Seeking Equitable and Sustainable Bilingualism Frameworks and Practices — A collective Position Paper
Guest Authors: Mariia Borovska, Łukasz Luty, Jakub Doroszkiewicz, Natalia Liszewska, Artem Velychko, Sylwia Ruducha, Michalina Kozłowska, Katarzyna Gulińska, Cezary Zieliński, Julia Mklif, Magdalena Bakun, Julia Wirkowska, and Vikentsi (Vincent) Shpakouski
1st Year Students at the MA in English Philology, University of Białystok, Poland
Introduction (by Dr. Berry)
This position paper brings everybody in the course “Language, Languaging, and Bilingualism: A Socio-Critical Perspective” together for one last statement about a possible future for bilingualism as a global, cosmopolitan affair (Mora & Golovátina-Mora, 2011). This is the result of our conversations throughout the course, so this does not represent one single view point, but the multiple agreements and questions we raised as we talked about ideas that we sometimes took for granted, sometimes we had not even considered in our conversations.
The paper will first look at some perceptions and definitions surrounding bilingualism to then explore some key societal and systemic issues to keep in mind in terms of equity and sustainability. The next section of this paper will propose some solutions and possibilities in what is now an ongoing conversation among all of us.
Perceptions and Definitions
In order to properly understand the topic of a sustainable bilingual framework in English as a second language, we need to establish the core notions first. While the idea of bilingualism might seem to be quite straightforward, it is wise to account for differences in the definitions presented by scholars in this field. For instance, Einar Haughen points at the sole knowledge of two languages (Garcia and Li Wei, p. 11). However, taking into consideration the branching ideas, such as multilingualism and plurilingualism, a more intricate image forms. The three terms seem to converge in “a plurality of autonomous languages” and encompass the individual’s ability to constructively use two or more languages in everyday life (p. 12). In the past, bilingualism was thought to be composed of two autonomous systems, conversely pushing forward a narrative of independent monolingual personalities in one person. This was later disproved, as the language processing in the human brain is dynamic (p. 13).
A consequence of this method of processing speech and language in humans is a phenomenon called translanguaging. Languaging, defined as “the cognitive process of negotiating and producing meaningful, comprehensible output” (Li Wei and Angel, p. 210), can be further extended when other languages in the system start to interact. The Welsh term coined by Cen Williams in the 1980s, trawsieithu, conveys this interaction very well. Traws, meaning “cross”, shows not only the interaction between the two ieithoedd (languages), but their intermingling, as understood in the original speech. Originating as a pedagogical approach (Makalela, p. 240), translanguaging became a method of facilitating second language acquisition. A study conducted on Costa Rican students has shown a preference for using one’s native language to explain more demanding English terms, seamlessly blending the two tongues in a sentence (Escobar, p. 296).
Those initial explanations set the course for understanding how to frame bilingualism and use it in practice in a sustainable way. The notion is of crucial importance to the ESL teachers, who in order to successfully provide their students with linguistic knowledge often are in need of transforming their methods and professional identity. In some cases, the transformation has to happen as a result of the societal proficiency pressure (Fan and de Jong, p. 7). Shaping the way of teaching a language and molding it to fit the environmental demands is connected with the teacher’s own “constructed image” (p.2).
According to Rodriguez-Mojica, it is vital to develop bilingual teacher candidates’ critical consciousness in order to generate emancipatory educational spaces and identify and then disorganize hegemonic structures and practices that pervade schooling in the USA. All these processes have a direct influence on biliteracy experiences (p.2).
The literature on biliteracy focuses more on the experiences of the teachers rather than on how it is developed in teacher preparation (Rodriguez-Mojica, 2019, p. 3). As it was noticed by Shannon, what should become an important focus in bilingual teacher preparation is developing critical language ideologies. Apparently, when an educator opposes the hegemony of English, students do so as well. (Rodriguez-Mojica, 2019, p. 4)
Bilingual teachers should be provided with an opportunity to develop their critical consciousness, because in such a way they can understand their and students’ biliteracy. This enables the teachers to connect pedagogy with their beliefs and as a result teach in emancipatory ways. (Rodriguez-Mojica, 2019, p.15)
Constant Leung suggests that language division in terms of time, curriculum activities and speakers appears to be common in the practice and study of bilingual education. (Leung, 2005, p. 243). In his thesis, Leung presented what had been described much earlier, which shows that science is an area that teachers use to combine content area study with language development. (Leung, 2005, p. 243). Much of the published analysis on bilingual education aims to demonstrate productivity of using one or more languages for teaching and communication in schools.
