Visualising Language Students and Teachers as Multilinguals

BILINGUAL EDUCATION & BILINGUALISM

Series Editors: Nancy H. Hornberger (University of Pennsylvania, USA) and Wayne E. Wright (Purdue University, USA)

Bilingual Education and Bilingualism is an international, multidisciplinary series publishing research on the philosophy, politics, policy, provision and practice of language planning, Indigenous and minority language education, multilingualism, multiculturalism, biliteracy, bilingualism and bilingual education. The series aims to mirror current debates and discussions. New proposals for single-authored, multiple-authored, or edited books in the series are warmly welcomed, in any of the following categories or others authors may propose: overview or introductory texts; course readers or general reference texts; focus books on particular multilingual education program types; school-based case studies; national case studies; collected cases with a clear programmatic or conceptual theme; and professional education manuals.

All books in this series are externally peer-reviewed.

Full details of all the books in this series and of all our other publications can be found on http://www.multilingual-matters.com, or by writing to Multilingual Matters, St Nicholas House, 31–34 High Street, Bristol, BS1 2AW, UK.

BILINGUAL EDUCATION & BILINGUALISM: 147

Visualising Language Students and Teachers as Multilinguals

Advancing Social Justice in Education

Edited by

Paula Kalaja and Sílvia Melo-Pfeifer

MULTILINGUAL MATTERS

Bristol • Jackson

DOI https://doi.org/10.21832/KALAJA6512

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.

Names: Kalaja, Paula, editor. | Melo-Pfeifer, Sílvia, editor.

Title: Visualising Language Students and Teachers as Multilinguals: Advancing Social Justice in Education/Edited by Paula Kalaja and Sílvia Melo-Pfeifer.

Description: Bristol; Jackson: Multilingual Matters, 2025. | Series: Bilingual Education & Bilingualism: 147 | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Summary: “This book fosters an awareness of multilingualism as lived or as subjectively experienced from the perspective of those involved in language education and teacher education. It illustrates how visual methods can be used to explore individual multilingualism, identify language ideologies and support professional development”— Provided by publisher.

Identifiers: LCCN 2024013877 (print) | LCCN 2024013878 (ebook) | ISBN 9781800416505 (paperback) | ISBN 9781800416512 (hardback) | ISBN 9781800416529 (epub) | ISBN 9781800412101 (pdf)

Subjects: LCSH: Language and languages—Study and teaching—Social aspects. | Multilingualism—Social aspects. | Social justice and education. | | LCGFT: Essays.

Classification: LCC P53.8 .V57 2025 (print) | LCC P53.8 (ebook) | DDC 418.0071—dc23/eng/20240524 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2024013877

LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2024013878

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A catalogue entry for this book is available from the British Library.

ISBN-13: 978-1-80041-651-2 (hbk)

ISBN-13: 978-1-80041-650-5 (pbk)

ISBN-13: 978-1-80041-210-1 (pdf)

ISBN-13: 978-1-80041-652-9 (epub)

Open Access

Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, PO Box 1866, Mountain View, CA 94042, USA.

Multilingual Matters

UK: St Nicholas House, 31–34 High Street, Bristol, BS1 2AW, UK.

USA: Ingram, Jackson, TN, USA.

Website: https://www.multilingual-matters.com

X/Twitter: Multi_Ling_Mat

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/multilingualmatters

Blog: https://www.channelviewpublications.wordpress.com

Copyright © 2025 Paula Kalaja, Sílvia Melo-Pfeifer and the authors of individual chapters.

All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced in any form or by any means without permission in writing from the publisher.

The policy of Multilingual Matters/Channel View Publications is to use papers that are natural, renewable and recyclable products, made from wood grown in sustainable forests. In the manufacturing process of our books, and to further support our policy, preference is given to printers that have FSC and PEFC Chain of Custody certification. The FSC and/or PEFC logos will appear on those books where full certification has been granted to the printer concerned.

Typeset by Techset Composition India(P) Ltd, Bangalore and Chennai, India.

Contents

Contributors

Foreword: Multistoried Visualisations and Narrative Holes

Gary Barkhuizen

Introduction: Being Multilingual and Living Multilingually – Advancing a Social Justice Agenda in Applied Language Studies

Paula Kalaja and Sílvia Melo-Pfeifer

Part 1: Reconstructing Histories of Individual Multilingualism

1‘From YouTube, I Watch Videos and Vlogs and Other Stuff in Different Languages’: Immersion Students as Users of Multiple Languages

Karita Mård-Miettinen and Siv Björklund

2Just ‘Native’ Assistants? Exploring the Plurilingual Potential of Assistant Language Teachers in Japan through Visual Polyethnography

Daniel Roy Pearce, Mayo Oyama and Danièle Moore

3Visual Methods in Language Teacher Education: Uncovering Beliefs about Career Choices Held by Pre-Service Teachers

Sílvia Melo-Pfeifer

4English Remote Teaching in Drawings: Stories of Teacher Resilience in Brazilian State Schools

Ana Carolina de Laurentiis Brandão

Part 2: Describing the Present of Multilingual Pedagogies

5Language Ideologies in Primary School Pupils’ Drawings of the Finnish Language

Heidi Niemelä

6Using Data Visualisations in a Participatory Approach to Multilingualism: ‘I Feel What You Don’t Feel’

André Storto

7Seeing the Unseen: Representations of Being and Feeling in Plurilingual International Students’ Adjustment Experiences

Vander Tavares

8Interpreting Multilingual Spaces through a Lens: Linguistic Landscape Projects for Cultivating Intercultural Competence

So-Yeon Ahn

9Language Teachers’ Professional Identity in Visual Narratives: Depicting Pedagogy for Linguistic and Cultural Diversity through a Social Justice Lens

Ana Sofia Pinho and Maria de Lurdes Gonçalves

10Visualizing Translanguaging Awareness in Language Teacher Education: A Case Study

Josh Prada

Part 3: Envisioning the Future of Multilingualism in Language (Teacher) Education

11The Role of Multilingualism and Multiculturalism in English Classes as Envisioned by Student Teachers in Finland

Paula Kalaja and Katja Mäntylä

12Visualising Interaction in Plurilingual Situations: What Do Future Teachers Think and How Do They Approach This Reality?

Mireia Pérez-Peitx

13Multilingualism in First-Year Student Teachers’ Visualisations of Their Professional Futures in Finland and Brazil

Maria Ruohotie-Lyhty, Rodrigo Camargo Aragão and Anne Pitkänen-Huhta

Conclusion: Lessons Learnt and Future Avenues for Arts-Based Approaches in Applied Language Studies for Social Justice

Sílvia Melo-Pfeifer and Paula Kalaja

Index

Contributors

So-Yeon Ahn is Associate Professor (with a PhD degree, State University of New York at Buffalo, New York, USA) at Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), South Korea, where she conducts research on intercultural communicative competence, language play and awareness, and social and cultural approaches to language learning. She is particularly interested in areas such as multimodal analysis, classroom interaction, discourse analysis, and language teaching and learning. Her recent work has appeared in Language Awareness, Applied Linguistics Review, Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development and System.

Rodrigo Camargo Aragão is Full Professor (with a PhD degree, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brazil) and a language teacher educator at the Faculty of Language and Arts, State University of Santa Cruz, Bahia/Brazil. His research interests include the role of emotions in language teacher education, language learning and teaching, digital literacies and visual methods. He has published his research in different national and international journals and co-edited special issues. He is grateful to the CNPq for funding his research in Brazil (grant n. 308716/2023-0).

Siv Björklund is Full Professor of Swedish Immersion and Multilingualism at the Faculty of Education and Welfare Studies at Åbo Akademi University, Finland. During her academic career, she has been actively involved in developing immersion and other bi- and multilingual education programs both in Finland and internationally. Her research encompasses individual, institutional and societal bi- and multilingual issues. Her recent research projects focus on the relation between praxis, ideology and identity in multilingual settings, dominant language constellations, bi- and multilingual pedagogies, writing in a second language, and minority speakers.

Ana Carolina de Laurentiis Brandão is Adjunct Professor of English (with a PhD in Applied Linguistics, Birkbeck, University of London, UK) at the State University of Mato Grosso, UNEMAT, Brazil. Her research interests include language learning and teaching practices, teacher identity, teacher resilience and language materials development. She has adopted narrative inquiry and arts-based research methods to understand how pre/in-service teachers make sense of their experiences in Brazilian language teaching landscapes.

Maria de Lurdes Gonçalves is Pedagogical Coordinator of Portuguese Foreign Teaching (with a PhD degree, Universidade de Aveiro, Portugal) in Switzerland. She is responsible for the Portuguese Heritage Language teaching staff and her main responsibilities include curriculum planning, teacher education and evaluation. Her research interests include curriculum management, teacher professional development, plurilingual and intercultural education, and heritage language education including arts- and science-based approaches. She has written several articles and book-chapters on heritage language teaching and professional development and recently co-authored Ensinar Português Língua de Herança como Língua Pluricêntrica: Propostas didáticas (Duarte, Gonçalves & Melo, 2023).

Paula Kalaja is Professor Emerita (with a PhD degree, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA) and a former teacher educator (University of Jyväskylä, Finland). Her research interests include individual (learner) differences, IDs (e.g. attitudes, beliefs, motivation) and language learning and/or teaching as lived accessed through verbal and/or visual narratives. She has co-edited a few special issues and co-authored/edited publications, including Beliefs about SLA: New Research Approaches (2003), Narratives of Learning and Teaching EFL (2008), Beliefs, Agency and Identity in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching (2016) and Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words (2019).

Sílvia Melo-Pfeifer is Full Professor (with a PhD degree, Universidade de Aveiro, Portugal) at the Faculty of Education, University of Hamburg, Germany. Her research interests include arts-based and pluralistic approaches in language and teacher education. She has published on multilingualism in language education and on the use of visual methods to uncover pre-service teachers’ attitudes towards and representations of multilingualism. She has co-authored/edited (among others) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words (2019, with Paula Kalaja), Assessment of Plurilingual Competence and Plurilingual Learners in Educational Settings (2023, with Christian Ollivier) and Language Awareness and Identity (2023, with Larissa Aronin).

Danièle Moore is Distinguished Professor in the Faculty of Education, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, Canada, and Research Director at Université Sorbonne Nouvelle – Paris 3, France (DILTEC-EA2288). Her research interests in educational sociolinguistics cover the study of plurilingualism in societies, endangered languages and language reclamation, diasporas, language policy, and plurilingual education and curriculum development, with a focus on teacher training. She favours inquiry methods blending visual, narrative, performative, poetic (auto)ethnography, language biographies, and participatory action research that engage collaborations between teachers, learners, families, communities, and museal institutions, locally and across contexts.

Katja Mäntylä is a PhD and Senior Lecturer at the University of Jyväskylä, Finland, and has a title of Docent. She works as a teacher educator and has done research most recently on early foreign language learning and teaching, learner and teacher identities, and reasons for (not) studying optional languages. She also works for the Matriculation Examination language tests as an item writer and rater for English exams, and she is a member of the Matriculation Examination Board.

Karita Mård-Miettinen is Full Professor in Applied Linguistics (language learning and teaching) at the Department of Language and Communication Studies at the University of Jyväskylä, Finland. Her research and development work focuses especially on practices and policies in settings of early language learning and teaching, and multiple language learning in bilingual education and additional language teaching. She has published widely on these issues. In her research, she applies ethnographic, collaborative and visual methods and adopts content and discourse analytic approaches.

Heidi Niemelä is a university teacher and a PhD student in the Faculty of Education and Psychology at the University of Oulu, Finland. She is a teacher educator, offering courses on the didactics of the Finnish language and literature in an elementary school teacher education programme. Her research interests include language ideologies, multilingualism, translanguaging, and teacher education. Her PhD thesis will be an analysis of the Finnish language as an ideological construction in visual representations. She has also reported on attitudes towards the Finnish language spoken with a foreign accent.

Mayo Oyama, PhD, is an associate professor in the Faculty of Literature and Human Sciences, Osaka Metropolitan University, Osaka, Japan. Her main field of research is language teaching and learning in relation to plurilingualism. She has authored 言語への目覚め活動：複言語主義に基づく教授法 [Awakening to Languages: A Plurilingual Teaching Methodology] (Kuroshio Shuppan Publishing, 2016) and edited the volume 多言語化する学校と複言語教育 [Linguistically Diversifying Schools and Plurilingual Education] (Akashi Shoten, 2022).

Daniel Roy Pearce, PhD, is a lecturer and teacher trainer in the Faculty of Education, Shitennoji University, Osaka, Japan. He holds a Japanese teachers license for the foreign language subject, has previously taught for five years in Japanese public schools and is a member of the textbook review committee of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. His current research interests include teacher collaboration, interdisciplinary plurilingual education, and plurilingualism and linguistic diversity within primarily monolingual contexts. He is the author of Plurilingual Education in a Monolingualised Nation: Exploring New Frontiers in Language Teaching in Japan (2025).

Mireia Pérez-Peitx is a full-time teacher in an elementary school in Barcelona (Escola Xirinacs) and a part-time Professor (with a PhD degree, Universitat de Barcelona, Spain) at the Faculty of Education (Universitat de Barcelona). Her research interests include the evolution of teachers’ beliefs, language learning and teaching – particularly in early acquisition – and plurilingualism. Presently, she integrates research with assessment in various educational settings and courses. Her aim is to assist in-service teachers in reflecting on language learning and teaching practices, thereby bridging the gap between academia and real-world school practices.

Ana Sofia Pinho is Assistant Professor (with a PhD degree, Universidade de Aveiro, Portugal) at the Institute of Education, University of Lisbon, Portugal. Her publications and research interests include pedagogy for linguistic and cultural diversity, education for global citizenship, teacher professional identity and development, teacher-learning communities, and university–school partnerships. She has adopted arts-based approaches, such as visual narratives, in (language) teacher education both as an educational and research practice, as illustrated in the authored chapters in Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words (2019, edited by Paula Kalaja and Sílvia Melo-Pfeifer) and Language Awareness and Identity (2023, edited by Larissa Aronin and Sílvia Melo-Pfeifer).

Anne Pitkänen-Huhta is Full Professor (with a PhD degree, University of Jyväskylä, Finland) at the Department of Language and Communication Studies, University of Jyväskylä, Finland. She is currently Dean for the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Jyväskylä. Her research focuses on (foreign) language learning and teaching practices, multilingual language education, and multilingual literacy practices. She employs ethnographic, discourse analytic and visual methods. Her co-edited publications include Literacy Practices in Transition: Perspectives from the Nordic Countries (2013), Reconceptualizing Connections between Language, Literacy and Learning (2019) and a special issue ‘Visual Methods in Applied Language Studies’ (Applied Linguistics Review, 2018).

Josh Prada (PhD, Texas Tech University, USA; MA, Birkbeck, University of London, UK) is Assistant Professor of Applied Linguistics and Multilingualism at the Center for Language and Cognition, University of Groningen, The Netherlands. His research explores multilingualism and its interfaces with psychological, cognitive, social and educational factors, with attention to how these emerge in language-minoritised communities. Josh has published widely in heritage/minority language education, critical teacher development, and translanguaging. Josh serves as Reviews Editor of the International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism and Associate Editor of Spanish as a Heritage Language.

Maria Ruohotie-Lyhty is Senior Lecturer (with a PhD degree, University of Jyväskylä, Finland) and Teacher Educator at the Department of Language and Communication Studies, University of Jyväskylä, Finland. Her research interests include language learner and teacher identity, agency, and emotions and teacher education. She employs narrative, discourse analytic and visual methods. Her research is widely published in international journals and edited publications, and she is a co-author of the book Beliefs, Agency and Identity in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching (2016).

André Storto is Associate Professor in English language and didactics at Høgskulen på Vestlandet, Norway (with a PhD degree, University of Bergen, Norway). He has more than 25 years’ experience in teaching English as a foreign language, and he has lived and worked in multiple countries. André has published in language-related areas such as foreign language learning, multilingualism and research methodology. He has also worked in the development of interactive digital data visualizations based on research data. His research interests include performance/performativity and language learning, arts-based approaches and the new forms of subjectivity engendered by multisensorial digital environments.

Vander Tavares is Postdoctoral Researcher in education at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, Norway, and holds a PhD from York University, Canada. His research interests include critical second language education, teacher education, and the internationalization of higher education. In 2021, he was the recipient of the Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) Award by the Canadian Bureau for International Education (CBIE). He is the author of International Students in Higher Education: Language, Identity, and Experience from a Holistic Perspective (Rowman & Littlefield), editor of Social Justice, Decoloniality, and Southern Epistemologies within Language Education (Routledge) and co-editor of Language Teacher Identity (Wiley-Blackwell).

Foreword: Multistoried Visualisations and Narrative Holes

I have a photograph of my father hanging on the wall of my study next to me as I write this Foreword. It must have been taken some time in the 1940s when black and white photos were later colourised. In the photo my father is wearing a sailor’s uniform. He served in the Navy in the Second World War. He is young, probably still a teenager. It is an upper-body shot and he is leaning slightly forward, clasping his hands together. A gentle, unsure smile on his face. His clean white uniform with black edges and collar is a contrast against the smokey, blue-grey backdrop. The photo is mounted on a thin piece of cardboard, now aged to a nearly brown color and is bordered by a thin black frame. Immediately beneath the photo is the signature of the photographer.

I never knew my father. He died tragically when I was very young. So, he never got to tell me about his experiences while wearing that uniform. I never heard his stories. This photograph is bursting with stories, and my father is only one source of those stories. There are others. But before I get onto those, let me dwell a little more on him as a storyteller. As the only character in the photograph, he would be the most reliable source of information regarding his experiences of being a sailor during the war. These experiences include what he did, where he was, and his emotions during this time. To put it in academic terms, he could have constructed storied data about his life experiences represented in the visualisation. This is what we sometimes do with visual data, or with visuals that we use to generate further data when, for example, we ask an interviewee to tell us about what is happening in a photograph, or how it makes them feel. In this case, because my father is dead, he is no longer available to tell his stories about the photograph.

Stories could also have come from my mother. She never knew my father at the time the photograph was taken, but surely he would have told her about it later. The picture hung in our house for many years when I was growing up, so it had been around for a long time. And he must have told her stories about his experiences as a sailor during the war; experiences that one would want to know about when looking at the photograph (like I still do). But possibly because of the tragic circumstances surrounding his death, my mother and I didn’t really talk much about his past. I missed out on the stories that my mother could have told about my father in the photograph, just like I missed out on the stories he could have told. Two narrative holes.

So far then, we have a visual artefact with stories to be told about it; two potential sources of these stories – my father (the protagonist in the story) and my mother – have probably told stories about the photograph, but these stories are not available to me. I want to briefly mention three other sources of story in relation to this photograph. One is the photographer – the creator of the medium or visual that conveys the story. The photographer would have had a conversation with my father beyond just the technical aspects of the photo shoot. Whatever the age or gender (it is not clear from the signature), the photographer would have been alive at the same time and experienced, obviously in different ways, the World War. They must have spoken about it, even if briefly. The photographer would have been able to share what they heard from my father’s story when fleetingly engaged with his story. However, that person too is no longer with us. Another hole in the sharing of my father’s story.

The second further source of story is the photograph itself. Yes, it is an inanimate object, made of paper and cardboard with fading colors and a thin black frame. It cannot speak, but it tells a story. Anyone looking at it and examining it, can, based on what is represented, imagine the stories the depicted character might tell, the experiences he lived. They can also tell their own stories about the character; how they see him, when he lived his story, who and where he might be, and how it makes them feel. They will also be able to determine some facts, e.g. the man in the photograph is wearing a sailor’s uniform, he is young. They could even tell what country he is from if they look closely enough – the Navy’s national affiliation is printed on the left shoulder of the uniform in small letters. But there will be many narrative holes; there will be a lot they won’t be able to imagine or that they will get wrong.

The third source also has narrative holes. This source is me, the son of the father in the photograph, the father he never knew. I can weave together bits and pieces of his story that relate to his image in the photograph. Something about the Navy, something about the war, something about his return to life after the war. I am intrigued by the uniform – it looks like something a child might wear in a school play. But it is real; it was worn in a war zone. But there is so much more I don’t know about the stories that could be told about the photograph.

I have identified five potential sources of story that emerge from this photograph of my father hanging on my study wall: (a) my father, who is in the picture, and who never had the chance to tell me about it, (b) my mother, who must have heard stories about that time, but didn’t share them with me, (c) the photographer, who probably had a fleeting conversation with my father about shared experiences, (d) the photograph itself, that can’t speak but tells stories, and (e) me, who has lived with the photograph for many years and imagines stories about it all the time.

Visualisations, whether they be photographs, digital pictures, drawings, timelines, or silhouettes to be colored in, are multistoried. As I have demonstrated with my father’s photograph, each visual’s potential for stories exists beyond just the owner or producer of that visual or who it is about. In research we need to always bear this in mind. Asking a research participant to talk about their photograph or to explain their drawing is but one source of story, or data. Paula Kalaja and Sílvia Melo-Pfeifer’s Visualising Language Students and Teachers as Multilinguals: Advancing Social Justice in Education displays a wide range of options available to us to examine such multistoried visuals. The studies in the book show that stories come from all directions and are engaged with in multiple ways when we try to make sense of them. They show that considering the multistoried possibilities of visual and text combinations or visual as text enhance meaning-making possibilities and challenge the conventions of narrative and qualitative research that pay attention mainly to stories as language. The studies also show how working with visualisations enables progress towards filling the narrative holes that a language-limited research approach might generate – in addition to filling the types of narrative holes I described earlier, i.e. those associated with neglecting potential sources of story.

Finally, in working with visuals (e.g. collecting, analysing and interpreting visual data) – and again, the studies in this book demonstrate these processes in multiple ways – we are compelled to ask not only my three favourite questions when doing narrative research: (1) Who is in the story and how do they relate to each other? How do they position themselves vis-à-vis each other? (2) Where does the action of the story take place – in what physical places and social spaces? (3) When does the action of the story unfold? What happens over time? We are also compelled to ask why questions. Visuals draw us in, we want to know more, we wonder why things are the way they are. And especially when used with textual data, visuals seem to open up avenues for exploration not considered before. As inquirers, we want to know what has happened or is happening in the visual, but it seems impossible not also to ask why. This is one place where visual narratives generate opportunities for social justice in multilingual education, as the editors of this volume say in their introduction, ‘Social justice in education is about agency and authorship of one’s own story in one’s own terms, critical dialogue, commitment to inclusion and transformation, and promotion of equity’. In constructing visual data, whether it be taking a photograph or drawing a picture, research participants have available to them new freedoms to tell their stories beyond the sometimes difficult manipulation of words, and researchers too, when examining those visuals and attempting to fill narrative holes, are offered further pathways for understanding and consequently opportunities to bring about change.

Very few people have seen the photograph of my father in his sailor’s uniform. It has never made it onto Facebook or Instagram, and never will. It is a multistoried visual, still, as it hangs on the wall. The photograph has ongoing meaning. But it is private and personal. In contrast, as we endeavour to understand the complex world of multilingual education, we need to explore alternative means of understanding language learners, their teachers, and teacher educators, and what they do together. To do this we need to share our methods and our findings. This book is a step in that direction.

Gary Barkhuizen

University of Auckland

Introduction: Being Multilingual and Living Multilingually – Advancing a Social Justice Agenda in Applied Language Studies

Paula Kalaja and Sílvia Melo-Pfeifer

1 Introduction

Applied language studies (or applied linguistics) have undergone quite a number of turns in the past few years, including a multilingual turn (see, e.g. May, 2014), and methodologically, a visual turn (see, e.g. Block, 2014). This new publication, with the title Visualising Language Students and Teachers as Multilinguals: Advancing Social Justice in Education, is a response to the theoretical call for questioning traditional or lay notions of multilingualism of individuals, be they learners, teachers, or users of more than one language, or of more than two varieties of a single language. It is also a response to the methodological call for widening the repertoire of research methodologies that have dominated research on the topic until recently: from linguistic (or verbal) methodologies to visual ones (Pitkänen-Huhta & Pietikäinen, 2017; Kalaja & Pitkänen-Huhta, 2018: 157–176). Thus, this new publication criss-crosses the multilingual and visual turns in language education and language teacher education (for short: language (teacher) education) and takes a social justice approach to these areas of expertise. The book approaches these issues from the perspective of those involved in language (teacher) education with a mission to enhance the quality of these areas of expertise, regarding aspects of becoming or being multilingual in the globalised world of today.

