Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - The Implementation and Results of the European Year of Languages 2001 (presented by the European Commission in accordance with Article 11 of Decision n° 1934/2000/EC)
Date: 2002-11-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, European language, European symbol, cooperation policy, dissemination of information, language teaching, multilingualism, report

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 4.11.2002
COM(2002) 597 final

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION
TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND
THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

The Implementation and Results of the European Year of Languages 2001

(presented by the European Commission in accordance with
Article 11 of Decision n° 1934/2000/EC)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Summary................................................................................................................................ 3

Introduction to the Report ...................................................................................................... 5

Part 1: Description of structures and implementation.............................................................. 6

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

Objectives and target groups of the European Year of Languages ............................. 6

Collaboration with the Council of Europe................................................................. 6

Co-operation with Participating Countries ................................................................ 7

Resources ................................................................................................................. 7

Meetings and events ................................................................................................. 9

Information and communications............................................................................ 10

Eurobarometer 54 .................................................................................................. 13

Co-financed projects............................................................................................... 13

Conclusions on the implementation of the European Year ...................................... 16

Part 2: The results of the Year - policy and strategy.............................................................. 17

10.

11.

12.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

The results of the Year as defined by its objectives: ................................................ 17

Political and strategic results................................................................................... 18

Future developments at a European Level............................................................... 23

Principal recommendations of the external evaluation............................................. 25

Detailed breakdown of the European budget commitments..................................... 26

Detailed breakdown of expenditure in Participating countries................................. 27

Project selection: statistical data ............................................................................. 30

EYL co-financed projects and other activities: Examples of good practice:............. 32

2

Summary

2001 was designated the European Year of Languages 2001 by the European Union and the
Council of Europe, with the general aim of encouraging language learning by all persons
residing in Europe. 45 European countries participated in the Year and its implementation in
the EU Member States and EEA countries was the responsibility of
the European
Commission. At a national level the implementation was undertaken by a network of Co-
ordinating Bodies, appointed by national authorities.

€

The European Year budget was
11 million, and it was allocated to co-financed projects, an
information campaign, events to mark the launch and closing of the Year at European and
national levels and a Eurobarometer survey. Two points during the Year were identified to act
as focal points: a Week of Adult Language Learners in May, and a European Day of
Languages in September. These instruments were defined to provide stimulation for activities
to be organised on a wide scale. An external evaluation of the Year was undertaken between
January and June 2002.

190 co-financed projects took place at local, regional, national and transnational levels.
Projects typically included 3 or 4 different types of activities, such as festivals, conferences,
seminars, exhibitions, open-days, mini language courses and competitions. The majority of
them included a web-site and publications which were widely distributed. The projects
covered over 60 languages, with a good balance between official languages, regional and
minority languages, languages of pre-accession countries and sign languages. Each project on
average reached more than 12.000 people. The selection included a small number of media
initiatives which reached several million television viewers and radio listeners.

The information campaign had three main elements: a press and communications campaign;
the production of a logo, publications and promotional items; and a European Website. The
press and communications campaign included direct support to NCBs and three specific press
initiatives during the Year (the Eurobarometer survey, the co-financing of projects and the
European Day of Languages). The publications included an information pack and a leaflet
about the European year and its objectives as well as a Guide for language learners and a
brochure containing highlights of the Year. Over 4 million promotional items were produced
and distributed during the Year including pens, T-shirts and posters. Postcards were
distributed with official EU publications and also directly through bars and cafés. The website
was highly interactive and available in 11 language versions. It remained on-line until the end
of the Year. It was designed to provide information about the Year and its objectives and
activities, links directly to national websites and to other language-related sites and a range of
resources to assist people with language learning. Furthermore, services across the EU
Institutions contributed to the visibility of the Year through their respective communication
activities.

Overall, the European Year of Languages succeeded in creating a framework to encourage
grassroots activity with a common European identity. This common framework was flexible
enough to accommodate national contexts and priorities, both in terms of the objectives
pursued and in terms of instruments chosen.

its objectives. It supported the promotion of a large number of
The Year fulfilled all
languages and different types of language featured side by side in activities as well as in
strategic and political developments.

3

Overall, the impact of the Year was particularly strong amongst professionals (teachers and
students) and policy officials. Activities, particularly around the European Day of Languages
and the European Week of Adult Learners, acted as focal points for the media and the results
of the Eurobarometer survey were also widely covered in the press. The presence of well
known persons taking part in EYL activities was also effective in attracting media attention.

It is too soon to say what the lasting impact of the Year will be, particularly on the take up of
language learning. There is some anecdotal evidence of increased demand for language
learning, especially from adults, or for new language courses. One of the strongest impacts of
the Year has been better links between organisations with an interest in language issues. The
value of these new networks cannot be overstated.

In addition to raising awareness of the general public, the Year was an opportunity for
national and regional authorities and NGOs to debate language teaching and learning.
Conferences, seminars and scientific events provided a good arena for policy makers,
scientists and language teaching professionals to discuss language learning. Several policy
papers promoting multilingualism and linguistic diversity resulted from these debates and
have already led to some changes in language policies. The Year was also an opportunity for
a number of countries to consider the implementation of the Council of Europe's Language
Portfolio and Common European Framework of Reference.

The proposal that European school leavers should have as a minimum "Mother Tongue plus 2
languages" appears in many policy statements and was endorsed at a European level by the
Barcelona Council. Other political debates have focussed around the status of language as a
basic skill for European young people. There is also a growing opinion that it is important to
ensure a communicative level of competence in English for all citizens, but that English alone
is not enough.

The experience of the European Year has demonstrated conclusively that all languages
present within communities can be promoted in an integrated fashion. Consideration needs to
be given to the notion of mainstreaming the promotion of regional and minority, sign and
immigrant languages and of developing a more integrated approach to enable the skills of
bilingual citizens to be valued and promoted.

There is a clear call from the national bodies responsible for the European Year for the
momentum created within the Year to be sustained. Specific actions need to be continued in
the short term, and Community Programmes are seen as essential tools. Examples of good
practice for the promotion of language learning and linguistic diversity need be made widely
available to inspire others to organise future activities.

At European level, the Year provided a stimulus for future developments defined through a
series of resolutions and opinions passed by the European Parliament, the Committee of
regions and the Council of the EU. The Commission will present,
in mid-2003, a
Communication to the European Parliament and the Council on an Action Plan to promote
linguistic diversity and language learning, using resources available within existing
Community Programmes and Activities.

4

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

1

2

3

4

5

Introduction to the Report

2001 was designated the European Year of Languages 2001 on the 17 July 2000 by
Decision of the European Parliament and the Council1 with the general aim of
encouraging language learning by all persons residing in the Member States. The
European Year was also included in the EEA Agreement on 15 December 20002. It
was organised in collaboration with the Council of Europe. The Year was therefore
organised in 45 European countries.

The content of the Report has been drawn from a number of sources, notably: the
independent evaluation undertaken by ECOTEC Research and Consulting Limited,
who were appointed after an open Call for Tender3 and whose report was submitted
to the European Commission in September 20024; national evaluation reports (where
available) and the evaluation report produced by the Council of Europe; policy
documents produced by national and regional authorities and by NGOs published
during, or as a result of, the Year; the final report submitted by EurO&M, who were
appointed to supply communications and production services after an open invitation
to tender5 and the final reports of co-financed projects.

The Year was managed with a high degree of decentralisation, with funding from a
wide range of sources. As a result, comparable and complete data have not always
been available, especially for national budgets, and for the quantification of activities
and press coverage. Nevertheless the report does cover major trends and includes all
available quantitative data (which, because incomplete, are underestimates).

This report covers activities undertaken in, and on behalf of the 15 EU Member
States plus 3 Members of the EEA, Liechtenstein, Iceland and Norway. All candidate
countries were included in the general campaign through their membership of the
Council of Europe. "EYL", "the Year" and "the European Year" refer to the
European Year of Languages and "NCB" refers to the national implementation
services known as the National Co-ordinating Bodies.

The Report is organised into two Parts. Part 1 deals with descriptive information on
the structures and content of the Year as well as conclusions on its implementation.
Part 2 deals with the political and strategic results of the Year.

