a case study on multilingual classroom

Search NYU Steinhardt

Case study on multilingualism in classrooms shows acts of care and solidarity as well as exclusion, aggression.

US classrooms are becoming increasingly multilingual, with students from various language backgrounds. To meet the needs of these multilingual students, many teachers are adopting a pedagogy that encourages students to use all their languages in the classroom. 

This teaching approach leverages multilinguals’ translanguaging – their ability to move fluidly between languages – for communication and learning. New research led by Associate Professor of Language Education  Kongji Qin outlined the various ways that translanguaging can be used in a classroom, including to facilitate learning and foster bonds as well as isolate or insult others who don’t share a language. In these multilingual classrooms, a shared language among people can promote shared identity, bonding, and support. It can also be used for exclusion and aggression.

Qin’s co-authored article, published in  The Modern Language Journal ,  drew on a case study his research team conducted in a high school science classroom where students’ languages included Spanish, Chinese, Bengali, and Arabic. The teacher in the case study spoke English as his first language and had an intermediate proficiency in Spanish and a beginner’s proficiency in Chinese. This research project was funded by the Spencer Foundation. 

Through observation, audio and video recordings, and interviews with the teacher and students, Qin and his co-author, Vice Dean of Academic Affairs and Professor of Education  Lorena Llosa , identified varied uses of translanguaging in this multilingual classroom:

• Translingual support: acts (between teacher and student or among students) that support students in accessing the instruction or negotiating meaning
• Translingual caring: acts that show care or make students more comfortable by speaking their first language, particularly when students are experiencing moments of vulnerability
• Translingual critical love: acts as a critical languaging practice for short-circuiting racism and countering inequality related to language use
• Translingual bonding: acts that work to develop and strengthen social relationships among students, either within or across language groups
• Translingual safe houses: acts that allow students to bypass surveillance to create a safe space for themselves, for having a laugh, resisting school power structures, or defying classroom rules or teacher control
• Translingual exclusion: acts that work to exclude people from other language groups
• Translingual aggression: acts that derogate or demean other people along the lines of differences, often in the form of racism, misogyny, and linguicism.

NYU News spoke to Qin and Llosa about the practice of translanguaging, the contributions of their research, and their suggestions for how to curtail negative uses. 

Why is translanguaging important for the education of multilingual students?

First, translanguaging disrupts the deficit lens that views multilingual students as lacking English language proficiency; instead, it views them as multilingual speakers who can use their linguistic resources from all the languages they know for learning. Thus, translanguaging pedagogy embraces an asset-based approach to multilingual students. Secondly, by encouraging multilingual students to use their multilingual resources for learning, translanguaging pedagogy challenges monolingual ideologies and asserts that multilingualism is the norm, which works to affirm multilingual students’ linguistic and cultural identity. Third, translanguaging pedagogy allows teachers to make their instruction more accessible to multilingual students and allows them to use all their linguistic resources to demonstrate their academic learning and understanding.  

How does your study contribute to the research on translanguaging pedagogy?

Few studies have acknowledged the complexity of translanguaging pedagogy. As educators, we need to ask: besides its benefits, what challenges does translanguaging pedagogy bring to the classroom? Our study examined both its affordances and challenges. We illustrated that in addition to its benefits, sometimes students used translanguaging to exclude other students. Such translingual exclusion often happened in group activities where students from the same linguistic background interacted with each other in their shared language, leaving out those from a different linguistic background. More critically, our study identified instances of translingual aggression – students sometimes used translanguaging to put down and discriminate against other students. These acts are more vicious because they are often left unchecked. By shedding light on its challenges, our study contributes to the research with a balanced view of translanguaging pedagogy that illuminates its complexity. Such a complex view can better inform teachers in using this instructional approach to advance educational equity for multilingual students. 

Your article calls for using a lens of criticality toward translanguaging in classrooms. What does a lens of criticality mean and why is it necessary?

Taking up a lens of criticality means that language should not be just viewed through a neutral lens as only serving the purpose of exchanging information or communication; instead, we should attend to the relationships of language and power. Language often influences power relations and it is also influenced by power relations. It is important to take up a lens of criticality toward translanguaging in classrooms because as a theory of language, translanguaging challenges the power relations or the hierarchical relationships among languages created by monolingual ideologies. Relatedly, it also disrupts deficit views toward multilingual students. Yet, as previously mentioned, our study also showed that translanguaging was used by students for exclusion and aggression, such uses result in inequalities. Therefore, adopting a lens of criticality allows us to gain a comprehensive understanding of this approach – how it challenges power and inequality and how it might perpetuate inequality when used uncritically. 

How can teachers curtail negative uses of translanguaging? 

Teachers should develop students’ critical language awareness – awareness of how language is connected to power and inequity – so that they can move away from translingual exclusion and aggression. Once students develop such critical awareness, they will be able to become more conscious of their language use and its impact. A variety of approaches can be used to foster students’ critical language awareness. Teachers can ask students to do a survey to see what languages their peers speak in the classroom and discuss the relative positions of their class’s languages in hierarchies of power. Teachers can help students understand that translanguaging practices, like any language use, are connected to and often shape power and ideologies. Teachers can also engage students in critical reflection of  when and with whom  they use translanguaging, and  why , as well as how their translanguaging might impact others in the context.  

Related Departments

Teaching and Learning

Explore our teacher education programs where you will develop core skills, build expertise in content areas, and engage with urban schools and communities.

This site belongs to UNESCO's International Institute for Educational Planning

IIEP Learning Portal

Search form

Promoting multilingual approaches in teaching and learning.

Multilingualism is good for us. Not only does speaking more than one language keep our brains healthy as we age, but it has multiple benefits for children too, such as giving them an academic advantage and improving their employment prospects once they leave school. Moreover, multilingualism gives us access to more than one culture and improves our understanding of our own cultures. 

But what does this mean for classroom teaching, especially in school contexts that equate English language proficiency with academic success? How can teachers harness the benefits of their students’ multilingualism, while simultaneously helping them to develop the academic language they need to succeed?

A team of Australia-based educational researchers has embraced this challenge by working with the British Council to produce a groundbreaking collection of multilingual classroom activities. These activities are aimed at teachers who work with English as a subject or use English as the medium of instruction in low-resource, multilingual classrooms. The team comprised researchers from the University of South Australia , Griffith and Macquarie Universities, all of whom have extensive experience of teaching in culturally and linguistically diverse contexts, including sub-Saharan Africa, northern Africa and southeast Asia. Two team members explain what lies behind the publication.

For many years, teachers of English have been told that using student’s home languages in English lessons should be avoided at all costs

A growing body of research literature shows that drawing on students’ home language and cultural backgrounds in classroom teaching validates their identities and provides a strong foundation for additional language learning. Yet the reality for many multilingual students, especially English language learners, has been that their home languages are left at the classroom door or regarded as an obstacle to the development of the language of schooling and learning in general. For many years, teachers of English have been told that using student’s home languages in English lessons should be avoided at all costs. 

Language as a resource 

Multilingual classrooms are a growing phenomenon around the world, as a result of rapid increases in global mobility and migration. Within these classrooms, students may have different linguistic and cultural backgrounds, may speak one language at home and another language at school, or be learning the language of instruction as an additional language. International agencies such as UNICEF, UNESCO and the European Commission contend that multilingual education can play a significant role in engaging diverse learners. As well as supporting academic success, classrooms that promote multilingualism can foster positive identities associated with their home cultures. This position is supported by Richard Ruiz’s notion of “ language as a resource ” (1984) which advocates for the use of students’ home languages as resources for learning and teaching. In practice, a language-as-resource perspective implies that teachers should use students’ home languages as a tool for thinking and communication while simultaneously learning and developing proficiency in the language of instruction. Nevertheless, English still overwhelmingly dominates lessons in many classrooms throughout the world where students read, write, listen and speak only in English. Despite considerable research pointing to the importance and benefits of incorporating multilingual pedagogies into classroom practice, there are few materials available to educators that explain how this can be done deliberately and systematically in lesson planning and lesson delivery.

Signs of change 

Happily, in recent years, publications, conferences and professional development materials have advanced thinking about the medium of instruction and ways to approach teaching that challenge the “national/official language-only” view.

Using multilingual approaches: Moving from theory to practice

A new British Council publication,  Using multilingual approaches: Moving from theory to practice , reflects the growing body of research evidence showing that preventing learners from using their home languages in the English language classroom not only impedes learning and denies their linguistic human rights, but also loses valuable opportunities for teachers to draw on their students’ knowledge and experience as resources for teaching. This collection of activities was developed in response to the British Council’s conscious decision to promote multilingual approaches to teaching English internationally. The activities are designed to acknowledge learners’ home languages and cultures when teaching English as an additional or foreign language or using English as the medium of instruction in multilingual classrooms. The activities are grounded in research-based pedagogic principles, briefly outlined below.

Funds of knowledge in the language classroom

It has long been recognised that one of the key characteristics of high-quality teaching is the ability of teachers to engage students’ prior understandings and experiences and background knowledge. This prior knowledge is encoded in their home languages, and therefore it is vital that teachers facilitate the transfer of both concepts and skills from students’ home languages to English. 