It is gradually acknowledged that the majority of people in the world are in fact multilingual (and not monolingual). This is a result of intensive forced displacement, transnationalism, diasporic migration, traveling of people, information and goods – globally – for a host of reasons, and also of changes in educational curricula in many parts of the world, such as in Europe. Being and becoming multilingual is thus the consequence (product) but also a key driving force (process) of the cumulative effects of many factors, including political, economic, social, educational and technological changes and/or innovations. But the acknowledgement of the wide spreading of individual and societal multilingualism is also a result of our evolving understanding of what multilingualism is and of what makes a multilingual individual. In Section 2 we will return to the concepts of multilingualism and plurilingualism, but for the sake of clarity, we will use societal multilingualism to refer to the recognition of multiple language in societies and individual multilingualism, the latter also known as plurilingualism (making plurilingualism and individual multilingualism synonyms), to refer to individual repertoires (Coste et al., 1997; Moore, 2006 even uses the plural form, ‘plurilingualisms’ to better convey the idea of complexity of individual repertoires). The current understanding of multilingualism (and related terminology) has challenged some well-established assumptions about multilingualism, including the monolingual bias and native-speakerism – as an ideology (e.g. Ortega, 2019). In short, monolingualism was assumed to be the norm in the world, multilingualism an exception. Native speakers of a language (e.g. English) were thought to be the best teachers of the language as an L2 and experts in L2 teaching methodologies because they possessed ‘full’ competence in their L1 (assumed to be unattainable by L2 learners), represented Western ways of thinking, and embodied the aesthetics of the European individual, who held cultural power over colonised nations and racialised groups. Some traditions in the definition of a multilingual individual expect a balanced command of two or more languages, which means the full productive and receptive set of competences in more than one language, according to the designation of parallel and concomitant monolinguals. A bilingual, for example, would be someone with a considered (and externally assessed) full command of two languages. Such a perspective is quite elitist, as it would mean that speakers’ partial competences would not be considered or that they would need to be schooled in the two languages to be considered bilingual. And in case a language is neither written nor spoken, it would bring the idea that the command of that language would be compromised. This would make most of us, plurilingual individuals, not recognised as such at all (Piccardo, 2019). The parallel monolingual understanding of individual plurilingualism, a sum of perfect monolinguals in different languages (apparently without contact to each other!), has accounted for many social and educational injustices in the acknowledgement of the partial, unbalanced, distributed competences of plurilingual individuals in different domains of language use. One sign of social and linguistic injustice(s) could be recognised in the very concept of ‘semilingualism’ or in the assumptions that some individuals cannot fully speak any language at all (Martin-Jones & Romaine, 1986). The same injustice was transferred to the context of language learning, in which language learners would never be able to meet the standards of the idealised native speaker of the target language, being forever condemned to stay in some sort of limbo, the interlanguage. The same issue of unbalanced competences was also present in the discussions on the profiles of native and non-native teachers of a target language. So, to keep it short, language competences (how one speaks a set of languages) and the languages included in one’s repertoire (languages perceived as having low or high prestige, for example) have been (part of) yardsticks to measure an individual’s social ability to integrate and therefore succeed in a host country, a child’s academic performance, a student teacher’s professional competence to teach an additional language. Issues of correctness and (native) speakerism and the constitution of the linguistic repertoire are then connected to social justice, in general, and to social justice in language (teacher) education, more particularly.

It is not easy to find a straightforward definition of social justice, and it is perhaps even harder to find definitions that bring issues of social justice and language diversity together. As a term that navigates different disciplines (such as political science and philosophy), explaining its specific meaning in applied linguistics might be hazardous (see Avineri et al., 2019 for an historical overview on the origins and use of the concept). Additionally, as stated by Pennycook (2021: 53), ‘the problem with the idea of social justice … is that it is also a rather vague term whose lineage is principally in liberal democratic principles’. In addition, Pennycook points out that, while social justice might be an appealing way to frame a critical project in applied linguistics, it does not really make it adequate according to theoretical and political grounds, as it remains a largely liberal and colonial idea.

Following the argument by Baugh (2018), language, injustice and inequality can co-occur and, according to Avineri et al. (2019), education is a thematic area where that co-occurrence is most visible (alongside other domains such as racial discourse, health, social activism, law and policy). These authors acknowledge that language is not neutral and can operate to limit and subvert equitable participation at school, thus reducing social justice in this particular setting. Despite Pennycook’s criticisms, we then consider that social justice provides a potentially transformative and empowering framework to carry out research on multilingualism, in general, and on individual multilingualism in education, more specifically. Adopting a social justice lens highlights manipulation and biases, inequalities and linguistic hierarchies that often marginalise individuals with diverse language backgrounds in different school settings, while at the same time proposing more equitable educational opportunities for all, regardless of their linguistic and cultural backgrounds (what we will call linguistic and culturally responsive pedagogies later on). Moreover, in the field of (language) teacher education, it allows us to think of teaching programmes as sometimes creating and reproducing inequalities in the access to the teaching profession, based on teacher candidates’ linguistic, cultural or economic differences, framed as disadvantageous.

Piller provides a clear account of what discourses on social justice are about: ‘engagement with social justice focuses principally on disadvantage and discrimination related to gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion, and age. It is extremely rare for “language” to feature as a basis on which individuals, communities, or nations may be excluded’ (2016: 5). This acknowledgement comes even after the work of some scholars towards the recognition of Language Rights as Human Rights (Skutnabb-Kangas et al., 1995). Piller continues by stressing that ‘linguistic diversity relates to economic inequality, cultural domination, and imparity of political participation’ (2016: 5). Social justice, which can be conceptualised as a goal and a process (Bell, 2007), has been connected to issues of parity of participation in cultural, economic and political domains, implying cultural recognition, economic redistribution and political representation (Fraser, 1995). Adding individual multilingualism to this equation, means that a multilingual dimension to research has the potential to highlight how linguistic hierarchies and (in)visibilities might foster or hinder that parity and participation in the three domains. More specifically, in applied language studies which focus on language (in) education, a social justice lens underscores the linguistic power dynamics at play in the making and reproduction of educational inequalities. This is an even more pressing research agenda when linguistic diversity and inequalities based on ‘linguistic scapegoating’ – i.e. using linguistic arguments as a basis for discrimination – combines with other forms of discrimination, such as those based on race and ethnicity (Baker-Bell, 2020; Rosa, 2019).

In this book we address social justice in education, in general, and in language (teacher) education, more particularly. Social justice in education is about agency and authorship of one’s own story in one’s own terms, critical dialogue, commitment to inclusion and transformation, and promotion of equity: ‘social justice education involves every aspect of education, including but not limited to, access, curriculum development, program offerings, hiring decisions and instructional choices’ (Perugini & Wagner, 2022: 45). In research in applied language studies, a social justice perspective is about both recognising and challenging the playfulness of multilingualism and the sunny-side up of multilingual lives. Through a social justice perspective, research opens up spaces that unveil the – emotional, economic, social, epistemic – precariousness of many multilingual lives, which Dovchin (2022) called ‘translingual discrimination’. A social justice perspective on individual multilingualism is about recognising that multilingualism as lived can have as much multivoicedness as voicelessness. It is about counter-narratives of hegemonic positions and perspectives. When connected to citizenship, social justice ‘runs counter to assimilationist approaches … frequently advocated in schools which tend to control and smother individual and group differences through focusing on responsibilities, social control and preparedness for work’ (Chung & Macleroy, 2022: 258).

This book answers the call to adopt a social justice perspective in applied language studies by showing and discussing ways in which students, teachers and student teachers, by actively engaging in the construction and reconstruction of their lived experiences and stories of multilingualism, become agents of critical thinking and dialogue, with a transformative and creative potential in language (teacher) education. By using drawings and other arts-based approaches, participants and researchers disrupt a long-standing tradition of logocentric perspectives in narratives and narrative studies, and on studies on the voices beyond multilingual lives (see Section 2.3, below, for more details). Indeed, while logocentrism places a heavy emphasis on written or spoken language as the primary means of communication and expression in research and storytelling, drawings and arts-based methods introduce a more diverse and inclusive range of expressive tools (i.e. semiotic resources). Researching multilingual lives from a less logocentric perspective addresses crucial issues of how multilingual individuals can participate in creating and disseminating scientific knowledge, beyond research traditions in linguistics and applied linguistics that constructed multilinguals as deviant, for example, as lacking resources in the language of schooling (just think of the tradition of analysing multilingual students’ errors or measuring their language gap). Through arts-based research methods, individuals can convey their experiences, emotions and narratives through visual art, which allows for a broader and richer spectrum of expression, also nurturing their visual literacy. From a social justice perspective, incorporating drawings and different semiotic resources challenges the dominance of text-based narratives and opens up space for alternative ways of knowing and sharing stories, also impacting research dissemination strategies. This disruption is particularly pertinent in multilingual contexts where linguistic hierarchies and power dynamics can marginalise certain voices and certain narratives.

Visualising Language Students and Teachers as Multilinguals: Advancing Social Justice in Education is intended for all those involved in language (teacher) education, including teacher educators/trainers, teacher trainees/student teachers and practising teachers of additional languages, working in different levels of education (involving their students ranging from small children to senior citizens). In addition, this book can serve as a source of inspiration for senior or junior scholars wishing to pursue research along similar lines in the educational contexts where they find themselves.

In Section 2, we will discuss the central concepts of this volume, focusing on the issues of multilingualism as lived, on the relationship between multilingualism and social justice in language (teacher) education, and on the use of arts-based approaches to promote a social justice agenda in these fields. In Section 3, we briefly present Parts 1 to 3 of the book, describing the individual contributions, which in their own way move the social justice agenda in language (teacher) education forward.

2 What is This Book About?

2.1 Multilingualism as lived: More than Words, revisited!

Our understanding of multilingualism as lived is based on two complementary arguments, but goes beyond them. Firstly, we agree with the idea that ‘in real life and everyday usage languages are not usually as neatly compartmentalized as our usage of language names suggests’ (Piller, 2016: 11); secondly, we acknowledge the importance of adopting an emic stance, a more emotional and subjective one, in the analysis of individual multilingualism, to understand how plurilinguals make sense of their linguistic stories and repertoires. It goes nevertheless beyond these principles, as we also understand multilingualism as lived as interconnected and merged with other communicative resources, which are not limited to named and discrete languages or even ‘bits of languages’ (Blommaert, 2010). This is the reason why the subtitle of this section is ‘More than Words, Revisited!’. In our previous co-edited book (Kalaja & Melo-Pfeifer, 2019), we wanted to stress the added value of using visualisations to explore individuals’ (lived) multilingualism, by adopting less logocentric methodological perspectives; now, we take the same stance but embrace a less logocentric stance also on the very idea of the multilingual repertoire itself.

It is acknowledged that in fact all people are multilingual according to the current definition(s) of multilingualism (or of plurilingualism) of individuals (for a concise review of these terms, see, e.g. Piccardo, 2019; Piccardo et al., 2022a). Recent accounts of what counts as multilingualism and who the plurilingual speaker is have changed our perception of balanced competences in different, isolated languages. It is now acknowledged that plurilingual speakers can use their linguistic repertoires in a flexible and hybrid way to accomplish real goals in the real world, as ‘social agents’ (Piccardo & North, 2019). These linguistic competences include the use of different registers, dialects, sociolects and languages, which, in fact, would mean that everybody is, at a certain point, plurilingual. Furthermore, one can be plurilingual by making use of partial competences in different languages, such as receptive competences in languages of the same linguistic continuum (also known as intercomprehension or receptive multilingualism), say, across the Romance Languages (such as Portuguese, Italian and Catalan): being able to partially understand a language of the same linguistic family would be a display of plurilingual competence. Additionally, knowledge and use of different linguistic resources are combined with non-verbal and para-verbal semiotic repertoires, as well as with spatial and sensorial repertoires, in a very complex, organic and complementary way, meaning that multilingualism as lived is multi-layered, embodied, multisensorial, situated and emplaced. This more complex and organic perspective on individual multilingualism should be reflected in the teaching of languages (for theorising along these lines in different parts of the world, see, e.g. Piccardo et al., 2022b, regarding different languages, and Raza et al., 2021 and 2023, regarding a single language, namely, English) and in the curricula at all levels of education. Multilingualism as lived in education would need to address issues of complementarity, redundancy, and discrepancies between the use of linguistic resources and other semiotic resources. It would, perhaps paradoxically, lead to a less logocentric language classroom, where multisensoriality (Prada, 2023) and the material culture of multilingualism (Aronin et al., 2018; Aronin & Ó Laoire, 2012), with their emotional weight, would have a meaningful place.

Despite these theoretical and epistemological advances, curricula or the series of textbooks on the market tend to provide language students and teachers with very few practical guidelines to achieve a more complex and dynamic vision of how languages work, how they are acquired and used, and especially how to address multilingualism as lived. And, also importantly, usually just logocentric methodologies are included in syllabi for (student) teachers, a limitation in the approach to language education that we expect to counter with this collection of empirical studies.

Multilingualism can be approached from a number of perspectives (for a comprehensive review, see, e.g. Cenoz, 2013). One basic distinction was already noted above between societal and individual multilingualism. In other words, the focus can be on communities where a number of languages are used, or on individuals who speak more than one language – or more than one variety of a single language. As Kramsch (2009: 2) notes: ‘In its attempts to elucidate how people learn and use various languages, SLA research has traditionally given more attention to the processes of acquisition than to the flesh-and-blood individuals who are doing the learning. It has separated learners’ minds, bodies, and social behaviours into separate domains of inquiry and studied how language intersects with each of them’. Thus, regarding individual multilingualism (or plurilingualism), a further distinction can be made between an objective and a subjective approach (Kramsch, 2009). The objective approach focuses on tracing the development of individuals’ knowledge of languages in terms of a linguistic system, including the mastery of grammar and lexicon, or in terms of an ability to communicate with others – in the languages in their repertoires. In contrast, the subjective approach attempts to figure out what sense individuals themselves make of becoming or being multilingual as subjectively experienced (or as lived), involving ups and downs, positive and negative emotions, attitudes, beliefs, ideologies, visions and identities.

These developments have led to the redefining of traditional terminology (e.g. multilingualism or repertoire), introducing new terminology (including translanguaging, plurilingualism, multicompetence) and challenging some traditional notions such as mother tongue, L2, L3, etc., fossilisation, language attrition, semilingualism, interlanguage, communicative competence, and assumptions about the nature of languages as discrete and fixed units. They have also debunked some misconceptions about communication: communication has to be monolingual, interlocutors should all speak and share the same language, languages are the principal meaning makers in communication (see Canagarajah, 2013; García & Li, 2014). So, if plurilingual individuals make use of all their verbal and non-verbal resources to communicate, in a dynamic, selective, goal-oriented way, according to the ingredients of the context (e.g. a formal or informal situation, interlocutors and languages present, objects available, own bodily resources, etc.), then translanguaging would be a more accurate way to describe how plurilingual subjects collaboratively perform to co-construct sense (Li, 2018; Prada, 2023). It has not so much to do with the use of unique languages to communicate or about switching languages as if we were dealing with parallel monolingualisms, but rather with the flexible and skilful navigation of the plurilingual and multisemiotic repertoire in a given time and space.

This stance is important in terms of language education programmes. To acknowledge the full communicative repertoire of students would go beyond knowing which L1, L2, L3 or Lx a student has learnt at school or acquired during their linguistic biography. It would mean knowing how they make use of those linguistic repertoires, how they subjectively perceive them, and how they combine them to accomplish and co-create meaning. It thus comes as no surprise that concepts such as mother tongue or foreign language are increasingly under fire: the first can no longer be considered the yardstick to measure the emotional bond to a language or the communicative competence of an individual; and foreign language is a term that more often than not helps to stigmatise individuals and languages. Additionally, mother tongue and foreign language are not stable biographic givens: not always the language one learnt first, not always a language one learnt later in life (Dabène, 1994; Melo-Pfeifer, 2019). That is why, in the scope of this introduction, we prefer the terms modern and world languages or additional languages, to refer to languages being used, learnt, or taught (see also Melo-Pfeifer & Tavares, 2024).

These developments are beginning to be recognised, and thus fostering awareness of multilingualism – and related multiculturalism – has become one of the core aims in language education since the launch of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment (Council of Europe, 2001) and the more recent updates to the original document (e.g. Council of Europe, 2007, 2020). These guidelines were developed for teaching additional languages, including English, in Europe but have since been adopted in other parts of the world, too (Byram & Parmenter, 2012; for comparisons of practices and policies across different countries and educational contexts, see Björklund & Björklund, 2023).

The ever increasing multilingualism, or linguistic and cultural diversity of language learners (and possibly also that of their teachers) in language (teacher) education is posing new challenges regarding, e.g. classroom interaction and assessment practices (for recent theorising along these lines in different parts of the world, see, e.g. Piccardo et al., 2022b, regarding different languages, Raza et al., 2021 and 2023, regarding a single language, namely, English, and Melo-Pfeifer & Ollivier, 2023, on the challenges of multilingual assessment). The multilingualism of language learners (which might differ from that of their teachers) and the way learners live their multilingualism have been viewed by teachers with mixed feelings (or attitudes and beliefs): either in positive or negative terms – or as an asset or as a problem (e.g. Haukås, 2015; Lundberg, 2019); or in three orientations – as a right, as a problem, or as a resource (Paulsrud et al., 2020).

2.2 Multilingualism and social justice in language (teacher) education: Towards linguistically and culturally responsive practices

Following our review of the concept ‘social justice’ in Section 1, particularly in what concerns the connection between social injustice and linguistic inequalities, addressing social justice in education is based on the premise that teachers and researchers alike should ‘avoid being complicit in sustaining an oppressive status quo and to rethink their roles as contributors to advance justice in marginalized and vulnerable communities’ (Mertens, 2022: xxiii; see also Li, 2023). This implies taking a proactive stance in the promotion of social justice. A way to advance social justice in language (teacher) education would be to fully acknowledge the linguistic and semiotic repertoires of students and teachers alike, in their uniqueness, heterogeneity, and in their potential for creative use. This would also encompass the recognition that not all individuals have the same embodied repertoires available to communicate: some students might come short in listening capacities, others might not be able to see or walk, others might still be developing their linguistic repertoires in the language of schooling, others might be struggling to maintain their language(s) of origin. To cope with differences in linguistic and cultural repertoires in the classroom, some authors have called for the development of linguistic and culturally responsive teaching practices, which would acknowledge, legitimate and leverage the repertoires brought by students (and therefore, the repertoires of their families) to the classroom (Bonnet & Siemund, 2018; Candelier et al., 2007; Herrera, 2016; Kirsch & Duarte, 2020; Li, 2023; Tavares, 2023; Yiakoumetti, 2012). These practices would be valid for both school subjects more directly related to languages (language subjects), and for so-called ‘non-linguistic subjects’ (such as Maths). In this subsection, we will only refer to linguistic and culturally responsive practices in the language classroom, and just touch upon the theme of less ableist practices in that context, as this is not the main theme of the volume. Together, multilingual pedagogies highlight ‘a shift in focus from issues of integration and interaction between different cultures to social justice issues’ (Zilliacus et al., 2017: 168). Some approaches to acknowledge, capitalise and leverage the potential of students’ linguistic and cultural repertoires have been proposed. Among them, we can name the pluralistic approaches to language and culture teaching and learning (Candelier et al., 2007), pedagogical translanguaging (Cenoz & Gorter, 2022), and decolonising language education (Macedo, 2019), which includes the discussion about deracialising the language curriculum and being aware of raciolinguistic ideologies in language and teacher education (Rosa, 2019; Rosa & Flores, 2020). These approaches seek to promote linguistic equity in multilingual and multicultural teaching and learning contexts and offer support for communities – mainly linguistic communities – which have been oppressed or disregarded, and they are engaged in promoting social change through transformative language education. They all have in common the acknowledgement that previously acquired linguistic and semiotic repertoires, biographical experiences and individuals’ dispositions and goals are paramount to understand how they engage in language learning, how they view their own and others’ multilingualism and how they live with and across languages. Also importantly, they acknowledge that multilingual education should be a goal not only for students with a migrant background, but for all the school population, as the benefits attached to language education include increased multilingual awareness, cognitive and linguistic abilities, and enhanced intercultural competence, among others. Thinking of multilingual and intercultural education for all also avoids systematically focusing on migrant students as lacking something and on proposing multilingual pedagogies as an instrument to overcome it, hence avoiding accentuating discourses of othering in multilingual education. Culturally and linguistically responsive practices in language education address two complementary issues related to social justice: firstly, by normalising the use of previously acquired linguistic and semiotic repertoires of all students; and secondly, by stressing the value of multilingual education for all, and not just to overcome deficits in the language(s) of instruction.

Linguistically and culturally responsive practices such as the ones listed above are a way of challenging practices based on ‘ableism’: being or not being able to speak the language of the school, being or not being able to adapt to a school culture or to the so-called culture of the host country (in certain homogenising discourses!). Promoting less ableist practices could also mean diversifying input in the language classroom, to include students’ repertoires and pay justice to their abilities and set of cognitive assets, which implies addressing students traditionally considered ‘monolingual’. Most of the activities in the language classroom are based on visual and/oral input, which exclude part of the learners from the communicative and learning tasks, if they have seeing or hearing characteristics that distinguish them from the majority of the classmates. And if we criss-cross issues of language competence in the language of schooling with multisensoriality (or a lack thereof to some degree) and ableism, we can infer how urgent social justice issues should enter the language classroom.

2.3 Multilingualism, social justice and arts-based approaches to research

Recently edited books have been acknowledging the need to rethink research methodologies to cope with the linguistic and cultural repertoires of the participants, in order to strive for more equity in research designs, for more balanced participation of all individuals involved, and for promoting social justice not only in the dissemination of results, but in all moments of research design and development (among them, CohenMiller & Boivin, 2022; Martin-Jones & Martin, 2017; Purkarthofer & Flubacher, 2022; Robinson-Pant & Wolf, 2017; Warriner & Bigelow, 2019). Most of the books add the use of visual methodologies or other less logocentric research methods in research to the mainstream research methods based exclusively on linguistic data, striving for multiliteracy usages in research and challenging graphocentrism (Menezes de Souza, 2017), and they make the case that research on multilingualism should be made multilingually, following the work by Holmes et al. (2013 and 2016). In this book, we claim that research on individual multilingualism, when performed through a social justice lens, should combine doing research multilingually and multisemiotically.

In applied language studies, in general, and in language (teacher) education, more specifically, issues such as ‘how are languages learnt at different stages of life?’, ‘what differences can be observed in the learning pathways of monolingual and plurilingual learners?’, ‘how do language learners/speakers become language teachers?’ or ‘how do student teachers develop professionally?’ have been addressed through methods anchored in discourse and linguistic-verbal discursive practices (such as interviews, questionnaires, written or oral narratives). These studies rarely take embodiment and multimodality into consideration in data collection and/or in the analyses. Applied language studies, probably because the name of the field is so dominated by the term language, has been characterised by a linguistic bias that sees it as the preferred modus for meaning making, positioning other (concomitant) modi to an underestimated and subaltern position. This would explain why language (teacher) education and research in these fields has been determined by an empire of the written discourse, ‘empire langagier’ (Morilhat, 2008), or a bias known as ‘lingualism’ (Block, 2014).

The predominant glottocentric approaches to language, communication, plurilingualism and identity have already been acknowledged in this chapter. We defined those approaches as methodologies and perspectives that focus predominantly on written or spoken language as the central and most significant means of communication and knowledge production. They strongly convey the idea that rational discourse is word-based only (or mostly) and, as a byproduct of this connection, also monolingual only. Such a perspective emphasises the written or spoken word as the primary mode of expressing ideas, conducting research and conveying knowledge, thus limiting how linguistically diverse populations are present(ed) in research on their own multilingualism. Such a perspective tacitly accepts a hierarchy between modes of meaning making and the subordination or exclusion of meaning makers aside from words (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016: 65) in research. According to Morilhat (2008: 16), this epistemological stance entails as a corollary that ‘the complex modes of our being in the world are ignored, purged to the benefit of the language relationship alone. The exclusive attention given to the constitutive power of language results in the disappearance of extra-linguistic reality’ (translation by Melo-Pfeifer). Against this backdrop, arts-based approaches emerge as a methodological (and even ontological or ‘theoretical’, Melo-Pfeifer & Chik, 2022) alternative in research that brings the multisensorial and multimodal ways of producing and interpreting meaning to the forefront, thus valuing participants’ multiliteracies and challenging the above-mentioned graphocentrism in research. Ortega (2019: 29) refers to this complexity of meaning making as follows:

Human meaning-making is always multisensory and embodied, multimodal and situated, and always involving much more than purely linguistic resources or perfect correspondences between what is said (a linguistic matter of words but also embedded in many other nonlinguistic signs, symbols, and resources), what is meant (a nonlinguistic matter of intention and construal), and what is understood (a nonlinguistic matter of construal and effect).

Arts-based research makes use of a set of tools that adopt and combine ‘the tenets of creative arts in order to address social research questions in holistic and engaged ways’ (Leavy, 2015: 4). It therefore answers the call to expand research objects and tools beyond words. It can be interpreted as an effort to extend beyond the limiting constraints of discursive communication in order to express meanings that otherwise would be left untold. Seen from this perspective, it is an approach that challenges the standardisation of research methodologies and promotes ‘methodological pluralism’ (Barone & Eisner, 2012: 4).

Arts-based approaches, such as those using drawings or photographs, might be considered innovative and disruptive in three ways. First, they recognise the relationship between emotion and cognition, supporting the appreciation of emotions as central elements in learning, teaching and researching, due to the emotional inscription of lived experiences. Secondly, they favour other modes of expression, benefiting the participation of audiences that, for different reasons, may have difficulties in verbal expression (hearing or speech problems, recent immigrants and refugees, etc.), offering a multimodal voice to voice-deprived audiences, thus promoting greater equity in the production of scientific facts and discourses (Melo-Pfeifer & Schmidt, 2019). Thirdly, they recognise the value of involving subjects in the complex and multi-stakeholder processes of language learning and teaching and of adopting an emic perspective to research.

