When visions meet reality in the teaching of the two Norwegian L1s. Content, ideology and consequences of the newly revised national curriculum
Submitted by:
Inger Synnøve Moi
Abstract:
Written Norwegian, L1, comes in two varieties, Dano-Norwegian (Bokmål) and Norwegian (Nynorsk). Bokmål is the majority language, Nynorsk is the lesser used language. From a sociolinguistic perspective, one could also say Nynorsk is considered a lesser language. However, both are official Norwegian varieties and both varieties are taught in all schools, although each school teaches one of the two as its main L1-variety.
One of the visions behind a revision of the national curriculum in 2013 was to make Norwegian children equally skilled in both varieties by encouraging an early start with the L1-variety that is not the pupil’s main variety. The advantages of early start has been a well-known fact for years, and it has been proven by a number of researchers (e.g. Traavik & Jansson 2011) The advantages of mastering both varieties of written Norwegian is discussed in "The Norwegian language situation with Nynorsk and Bokmål - cognitive advantages?" (Vulchanova 2013).
Closing the gap between oral and written language has traditionally been part of the national curriculum, but the benchmarks were strengthened in the latest revision. Making an early start with the other L1-variety is also more than ever clearly stated in the current curriculum, although this intention has been expressed in management document for years (e.g. St.meld. nr 23 2007- 2008, St.meld.nr. 35 2007 -2008).
As a revision of the national curriculum happens relatively often in Norway, research reports on the practical impact of reforms in schools are prolific. An example of this is the research report "Kunnskaplsløftet - tung bør å bære", which deals with the overall impact of the latest school reform (NIFU STEP 2009-42). The purpose of my study, however, was not to study the general impact of the latest revision, but more specifically I wanted to find out: Did the curriculum revision lead to any changes in the teaching of the two varieties of written Norwegian? If so, were there any differences between teaching Nynorsk and teaching Bokmål as main L1?
Twenty teachers in six schools answered my questionnaire. Three schools teach Bokmål as their main L1- variety and the other three Nynorsk. The schools involved are close geographically, and oral Norwegian in the area is largely the same when it comes to morphology, syntax and vocabulary. The questionnaire held both open and closed questions as I wanted to obtain both quantitative and qualitative data. A preliminary analysis of the data shows that teachers in the schools teaching Bokmål seem partly ignorant of the revised benchmarks, partly in denial - which means the revision is not implemented. Pupils that are taught Bokmål as their first L1-variety, are not introduced to Nynorsk in their early years at school as was the overall intention of the revised curriculum. Teachers in the schools teaching Nynorsk are mainly well aware of the revision but give both linguistic and sociolinguistic reasons for not changing classroom activities. Pupils that are taught Nynorsk, the lesser used language, have an early start with Bokmål, and are equally skilled in both varieties because they meet the majority language both early and everywhere - both inside and outside school.
The ideology behind the revision was the fact that written Norwegian is based on oral Norwegian and to make sure that pupils should be equally skilled in both L1-varieties, pupils should benefit from meeting both varieties in the early years of learning to read and write. My study implies that the ideology behind the revised curriculum has met with Norwegian sociolinguistic reality, i.e. the notion of Nynorsk being a lesser language. The three schools teaching Bokmål were ignoring and/or denying the revised benchmarks, which in turn means they fail to implement the revised curriculum in order to fulfill the vision to make Norwegian children equally skilled in both varieties by encouraging an early start with the L1-variety that is not the pupil’s main variety.
Literature
Jansson, B.K & Traavik, H.: 2011 "Tidleg start med skriving på begge målformene"
NIFU STEP rapport;2009-42. https://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/handle/11250/279950
St.meld. nr 23 (2007- 2008) Språk bygger broer
St.meld.nr. 35 (2007 -2008) Mål og meining
Vulchanova,M. D. 2013. "The Norwegian language situation witn Nynorsk and Bokmål - cognitive advantages?" https://www.cristin.no/as/WebObjects/cristin.woa/wo/6.Profil.29.25.2.3.15.1.2.3