Decision No 1934/2000/EC published in the OJ no L 232 of 14 September 2000, p. 1.
Decision N° 112/2000 of the EEA Joint Committee, published in the OJ L 52 of 22 February 2001, p. 37.
By open procedure, through public service contract N° DG EAC/28/2001 published in the OJ 2001/S
128-086687 of 6 July 2001. Prior information notice published in the OJ 2001/S 100-068433 of 26 May
2001.
See Annex 1 for the principal recommendations of the evaluators.
By open procedure, through public service contract N° EAC 31/00 published in the OJ 2000/ S 67-
043013 of 5 April 2000. Prior information notice published in the OJ 2000/S 33-019578 of 17 February
2000.

5

Part 1: Description of structures and implementation

1.

OBJECTIVES AND TARGET GROUPS OF THE EUROPEAN YEAR OF LANGUAGES

Five specific objectives were set by the Decision establishing the European Year,
which can be summarised as follows:

– Raising awareness of the Linguistic and cultural Diversity in Europe

– Encouraging multilingualism

– Promoting the advantages of having skills in several languages

– Promoting life-long learning

– Publicising different methods for teaching and learning languages

The Decision covered all persons residing in Member States and provided that the 11
official languages of the EU6 would be included along with Irish and Letzeburgesch.
Additionally it opened the possibility for Member States to include other languages
and as none of them wished to produce a restrictive list of languages, the Year in
practice covered all languages used and learned by Europeans.

The measures specified in the Decision included meetings and events at European
and national level, information and promotional campaigns, surveys and studies, a
limited number of co-financed projects and moral support for activities organised
without EU funding. The year had three main elements: an information and
communications campaign managed via an external communications company,
EurO&M; co-financed projects, selected as a result of a call for proposals managed
in 2 selection rounds and the labelling of other activities which did not receive any
funding from EU budgets, but which carried the identity of the European Year of
Languages 2001 and which contributed to the achievement of its objectives.

2.

COLLABORATION WITH THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE

The collaboration with the Council of Europe was one of the strengths of the
European Year. Not only because it extended the Year to a larger geographic area but
also because it enabled a cross-fertilisation of expertise. It focussed on a number of
joint initiatives: the European opening event in Lund and the closing event in
Brussels (organised with the Swedish and Belgian presidencies respectively); the
European Week of Adult Language Learners (5 - 11 May 2001) and the
European Day of Languages (26 September 2001); the publication of a guide for
the
language learners entitled "How YOU can learn a language";
adult
development of a joint web-site for the Year; the definition of a logo (four heads
superimposed) and slogan for the Year (Languages open doors).

6

castellano, dansk, Deutsch, elliniká, English, français, italiano, Nederlands, português, suomi, svenska

6

The Council of Europe and the European Commission played an active role in each
other's committee structures, organised joint meetings of the bodies responsible for
co-ordinating the Year at national level and many Countries appointed the same
contact people for both the Council of Europe and the EU. The European
Commission allocated a proportion of the publications and promotional items to the
Council of Europe to be distributed to its non EU/EEA members and made all
graphic designs available in electronic form to the authorities in the Council of
Europe's Member States. The Council of Europe and European Commission
evaluators have also shared information on their respective evaluation exercises.

3.

CO-OPERATION WITH PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES

An Advisory Committee, established by the Parliament and Council Decision, was
set up in September 2000 and met on 5 occasions between September 2000 and July
2002. Prior to this a working group of national experts met in February and May
2000 and enabled work to start before the Decision was finalised. There was a high
degree of overlap between the membership of these two groups. The Decision also
required the Member States to set up National Co-ordinating Bodies (NCBs) for
the EYL. These bodies had a substantial workload: the selection of co-financed
projects; dissemination of information on the EYL; relations with the national media
and with the public; the organisation of activities and events at national level. NCBs
in many countries did not have previous experience of working with the European
Commission and the national resources available were sometimes extremely limited.

4.

RESOURCES

Data provided to the European Commission indicates that an investment of at least
€
30.7 million was made in the 18 countries covered by this report. This figure
includes the contributions of national and regional ministries as well as those of co-
include the
financed projects co-ordinators and direct EU budgets. It does not
investments made by the organisations who undertook EYL activities without
financial assistance from the EU or from their national or regional governments. The
total investment is therefore clearly significantly higher. The global situation hides
significant variations from one country to another although, taking population into
account the investment per capita is more coherent: in the majority of countries the
investment amounted to between

0.50 per capita.

0.10 and

€

€

4.1.

European budget

The EU budget for the Year amounted to around
11 million and was divided into
two parts: measures which could be financed up to 100% and measures which could
be co-financed up to 50%7. Between 1999 and 2002 the European Commission
invested approximately 170 months of staff time in the core activities of the
European Year.

€

7

See Annex 2 for a breakdown of the European budget commitments.

7

Although the management of the EYL budget was centralised, in fact 70% of it was
channelled directly into organisations operating at a national, regional or local level.
€
7.6 million was invested by the EU in projects, launch events, promotional items
and publications distributed directly by NCBs, communications training and support
for NCBs and specific national activities organised by the European Commission to
celebrate the European Day of Languages on September 26th. The remainder was
used centrally to provide graphic design, a website, studies, materials distributed
centrally and technical assistance related to the selection of projects.

In recognition of the fact that the budget for the Year was modest compared with the
objectives, the European Commission made every effort to ensure that the impact of
each element of the budget would be maximised. To reduce the costs of articles
created for activity organisers and thereby raise the number of units, all promotional
items could be used in all linguistic settings. To ensure that the EYL messages and
visual identity reached as many people as possible, the publications and promotional
items were distributed through various channels: NCBs, the Council of Europe and
the Commission's own services. To encourage as high a level of press coverage
during the Year as possible, press releases were produced centrally with significant
input from NCBs to ensure the final product would be relevant in a local context, and
the selection of projects also took into account the potential media interest they could
create.

4.2.

National Resources
€

co-ordinators8.

19.7 million was invested in the Year by ministries, private sponsors and project

€

€

€

–

–

–

10.7 million was contributed directly to NCBs by ministries

1.8 million was provided by private sponsors

7.2 million was invested in co-financed projects by beneficiary organisations;

However, this is clearly a conservative estimate as it excludes the investment of
organisations in as many as 8.000 other activities for which no financial data is
available. The Commission does not have access to complete information about how
the resources were allocated within countries: in some cases national budgetary
information includes,
for example, staffing costs and in others it does not.
Nevertheless globally it can be said that all countries organised at least one strategic
or festive event in addition to an official launch, many also organised a closing event.
Almost all countries produced their own promotional
items including postage
stamps, directories of language learning resources and exhibition panels.

8

See Annex 3 for a detailed breakdown of expenditure in Member States

8

5.

MEETINGS AND EVENTS

5.1.

European Launch events

included a high-level

the Year. The opening event

The Belgian and Swedish presidencies organised, in collaboration with the European
Commission and the Council of Europe, specific events to celebrate the opening and
closing of
round table,
performances and activities celebrating linguistic diversity, demonstrations of
teaching methods, and debates. Commissioner Viviane Reding and Walter
Schwimmer, Secretary-General of the Council of Europe, attended. The event
attracted significant media coverage around Europe, mainly as a result of the
simultaneous press announcement of the results of the Eurobarometer survey
mentioned below. The closing event, organised in the European Parliament, was
opened officially by HRH Prince Philip of Belgium and included an exhibition of
projects and a number of round-table discussions, led by organisers of European
Year activities.

5.2.

National Launches and presentations

Launch events were held in all countries, and most of them received some co-
financing from EU budgets. They varied enormously: some were festive, some
political and others information-based. Almost all of them were endorsed by high-
level politicians and celebrities.

5.3.

Other meetings

In October 2001, a conference was held in Rotterdam which presented a variety of
latest developments in language teaching and learning methods, and notably those
which had been developed through the Socrates and Leonardo da Vinci Programmes.
The event was organised by the Dutch Ministry of Education in collaboration with
the European Commission and the Council of Europe, and was co-financed from
Socrates and Leonardo da Vinci funds, enabling the pre-accession countries to
participate fully within EU budgets.

In addition to the national launches, almost all countries organised at least one major
event in the course of the Year, focussing on the main national strategy for the Year.
These varied from the festive to the political and involved almost all sectors with an
interest in education, training, culture and integration. As a result declarations and
policy documents are now under scrutiny by political authorities in many countries.

5.4.