The recent calls for using visual methods and arts-based approaches in applied language studies include the study of creative and multilingual post-communicative methodologies in language learning (Coffey & Patel, 2023), beliefs about languages and societal and individual multilingualism (Chik & Melo-Pfeifer, 2023; Umino, 2023), the composition of plurilingual repertoires and dominant language constellations (Aronin & Vetter, 2022; Carbonara, 2023), students’ and teachers’ plurilingual biographies (Busch, 2017; Carbonara, 2023; Melo-Pfeifer & Chik, 2022; Prasad, 2015), and the understanding of multilingualism as subjectively experienced by individuals, in different circumstances not limited to school and formal education (Kalaja & Melo-Pfeifer, 2019). These calls converge on the fact that they all see visual and artistic productions as ‘identity texts’ (Cummins & Early, 2011) fostering reflection on beliefs, ideologies, linguistic and professional development, and the circumstances surrounding the lives of multilinguals. Identity texts, the authors claim in the title of the book, allow for ‘the collaborative creation of power in multilingual schools’ (Cummins & Early, 2011) or, as put by Moore et al. in the subtitle of a book, the ‘collaborative construction of new linguistic realities’ (2020). They are therefore an instrument for addressing equity and social justice for plurilinguals in contexts of multilingual education by challenging imposed power relations based on linguistic competences.

3 How Are the Three Parts of the Book Organised?

In addition to this Introduction and Conclusion, Visualising Language Students and Teachers as Multilinguals: Advancing Social Justice in Education comprises three parts, and these emphasise different orientations towards temporality: past, present and/or future. If we understand visual methods, and particularly drawings, as narratives of personal relevance for the subjects, then temporality becomes an important clue to read them. The way the table of contents of this publication is organised highlights the different uses of visual methods. Firstly, visual methods can be used to reconstruct histories of individual multilingualism, by means of production and interpretation of visual (or multimodal) biographies (Part 1). Secondly, visual methods can be used to diagnose current beliefs, ideologies and attitudes concerning individual and societal multilingualism and how these carve teachers’ professional identities and actions (Part 2). Thirdly, visual methods can be used to support teachers’ professional development towards multilingual pedagogies by envisioning their future selves in action (Part 3).

Of Chapters 1 to 13, each one reports on an empirical study, bringing something novel to the field, and being divided into the standard sections of Introduction (including aims of the study), Background to the Study, Research Methodology, Findings, and Lessons Learnt, a concluding section, with a critical evaluation of the study from the perspective of social justice.

3.1 Reconstructing histories of individual multilingualism

Part 1 of the book comprises five chapters and starts with Chapter 1, by Karita Mård-Miettinen and Siv Björklund, titled ‘“From YouTube, I Watch Videos and Vlogs and Other Stuff in Different Languages”: Immersion Students as Users of Multiple Languages’. The chapter reports on a study with students (attending Grades 5–8) enrolled on an immersion programme within the Finnish educational system, where two languages are used in instruction: Finnish as the L1 (or the majority language) and Swedish as an L2 (or the minority language) of the students. The study sought to find out if the students’ multilingualism out-of-school was similar or different in their experience. The students were asked to take a set of photographs of the use of their repertoire of different languages beyond school. These were complemented with commentaries in writing and interviews. The pools of data were subjected to content analysis. Indeed, the students identified themselves as users of multiple languages beyond school premises, the languages were used for specific purposes (and mixed) and indicated increased metalinguistic awareness.

Chapter 2, by Daniel Roy Pearce, Mayo Oyama and Danièle Moore, titled ‘Just “Native” Assistants? Exploring the Plurilingual Potential of Assistant Language Teachers in Japan through Visual Polyethnography’, is concerned with a specific group of teachers, namely, assistant language teachers (ALTs), and their evolving role and identity within the Japanese educational system. The ALTs used to be assumed to be native speakers of, say, English and thus considered to have full competence in the language and be apt representatives of English-speaking countries and cultures. And even if this was not necessarily the case, they were treated as if that was the case, leading to false assumptions about their linguistic and cultural expertise. The study describes how two ALTs – with the help of researchers – decided to challenge native-speakerism as ideology. The idea was to increase the ALTs’ awareness of their own multilingual (or plurilingual) identities and that of their students (1) by having the ALTs produce visual autobiographies and (2) by asking them to design material for a specific project (School Lunches). The discussions about these ventures comprise the data analysed within a specific framework, namely, polyethnography.

Sílvia Melo-Pfeifer, in Chapter 3, presents a study called ‘Visual Methods in Language Teacher Education: Uncovering Beliefs about Career Choices Held by Pre-Service Teachers’. The author set out to find out how university students in Germany ended up pursuing a career in language education. They were asked to answer the question ‘How did you become a teacher of French’ visually by producing a picture and verbally by complementary comments in writing. The data were subjected to content analysis. Three different motives (or reasons) were found for taking on the identity of a teacher of French: (1) the specific language (French), (2) the field (foreign languages), and (3) the profession (teacher).

Chapter 4, by Ana Carolina de Laurentiis Brandão, is titled ‘English Remote Teaching in Drawings: Stories of Teacher Resilience in Brazilian State Schools’ and reports a study on the resilience of two teachers of English in Brazil. They were faced with the COVID pandemic and the challenge of having to adjust to teaching English remotely, lacking training and resources, and experiencing resistance by students. The teachers were asked to describe their teaching experiences visually by producing a drawing and verbally by being interviewed online, and findings are reported in the form of multimodal narratives.

3.2 Describing the present of multilingual pedagogies

Part 2 of the book depicts multilingual pedagogies in six chapters. It starts with Chapter 5, by Heidi Niemelä, titled ‘Language Ideologies in Primary School Pupils’ Drawings of the Finnish Language’. It seeks to identify discourses constructed about the Finnish language and trace their reproduction and circulation as language ideologies within the Finnish educational system. Students, aged 11 to 13 years, were asked to ‘draw the Finnish language’ and answer a set of prompt questions in writing. The students, who came from different regional and social backgrounds, were divided into six groups. Based on the visual and verbal data, three main discourses were identified, and one of the six groups stood out from the rest, namely, the students living in eastern parts of Helsinki, the capital, and coming from immigrant and lower socioeconomic backgrounds. The discourses identified were used as language ideologies for cross-purposes by the different groups of students to include or exclude people from being considered a Finn or not, based on different criteria.

Chapter 6, by André Storto, discusses ‘Using Data Visualisations in a Participatory Approach to Multilingualism: “I Feel What You Don’t Feel”’ as part of a major project focusing on beliefs about multilingualism carried out within the Norwegian educational system. The chapter reports on an attempt by the researcher to involve school children in answering the question ‘Are you multilingual?’ in a questionnaire and providing justifications for their responses, categorising the data and compiling the findings into digital visualisations (or fancy graphs). In a way, the students had double roles, acting as participants in the study and at the same acting as co-researchers, and thus exercising agency over the research process, resulting in becoming aware of their own multilingual identities.

The next chapter, by Vander Tavares, is titled ‘Seeing the Unseen: Representations of Being and Feeling in Plurilingual International Students’ Adjustment Experiences’ and focuses on the sociocultural adjustment, including linguistic and cultural differences, as experienced by three multilingual international students studying at a Canadian university. The students had been asked to take photographs over their stay and were interviewed for their experiences of studying abroad. Findings are reported as case studies, or as emotionally charged journeys. The students’ knowledge of languages played a role, too, whether they experienced their study abroad and its challenges (or fitting in and/or interacting with local students) in positive or negative terms and whether they managed or did not manage to adjust to a period of study abroad.

So-Yeon Ahn reports on ‘Interpreting Multilingual Spaces through a Lens: Linguistic Landscape Projects for Cultivating Intercultural Competence’, in Chapter 8. It presents and critically discusses an attempt by the author to raise the critical language and cultural awareness of a group of South Korean university students (or science majors) by having them carry out projects. The students were asked to take photographs and/or record video-clips of a specific public location or area of their own interest (such as a university campus, hospital or bus station) and observe the uses, modes and functions of the different languages (or possible lack of these) in these contexts. The students shared their linguistic landscape projects orally and in writing. Findings are reported as illustrative case studies.

Chapter 9, by Ana Sofia Pinho and Maria de Lurdes Gonçalves, is titled ‘Language Teachers’ Professional Identity in Visual Narratives: Depicting Pedagogy for Linguistic and Cultural Diversity through a Social Justice Lens’. This study compares two groups of teachers within longitudinal projects. The study to be reported focuses on the role that the pre-service teachers of English-as-a-Foreign-Language and in-service teachers of Portuguese-as-a-Heritage-Language would assign to linguistic and cultural diversity in teaching the two languages with different status in their specific contexts (Portugal vs. Switzerland). The teachers were asked to produce visual narratives or drawings of their teaching over time and verbal commentaries, but findings are reported only on the initial sets of data, subjected to content analysis. Similarities and differences are noted across the two groups of teachers regarding their understanding of their professional identities and aims in their teaching.

Part 2 concludes with Chapter 10, by Josh Prada, called ‘Visualizing Translanguaging Awareness in Language Teacher Education: A Case Study’. It reports on the effects of a short-term intervention in teaching, e.g. Spanish to immigrants in the US. The idea of this intervention (or an international seminar) was to advocate translanguaging practices and to challenge monolingual ideology in schools. The development of translanguaging awareness was observed in an international, multilingual student who was considering pursuing a career as a language teacher. The observation was based on the course work completed by the student, including notes and journal entries, and culminating in a final project, or a three-dimensional visualisation (as an application of arts-based methodologies) entitled La Nube ‘The Cloud’. All these pointed to the student’s increasing translanguaging awareness over the intervention.

3.3 Envisioning the future of multilingualism in language (teacher) education

Part 3 of the book comprises three chapters. Chapter 11, by Paula Kalaja and Katja Mäntylä, titled ‘The Role of Multilingualism and Multiculturalism in English Classes as Envisioned by Student Teachers in Finland’, sought to find out (as part of a project) what role multilingualism was envisioned to play in teaching English by student teachers once they would have graduated and entered working life. The participants were asked to produce a picture ‘The English class of my dreams’ and provide further details of the future class in writing by answering a set of related questions. The data were subjected to content analysis, and findings are reported as case studies to illustrate the qualitative variation in the classroom interaction and environment(s) of their envisioned English classes.

Chapter 12, by Mireia Pérez-Peitx, is named ‘Visualising Interaction in Plurilingual Situations: What Do Future Teachers Think and How Do They Approach This Reality?’. It is concerned with the beliefs about multilingualism (or plurilingualism) held by three groups of student teachers or graduating language professionals in Catalonia (Spain). They were asked to produce a set of two pictures: (1) a situation, involving anybody multilingual and (2) a situation involving oneself as a multilingual professional in a classroom, and these were complemented with commentaries in writing. The pools of data were subjected to content analysis, and findings are reported as illustrative case studies and noting differences across the two situations envisioned, regarding three themes: (1) context, (2) interaction and (3) people and their actions.

Finally, Chapter 13, by Maria Ruohotie-Lyhty, Rodrigo Camargo Aragão and Anne Pitkänen-Huhta, called ‘Multilingualism in First-Year Student Teachers’ Visualisations of Their Professional Futures in Finland and Brazil’, asked (as part of a project) student teachers in the two countries to envision the best and worst scenarios for their future as multilingual professionals by producing two pictures and commentaries in writing. The data for the best scenarios were re-analysed for their contents. Similarities and differences in the beliefs as part of their identities are reported across the two contexts of the study. The positive professional futures envisioned by Finnish students turned out to be much more varied compared with those of their Brazilian counterparts: they envisioned needing English only when working abroad.

To sum up, the chapters in this publication report attempts around the world to foster or enhance awareness of aspects of multilingualism as lived (or as subjectively experienced), in the contexts in which the contributors to the publication find themselves (basic, secondary or tertiary education), and importantly, accessed by visual means (for the range of visual methodologies, see Rose, 2016) or by visual means combined with other means. The idea is to explore further the possibilities of these means (in contrast to verbal means alone, including interviews, questionnaires, and written or oral life stories) and to broaden the variety of the visual methods used so far in some previous major projects regarding the type of data used and ways of analysing the pools of data collected. Importantly, all the chapters are concerned with issues related to social justice to foster multilingualism of any type in language (teacher) education.

4 Conclusion

This new publication, Visualising Language Students and Teachers as Multilinguals: Advancing Social Justice in Education, approaches multilingualism as lived from the perspective of language (teacher) education. In other words, the studies reported have been conducted from a tighter/narrower perspective, compared with some previous publications: all the studies have been conducted within educational contexts (and thus excluding other contexts, e.g. home). Overall, the publication is our joint attempt to advance social justice for any type of individual multilingualism (or of plurilingualism) in contexts of language (teacher) education, ranging from the basic to tertiary level, and based on arts-based research of a specific type, namely, visualisations. From this perspective, this publication offers a reimagination of alternative ways to do research on multilingualism as lived.

The studies reported have been carried out by people actively involved in language (teacher) education, including teacher educators/trainers and trainees/student teachers, or practising teachers in different phases of their careers. In a way, the contributors (with their reports to the new publication) are gatekeepers with a great impact on the quality of language (teacher) education on a global scale in meeting its current aims, including the fostering or enhancing of awareness of multilingualism as lived and advancing social justice and equity in educational contexts.

This book contains plenty of illustrations of how to foster or enhance awareness of multilingualism as lived in language (teacher) education, from primary education to tertiary education, or from school children to university students (or student teachers), as such or with some adaptations, depending on the target groups in any context. As the chapters in this new publication are full reports of empirical studies, the classroom applications or adaptations can be deepened by comparing what is discussed in class to the findings found in the original studies to gain even further insights into the issues addressed. Together, all the authors make it clear that by embracing visual methods, research creates a more inclusive, diverse and expressive space for participants to share their multilingual experiences and disrupt traditional research paradigms, ultimately leading to a richer understanding of multilingual lives and identities.

A final word should be added regarding terminology: while we see ‘individual multilingualism’ and ‘plurilingualism’ as synonyms and the term ‘multilingualism’ is more recurrent in Anglo-Saxon studies, we left the authors the choice to use one or the other, depending on their academic and linguistic traditions. It is left to the authors to explain their positionality regarding the use of the concepts.

Acknowledgements

We would like to start by thanking Rosie McEwan, from Multilingual Matters, for her guidance throughout the whole production process, being always encouraging, judicious and timely in her advice. We would also like to thank the anonymous reviewer of the manuscript whose insights and expertise helped us to improve the quality and readability of this volume. In addition, our thanks go to Nancy H. Hornberger and Wayne E. Wright, the editors of the Bilingual Education and Bilingualism series, for believing in this publication, and to Gary Barkhuizen for sharing his history with us in the Foreword to this volume. A word of gratitude goes to Conde Baltazar, an artist, who designed the cover for this book. Finally, we appreciate the financial support of the University of Hamburg, Germany, by making available the Open Access publication of this volume.

References

Aronin, L. and Ó Laoire, M. (2012) The material culture of multilingualism. In D. Gorter, H.F. Marten and L. van Mensel (eds) Minority Languages in the Linguistic Landscape (pp. 299–318). Palgrave Macmillan.

Aronin, L., Hornsby, M. and Kiliańska-Przybyło, G. (eds) (2018) The Material Culture of Multilingualism. Springer.

Aronin, L. and Vetter, E. (eds) (2022) Dominant Language Constellations Approach in Education and Language Acquisition. Springer.

Avineri, N., Graham, L., Johnson, E., Riner, R. and Rosa, J. (2019) Introduction: Reimagining language and social justice. In N. Avineri, L. Graham, E. Johnson, R. Riner and J. Rosa (eds) Language and Social Justice in Practice (pp. 1–16). Routledge.

Baker-Bell, A. (2020) Linguistic Justice: Black Language, Literacy, Identity, and Pedagogy. Routledge.

Barone, T. and Eisner, E. (2012) Arts Based Research. Sage.

Baugh, J. (2018) Linguistics in the Pursuit of Justice. Cambridge University Press.

Bell, L.A. (2007) Theoretical frameworks for social justice education. In M. Adams, A. Bell and P. Giffin (eds) Teaching for Diversity and Social Justice: A Sourcebook (pp. 3–15). Routledge.

Björklund, S. and Björklund, M. (eds) (2023) Policy and Practice for Multilingual Educational Settings: Comparisons across Contexts. Multilingual Matters.

Block, D. (2014) Moving beyond ‘lingualism’: Multilingual embodiment and multimodality in SLA. In S. May (ed.) The Multilingual Turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL and Bilingual Education (pp. 54–77). Routledge.

Blommaert, J. (2010) The Sociolinguistics of Globalization. Cambridge University Press.

Bonnet, A. and Siemund, P. (eds) (2018) Foreign Language Education in Multilingual Classrooms. John Benjamins.

Busch, B. (2017) Biographical approaches to research in multilingual settings: Exploring linguistic repertoires. In M. Martin-Jones and D. Martin (eds) Researching Multilingualism: Critical and Ethnographic Perspectives (pp. 46–59). Routledge.

Byram, M. and Parmenter, L. (2012) The Common European Framework of Reference: The Globalisation of Language Education Policy. Multilingual Matters.

Canagarajah, S. (2013) Translingual Practice: Global Englishes and Cosmopolitan Relations. Routledge.

Candelier, M. (coord.) Camilleri-Grima, A., Castellotti V., De Pietro, J.-F., Lörincz, I., Meissner F.-J., Schröder-Sura, A. and Noguerol, A. (2007) Framework of Reference for Pluralistic Approaches to Languages and Cultures. Council of Europe.

Carbonara, V. (2023) The effects of multilingual pedagogies on language awareness: A longitudinal analysis of students’ language portraits. Linguistics and Education 78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2023.101244

Cenoz, J. (2013) Defining multilingualism. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 33, 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026719051300007X

Cenoz, J. and Gorter, D. (2022) Pedagogical Translanguaging. Cambridge University Press.

Chik, A. and Melo-Pfeifer, S. (2023) Discussion of the special issue. Beliefs about multilingualism: Is a methodological and epistemological change necessary? International Journal of Multilingualism. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2023.2172174

Chung, Y.-C. and Macleroy, V. (2022) How weird is weird? Young people, activist citizenship and multivoiced digital stories. In V. Lytra, C. Ros i Sole, J. Anderson and V. Macleroy (eds) Liberating Language Education (pp. 255–276). Multilingual Matters.

Coffey, S. and Patel, D. (2023) Sparking the imagination: Creative language pedagogies as intersemiotic translation. The Language Learning Journal 51 (5), 564–578. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2023.2239812

CohenMiller, A. and Boivin, N. (eds) (2022) Questions in Qualitative Social Justice Research in Multicultural Contexts. Routledge.

Coste, D., Moore, D. and Zarate, G. (1997) Compétence plurilingue et pluriculturelle. Vers un cadre européen commun de référence pour l’enseignement et l’apprentissage des langues vivantes: Études préparatoires [Plurilingual and pluricultural competence: Toward a common European reference framework for teaching and learning living languages. Preparatory studies]. Editions du Conseil de l’Europe.

Council of Europe (2001) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge University Press. https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=0900001680459f97

Council of Europe (2007) From Linguistic Diversity to Plurilingual Education: Guide for the Development of Language Education Policies in Europe. https://rm.coe.int/16802fc1c4

Council of Europe (2020) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment – Companion Volume. https://www.coe.int/lang-cefr

Cummins, J. and Early, M. (2011) Identity Texts: The Collaborative Creation of Power in Multilingual Schools. Trentham Books.

Dabène, L. (1994) Repères Sociolinguistiques pour l’Enseignement des Langues. L’Harmattan.

Dovchin, S. (2022) Translingual Discrimination. Cambridge University Press.

Fraser, N. (1995) From redistribution to recognition? Dilemmas of justice in a ‘post socialist’ age. New Left Review 212, 68–93.

García, O. and Li, W. (2014) Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education. Palgrave Macmillan.

Haukås, A. (2015) Teachers’ beliefs about multilingualism and multilingual approach. International Journal of Multilingualism 13 (1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2015.1041960

Herrera, S.G. (2016) Biography-driven Culturally Responsive Teaching. Teachers College Press.

Holmes, P., Fay, R., Andrews, J. and Attia, M. (2013) Researching multilingually: New theoretical and methodological directions. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 23 (3), 285–299.

Holmes, P., Fay, R., Andrews, J. and Attia, M. (2016) How to research multilingually: Possibilities and complexities. In H. Zhu (ed.) Research Methods in Intercultural Communication: A Practical Guide (pp. 88–102). Wiley.

Kalaja, P. and Melo-Pfeifer, S. (eds) (2019) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words. Multilingual Matters.

Kalaja, P. and Pitkänen-Huhta, A. (eds) (2018) Double special issue ‘Visual methods in applied language studies’. Applied Linguistics Review 9 (2–3), 157–473.

Kirsch, C. and Duarte, J. (eds) (2020) Multilingual Approaches for Teaching and Learning: From Acknowledging to Capitalizing on Multilingualism in European Mainstream Education. Routledge.

Kramsch, C. (2009) The Multilingual Subject: What Foreign Language Learners Say about Their Experience and Why It Matters. Oxford University Press.

Leavy, P. (2015) Method Meets Art: Arts-based Research Practice. The Guilford Press.

Li, W. (2018) Translanguaging as a practical theory of language. Applied Linguistics 39 (1), 9–30.

Li, W. (2023) Transformative pedagogy for inclusion and social justice through translanguaging, co-learning, and transpositioning. Language Teaching 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444823000186

Lundberg, A. (2019) Teachers’ beliefs about multilingualism: Findings from Q method research. Current Issues in Language Planning 20 (3), 266–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2018.1495373

Macedo, D. (2019) Decolonizing Foreign Language Education: The Misteaching of English and Other Colonial Languages. Routledge.

Martin-Jones, M. and Martin, D. (eds) (2017) Researching Multilingualism: Critical and Ethnographic Perspectives. Routledge.

Martin-Jones, M. and Romaine, S. (1986) Semilingualism: A half-baked theory of communicative competence. Applied Linguistics 7 (1), 26–38.

May, S. (ed.) (2014) The Multilingual Turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL and Bilingual Education. Routledge.

Melo-Pfeifer, S. (2019) Business as usual? (Re)conceptualisations and the multilingual turn in education. The case of mother tongue. In E. Vetter and U. Jessner (eds) International Research on Multilingualism: Breaking with the Monolingual Perspective (pp. 27–41). Springer.

Melo-Pfeifer, S. and Chik, A. (2022) Multimodal linguistic biographies of prospective foreign language teachers in Germany: Reconstructing beliefs about languages and multilingual language learning in initial teacher education. International Journal of Multilingualism 19 (4), 499–522. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2020.1753748

Melo-Pfeifer, S. and Ollivier, C. (eds) (2023) Assessment of Plurilingual Competence and Plurilingual Learners in Educational Settings: Educative Issues and Empirical Approaches. Routledge.

Melo-Pfeifer, S. and Schmidt, A.F. (2019) Integration as portrayed in visual narratives by young refugees in Germany. In P. Kalaja and S. Melo-Pfeifer (eds) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words (pp. 53–72). Multilingual Matters.

Melo-Pfeifer, S. and Tavares, V. (eds) (2024) Language Teacher Identity: Confronting Ideologies of Language, Race, and Ethnicity. Wiley-Blackwell.

Menezes de Souza, L.M.T. (2017) Multiliteracies and transcultural education. In O. García, N. Flores and M. Spotti (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Language and Society (pp. 261–280). Oxford University Press.

Merriam, S. and Tisdell, E. (2016) Qualitative Research. Jossey-Bass.

Mertens, D. (2022) Preface. In A. CohenMiller and N. Boivin (eds) Questions in Qualitative Social Justice Research in Multicultural Contexts (pp. xxiii–xxvii). Routledge.

Moore, D. (2006) Plurilinguismes et École. Didier.

Moore, E., Bradley, J. and Simpson, J. (eds) (2020) Translanguaging as Transformation: The Collaborative Construction of New Linguistic Realities. Multilingual Matters.

Morilhat, C. (2008) Empire du Langage ou Impérialisme Langagier. Page 2 Éditions.

Ortega, L. (2019) SLA and the study of equitable multilingualism. The Modern Language Journal 103, 23–38. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/modl.12525

Paulsrud, B., Zilliacus, H. and Ekberg, L. (2020) Spaces for multilingual orientations in the national curricular of Sweden and Finland. International Multilingual Research Journal 14 (4), 304–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2020.1714158

Pennycook, A. (2021) Critical Applied Linguistics: A Critical Reintroduction. Routledge.

Perugini, D.C. and Wagner, M. (2022) Enacting social justice in world language education through intercultural citizenship. In B. Wassell and C. Glynn (eds) Transforming World Language Teaching and Teacher Education for Equity and Justice: Pushing Boundaries in US Contexts (pp. 41–64). Multilingual Matters.

Piccardo, E. (2019) ‘We are all (potential) plurilinguals’: Plurilingualism as an overarching, holistic concept. OLBI Journal 10. https://doi.org/10.18192/olbiwp.v10i0.3825

Piccardo, E. and North, B. (2019) The Action-oriented Approach: A Dynamic Vision of Language Education. Multilingual Matters.

Piccardo, E., Germain-Rutherford, A. and Lawrence, G. (2022a) An introduction to plurilingualism and this handbook. In E. Piccardo, A. Germain-Rutherford and G. Lawrence (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Plurilingual Education (pp. 1–15). Routledge.

Piccardo, E., Germain-Rutherford, A. and Lawrence, G. (eds) (2022b) The Routledge Handbook of Plurilingual Education. Routledge.

