (Cummins, 1998; Genesee, 1994; May et al., 2004;Thomas & Collier, 1997). The teachers' reports all underscore the six key aspects found in the literature about bilingual education in general:

* adding cognitive enrichment through metalinguistic awareness

* adding awareness of another culture

* enriching the curriculum in general

* enriching staff professional development

* enriching the learning environment

* enhancing student confidence and building student identity.

Where the Killarney model differs is in the presence of two teachers in the classroom, each representing one or other of the languages. The presence of two teachers in the Killarney classrooms adds an important and, for the most part, enriching aspect to these teachers' professional experiences. The teachers do not mention that they have noticed difficulties for students who have a French. What they do mention, however, is seeing the children's French skills develop and alongside that, their own professional development. Moreover, for the Anglophone teachers, the presence of French in the classroom is clearly enriches their own professional development, as Teacher 1 noted above. Unfortunately, the dearth of literature on such team-teaching bilingual models does not allow us to compare to other contexts or contrast the notions embedded in successful bilingual team-teaching contexts.

The data sets collected, analysed, and reported in this paper represent a preliminary discussion of a team-teaching bilingual program and may not be generalisable to other contexts. However, in our view, our commentary regarding implementation and administration issues, and teacher professionalism are a valuable addition to consideration of bilingual education.

Conclusion

A discussion of the research findings has attempted to place what we know about the team-teaching model of curriculum implementation at Killarney Heights Public School in terms of both research and practice within an additive bilingual framework. This provides a useful starting point for further research on the impacts of such a model for student and teacher learning.

As previously stated, Sdnow, Met, and Genesee (1989) propose a conceptual framework for integrating second language and content instruction in which language and content teachers work collaboratively to determine language teaching objectives.

This is exactly what is occurring at Killarney Heights Public School. While perceptions of the program are overwhelmingly positive, we can also identify concrete successes. Year 6 graduates accelerate into Year 9 French programs at the feeder high school next door. At present, the first group of Year 10 students who graduated from the primary school program are preparing to sit the NSW Higher School Certificate in French (see Doherty, 2005).

The principal is understandably proud of the school's achievements and believes her model is one of the only programs in the system catering to 'children whose bilingualism and biculturalism remain ignored and unexploited' (Young & Helot, 2003, p. 234). Future research will explore the parents' views of this curriculum model, as well as the development of students' identities within such a curriculum offering. Further research may also gather evidence of the level of language acquisition that is possible through such models of implementation. As noted at the outset, this might be any primary school in Sydney's northern suburbs, or in fact, Australia. However, it is the synergy of French and English together inside and outside the classroom that provides strength in the curriculum and makes the learning experience 'additive': the effect is greater than the sum of the parts.

References

Baker, C. 2006. Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Baetens Beardsmore, H. 1982. Bilingualism: Basic principles. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Bench, V. 1967 Concepts of team teaching. Team Teaching, 2, 1, 2-3.

Berthold, M. 1990. The language immersion concept. Babel, 25, 3, 30-35.

Boren, W.R. 1969.Team teaching: How to incorporate it into our schools. Team Teaching, 3, 3, 3.

Brisk, M. 1998. Bilingual education: from compensatory to quality schooling. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Brown, H.D. 2001. Teaching by principles: an interactive approach to language pedagogy. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Christian, D. 1994. Two-way bilingual education: students learning through two languages. Educational Practice Report: 12. Washington, D.C.: George Washington University, Center for Applied Linguistics, National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning.

Clyne, M., Jenkins, C., Chen, I., Tsokalidou, R., & Wallner, T. 1995. Developing second language from primary school: Models and outcomes. Deakin, ACT: National Languages and Literacy Institute of Australia.

Collier, V.P 1992. A synthesis of studies examining long-term language minority student data on academic achievement. Bilingual Research Journal, 16, 187-222.

Commonwealth of Australia. 1999. Pathways for Australian students to achieve high levels of proficiency in Asian languages: A report prepared for the National Asian Languages and Studies in Australian Schools (NALSAS) Taskforce. Canberra: The Centre for Curriculum and Professional Development, Murdoch University and Simpson Norris International.

Cummins, J. 1998. Immersion education for the Millennium: What have we learned from 30 years of research on second language immersion? In M. R. Childs & R.M. Bostwick (Eds), Learning through two languages: research and practice, 34-4-7 Katoh Gakuen, Japan.

Cummins, J. 1991. The development of bilingual proficiency from home to school: A longitudinal study of Portuguese-speaking children. Journal of Education, 173, 85-98.

Cummins, J. & Swain, M. 1986. Bilingualism in education: aspects of theory, research and practice. London; New York: Longman.

de Courcy, M. 2002. Immersion education downunder. The ACIE Newsletter, 5, 3, May.

de Courcy, M. 2006. The effect of literacy in Hebrew on the acquisition of English. Babel, 41, 2, 4-9 & 36.

de Courcy, M., Burston, M., & Warren, J. 1999. Language development in an Australian French early partial immersion program. Babel, 34, 2, 14-20 & 38.

Deumert, A. (2005). The unbearable lightness of being bilingual: English-Afrikaans language contact in South Africa. Language Sciences, 27, 1, 113-135.