The European Week of Adult Language Learners (5-11 May 2001)

A week of activities was organised to emphasise life-long language learning and
specifically the needs of adults. The guide for adults, "How YOU can learn a
language", was published and widely distributed during the Week. The European
item specifically for this week, a
Commission also produced one promotional
notebook with language learning tips in 11 languages, and promoted it particularly
during the 9th May celebrations in Strasbourg and Brussels. Some co-financed
projects also focussed their energies on this week. Activities including festivals,
publications, language-taster events and conferences were held in most participating
countries, and the Week was widely covered by the media.

9

5.5.

The European Day of Languages (26 September 2001)

The Day of Languages was a resounding success. It acted as a focal point for many
thousands of festivals, conferences, publications and other activities, was celebrated
by well over half of the co-financed projects and attracted more press and media
coverage than at any other time during the Year. The European Commission
organised activities in 17 countries in partnership with a national or local radio
station.

6.

INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS

6.1.

Introduction

The Information campaign was the second largest EU contribution, absorbing 30%
of the total funds. Significant though it was, it was nowhere near sufficient to fund a
paid media advertising campaign across the EU, and the strategy for managing the
campaign was based on the creation of multiplier effects. Each of the major aspects
is dealt with below.

6.2.

Press and communications campaign

The strategic campaign rested on two key observations. First of all, without the
resources for a centrally delivered, high profile advertising campaign, the Year
would need to rely on its ability to attract editorial content in the media. Secondly, a
press campaign needed to be delivered at a national and local level. As a result,
collaboration with the NCBs was extremely important in delivering this aspect of the
campaign.

Initially EurO&M undertook an audit of all NCBs to ascertain their level of
knowledge and experience with press and PR matters, as well as their priorities and
planned activities. The audit determined that there were specific needs in NCBs
which varied in nature and volume across countries. Consequently it was decided to
establish a contract between each NCB and a local PR company, reflecting the
needs defined in the audit. A training course on communications and media issues
was also organised in January 2001 and was well received, but would have been
welcomed much earlier. A communications handbook was published in February
2001 and circulated to all NCBs. A modified version of it was produced and sent to
all co-financed projects.

Key points in the Year were identified for which a specific media push could be
effective. These were: the publication of the Eurobarometer results in February
2001, coinciding with the European launch; the publication of the list of co-financed
projects in June 2001 and the European Day of Languages in September 2001. On
these occasions, in addition to a standard European press release, 20 individual press
releases were developed and published, each one drawing on the national situation
and published in the national language(s).

The information and communication campaign relied heavily on multiplier effects
though activities in participating countries. Press coverage of the European Year of
Languages was generally strong, particularly around the European Day of Languages
in September 2001. Coverage was often linked to strong statements supported by
factual material, such as the results of Eurobarometer surveys, or to the involvement

10

of high-profile individuals. The role of projects in generating local and regional press
coverage was also substantial and successful. Many NCBs and committee members
did feel that that greater television exposure would have been desirable, although
they were realistic about the opportunities for this.

6.3.

Logo, promotional items and publications

The logo for the Year was developed as a result of a call for tender9 and after
consultation with the Council of Europe and Member States. It was made widely
available through NCBs, European and national websites, and directly to interested
parties. There was a set of rules explaining how the logo could be used. The external
evaluation concludes that the logo scored well in terms of use, appropriateness and
recognition. It will continue to be used to brand the annual Day of Languages, which
will be celebrated on September 26th every year under the auspices of the Council of
Europe.

items (posters,

The European Commission, via EurO&M, also produced and distributed about two
million promotional
tee-shirts, postcards, pens, pencil boxes,
notepads, balloons, plastic bags, mouse mats). There were materials suitable for most
target groups, with a strong emphasis on children. The art-work for all these items
was made available on the European website for any parties to use, thus ensuring a
coherent look for EYL products, and also enabling linguistic and design adaptations
to be made to suit individual requirements. A short animation was produced and
widely distributed to television stations, projects and events organisers. It was also
available via the European Website.

A range of publications was produced and distributed: an information pack,
providing information about the European Year, the activities of the EU and the
Council of Europe in language learning and some statistics; a leaflet which was
based on the information pack; a guide to language learning for adults and a
brochure providing some highlights of the Year. All of these were published in the
11 official languages of the EU and the artwork and content was made widely
available to enable other language versions to be developed using the same house
style. The reactions to these were generally favourable.

All material was produced centrally and 72% was distributed nationally by NCBs.
The EU distributed 18% directly, mainly via conferences and exhibitions, and the
Council of Europe distributed 10%. This arrangement generated a significant amount
of work at national level. The promotional items were well received although many
NCBs felt that the stocks of some items were too low and the external evaluation
concluded that higher quantities of a more limited range of items would have been
more appropriate. Feedback also suggests that overall this aspect of the campaign
was successful, however European Year budgets need to take fuller account of the
costs and logistics of storage and distribution. The impact of the animation is not
known, although it was certainly broadcast on national television in Greece.

9

By restricted procedure N° DG EAC/33/00 of 31 March 2000, based on a list of graphic designers
established as a result of Call for Expressions of Interest N° 97/S 153-97419 of 8 August 1997

11

6.4.

European Website

A central feature of the information campaign was the website, which used around
one quarter of the information campaign budget. Its URL was featured on almost all
publications and promotional items. The website was available in the 11 official
languages of the EU. It was fully on-line from mid-February 2001 to the end of
January 2002 and attracted over 75.000 unique visitors and just over 170.000 visits.

The website was structured in 4 distinct areas and interactivity was a key component:
an information section, providing explanations of the EYL,
information about
activities, downloads of the logos and all of the publications and news stories; a
learning section with tips on language learning and information about the EU's and
the Council of Europe's activities; a poetry section in which children could
contribute and translate poetry; a discussion forum. There was also an extensive list
of links which were organised into categories.

700 users contributed to an on-line survey and views were also sought from the
NCBs and project co-ordinators. On the whole the site was well received and valued
by its users. It was felt to be well designed with good clear navigation. It appears to
have been mainly used by those interested in language learning issues and chiefly as
a mechanism for gathering information. The short life span of the site was brought
into question in the evaluation however all the material from the site has been
reserved by the European Commission for future use. The ability to link to the
websites of NCBs was applauded, as was the wide variety of links available from the
site. All language versions of the site were used although there was a frustration
among some users that the site was not available in even more languages. Some
50.000 downloads of documents have been recorded, which suggests that just under
30% of visits generated a download.

6.5.

Additional promotional activities

European Commission services contributed significantly to the visibility of the
European Year and its objectives through their respective core activities. A set of
EYL panels for the main exhibition stand and two portable stands, which were
used by organisations around Europe, and a short video clip promoting the objectives
of the Year were produced by DG EAC. The Office of Publications produced
2 million postcards and distributed them as inserts in official publications. The
Translation Service and the Joint Interpreting and Conference Service collaborated
on the publication of a handbook10 containing information for people interested in
working as translators or interpreters, and providing tips on how to get the best
results from translation and interpreting services. DG Press collaborated to organise
an awareness-raising activity for the Brussels Press Corps in advance of the
European Day of Languages. The European Parliament organised a conference and
also produced and distributed a poster for the European Year.

10

Can be downloaded from http://europa.eu.int/comm/translation/en/eyl/traduc-int-en.pdf

12

7.

EUROBAROMETER 5411

A Eurobarometer public opinion survey, which was conducted in December 2000
among 16 000 citizens of the European Union, provides information on the language
knowledge of Europeans, their opportunities to use the foreign languages they know,
their opinions on the usefulness of speaking other languages,
in
speaking these languages and the ways in which languages are learned. The report
was released to the press in February 2001 on the occasion of the European launch
for the Year in Stockholm. The results of the Eurobarometer survey have been
widely quoted since they were published and they continue to be featured in strategic
and policy papers around Europe.

their interest

8.

CO-FINANCED PROJECTS

€

The Commission allocated
6 million to a total of 185 co-financed projects, and
placed a further 21 projects on a waiting list which was used once all budgetary
allocations had been finalised. A total of 190 projects finally took place, 40 more
than the number estimated in the Call for Proposals. Projects on average received
€
41.000 in other funds bringing the average total cost to
32.000 and invested
€
73.000. As part of their independent evaluation, Ecotec undertook a detailed survey
of co-financed projects via an electronic questionnaire. Just under 50% of the
projects returned the questionnaire. Additionally some 45 co-financed projects were
selected for an in-depth interview along with 27 activities which were not co-
financed.