In addition to the chronological division, bilingual education is also approached according to cirriculum division of language use, i.e. different teaching and learning activities labeled by language (p. 242). The conceptualization of cirriculum and pedagogy in bilingual education in terms of language in terms of time, program and speakers. For example, two-way bilingual education programs are often considered an effective program option for language enhancement and overall academic success. (p. 244)
Societal and Systemic Issues
According to Jacquemet (2005), the intrusion of alien language into the stable ecosystem of long established hegemony on a particular territory had always threatened its ubiquitous status. Nevertheless, the natural practice perpetually reveals that any act of minglement leads to mutual enrichment. Thus, people appreciate new experience and are eager for more exposure. By such demand they define the actual status of their own language and any newcomer. The novelty becomes subordinated in accord with local rules and incorporated into the ecosystem or dies out as a foreign element.
Although mixing practice may not show any evidence of actual multilingual competence, such code-switching model gives proof to language enrichment. Combined with societal diversity, the term multilingualism was raised as a bridging element providing common ground for systemic and social layers (Blommaert 2013).
Applying Blommaert’s approach to the notion of multilingualism, we can claim that humans do not speak languages but rather use languaging, that is, do language. It implies not only that people speak mixed languages but also use different speech styles, dialects, genres, and accents. The problem arises when it comes to equality in societies populated by people of different social classes, races, origins, etc. States authorities and governments make their citizens take native language tests disregarding many aspects related to the language they actually speak. For instance, they take a test on standard language variety proficiency and, therefore, are confined to using vocabulary approved by official dictionaries. Dialects and other aspects of their natural speech do not matter. When it comes to minority groups, they are often disregarded when it comes to their native language manifestation at school. Firstly, because as a country’s citizens they are expected to take a test on a language that is not their mother tongue in the first place. Secondly, the educational process is sometimes conducted mostly in a country’s official language rather than in their native one.
The second issue concerns foreigners or refugees. Not taking into consideration the vernacular or modified language acquired throughout their lifetime while being in many places before making it to a particular country, they are similarly expected to write a test in the official language of their country. Another issue they confront is inaccessibility to particular social privileges. Because not all foreigners are instantly able to learn a particular language registers, they are often treated differently than other citizens. For instance, they may not be able to find a decent job or may be seen as a potential danger and, therefore, are not trusted by the police and others. Focusing mainly on the African context, Sinfree B. Makoni (2012) provides three reasons to explain his rather unfavourable attitude towards the concept of diversity, which implies that everyone is treated equally in a given society. These are the debatable capability of the concept to exist outside the elitist and scientific discourse, power differences concealment in an unequal world seeking for homogenization, and xenophobic societies in which the idea of diversity only emphasizes language and group differences.
Solutions and Future Possibilities
When it comes to possible solutions for establishing sustainable and equitable bilingualism frameworks and practices, one must draw their focus to English as second language classrooms and practical changes to be employed there. In numerous institutions, the hitherto fashionable practice has been the separation of languages and prohibition of native language use. In recent years, however, the trends seem to be changing, albeit slowly, to accommodate students’ linguistic knowledge and utilise their mother tongues to facilitate the acquisition of the second language.
Lewis et al (2012, p. 643) state that incorporating the use of two or more languages during the same lesson “reflects the idea that children pragmatically use both of their languages in order to maximize understanding and performance in the home, street and school”.
Another matter of significance within the scope of the topic of translanguaging is student-student(s) communication. According to a study conducted by Escobar (2019), students use translanguaging in a purposeful manner and not due to the lack of bilingual skills. They swiftly switch between languages mid-sentence, integrating and substituting vocabulary from two different languages to reference key points of the lesson and convey as much information as possible. Despite English-only policies in their classroom, translanguaging was met with a favourable reception from students. As Escobar relays “some students suggest that when they translanguage, they feel more confident and lose that constant pervasive fear of making mistakes in the classroom”. Moreover, “they claim that the few times that some instructors have translanguaged in class, they have been able to build rapport with them more easily.”
That evidently displays the need for changes in the teaching practices in second language acquisition classrooms.
Problems caused by the deep-rooted English hegemony are not irreversible. Another crucial step to building a more inclusive environment for multilingual people is creating awareness of the issue and encouraging education for both students and teachers. A praiseworthy example of such actions is described in the 2019 work by Rodriguez-Mojica and Briceño. Their study showed that bilingual (English and Spanish speaking) teachers, after being allowed to practice their Spanish literacy, felt more comfortable about teaching bilingual students. What is more, teachers, who had taken part in the teacher preparation bilingual classes, were able to consciously apply translanguaging techniques (e.g. making notes in both languages or allowing students to witness the teacher’s process of language development) that helped to expand both their and their students’ biliteracy and increased students’ comfort during classes (p.13–14). According to Rodriguez-Mojica and Briceño, “candidates recognized their own experiences with oppression and considered counter-hegemonic practices that would support their own biliteracy as well as that of their students” (2019, p. 15). This suggests that providing knowledge on the issues such as hegemony, bilingualism or translanguaging and educating not only the students but also the teachers are proven to help eradicate the problems caused by English hegemony.