Piller, I. (2016) Linguistic Diversity and Social Justice. Oxford University Press.

Pitkänen-Huhta, A. and Pietikäinen, S. (2017) Visual methods in researching language practices and language learning. Looking at, seeing and designing language. In K.A. King, Y.-J. Lai and S. May (eds) Research Methods in Language and Education (pp. 393–405). Springer.

Prada, J. (2023) Sensescapes and what it means for language education. In S. Melo-Pfeifer (ed.) Linguistic Landscapes in Language and Teacher Education: Multilingual Teaching and Learning Inside and Beyond the Classroom (pp. 243–258). Springer.

Prasad, G. (2015) Beyond the mirror towards a plurilingual prism: Exploring the creation of plurilingual ‘identity texts’ in English and French classrooms in Toronto and Montpellier. Intercultural Education 26 (6), 497–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2015.1109775

Purkarthofer, J. and Flubacher, M.-C. (eds) (2022) Speaking Subjects in Multilingualism Research: Biographical and Speaker-centred Approaches. Multilingual Matters.

Raza, K., Coombe, C. and Reynolds, D. (eds) (2021) Policy Development in TESOL and Multilingualism: Past, Present and the Way Forward. Springer.

Raza, K., Reynolds, D. and Coombe, C. (eds) (2023) Handbook of Multilingual TESOL in Practice. Springer.

Robinson-Pant, A. and Wolf, A. (2017) Researching across Languages and Cultures: A Guide to Doing Research Interculturally. Routledge.

Rosa, J. (2019) Looking Like a Language, Sounding Like a Race: Raciolinguistic Ideologies and the Learning of Latinidad. Oxford University Press.

Rosa, J. and Flores, N. (2020) Reimagining race and language: From raciolinguistic ideologies to a raciolinguistic perspective. In H. Alim, A. Reyes and P.V. Kroskrity (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Language and Race (pp. 90–107). Oxford University Press.

Rose, G. (2016) Visual Methodologies: An Introduction to Researching with Visual Materials (4th rev. edn). Sage.

Skutnabb-Kangas, T., Phillipson, R. and Rannut, M. (eds) (1995) Linguistic Human Rights: Overcoming Linguistic Discrimination. De Gruyter.

Tavares, V. (ed.) (2023) Social Justice, Decoloniality, and Southern Epistemologies within Language Education: Theories, Knowledges, and Practices on TESOL from Brazil. Routledge.

Umino, T. (2023) Using multimodal language learning histories to understand learning experiences and beliefs of second language learners in Japan. The Modern Language Journal. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12828

Warriner, D. and Bigelow, M. (eds) (2019) Critical Reflections on Research Methods: Power and Equity in Complex Multilingual Contexts. Multilingual Matters.

Yiakoumetti, A. (ed.) (2012) Harnessing Linguistic Variation to Improve Education. Peter Lang.

Zilliacus, H., Paulsrud, B. and Holm, G. (2017) Essentializing vs. non-essentializing students’ cultural identities: Curricular discourses in Finland and Sweden. Journal of Multicultural Discourses 12 (7), 166–180.

Part 1

Reconstructing Histories of Individual Multilingualism

1‘From YouTube, I Watch Videos and Vlogs and Other Stuff in Different Languages’: Immersion Students as Users of Multiple Languages

Karita Mård-Miettinen and Siv Björklund

1 Introduction

This study is based on the relatively recent new perspective on Second Language Acquisition (SLA) to view multilingual language use as normal (May, 2019). This perspective is closely related to social justice and equal possibilities for all speakers to maintain and develop their language(s) to become part of sustainable language-diverse societies and inclusive multilingual communities (Piller, 2016; see Introduction to this volume). Today, a growing body of minority-language students is educated in a language other than their first language (L1), and their opportunities to develop all their languages have increasingly and rightfully been addressed in educational research (Cenoz & Gorter, 2019). However, majority-language students who attend multilingual schooling have rarely been studied from the perspective of multilingualism (see, however, Carbonara, 2023 on multilingual pedagogies). We maintain that a one-eyed focus on language minorities (or their experiences) is not enough to further social justice in research in educational settings. We suggest that one way of creating an active interest among majority-language students in issues of language diversity is for them to experience what all ‘being multilingual’ and ‘being in minority position’ entail.

This study attempts to fill this void with a research design that investigates majority-language students in an educational programme in which approximately half of the teaching is delivered in a minority language that is the students’ second language (L2) and half in the students’ L1 (for details, see Section 2). It is important to understand if and how majority-language students’ encounters with an L2 in school are transformed into multilingual daily life and identification as users of several languages in a context where their L1 is dominant in the surrounding society. As most of the research on multilingual educational programmes has been centred on language use in the classroom, we focus on students’ out-of-school language use under the following overall research question: To what extent and in what ways do the languages taught in the immersion programme and other languages in their repertoires become part of the everyday lives of majority-language immersion students?

To answer this question, we asked 17 students enrolled in a Swedish immersion programme in Finland to visualise their language use with photographs and to describe these photographs in individual interviews. This methodological approach added to the equity in the research process as it gives the young participants the possibility to voice their own lived multilingual experiences by multimodal means (CohenMiller & Boivin, 2022). In this chapter, we use a thematic analysis to investigate how the students frame their use of different languages beyond classroom walls when participating in and navigating multiple language practices.

Section 2 adresses the multilingualism issues related to the multilingual educational programme under study (immersion education). Section 3 introduces the participants and the methods used for data collection and analysis. Sections 4 and 5 present and discuss the findings, respectively.

2 Background to the Study

The context of our study is a Swedish immersion programme in Finland that targeted majority-language students. The students enter the programme at the age of 4–5 years and receive about half of the teaching through their L2, Swedish, which is the second national language and societally a minority language in Finland (spoken by some 5% of the population; Official Statistics Finland, 2021). Hence, they learn an L2 while using it to study other school subjects. The rest of the teaching is delivered in the students’ L1 (Finnish, the majority language in Finland; Official Statistics Finland, 2021) accompanied by the teaching of two to four foreign languages (e.g. English, German and French) (for details on Swedish immersion in Finland, see, e.g. Björklund & Mård-Miettinen, 2011). The use of Swedish, the immersion language, as the medium of instruction and its extensive use during the 11 years in preschool and school result in speakers of two or more languages without compromising their L1 (for results on Swedish immersion, see Björklund & Mård-Miettinen, 2011; Bergroth, 2015; Björklund, 2019; Mård-Miettinen & Björklund, 2019). On the one hand, these results are based on the teaching principles and strategies that have emerged over the years (e.g. how to maintain a dual focus on both content and language during content lessons in the immersion language) (e.g. Cammarata & Cavanagh, 2018; Cammarata & Ó Ceallaigh, 2018; Tedick & Lyster, 2020). On the other hand, there are other central principles that have been established since the introduction of immersion programmes several decades ago to serve majority-language speakers.

Immersion programmes strongly adhere to the teaching strategy of ‘one teacher–one language’ to maximise the use of the immersion language in the classroom. Recently, this strategy has been debated (e.g. Cummins, 2014; Swain & Lapkin, 2013), and teachers’ strict separation of languages has been questioned to be unnatural considering the new research on individual multi-competence as the overall system of a mind that uses several languages (Cook, 2016; for further details, see Introduction, Section 2.1 of this volume). However, Ballinger et al. (2017) argued that this strategy is crucial for minority-language immersion. This is because the increased use of a majority language in a minority-language classroom, such as an immersion classroom, does not automatically lead to identification as a user of multiple languages (Roy, 2012) or greater fluency in the minority (immersion) language and more confidence in using it. They further noted that empirical evidence points to the so-called ‘crosslinguistic pedagogy’, a natural use of students’ L1 in a mediating role when teaching, since this language is known by both students and teachers (Ballinger et al., 2017).

Our study sheds light on whether and how the use of two languages for teaching content and multiple foreign languages in Swedish immersion, as well as a strict language separation in teaching, is reflected in students’ out-of-school language use. In addition, we empirically address immersion students’ language use in out-of-school lessons and determine the extent to which the languages taught in the programme and other languages in the students’ repertoires become part of the everyday lives of these majority-language students. Such a holistic approach remains under-addressed in language immersion research. Instead, salient approaches within language immersion research globally (Johnson & Swain, 1997; Tedick et al., 2011; Ó Duibhir, 2018) have focused on in-school achievements (i.e. how students acquire the immersion language and use the L1 or majority language and the immersion language for successful interactions in schools and for content learning). For out-of-school use, the main focus has been on the use of the immersion language (Roy, 2012). In other educational contexts with majority-language students, the emphasis has been on the out-of-school use of a particular named language, often English (e.g. Leppänen et al., 2011), or sometimes all languages studied in the school (e.g. Markkanen, 2021). Finally, by combining visualisation and elicitation, we aim to promote a methodologically more participant-initiated analysis since, according to our previous results from questionnaires and pair and group interviews with immersion students in grades 7–9 (Björklund et al., 2015), the students associated their language use mainly with the languages taught in the programme even when asked about language use in general.

3 Research Methodology

We set up data collection in our study to enable the participants to communicate their everyday language use beyond classroom walls through visualisations and elicitations based on the photographs taken by them. We first present the participants and then explain the data collection process and the analysis method in detail.

3.1 Participants

The participants comprised 17 students in grade 5 (ages 11–12 years, eight students) and grade 8 (ages 14–15 years, nine students) in the Swedish immersion programme in Finland (see Table 1.1). We collected data for 2016 (dataset 1) with ten students, five in each grade, and for 2018 (dataset 2) with seven students, three in grade 5 and four in grade 8. All students had a majority-language background, with Finnish as their registered mother tongue. They enrolled in Swedish immersion at the age of 4–5 years either in southern Finland (10 students) or on the west coast (seven students). Based on the answers to a short language background questionnaire (What languages do you know?), their self-reported language repertoires comprised three to six languages. All 14 participants who answered the questionnaire reported having Finnish (L1), Swedish (immersion language) and English in their repertoires, and all except three reported knowing more than these three languages. The fourth language known was German, French or Spanish. The students who knew more than four languages reported knowing either several of the above languages or Italian. All these languages were learned in school within the immersion programme. Furthermore, some participants indicated knowing Estonian (one student), French (one student), Russian (one student) or Spanish (one student), which they were learning in out-of-school contexts.

Table 1.1 Participants in datasets 1 and 2 and their self-reported language repertoires

Name

Grade

Self-reported language repertoire (questionnaire data)

Dataset

Ada

5

4: Finnish,1 Swedish,2 English,3 German3

1 (2016)

Arttu

5

5: Finnish,1 Swedish,2 English,3 Spanish,3 Estonian4

1 (2016)

Karoliina

5

4: Finnish,1 Swedish,2 English,3 German3

1 (2016)

Mea

5

6: Finnish,1 Swedish,2 English,3 German,3 French,4 Russian4

1 (2016)

Richard

5

4: Finnish,1 Swedish,2 English,3 German3

1 (2016)

Veera

5

*

2 (2018)

Veli

5

*

2 (2018)

Venla

5

*

2 (2018)

Aku

8

4: Finnish,1 Swedish,2 English,3 Spanish3

1 (2016)

Anton

8

3: Finnish,1 Swedish,2 English3

1 (2016)

Minea

8

4: Finnish,1 Swedish,2 English,3 German3

1 (2016)

Paula

8

4: Finnish,1 Swedish,2 English,3 German3

1 (2016)

Siru

8

3: Finnish,1 Swedish,2 English3

1 (2016)

Viivi

8

6: Finnish,1 Swedish,2 English,3 French,3 Italian,3 Spanish4

2 (2018)

Vilja

8

4: Finnish,1 Swedish,2 English,3 French3

2 (2018)

Viola

8

4: Finnish,1 Swedish,2 English,3 French3

2 (2018)

Virve

8

4: Finnish,1 Swedish,2 English,3 French3

2 (2018)

*No questionnaire data available; 1Registered mother tongue; 2The immersion language; 3A foreign language learned in school; 4A language not learned in school

3.2 Data collection

The two datasets used in our study included visual and interview data. Heath et al. (2009) argued that visual methods for data collection enable access to information that might be difficult for younger learners to illustrate with words. In our study, we aimed to capture young immersion students’ everyday language use and believed that visual methods can be used to obtain such information. Furthermore, we aimed to access out-of-school language use. For this, we selected a method that would actively engage the participants in data collection, as they had to collect the data in their free time. The visual method involved the participants taking photographs with their mobile phones. This choice was backed by the views of Epstein et al. (2006) and Heath et al. (2009), who indicated that the use of participant-generated photographs minimises the power relation between an adult researcher and a student participant, as young participants are active social agents in such data collection. Heath et al. (2009) also highlighted that the use of participant-generated data provides access to more private spaces connected to young participants’ lives, which was crucial in our research.

We instructed the participants for data collection as follows (an English translation is provided here from the original instructions in Finnish):

Take photos with your own cell phone during your leisure time and recess in school in different situations using languages that you know. Take photos in situations that are typical of your language use. Take photos for one week (e.g. 2–3 pictures per day). The photos may be related to your hobbies, friends, family and relatives; book reading; homework or media (e.g. TV, magazines, internet, phone or social media). Remember to take photos of all languages that you use. One photo can show several languages.

Please do not include people’s names or faces in the photos without their permission. Send the photos daily through email to [email address] or through WhatsApp to [phone number]. Also describe the photos in two sentences. Send all photos at the latest by [date].

Think about the following questions when taking photos:

•Which languages are you using in the photo?

•What role do these languages have in your life? (e.g. How often do you use them? In what situations and how do you usually use them?)

•How does the situation link with your knowledge of the languages displayed?

The instructions guided the participants to explicitly visualise their entire language repertoires (i.e. the use of all their languages), as well as the language use that is typical for them and that occurs beyond classroom walls. To help and encourage the participants, we further accompanied the instructions with some guiding questions and some examples of language use contexts in which the photographs could be taken. We also asked the participants to accompany each photograph with two descriptive sentences.

The students sent us a total of 164 photographs with individual variations between two and 21 photographs; the median was eight photographs. A research assistant studied all photographs in depth and used the related descriptive sentences to make a pre-selection of photographs to be used in an elicitation interview. The pre-selection was based on the language use contexts illustrated in the photographs. Hence, if a participant, for example, sent two photographs illustrating the use of the same language(s) on YouTube, only one was used in the interview. After the pre-selection, the interviews were based on 139 photographs (2–17 photographs for each participant, with a median of 7 photographs). These 139 photographs are used as the data in this chapter.

Heath et al. (2009) emphasised that visualisation itself does not necessarily reveal the thoughts of (young) participants and suggested supporting the analysis with the interpretation by the person that has produced the visualisation. Hence, two weeks after the photographs had been taken, we invited the students to participate in an mp3-recorded individual photo elicitation interview, accompanied by a GoPro video recording zoomed on the photographs discussed to capture possible pointing to the photographs during the interview. Harper (2002: 20) stressed photo elicitation as a form of interview that ‘may overcome the difficulties posed by in-depth interviewing because it is anchored in an image that is understood, at least in part, by both parties’. With a solid foundation in the participants’ self-initiated photographs we further aimed at giving both agency and voice to our participants who, in turn, would be in the position to provide us with a more equal and deeper understanding of their lived language stories (CohenMiller & Boivin, 2022). We also expected that the participants would provide a more versatile picture of their language use when the discussion was based on the photographs that they had taken themselves.

The interview was structured, and for each photograph, the researcher asked the following questions (an English translation is provided here from the original questions in Finnish):

•Please tell me about the photo.

•Why have you taken this photo?

•How does the displayed situation link with your knowledge of [the language(s)] illustrated in the photo?

•How often do you use [the language(s)] illustrated in the photo in such a situation?

At the end of the interview, after discussing the last photograph, the researcher asked some concluding questions:

•Are all your languages displayed in the photos?

•What kind of image would you like the photos to give of you as a language user?

•Please choose the photo that best describes you as a language user. Please provide an explanation.

•Do you use your languages similarly or differently during lessons and in the situations displayed in the photos? Please give examples.

•Several languages are displayed in the photos. Do you use these simultaneously?

•Was one week a suitable time to take photos of uses of all your languages?

The longest interview lasted 19:48 minutes and the shortest one lasted 6:00 minutes, with a mean of 11:04 minutes and a median of 10:52 minutes. In total, our data comprised 139 photographs and 3 hours and 8 minutes of elicitation interview data.

3.3 Data analysis

We analysed the visual and interview data by using a thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) accompanied by multimodal elements inspired by Serafini and Reid’s (2019) multimodal content analysis, where visualisations (photographs in our study) and texts (elicitation interview data in our study) were closely integrated. Our previous analysis of dataset 1 (Mård-Miettinen & Björklund, 2019) confirmed that in the interview, the photographs illustrated some students’ use of certain language(s) in a particular situation or with a particular person. However, for other students, they functioned as examples or crib sheets to discuss their overall language use, an issue also noted by Sampson-Cordle (2001) in photo elicitation interviews. In our study, the interview questions were also intended to inspire the students to reflect more broadly on their use of their language repertoires. Hence, the analysis of the visuals and interviews as closely integrated pieces of data enabled us to address the students’ out-of-school language use not only as it is depicted in the photographs but as ‘a complex, culturally situated nexus of circulating discourses of languages in our lives’ outside the context of the photograph (Pitkänen-Huhta & Pietikäinen, 2016).

The analysis involved five steps. First, we transcribed the elicitation interview data and created a document for each participant that connected the photographs to the parts of the transcribed interview that dealt with each photograph. Then, the first author processed the data, identified the languages and modes of language use illustrated in the photographs and communicated in the interviews. After that, both authors read and reread the combined photograph and interview data and developed initial categories to characterise the key features of the students’ language use in their repertoires. We then condensed the categories together into three themes: (1) identification as a multiple language user, (2) intentionality in the use of the language repertoire, and (3) manifestations of language awareness. The first theme addressed the use of different named languages and their modes and frequencies. The second theme showcased the extent to which the participants noticed how they used different languages. The third theme illustrated inter- and intralingual sensitivity that goes beyond named languages. Finally, we decided on the most illustrative examples for each theme and translated them from Finnish into English for this chapter.

4 Findings

In the three subsections below, we, respectively, present the findings from each of the above mentioned three themes. Each theme forms a separate subsection.

4.1 Identification as a multiple language user

In total, 11 named languages were found in the data as those used beyond classroom walls. The lowest number of languages for a participant was three, whereas the maximum number was eight; the median and mean were four. Hence, all 17 immersion students in our study used multiple languages, even in their spare time.

A typical photograph in our data concerned the YouTube or Spotify icon or a TV or computer screen. In Figure 1.1, the screenshot depicts icons of English football videos and the Finnish computer system metatext. When explaining the picture, Rickard not only mentions videos in English, a foreign language he studies in school, but also explains sometimes watching them in German, another foreign language that he studies (Table 1.1, Section 3.1).

Figure 1.1 Watching football videos in two languages. © ‘Rickard, G5’.

The participants indicated often using English for watching videos, series or movies; listening to music or playing computer games and sometimes performing these activities in other languages, as Rickard does in Figure 1.1. Some other participants sometimes conducted these activities in languages studied in the immersion programme, Finnish (L1), Swedish (immersion language), or Spanish. Some did it even in Norwegian, which was not taught in the school (see Figure 1.8, Section 4.3).

The participants used their languages not only in the virtual space but also in face-to-face interactions with family, friends and relatives. As they were instructed not to take photographs of people without permission, most of the pictures on interactions with people were on objects. Thus, their relation to the participants’ language use was clarified in the elicitation interview, as in the case of Minea (Figure 1.2), who sent a picture of a pizza illustrating a family dinner during which Finnish (L1) and Swedish (immersion language) were used.

Figure 1.2 Having a bilingual dinner discussion with relatives. © ‘Minea, G8’.

Overall, the participants indicated that they usually spoke Finnish (L1) with their family but that they also used other languages with them. In addition to Swedish (immersion language), English, German and Spanish (the foreign languages studied in schools), as well as Norwegian (not studied in school), were such languages.

The participants also used their language repertoires for reading books. Like speaking, Finnish was also the primary language for reading books other than schoolbooks, but the students read books, at least to some extent, even in other languages. As shown in Figure 1.3, Ada took a picture of her bookshelf, with books in Finnish and Swedish, to be identified as a reader of books in these languages in her spare time.

Figure 1.3 Reading books in two languages. © ‘Ada, G5’.

The three photographs above and the related accounts explain that the participants used the languages in their repertoires in different modes. Furthermore, the participants’ accounts for the use of different languages were accompanied by indications of frequency, showing that all languages were not used to the same extent.

Overall, the number of languages in our data (11 named languages) demonstrates that the participating immersion students used multiple languages, even in their spare time. When explicitly asked about the image as a language user, they wanted to be identified as users of multiple languages through the photographs taken (Examples 1a–c).

(1)

Interviewer: What kind of image would you like the photos to give of you as a language user?

(a)Aku, G8: ‘Good image, when you use many languages, then it should show that I know languages’.

(b)Veera, G5: ‘That I sometimes speak other languages and not only Finnish in my spare time, too’.

(c)Anton, G8: ‘That I use more English than Swedish even though I have been quite many years in an immersion class, that I use English daily and Swedish mainly in school, that I use English in social media and when playing. I don’t use that much Swedish in my spare time’.

Example 1 further reinforces that the participants were proud of being users of multiple languages. They not only focused on language use but also indicated that the use of multiple languages reflects their multi-competence (Cook, 2016), or as shown in our data, their knowledge of multiple languages (Example 1a). Furthermore, the immersion students’ background as majority-language speakers was reflected in their accounts, as the participants highlighted a particular aim to depict the use of languages other than Finnish in their spare time (Example 1b). In addition, some of the participants wanted to be identified as users of certain languages in their repertoires, most often English and/or Swedish (Example 1c).

4.2 Intentionality in the use of language repertoires

When portraying the use of their language repertoires with photographs and the elicitation interviews, the participants not only indicated the mode and frequency of their language use (Section 4.1) but also that a certain language other than Finnish (L1) was purposefully chosen as a language of communication (Figures 1.4 and 1.5). In many cases, this language was Swedish, the immersion language that the participants readily used even outside school lessons. In Figure 1.4, Veera depicts a situation in which she is sitting with her friends in the school corridor during recess. The explanation related to the picture first emphasises their usual language of communication (Finnish) and then highlights that even Swedish may be used with these friends but that it is done only if they feel like it.

Figure 1.4 Speaking in multiple languages with friends in the school corridor. © ‘Veera, G5’.

Figure 1.5 Playing the STIGA Play Off table hockey game (https://www.stigasports.com/) with family in Finnish and Swedish. © ‘Mea, G5’.

A similar situation of intentional use of certain languages is depicted by Mea in Figure 1.5. The photograph of a table hockey game includes text in several languages (mainly English), and the colour of the player’s outfit indicates that they represent players from Finland (white and blue) and Sweden (yellow and blue). The elicitation interview accompanied by the photograph shows Mea taking the picture to represent her spoken use of multiple languages with her brother.

Mea’s account in Figure 1.5 shows that the uses of Finnish and Swedish were intentional in the same way as that explained by Ada in Figure 1.4. This indicates that immersion students have (at least) two strong languages in their repertoires; thus, they can use them if they feel like it.

However, the participants not only reported intentional use of multiple languages separately but also unintentional mixing of languages, which in the case of Siru concerns her interaction with friends depicted in the photograph in Figure 1.6.

Figure 1.6 Mixing three languages when speaking with friends. © ‘Siru, G8’.

For Siru, language mixing was, as for most of the participants, related to interactions with immersion classmates. In Figure 1.6, Siru takes a photograph of her friends and classmates and explains that they have developed a way to communicate with each other by using languages they all know. Instead of speaking certain contents in a particular language, the three friends are used to mixing their languages – without even noticing the mixing.

4.3 Manifestation of language awareness

The third theme illustrates how participation in multilingual discourses in immersion and the participants’ encounters with several languages resulted in metalinguistic observations of languages. In her picture (Figure 1.7), Venla chose to use a lemon and lime water bottle as a symbol representing the use of Swedish, the immersion language used in out-of-school physical training. She not only wanted to depict the use of Swedish in the training but also that she had become aware of different varieties of Swedish: Finland-Swedish spoken in Finland and Sweden-Swedish spoken in Sweden.

Figure 1.7 Noticing the different varieties of Swedish used in the training and elsewhere. © ‘Venla, G5’.

Venla’s comment in Figure 1.7 reveals that her own competence in Swedish is sensitive enough for her to identify the differences among the intralinguistic varieties of Swedish. While Venla’s illustration concerns intralinguistic variation, the manifestation of language awareness can also include interlinguistic variation, as for Siru in Figure 1.8, when watching YouTube videos.

Figure 1.8 Using multiple languages in YouTube and noticing similarities between Norwegian and Swedish languages. © ‘Siru, G8’. The YouTube icon in the original picture is removed for copyright purposes.

As Figure 1.8 shows, the YouTube icon itself does not indicate which languages Siru referred to, but the reflection related to the photograph reveals that she depicted her interest in videos and vlogs in different languages. Siru explained that, along with Finnish (L1) and Swedish (immersion language), she could follow a certain Norwegian vlogger, as she noted the similarities between the two Nordic languages, Swedish and Norwegian. She seemed to be well aware of the criticality of the content, and the content that this vlogger produced triggered her interest in the vlogger. Even though Siru had not learnt Norwegian in school (Table 1.1, Section 3.1), she could follow it.