€

8.1.

The selection procedure

Applications, made as a result of a Call for Proposals12, were submitted via NCBs
who sent them to the European Commission with a commentary. The selection was
made by the European Commission, assisted by a panel of experts nominated by the
the commentaries received. Almost
taking into account
Advisory Committee,
€
47 million. Many applications could
1300 applications were made, requesting over
not be financed because they proposed activities which could be funded under
existing measures. These applicants were redirected to other Community initiatives.

The majority of NCBs were satisfied with the selection procedure, although some felt
that the selection placed a heavy administrative burden on the NCB. Some also felt a
decentralised selection would have been more effective. The project co-ordinators
felt
the selection, management and reporting were
cumbersome, although those interviewed generally recognised that a fair selection
requires detailed information and the majority of them felt that their contacts with the
European Commission staff responsible for the projects were positive.

the procedures for

that

11

12

Eurobarometer 54 ‘Europeans and Languages’ 2001:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/languages/lang/eurobarometer54_en.html
Call for Proposals No EAC/66/00 published in the OJ C 257 of 8 September 2000, p. 6. Deadlines for
submission 02 October 2000 and 15 February 2001.

13

The European Commission considers that a centralised procedure ensured that the
final selection included a wide variety of activities and a consistent approach to the
published eligibility criteria and priorities. The approach adopted also enabled
national priorities to be taken into account and ensured that scarce European Year
funds were not allocated to activities that could be financed under existing measures.
It also enabled NCBs to have a direct relationship with the co-financed projects.

8.2.

Characteristics of the projects selected

local, regional, national or transnational

Projects could be organised at
level.
Although only organisations located in the 18 participating countries could be
funded, the impact of certain projects went beyond these geographical limitations,
the participation of organisations from other countries having been funded from other
sources. A wide variety of institutions managed the projects. By far the most
common lead organisations were non-profit associations,
followed by public
authorities and higher education institutions. Adult or continuing education providers
also featured and private companies and schools were less common.

Most projects included 3 or 4 different types of activity13. Conferences and festivals
were most commonly classed as the 'main activity' and the most common 'side
activities' were media related. Language tasters and competitions were also common
particularly as elements within festivals. Most of the projects worked on a regional
and local level.

Although most of the activities focused on the general public, expert-focused
activities were also common. Festivals, language tasters and competitions reached
large numbers of people (11.000 people on average) although media activities such
as television and radio broadcasts reached even more. EYL projects targeted mostly
"the general public",
followed by students and teachers at various levels of
education. It
is also worth noting that policy makers were targeted by almost
50 activities within projects, making it the 8th most important target group out of 17,
and providing potential for longer-term impact. On average, each of the projects
targeted 12 different languages. At least 65 different languages were targeted, with a
good spread between EU languages, the languages of Central and Eastern European
countries, non EU languages, sign languages, regional and minority languages and
languages of immigrant communities.

8.3.

Results and impact of co-financed projects14

High number of beneficiaries

The projects which reached the highest number of people were those which centred
on television or radio broadcasts. It is clear that one broadcast on prime-time
national television reaches many millions of viewers. Similarly one series of radio
programmes, syndicated across partner stations in a number of countries, and
broadcast in the same time-slot reached a vast audience. The main purpose of this
type of activity was awareness-raising and the main themes were the diversity of
languages in Europe and the value of language skills. Other broadcasting initiatives

13

14

See Annex 4 for statistical data relating to the projects selected
Some examples of project activities can be found in Annex 5.

14

however
promotion of EYL objectives and activities.

took place outside the co-financing framework which enabled wide

High impact on the promotion of language learning

Many language tasters / mini-courses were carried out during the Year. Organisers
tended to offer more than one session within a project, and frequently offered a wide
selection of languages. The impact of these projects on the promotion of language
learning is extremely high, as they involve participants in the process of language
learning. In so doing, they may also inform them directly about the various ways of
learning a language and demonstrate that these can be fun and useful.

High impact on language policy

The external evaluation identified that a significant number of activities, particularly
conferences, seminars and surveys, were targeted upon decision-makers and
multipliers, notably teaching professionals. A synthesis of the results of many of
these activities is presented in Part 2 of this report.

Awareness-raising about the European Year

All projects were contractually required to advertise the European Year through the
use of the logo. Additionally the European Week of Adult language Learning and
the Day of Languages provided a framework within which many activities were
organised. Some projects went much further and, using existing networks or creating
new ones, generated activities in many locations. In one case a European Association
organised a simultaneous language lesson in 50 cities across Europe; in another a
national association of adult education provided an information base for their
members, who undertook a public opinion survey in 7 major cities in the context of a
Day of Languages festival.

Creating a language-friendly environment

A significant number of EYL activities, notably festivals, demonstrated what a true
language-friendly environment could be like. As an example, a core festival might
include cinema from other countries in the original version, and provide information
about language learning facilities, or give people the opportunity to try out new ways
of learning a language. School children might explore the languages present in their
communities, the languages and cultures of their friends and of their partner schools.
Encouraged by this activity, the local media could discover a range of related stories
which were both journalistically and visually interesting. The Internet would then act
as a source of further information and a provider of more language practice. Local
businesses, keen to create closer links with their future employees, might provide
sponsorship and prizes for examples of good practice.

Sustainability

The Evaluation included detailed interviews with organisers of 72 EYL activities, of
which 45 were co-funded and 27 were not. The organisers were asked specifically if
they had plans to continue. Almost 3 out of 4 activity organisers anticipate some
degree of sustainability for their activities. Co-financed initiatives are more likely to
be sustainable than activities which were not co-financed.

15

9.

CONCLUSIONS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EUROPEAN YEAR

Drawing specifically on the external evaluation report, it is clear that the three types
of activity around which the Year was organised (the information campaign; co-
financing a small number of projects; and encouraging "spontaneous" activities to
take place which carry the European badge) were broadly successful. Despite a late
start, limited staff resources and a modest budget compared to the tasks required, the
EYL was a catalyst which stimulated the development of more than 8000 activities at
grass root level, and laid the foundations for future policies at national and European
level. The co-financed projects contributed in a tangible way to these results, and the
information campaign provided materials, guidance and a graphic identity that were
usable and used by actors at all levels.

While there is evidence that the implementation therefore has been successful in its
own right, a number of practical issues nevertheless merit consideration for future
European Years.

• A European Year is a 3-year initiative. Funding and staff resources are required
for a preparatory year, during which strategies can be developed, briefing and
information and publicity
training can take place, projects can be selected,
material can be produced and a website can be established; the implementation
year in which the emphasis is on co-ordination and monitoring; and a concluding
year during which activity is focussed on reporting and evaluating. The European
Year of Languages suffered from insufficient staff and financial resources in the
preparatory year, with the result
in 2001 the staff available were still
developing key features while they also had to implement the activities that had
been planned.

that

• The skills necessary to run a Year at European level demand a certain amount of
subject knowledge and certain generic skills such as communications, logistical
and project management skills. A core team for European Years is essential,
which would deal with the generic issues, leaving the subject-specific issues to be
managed in partnership with the appropriate Unit.

• At a national level the same mixture of expertise is ideal to manage a European
Year. The PR training and PR network could usefully be replicated in the context
of other European Years. Agreement also needs to be in place as to the budgets
and personnel necessary for the storage and distribution of publications and
promotional items to ensure that they reach the target groups locally without using
up badly needed staffing resources at NCB or Commission level. This could be
the subject of a particular call for tender.

• The European Year of Languages was the first European Year to be significantly
present on the Internet, and there are lessons to be learned from this. The
European Commission considers that a multilingual website is an essential feature
of any European Year designed to engage the public at large. The ambitions of
such a website however, need to reflect the time available and the needs of the
campaign. A specific site focussing on core activities and news, with download
facilities and clear links to national and other relevant websites should be
envisaged. The investment
in an interactive website community cannot be
justified within the constraints of a European Year, unless funds are available for
the future hosting and management capacity.

16

Part 2: The results of the Year - policy and strategy

10.

THE RESULTS OF THE YEAR AS DEFINED BY ITS OBJECTIVES:

10.1.