This view of language is complemented by Luis Moll’s notion of ‘ funds of knowledge (1992), which refers to the rich bodies of cultural knowledge that exist within students’ households and communities. Moll argues that when teachers tap into this type of knowledge by building relationships with their students and their wider social networks, they allow for meaningful learning opportunities. Teaching practices that tap into multilingual ways of reading, writing and speaking allow students to access the cultural resources that enhance the personal significance of their classroom work, as well as expanding access to knowledge through texts in more than one language.

Purposeful translanguaging

One of the most successful approaches to bilingual teaching and learning has been the purposeful and simultaneous use of two languages in the same classroom, a process that is referred to as translanguaging. The activities in this collection break new ground in being designed to enable teachers to constantly draw on and make use of students’ emergent bilingual skills. The activities are designed in a planned and purposeful way to encourage students draw on the most appropriate linguistic resources they have, allowing teachers to design intercultural and inclusive lessons that support English language learning but also draw on learners first languages and their community and family funds of knowledge. 

The activities were workshopped with and piloted by teachers in India, who applied them to their own classrooms and provided rich feedback and valuable ideas. This short film explains more about the process and rationale behind the resource.

Project leader, Associate Professor Kathleen Heugh sums up the social significance of the project in her observation that: “Forbidding a child to use his/her language is a violation of their rights, and deeply problematic for their future. We cannot afford to have students marginalized, feeling lost and falling out of the school system. Using students’ home languages, bringing in their own knowledge systems to the classroom should be the most important aspect of any school language policy”. 

Luis C. Moll, Cathy Amanti, Deborah Neff and Norma Gonzalez (1992) Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms , Theory Into Practice, 31:2, 132-141.

Richard Ruíz (1984) Orientations in Language Planning , NABE Journal, 8:2, 15-34.  

English in the multilingual classroom: implications for research, policy and practice

PSU Research Review

ISSN : 2399-1747

Article publication date: 28 November 2017

The shift in the function of English as a medium of instruction together with its use in knowledge construction and dissemination among scholars continue to fuel the global demand for high-level proficiency in the language. These components of the global knowledge economy mean that the ability of nations to produce multilinguals with advanced English proficiency alongside their mastery of other languages has become a key to global competitiveness. That need is helping to drive one of the greatest language learning experiments the world has ever known. It carries significant implications for new research agendas and teacher preparation in applied linguistics.

Design/methodology/approach

Evidence-based decision-making, whether it pertains to language policy decisions, instructional practices, teacher professional development or curricula/program building, needs to be based on a rigorous and systematically pursued program of research and assessment.

This paper seeks to advance these objectives by identifying new research foci that underscore a student-centered approach.

Originality/value

It introduces a new theoretical construct – multilingual proficiency – to underscore the knowledge that the learner develops in the process of language learning that makes for the surest route to the desired high levels of language proficiency. The paper highlights the advantages of a student-centered approach that focuses on multilingual proficiency for teachers and explores the concomitant conclusions for teacher development.

• Internationalization
• Policy and education

Brutt-Griffler, J. (2017), "English in the multilingual classroom: implications for research, policy and practice", PSU Research Review , Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 216-228. https://doi.org/10.1108/PRR-10-2017-0042

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2017, Janina Brutt-Griffler

Published in PSU Research Review: An International Journal . Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

Introduction

Today’s institutions of higher education are increasingly tied to the global knowledge economy and tasked with preparing students and researchers to succeed transnationally. That includes the universities that are becoming regional centers of learning. Scientists and other professionals require access to the latest research as well as the ability to disseminate their ideas to the widest audience possible to promote economic and social advancement. To advance the project of global interconnectedness and knowledge production, it necessitates that we assess some of the current trends in higher education and policies with respect to systems of communication, English in particular. The ability of nations to produce multilinguals with advanced proficiency has become a key to global competitiveness. To participate fully in the world today means that students will more often need multilingual proficiency – a theoretical construct that I put forward in this account that measures the ability to communicate in a multilingual world. Knowledge of English is, for many, a key component of such proficiency. There is, consequently, a need to enhance preparation of English teachers and advance new research agenda in English language education.

The present day reach of English education is, in some respects, one of the greatest language learning experiments the world has ever known. As I first pointed out in my book World English: A Study of Its Development , for speakers across the globe, English is, by its nature, a language of multilingualism and multilinguals, and English has established itself alongside other languages in many speech communities around the world. This process takes on different forms and intensity and generates a good deal of intellectual debate in the field of applied linguistics ( Brutt-Griffler and Kim, 2016 ; Kramsch, 2016 ; Seidlhofer, 2011 ; Widdowson, 2003 ). My goal in this paper is to look at some of the current processes and consider what drives English learning today, what impact it has on preparing future professionals and students and what kind of new research is needed to understand the needs of the learner.

English in education: the construction and dissemination of knowledge

I locate the shift in the function of English as a medium of instruction as one of the significant processes that impacts English education and the field of applied linguistics today. While English continues to be one of the main languages taught as a subject in many national school systems, English now increasingly serves as a medium of instruction in a growing number of schools and particularly in universities worldwide ( Dearden, 2015 ). In other words, students in many universities outside of what is thought of as English-speaking contexts may pursue their university education in English in content areas such as business, medicine or engineering. We can, for example, see this process unfolding in the European Union, as detailed in a recent study devoted to the topic of English-medium instruction in the 28 EU member states ( Wächter and Maiworm, 2014 ) supported by the European Commission’s Directorate General for Education and Culture and published by the Academic Cooperation Association (ACA). The authors count 8,089 ETPs, a steep growth when compared to the 725 such ETPs in 2001. The study notes that “there is now little doubt that a critical mass of ETPs is on offer across non-English-speaking Europe” ( Wächter and Maiworm, 2014 , p. 16), with The Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, France taking the lead in terms of numbers. It continues, “one of the policy priorities in Europe – and increasingly elsewhere in the world, too – has been to remove or to reduce barriers possibly preventing students from becoming internationally mobile” ( Wächter and Maiworm, 2014 , p. 25). To overcome the “linguistic disadvantage”, the systems set the trend in offering instruction in the most widely taught language in secondary education world-wide, English.

This shift in the function of English in academia is a significant modification of the earlier role of English as a so-called “foreign” language. It carries important implications for getting students ready, ensuring quality instruction in earlier grades, especially at secondary school levels, to equip them with the advanced language proficiencies to study and be assessed in English in a range of subjects at the university level. The use of English as a medium of instruction requires a high level of language proficiencies on the part of the students, faculty and administration to deliver quality curricula. Its use also creates a unique opportunity for many international students to study the language(s) and culture of the host country as well.

A second driver for English learning and use takes the form of its growing role in scientific dissemination. Scholarly publishing in top tier international venues has become almost synonymous with publishing in English. Recent data point out that over 90 per cent of articles in the natural sciences are written in English and more than 70 per cent in the social sciences and humanities ( Hyland, 2015 ; Ferguson et al. , 2011 ; Hamel, 2007 ). We see a slight difference across disciplinary boundaries, with the highest average in English publishing in mathematics and physics, as illustrated in Table I .

Taking the same timeframe, we observe that scientific production and dissemination globally shows a steady and upward progression in English and a corresponding decline in other languages ( Figure 1 ).

Databases are another indicator of scientific production and communication. Humanities databases (e.g. MLA) point to a greater language distribution while social sciences again tend to index English medium sources (see Table II for the language share).

Many national systems have created a reward system that privileges English language publications and, thus, reinforces the need for advanced academic literacy in English. Such academic literacy is not innate but developed over a lengthy process of formal education. There is an evidentiary basis that writing in English can, and does, “impose an additional burden on some non-Anglophone researchers” ( Ferguson et al. , 2011 , p. 43). Specific areas of linguistic difficulty include “a ‘less rich vocabulary’ and ‘less facility in expression’” ( Ferguson et al. , 2011 , p. 43), “word choice and sentence syntax” ( Ferguson et al. , 2011 , p. 43), specificities of scientific discourse and authorial voice and “time needed to learn English to a high level” ( Ferguson et al. , 2011 , p. 44). Beyond the linguistic domain, researchers need to devote additional time to “substantive matters of research design and methodology, focus, narrative, and coherence of argument” ( Ferguson et al. , 2011 , p. 42). Surveying the field, we find a multitude of attitudes on the dominance of English (DoE) in scientific communication. Ferguson et al. ’s (2011) recent study with 300 scientists finds that 83 per cent of the subjects believe that there is a need for one international language of science. Interestingly, the study finds that:

[…] the higher the subjects’ perceived language proficiency, the less likely they are to agree that the DoE is an unjust advantage to English native-speaking academics and the more likely they are to agree that the advantages of English in their work outweigh the disadvantages ( Ferguson et al. , 2011 , p. 54).

