Since 2001, the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR), advocated a task-based approach in teaching and learning foreign languages which integrates multilingual and multicultural perspectives, in a bid to promote individual multilingualism in European countries and abroad. In a similar vein, in 2009, a year after swiss entry into Schengen zone, federal language policy makers introduced a nationwide educational policy, the Harmos Concordat, to promote individual multilingualism through mandatory teaching of a first language (official language in different Cantons), a second federal language, a foreign language as well as heritage languages of pupils coming from diverse cultural backgrounds, to ensure their inclusion in various schools. In French speaking Switzerland, this implies that primary pupils learning French as first or a second language, also need to develop a basic communicative competence in German and English as first and second foreign languages respectively. However, primary generalist teachers do not consider themselves sufficiently qualified (Edelenbos, Johnstone, & Kubanek, 2006) to teach German despite several years of scholastic and study abroad learning experiences. Most of these teachers were born in bilingual Swiss families. Some of them also come from a migrant family background and hence, do not share French as first language with the majority of pupils. Subsequently, these teachers have to fight on the one hand against protectionist policies favouring recruitment of native speaker teachers of French, German or English, and constant undermining, on the other hand, of their language proficiency by specialist secondary teachers (Poppi & Bondi, 2009) of German who deem them unfit to teach the language at the primary level. As primary generalist teachers are also trained in broad-spectrum curriculum design (Cambra-Giné, 2003), it is crucial to understand the role they play in combining their transdisciplinary practices to include pre-knowledge of primary pupils coming from heterogenous cultural backgrounds, to enable the latter to communicate in basic German during classroom interaction.

1. How do language learning experiences of primary generalist teachers affect their perceptions of communicative competence in German ?
2. How do such perceptions affect how these teachers communicate with their pupils in German during classroom interaction ?
3. How do German language teaching practices of primary generalist teachers correlate with means they use to include pupils from heterogenous backgrounds ?

This paper is part of an ongoing doctoral dissertation on communicative competence of primary generalist teachers who teach German as a first foreign language in French speaking Switzerland. The goal is to conceptualize an inclusive model of communicative competence of primary generalist teachers which takes into account the specific context of an increasingly diverse primary instructed setting, where the use of German, the target foreign language by teachers can create learning opportunities (Cameron, 2001) for their pupils. Through appropriate input (Wode, 2009) in classroom discourse, primary generalist teachers can encourage pupils to interact (Edelenbos & Kubanek, 2009)(Edelenbos & Kubanek, 2009) effectively. A critical review of theoretical underpinnings of Common European Framework of reference, the European teacher portfolio (Newby, 2011) and the profession-related language competence profile (Cuenat et al., 2014) show that communicative competence is limited to either declarative knowledge (Canale & Swain, 1980) of the target foreign language or strategic competence (Bachman, 1990). However, classroom discourse, involves use of socially constituted procedural knowledge (Bulea & Bronckart, 2005; Hymes, 1972; Wray, 2008) as well as socio-discursive abilities of speakers to communicate appropriately (Celce-Murcia, 2007; Dolz & Bronckart, 2002) in specific teaching and learning situations. Fluency (Fillmore, 1979; Schmitt-Gevers, 1997; Segalowitz, 2010), a key indicator of sociolinguistic communicative competence in benchmark tests, as well as pedagogical content knowledge (Schneuwly, 1995; Watzke, 2007) is also part and parcel of teachers’ communicative competence.

Bulea, E., & Bronckart, J.-P. (2005). Pour une approche dynamique des compétences langagières Repenser l'enseignement des langues: comment identifier et exploiter les compétences ? (pp. 193-227). Lille: Presses du Septentrion. Cambra-Giné, M. (2003). Les contextes d'appropriation des langues Une approche ethnographique de la classe de langue (pp. 29-64). Paris: Didier. Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching languages to young learners. Cambridge University Press. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1). Celce-Murcia, M. (2007). Rethinking the Role of Communicative Competence in Language Teaching. In E. A. Soler & M. P. Jordà (Eds.), Intercultural Language Use and Language Learning (pp. 41-57): Springer Netherlands. Cuenat, M. E., Klee, P., Roderer, T., Zappatore, D., Vosicki, B. F., Stoks, G., . . . Lenz, P. (2014). Exigences quant aux compétences langagières spécifiques des personnes enseignantes en langues étrangères au degré primaire. Dolz, J., & Bronckart, J.-P. (2002). La notion de compétence: quelle pertinence pour l'étude de l'apprentissage des actions langagières ? In J. Dolz & E. Olagnier (Eds.), L'énigme de la compétence en éducation (Raisons éducatives ed., pp. 27-44). Bruxelles: De Boeck Université. Edelenbos, P., Johnstone, R., & Kubanek, A. (2006). Les grands principes pédagogiques sur lesquels se fonde l'enseignement des langues aux très jeunes apprenants. Edelenbos, P., & Kubanek, A. (2009). Gute Praxis in Fremdsprachen-Frühbeginn. Braunschweig: Westermann. Fillmore, C. J. (1979). On Fluency. In F. Charles J, K. D, & W.S.Y.Yang (Eds.), Individual differences in language ability and language behaviour (pp. 85-102). New York: Academic Press. Hymes, D. H. (1972). On Communicative Competence. In P. J. B & J.Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp. 269-293). Harmondsworth: Penguin. Newby, D. (2011). Insights into the European Portfolio for Student Teachers of Languages (EPOSTL): Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Poppi, F., & Bondi, M. (2009). Primary Language Teacher Education in Italy; Refining Syllabus Design by listening to learner's voices. Ikala revista de lenguaje y cultura, 14, 159-194. Schmitt-Gevers, H. (1997). L'aisance orale en langue étrangère: enseignement/acquisition et évaluation. Mélanges CRAPEL. Schneuwly, B. (1995). De l'utilité de la «transposition didactique». Paris: De Boeck Supérieur. Segalowitz, N. (2010). Cognitive bases of second language fluency. New York: Routledge. Watzke, J. L. (2007). Foreign Language Pedagogical Knowledge: Toward a Developmental Theory of Beginning Teacher Practices. The Modern Language Journal, 91, 63-82. Wode, H. (2009). Frühes Fremdsprachenlernen in bilingualen Kindergärten und Grundschulen. Braunschweig: Westermann. Wray, A. (2008). Formulaic Language: Pushing the Boundaries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.