Raising awareness of Linguistic and Cultural Diversity in Europe

Local communities in Europe are dominated by few languages: one or maybe two
official languages and languages that are frequently learned. The European Year of
Languages provided a framework in which Europe's diverse linguistic communities
were able to publicise their presence and integrate the promotion of their cultures and
languages into a wider context. 94% of the co-financed projects sought to address
this objective and they included 65 different languages.

The true diversity of communities was revealed throughout the Year and at every
level of operation. Certainly the languages taught frequently in schools had their
place in many activities, but sign languages, regional and minority languages and
other languages like Arabic or Turkish, which have arrived through waves of
immigration, perhaps for the first time, shared the spotlight with more "dominant"
languages. There is also evidence that the inclusion in the Year of all languages
spoken in Europe has supported citizens who speak languages rarely used outside the
home and given them a pride in their heritage.

10.2.

Encouraging multilingualism

The inclusion of different languages is a welcome feature of the Year, which enabled
the benefits of bilingualism and multilingualism – hitherto relatively undervalued - to
be illustrated and promoted. Many projects have shown that people are curious about
languages and interested in learning to communicate a little in a sign language, a
regional language or a language formerly seen as exotic. The "language-taster"
framework has been particularly effective in providing curious but perhaps sceptical
people with information about new and different ways of learning languages and
letting them try them out.

10.3.

Promoting the advantages of having skills in several languages

As a result of the Year, there is evidence that the advantages of having skills in
several languages are more widely recognised. Eurobarometer has demonstrated that
the majority of European citizens are persuaded that having skills in several
languages is important.

Through European Year of Languages projects thousands of school children have
had the opportunity to reflect on the value of having language skills and to try out
learning new languages. Major conferences and seminars have resulted in
declarations and policy statements calling on national and institutional decision-
makers to ensure that educational provision allows for diversity in the choice of
languages learned, and in some Member States there are signs that this call is being
answered. The media meanwhile has highlighted weaknesses in national contexts and
actively promoted good practice.

17

10.4.

Promoting Life-long Language Learning

European Year activities emphasised that life-long language learning begins at the
earliest age and continues throughout schooling and professional and personal life.
They gave visibility to many initiatives which promote starting in pre-primary and
primary cycles. At every level of education and training, whether in formal or
informal settings, activity organisers have encouraged a reflection on the purpose of
language learning at each stage in life and demonstrated various approaches for
different types of learners. The conclusions of these activities are varied but they
emphasise a common belief: each phase of language learning within the formal
education system needs to provide blocks of knowledge, skill and understanding
upon which further language learning can be built.

The Year also demonstrated that many people have language skills that are
underused in the workplace but also that employers are seeking to recruit people who
already have language skills, experience of living in another country and also the
ability to develop skills in new languages. The emphasis for adult education is placed
in three areas: professional development, integration into the local community and
leisure activities. Some EYL activities also focussed on the resources provided by
retired people who have language skills.

10.5.

Publicising different methods for teaching and learning languages

Eurobarometer showed that, while many citizens believe language skills to be useful
for them and for their children, fewer think they have the time, the money or the
skills to undertake language learning themselves, and many think that the language
provision in their area is not good. These findings provide local, regional and
national decision-makers with an agenda to review and improve language learning
provision.

Many language schools opened their doors to the public and demonstrated new
techniques for language learning; national and regional authorities established
electronic and paper catalogues of
language providers. Many seminars and
conferences brought
together experts from various countries to explain latest
developments in language teaching and learning, and experts published handbooks
for parents and schools explaining the benefits of developments such as content and
language integrated learning (the learning of a subject through the medium of a
foreign language).

11.

POLITICAL AND STRATEGIC RESULTS

The European year provided a platform for reflection and debate at all levels. At a
European level both the European Parliament and the Committee of the Regions
published declarations in 2001 in support of linguistic diversity in Europe and
particularly on the promotion of regional and minority languages. A steady stream of
policy and strategic documents issued by Ministries, NCBs, European Associations,
research centres, local authorities and co-financed projects have been collected by
the European Commission.

18

While it is not possible to provide a comprehensive list of these in this report, and
generalisations risk over-simplifying complex issues, certain key issues and
achievements merit inclusion in this report, with a view to broadening the reflection
on core themes. Equally the European Year cannot
take credit for all policy
developments: some countries had begun the process of reviewing national language-
learning provision before the Year, and it
therefore provided a framework for
broadening debate rather than an instigation to start debates. In other cases it is clear
that the European Year was the impetus for future action.

This section provides an overview of the policies, declarations and reports that have
already been submitted to the Commission, as well as a synthesis of the major
themes under debate and issues arising from them.

11.1. Overview

At a national and regional level the European Year has supported the emergence of
high level strategic developments. Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, Ireland and
the UK have all published reports on the activities and results of the European Year.
Many of these point
to future policy developments. In France the ministerial
announcement in April 2002 of the establishment of a Maison des Langues heralded
also a wide array of developments the teaching of languages. In Denmark and the
UK it has also been announced that the age at which language learning starts in
schools is to be lowered and Ireland is in the process of producing its first national
language policy. The debates inspired by these developments are still receiving
significant press attention as 2002 draws to a close.

At a regional level the European Year inspired significant activities and several
reviews of these as well as strategic documents have resulted. In Spain the
Communidad de Madrid undertook a year long review of language teaching, and
Cataluña published a full report on strategic and policy initiatives that had taken
place during the Year. The German Länder all contributed significantly to the
development of new practices across Germany and several regional educational
authorities, notably in the UK and Italy have acted as a focal point for a variety of
activities.

In advance of the European year, and indeed, in anticipation of it, some European
Associations and NGOs already began a reflection on the themes of the European
Year. The European Parents Association and the European Trade Union
Committee for Education published a declaration on "Successful Language
learning" as early as November 200015.

In the course of 2001 Major European associations promoting specific languages
mobilised their membership and reflected upon the position of the languages they
represent. The European Union of the Deaf published its "EUD sign languages day
resolution"16 in December, while members of the EUD organised major events
throughout the Year in many countries, and notably in Germany, Spain, Finland and
Greece. Students and young people also took the opportunity to reflect on language
issues in 2001. Although no official declarations were made during the European

15

16

Available from http://www.epa.be/eindex.html and http://www.csee-etuce.org/main/english/index.html
Available from http://www.eudnet.org/shownews.php3?id=35

19

Year, the European Bureau for Lesser Used Languages gave it a high visibility
among its members. This contribution has clearly influenced events in many
countries and given voice to EBLUL's existing resolutions. The Cultural Institutes
celebrated the Year in many ways, and in a number of capital cities around Europe,
the Institutes representing various languages and cultures worked together to increase
the impact of their activities.

statement about

the autumn developing their

In the school sector the Organising Bureau of European School Student Unions
language learning, and
spent
specifically from the point of view that life-long learning starts in school17 which will
be published in the course of 2002. School teacher unions also prepared a resolution
through the European Trade Union Committee for Education mentioned above.
In Higher Education two landmark resolutions were published. In December the
European Students' Forum - AEGEE published the "AEGEE Language Policy
Paper"18 while at an institutional level, the European Language Council developed
its Berlin Declaration, "Language Studies in Higher Education: A key contribution to
European integration"19.

11.2.

Synthesis of the policy statements and declarations

The semantics of language policy has evolved: multilingualism has been expressed in
terms of the rights of citizens to use their own languages, the needs of communities
to have access to high quality language learning facilities for a broad range of
languages, the benefits of language skills to society, commerce and individuals and
the duty of governments and European authorities to promote Europe's linguistic
diversity and to ensure that educational provision covers life-long learning of
languages. Language issues have also been closely linked with those of social
inclusion, particularly with respect to sign languages and the recognition that they
are not only languages for deaf people and their families, and to the language skills
of immigrants, where a significant focus has been placed on second language
learning.

The minimum qualification for young people leaving formal education is reiterated
across these statements as 2 languages in addition to the mother tongue.
Continuity throughout the education system and beyond remains an issue in
certain countries and there is a growing body of opinion recommending that foreign
language be treated as a basic skill alongside literacy, numeracy and IT skills.
Several countries have defined age thresholds for the introduction of each of at least
2 foreign languages into the curriculum and, where these existed before the Year,
there are examples of the starting age being lowered.