Those who take a pragmatic approach believe that English as an international language “facilitates international co-operation, enables scholars to more easily keep abreast of developments in their discipline and generates a wider potential readership for their published outputs” ( Ferguson et al. , 2011 , p. 52). Researchers in physical sciences see as it more advantageous to have one international language of science as opposed to those in social sciences or humanities that are connected more to a national context of research and/or dissemination to communities that may not have equal access to English ( Flowerdew, 2013 ; Hamel, 2007 ). Ferguson et al. ’s (2011 , p. 56) study rightly concludes that preparation in academic writing and “teachers of academic writing in English are important agents in mitigating any disadvantage that flows from it”.

In sum, the role of English in higher education and knowledge dissemination are significant. It determines the need for high levels of proficiency, inclusive of using the language to both understand and produce academic/professional writing aimed at and produced by an international English medium community of experts. There is much more to it than mere disciplinary terminology. To meet the demands of the global market place, including knowledge dissemination, some areas of education, particularly within Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) as well as in the domain of business and management have turned to English as a medium of instruction in higher education. That reality in turn affects the primary and secondary school levels. In order that STEM and other professionals not face a double burden of both achieving in their field of expertise while struggling with the language demands the need for English places on them, the educational system must establish a base for an exact understanding of national needs, assessment databases and professional English teacher preparation, with a focus on advanced academic literacy skills.

A new theoretical focus for English applied linguistics

To address the processes in higher education and global knowledge economies, the field of English applied linguistics has generated an enormous literature that can provide guidance. There is no more global enterprise than English teaching and learning. It takes place in literally every nation of the world and involves millions of people. Yet, when we look at the picture globally, we often find a disconnect between the typical English learning context and the conditions and assumptions that continue to a large extent to dominate the field of English applied linguistics. The vast and ever-growing majority of English learning takes place outside of the principal English speaking nations. Yet much of the field of English applied linguistics continues to respond to the educational concerns that arise within them.

First among them is the need to educate children who speak another language at home in school systems in which English is the exclusive medium of instruction. With ever-greater frequency, primary school classrooms in English-speaking nations are filled with learners from myriad language backgrounds, part of a broader phenomenon that has come to be known as the “multilingual classroom”. It has been a prominent trend in the USA, UK, Canada and Australia for decades. More recently, it has spread far beyond their borders, now encompassing, for instance, many of the nations that make up the EU. In the careful language of the world of gray literature, such as the European Commission’s (2015a) report Language teaching and learning in multilingual classrooms , the “multilingual classroom” is called a “challenge”, by which is really meant a problem . The approach advocated in such reports, backed up by a body of academic literature and government policy, is to try to mitigate this problem. That consists of the taken-for-granted circumstance that the teacher does not speak the home languages of the multilingual students while the students have only limited proficiency in the language of instruction used in the classroom.

The goal is a “least-worst” outcome. Because, any countervailing research conclusions aside, practical constraints dictate a policy of “mainstreaming” students as quickly as possible into classes taught in the target language, whether they are actually ready for such a transition, the results for students can be anything but optimal. The EC (2015a , p. 13) report notes, “Assessment tools and assessors with negative perceptions of migrant children’s abilities which allocate more of them to lower ability tracks and special education classes”. The students also “lack […] opportunities to develop their mother tongue competences to higher levels” (p. 13). One unfortunate result is that the European Union has effectively dropped all discussions of its policy of “mother tongue +2” – two additional languages in addition to the child’s first language. That laudable goal now seems to promise too much when applied to what the EC (2015a) calls Europe’s “migrant” students, the broad definition of which includes even the grandchildren of persons not born in the country. The policy of mainstreaming prioritizes protecting the role of the language of instruction and insuring that students learn it over the former goal of European-wide multilingualism. It may be a concession to what are seen to be practical impossibilities. It is one, nevertheless, for which children rather than the society as a whole are asked to pay the price.

Even when the outcome measured in terms of learning the language of instruction of the educational system is good, the child’s experience can nevertheless be trying in the extreme. A graduate student of mine from southern Europe whom I shall call Eva found herself mainstreamed in the US school system before she had mastered even the rudiments of the language and with no one able to help her in her first language. Isolated and struggling, to this day she vividly recalls what she considers to be the “trauma” that she experienced as a primary school student. She emphasizes that she, as an aspiring language teacher, would not willingly put any child in that circumstance no matter how favorable the outcome.

To advance the agenda of applied linguistics, the field needs to be liberated from a too-close attachment to language learning in the USA and EU, where the most urgent need is often transitioning students to the language of instruction and leaving their first language behind. Leaving aside for the moment whether such “mainstreaming” is best for the students in these circumstances, we ought to be able to admit that these circumstances peculiar to English-speaking nations are not those upon which we should generalize to the far more prevalent conditions to be found for the most of the world’s hundreds of millions of English learners. The same is true for the other major strand of English applied linguistics research that stems from the ESL classroom at universities in mainly English-speaking nations – a second overemphasized site of research given in its limited share of the English language market. It too features multilingual backgrounds of students, which the instructor does not share with them.

Overgeneralizing from contexts where the teacher does not know the learners’ language to those where the teacher and students share both languages has the tendency to make a virtue of necessity. The result of neglecting the student’s first language in the process of learning and becoming proficient in a second may not produce the kind of trauma that it meant for Eva, but it can result in confusion and frustration, neither of which is necessary or productive. Why would we not make use of all of the knowledge a student brings into the classroom in the effort to help them learn more? From a student-centered perspective the “problem” lies not with the knowledge of the student but often with that of the teacher, who in some cases may lack the language proficiency to unleash the learning potential of the student.

When students study subjects such as math, engineering or technology, we recognize that they develop a body of knowledge. On the other hand, we do not always readily acknowledge the body of knowledge that they develop as they learn multiple languages. Because of the focus on proficiency in the target language (L2), at an earlier juncture in the development of applied linguistics, the tendency grew to view knowledge of the first language (L1) from the standpoint of its negative impact on the learning of the second. There arose an extensive literature on “transfer errors” (for a review, see Odlin, 1989 ). They were held to be of such importance that the learner from the standpoint of the mainstream second language acquisition theoretical frameworks has been viewed as speaking an interlanguage, an incomplete system.

The consequences shaped notions of pedagogy. As a source of “interference”, at the height of the influence of this paradigm, the first language came to be almost regarded with suspicion in the classroom ( De Angelis and Selinker, 2001 ; Selinker, 1983 ). The best way to learn was thought to be to “immerse” the student in the target language with the notion being that assuring error free input would somehow best lead to error free output. It was almost looked at as language learning de novo, the acquisition of a new linguistic “system” to which previous learning had little, if anything, to contribute. It became almost irrelevant whether the teacher spoke the learner’s L1.

Such an approach takes for granted the far more extensive “positive transfer” that goes unnoticed. An L2 can, of course, only be learned at all because the learner previously speaks an L1. We have all experienced this taken-for-granted aspect of language learning. What challenges us most in learning a second language are those components that are missing in our L1 or are so radically different that we struggle to grasp them. If the L1 and L2 share an alphabet or writing system, we breeze through that portion. If not, we laboriously learn that of the target language. It is far more difficult to acquire an L2 with extensive declensions, or a case system of nouns, coming from a first language largely without them. Languages with elaborate morphosyntax of tense, aspect and mood conjugations require tremendous time and effort to master where they differ extensively from our first languages.

We also miss a process every bit as significant: the use of an L2 in learning a third language. Once we have first learned some grammatical forms we have never before encountered, we no longer need to do so if they exist in another language we attempt to learn. The Latin alphabet, with minor modifications, is common to English, French, Spanish and German. A learner of French whose first language uses a different writing system but who has learned English will draw on his knowledge of that language and not the L1 ( Bardel and Falk, 2007 ; Cenoz, 2001 ; Grosjean, 2001 ; Cook, 1995 ).

What happens, if instead of taking for granted in our theories learning always consists of the expansion of the learner’s body of knowledge we make that the theoretical focus? A learner-centric approach, by focusing on the student, leads us to an understanding based on what I will call multilingual proficiency . I define this concept as a person’s total linguistic proficiency across two or more languages. I do not have in mind here mere “awareness” of other languages, as we hear so much about today with respect to the multilingual classroom. I mean knowledge of these languages.

The notion of multilingual proficiency is meant to underscore knowledge that the learner develops in the process of language learning. It recognizes that language learning capacities among students are virtually without limit and conceptually it does not limit itself as a model to one or two languages. Multilingual proficiency recognizes that there is an aspect of language learning, in the form of knowledge of language , that is acquired in the study of multiple languages. That knowledge of language acquired in studying languages in turn aids learning additional languages. Thus, for example, knowing how cases or conjugation are used in one language can aid learning the system in another. A student’s multilingualism is a resource rather than a problem. Unlocking and helping the student to apply their knowledge should be an essential goal of teaching – one that is best activated by direct appeal to their existing multilingual proficiency in helping them acquire still more.

Multilingual proficiency development constitutes an intellectual endeavor in which in the process of language learning a learner uses the knowledge from various languages ( Baker, 2011 ; Lantolf and Thorne, 2006 ; Brutt-Griffler and Varghese, 2004 ; Swain and Lapkin, 2000 ). Thus taking knowledge as its point of departure, multilingual proficiency becomes an objective measure of language learning from its incipient stages all the way through the attainment of advanced level of proficiency in multiple languages.