Doherty, L. 2005.Tandem lessons yield magnifique results for young linguists. The Sydney Morning Herald, 2 December.

Fernandez, S. 1992. Room for two: a study of bilingual education at Bayswater South primary school East Melbourne, Vic.: National Languages and Literacy Institute of Australia.

Fielding, R. 2009. Bilingual education in an Australian primary school: Student identification with more than one language. Refereed Conference Proceedings of the Language, Education & Diversity Conference, University of Waikato, New Zealand. November.

Francis, N. 1998. Bilingual's children's reflections on writing and diglossia. International journal of bilingual education and bilingualism, 1, 1, 18-46.

Genesee, F. 1994. Integrating language and content: lessons from immersion. National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning Educational Practice Report, Paper EPR11. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley.

Hellekjaer, G.O. 1999. Easy does it: introducing pupils to bilingual instruction. Zeitschrift fur Interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht, 4, 2, 1-9.

Johnson, R.K. & Swain, M. 199-7 Immersion education: International perspectives. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Lambert, W.E. &Tucker, G.R. 1972. Bilingual education of children: the St. Lambert experiment. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.

Lindholm-Leary, K. 2001. Dual language education. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.

May, S., Hill, R., & Tiakiwai, S. 2004. Bilingual/immersion education: indicators of good practice. Final Report to the Ministry of Education. Wilf Malcolm Institute for Educational Research. School of Education, University of Waikato, New Zealand: Ministry of Education, New Zealand. Retrieved 31 August 2007 from http://www.minedu.govt.nz

McDaniel, E.A. & Colarulli, G.C. 1997. Collaborative teaching in the face of productivity concerns: the dispersed team model. Innovative Higher Education, 22, 1, 19-36.

Met, M. 1987. Twenty questions: The most commonly asked questions about starting an immersion program. Foreign language annals, 20, 4, 311.

Molyneux, P. 2009. Education for biliteracy: Maximising the linguistic potential of diverse learners in Australia's primary schools. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 32, 2, 97-11-7

Palmer, M. 2006. French at Primary School. P & C Journal, Term 2, 2006, 30-31.

Snow, M.A., Met, M., & Genesee, F. 1989. A conceptual framework for the integration of language and content in second/foreign language instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 2, 201-217.

Thomas, W.P. & Collier, V. 1997. School effectiveness for language minority students. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.

Toukomaa, P. & Skutnabb-Kangas, T. 1977. The intensive teaching of the mother tongue to migrant children at pre-school age (Research Report No. 26). Tempere, Finland: Department of Sociology and Social Psychology, University of Tampere.

Veque, C. 2005.Teacher talk in the immersion classroom. Babel, 40, 2, 10-15 & 37.

Young, A. & Helot, C. 2003. Language awareness and/or language learning in French primary schools today. Language Awareness, 12, 3&4, 234-246.

Jessica Wiltshire has been involved in multicultural and languages education for almost 40 years in schools in London and Sydney. Jessica currently works at Killarney Heights Public School where she has been Principal since 1992 and where she established the unique English/French bilingual program which has operated successfully since 1999. In 2008, she was awarded a NSW DET Leadership Fellowship to visit educational institutions in USA and Canada to research the leadership and management practices of schools teaching bilingual programs. Email jessica.r.wiltshire@det.nsw.edu.au

Lesley Harbon teaches in preservice and postgraduate languages education units of study at The University of Sydney. Her research interests include researching bilingual/immersion programs and the impact of short-term international experiences in preservice language teacher professional development. Her recent publications and projects can be found on her website at www.personal.edfac.usyd. edu.au/staff/harbonl

Lesley is currently a member of the management team for the Professional Standards Project Phase 2 and President of the Australian Federation of Modern Language Teachers Associations. Email lesley.harben@sydney.edu.au Table 1 Classes, teachers, and languages at Killarney Heights Public School, 2009 Year Level/Stage Teachers Kindergarten bilingual Class Teachers 1 and 2 and French teacher 1 (39 children in a double class) Kindergarten bilingual Class Teacher 3 and 4 and French teacher 2 Kindergarten bilingual Class Teacher 5 and French teacher 3 Year 1 bilingual Class Teacher 6 and French teacher 4 Year 1 bilingual Class Teacher 7 and French teacher 5 Year 1 bilingual Class Teacher 8 and French teacher 5 Year 1/2 bilingual Class Teacher 9 and French teacher 6 Year 2 bilingual Class Teacher 10 and French teacher 7 Year 2 bilingual Class Teacher 11 and French teacher 4 Year 2 bilingual Class Teacher 12 and French teacher 7 Year 3 bilingual Class Teacher 13 and French teacher 8 Year 3 bilingual Class Teacher 14 and French teacher 8 Year 3/4 bilingual Class Teacher 15 and French teacher 3 Year 4 non-bilingual Class Teacher 16 Year 4 bilingual Class Teacher 17 and French teacher 9 Year 4 bilingual Class Teacher 18 and French teacher 9 Year 5 bilingual Class Teacher 19 and French teacher 10 Year 5/6 bilingual Class Teacher 20 and French teacher 11 Year 5/6 bilingual Class Teacher 21 and French teacher 11 5/6 non-bilingual Class Teacher 22 5/6 non-bilingual Class Teacher 23