The symbolic representation of manifestations of language awareness is also present in Figure 1.9, with Aku’s photograph of his mathematics book.

Figure 1.9 Reflecting on the language of mathematics. The depicted book is Matematikens värld 3 from 2008 published by Schildts & Söderströms (sets.fi). © ‘Aku, G8’.

The Swedish mathematics book illustrated in Figure 1.9 does not imply any multilingual discourse other than that of the out-of-school use of schoolbooks in Swedish for homework. Interestingly, Aku chose not to focus on only this type of statement, which was often referred to among the participants. He took a different stance and viewed the ‘language of mathematics’ as a way of crossing languages. He noted that for ‘quite of lot of numbers’, as in mathematics, there is no need for either difficult Swedish or different languages. His metalinguistic comment represents another dimension of intralinguistic variation than that exemplified by Venla (Figure 1.7). Though all three examples used for presenting the third theme showcase different dimensions of language awareness that imply bi- or multilingual use in different contexts, the inclusion of the immersion language seems to be a common denominator among these students, probably due to the extensive and intensive uses of the language for learning school subjects.

5 Lessons Learnt

In this chapter, we sought to find out to what extent and in what ways languages taught in the Swedish immersion programme in Finland and other languages in the majority-language students’ repertoires become a part of their everyday lives. To access this information, we used a thematic analysis to investigate participant-generated visualisations accompanied by elicitation interviews. The overall results revealed that the participants used multiple languages in their free time in different modes and with varied frequencies and that the use of these languages showed intentionality and awareness.

The first key theme, identification as multiple language users, strengthened previous research on Finnish immersion students (Björklund et al., 2015; Mård-Miettinen & Björklund, 2019) as users of the immersion language as well as other languages outside the programme compared to other immersion contexts that report a modest use of the immersion language outside the programme (Roy, 2012). For out-of-school use of English, the immersion students in our study can be compared to Finnish youth in general with extensive use of, for example, YouTube and TV (Leppänen et al., 2011). Furthermore, the results revealed an explicit wish among the immersion students to be identified as users of multiple languages. In the immersion context, the students come from majority-language homes (Björklund & Mård-Miettinen, 2011); hence, the participants in this study may have been held as monolingual Finnish speakers outside the school context. When generating data for our study in their own terms, they took the opportunity to correct this misconception and wanted to be identified as users of multiple languages. Thus, the methods used proved to generate a fine-tuned justice-related analysis of language use among immersion students as majority-language speakers. The students’ reflections related to the photographs also provided opportunities for them to illustrate how they navigated different languages daily. The students’ navigation between different languages further shows that their use of language(s) was part of sustainable multilingual practices, ranging from active use of all multilingual resources at hand (e.g. Figure 1.8) to deliberate actions to include all interlocutors linguistically (e.g. Figure 1.7).

The participant-generated data for the second theme, intentionality in the use of the language repertoire, brings purposeful use of languages to the fore. Results regarding the immersion students’ active use of multiple languages and flexibility when needs arise are already available (Björklund et al., 2015; Mård-Miettinen & Björklund, 2019). Additionally, previous results have indicated students’ willingness to use multiple languages in situations in which two or more languages come into play. The participant-generated data show that students not only act multilingually when a need arises, but they also proactively created ways of using their languages in situations in which the use of Finnish, their L1, would have been the first and natural choice. In Figure 1.4 (Section 4.2), Veera shares the information that she and her friends, upon their own wishes, use Swedish during recess, whereas Mea (Figure 1.5, Section 4.2) takes on the role of a Swedish speaker when playing table hockey with her little brother. This can be interpreted as Veera and Mea being proud of their knowledge of Swedish, which makes it possible to use it whenever they desire. However, it can also be seen as an agency statement to contrast the fact that, in immersion classrooms, it is often the teacher who explicitly or implicitly indicates what the preferred language of communication is, Swedish or Finnish (Lilja et al., 2019). The habit of ensuring the use of all linguistic resources at hand is even internalised among some students to the extent that they report not noticing their translanguaging anymore (Figure 1.6, Section 4.2). Similarly, the occurrence of translanguaging (García & Li, 2014) and accounts of preferred language choice – dependent on the interlocutor, domain and shared language repertoires – indicate that the separation of language by teachers in immersion (Ballinger et al., 2017) is not transformed into one-to-one language behaviour. Instead, the immersion students in our study reported that they used their language repertoires flexibly and dynamically.

The third theme, manifestation of language awareness, diverges from the aforementioned themes, as the students in these examples do not directly share their use of the linguistic resources at hand. This theme is more focused on students’ noticing and reflecting based upon their multilingual experiences, particularly their experiences of having been exposed to and intensively using Swedish, the immersion language, for many years. Apart from showing awareness of their own language use, they also account for others’ language use (Figure 1.7, Section 4.3). The noticing of both inter- and intralinguistic variation, as well as the language-oriented subject-specific notions, shows the breadth of the awareness. For this theme, the visualisations functioned as incentives for this novel information. This information contributes to the overall picture of immersion students’ language use and confirms that the participating students’ use of languages outside school lessons extends beyond doing homework and that they feel like legitimate speakers of the immersion language (Figure 1.7, Section 4.3), even though many immersion students in other contexts do not necessarily do so (e.g. Roy, 2012).

Overall, the results from the analysis of the three themes indicate that the majority-language students in this study show a sensitivity towards the use and choice of languages depending on context and interlocutors. In addition, their willingness to use multiple languages and adapt their language use shows that they are heading towards a greater understanding of what multilingual lives entail for speakers of different languages in society. Their experiences are thus valuable for narrowing the gap that Piller (2016), for example, discussed being between unequal terms of language use in favour of the dominant language in society towards more socially justified and sustainable multilingual practices.

The photographs, in combination with photo elicitation interviews, used in this study complemented previous studies of multilingual language use among students in Swedish immersion (Björklund & Mård-Miettinen, 2011; Björklund et al., 2015). However, the visualisations of the participants’ language use spurred new and more multi-layered dimensions of their multilingual behaviour and confirmed Heath et al.’s (2009) view that participant-generated visualisations motivate young participants to give access to their lives and more actively engage in (re)construction of their lived experiences that also mirrors other research where visual methods (language portraits) were used (Galante, 2020; Soares et al., 2021). Moreover, since the data collection is self-initiated, it increases the opportunities for all students, both majority and minority speakers, of telling other lived stories of language use than those often associated with the languages of school or the community, as highlighted by CohenMiller and Boivin (2022).

Internationally, questionnaire and interview data have been used in research on immersion students’ out-of-school language use (e.g. Ó Duibhir, 2018; Roy, 2012). The results of this study suggest that collecting more participant-generated data in other immersion contexts can enhance the social justice perspective to immersion research as it potentially brings out a more nuanced reality of the out-of-school use of the immersion language and other languages among students (see also Introduction, Section 2.2 of this volume). Furthermore, collecting more data in the Finnish immersion context, as well as in other bilingual education contexts in Finland and elsewhere, could bring forth interesting long- and short-term similarities and differences in language use.

Methodologically, visualisation in the form of photographs allowed the participants to engage in the data collection and decide themselves what photographs to take for representing their use of their language repertoires. Our impression is that the relatively elaborated instructions, as well as the questions to inspire the students, were necessary for them to understand the task and be prompted to take the photographs. Similarly, there was relatively wide variation in how many photographs the students eventually sent to us, which indicates that instructions can be improved in further studies. For dataset 1, the photographs were sent through email at the end of the one-week period of taking photographs. For dataset 2, WhatsApp was used to send photographs, and they were sent daily, thus enabling the researcher to remind and encourage the participants during the period of taking photographs. This resulted in all participants sending more than a couple of photographs.

In addition, since we instructed the students not to depict persons and other personal details, they often chose different symbols to represent their language use. It would not have been possible to interpret the language use behind these symbols without elicitation interviews with the participants. In contrast, the student reflections were inspired by the photographs and gave rise to novel, versatile and in-depth perspectives that previous research methods had not managed to uncover. Therefore, the combination of visualisation and elicitation functioned both inspiringly and promisingly in this study.

References

Ballinger, S., Lyster, R., Sterzuk, A. and Genesee, F. (2017) Context-appropriate crosslinguistic pedagogy: Considering the role of language status in immersion education. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education 5 (1), 30–57. https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.5.1.02bal

Bergroth, M. (2015) Kotimaisten kielten kielikylpy. [Language immersion in the two domestic languages]. University of Vaasa.

Björklund, S. (2019) Research trends and future challenges in Swedish immersion. In M. Haneda and H. Nassaji (eds) Perspectives on Language as Action: Festschrift in Honour of Merrill Swain (pp. 45–60). Multilingual Matters.

Björklund, S. and Mård-Miettinen, K. (2011) Integrating multiple languages in immersion: Swedish immersion in Finland. In D.J. Tedick, D. Christian and T. Williams Fortune (eds) Immersion Education: Practices, Policies, Possibilities (pp. 13–35). Multilingual Matters.

Björklund, S., Pakarinen, S. and Mård-Miettinen, K. (2015) Är jag flerspråkig? Språkbadselevers uppfattningar om sin flerspråkighet. [Am I multilingual? Immersion students’ conceptualizations on their multilingualism.] In J. Kalliokoski, K. Mård-Miettinen and T. Nikula (eds) Kieli koulutuksen resurssina: vieraalla ja toisella kielellä oppimisen ja opetuksen näkökulmia (pp. 153–167). AFinLA-e. Soveltavan kielitieteen tutkimuksia n:o 8. University of Jyväskylä. http://journal.fi/afinla/article/view/53777

Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3 (2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Cammarata, L. and Cavanagh, M. (2018) In search of immersion teacher educators’ knowledge base: Exploring their readiness to foster an integrated approach to teaching. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education 6 (2), 189–217.

Cammarata, L. and Ó Ceallaigh, T.J. (2018) Teacher education and professional development for immersion and content-based instruction: Research on programs, practices, and teacher education. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education 6 (2), 153–161.

Carbonara, V. (2023) The effects of multilingual pedagogies on language awareness: A longitudinal analysis of students’ language portraits. Linguistics and Education 78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2023.101244

Cenoz, J. and Gorter, D. (2019) Educational policy and multilingualism. In D. Singleton and L. Aronin (eds) Twelve Lectures on Multilingualism (pp. 101–132). Multilingual Matters.

CohenMiller, A. and Boivin, N. (2022) Questions in Qualitative Social Justice Research in Multicultural Contexts. Routledge.

Cook, V. (2016) Premises of multi-competence. In V. Cook and W. Li (eds) The Cambridge Handbook of Multi-competence (pp. 1–25). Cambridge University Press.

Cummins, J. (2014) Rethinking pedagogical assumptions in Canadian French immersion programs. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education 2 (1), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.2.1.01cum

Epstein, I., Stevens, B., McKeever, P. and Baruchel, S. (2006) Photo elicitation interview (PEI): Using photos to elicit children’s perspectives. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 5 (3), 1–11.

Galante, A. (2020) ‘The moment I realized I am plurilingual’: Plurilingual tasks for creative representations in EAP at a Canadian university. Applied Linguistics Review 11 (4), 551–580. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2018-0116

García, O. and Li, W. (2014) Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism, and Education. Palgrave Macmillan.

Harper, D. (2002) Talking about pictures: A case for photo-elicitation. Visual Studies 17 (1), 13–26.

Heath, S., Brooks, R., Cleaver, E. and Ireland, E. (2009) Researching Young People’s Lives. Sage.

Johnson, R.K. and Swain, M. (eds) (1997) Immersion Education: International Perspectives. Cambridge University Press.

Leppänen, S., Pitkänen-Huhta, A., Nikula, T., Kytölä, S., Törmäkangas, T., Nissinen, K., Kääntä, L., Virkkula, T., Laitinen, M., Pahta, P., Koskela, H., Lähdesmäki, S. and Jousmäki, H. (2011) National Survey on the English Language in Finland: Uses, Meanings and Attitudes. Studies in Variation. Contacts and Change in English. eSeries. https://varieng.helsinki.fi/series/volumes/05/evarieng-vol5.pdf

Lilja, N., Mård-Miettinen, K. and Nikula, T. (2019) Luokkahuone kielipoliittisena ja kielikoulutuspoliittisena tilana. [Classroom as a space for language policy and language education policy.] In T. Saarinen, P. Nuolijärvi, S. Pöyhönen and T. Kangasvieri (eds) Kieli, koulutus, politiikka – monipaikkaisia käytänteitä ja tulkintoja (pp. 175–197). Vastapaino.

Markkanen, M. (2021) Monimediaisen kieltenopetuksen vaikutuksia oppijan autonomiaan, motivaatioon ja vapaa-ajan kielen käyttöön. [The impact of multimodal language teaching on learner autonomy, motivation, and free time language usage]. JYU dissertations 448. University of Jyväskylä. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-39-8905-7

May, S. (2019) Negotiating the multilingual turn in SLA. The Modern Language Journal 103(Supplement), 122–129.

Mård-Miettinen, K. and Björklund, S. (2019) ‘In one sentence there can easily be three languages’: A glimpse into the use of languages among immersion students. In A. Huhta, G. Erickson and N. Figueras (eds) Developments in Language Education: A Memorial Volume in Honour of Sauli Takala (pp. 239–249). EALTA and University of Jyväskylä.

Ó Duibhir, P. (2018) Immersion Education: Lesson from a Minority Language Context. Multilingual Matters.

Official Statistics Finland (2021) Population Structure. Appendix table 1. Population according to language 1980–2021. Statistics Finland. https://www.stat.fi/til/vaerak/2021/vaerak_2021_2022-03-31_tau_001_en.html

Piller, I. (2016) Linguistic Diversity and Social Justice. Oxford University Press.

Pitkänen-Huhta, A. and Pietikäinen, S. (2016) Visual methods in researching language practices and language learning: Looking at, seeing, and designing language. In K. King, Y.-J. Lai and S. May (eds) Research Methods in Language and Education, Encyclopedia of Language and Education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02329-8_29-1

Roy, S. (2012) Qui décide du meilleur français? Représentations des variétés linguistiques du français en immersion. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 15 (1), 1–19.

Sampson-Cordle, A.V. (2001) Exploring the relationship between a small rural school in Northeast Georgia and its community: An image-based study using participant-produced photographs. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Athens, Georgia.

Serafini, F. and Reid, S.F. (2019) Multimodal content analysis: Expanding analytical approaches to content analysis. Visual Communication 22 (4), 623–649. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357219864133

Soares, C.T., Duarte, J. and Günther-van der Meij, M. (2021) Red is the color of the heart: Making young children’s multilingualism visible through language portraits. Language and Education 35 (1), 22–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2020.1833911

Swain, M. and Lapkin, S. (2013) A Vygotskian sociocultural perspective on immersion education. The L1/L2 debate. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education 1 (1), 101–129. https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.1.1.05swa

Tedick, D.J., Christian, D. and Fortune, T.W. (eds) (2011) Immersion Education: Practices, Policies, Possibilities. Multilingual Matters.

Tedick, D.J. and Lyster, R. (2020) Scaffolding Language Development in Immersion and Dual Language Classrooms. Routledge.

2Just ‘Native’ Assistants? Exploring the Plurilingual Potential of Assistant Language Teachers in Japan through Visual Polyethnography

Daniel Roy Pearce, Mayo Oyama and Danièle Moore

1 Introduction

Assistant Language Teachers (ALTs) have played a major role in foreign language teaching in Japan for over three decades. Initially recruited from the Anglosphere alone, the ALT population has diversified, now including speakers of many languages, although often represented as ‘native speakers’ of the target language they teach, usually English. This can have the unintended effect of ‘hiding away’ ALTs’ linguistic diversity or having them represent Anglophone cultures with which they do not identify – perpetuating native-speakerism ideology which contributes to social injustice and damages equity by framing language learners as deficient users, and other languages as inferior to English (Houghton & Hashimoto, 2018; see Introduction to this volume regarding native-speakerism). Until recently, the research literature has mostly focused on ALTs as English-language assistants, and little attention has been given to their full linguistic repertoires or how they might be applied in the language classroom.

In line with the ethos of the volume, this chapter considers the potential of ALTs in plurilingual education,1 as a means for practitioners to ‘avoid being complicit in sustaining an oppressive status quo and to rethink their roles as contributors to advance justice’ (Mertens, 2022: xxiii). First, after giving a brief history of the ALT system to examine the reasons behind the ‘nativized’ status quo, we explore the plurilingualism of two ALTs through polyethnographic discussions (Olt & Teman, 2019), centred on visual autobiographies (Melo-Pfeifer & Chik, 2020). Based upon these explorations, the final sections consider the pedagogic potential of plurilingual ALTs, specifically through the lens of the interdisciplinary School Lunches Project (Pearce et al., 2021), and discuss the relevance of this research to teacher (self-)training to promote social justice.

2 Background to the Study

2.1 Monolingualism in Japan

An archipelago nation, Japan has historically been separated from the wider world by sea and remains characterised by a high degree of linguistic homogeneity. In society, Japanese is overwhelmingly used for domestic communication, while in education, there are calls for the development of oral communication skills in English to embrace globalisation (Oyama & Pearce, 2019). However, as very few private-sector professions require oral English (Terasawa, 2021), there is little practical necessity for proficiency. As such, despite rhetoric surrounding the need for spoken English, most university graduates do not reach a CEFR B1 level.

This historical monolingualism likely informs representations of ALTs, who, while only sparsely referenced in educational policy, are represented as ‘native speakers’ – a representation that does not accurately reflect the diverse nature of their population (Pearce, 2021a).

2.2 Imported diversity? An overview of the ALT system

ALTs first became mainstream in 1987 with the establishment of the Japan Exchange and Teaching (JET) programme, and over 75,000 participants have since joined foreign language classes (CLAIR, 2022). While much of the established literature focuses on ALTs’ contributions to English language teaching, this belies the goals of the programme, which is not solely a language-teaching initiative:

Aiming primarily to promote grassroots internationalisation at the local level, the JET Programme invites young college graduates from around the world to participate in internationalisation initiatives and be involved in foreign language education. (CLAIR, 2022: np)2

While over 90% of participants are ALTs, spending most of their time in school classrooms, the programme is sponsored by three separate ministries (the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications [MIC], the Ministry of Foreign Affairs [MOFA], and the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology [MEXT]). David McConnell, in his seminal volume on the JET programme, Importing Diversity (2000), explains that the impetus behind the programme came from the ministries of Home Affairs (predecessor to MIC) and Foreign Affairs:

Officials immediately grasped the diplomatic potential of the proposed program, particularly if the number of participant countries could be expanded. … it would enhance foreign understanding of Japan … among young people who were likely to rise to positions of power in their respective countries. (39)

One initial proposal was to have participants join local governments directly, to promote internationalisation through English (McConnell, 2000). Eventually, however, schools were seen as the venue most capable of hosting a large cohort of incoming English speakers, and a venue to which they could be readily marketed – at the time, the foreign languages curriculum was undergoing a ‘communicative turn’, thus, introducing ‘native speakers’ to stimulate communicative language teaching practices aligned with the pedagogical zeitgeist (Wada, 1994).

The JET programme has now expanded to include 57 participant countries (CLAIR, 2022), reflecting its initial diplomatic aspirations. Furthermore, in the 1990s, municipalities began employing ALTs directly, and private dispatch companies arose to meet the growing demand for ALTs; non-JET ALTs now account for over 75% of the population, around 20,330 in 2021 (MEXT, 2022). This diversification of employment types and participant countries has brought with it (or rather, brought to the surface) a different diversity in ALTs: Plurilinguals.

Plurilingual ALTs have the potential to contribute to pedagogical innovation, although that is not easily achieved. Reasons for this are first explored in the next section, before we introduce a long-term plurilingual educational project (Pearce et al., 2021) that promoted the application of ALTs’ full linguistic repertoires.

2.2.1 ALTs’ roles and restrictions

ALTs are subject to several restrictions. As they do not hold Japanese teachers’ licenses, they cannot teach without a licensed colleague present. Nor can they take responsibility for curriculum development or evaluation; they must work within the frameworks of the municipalities and schools at which they are employed. Thus, while ALTs often take a lead role in classroom teaching, they must do so in accordance with pre-established guidelines and curriculums (Ishihara et al., 2018; Pearce, 2021b).

While the Course of Study, the national curriculum, makes no overt reference to ALTs,3 where ALTs are mentioned in related documents, they are often referred to as (presumed monolingual) ‘native-speakers’, likely a legacy policy from the 1980s (Pearce, 2021b). For instance, take the roles of ALTs as described in the following teaching manual:

•Introduce the life and culture of their home country relevant to the current unit, and learn about the students’ country through interaction.

•Repeat and have students listen to the correct native-speaker pronunciation.

(MEXT, 2017: 110, translation and emphases by the authors)

As ALTs are required to follow their colleagues’ lead, the degree to which they act as ‘cultural informants’, or how they bring their linguistic resources into the classroom, depends entirely on others’ policies – either micro level (Japanese teaching colleagues) or meso level (schools or boards of education). Given that ALTs are rarely taken up in teacher training, and that they are generally a transient presence – in many cases coming and going within a year, or teaching at multiple schools simultaneously – Japanese teachers do not have many opportunities to learn about their ALTs, and thus their plurilingualism often goes unnoticed (Pearce, 2022).

2.2.2 ALTs’ plurilingualism

ALTs’ languages other than English have seen increasing attention in the literature, and several studies have investigated non-native English-speaking ALTs (e.g. Mahoney, 2020; Sugimoto & Yamamoto, 2019). However, most studies remain focused on English-only teaching (the status quo), or issues that non-native speakers face in a native-speakerism informed system (Houghton & Hashimoto, 2018; see also Introduction to this volume). Among the few studies that have begun to examine ALTs’ translingual practices, these have tended to focus on Japanese use in resistance to English-only policies (e.g. Ishihara et al., 2018). The pedagogical applications of ALTs’ full linguistic repertoires have yet to be explored.

Cognisant of this, the lead author sought to investigate ALTs’ plurilingualism. In a survey study, he found that almost all respondents (99%) reported some degree of ability in Japanese, and the majority (57%), ability in at least one language other than Japanese and English (Pearce, 2021a). However, simply establishing that plurilingualism is common in the ALT population is not sufficient for individual ALTs’ plurilingualism to be utilised as an asset in the classroom. One prerequisite is that ALTs themselves are aware of their own plurilingualism and its pedagogic potential. Also, given the restrictions mentioned above, a more important prerequisite is that their schools and co-teachers are aware of them. One useful tool for exploring individuals’ plurilingualism is the visual autobiography.

3 Participants and Data Collection

In the remainder of this chapter, we explore two ALTs’ plurilingualism through phenomenological polyethnography (Olt & Teman, 2019), employing visual autobiographies (Melo-Pfeifer & Chik, 2020) as tools to develop awareness of plurilingualism and how it can be an asset to language teaching.

Multimodal content analyses are centred on polyethnographic discussions between the authors and participants. Polyethnography is a qualitative research methodology that emerged from duoethnography (Norris et al., 2012), in which multiple researchers with shared experiences of (and/or expertise on) the phenomena being investigated employ dialogue to understand the phenomena (here, plurilingualism in ALTs and in their teaching). Most implementations share the following characteristics: (1) focusing on life histories; (2) including multiple voices in dialogue; (3) disrupting metanarratives; and (4) requiring trust, as analysis often involves exploring deeply personal experiences and emotions (see Lawrence & Lowe, 2020). Polyethnography distinguishes itself from duoethnography in the following way:

Whereas duoethnography generally considers data in the past and reflection in the present, phenomenological polyethnography places both in the present for the researcher-participants to illuminate a phenomenological question. Data of both descriptions and reflections are collected as a phenomenon is being experienced by the researcher-participants, with further reflection occurring after the experiences have passed. (Olt & Teman, 2019: 146)

The data in this chapter include discussions during the creation of materials for the School Lunches Project and visual autobiographies. The latter are presented first, a culmination of multi-year collaborations – the very nature of which serve to disrupt homogenising metanarratives (i.e. ALTs = monolingual native speakers). The team had developed a relationship of trust before the present research. The authors have worked together for several years, and one, hereafter referred to as ‘Dan’, has been a friend of both participants for close to a decade (and was an ALT himself for half a decade).

The first ALT researcher-participant, Val,4 was born in France, and uses French, English and Japanese daily. Currently an ALT, Val has taught French at a senior high school in the Kantō region since October 2020. Our second participant, LoukYee, was a Coordinator for International Relations (CIR) in the Kyūshū region from 2018–2020, where she facilitated exchange programs with Thailand, and visited schools in an ALT capacity. Born in Thailand, LoukYee speaks Thai, Japanese and English fluently.

Both Val and LoukYee are outliers – most ALTs are recruited as fresh university graduates, very few with high Japanese proficiency. When Val and LoukYee became ALTs, they had completed graduate degrees (both in Japan) and spoke Japanese fluently (as does Dan). Thus, we do not seek to generalise from their experiences, but rather to explore the potential for visual autobiographies as a tool to assist in (self-)understanding of ALTs’ plurilingualism. Before asking Val and LoukYee to create their biographies, Dan first showed them his own, and those of two Japanese teachers engaged in plurilingual practice (see Moore et al., 2020b).

In polyethnography, participants are co-researchers, and discussions are both means of exploration and tools for analyses. Polyethnography seeks to form joint and intersubjective representations of phenomena (here, plurilingualism in ALTs and plurilingual education), rather than objective descriptions of ‘truth’ (Olt & Teman, 2019). Thus, the collaborative analyses are conducted in tandem with the findings in the next section.