Neither am I here referring to what has come to be called “translanguaging”, ( García and Wei, 2014 ) the mixing of two languages together. Multilingual proficiency includes the ability to distinguish one language from another. The notion of multilingual proficiency recognizes that proficient speakers are perfectly able to keep their languages distinct. It is incontestably among the most important of skills in a multilingual world, and, of course, one of the driving forces of English learning in the world today.

It goes without saying that learning English is not, as is sometimes falsely assumed from a monolingualist standpoint, a rejection of the advantages of learning other languages. On the contrary, English learners around the world recognize the equal importance of knowing other languages. If we listen, therefore, to the students on whom a student-centered model must be constructed we hear them emphasizing through their actions their own understanding of the need for multilingual proficiency. Their goal is to learn English alongside other languages they grew up speaking, learned from the context around them, or studied in school.

Language is perhaps the only realm in education in which a student’s knowledge is often not credited. It would be unthinkable in mathematics or science education to take no account of a student’s previous knowledge in teaching the subjects. Yet confining an English language classroom, however multilingual, to one language of instruction can have just that effect. Worse, we may look at quite linguistically accomplished multilinguals through something approaching a deficit model, a significant part of the trauma Eva faced, and made worse by the tendency noted by the EU report on the multilingual classroom to place such students into special education. In such circumstances, their very accomplishments as multilinguals are held against them. But this can happen as well in more subtle ways in every English language classroom that replaces multilingual proficiency with English proficiency viewed in isolation. An alternative consists in recognizing the implications that a student-centered approach that focuses on multilingual proficiency holds for teachers.

New roles for English teachers

A Saudi PhD student enrolled in an applied linguistics program in the USA recalls the first time she entered an English classroom in KSA. She began to address the undergraduate students in English, only to have them stop her and say in Arabic, “no, we don’t know what you’re saying […] we don’t know English. Tell us in Arabic so we can understand.” Her surprised reaction was to think “this is my first time teaching […] I’m not going to ruin it for myself […] I’m gonna follow the rules.” Her co-workers told her, “don’t listen to them […] that’s the school policy […] you have to speak in English all the time.” She decided that she had no choice but to use Arabic despite of the policy. The result, she recalls, was immediate: “they were responsive […] they were actively engaged.”

Not all multilingual classrooms are thereby the same. A multilingual classroom may be one where there are multiple languages, but in a state of dormancy. Or it may be one in which students’ multilingual proficiency is activated. The EC (2015b, p. 4) writes in its report on the multilingual classroom, “teaching culture urgently needs to adapt to the presence of several languages in the classrooms”. It is evidence that the pendulum has swung decisively back the other way in acknowledging the place of students’ first language in the second language learning classroom, confirming that the above mentioned English teacher instinctively made a good choice in the context where she taught ( Storch and Aldosari, 2010 ).

It goes without saying that the Saudi PhD student in her stint as a teacher of English in KSA could only make the decision she did because she had the requisite proficiency in the students’ first language. And yet one place we continue to see the influence of the theoretical models to which applied linguistics remains stubbornly attached, and which produce policies like the English-only classroom, is in the lack of attention to the multilingual proficiency of teachers. One adaptation the EC never mentions in the quest to alter “teaching culture” is the training of teachers in multilingual proficiency and the strategic and planned use of students’ language to allow them to access the curriculum or content in the class ( Ferguson, 2003 ). And yet it might easily be supposed that multilingual students require multilingual teachers. In that case, teacher and student have something essential in common: the skills and knowledge of a multilingual, or multilingual proficiency. In that understanding a multilingual classroom would not be one that is simply characterized by students who among them bring two or more home languages different than the medium of instruction. In the more meaningful form of the term, a multilingual classroom is one in which both students and teachers are multilingual and in which they bring their multilingual proficiency to bear on the dual tasks of teaching and learning.

To be fully accurate, the EC (2015a) report does all but admit that it would be better to fully serve students if teachers were multilingual. But the idea is then dismissed as impractical – or, rather, it is not discussed and readers are left to draw that conclusion themselves. What else can we conclude when the EC (2015a , p. 54) admits that students do better with the “adaptation of teaching to provide academic vocabulary in [the] mother tongue”, and that “staff having the same mother tongue and cultural background as the children who can win their trust” (p. 51)? The authors of the report even go as far as to claim that “opportunities for schools to use bilingual […] approaches [to] teaching are available where many children have the same mother tongues” (EC, 2015a, p. 71). Finally, they note, “Having qualified mother tongue teachers in schools and mother tongues included in language curricula and examinations encourage mother tongue learning” (EC, 2015a), p. 71). That is, such teachers promote what I am calling multilingual proficiency.

These conclusions are drawn without being emphasized. They constitute an important and almost surprising admission. When transferred from the EU context to that of English teaching globally, the real advantage is to the laudable goal of building a learner-centered educational system. Multilingual proficiency is best modeled by multilingual teachers, or, put another way, teachers with multilingual proficiency are needed to develop that set of skills within students.

Implications for research agendas

Evidence-based decision-making, whether it pertains to language policy decisions, instructional practices, teacher professional development or curricula/program building, needs to be based on a rigorous and systematically pursued program of research and assessment. First, a research agenda should emerge from the kinds of contexts in which English learning and teaching takes place and should be aligned with the needs of the students and teachers. It should, therefore, be learner centered. It must proceed not from the conceptualization of the multilingual classroom as a “problem” but as a body of knowledge to be leveraged in the interests of the expansion of language learning and developing proficient users of the language(s). It must also be driven by new theoretical models of language learning. In this respect, the notion of multilingual proficiency can help overcome the limitations of many of the monolingualist assumptions held in the field. Pedagogies that are backed by rigorous classroom research that prepare teachers for how using more than one language in the classroom can mutually reinforce each can help address the new trends in higher education.

a learner-centered approach and instructional practices;

teacher professional development;

developing national assessment data on learning outcomes.

With respect to a learner centered approach and for reasons discussed in the first part of this paper, in higher education today learners often face the dual challenge of learning content (e.g. science, STEM, arts and social science) through the second language that they are acquiring. Researchers, therefore, should consider important questions with respect to precise learning goals and teaching practices in school curricula. These should include whether schools should build curricula that incorporate model(s) of a content and language integrated learning (CLIL) approach, where the curricular content is taught through the medium of a second language; and if so, how much explicit language scaffolding should be provided to achieve the desired language learning outcomes in the classroom? Current research from the English CLIL classroom points to many benefits ( Dalton-Puffer, 2011 ). Research also needs to provide evidence of whether existing language programs have the capacities to develop independent writers and readers for tertiary programming demands.

At the core of a learner-centered approach, researchers need to pay attention to student engagement (affective, cognitive and behavioral) in learning ( Brutt-Griffler and Kim, 2017 ). Based on well-grounded and newly emerging evidence, I consider student engagement to be one of the important factors that will mediate the relationship between teachers’ instructional practices and students’ academic outcomes, as illustrated in Figure 2 .

Equally important, teachers are often not sufficiently prepared in instructional practices that capitalize on new technologies and aid learner centered learning (inquiry based, cooperative learning or e-portfolio assessment). A research agenda, therefore, needs to help to identify best instructional practices so that these are modeled and rewarded by school leaders. Research is also needed with respect to the professional development of teachers, including identifying and analyzing the qualities of effective teachers, curricula and course design and integrating these concepts into their teaching and instructional strategies. Enhancing teachers’ instructional practices via engaging them in teacher inclusive educational research and/or study abroad dual degree programming can aid the expectations of excellence in language teaching.

Developing a new agenda in English education also requires steps to building a national database on learning outcomes/assessment and teacher preparation. A data system that efficiently and accurately collects, manages, analyzes and uses education data can be a powerful source of assessment, an essential mechanism for understanding and improving language education in the public and private sectors. It can provide reliable data for longitudinal and large-scale empirical research on academic performance and literacy of the nation’s students. Such a database could be housed in a National Center for English Development and Research (CEDR) and be available to its stakeholders - program administrators, policymakers and researchers.

In World English: A Study of its Development and a number of related publications, I stressed the condition that English around the world has become a language of multilinguals, with important implications of the language. But that important quality of the global English language has equally crucial ramifications for pedagogy. It is my contention that much of this insight will emerge from the kinds of contexts around the world in which most English learning takes place and will do so where pedagogy is adapted most to the needs of the students. A student-centered approach to teaching English makes demands on teachers and educational policy, both of which must look to new frontiers in research for guidance. The question of how to develop teachers for the demands of educating students in English that serves such vital functions for its speakers depends on new understandings of the process of second language acquisition rooted in the experiences of multilinguals and multilingualism. In charting a vision for a research program to establish the direction forward for the field of English applied linguistics, I have introduced the understanding of multilingual proficiency . This new paradigm stems from our need to reverse the usual lens on language learning that makes use of a deficit model of the learner’s knowledge and ask instead what knowledge teachers and students have in common as multilinguals. The research foci I outline above constitute an important starting point.