Finally, policy statements released at national level express a strong desire for
sustainability of the momentum created during the European Year of Languages. In
some countries sustainability is seen as a political issue, and the presence, often for
the first time, of moves to create a national language policy is seen as crucial. The
networks created during the Year also feature strongly in national reports: the new
relationships between educationalists, employers, social partners and cultural

17

18

19

For more information contact OBESSU through http://www.obessu.org/index2.htm
Available from http://www.karl.aegee.org/aeg-
info.nsf/7560fdaee30cc69bc1256368004b00e3/181c5a2f235823a9c1256bcd005740af?OpenDocument
Available from http://www.fu-berlin.de/elc/en/berldecl.html

20

organisations are seen as crucial vehicles to further developments. Elsewhere the
European Year activists and the legacy of their initiatives are seen as providing
inspiration for more and better promotion of language learning and language
awareness.

11.3.

Specific proposals for action

The need for improved language skills

A new and urgent need to improve the language skills of all European citizens has
been defined. Economic factors and professional demands provide a clear agenda,
but issues relating to personal identity and the development of mutual understanding
are also key factors. Employees with language skills are an asset to workplaces, not
only because these skills can be used to benefit businesses, but also because people
with language skills also have other useful skills: they are often communicators,
strategic and logical thinkers and problem-solvers.

How to improve language learning

The key issue of motivation to learn languages is underlined and students declare
they want to take responsibility for their own learning paths. They specify their need
to discover and develop reasons for
their own learning and recognise that
developments should arise from co-operation between teachers and students.
Teachers also call for closer involvement in the selection of appropriate materials
and methods.

In Higher Education, students and professionals agree that
there should be
mandatory language study regardless of the course being studied and the provision
of degree programmes or portions of programmes taught in other languages.
Institutions need to create environments for
independent language learning,
exploiting ICT and e-learning as well as clear learning and communication
objectives need to be set for all language learning programmes.

Direct contact with people from other countries is seen as an essential part of
language study. Mobility is a key aspect of this although it is also recognised that
ICT has an important role to play in bringing other languages and cultures into the
classroom. Linguistic and intercultural preparation and support for mobility
should be improved. This also underlines the importance of developing new learning
pathways that enable students to acquire some communication skills in the countries
of their partners, and in the countries where they will undertake periods of study or
work placement.

How to improve the quality of language teaching

The relationship between teachers and students in the school and in the learning
process is changing, and teachers are moving towards facilitating learning.
Teachers also call for improved access to innovative practices and to the results of
research programmes and would like more opportunities to organise and be involved
in research projects.

21

An increase in the number of native speakers in the teaching force generally and in
Higher education in particular would be welcomed, as would a requirement that all
language teachers spend 6 months working or studying in a country of the language
they teach. Higher education professionals call for highly qualified university
language teachers through the introduction of postgraduate programmes and
continuing education modules, and all should have and use the ability to teach
through the medium of their foreign language. Additionally they propose a
requirement that trainee language teachers should learn a new language as part of
their programme of study.

The process of life-long learning needs to be emphasised. The teaching profession
draws particular attention to the need to raise young children's awareness of different
languages and cultures. They also refer to the specific needs of adults whose mother
tongue is not the national language. Other aspects identified include the need to
increase access to language learning for everyone after leaving formal education and
to ensure a diverse range of opportunity, including summer schools and high quality
distance-learning and e-learning.

Multilingualism

"Mother tongue plus 2" is seen as a basic objective for the education system and
many voiced the opinion that English is not enough on its own, although it is clearly
seen as essential, and mentioned as a minimum for school-leavers. Graduates must
achieve a high level of communication skills in language studies, and must also gain
specific knowledge enabling them to adapt and further develop their linguistic
repertoire in response to changing needs. Language students should be encouraged to
study a second language beside their major and students following ab-initio courses
should have access to intensive foundation courses preceding the degree proper.

Assessment and accreditation

There is general agreement that improvements are needed to systems for assessing
language skills. Students indeed observe that many systems of language skill
recognition exist, but that few are exploited. Students and professionals agree that
language skills gained through non-formal education need to be recognised; these
include the skills gained from mobility programmes as well as through summer
schools and informal learning environments. The transparency and comparability
of language skills and qualifications needs attention. There is agreement that the
Council of Europe's Common European Framework of Reference and the Language
Portfolio are key tools. Initiatives such as Dialang, a European project seeking to
provide a facility for citizens to test their language skills on-line, are particularly
welcomed.

22

12.

FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS AT A EUROPEAN LEVEL

The European Year gave new impetus and visibility to activities in the field of
languages; the European Commission will ensure that the momentum is maintained.

On 13 December 2001 the European Parliament adopted a resolution20 calling for
measures to promote linguistic diversity and language learning, with emphasis placed
on communication skills and the preservation and promotion of regional or lesser-
used languages. As well as ensuring that the linguistic dimension remains present
within its work on education and training, the Parliament, through its Committee
initiatives has also been integrating the promotion of linguistic diversity and
language learning in fields as diverse as film distribution, theatre and the performing
arts, publishing and social exclusion.

On 14 February 2002, the Education Council and the Commission adopted the
Detailed work programme on the follow-up of the objectives of education and
training systems in Europe, which explicitly mentions foreign languages among the
‘basic skills’ required by all European citizens.
‘Improving foreign language
learning’ is a specific objective.

On the same date, the Education Council asked the Member States to take concrete
initiatives and invited the Commission to draw up proposals by early 2003 for
actions to promote linguistic diversity and language learning21.

At the Barcelona European Council of 15-16 March 2002, the Heads of State and
Government called for further action to improve the mastery of basic skills, in
particular by teaching at least two foreign languages from a very early age. They
asked for the establishment of a common linguistic competence indicator in 200322.

To assist the Commission in making progress on these issues, Member States have
nominated a group of national experts in the field of languages. Its role will be
twofold: to provide advice and information about practical ways in which Member
States can implement the languages objectives they have set themselves, and to help
in drawing up the proposals for action at a European level that were requested by the
Council.

The Commission will publish a Discussion Document in the autumn of 2002 which
will be based upon issues that have been highlighted both by the European Year and
by the Commission’s decade of involvement in promoting foreign language learning
and supporting linguistic diversity. A wide consultation with relevant organisations
will be undertaken. Arising from the responses to this consultation, the Commission
will present in mid-2003, a Communication to the European Parliament and the
Council on an Action Plan to promote linguistic diversity and language learning,
using resources available within existing Community Programmes and activities.

20

21

22

Resolution Published in the OJ C 177E of 25 July 2002 p. 334.
Resolution Published in the OJ C 50 of 23 February 2002 p. 1.
The Conclusions of the Barcelona European Council can be consulted on
http://europa.eu.int/council/off/conclu/

23

The Commission therefore is now taking stock of its investment to date and is
considering further ways and means of promoting linguistic diversity and language
learning at a European level. It is committed to adopting a coherent and proactive
approach across all of its actions and programmes in the fields of education and
culture to complement the work of Member States.

The results of the European Year of Languages 2001, as reported in this document,
will certainly contribute significantly to these future developments.

24

ANNEXES

1.

(1)

(2)

PRINCIPAL RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE EXTERNAL EVALUATION

Make available information on EYL projects and publications potentially through a
compendium of EYL good practice projects. It should also be ensured that information
on potential funding opportunities as well as activities planned for the European Day
of Languages is widely accessible, to sustain the momentum generated during the
EYL.

Organisers of future European Years should recognise the time and resources required
in planning and implementing a European Year. A Year is a short period of time in
which to achieve ambitious objectives and hitting the ground running is an important
factor in securing success. A three-year timescale would seem appropriate, consisting
of a year of preparation, a year of implementation and a year to secure follow-up
actions.

(3) When appointing National Co-ordinating Bodies, existing European networks should
be used as far as possible and the management skills and obligations be explicitly
recognised.

(4)

The successful structure adopted by the EYL should be retained for future Years with
the following considerations:

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

The inclusion of a website should be maintained but its role and focus should
be carefully considered in view of the limited resources available and the
longer term objectives. It should be designed and resourced to last beyond the
Year.

The visual logo for the Year proved very successful. The need for a common
slogan might be re-considered in the light of experience. Participating countries
should be encouraged to adopt a slogan relevant to national circumstances.

National PR support should be maintained and enhanced and its content clearly
defined on the basis of NCBs’ needs. It could prove useful to focus this support
on helping NCBs to use co-funded activities more effectively in their national
media campaigns.

A smaller range of promotional items should be produced but
in greater
numbers. Provision should be made for the costs of storing and distributing
promotional items.