4 Findings and Analyses

4.1 Val’s autobiography

Val has an intensely multilingual background, having studied several languages (to varying degrees) at school, including French, English, German and Russian, Japanese during and after his undergraduate years, and some Thai during his postgraduate studies (see Figure 2.1).

Figure 2.1 Val’s visual autobiography

Val’s autobiography is comprised of eight vignettes, weaving across the page from top to bottom, beginning with his childhood in France, and ending in Thailand, before his tenure as an ALT begins.

Vignette ① positions Val at the top of a family tree, with an arrow pointing to a hexagonal representation of France, and the northern region where he was born and raised. The tree has a clear vertical contrast between Le Français and le patois (the unconventional capitalisation of the former conveying an elevated status). Val elaborates as he relays his story; ‘I spent a lot of time with my mother’s-side grandparents’ – Val’s grandparents and great-grandparents would speak to each other in le patois (dialect), ‘a variation of Picard language. Words are different, pronunciations different. Verbs change their forms according to the subject conjugate’, he tells:

I was a kid, so I would pick up those words and use them. But there’s that sentiment [in France] that French is superior. … even now, [if you use dialects], people say it sounds like you’re a peasant, or something like that. It’s really not something that is very, how can I say, valued. My parents speak with very little patois, almost none. … for me, it was just ‘the old-people’ language.

Vignette ② introduces Val at ages seven to nine (7–8–9 ans). Three flags represent English, German and Russian, languages that he experienced at primary school, and the red crosses and green circle, his feelings about them:

Val:   

We had kind of a ‘language initiation’ each year, so my second year was German. I didn’t like it. My third year was English. I didn’t like it. My fourth year was Russian, and I loved it.

Dan:

What was the difference, do you think?

Val:   

I honestly don’t know. Maybe, I think, a couple of different reasons. First, about the language itself, I’ve always liked Russian for the sound of it. And then there’s the cultural image. … Russian is exotic and rare and so much more valuable.

Val’s enjoyment of Russian is clear in that it represents his school years from ten to 18 years of age in Vignette ③; a smiling visage accompanied by the text ‘Я говорю по-русски’ (I speak Russian). In the next vignette, Val steps back in time, to age 13, where he reaffirms his dislike for English, despite his developing proficiency. In Vignette ⑤, Val has a fateful encounter:

So, from 15 to 18, I discover Japanese culture, through anime and manga mainly. … the first time I heard Japanese was when I was in high school. And it was the language of anime, so it was so cool. I was a huge fan of Naruto. … I decided, okay, if I have the opportunity, I want to start learning that language.

For Val, that opportunity arrives in higher education (Vignette ⑥). He wanted to continue Russian, but remarks that ‘[I] didn’t have a high enough level, so I had to drop Russian’. While Val studies a variety of non-language subjects in his tertiary education (at the Grande école, SciencesPo), his course also has a compulsory year abroad. Val, looking to do his in Japan (signified by three Japanese flags and ‘がんばるんだ！’ – ‘I’m gonna do it!’), pursues Japanese study independently. His first trip to Japan (20–21 ans in Vignette ⑦) demonstrates his accomplishment. He progresses in Japanese during this year and, upon returning to France in 2011, passes level N2 of the Japanese Language Proficiency Test.5

Val’s second venture to Japan is from age 23, to pursue graduate studies. Through experiences in his dormitory (where he met Dan, and where most residents communicated in English), and as the university offered subsidised test-taking, he attempts the TOEFL® examination. After another three years in Japan, he begins shūkatsu (job hunting), for which he also takes TOEIC®, but finds the overall experience unpleasant – ‘It didn’t go well, I mean, I kind of hated it’ – opting instead to pursue a PhD in public policy. Val chooses Thailand as his field of study (พุดภาษาไทยได้นิดดดดหน่อย – ‘I can speak a liiiittle bit of Thai’), returning to Japan in 2020, where he takes up a position as an ALT of French.

As an ALT, Val explains that he is asked to use as much French as possible, and to avoid using Japanese. His plurilingualism (if not overtly his full repertoire) is nevertheless capitalised upon, as his department recognises the value in connecting languages that students have previously learned – they encourage Val (and the learners) to make connections between French and English. While his Japanese ability is ostensibly ‘hidden’ by his colleagues’ request, it remains an asset in teaching:

[When students make errors] I will often tell them ‘think in Japanese’, ‘the sentence that you are saying now in French, think how you would say it in Japanese and you’ll see there’s something missing or something illogical’. Because I know Japanese and I can imagine how they would imagine … how they would translate the sentences. I can then try to guide them into finding whatever the problem is.

4.2 LoukYee’s autobiography

LoukYee’s autobiography spirals around the page over seven vignettes, almost entirely conveyed through writing, but employing traditional Thai colours of purple and gold (Figure 2.2). LoukYee’s manner of speaking is self-analytical (and translingual), less linear than her visuals suggest, as she jumps between time periods in explaining her ideological stances and emotions.

Figure 2.2 LoukYee’s visual autobiography

LoukYee begins in childhood, and like Val, with dialects (Vignette ①):

I was raised by my grandmother, until she passed away. So until, like, 小学校 [primary school], we were in the same house, and my mum and grandmother spoke dialect. … and my mum always brings me back to her hometown, like every お盆 [obon].6

LoukYee’s childhood experiences with minoritised languages inform her life-long engagement with languages and teaching. Similar to patois, in Bangkok, where she was born and raised, dialects were not valued. However, her family originally comes from near the Kong River in Thailand, bordering Laos:

The north-eastern dialectic is very similar to Laos language. … So, I kind of built up the idea that there are languages in the world that are very similar, and that formed my idea of what language is.

LoukYee’s experiences with minoritised languages and intercomprehension (as well as cultural similarities with neighbouring countries) are core memories that inform her teaching, and her vocal distaste for nationalism and ‘majority-group thinking’, which she mentions several times during discussions:

People who speak north-eastern dialects … face lots of discrimination because it’s the poorest part of Thailand. So, my mum, she never spoke in dialect outside the house. … While I understand 100% of what my mum and grandma are saying, I never wanted to speak it myself, because I looked at it as a ‘poor people dialect’.

Vignettes ② and ③ cover LoukYee’s school years. Despite her proficiency, she does not dwell on English learning, simply stating that she began in grade three. In high school, she takes on a second foreign language. Her school offered French and Japanese, and she chose the latter. LoukYee had a closer affinity with Japanese because it was more present – her schoolmates avidly read manga and watched anime, although she herself did not. Despite not having any real motivation to take Japanese (LoukYee reflects, 特に言える理由が全くない – ‘I really don’t have any reason I can give’), she excels, achieving level 3 of the Japanese Language Proficiency Test, and coming a few points shy of level 2. LoukYee wants to continue studying Japanese, and secures entrance to the elite Chulalongkorn University, but this is where she experiences her first ‘heartbreak’ in language learning:

Adults kept saying ‘oh, if you’re good at foreign language, you better go to 文学部 (bungakubu: Faculty of Letters) at Chulalongkorn’. … so, I chose that, and Japanese language major as my first choice. … I missed my first choice by only one point. So, I turned my back to Japanese, 本当に悔しい (I was bitterly disappointed).

LoukYee majors in history, and although she takes a few credits from Korean and Chinese language (Vignette ④), her disappointment looms: ‘It’s a kind of trauma. I didn’t want to study language anymore’. Despite this, LoukYee remains involved with language:

I joined a volunteer group to go to northern Thailand and teach Thai to Karen people, ethnic minority people. … I could speak some basic Karen because I’ve been there every summer vacation, teaching small children Thai.

In Vignette ⑤, LoukYee makes her first long-term trip to Japan. Not as wealthy as her classmates (who, she recalls, spent university holidays in the UK or US), she also wants the study-abroad experience. As Japan is a relatively inexpensive option, she joins a masters’ preparation course in Kyoto after graduating. This, again, is challenging:

It was even more overwhelming [than Chulalongkorn], because I joined a high advanced level and I was surrounded by super オタク(otaku),7 or students that came here with very strong motivation, like, ‘oh, I want to die in Japan. I love Japan so much. This is my dream life to come here, blah, blah.’ I hate that. I don’t like to do things like everyone else does.

While LoukYee opts to remain in Japan, she maintains her dislike of ‘the majority’, deciding against a Japanese-language programme, and pursuing graduate study in an English-language programme (Vignette ⑥). While LoukYee does not regret her choice, she reflects that it led to a second heartbreak:

When I finished my master’s, the 中途半端 (chūtohanpa: feeling of half- measures/incompleteness) feeling also hit me because I didn’t study in Japanese language. And when I had to do job hunting, it was kind of 足りないね (tarinai: insufficient). So, I was kind of heartbroken again. I decided to go back to Thailand.

This brings us to Vignette ⑦, in which LoukYee describes three jobs; working for JETRO (the semi-governmental Japan External Trade Organization), in which she uses Thai and Japanese relatively equally (TH50/JP50), before moving on to a Thai-led NGO with majority Japan sponsors, where she uses Japanese, Thai and English (EN10/TH20/JP70). LoukYee’s ‘Job #3’ is where she returns to Japan as a Coordinator for International Relations (CIR).

LoukYee’s municipality had conducted exchanges with schools in Thailand for several years. Before she arrived, this was conducted mainly through English (she was the first Thai speaker to come to the town). Due to her Japanese and English proficiency, LoukYee often accompanied her town’s other ALT to teach English at schools, but she was also asked to give lectures on Thai culture and language. LoukYee focuses on her ‘cultural informant’ role, in which she drew on her experiences of dialects and cultures related to Thai:

I try to show them that my culture is not like a single independent culture that just popped up in that Southeast Asian land, without relating to other neighbouring countries. … For example, Japanese, they know Thai food a lot. … but I want them to also know that it’s not an appeal of only our culture. You also can find similar food in Myanmar, in Cambodia, in Laos, in Vietnam.

When Dan recalls a conversation from several years prior, in which LoukYee mentioned plurilingual activities, he asks about those. LoukYee initially denies engaging in plurilingual tasks, stating that she just helped with English lessons, when Val interjects:

Val:   

But you did!

LoukYee:   

Oh, I guess that was part of my game… I use a lot, like, I let them listen to Thai music, but like Thai music, Myanmar, Vietnam…

Val:   

I remember that one. Thai music, Burmese music, and Vietnamese music.

LoukYee:   

And just have them guess which language was Thai.

LoukYee initially forgets her engagement with plurilingual practice – perhaps not surprising, as ALT work is often framed within the target language, and other languages are relegated to ‘play’, as opposed to ‘real study’ (Pearce, 2021b: 17). While LoukYee’s Thai ability is considered an asset in contributing to preparatory study for elementary children who would participate in an exchange with a Thai school, her role in everyday classes is clearly interpreted as that of ‘English expert’.

Perhaps due to this framing of ALTs’ roles as primarily English support (or in Val’s case, French), neither Val nor LoukYee immediately address how they apply their plurilingualism in practice, only touching upon it when prompted. Nevertheless, during discussions their plurilingualism becomes a point of reflection and reconsideration in respect to both their life histories and their roles in the classroom. Also noteworthy is that, while the two initially discussed both their practices and their own experiences of language learning at schools as essentially ‘monolingual’ (for instance, Val remarks, ‘as far as I remember, I’ve always learnt language in a monolingual environment, meaning, like when I learnt Russian, the teacher would only speak Russian and French’), they both begin their biographies with reflections on minoritised languages. Oft neglected in language education discourse, minoritised languages were clearly influential to the two upon reflection. This reflection is likely not coincidental, but possibly inspired by the fact the two had engaged in a plurilingual education project with which the authorial team was also involved: The School Lunches Project.

4.3 Making plurilingualism an asset: The School Lunches Project

In the School Lunches Project, spearheaded by foreign language and nutrition teachers at elementary schools in Osaka, children would experience international cuisine once per month in their school lunches. Prior to this, children would engage with museum-like displays of cultural artefacts from the respective nations (eventually including over 16 countries), and view plurilingual videos on the countries and representative languages.8 The aims of the project were (in part) to:

encourage questioning of common (often hegemonic) sociolinguistic representations such as one-country-one-language, to be inclusive of local and indigenous languages, and to show languages in contexts different to those they are usually related to, such as English in Gambia and Spanish in Peru. (Pearce et al., 2021: 37)

The project provided a venue for ALTs (including Val and LoukYee) to capitalise upon their plurilingualism as an asset for teaching and learning. While they had a great degree of freedom in content, they were requested by the project teachers to include the following:

(1)an introduction of the country in question;

(2)an introduction of representative languages; and

(3)memories related to the cuisine.

Thus, much like most ALTs’ classroom practice, in this project, contributors still had to work within pre-established guidelines. However, unlike regular practice, in which ALTs’ other languages are often hidden away, here, their plurilingualism was central.

Val’s video begins with the demographics of France (Figure 2.3). Following this, he introduces the French writing system, focusing on the differences between French and English, introducing the various accents and the diacritic cédille. Val remarks that ‘as a first contact with French, I thought that … the visual impact was interesting’. Weaving his understanding of English and French, and after discussing with Dan what the children have previously learned, he skilfully contrasts the two languages in easy-to-understand Japanese for the primary school children. Val concludes this section with an introduction of écriture cursive, comparing it to Japanese calligraphy (書道: shodō).

Figure 2.3 France and cake salé

Non-linguistic elements included wildlife and their representations in cultural symbols (such as Le coq, which has adorned French francs and sports uniforms). Val’s video then adopts a theme of ‘cultural evolution’, connecting wildlife to cave paintings such as those found in Lascaux, and what life was like for people who lived in what is now France. While including cave paintings was proposed by Dan, Val capitalises on the theme; his introduction of cake salé traces the evolution of the food from an appetiser to a main dish, including aspects of how French gustative culture has generally evolved. Drawing comparisons to similar and different cultural aspects in Japan, Val employs his plurilingualism and pluriculturalism in a way that demonstrates that ‘[cultural] meaning is not static, but is socially constructed, negotiated, and evolving’ (Pearce et al., 2021: 46). The School Lunches Project, and discussions during and after video production, provided a space for Val to raise awareness of his own plurilingualism and pluriculturalism as assets, and a means to capitalise on his plurilingualism in teaching. This was also true for LoukYee, and her video on Pad Thai (Figure 2.4).

Figure 2.4 Thai and Pad Thai

LoukYee created her video before Val, and its influence on his is clear; she begins with demographics, before introducing the Thai script (อักษรไทย). She first shows consonants, remarking that they are fewer in number than the Japanese kana (in which each character corresponds to a mora), but unlike Japanese, Thai also uses diacritic markers to represent vowels. LoukYee explains how the characters are written, comparing them to hiragana, and also explains tones in Thai language, which are visibly represented in individual characters.

LoukYee also introduces animals, beginning with elephants, and their historical role/importance in Thai society. She connects the various animals to onomatopoeia, comparing the sounds of animal cries in Japanese and Thai (a suggestion of the authors, who had engaged in the practice of incorporating onomatopoeia as part of L’éveil aux langues practice: Oyama & Pearce, 2019).

LoukYee also finds a space in the video to connect her dislike of nationalism (ideology) to her (pedagogical) content. Recall that she mentioned ‘similar food in Myanmar, in Cambodia, in Laos, in Vietnam’ – this is also true of Pad Thai. She introduces the political history of the cuisine, as, while known internationally as a quintessentially Thai dish, the noodles were originally from China; the present-day dish was the result of nation-building after the Siamese revolution of 1932, rebranded as a ‘symbolic “Thai” national dish to counter the cultural influence of Thailand’s Chinese population’ (Padoongpatt, 2017: 49). LoukYee subtly introduces this aspect, mentioning the Chinese connection several times; ‘I feel like Pad Thai is a good combination between language and history and social studies’ – she eschews the idealisation of Pad Thai as ‘uniquely Thai’, and connects it back to its historical roots.

The project thus provided an outlet for LoukYee to employ her specialised knowledge in education, her plurilingualism, and her own specific interests in language learning and teaching, which she describes as follows:

I’m more interested in how culture manifests in language. Even in my everyday life, I love picking up what the culture is behind Japanese sentences, Japanese grammar. … I always analyse in my head ‘why they say that’, ‘how is that connected to social norms, values’. I’m not interested in just [the surface-level linguistic elements of] language.

In the way that the School Lunches Project provided a pedagogically meaningful outlet for Val and LoukYee’s plurilingualism, the collaborative experience of creating videos, and the subsequent creation of, and discussions surrounding, their visual autobiographies, gave structure and meaning to their experiences and plurilingual repertoires. This polyethnographic endeavour helped to interlink (plurilingual) theory and practice, to deconstruct ideologies of the monolingualised ‘native speaker’, and to disrupt the artificial compartmentalisation of separate languages. For Val and LoukYee, this multi-year endeavour contributed to the understanding of their own plurilingualism, and how they have been using (or might better use) this asset in their professional practice – the polyethnographical exploration also became an endeavour of self-teacher-training.

Utilising ALTs’ plurilingualism as an asset for education is not easy. One major prerequisite mentioned above, is that ALTs’ teaching colleagues and schools need to be aware of their plurilingualism, and its value in education. This was indeed the case of the school that launched the School Lunches Project. The school itself was aware of the importance of plurilingual education, and encouraged collaboration between teachers, and between the school and wider community, including academia. This resulted in the development of a complex network of collaboration including teachers, boards of education, researchers, and other community members, who came together to realise the project, and to capitalise on the participants’ plurilingualism for learning (Figure 2.5).9

Figure 2.5 Network of collaboration

5 Lessons Learnt

In the background section of this chapter, we argued that awareness of plurilingualism as a common phenomenon is not sufficient to capitalise upon individual ALTs’ plurilingualism in pedagogy (i.e. to challenge the nativized status quo) and to foster social justice, as this one is both a process and a product (see Introduction to this volume for more details). To capitalise upon ALT’s plurilingualism there are necessary prerequisites.

The first prerequisite was that ALTs themselves were aware of their own plurilingualism and its potential. Creating and discussing visual autobiographies appeared to help our participants better understand their own plurilingualism in practice. For instance, when Val mentioned how he applies his Japanese in French lessons (albeit not overtly), Dan describes what he does back to him:

Dan:   

You’re applying your Japanese knowledge to understand where the students are making mistakes, not just giving them the answers. You’re prompting them to use their full linguistic ability to solve things for themselves. Right?

Val:   

If you put it like that, it sounds very cool. … but I guess that’s actually what I do, making them think in Japanese sometimes when I see something, when I feel that might help them going to the correct answer in French.

Although Val’s full repertoire was not overt in his lessons (recall that he had to avoid openly using Japanese), reflections through the biography and discussions with the authors helped him to realise how it was an asset to his teaching – and the School Lunches Project gave him an outlet to capitalise on his plurilingualism and pluriculturalism in an overt way. The project also created a space for LoukYee to bring her other languages and cultural knowledge into pedagogy in a way that was not simply ‘play’. The multimodality involved in the creation of visual autobiographies, video-making and polyethnographic discussions allowed for the joint and intersubjective exploration of individual experience from multiple viewpoints (i.e. engaging in authorship on one’s own terms; see Introduction to this volume). The entire research project also functioned as a tool for self-reflection and self-development, fostering in the participants deeper understanding of, and agency over, their own plurilingualism as an asset, and how their identities as ALTs do not need to be limited to representations of isolated, compartmentalised languages, such as English, or French.

The second prerequisite highlighted, within the pedagogical aims established by ALTs’ colleagues and their institutions, was that the latter are aware of the value of plurilingual approaches, and of their ALTs’ plurilingualism. It was also pointed out that Japanese teachers have few opportunities to learn about ALTs’ plurilingualism. This can have unfortunate consequences – previous research has demonstrated how ALTs with non-Anglophone backgrounds are sometimes asked to represent ‘American culture’, for instance (Pearce, 2022). This type of situation is likely due to representations of ALTs as homogenous, ‘native speakers’ of their languages, and the resulting assumption that, for instance, English speaker = representative of American culture. Visual biographies themselves could potentially be a means for ALTs to share their plurilingualism with their colleagues. In the case of the School Lunches Project, the school was supportive of plurilingual education, and one of the lead teachers includes plurilingual education in her regular English teaching (see Moore et al., 2020b).

The aim of this chapter has been to explore the plurilingualism of individual ALTs, and to consider their potential for education in an often-homogenising context. Understanding an individual’s plurilingualism, an intensely complex concept and competence, is not easy, much less promoting that plurilingualism as a pedagogical asset. The complexity of the School Lunches Project, and the network of collaborators necessary to achieve it, speaks to the difficulty of overtly including ALTs’ plurilingualism in educational practice, which requires awareness of, and a proactive attitude towards, promoting plurilingualism at both an individual and institutional (school) level.10 Nevertheless, the endeavour was worthwhile, in that it was emancipatory for the participants: Developing deeper understandings of their plurilingualism allowed them to understand how their full linguistic and cultural repertoires can contribute to their practice, even in situations in which their plurilingualism is not made overt.

Highlighting plurilingualism in ALTs’ practice is also emancipatory in that it challenges hegemonic views of ‘the native speaker’ and representations of foreign languages as ‘English only’ (Oyama & Pearce, 2019; see Introduction to this volume). This denativizing process through plurilingual education and polyethnography as a (self-)training tool also supports social justice and equity in learning for all.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers 21K13080, 22K13185.

Notes

(1)Although space precludes a full discussion about plurilingual education, see Moore et al. (2020a) for a delineation between this concept and the related theoretical trends of translanguaging and multilingual pedagogy.

(2)The Japanese naming of the programme does not reference teaching; Gaikokugoseinenshōchijigyō (外国語青年招致事業) could be translated as ‘Foreign-language Youth Invitation Project’. JET also recruits Coordinators for International Relations (CIRs) who engage in planning international exchanges and translation/interpreting at local municipalities, and occasionally visit schools as ALTs.

(3)Perhaps because the Course of Study is legally binding, and because MEXT cannot guarantee placement of ALTs, there is a reticence to reference to them.

(4)All participants chose their names for this chapter.

(5)The most widely taken test of Japanese as a foreign language, with five levels from N5 to N1; N1 is the highest level.

(6)A summer event in Japan in which tradition holds that spirits of deceased ancestors return to the mortal plane. It is common to return to one’s hometown for obon to spend time with family. LoukYee actually refers to the Thai New Year, using obon as a comparison, as the authors share this cultural understanding.

(7)Otaku is similar in meaning to ‘geek’, or ‘nerd’, usually associated with intense interest in Japanese-produced popular culture, including anime, manga, and video games.

(8)Full videos available on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLWFmEfaRaRmTweXM_QmoDoR0C7wNy1aQW

(9)As this chapter’s focus is on ALTs’ plurilingualism, children’s learning has not been explored. Interested readers are directed to Pearce et al. (2021).

(10)For another innovative school-wide plurilingual education practice, informed by social justice perpectives, albeit under the umbrella term of ‘peace learning’, see Pearce et al. (2020).

References

CLAIR (2022) Introduction. http://jetprogramme.org/en/about-jet/

Houghton, S.A. and Hashimoto, K. (eds) (2018) Towards Post-Native-Speakerism: Dynamics and Shifts. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7162-1

Ishihara, N., Carroll, S.K., Mahler, D. and Russo, A. (2018) Finding a niche in teaching English in Japan: Translingual practice and teacher agency. System 79, 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.06.006

Lawrence, L. and Lowe, R.J. (2020) An introduction to duoethnography. In R.J. Lowe and L. Lawrence (eds) Duoethnography in English Language Teaching: Research, Reflection and Classroom Application (pp. 1–26). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788927192-003

Mahoney, S. (2020) A new era: Non-native English-speaking assistants. JES Journal 20, 210–225. https://doi.org/10.20597/jesjournal.20.01_210

McConnell, D.L. (2000) Importing Diversity: Inside Japan’s JET Program. University of California Press.

Melo-Pfeifer, S. and Chik, A. (2020) Multimodal linguistic biographies of prospective foreign language teachers in Germany: Reconstructing beliefs about languages and multilingual language learning in initial teacher education. International Journal of Multilingualism 19 (4), 499–522. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2020.1753748

Mertens, D. (2022) Preface. In A. CohenMiller and N. Boivin (eds) Questions in Qualitative Social Justice Research in Multicultural Contexts (pp. xxiii–xxvii). Routledge.

MEXT (2017) Shōgakkō gaikokugokatsudō/gaikokugokenshū gaidobukku [Guidebook for Foreign Languages (Activities)]. http://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/kokusai/gaikokugo/1387503.htm

MEXT (2022) Reiwa 3nendo ‘eigo kyōiku jisshi jōkyō chōsa’ no kekka ni tsuite [Results of the 2021 Survey on the State of English Language Education Implementation]. https://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/kokusai/gaikokugo/1415043_00001.htm

Moore, D., Oyama, M., Pearce, D.R. and Kitano, Y. (2020a) Plurilingual education and pedagogical plurilanguaging in an elementary school in Japan: A perspectival origami for better learning. Journal of Multilingual Theories and Practices 1 (2), 243–265. https://doi.org/10.1558/jmtp.17783

Moore, D., Oyama, M., Pearce, D.R., Kitano, Y. and Irisawa, K. (2020b) Biographies langagières et EMILE, quand tous les chemins mènent… au plurilinguisme, même au Japon ! Contextes et Didactiques 15 (1), 13–31. https://doi.org/10.4000/ced.2051

Norris, J., Sawyer, R. and Lund, D.E. (eds) (2012) Duoethnography: Dialogic Methods for Social, Health, and Educational Research. Left Coast Press.