Share of languages in natural science publications worldwide 1980-1996

Student-centric model: student engagement as a mediator between teacher instructional practices and student academic achievement

Share of languages in several natural sciences in 1996

LLBA: Linguistics & Language Behavior Abstracts; MLA: Modern Language Abstracts

Source: Hamel (2007)

Baker , C. ( 2011 ), Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism , 5th ed. , Multilingual Matters , Clevedon .

Bardel , C. and Falk , Y. ( 2007 ), “ The role of the second language in third language acquisition: the case of Germanic syntax ”, Second Language Research , Vol. 23 No. 4 , pp. 459 - 484 .

Brutt-Griffler , J. and Varghese , M. (Eds) ( 2004 ), Bilingualism and Language Pedagogy , Multilingual Matters , Clevedon .

Brutt-Griffler , J. and Kim , S. ( 2016 ), “ Closing the gender gap: the role of English ”, in Pitzl , M-L. and Osimk-Teasdale , R. (Eds), English as a Lingua Franca: Perspectives and Prospects , Mouton De Gruyter , Berlin , pp. 245 - 257 .

Brutt-Griffler , J. and Kim , S. ( 2017 ), “ In their own voices: development of English as a gender-neutral language ”, English Today , available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078417000372 (accessed 15 September 2017 ).

Cenoz , J. ( 2001 ), “ The effect of linguistic distance, L2 status and age on cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition ”, in Cenoz , J. , Hufeisen , B. and Jessner , U. (Eds), Cross-Linguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition: Psycholinguistic Perspectives , Multilingual Matters , Clevedon , pp. 8 - 20 .

Cook , V. ( 1995 ), “ Multi-competence and the learning of many languages ”, Language, Culture and Curriculum , Vol. 8 No. 2 , pp. 93 - 98 .

Dalton-Puffer , C. ( 2011 ), “ Content-and-language integrated learning: from practice to principles? ”, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , Vol. 31 , pp. 182 - 204 .

De Angelis , G. and Selinker , L. ( 2001 ), “ Interlanguage transfer and competing linguistic systems in the multilingual mind ”, in Cenoz , J. , Hufeisen , B. and Jessner , U. (Eds), Cross-Linguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition: Psycholinguistic Perspectives , Multilingual Matters , Clevedon , pp. 42 - 58 .

Dearden , J. ( 2015 ), English as a Medium of Instruction – A Growing Global Phenomenon , British Council , London , available at: www.britishcouncil.es/sites/default/files/british_council_english_as_a_medium_of_instruction.pdf (accessed 15 August 2017 ).

European Commission ( 2015a ), Language Teaching and Learning in Multilingual Classrooms , Publications Office of the European Union , Luxembourg , available at: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/repository/languages/library/studies/multilingual-classroom_en.pdf (accessed 14 August 2017 ).

European Commission ( 2015b ), Language Teaching and Learning in Multilingual Classrooms: Policy Brief , Publications Office of the European Union , Luxembourg , available at: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/repository/languages/library/policy/policy-brief_en.pdf (accessed 24 June 2017 ).

Ferguson , G. ( 2003 ), “ Classroom code-switching in post-colonial contexts: functions, attitudes and policies ”, AILA Review , Vol. 16 No. 1 , pp. 38 - 51 .

Ferguson , G. , Pérez-Llantada , C. and Plo , R. ( 2011 ), “ English as an international language of scientific publication: a study of attitudes ”, World Englishes , Vol. 30 No. 1 , pp. 41 - 59 .

Flowerdew , J. ( 2013 ), “ English for research publication purposes ”, in Paltridge , B. and Starfield , S. (Eds), The Handbook of English for Specific Purposes , Wiley-Blackwell , Malden, MA , pp. 301 - 321 .

García , O. and Wei , L. ( 2014 ), Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education , Palgrave Macmillan , New York, NY .

Grosjean , F. ( 2001 ), “ The bilingual’s language modes ”, in Nicol , J.L. (Ed.), One Mind, Two Languages: Bilingual Language Processing , Blackwell , Oxford , pp. 1 - 22 .

Hamel , R.E. ( 2007 ), “ The dominance of English in the international scientific periodical literature and the future of language use in science ”, AILA Review , Vol. 20 No. 1 , pp. 53 - 71 .

Hyland , K. ( 2015 ), Academic Publishing: Issues and Challenges in the Construction of Knowledge , Oxford University Press , Oxford .

Kramsch , C. ( 2016 ), “ Multilingual identity and ELF ”, in Pitzl , M-L. and Osimk-Teasdale , R. (Eds), English as a Lingua Franca: Perspectives and Prospects , Mouton De Gruyter , Berlin , pp. 179 - 186 .

Lantolf , J.P. and Thorne , S.L. ( 2006 ), Sociocultural Theory and the Genesis of Second Language Development , Oxford University Press , Oxford .

Odlin , T. ( 1989 ), Language Transfer: Cross-Linguistic Influence in Language Learning , Cambridge University Press , Cambridge, MA .

Seidlhofer , B. ( 2011 ), Understanding English as a Lingua Franca , Oxford University Press , Oxford .

Selinker , L. ( 1983 ), “ Language transfer ”, in Gass , S. and Selinker , L. (Eds), Language Transfer in Language Learning , Newbury House , Rowley, MA , pp. 33 - 53 .

Storch , N. and Aldosari , A. ( 2010 ), “ Learners’ use of first language (Arabic) in pair work in an EFL class ”, Language Teaching Research , Vol. 14 No. 4 , pp. 355 - 375 .

Swain , M. and Lapkin , S. ( 2000 ), “ Task-based second language learning: the uses of the first language ”, Language Teaching Research , Vol. 4 No. 3 , pp. 251 - 274 .

Wächter , B. and Maiworm , F. (Eds) ( 2014 ), “ English-taught programmes in European higher education. The state of Play in 2014 ”, ACA papers on International Cooperation in Education , Lemmens Medien GmbH , Bonn , available at: www.aca-secretariat.be/fileadmin/aca_docs/images/members/ACA-2015_English_Taught_01.pdf (accessed 15 August 2017 ).

Widdowson , H.G. ( 2003 ), Defining Issues in English Language Teaching , Oxford University Press , Oxford .

Further reading

Brutt-Griffler , J. ( 2002 ), World English: A Study of Its Development , Multilingual Matters , Clevedon .

Corresponding author

Related articles, we’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

Handbook of Multilingual TESOL in Practice pp 5–22 Cite as

Multilingual TESOL in Practice in Higher Education: Insights from EFL Classrooms at a Gulf University

• Kashif Raza 4 ,
• Dudley Reynolds 5 &
• Christine Coombe 6  
• First Online: 22 March 2023

581 Accesses

Many people support “multilingualism” in theory, acknowledge the importance of heritage languages, and denounce the tragedy of language death. However, when it comes to multilingual praxis—using multiple languages as part of our classroom repertoire or when assessing students, developing materials and offering professional development, they often ask themselves: But how would this work in my own language classroom? Because many of us have not seen multilingual Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) in practice, we cannot imagine it. This chapter provides a case study of the work done by one teacher, Kashif, to overcome this lack of imaginability. In this chapter, we present a case study of how the first author, Kashif, incorporates multilingual teaching practices into university-level, English for academic purposes (EAP) and English for specific purposes (ESP) courses in the Gulf. The chapter also argues that the case study makes visible the, often invisible, agency that teachers have as language planners for their own classrooms. The discussion of the case study centers around the already established benefits of a multilingual classroom and showcases how the case study on Kashif’s university-level EA/SP courses exemplifies these benefits through the use of the Teaching Adaptation Model or TAM (Raza in J Ethn Cult Stud 5:16–26, 2018, Raza in TESL Ontario Contact Mag 46:41–50, 2020), aimed to increase culturally sustaining pedagogy. A note about this chapter’s organization: The bulk of this chapter offers a case study of how the first author, Kashif, incorporates multilingual teaching practices into a university-level, EA/SP courses. The introduction, authored by the second author, Dudley, argues that the case study makes visible the, often invisible, agency that teachers have as language planners for their classrooms. The discussion of the case study, presented by the third author, Christine, centers around the already established benefits of a multilingual classroom and showcases how Kashif’s university-level EA/SP courses exemplify these benefits through the Teaching Adaptation Model or TAM (Raza in J Ethn Cult Stud 5:16–26, 2018, Raza in TESL Ontario Contact Mag 46:41–50, 2020), aimed to increase culturally sustaining pedagogy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Buying options

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

10 Advantages to Being Multilingual. (2017). 10 Things. http://kodaheart.com/10-things-21/

Bhattacharjee, Y. (2012, March 17). Why bilinguals are smarter. The benefits of bilingualism, New York Times . https://www.wis.edu/uploaded/Admissions/Dual_Language.pdf

Bialystok, E. (2017). Second language acquisition and bilingualism at an early age and the impact on early cognitive development. In R. E. Tremblay, M. Boivin, & R. DeV. Peters (Eds.), Encyclopedia on early childhood development (online) https://www.child-encyclopedia.com/second-language/according-experts/second-language-acquisition-and-bilingualism-early-age-and-impact

Bialystok, E., Poarch, G., Luo, L., & Craik, F. I. M. (2014). Effects of bilingualism and aging on executive function and working memory. Psychology and Aging, 29 (3), 696–705. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037254

Article   Google Scholar  

Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36 (02), 81–109.