(5)

To capture the experience acquired, a “European Year operational template” could be
designed for future Years, including the balance of financial and human resource
needs at different phases, profile of the nature of human and financial resources
required, the identification of types of activities, minimum monitoring requirements.

(6)

It may also be useful to consider the appropriate strategic role which European Years
play in the sustainable promotion of themes of European interest.

25

2.

DETAILED BREAKDOWN OF THE EUROPEAN BUDGET COMMITMENTS

Co-financed projects

Information Campaign

National launches and presentations of the European
Year

Studies: Eurobarometer 54

2000

2001

Total

0

6,044,405

6,044,405

1,853,963

1,346,437

3,200,400

567,482

374,607

0

0

567,482

374,607

European Opening and Closing Events

149,438

132,000

281,438

Evaluation

Technical Assistance and experts for the project
selection

0

186,600

186,600

5,750

132,145

137,895

Total

2,951,240

7,841,587

10,792,827

26

3.

DETAILED BREAKDOWN OF EXPENDITURE IN PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES

Notes

Description of expenditure

(see below)

Number of
Participating
countries
covered

18

18

18

17

6

15

17

14

9

15

18

18

18

15

18

18

7

18

18

GRAND TOTAL

Total national spend

Total EU spend
countries

in

participating

National public funding

National Private sponsorship

Estimated value of radio coverage of EYL
on 26 September

Total direct national funding and
sponsorship

EU European and national launch funding

EU co-financing for projects involving
ministries and NCBs

Total EU contribution directly to NCBs

EU publications and promotional items

EU PR network and communications
training

EU Languages Lift-Off (26 September)

EU postcard campaign

Total EU contribution to promotional
activities undertaken in Member States

EU contribution to co-financed projects
not involving national authorities directly

EU contribution to European level co-
financed projects

(1)

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

(9)

(10)

National co-financing for projects above

Total project financing

27

Total
€

(in

1000)

26.900

19.300

7.600

10.700

1.600

200

12.500

800

500

1.300

400

300

200

100

1.000

4.900

400

6.800

12.100

Explanatory notes

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

Source: all data is taken from interviews with NCBs, conducted by Ecotec between
May and June 2002 except Luxembourg for which no data was available and Denmark
for which data has been taken from the questionnaire submitted to the Council of
Europe in March 2002.

Source: EurO&M final report. The value of the radio coverage is based on feed-back
provided from the radio stations which were official partners for the events. No radio
partners could be found in France or Sweden.

Source: European Commission records. All participating countries could apply for
funding to co-finance national launch events and other presentations for the European
Year. All participating countries except Finland, Iceland and Norway requested some
funding. Financing was also provided to the Swedish and Belgian Presidencies for the
European launch and closing events.

Source: European Commission records. NCBs and ministries were not excluded from
the Call for Proposals for co-financing projects. They were however required to
declare if there was a conflict of interest and they therefore could not provide a
national recommendation with respect to such projects. National initiatives managed
by or involving NCBs and ministries were supported Belgium, Denmark, France,
Italy, Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Finland and United Kingdom.

Source: EurO&M final report. The data for publications and promotional items is
reached by calculating the number of copies of each item that was distributed directly
by participating countries according to the unit cost of production for each item. The
the European
the stock was distributed directly by EurO&M,
remainder of
Commission and the Council of Europe. These calculations do not include the costs of
the time of core staff involved in the content or design of the materials

Source: EurO&M final report. A part of the budget managed by EurO&M was
reserved to establish contracts with PR companies in participating countries who
worked directly and exclusively on tasks specified by the NCBs and in collaboration
with them. This part of the budget also covers the costs of the NCB communications
training held in January 2001 in Paris.

Source: EurO&M final report. 18 participating countries are included although the
Languages Lift-Off took place in only 17 of them: one withdrew after September 11th
but a certain amount of expenditure had already been incurred in the preparations.

Source: EurO&M final report. The postcard campaign was implemented at EU level as
the text on the materials was in the 11 official languages.

Source: European Commission project reports. Differences from the total amount
committed are explained by the withdrawal of a small number of projects after the
final commitments had been made.

(10)

Source: European Commission project reports.

28

EYL spending in participating countries per capita of population

Total

National sources

EU sources

€

€

€

between

between

between

0,01 and

0,05 and

0,10 and

€

€

€

more than

€

0,50

0,05 D, I, UK

D, F, I, UK

B, DK, D, GR, E, F,
IRL, I, NL, A, P, S,
UK, NO

0,10 B, F, P

0,50 DK, GR, E, IRL, L,
NL, A, FIN, S, NO

B, GR, E, IRL, FIN,
P, S, NO

FIN

DK, NL, L, A

L, IS

IS, FL,

FL, IS

FL

This table excludes data relating to European projects as the financing cannot be correctly
allocated to specific participating countries.

29

4.

PROJECT SELECTION: STATISTICAL DATA

Distribution of the co-financed projects according to types of activity

Type of activity

Frequency

% of projects
including this
feature

% of all
activities

Publication

Language taster

Internet event

Conference

Festival

Exhibition

TV event

Competition

Other

Study

91

91

85

72

70

67

57

55

54

31

TOTAL

673

48

48

45

38

37

35

30

29

28

16

14

14

13

11

10

10

8

8

8

5

30

Themes developed within projects

The learning of (a) specific language(s)

Knowledge about (a) specific language(s)

Specific language learning methods/approaches

The benefits of having language skills in the personal development of
individuals

The benefits of having language skills in the professional development
of individuals

Generic language-learning skills

Knowledge about specific cultures

Knowledge about and/or access to language learning providers

Knowledge about or increased use of e-learning (the use of internet
&/or other technology in language learning)

Policy or institutional developments relating to teaching and language
learning languages

Target Languages

%

73%

72%

59%

94%

77%

65%

79%

57%

61%

38%

Group of languages

Number of times a language from
the group was targeted

812

111

68

60

53

42

Official languages (EU and EEA countries)23

Languages of pre-accession countries

Other Central / Eastern European Country

Sign languages

Regional or minority languages

Languages significantly present in Europe as a
result of migration

Source: ECOTEC survey of co-funded projects

23

Including Icelandic, Norwegian, Irish, Letzeburgesch

31

5.

EYL CO-FINANCED PROJECTS AND OTHER ACTIVITIES: EXAMPLES OF GOOD
PRACTICE:

Co-financed activities involving television or radio stations

Danmarks Radio ran a series of 10 radio programmes (each 15 minutes) and four radio
programmes (30 minutes each) in other EU languages to encourage people to learn new
languages. A total of 758,000 people have seen the programmes.

In Greece, ERT produced one hundred TV sports (2 minutes each) where celebrities talked
about their personal experiences of learning languages. These spots were broadcast everyday
on prime time TV after the news bulletin (8pm and 11pm) from the 26th of September to the
30th of November 2001. Approximately 200,000 people were reached every evening.

In Finland, a TV spot (20 second) was designed by the Federation of Foreign Language
Teachers (SUKOL) aimed to encourage language take-up of children aged 10-14. The spot
was shown 32 times on Channel MTV3 between the 17th and 26th of September 2001.
According to the campaign analysis, the spot was seen 425,000 times and by 65 % of the
target population, i.e. approximately 200,000 children of 10-14 years of age saw the ad
approximately 2 times each. One of the success factors was the agreement with MTV3, which
guaranteed to show the spot as many times as required to reach an agreed number of viewers.

TV5, an international francophone broadcasting company, produced 84 clips featuring young
people speaking about why they enjoyed their ability to speak in different languages and what
their language skills had helped them to achieve. Each of the spots was broadcast 20 times per
day for 120 across transnational TV networks owned by TV5 and their partner networks,
reaching a potential audience of 600 million viewers. The programme clips were also
broadcast on a continuous loop in a central Paris Metro station all day for 1 year, and have
been integrated into a teacher's pack that was sent directly to 14.500 teachers of French as a
foreign language and is also available on TV5's website.

The Confédération nationale des Radios Libres in France, in collaboration with partner
networks in Belgium, Italy and Spain, produced and broadcast 30 radio programmes dealing
specifically with regional languages. The programmes were made widely available to the
networks of the companies which produced them and were distributed to, and broadcast by
275 individual stations. Audience statistics for these programmes show that at least 4 million
people tuned in, although this remains a conservative figure based only on reliable audience
research. The CNRL has produced a specific internet facility dealing with regional languages
and enabling the programmes to be downloaded, and has also appointed a Vice President post
for languages.