Olt, P.A. and Teman, E.D. (2019) Un[bracketed]: Phenomenological polyethnography. Qualitative Research Journal 19 (2), 146–155. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-12-2018-0001

Oyama, M. and Pearce, D.R. (2019) Promoting bilingualism in Japanese elementary schools: Exploring the possibilities of the awakening to languages approach. Japan Journal of Multilingualism and Multiculturalism 25 (1), 65–86.

Padoongpatt, M. (2017) Flavors of Empire: Food and the Making of Thai America. University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.1525/california/9780520293731.001.0001

Pearce, D.R. (2021a) Homogenous representations, diverse realities: Assistant language teachers at elementary schools. The Language Teacher 45 (3), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.37546/JALTTLT45.3-1

Pearce, D.R. (2021b) Shōgakkō no gaikokugoshidōjoshu ha monoringaru ka: tanitsu gengo kyōiku ni shitagau fukugengowasha no isō [Plurilingual speakers within a monolingual education paradigm: Are ALTs at elementary schools really monolingual?]. Gengo seisaku [Language Policy] 17, 1–24.

Pearce, D.R. (2022) ‘Tayōka’ wo tonaeru gaikokugokatsudō no genjitsu to kadai: Nihon no shōgakkō ni okeru gaikokugoshidōjoshu no juyō wo megutte [Realities and challenges of ‘diversified’ foreign language activities: On assistant language teachers in Japanese elementary schools]. In M. Oyama, J. Kiyota and N. Nishiyama (eds) Tagengoka suru gakkō to fukugengokyōiku: Imin no kodomo no tame no kyōiku shien wo kangaeru [Linguistically diversifying schools and plurilingual education: Educational support for immigrant children] (pp. 93–112). Akaishi Shoten.

Pearce, D.R., Oyama, M., Moore, D. and Irisawa, K. (2020) Plurilingualism and STEAM: Unfolding the paper crane of peace at an elementary school in Japan. International Journal of Bias, Identity and Diversities in Education 5 (2), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJBIDE.2020070101

Pearce, D.R., Oyama, M., Moore, D., Kitano, Y. and Fujita, E. (2021) Plurilingual STEAM and school lunches for learning? Beyond folklorization in foreign language and intercultural education. International Journal of Bias, Identity and Diversities in Education 6 (2), 33–57. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJBIDE.2021070103

Sugimoto, H. and Yamamoto, A. (2019) Nihon ni okeru Firipinjinn gaikokugoshidōjoshu (ALT) no koyō mondai: Gaikokugoseinenshōchijigyō (JET) nado wo chūshin ni [Employment issues of Filipino assistant language teachers (ALTs) in Japan: A focus on JET and other programmes]. Kyoto University Research Studies in Education 65, 179–200.

Terasawa, T. (2021) Web survey data on the use of the English language in the Japanese workplace. World Englishes. https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12574

Wada, M. (1994) Team teaching and the revised course of study. In M. Wada and A. Cominos (eds) Studies in Team Teaching (pp. 7–15). Kenkyusha.

3Visual Methods in Language Teacher Education: Uncovering Beliefs about Career Choices Held by Pre-Service Teachers

Sílvia Melo-Pfeifer

1 Introduction

Visual methods, as one of the arts-based approaches to research (Leavy, 2014, 2019; Rolling, 2013), have gained much attention and originated a visual turn in Applied Language Studies (Kalaja & Pitkänen-Huhta, 2020). In language teacher education, studies have highlighted the potential of using drawings to uncover teachers’ beliefs about subject content, methodologies of learning and teaching, learning theories, the teaching (and learning) profession and professional development across time. Visual methods have thus acquired legitimacy for uncovering language (pre-service) teachers’ beliefs, broadly understood as implicit or tacit judgements made by them about different objects (language definition, student autonomy, etc.) or processes (different strategies for teaching vocabulary). According to Borg (2018), teachers’ beliefs: (a) refer to ideas that teachers consider to be true; (b) have a cognitive and affective dimension; (c) are relatively stable and the result of substantial social experiences; (d) influence and are influenced by practices; and (e) can be explicit/assumed or implicit/tacit. Borg (2018) also distinguishes between espoused and enhanced beliefs, the first explicitly stated and the second inferred from practices or ‘beliefs in action’. Using visual methodologies thus uncovers a third way to diagnose teachers’ beliefs, which are neither purely accessed through language nor through practice and action. With visual methodologies, beliefs are reconstructed by the researcher based on teachers’ own visual interpretations of actions and/or events.

In this chapter, I address schooling and teaching programs as ‘sometimes creating and reproducing inequalities in the access to the [language] teaching profession’, as stated in Introduction to this volume. Framed by the epistemological and didactic foundations of current research using visual narratives as data in Applied Language Studies, I report on an empirical study on pre-service teachers’ beliefs about their professionalisation process, from one possible starting point: career choice. Following previous studies based on analysis of visual biographies of modern language pre-service teachers (Melo-Pfeifer, 2021; Melo-Pfeifer & Chik, 2022), this chapter delves into visual professional biographies, focusing on the choice of career path and answering the following research question: How do German pre-service teachers represent their choice of becoming French teachers? I consider that visual biographies of language teachers can make issues of social justice (see Introduction to this volume on the concept) visible by providing a multifaceted platform to explore and convey the complex experiences, challenges and decisions that shape a language teacher’s career choice. This platform of expression conveys a more humanised perspective of the language teacher as a (multilingual) person, sometimes fighting hegemonic ideologies of authenticity and legitimacy attached to the native-speaker and engaging in specific moves to become like one. By eliciting a visual biography, I also intend to show how systemic elements, such as language education policies, influence teachers’ trajectories, opening and closing doors to specific career paths.

First, I review the main theoretical foundations legitimising the use of visual methods to capture teachers’ beliefs. Then, I present an empirical study on how pre-service language teachers, through drawing professional biographies and written reflection processes, make sense of the complex and never-ending process of becoming multilingual and becoming a (language) teacher. The multimodal analysis of portraits and discourse analysis of written reflections will give us a glimpse into how pre-service teachers think about their developing identities as teachers of additional languages at school and how they cope with contextual constraints and affordances. The conclusions will lead us to address questions of intersectionality in the development of teachers’ identities and the need to consider intersectionality in teacher education programmes to enhance participation and equity for all teacher candidates.

2 Background to the Study: Uncovering Teachers’ Beliefs and Knowledge through Visual Methods

Arts-based approaches and visual methods such as drawings, photographs or performance have been used in multiple studies exploring the beliefs and identity of multilingual teachers and students and the processes of teaching and learning, inside and outside of the school context (Moore et al., 2020; Tavares, 2022). In particular, the use of visual narratives is well documented in language and plurilingualism didactics (Castellotti & Moore, 2009; Kalaja & Melo-Pfeifer, 2019; Molinié, 2009; Moore & Castellotti, 2011) and in teacher education, both initial and in-service, it is already established as a research object and training tool.

As explained by Barone and Eisner (2012: 9), ‘literal language, which is discursive rather than non-discursive, is not particularly helpful when it comes to matters of feeling and their representation’. This means that drawings are particularly suitable for studying personal, emotional and cognitive development, trauma and fears, and identity aspects (Mitchell, 2017: 93). In the field of beliefs, such methods allow researchers to go ‘beyond the conventional triumvirate of questionnaires, interviews and observations’ (Borg, 2018: 88).

The use of visual methods, especially drawings, has been explored in studies around three main topics related to language and teacher education:

•uncovering social representations of languages, multilingualism and plurilingualism (Molinié, 2009; Castellotti & Moore, 2009; Prasad, 2015);

•analysing beliefs about language learning and acquisition (Castellotti & Moore, 2009; Kalaja et al., 2008; Melo-Pfeifer & Chik, 2022; Melo-Pfeifer & Schmidt, 2019);

•discovering and analysing language (pre-service) teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning, about the profession and about teacher professional development (de Laurentiis Brandão, 2019; Kalaja, 2016; Mäntylä & Kalaja, 2019; Melo-Pfeifer, 2019a and 2019b; Pinho, 2019).

Because this chapter focuses on (pre-service) teacher education and how we can trace the roots of pre-service teachers’ professional paths and professional knowledge, we now highlight some conclusions from studies that focus on the latter thematic strand. These studies reflect subjects’ beliefs about the language teaching profession as the result of school (and university) language learning experiences, biographical linguistic experiences, interactions with students and other teachers or future teachers, and teacher education programmes or specific teacher education modules. The studies are either related to social representations of the teaching profession (in particular, the didactic, methodological and pedagogical repertoires of teachers) or to language as a subject of instruction (Melo-Pfeifer, 2019b).

Becoming a language teacher implies developing different forms of knowledge (subject-specific knowledge, subject-specific didactic knowledge and general pedagogical-psychological knowledge, according to Baumert & Kunter, 2013), identifying and sharing professional funds of knowledge, and reflecting on the processes related to being and/or becoming multilingual (Cenoz & Gorter, 2015). Subject-specific knowledge concerns the mastery of subject content (such as a specific modern language or mathematics); subject-specific didactic knowledge refers to methodologies and knowledge of teaching and learning processes with regard to particular subjects (e.g. methodologies of modern language teaching); general pedagogical-psychological knowledge refers to knowledge about learning motivations, evaluation processes or how to manage classroom activities.

In a previous study, I categorised studies using visual methodologies to uncover beliefs about different aspects of language teacher education into three main thematic strands (Melo-Pfeifer, 2019b): (1) teachers’ representations of languages, (2) teachers’ representations of pedagogies, and (3) pre-service teachers’ professional development (and their representations of it).

In the first thematic category, I included studies that featured (pre-service) teachers’ representations of the languages they will teach (Kalaja et al., 2013) and of being and becoming multilingual (Melo-Pfeifer & Chik, 2022). This strand relates to subject-specific knowledge as participants tend to reflect on particular characteristics of the target language or the processes of becoming multilingual and acquiring that language themselves, sometimes unveiling the tensions surrounding being multilingual and becoming multilingual at school, as languages are not all valued the same (see Introduction, above). In a study of students’ representations (mainly pre-service teachers of English in a Finnish context), Kalaja, Barcelos and Aro state that ‘students came to construct English and Finnish as being close or distant as languages, or with positive or negative feelings; beautiful or ugly as languages; local or global as languages; and finally, easy or difficult as systems or as languages to be learnt’ (Kalaja et al., 2018: 226; also Kalaja, 2016). The authors unveiled relationships to languages constructed throughout the language biography, with great importance attributed to the school path in the construction of a linguistic imaginary.

The second group of studies includes research on pre-service teachers’ representations of teaching methodologies and content (Kalaja, 2016; Mäntylä & Kalaja, 2019; Melo-Pfeifer, 2019a; Pinho, 2019). This category is closer to subject-specific didactic knowledge, as participants tend to represent methodologies of language learning, materials, forms of interaction in the classroom, etc. These studies highlight ‘visions of the profession’, in particular the ‘how’ and ‘what’ to teach. These studies illustrate didactic repertoires under construction, and prior representations of what constitutes a didactic repertoire for the language classroom. In this category, pre-service teachers reflect, for example, on the development of multilingual pedagogies (the ‘how’) and other strategies to teach diverse classrooms, thus overcoming the constraints of monolingual education structures for justice and participation of all students.

Finally, the third category includes research on pre-service teachers’ professional development (and their representations of it) (de Laurentiis Brandão, 2019 and 2021; Melo-Pfeifer, 2019b and 2021; Pérez-Peitx, Civera López & Palou Sangrà, 2019; Pinho, 2019). For instance, the studies by de Laurentiis Brandão (2019) and Pinho (2019) reveal the importance of temporality in understanding the identity of future teachers, and in particular to understanding how they reconcile pre-existing representations and new ideas about language teaching and learning in schools (e.g. the tension around a monolingual mindset and multilingual pedagogies). Generally, these studies aim to show the effects of training programmes (particularly in the context of initial training) on the evolution of teachers’ representations of different aspects of professional competence. If we evoke the categories of professional knowledge, it is possible to assert that these studies more closely contribute to understanding (pre-service) teachers’ general pedagogical-psychological knowledge, but they also represent the interfaces between this and the subject-specific didactic knowledge.

As is evident from this brief state-of-the-art review, arts-based approaches, in general, and visual methods, more specifically, have been used productively to analyse (pre-service) teachers’ identity, diagnose their professional knowledge, and study their professional development. In the field of language teacher education, as explained in previous work:

By drawing their linguistic autobiography, pre-service foreign language teachers may reflect on their funds of linguistic knowledge and on their plurilingual skills, focusing on a salient aspect of their professional identity as language teachers and on the living circumstances that influenced their linguistic and professional trajectories. (Melo-Pfeifer, 2021: 606)

Despite the diversity of studies dealing with professional identity and its development during different stages of the professional career path, research is not yet available on how pre-service teachers of additional languages reflect on their career choice while visually recreating their language and professional biographies. And previous literature has not explored the connections between career choice and issues of social justice in language and teacher education programmes. This is the scope of the current empirical study.

3 Data Collection and Analysis

3.1 Context and participants

The research question that oriented our study was ‘How do pre-service teachers reconstruct their professional path and choices to become French teachers?’. To explore this issue, I formulated a task for the online teaching assignment in the summer semester of 2021 (during the pandemic), at the University of Hamburg (Germany), that would instigate pre-service teachers of French to reflect upon their choices. Students would have to visualise their language and career path following the prompt: ‘How did you become a (potential) French teacher? (Upload your drawing in the discussion forum and comment on it)’.

Twenty participants of the assignment ‘Introduction to Romance language didactics (French)’ from the bachelor level completed the task, uploading their drawings (or otherwise produced visualisations) in the discussion forum of an online platform used during the semester and providing a written comment on them.

3.2 Pool of data and methodology of analysis

Our corpus comprises 20 visualisations (not all drawings, as shown in Figures 3.1, 3.3 and 3.6) and 20 respective comments, which were uploaded in a discussion forum publicly for all the participants. For the purpose of this study, visualisations were anonymised, to preserve the identity of the participants. These productions are to be understood as personal narratives about professional development:

Personal narratives, whether textual or visual/multimodal, enact the professional ‘self’, constituting a performative act of the teacher’s identity and accounting for the processes of reconstruction and (re)meaning of professional autobiography. (Melo-Pfeifer, 2019b: 590, my translation).

We accept the assumption that ‘visual materials can certainly constitute narratives’ (Esin & Squire, 2013: 4), calling for different methodologies for reading them. That is why multimodal content analysis is required, combining reading images (which already combine text and visual elements) with reading written interpretations. This choice is supported by the fact that ‘like linguistic structures, visual structures point to particular interpretations of experience and forms of social interaction’ (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 1996: 2). This explains why drawings – or visual narratives – can be analysed independently of or combined with other data: ‘as in textual biographies, also visual biographies present authors’ retrospective interpretations, namely through the selection of facts, places, and actors that are represented’ (Melo-Pfeifer, 2021: 607).

The methodology for this study involved two separate steps. First, I collected all the data uploaded in the discussion forum, creating individual folders for each student and saving each drawing and written narrative. In the second step, I made a preliminary analysis of what I considered to be the focus of the reconstruction of the career path, grouping the drawings around specific features (i.e. focus on the acquisition of different languages focus on strategies of language learning and teaching, focus on a specific target language). I came to three main narrative foci, even if they sometimes overlap, and I matched each drawing to one of them. The three categories of analysis (or foci) can be described as follows:

•Focus 1: becoming a teacher – the narrative is organised around the process of choosing a profession and centred on how students discovered what we might see as their emerging pedagogical-psychological knowledge.

•Focus 2: becoming a teacher of a modern language – the focus is on a specific field of the teaching profession, closely associated with emerging pedagogical content knowledge.

•Focus 3: becoming a French teacher – the narrative is focused on the specific target language. This category tends to relate to developing specific content knowledge (French language and cultures) through the language biography.

In the next section, I will look at the specificities of each of these foci by emphasising the visual and linguistic tools through which pre-service teachers reflect upon their choices.

4 Findings

4.1 Becoming a teacher

Students’ visual and written narratives classified under this category are oriented toward discovering teaching as a professional field. Sentences like ‘I always wanted to become a teacher’ and ‘[I wanted to] work with children’ are examples of this focus. They relate to envisioning a professional self, working in a specific environment and with a particular audience/public.

Figure 3.1 illustrates the sequential learning of different languages, alongside the experience of different teaching, learning and artistic situations. Through life, the student has participated in different artistic and sports projects, which have as a common denominator the fact that they are collaborative (theatre, chorus, musicals and Judo) and involved working with children whether inside or outside school.

Figure 3.1 From artistic experiences to a teaching profession

French does not have a prominent status in this visual representation of the linguistic and professional biography. The first teaching experience is said to be with Judo. In the visual narrative, the author stresses that languages are fascinating and French above all. However, this information is not corroborated by the written reflection, which instead underscores the process of choosing a profession based on previous experiences with children, teaching other subjects outside the school, and the observation of the daily life of a school. The narrative account highlights the interplay between free time interests or hobbies and the career choice:

… Furthermore, in my free time I play theatre, do judo and have been dancing for two years. In the sports club, I coached children in judo for a while, which was my first experience with teaching. At school, I was allowed to do assistant directing for a musical, where I was able to work with children again. I really enjoy working with children. That’s why I decided to do an FSJ at a district school after my A-levels, where I was able to get to know everyday school life from the other side and, among other things, was allowed to take over individual lessons up to and including the whole lesson myself, which I really enjoyed. Therefore, the decision to become a teacher was very easy for me. (Translated from German)

The written narrative also emphasises contact with children as decisive for choosing a teaching career. The temporal narrative around this issue is unmistakable: ‘In the sports club I coached children’ and ‘At school … I was able to work with children again. I really enjoy working with children’ (emphasis added). Each new experience of working with children added a layer of satisfaction to the previous one, ultimately leading to an internship at a school (‘That’s why I decided to do an FSJ at a district school’). The lack of a specific subject focus is apparent and culminates in the last sentence of the written narrative: ‘Therefore, the decision to become a teacher was very easy for me’.

While some students go through different personal interests until finding a professional career, others seem to have been thrown into the teaching career by a process of narrowing or exclusion from other options. This is the case of the student who produced Figure 3.2. In this visualisation, the student draws a circular path starting in Germany, going to Tunisia, and returning to Germany again. Each of these space-times are connected to different learning highlights: childhood in Germany is associated with a trilingual education involving Arabic, French and German; the next period of life in Tunisia is associated with learning in Arabic and French and starting to learn English; the return to Germany is associated to passing a C1 exam in German, entering university to study medicine, changing to law and finally settling in a teacher education programme.

Figure 3.2 Teaching as a second career choice

The written narrative highlights the frustration associated with two unsuccessful career choices after the return to Germany:

I wanted to study medicine but ended up choosing to study German law. Unfortunately, because of a dissertation, which I didn’t pass, I had to give up studying German law. The German education system shocked me with the ‘all or nothing law’. Because of one grade, I was not allowed to study German law anywhere in Germany. It was not so easy to accept this failure at first, but after a six-month break from education, I discovered myself, I saw in myself the profile of a teacher. That’s what prompted me to go back to school. To become a teacher, I chose to be a teacher in a scientific subject, ‘Physics’, and a linguistic subject, ‘French’. (Translated from French)

The student does not say much about why she could not pursue her first career choice (medicine), which is not even mentioned in the visual production. The second career choice is narrated in quite some detail. The anger and frustration are visible in this account of the experience, introduced by the adverb ‘unfortunately’ and followed by ‘I didn’t pass’, ‘I had to give up’, ‘I was not allowed’ and ‘this failure’. The student reconstructs a process in which she assumes a relatively passive role, as someone who endures an unfair situation. This frustration is followed by a moment of self-discovery (‘I saw in myself the profile of a teacher’). She describes agency in returning to school and choosing both a linguistic and a non-linguistic subject. The language she chooses to teach is one of the languages she grew up with bilingually, indicating an acceptance of the native-speaker model of the target language (French) in the German context. A further interpretation of this narrative reveals that her level of German might not have been sufficient to pursue studies in medicine and law, thereby subordinating the future teacher at two levels: firstly, skills in German are more important than in French; and, secondly, law and medicine are more prestigious careers than teaching and are safeguarded to high-proficiency speakers only.

Another non-linear account of the teaching path is presented in Figure 3.3. In this account, which combines language learning (English and French) and different career options, the first intuition about a teaching path was already present in 2011 (‘Lehramt?’ / ‘Teaching profession?’). As in Figure 3.1, the French language does not seem to have a very prominent status although the mention of a semester abroad in France may have played a role.

Figure 3.3 From a Bachelor of Science to a teacher programme

The author seems to have had a successful academic path with the conclusion of a ‘Bachelor of Science’ and eight years of experience in the field of finance. From the visual narrative, it is unclear why the student decided to start another university course. The written narrative provides an explanation: pursuing the old dream that was also signalled in the visual narrative (‘Lehramt?’ / ‘Teaching profession?’).

When I was 11 years old, I decided to learn French as a second foreign language alongside English. Since my mother studied Russian and this was the only alternative to French as a second foreign language at our school, I rebelliously decided not to choose Russian so that I could have ‘peace and quiet’ while doing my homework. … My original dream of becoming a teacher never left me from the beginning of my business studies. It was definitely clear to me to go into mathematics. However, I was hesitant to take my second subject, French, because I have great respect for the responsibility of correctly teaching such an extensive knowledge of the language. (Translated from German)

This textual account also shows a strong will to differentiate from the choices of other family members and become an independent learner. Later in life, the difficulty of career changing is associated not with choosing the teaching programme, but with the combination of two school subjects: while mathematics was obvious, the second was more difficult because of normative ideologies attached to language teaching. The student ends his written narrative with a reflection on the role of his past career – ‘I also feel that my previous career has made me much more mature and better able to teach children one day if necessary’ – suggesting that the past was necessary to gain maturity and for the emergence of pedagogical-psychological knowledge.

As we can see from these three individual accounts, a teaching career can be connected to unforeseeable and sometimes emotionally hazardous moments in life. The unpredictability of career choice is associated with the progressive discovery of personal preferences, the selection of university studies (or successful achievement) and the choice and combination of school subjects for the teaching profession. In some stories, it is also connected to passing a language examination to prove linguistic proficiency, meaning that language tests are gatekeepers, preventing a person from entering the language teaching profession.

4.2 Becoming a language teacher?

In this category, I noticed that pre-service teachers combined the desire to ‘work with languages’ with the focus on ‘me, as a plurilingual subject’ (the role of the positive appreciation of an individual’s plurilingual repertoire). This category is exemplified by utterances such as ‘I knew I wanted to do something with languages’.

Figure 3.4 illustrates a pre-service teacher’s journey across different languages, both at school and throughout different mobility periods abroad. The student represents language education at school through plain, solid lines and periods abroad through dashed lines, establishing what could be interpreted as hierarchies among different language education contexts. The visual representation is mainly space- and geographic-oriented, with the prominent visualisation of schools (école, colège / lycée, université d’Hambourg) and the naming of cities (some accompanied by symbols, such as Paris) and countries (followed by or substituted by national flags and symbols). The drawing shows awareness of the pluricentricity of some languages, such as English and Spanish, because these are represented by mentioning different varieties (and flags).

Figure 3.4 Becoming a language teacher at the crossroads of formal and informal learning situations

The written narrative includes some aspects of the previous category. Here, even if the student states that becoming a teacher was a wish from their early years, the choice of the school subject is more complicated. So, despite choosing a career, the school subject remained unknown until the student finally found out that it was possible to combine Special Education with a modern language: French.

My name is X, I am 21 years old, and I am studying teacher education for Special Education in combination with French as a subject. This pairing is quite unusual, but I chose it out of love for the French language, and I am very happy with it so far. I always wanted to be a teacher, but for a long time, I couldn’t decide which ‘type’ of teaching would be most suitable for me. When I saw that you could combine special needs education with French at the University of Hamburg, it was crystal clear to me! (Translated from German)

This narrative illustrates how individual the choice of school subjects can be and how they display the individuality of the pre-service teachers.

Another example of this category focuses on the central role languages play in the curriculum (Figure 3.5). The student portrays unhappy moments with English in the 5th grade but goes through better experiences with the language in grammar school. Her interest in languages is visible in how she adds new languages to her language biography, exploiting curricular opportunities. After choosing between French and Spanish and combining them in what is a very positive account of the simultaneous learning of two languages (the heart in the middle of the drawing made of a representation of English and French), she then finds her way into Spanish, in the 10th grade. She decides to focus on English and French for the exams leading to university.

Figure 3.5 Combining two languages in a teacher education programme

The student starts by acknowledging her monolingual beginnings to explain how her language biography evolved. Interestingly, becoming multilingual is exclusively connected to language learning at school. No references to contact with the languages in non-formal contexts or abroad are made. This drawing is a good example of the centrality of the school curriculum in developing multilingual speakers. The moment of career choice is described in the following terms:

… After my Abitur, I thought a lot about what I wanted to do professionally because social work appealed to me just as much as foreign languages. Then I found the opportunity to combine my two interests in the teaching profession. That’s why I’m now studying English and French to become a teacher. (Translated from German)

The written narrative explains the choice of professional career. It was a reflective moment in which the student pondered several professional interests (social work and modern languages) until she found a way to combine French and English in a teaching programme.