Borg, S. (2006). Teacher cognition and language education . Continuum.

Google Scholar  

Burns, A., Freeman, D., & Edwards, E. (2015). Theorizing and studying the language-teaching mind: Mapping research on language teacher cognition. The Modern Language Journal, 99 (3), 585–601. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12245

Canagarajah, S. (2018). Translingual practice as spatial repertoire: Expanding the paradigm beyond structuralist orientations. Applied Linguistics, 39 (1), 31–54. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amx041

Chau, L. (2014, January 29). Why you should learn another language. https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2014/01/29/the-business-benefits-of-learning-a-foreign-language

Conteh, J., & Meier, G. (Eds.). (2014). The multilingual turn in languages education: Opportunities and challenges (Vol. 40). Multilingual Matters.

Dewaele, J.-M., & Li, W. (2012). Multilingualism, empathy and multicompetence. International Journal of Multilingualism, 9 (4), 352–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2012.714380

Fan, S. P., Liberman, Z., Keysar, B., & Kinzler, K. (2016). The exposure advantage: Early exposure to a multilingual environment promotes effective communication. Psychological Science, 26 (7), 1090–1097. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615574699

Freire, P. (2005). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans.). Continuum. (Original work published 1968).

Harper, C., & de Jong, E. (2004). Misconceptions about teaching English-language learners. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy , 48 (2), 152–162. https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.48.2.6

Heugh, K., French, M., Armitage, J., Taylor-Leech, K., Billinghurst, N., & Ollerhead, S. (2019). Using multilingual approaches: Moving from theory to practice . University of South Australia.

Hughes, J., & Dummett, P. (2013). Life upper-intermediate . National Geographic Learning.

Kinzler, K. (2016). Studies suggest multilingual exposure boosts children’s communication skills. NPR interview transcript by Robert Siegel. https://www.npr.org/2016/03/21/471316384/studies-suggest-multilingual-exposure-boosts-childrens-communication-skills

Kroll J. F., & Dussias, P. E. (2017). The benefits of multilingualism to the personal and professional development of residents of the US. Foreign Language Annals , 2017 Summer, 50 (2), 248–259. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12271

Kubanyiova, M., & Feryok, A. (2015). Language teacher cognition in applied linguistics research: Revisiting the territory, redrawing the boundaries, reclaiming the relevance. The Modern Language Journal, 99 (3), 435–449. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12239

Lo Bianco, J. (2010). Language policy and planning. In N. H. Hornberger & S. L. McKay (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language education (pp. 143–176). Multilingual Matters.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

May, S. (2014). The multilingual turn: Implications for SLA . Routledge.

Muller, S. (2018). Multilingualism in the classroom: Why and how it should be encouraged. https://modernlanguagesresearch.blogs.sas.ac.uk/2018/09/03/multilingualism-in-the-classroom-why-and-how-it-should-be-encouraged/#:~:text=It%20can%20boost%20students%27%20confidence,by%20celebrating%20diversity%20and%20inclusion.

Okal, B. O. (2014). Benefits of multilingualism in education. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 2 (3), 223–229.

Ortega, L. (2014). Ways forward for a bi/multilingual turn in SLA. In S. May (Ed.), The multilingual turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL and bilingual education (pp. 32–53). Routledge.

Paris, D., & Alim, S. (2017). Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning for justice in a changing world. Teachers College Press.

Ramirez, N. F., Rey, R., Ramirez, M. C., Taulu, S., & Kuhl, P. K. (2016). Speech discrimination in 11-month-old bilingual and monolingual infants: A magnetoencephalography study. Developmental Science , 20 (1) . https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12427

Raza, K. (2018). Adapting teaching strategies to Arab student needs in an EFL Classroom. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, 5 (1), 16–26. http://www.ejecs.org/index.php/JECS/article/view/93

Raza, K. (2019). Student-teacher responsibilities in English studies: An empirical analysis of Arab student and English faculty perceptions. Arab World English Journal, 10 (2), 307–322.

Raza, K. (2020). Differentiated instruction in English language teaching: Insights into the implementation of Raza’s teaching adaptation model in Canadian ESL classrooms. TESL Ontario Contact Magazine, 46 (2), 41–50.

Raza, K. (2021, February). Supporting local languages of students in classroom through multilingual pedagogy: From competition to collaboration among languages in Pakistan. Session given as part of Teacher Development Webinars . https://www.youtube.com/c/TeacherDevelopmentWebinars

Raza, K., & Chua, C. S. K. (2022a). Neoliberal ideologies in teaching and assessing ESP legal English: A case study from the Middle East. In O. Z. Barnawi, M. S. Alharbi & A. Alzahrani (Eds.), English language assessment practices in a transnational world: Challenges and opportunities (pp. 189-203). Routledge.

Raza, K., & Chua, C. (2022b). Nuts and bolts of educational policy and educational governance: Unpacking the nexus between the two through a holistic educational policy-governance approach. Journal of Educational Thought 55(2):17–200. https://doi.org/10.11575/jet.v55i2

Raza, K., & Coombe, C. (2020). What makes an effective TESOL teacher in the Gulf? An empirical exploration of faculty-student perceptions for context-specific teacher preparation. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies , 8 (1), 143–162. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejects/538

Raza, K., Coombe, C., & Reynolds, D. (Eds.). (2021). Policy development in TESOL and multilingualism: Past, present and the future . Springer.

Reynolds, D. (2019). Language policy in globalized contexts. Appeared as part of the 2019 WISE Research Series. Doha: World Innovation Summit for Education. http://www.wise-qatar.org/2017-wise-research

Reynolds, D. (2020). Professionalizing practice through research. In C. Coombe, N. A. Anderson, & L. Stephenson (Eds.), Professionalizing your English language teaching (pp. 303–314). Springer.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Kashif Raza

Carnegie Mellon University Qatar, Al Rayyan, Qatar

Dudley Reynolds

Higher Colleges of Technology, Dubai, UAE

Christine Coombe

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kashif Raza .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Werklund School of Education, The University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

Carnegie Mellon University in Qatar, Doha, Qatar

Dubai Men's College, Higher Colleges of Technology, Dubai, United Arab Emirates

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Raza, K., Reynolds, D., Coombe, C. (2023). Multilingual TESOL in Practice in Higher Education: Insights from EFL Classrooms at a Gulf University. In: Raza, K., Reynolds, D., Coombe, C. (eds) Handbook of Multilingual TESOL in Practice. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9350-3_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9350-3_1

Published : 22 March 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-19-9349-7

Online ISBN : 978-981-19-9350-3

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Architecture and Design
• Asian and Pacific Studies
• Business and Economics
• Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
• Computer Sciences
• Cultural Studies
• Engineering
• General Interest
• Geosciences
• Industrial Chemistry
• Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Library and Information Science, Book Studies
• Life Sciences
• Linguistics and Semiotics
• Literary Studies
• Materials Sciences
• Mathematics
• Social Sciences
• Sports and Recreation
• Theology and Religion
• Publish your article
• The role of authors
• Promoting your article
• Abstracting & indexing
• Publishing Ethics
• Why publish with De Gruyter
• How to publish with De Gruyter
• Our book series
• Our subject areas
• Your digital product at De Gruyter
• Contribute to our reference works
• Product information
• Tools & resources
• Product Information
• Promotional Materials
• Orders and Inquiries
• FAQ for Library Suppliers and Book Sellers
• Repository Policy
• Free access policy
• Open Access agreements
• Database portals
• For Authors
• Customer service
• People + Culture
• Journal Management
• How to join us
• Working at De Gruyter
• Mission & Vision
• De Gruyter Foundation
• De Gruyter Ebound
• Our Responsibility
• Partner publishers

Your purchase has been completed. Your documents are now available to view.

International students’ perceptions of multilingual English-medium instruction classrooms: a case study in Taiwan

Many English-medium instruction (EMI) classrooms in non-Anglophone countries adopt a multilingual stance, using English alongside the host country’s local language(s). However, the perceptions of such multilingual practices held by students remain under-researched. Given many Asian countries’ current drives to internationalize and diversify their student bodies, a clear understanding of international students’ perspectives on multilingual EMI classrooms is long overdue. Through semi-structured interviews with international students from developing countries and the theoretical lens of language ideologies, this study investigates their perceptions of multilingual EMI classrooms in Taiwan. Most expressed a belief that their multilingual EMI classrooms, saturated with non-standard varieties of English, were not a legitimate pathway to acquiring their desired linguistic capital, i.e., standard English. These findings differ sharply from those of previous research, which has painted international students as holding positive attitudes towards English as a lingua franca (ELF). Moreover, the participants resisted the English-Mandarin translanguaging practices in their classrooms. As such, the findings highlight the need to understand the language ideologies of international students in Asia. Further investigation of learner resistance to multilingual EMI practices should also be conducted, with the wider aim of helping advanced English-language learners from developing countries accept different English accents, and accommodate ELF communication.