Language does not only deal with communication, but it determines our thoughts and perception of the world as well (Alves and Pozzebon, 2013). Therefore, as stated by Hagège (2012) — “to impose a language is to impose a way of thinking”, linguistic hegemony poses a threat to the heritage and humanity that needs to be resisted. This counteraction may be executed through broadly defined cultural appreciation and acceptance and promotion of diversity on many levels. Alves and Pozzebon (2013 p. 632f), for instance, to increase diversity in terms of language use in academic production, propose the promotion of the already existing multi-language journals that foster the visibility of non-Anglophone scholars. However, linguistic domination does not only affect the academic field, but it is an issue apparent in various spheres of life, e.g. education. Hornberger and Link (2012) draw attention to the problem of the English-only classroom that does not allow the use of any other foreign language by the students. In response to this action, they suggest empowering the notion of biliteracy, which could constitute a blueprint to further educational reforms that would abolish the ELLs’ language expertise, and on the other hand, improve the foreign language capacities of English speakers.
Nevertheless, little can be done without the systemic changes that are to be executed at higher levels. What is more, a lot shall be alternated as regards the perception of bilingualism. Many should understand that the advocacy of this phenomenon does not indicate combating a particular language but fighting for diversity (Alves and Pozzebon 2013, p. 630).
Conclusion
As already stated, the language processing in the human brain is dynamic. Hence, there is a phenomenon known as translanguaging. Additionally, this cognitive process is capable of being extended as a result of the interaction of other languages in the system. Translanguaging itself is considered a method that can significantly facilitate learning and second language acquisition.
However, when it comes to bilingual teacher candidates themselves, it is crucial to develop critical awareness to generate emancipatory learning spaces. Additionally, identifying them and disrupting hegemonic structures and practices. There should be an opportunity for bilingual teachers to develop critical awareness. As a result, they can better understand their own or their students’ biliteracy. It is due to the fact that teachers have the opportunity to combine their beliefs with pedagogy, and therefore teaching in an emancipatory way.
It has been also proven on the basis of research that pragmatic children speak both of their languages in order to improve their performance. Students using translanguaging can on purpose switch between languages at any time. In addition to switching in the middle of a sentence, they integrate and replace vocabulary from different languages so that later during learning they refer to the most important points of the lesson and are able to convey as much information as possible.
Moreover, given Blommaert’s approach to multilingualism, it is possible to find that people do language instead of just speak a language. Thus, people not only speak different languages, but also use different styles of speech, including dialects, accents or genres. However, there is a problem with equality with people from other societies, which further stresses undeniable need for significant change in second language acquisition classrooms.
References
Alves, M. A., Y Pozzebon, M. (2013). “How to resist linguistic domination and promote knowledge diversity?”. Revista de Administração de Empresas 53(6), 629–633.
Blommaert, J. (2013). Language and the study of diversity. Tilburg Papers in Culture Studies, 74
Fallas Escobar, C. (2019). Translanguaging by design in EFL classrooms. Classroom Discourse, 10(3–4), 290–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2019.1628789
Fan, F., & de Jong, E. J. (2019). Exploring professional identities of nonnative‐English‐speaking teachers in the United States: A narrative case study. TESOL Journal, 10(4), e495. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.495
Hagège, C. (2012). Contre la pensée unique. Éditions Odile Jacob.
Hornberger, N. H., & Link, H. (2012). Translanguaging and transnational literacies in multilingual classrooms: A biliteracy lens. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15(3), 261–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2012.658016
Jacquemet, M. (2005). Transidiomatic practices: Language and power in the age of globalization. Language & communication, 25(3), 257–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2005.05.001
Leung, C. (2005). Language and content in bilingual education. Linguistics and Education, 16(2), 238–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2006.01.004Lewis. G., Jones, B., & Baker C. (2012) Translanguaging: origins and development from school to street and beyond. Educational Research and Evaluation: An International Journal on Theory and Practice, 18(7), 641–654, https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2012.718488
Makoni, S. (2012). A critique of language, languaging and supervernacular. Muitas vozes, 1(2), 189–199.
Mora R. A. & Golovátina-Mora, P. (2011, August). Bilingualism — A bridge to cosmopolitanism? Keynote Presentation at the ELT Conference 2011, Medellín, Colombia (ED547646). ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED547646.pdf
Rodriguez-Mojica, C., & Briseño, A. (2019). Critical Consciousness in Bilingual Teacher Preparation for Emancipatory Biliteracy. Bilingual Review/Revista Bilingüe, 34(1).