Television and radio coverage which was not co-financed.

In Austria, ORF was closely involved during the EYL and the Year was extensively covered
on the radio and TV. The project Sprachpavillon, jointly implemented by the Ministry for
Education, Science and Culture and ORF has been a very successful example of awareness
raising activity. It is a mobile construction, which is transported by a truck and contains
mainly screens for presentations and internet stations. In May 2001, the truck made a tour
through all Austrian provinces to support the regional launch events by attracting the general
public with a wealth of activities. The Pavilion was also used to accompany smaller EYL
events in Austria, such as the Youki project which was co-financed by the European
Commission. All Sprachpavillon events were broadcast and featured in magazines on national

32

and regional level. In most provinces, the regional ORF station co-operated with the regional
broadcast of the neighbouring country (e.g. RAI Trieste, Radio Maribor).

In Ireland, the Language Bus was itself an awareness raising activity and received excellent
television coverage. The initial impetus came from a press release for the launch of the bus,
and which resulted in nation-wide publicity when it featured as the third story in that day’s
news broadcast. This helped the bus to gain identity, and led to numerous calls from people
who wanted the bus to come and visit them.

In Norway, the Norwegian Broadcasting (NRK) created 6 programmes specifically dealing
with EYL in the series ‘On the blackboard’, a weekly programme for learning, development
and teaching. Themes included ‘Get to know your own and other’s language’, ‘Language in
‘Who bothers to learn
Norway: more than the two written Norwegian languages’,
Norwegian?’, ‘The landscape of languages in Europe’. In addition, a summer series with tips
for tourists in Europe (10 programmes) was also broadcast.

Development or information sharing on new language teaching material

One of the aims of the Eurosign conference, organised by the German Deaf Association in
Munich, was to promote the use of new technologies for deaf people, including television,
internet, Visicast (virtual
language technology). The idea of creating a European Deaf
University was also debated. The conference provided a forum for participants from
15 countries to discuss these topics. A network is now in place and a follow-up conference
was held in Spain in June 2002.

In Weilburg, Germany, a conference was specifically organised to exchange experiences on
language teaching and learning at schools. Teachers and academics were brought together
to discuss issues such as language programmes, core curriculum, language learning in primary
schools, bilingual teaching and the use of modern media. Results of discussions are a direct
input in the development of a new curriculum in Hessen. The network created carries on
working both in formal working groups and on an informal basis.

A method for an “auto learning class” was initiated as a side-activity of the KELTIC project
(Spain) by a group of professionals in 2001 to be completed in 2002. The International
Congress for foreign language acquisition at early ages also enabled exchanges of experiences
and good practices on early language teaching. A publication of the conclusions is being
prepared.

In Italy, IRRE Lombardia developed a CD Rom containing the outcomes of 16 conferences
on different methodological aspects relating to teaching of foreign languages in nursery
schools. Good practices in each territory were identified and discussed by regional study
teams and information was disseminated at conferences. Each region will receive 100 copies
of the CD Rom.

In Iceland, a website and a CD Rom on alternative approaches to language learning and
teaching was created as a result of a conference organised on this theme. The CD and the
website contain presentations from experts from all over Europe and the conference was
attended by 200 foreign language teachers (i.e. 30-40% of all language teachers in Iceland).
These presentations are therefore widely available within Iceland and elsewhere.

33

Development of awareness raising instruments

In Belgium, the Adult Education Centre of the Brussels’ Chamber of Commerce, created a
series of 30-minute Lingua-Snacks (taster courses) based on the total physical respond
method. Adult students in the centre were recruited and trained to act as teachers for the EYL
project. Taster courses were delivered to 417 participants in 15 languages. An interactive CD-
Rom has been created by the project co-ordinator entitled “Lingua-Snacks - Teaching
Language Taster Courses with Total Physical Response” and is available to all teachers and
institutions willing to launch similar taster courses.

An open-air French course (Une classe dans la Ville) developed by the Association of
French Teachers in Greece was broadcast by TV5 in the main square of Thessaloniki. A
language games and
learning tool was made of the broadcasts as well as video-clips,
interactive activities. On the following day, a training seminar was organised bringing
together local teachers which explained the method adopted during the course. A videotape
has been produced to diffuse the learning tool. It contains extracts of the courses and explains
the method used in the course based on TV and interactive activities.

A language Portfolio was also developed by the General Secretariat for Adult Education in
Greece. Its innovation lies in that it is a portfolio for both informal and formal language
learning, whereas most portfolio focus on formal language qualifications. This portfolio aims
to raise the awareness of adults who may have some knowledge of words in another language
without being conscious of it. The pilot portfolio was developed by 100 adults and a further
300 users will complete it in the course of 2002, before it is used by all adults participating on
adult learning programmes.

In France, “la Fête de Toutes les Langues” consisted of two competitions for the best “fête”
organised by a class to promote linguistic diversity. Preparation for the “fête” included
research, learning ways of writing, looking at history of languages and linguistic differences
and use of languages in the local neighbourhood. Four experimental teaching materials were
also developed and distributed to schools to support them in their activities. These were
adapted from the EV-Lang programme which had been financed by the European
Commission.

As part of its awareness raising campaign on “Sign language: One of four languages”, the
Finnish Association of the Deaf developed a material package of sign language lessons, which
was disseminated to 1200 lower and upper secondary schools in Finland. The material is also
available on the website of the organisation.

Transborder initiatives

Germany and the Netherlands: A competition for "the most language-friendly authority"
was organised among public services on both sides of the border. In judging the entries, the
organisers ensured that on-site visits were made to assess the quality of the initiatives and also
to provide information and advice for further developments.

Sweden and Denmark: A project of the municipality of Malmø, developed several activities
in both sides of the Øresund in order to raise awareness and understanding among children in
primary education and teachers of the language of the neighbour. A follow-up project is
the INTERREG III-A community programme for secondary
planned supported under
education.

34

Austria and Czech Republic (and other CEEC’s): Gymradio Hollabrunn is a radio
programme that has been developed by teachers and pupils of the secondary school of
Hollabrunn with the aim to develop a better understanding of the Austrian and Czech
population in the border region. Language is seen as an important vehicle to do so and
therefore, twice a week, the radio broadcasts some Czech language courses for beginners and
advanced listeners. To create publicity, the Prime Minister of the Czech republic Vaclav
Klaus was also interviewed. In 2001, the Austrian school undertaking the project and a Czech
school close to the border created a partnership and the radio acts a platform for creating
exchange of pupils, artists and regional tourist managers.

Ireland, Spain, and UK: The Irish Theatre project run by Artslab was designed to encourage
young people in Ireland to create links with those who live in other bilingual regions of
Europe such as Navarre and Catalunya. Although the international network already existed,
past projects have concentrated on artistic issues rather than language. This time the
importance of language was brought to the forefront and the project involved creative artists
gathering for laboratory, training and performance time in 3 countries to celebrate 5 languages
(Castillan, Euskera, Catalan, Irish and English). Activities resulted in a shared fiesta organised
in each of the 6 participating towns.

Spain and other institutions from the countries in the “Atlantic Arc”: The KELTIC
project in Spain worked around networks. The project, which was organised around the 5 key
objectives of EYL, developed a local/regional network with institutions around Asturias, a
national network, and an international network, which involved institutions belonging to the
Atlantic Arc. The main Activities involved a 3-day multi-activity languages and culture
meeting, revolving around workshops and round tables, a video event in Oviedo and an
international congress on early foreign language learning.

Rotterdam-Frankfurt-Brussels: The Language Train, a project organised by the academy of
languages in Maastricht, brought together 20 young people of 4 different countries in a train.
These young people were expected to learn each other languages during a train journey.
Activities were reported in the media, including radio, newspapers and TV. Assignments were
also organised during train stops to raise awareness of the general public. A new project with
a train travelling from Athens to Brussels is currently being prepared.

France, Belgium, Luxemburg and Germany: A language bus that made a series of stops in
France, Luxembourg, Germany and Belgium and organised a festival in each location in order
to create publicity and awareness of neighbouring languages at each stop. Local town-halls
and councils were closely involved in the preparation and implementation of this project and
therefore the project was successful in both raising the awareness of local decision-makers on
languages and bringing pupils, teachers and decision-makers together.

35