Funding source: Taiwan Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST)

Award Identifier / Grant number: MOST 109-2635-H-020-001

Research funding: This study was supported by Taiwan Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) (Grant no. MOST 109-2635-H-020-001).

Three rounds of semi-structured interview questions

Please tell me about yourself, including your gender, ethnic background, and language background(s).

Please provide an account of your educational experiences before joining your current EMI programs/courses in Taiwan?

Why did you choose to apply for your current EMI programs/courses in Taiwan?

What did you expect to achieve while enrolled in your current EMI programs/courses in Taiwan?

What language(s) did you initially expect your fellow students and teachers to use in your current EMI programs/courses?

How did you perceived your own English and/or Mandarin proficiency before joining your current EMI programs/courses?

How did you learn English and/or Mandarin before joining your current EMI programs/courses?

Did you have any EMI experience prior to your current enrollment? If yes, please briefly describe that experience.

How do you feel about your EMI programs/courses in Taiwan?

How do you feel about your interactions with your instructors, and with fellow students, including other international students as well as local Taiwanese students?

Have you encountered any challenges while taking EMI courses in Taiwan?

How do you perceive your own English in relation to that of your fellow students and instructors?

How do you view “good English” in your current EMI programs/courses in Taiwan?

What language(s) do you use while pursuing your EMI programs/courses, and for what purposes?

What percent of English and/or Mandarin would you feel is appropriate for instructors to use in EMI programs/courses?

Are you learning Mandarin? Why do you think it is (is not) important to learn Mandarin?

Would you choose Mandarin-medium instruction at this university if EMI programs/courses were not available? Why or why not?

What are your plans after graduation?

How do you think your EMI programs/courses in Taiwan relate to your future plans?

How do you perceive your own English and/or Mandarin proficiency after taking your EMI programs/courses?

Do you think high proficiency in English and/or Mandarin can help with your future studies/career, and if so, how?

Having now attended some EMI courses in Taiwan, did they differ from your expectations? If they did, please give some concrete examples.

What suggestions would you give to international students thinking about joining EMI programs in Taiwan?

What suggestions would you give to Pineapple Field University and/or your department to improve the design of and pedagogy in its current EMI programs/courses?

Anderson, Jason & Amy Lightfoot. 2021. Translingual practices in English classrooms in India: Current perceptions and future possibilities. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 24(8). 1210–1231. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1548558 . Search in Google Scholar

Beiler, Ingrid Rodrick. 2021. Marked and unmarked translanguaging in accelerated, mainstream, and sheltered English classrooms. Multilingua 40(1). 107–138. https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2020-0022 . Search in Google Scholar

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1991. Language and symbolic power . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1997. The forms of capital. In A. H. Halsey, Hugh Lauder, Phillip Brown & A. Stuart Wells (eds.), Education: Culture, economy, and society , 46–58. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Byun, Bo-Kyung & Hyejoo Jung. 2019. From policy rhetoric to reality: The experiences of Southeast Asian science and engineering graduate students in Korea. Asia Pacific Education Review 20(12). 607–623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-019-09588-y . Search in Google Scholar

Canagarajah, Suresh. 2013. Translingual practice: Global Englishes and cosmopolitan relations . London & New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203120293 Search in Google Scholar

Chang, Sin-Yi. 2019. Beyond the English box: Constructing and communicating knowledge through translingual practices in the higher education classroom. English Teaching & Learning 43. 23–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42321-018-0014-4 . Search in Google Scholar

Choi, Jinsook. 2016. ‘Speaking English naturally’: The language ideologies of English as an official language at a Korean university. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 37(8). 783–793. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2016.1142550 . Search in Google Scholar

Darvin, Ron & Bonny Norton. 2015. Identity and a model of investment in applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 35. 36–56. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190514000191 . Search in Google Scholar

Dorleijn, Margreet & Jacomine Nortier. 2019. Introduction. Applied Linguistics Review 10(3). 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2017-0048 . Search in Google Scholar

Freire, Paulo. 1970. Pedagogy of the oppressed . London: Penguin Random House. Search in Google Scholar

Glaser, Barney G. & Anselm L. Strauss. 1967. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research . Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. Search in Google Scholar

Haidar, Sham. 2019. The role of English in developing countries: English is a passport to privilege and needed for survival in Pakistan. English Today 35(3). 42–48. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266078418000469 . Search in Google Scholar

Henriksen, Birgit, Anne Holmen & Joyce Kling. 2018. English medium instruction in multilingual and multicultural universities: Academics’ voices from the Northern European context . London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780429456077 Search in Google Scholar

Hu, Guangwei. 2019. English-medium instruction in higher education: Lessons from China. The Journal of Asia TEFL 16(1). 1–11. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2019.16.1.1.1 . Search in Google Scholar

Hu, Guangwei, Linna Li & Jun Lei. 2014. English-medium instruction at a Chinese University: Rhetoric and reality. Language Policy 13. 21–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-013-9298-3 . Search in Google Scholar

Jenkins, Jennifer. 2019. English medium instruction in higher education: The role of ELF. In Xuesong Gao (ed.), Second handbook of English language teaching (Springer International Handbooks of Education). Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978-3-030-02899-2_7 Search in Google Scholar

Jenkins, Jennifer & Anna Mauranen (eds.). 2019 Linguistic diversity on the EMI campus: Insider accounts of the use of English and other languages in universities within Asia, Australasia, and Europe . Abingdon: Routledge. 10.4324/9780429020865 Search in Google Scholar

Kim, Jeongyeon, Bradley Tatar & Jinsook Choi. 2014. Emerging culture of English-medium instruction in Korea: Experiences of Korean and international students. Language and Intercultural Communication 14(4). 441–459. https://doi.org/10.1080/14708477.2014.946038 . Search in Google Scholar

Kim, Eungyong, Soo-Ok Kweon & Jeongyeon Kim. 2017. Korean engineering students’ perceptions of English-medium instruction (EMI) and L1 use in EMI classes. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 38(2). 130–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2016.1177061 . Search in Google Scholar

Kimmel, Karen & Simon Volet. 2010. Significance of context in university students’ (meta)cognitions related to group work: A multi-layered, multi-dimensional and cultural approach. Learning and Instruction 20(6). 449–464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.05.004 . Search in Google Scholar

Kirkpatrick, Andy. 2014. English in Southeast Asia: Pedagogical and policy implications. World Englishes 33(4). 426–438. https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12105 . Search in Google Scholar

Kroskrity, Paul V. 2004. Language ideologies. In Duranti Alessandro (ed.), A companion to linguistic anthropology , 496–517. Malden, Oxford & Carlton: Blackwell Publishing. 10.1002/9780470996522.ch22 Search in Google Scholar

Kuteeva, Maria. 2020. Revisiting the ‘E’ in EMI: Students’ perceptions of standard English, lingua franca and translingual practices. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 23(3). 287–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2019.1637395 . Search in Google Scholar

Lan, Shu-Wen. 2018. Exploring the academic English socialization of international graduate students in Taiwan. Journal of International Students 8(4). 1748–1763. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v8i4.229 . Search in Google Scholar

Lan, Shu-Wen. 2020. Intercultural interaction in English: Taiwanese university students’ investment and resistance in culturally mixed groups. SAGE Open 10(3). 2158244020941863. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020941863 . Search in Google Scholar

Li, Jia, Ping Xie, Bin Ai & Lisheng Li. 2020. Multilingual communication experiences of international students during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Multilingua 39(5). 529–539. https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2020-0116 . Search in Google Scholar

Lin, Shumin. 2017. To speak or not to speak in the new Taiwanese university: Class participation and identity construction in linguistically and culturally diverse graduate classrooms. Language and Intercultural 18(2). 184–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/14708477.2017.1337778 . Search in Google Scholar

Lin, Shumin. 2022. Negotiating language choice in multilingual lab meetings: Voices from domestic and international students in Taiwan. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 25(1). 117–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2019.1636762 . Search in Google Scholar

Macaro, Ernesto, Samantha Curle, Jack Pun, Jiangshan An & Julie Dearden. 2018. A systematic review of English medium instruction in higher education. Language Teaching 51(1). 36–76. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444817000350 . Search in Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2012. Exploring ELF: Academic English shaped by non-native speakers . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Merriam, Sharan B. 2009. Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation , 3rd edn. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc. Search in Google Scholar

Montgomery, Catherine. 2009. A decade of internalisation: Has it influenced students’ views of cross-cultural group work at university. Journal of Studies in International Education 13(2). 256–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315308329790 . Search in Google Scholar

Otheguy, Ricardo, Ofelia García & Wallis Reid. 2015. Clarifying translanguaging and deconstructing named languages: A perspective from linguistics. Applied Linguistics Review 6(3). 281–307. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2015-0014 . Search in Google Scholar

Patton, Michael Quinn. 2015. Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice , 4th edn. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Search in Google Scholar

Piller, Ingrid. 2015. Language ideologies. In Tracy Karen, Ilie Cornelia & Sandel Todd (eds.), The International encyclopedia of language and social interaction , vol. 2 (The Wiley Blackwell-ICA international encyclopedias of communication), 917–927. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/9781118611463.wbielsi140 Search in Google Scholar

Rahman, Mohammad Mosiur & Manjet Kaur Mehar Singh. 2020. Language ideology of English-medium instruction in higher education: A case study from Bangladesh. English Today 36(4). 40–46. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266078419000294 . Search in Google Scholar

Rose, Heath & Jim Mckinley. 2018. Japan’s English-medium instruction initiatives and the globalization of higher education. Higher Education 75(1). 111–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0125-1 . Search in Google Scholar

Sah, Pramond Kumar & Guofang Li. 2018. English medium instruction (EMI) as linguistic capital in Nepal: Promises and realities. International Multilingual Research Journal 12(2). 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2017.1401448 . Search in Google Scholar

Sah, Pramond Kumar & Guofang Li. 2020. Translanguaging or unequal languaging? Unfolding the plurilingual discourse of English medium instruction policy in Nepal’s public schools. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism . https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1849011 (Epub ahead of print). Search in Google Scholar

Silverstein, Michael. 1979. Language structure and linguistic ideology. In Paul Clyne, William F. Hanks & Carol L. Hofbauer (eds.), The elements: A parasession on linguistic units and levels , 193–247. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. Search in Google Scholar

Söderlundh, Hedda. 2013. Applying transnational strategies locally: English as a medium of instruction in Swedish higher education. Nordic Journal of English Studies 12(1). 113–132. 10.35360/njes.278 Search in Google Scholar

Song, Yang. 2019. English language ideologies and students’ perception of international English-Medium-Instruction (EMI) master’s programmes: A Chinese case study. English Today 35(3). 22–28. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266078418000408 . Search in Google Scholar

Sung, Chit Cheung Matthew. 2016. Exposure to multiple accents of English in the English language teaching classroom: From second language learners’ perspectives. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 10(3). 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2014.936869 . Search in Google Scholar

Sung, Chit Cheung Matthew. 2020. Exploring language identities in English as a lingua franca communication: Experiences of bilingual university students in Hong Kong. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 23(2). 184–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1347138 . Search in Google Scholar

Tsou, Wenli & Fay Chen. 2014. EFL and ELF college students’ perceptions toward Englishes. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 3(2). 363–386. https://doi.org/10.1515/jelf-2014-0021 . Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Chaochang. 2017. Attitudes towards English diversity of students in the international college and the non-IC programmes at a University in Taiwan. RELC Journal 50(2). 300–313. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688217716509 . Search in Google Scholar

World Bank . 2021. World bank country and lending groups. https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519 (accessed 11 June 2021). Search in Google Scholar

Yeh, Chun-Chun. 2012. Instructors’ perspectives on English-medium instruction in Taiwanese universities. Curriculum & Instruction Quarterly 16(1). 209–232. Search in Google Scholar

© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

• X / Twitter

Supplementary Materials

Please login or register with De Gruyter to order this product.

Journal and Issue

Articles in the same issue.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Translanguaging in multilingual classrooms: a case study analysis

Philological Review

This research paper investigates the utilization of translanguaging practices in multilingual classrooms and its impact on language learning and academic achievement. Drawing upon a case study analysis conducted in diverse educational settings, the study aims to explore the benefits and challenges associated with the implementation of translanguaging pedagogies. The research design involved classroom observations, interviews with teachers and students, as well as document analysis of instructional materials. The findings of the study underscore the positive effects of translanguaging on various aspects of language development and academic engagement. The use of translanguaging strategies in multilingual classrooms facilitated language learning by promoting meaningful communication, scaffolding comprehension, and fostering a supportive language environment. Students demonstrated increased motivation and participation, as translanguaging allowed them to access and express complex idea...

Related Papers

Suresh Canagarajah

WAESOL EDUCATOR

Joshua Schulze

Translanguaging has become a "hot topic" in the field of teaching and learning English as a new language; however, experienced ESL teachers have long recognized that culturally and linguistically diverse students bring unique strengths to language learning classrooms. One of those strengths is their ability to use what they already know about language to help them navigate a new linguistic system. This article shares a practical perspective on the theory of translanguaging and demonstrates how translanguaging practices may be used in classrooms to foster English language development across the language domains.

Margaret Omidire

Benefits and issues of translanguaging pedagogies on language learning: teachers’ perspective

Emel Kucukali , Dilara Kocbas

The qualitative study aims to explore the benefits and issues of TP (Translanguaging pedagogies) in language education from teachers' perspectives. Bilingual teachers (N=3) of English and a multilingual teacher (N=1) of English and Turkish working at Turkish State University were purposefully selected. All the teachers had reported making use of TP in their language classes. The data were collected from semi-structured interviews and graphic elicitation tasks, which were analyzed through descriptive statistics (Frequency), and content and visual analysis by using CLAN (Computerized Language ANalysis) Program. The findings indicated that TP have benefits on the affective, cognitive and social engagement of students. The study also shows that the intensity of TP may vary depending on students' proficiency level and on specific skills and areas being taught. Moreover, teachers reported some potential issues of TP, specifically with emergent bilinguals in EFL classes. Based on the findings, pedagogical implications on implementing TP in language classrooms were suggested at the end of the study.

International Journal of Multilingualism

Joana Duarte

International Journal of Research in Education

Maya Marsevani

This research aim at examining students’ perceptions regarding the use of tranlanguaging in language classroom. There were 29 students in a university level involved in this research. Mix methods was used to gain data in which observation, questionnaire, and interview were implemented. Observations analyzed qualitatively by using descriptive analysis in detail information. The questionnaire was further analyzed by calculating percentages in Likert scale questionnaire. For interview section, researchers developed the question based on students answers from google form and transcribed all information and responses into English language. The findings show that students assess translanguaging from 2 aspects, positive and negative. Although they have a positive view of translating in certain situations, they do not often use this pedagogy because it is considered less efficient. This research emphasized that students can gain the good impact of translanguaging if they have a deep underst...

ournal of Advances and Scholarly Researches in Allied Education

Chiara Facciani

The linguistic complexity of multilingual countries presents many questions in developing a discussion about learning and teaching style and curriculum planning that facilitate the learning process for multilingual learners. This research will examine the complexities of Foreign Language Acquisition (FLA) by questioning the benefits of translanguaging theory developed by Baker, García and Li Wei, in order to facilitate the interplay between different languages in the classroom and allow learners to employ their full linguistic repertoires. The present paper will examine the origins and development of translanguaging in the multilingual classroom as a pedagogical practice, working with the interdependence of two (or more) languages that enables learners‟ linguistic and cognitive capabilities. The paper will be divided into three parts. The first one will analyse the origins of the term and its development as pedagogical theory. The second part of the paper will focus on the positive effect of using translanguaging in the foreign language classroom. Finally, the third part of the paper will consider the improvements that the foreign language education settings should embrace while adopting translanguaging as a pedagogical practice.

ana milena aguirre garcia

Kevin Donley

The Canadian Modern Language Review/La revue canadienne des langues vivantes

Katherine E Entigar

Excerpt: Translanguaging with Multilingual Students explores the experiences of emergent bilingual students and their teachers in education based on the principles and practices of translanguaging, a theory that conceives of linguistically diverse students as users of rich linguistic repertoires to navigate their world. García and Kleyn, experienced practitioners, scholars, and advocates for equitable education, make a momentous, ambitious contribution to scholarship about challenges and new possibilities in bilingual education. Part One provides a theoretical grounding for the case studies that form the core of the text. Translanguaging challenges the assumed rightness of traditional monolingual views of language. Education, the authors suggest, must instead legitimize all students’ linguistic practices as individual and meaningful, inviting educators to become “co-learners” (p. 17) as they support students’ unique voices and ways of accessing learning. Such a commitment embraces the linguistic diversity of emergent bilingual students as a form of advocacy for equal treatment in challenging and divisive times...

RELATED PAPERS

Journal of Animation & Games Studies

2016 24th European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO)

caroline fossati

Siembra UCE

Onur Gökçer

ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems

Nazim Madhavji

European Psychiatry

Ian Anderson

Oana Alexandru

Santiago Sierra

Turkish Thoracic Journal

Güntuğ BATIHAN

Superconductor Science and Technology

Pabitra Mandal

Joaquim Teles de Faria

Critical Care

Janete Brauner

Jose Gregorio Mendoza Gutierrez

Journal of Conflict Archaeology

Natasha Ferguson

Journal of Physics: Conference Series

Farhod Haydarov

European Radiology Experimental

Luis Martí-bonmatí

Lamido Aliyu

Oscar Donato

Journal of Applied Physics

Hassan Raza

MEDIA BINA ILMIAH

Aubrey de Grey

Stella Babalola

arXiv (Cornell University)

Antonio Restivo

Indian Journal of Private Psychiatry

Gopala Sarma Poduri

Ecological Processes

David Lindenmayer

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024