The next biographic account (Figure 3.6) is again proof of enthusiasm for the teaching career born from a diversified interest in languages. The visual narrative represents a sequence of different languages and learning situations, including classic languages, and refers to an interplay of language learning in the German school curriculum and during stays abroad.

Figure 3.6 Learning multiple languages

In the written narrative, the author unveils further details: the student went through a first degree in Psychology and came into contact with several languages and dialects during a stay abroad. The student clearly engages in diversified language learning projects and with self-learning study tools (such as Duolingo).

In my first degree (psychology), I did a semester abroad in Mallorca, where I had university in Spanish and Catalan (or the Mallorquì dialect, but I also heard the Valencian dialect etc., at university). I also had a beginners’ course in Catalan. … With Italian, it has also helped me to use Duolingo, but starting from French and Spanish. Sometimes I get to practice my Italian. But I can work out poems and texts very easily. During the semester abroad, I also met French people with whom I spoke French again for the first time in two years. After a week, all my knowledge was back, and I could speak French as well as I did at school. That’s when I knew: I definitely want to do something with languages!!! (Translated from German)

Choosing the teaching path is clearly related to languages as a field (‘to do something with languages’) and not to one language in particular. The last sentence of the written narrative shows a great deal of confidence in the choice: the student refers to the precise moment the career choice took form (after reconnecting to their previous knowledge of French, ‘that’s when’), the choice itself as being self-evident (‘I knew’), and the self-assurance on the choice (‘I definitely want…!!!’).

This section makes it clear that choosing a language teacher profession is closely related to positive experiences in language learning, mainly at school. The pre-service teachers refer to their multilingual identities positively and show great interest in adding more languages to their repertoires. In this category, students seem to identify more as language(s) teachers than teachers of a single target language.

4.3 Becoming a teacher of French?

The last category features students who focus on the specific target language. It is not very frequent in terms of primary focus and is visible in utterances like ‘always loved French’. Indeed, most of the student teachers usually start referring to a teaching career, and the teaching of a particular language is rarely stressed from the beginning.

Parallel to this positive appreciation of the additional language, students also highlight their wish to be part of an ‘imagined community’ of French speakers (Anderson, 1991). In Figure 3.7, the orientation towards French is immediately visible in the fact that the drawing is accompanied by French captions only. Even English is referred to in French (‘anglais depuis 2008’ / ‘English since 2008’). Learning French is depicted through references to exchanges in France (‘échange scolaire’ / ‘school exchange’) and multiple cities in that country. Alongside references to formal learning experiences, the student also represents informal learning situations by depicting people.

Figure 3.7 Orientation towards French as a target language

The written narrative gives a slightly different account. First, French was not immediately enjoyable at school (just a moderate love!), and it was the informal contacts in France that played a central role in the maintenance of a linguistic project and a subsequent career choice.

I am studying French and Philosophy to become a teacher. I chose French because I wanted to study a language to be forced to learn it better. I had French at school, and I liked it so moderately, but I had a close relationship with France from an early age, and that’s how my love for the country and the language developed. When I was little, my parents often took me on holiday to Paris, and I played with other children in the public playgrounds, even if I couldn’t understand what they were saying. (Translated from German)

This final case shows that a target language orientation does not necessarily come from positive learning experiences at school. In this case, it seems to come from positive experiences in informal contexts. This narrative also shows that the choice to pursue the teaching of a specific target language is also linked to somewhat maximalist learning objectives (‘to learn it better’), somehow in the sense of ‘closing the gap’ in terms of the necessary competences. It should be noted that initial training is then perceived as a context in which someone is ‘forced to learn’ in order to achieve a certain level of expertise and enter the profession, implying a space of little agency and little individual freedom. The fact that a reduced number of student teachers refer to teaching a particular language as a driving force of career choice seems to imply that the choice of the teacher career prevails over the specific school subject to be taught.

5 Lessons Learnt

The analysis of a pool of visual linguistic autobiographies brings to light pre-service language teachers’ beliefs related to their career choices, showing ‘the intricate relationship of personal, linguistic, professional, and contextual dimensions, underlining the nexus of individual aspirations and contextual constraints’ (Yazan & Lindahl, 2020: 3) and/or affordances. From the perspective of social justice, the biographies presented in this study showed a nonlinear and dynamic nature of language teaching careers based mainly on two ideologies: (1) mobility and study abroad as a means to achieve linguistic (and cultural) expertise and (2) becoming multilingual as a succession of linguistic contexts (with few interactions with one another). These two ideologies might be detrimental for student teachers in two ways: firstly, mobility and study abroad are consistently connected to financial wellbeing and some previous symbolic and cultural capital; secondly, the idea of seeing individual multilingualism as the result of a succession of non-interconnected and mostly structurally-led contacts with languages at school is detrimental in recognising forms of individual multilingualism related to economic and/or forced mobility. It also might help to naturalise the idea that schooling multilingualism is superior to multilingualism anchored in migration trajectories.

To answer my research question, ‘How do German pre-service teachers represent their choice of becoming French teachers?’, it was possible to uncover three main orientations in the narratives: towards the target language (specifically French), towards the field of teaching languages (in general), and towards the teaching career (more broadly). These orientations, as we saw, are not always clearly separated but influence one another. It was possible to assert the importance of pre-service teachers’ language biographies and their contact with significant others (family members, friends, teachers) who paved the way for the choice of language teaching profession. The language biographies show that specific phases in life were retrospectively thought of as essential to make that choice: in another study, I have called those phases ‘moments of linguistic ecological transition’ (Melo-Pfeifer, 2023), as they seem to introduce changes in the linguistic lives of the individuals, either because of changes in spaces (school transitions) or interlocutors (new contacts with interlocutors of the target language). In a study by Pujolar and Gonzàles (2013), some of those moments are accompanied by ‘mudas’ (or ‘mudes’ in the English version), defined as moments of becoming a speaker of a minority language, challenging the identity construction and definition of the minority speaker. Connected to the multidimensionality of the career choice are feelings of liking and disliking particular languages, being accepted or rejected by other speakers of the language, being refrained from entering other career paths (sometimes based on evaluation of linguistic competences in the language of instruction at the university), and the will to stand out as a unique person with different linguistic preferences and career aspirations.

The narratives combine moments in which the pre-service teachers went through the school system and its curricular offers with little (or even absence of) agency, with moments in which they took their career planning and linguistic preferences into their own hands. Career choice is thus depicted neither as completely planned nor completely spontaneous but rather as the sum of positive and/or negative experiences of language learning and use, in different contexts, across the lifespan: some of these experiences influence career choices and prompt changes in professional trajectories. This empirical study contributes to understanding language teacher professional development through a multimodal identity work, meaning the conscious selection and representation of moments, spaces and actors that frame a career choice. The empirical study also allows us to understand how moments, spaces and actors interact to make that career choice possible, even if by narrowing down from a variety of professional prospects. Pre-service teachers’ drawings and reflections provide further empirical evidence to claims by Yazan and Lindahl of ‘the complex ways in which teachers learn to be and become teachers, grow as teachers, and exercise their practices in situated sociohistorical, cultural, and political contexts’ (2020: 1).

It is also possible to observe how the visual representation of becoming a (modern language) teacher is embedded in the broader narrative of becoming plurilingual, which encompasses family and linguistic background. The process of learning multiple languages at school seems to be of paramount importance not only to becoming a language teacher but a teacher of a specific target language, by selecting or narrowing down the languages or by allowing the combination of specific languages. I can then hypothesise that the school curriculum is an instrument not only for the reproduction of linguistic orders (which languages are valuable to be present in the curriculum) but also for the reproduction (and limitation) of linguistic career choices by the way it allows pre-service teachers to envision specific careers and hides others. The school curriculum has the power to shape language and social justice by promoting (or not) linguistic diversity, recognising the value of societal and individual multilingualism, and by addressing power imbalances associated with language learning and use by students – the same students that can become language teachers in the near future. In terms of pre-service language teachers’ choices, it can contribute to creating inclusive learning environments that validate their plurilingual identities, inspiring them to become (engaged) language teachers, and empowering them to engage in language-related social justice issues, which can cover the development and use of multilingual pedagogies.

To sum up, the analysis of the visual representations of career choices and pre-service teachers’ written reflections about them provides a glimpse of their emergent (subject-specific, subject-specific didactic and general pedagogical-psychological) knowledge, experiences, beliefs, values, priorities, frustrations and aspirations. It also informs us about pre-service teachers’ agency and investment in a specific professional path, meaning the unique moments in which they had to stand up for and assume a career direction. From these moments on, they consciously look for ways to improve linguistic abilities and intercultural competences, such as when students engage in mobility periods abroad (meaning clearly investing financial resources in that experience, which per se might be seen as a mechanism of exclusion). Extrapolating from the results of this study, I conclude that becoming a language teacher is a response to dynamic, diverse, complementary and even contradictory sources of identity (Yazan & Lindahl, 2020) that unfold in time and space. This assumption led me to conclude that becoming a language teacher results from intersecting identities (‘intersectionality’), some of which being present in this study (for example, a son of a language teacher) and others still needing further research: a professional, a son/daughter, a mother/father, with an ethnic origin and/or a migrant background, a religion, a gender, a disability (some of these issues are covered in Melo-Pfeifer & Tavares, 2024; Nascimento, 2019).

These conclusions open up new avenues to studying (pre-service) language teachers, in order to promote social justice and equity in teacher education programmes. One unexplored issue seems to be the analysis of intersectionality in teachers’ identity construction and professional development and the way certain identity traits (gender, origin, ethnic identification, etc.) seem to foster a teaching career or exclude certain students from it, leading to misrepresentation of some teachers’ identity traits. Another blind spot is the analysis of that intersectionality across educational contexts. From an institutional perspective, it is important to analyse which school systems and academic paths are more open for including teachers from minority groups and how they cope with a different language and professional biographies, acknowledging (or not) that a choice at a certain point in life does not make all prospective teachers the same.

References

Anderson, B. (1991) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (rev. edn). Verso.

Barone, T. and Eisner, E. (2012) Arts Based Research. Sage.

Baumert, J. and Kunter, M. (2013) The COACTIV model of teachers’ professional competence. In M. Kunter, J. Baumert, W. Blum, U. Klusmann, S. Krauss and M. Neubrand (eds) Cognitive Activation in the Mathematics Classroom and Professional Competence of Teachers (pp. 25–48). Springer.

Borg, S. (2018) Teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices. In P. Garrett and J. Cots (eds) Routledge Handbook of Language Awareness (pp. 75–91). Routledge.

Castellotti, V. and Moore, D. (2009) Dessins d’enfants et constructions plurilingues. Territoires imagés et parcours imaginés. In M. Molinié (ed.) Le Dessin Réflexif: Élément pour une Herméneutique du Sujet Plurilingue (pp. 45–85). Université de Cergy-Pontoise.

Cenoz, J. and Gorter, D. (2015) Towards a holistic approach in the study of multilingual education. In J. Cenoz and D. Gorter (eds) Multilingual Education: Between Language Learning and Translanguaging (pp. 1–15). Cambridge University Press.

De Laurentiis Brandão, A.C. (2019) Imagining second language teaching in Brazil: What stories do student teachers draw? In P. Kalaja and S. Melo-Pfeifer (eds) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words (pp. 197–213). Multilingual Matters.

De Laurentiis Brandão, A.C. (2021) First experiences of teaching EFL in metaphors. Teaching and Teacher Education 97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103214

Esin, C. and Squire, C. (2013) Visual autobiographies in East London: Narratives of still images, interpersonal exchanges, and intrapersonal dialogues. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research 14 (2), 1–21. http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1971

Kalaja, P. (2016) ‘Dreaming is believing’: The teaching of foreign languages as envisioned by student teachers. In P. Kalaja, A.M.F. Barcelos, M. Aro and M. Ruohotie-Lyhty (eds) Beliefs, Agency and Identity in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 124–146). Palgrave Macmillan.

Kalaja, P. and Melo-Pfeifer, S. (eds) (2019) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words. Multilingual Matters.

Kalaja, P., Alanen, R. and Dufva, H. (2008) Self-portraits of learners of EFL: Finnish students draw and tell. In P. Kalaja, V. Menezes and A.M.F. Barcelos (eds) Narratives of Learning and Teaching EFL (pp. 186–198). Palgrave Macmillan.

Kalaja, P., Barcelos, A.M.F. and Aro, M. (2018) Revisiting research on L2 learner beliefs: Looking back and looking forward. In P. Garrett and J.M. Cots (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Language Awareness (pp. 222–237). Routledge.

Kalaja, P., Dufva, H. and Alanen, R. (2013) Experimenting with visual narratives. In G. Barkhuizen (ed.) Narrative Research in Applied Linguistics (pp. 105–130). Cambridge University Press.

Kalaja, P. and Pitkänen-Huhta, A. (2020) Raising awareness of multilingualism as lived – in the context of teaching English as a foreign language. Language and Intercultural Communication 20 (4), 340–355. https://doi.org/10.1080/14708477.2020.1786918

Kress, G. and Van Leeuwen, T. (1996) Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. Routledge.

Leavy, P. (2015) Method Meets Art: Arts-based Research Practice. The Guilford Press.

Leavy, P. (ed.) (2019) Handbook of Arts-based Research. The Guilford Press.

Mäntylä, K. and Kalaja, P. (2019) ‘The class of my dreams’ as envisioned by student teachers of English: What is there to teach about the language? In P. Kalaja and S. Melo-Pfeifer (eds) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words (pp. 254–274). Multilingual Matters.

Melo-Pfeifer, S. (2019a) ‘Ich werde Fremdsprachen lehren, also (wer) bin ich?’ – Berufsbezogene Überzeugungen künftiger FremdsprachenlehrerInnen und Lehrer für Französisch und Spanisch in der ersten Phase der Lehrerausbildung (Bachelor). Zeitschrift für Romanische Sprachen und ihre Didaktik 13 (2), 9–33.

Melo-Pfeifer, S. (2019b) Comprendre les représentations des enseignants de langues à travers des récits visuels: La mise en images du développement professionnel des futurs enseignants de français langue étrangère. ELLE 8 (3), 587–610. https://doi.org/10.30687/ELLE/2280 6792/2019/03/005

Melo-Pfeifer, S. (2021) Exploiting foreign language student-teachers’ visual language biographies to challenge the monolingual mindset in foreign language education. International Journal of Multilingualism 18 (4), 601–618. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2021.1945067

Melo-Pfeifer, S. (2023) The dynamics of dominant language constellations: Moments of linguistic ‘ecological transition’ as portrayed by pre-service foreign language teachers. In L. Aronin and S. Melo-Pfeifer (eds) Dominant Language Constellations: Language(s) Awareness and Identity (pp. 247–261). Springer.

Melo-Pfeifer, S. and Chik, A. (2022) Multimodal linguistic biographies of prospective foreign language teachers in Germany: Reconstructing beliefs about languages and multilingual language learning in initial teacher education. International Journal of Multilingualism 19 (4), 499–522. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2020.1753748

Melo-Pfeifer, S. and Schmidt, A. (2019) Integration as portrayed in visual narratives by refugees in Germany. In P. Kalaja and S. Melo-Pfeifer (eds) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words (pp. 53–72). Multilingual Matters.

Melo-Pfeifer, S. and Tavares, V. (eds) (2024) Language Teacher Identity: Confronting Ideologies of Language, Race, and Ethnicity. Wiley Blackwell.

Mitchell, C. (2017) Visual methodologies. In R. Coe, M. Waring, L. Hedges and J. Arthur (eds) Research Methods and Methodologies in Education (2nd edn, pp. 92–99). Sage.

Molinié, M. (ed.) (2009) Le Dessin Réflexif. Élément Pour Une Herméneutique du Sujet Plurilingue. Université de Cergy-Pontoise.

Moore, D. and Castellotti, V. (2011) Dessins d’enfants, recherche qualitative, interprétation. Des poly-textes pour l’étude des imaginaires du plurilinguisme. In Ph. Blanchet and P. Chardenet (eds) Guide pour la Recherche en Didactique des Langues (pp. 118–132). Éditions des Archives Contemporaines.

Moore, E., Bradley, J. and Simpson, J. (eds) (2020) Translanguaging as Transformation: The Collaborative Construction of New Linguistic Realities. Multilingual Matters.

Nascimento, G. (2019) Racism in English language teaching? Autobiographical narratives of Black English language teachers in Brazil. Revista Brasileira de Linguística Apllicada 19 (4), 959–984. https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-6398201914813

Pérez-Peitx, M., Civera López, I. and Palou Sangrà, J. (2019) Awareness of plurilingual competence in teacher education. In P. Kalaja and S. Melo-Pfeifer (eds) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words (pp. 232–253). Multilingual Matters.

Pinho, A.S. (2019) Plurilingual education and the identity development of pre-service English language teachers: An illustrative example. In P. Kalaja and S. Melo-Pfeifer (eds) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words (pp. 214–231). Multilingual Matters.

Prasad, G. (2015) Beyond the mirror towards a plurilingual prism: Exploring the creation of plurilingual ‘identity texts’ in English and French classrooms in Toronto and Montpellier. Intercultural Education 26 (6), 497–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2015.1109775

Pujolar, J. and Gonzàlez, I. (2013) Linguistic ‘mudes’ and the de-ethnicization of language choice in Catalonia. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 16 (2), 138–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2012.720664

Rolling, J. (2013) Arts-based Research. Peter Lang.

Tavares, V. (2022) Worlds apart: Representing multilingual international students’ experiences of sociocultural adjustment through pictures. Apples – Journal of Applied Language Studies 16 (1), 45–68. https://doi.org/10.47862/apples.110026

Yazan, B. and Lindahl, K. (2020) Language teacher learning and practice as identity work. In B. Yazan and K. Lindhal (eds) Language Teacher Identity in TESOL (pp. 1–10). Routledge.

4English Remote Teaching in Drawings: Stories of Teacher Resilience in Brazilian State Schools

Ana Carolina de Laurentiis Brandão

1 Introduction

Teachers’ journeys are unstable and uncertain (Britzman, 2007; Freire, 2016; Sinner, 2013; Vinz, 1997). As Vinz highlights (1997: 139), they are marked by ‘continuous reformulations of the self’, in which teachers confront the uncertainties of the profession. English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers deal with uncertainties throughout their careers, such as teaching a language other than their mother tongue, adapting to educational guidelines, moving to new positions, and so on. However, no teacher ever expected to teach remotely in a pandemic.

Language teachers worldwide had to deal with the abrupt shift to remote teaching with little online teaching experience and all the stress this caused (see MacIntyre et al., 2020; Moorhouse & Kohnke, 2021; Yan & Wang, 2022; Yuan & Liu, 2021). Brazilian EFL teachers were no different. They had to reinvent their practices overnight, while coping with the pandemic in their personal lives. Before vaccines were finally made available in Brazil, many feared for their lives. Teaching under these conditions was a huge challenge. During the first year of the pandemic, Brazilian EFL teachers scrambled to teach remotely without prior experience (see Braga et al., 2021; Có et al., 2020; Coscarelli, 2020; Ludovico et al., 2021; Ribeiro, 2020). In the words of Ribeiro (2020: 115): ‘there was no time for planning. There was no time for crying. There was no time to rehearse replies to the rudeness of intolerant, ignorant and abrupt fathers/mothers.’ I, personally, had never taught a module completely online. Nor had the state school EFL teachers that participated in this study.

Teaching English in Brazilian state schools demands much resilience, given students’ lack of interest and the low status of the language in the curriculum (see Assis-Peterson & Cox, 2007; British Council, 2015; James & Brandão, 2019). The uncertainty of teaching remotely compounded the already existing challenges. In short, I take resilience to describe the identity-making process shaped by stories of navigating challenges. Exploring teacher resilience helps second language teacher education researchers and educators understand how teachers persist, complementing studies of attrition and burnout (Beltman et al., 2011; Gu & Day, 2007; Mansfield et al., 2012). Educational researchers have been arguing for the need to build teachers’ resilience in teacher education programmes (Day & Gu, 2014; Mansfield et al., 2012).

Taking the form of a visual narrative inquiry (Clandinin, 2013; Clandinin & Connelly, 2000), this study explores EFL teachers’ stories of remote teaching through the lens of teacher resilience. I address the following research questions:

(1)What challenges did teachers encounter?

(2)How did they respond to them?

(3)How were they shaped as professionals by this experience?

I analyse EFL teachers’ drawings depicting stories of teaching remotely in the first months of the pandemic, contextualised by recorded conversations. These drawings thus act as visual journals. They are my primary source of stories, operating as an arts-based elicitation method (see Bagnoli, 2009; Rose, 2016): drawings previously produced by teachers were followed by recorded conversations to help me understand their depicted experiences.

This chapter is organised as follows. In Section 2, I give a theoretical background of teacher resilience and review studies on remote language teaching in Brazil. In Section 3, I introduce narrative inquiry which serves as the methodology for this study. In Section 4, I present my findings based on the visual narratives of two EFL teachers. I conclude in Section 5 by discussing my findings in the context of second language teacher education and reflecting on social justice and equity issues.

2 Background to the Study

2.1 Teacher resilience as an identity-making process

Studies of resilience strive to ‘understand the ways that teachers manage and sustain their motivation and commitment in times of change’ (Gu & Day, 2007: 1302), with an emphasis on thriving over merely surviving (Beltman & Mansfield, 2018; Beltman et al., 2011; Day & Gu, 2014; Gu & Day, 2007, 2013; Mansfield et al., 2012; Naidoo & Wagner, 2020). Such studies also highlight the link between teacher resilience and self-efficacy, that is, teachers’ belief in their own ability to effectively carry out their teaching tasks and achieve desired outcomes: the self-efficacy that comes with resilience improves teaching quality, and, serving as role models, teachers may also foster the resilience of their students (Day & Gu, 2014; Gu & Day, 2007). Overall, teacher resilience involves maintaining ‘equilibrium and a sense of commitment and agency in the everyday worlds in which teachers teach’ (Gu & Day, 2013: 26).

Researchers identify teacher resilience with a capacity. Beltman (2015: 21), for example, defines teacher resilience as ‘the capacity of teachers to navigate challenges, the process of interaction between individual teachers and their professional contexts, and the outcome of a teacher experiencing commitment, growth and wellbeing’. Gu and Day (2013: 22) define it as teachers’ ‘everyday capacity to sustain their educational purposes and successfully manage the unavoidable uncertainties which are inherent in the practice of being a teacher’. Resilience depends on the teacher’s individual circumstances, as well as their social and professional relationships, and may change over time (Beltman & Mansfield, 2018; Beltman et al., 2011; Day & Gu, 2014; Gu & Day, 2007, 2013; Hiver, 2018; Kostoulas & Lämmerer, 2018; Mansfield et al., 2012; Naidoo & Wagner, 2020).

Within language teaching, James and Brandão (2019) used narrative inquiry to explore early career English teachers’ stories of resilience in Brazil and the UK, identifying and comparing the risk and protective factors shaping their experiences. The study draws on the understanding of teacher resilience as ‘a complex, idiosyncratic and cyclical construct, involving dynamic processes of interaction over time between person and environment’ (Beltman et al., 2011: 195). It highlights similarities between countries, such as the lack of institutional support (as a risk factor) and a strong sense of commitment (as a protective factor), and self-reflection and wellbeing care practices as coping strategies. It also exposes country-based particularities concerning challenges: in Brazil, teachers needed to teach subjects other than English because of the few English classes available in the curriculum, while in the UK, the lack of self-efficacy was frequently raised.

Using interviews and reflective journal data, Fan et al. (2021) followed Chinese foreign language teachers and investigated the resilience strategies they developed to cope with their challenges. The study draws on Day and Gu’s (2014) concept of teacher resilience as the dynamic, relational, developmental positive adaptation to professional uncertainties. It provides an overview of risk factors within different sources: individual, classroom, institution, and national reform policy regarding FL teaching and learning. For instance, teachers had to cope with feelings of isolation, students’ lack of interest in a foreign language, heavy workload and a sense of insecurity concerning reform policy. In response, the teachers motivated students, sought help from peers and invested in their professional learning.

Lu and Zhu (2022) interviewed Confucius Institute teachers to understand how they exercised their resilience during the pandemic. The study draws on Gu and Day’s (2013) notion of teacher resilience as the capacity to manage the unavoidable uncertainties that permeate teaching. It identifies challenges similar to many teaching professionals, such as adapting teaching materials for online classes and dealing with well-being issues. It also highlights challenges specific to Chinese teaching, such as the lack of online alternatives for teaching stroke writing and the increasingly polarised perception of the country. The teachers exercised their resilience by learning how to be resourceful in online teaching, finding opportunities to learn with peers and focusing on their professional duties. In fact, ‘co-learning, mutual support and solidarity play a significant role in enabling teacher resilience’ (Lu & Zhu, 2022: 17).

In this chapter, I adopt a narrative perspective on teacher resilience. Thus, resilience will appear in the stories that shape teachers’ identities. I draw on Clandinin and Huber’s (2005: 44) understanding of a teacher’s identity as ‘a unique embodiment of his/her stories to live by, stories shaped by the landscapes past and present in which s/he lives and works’. Resilience forms part of an identity-making process as teachers navigate challenges and uncertainties in their profession. A similar approach has been used by Clandinin et al. (2015: 1) in regard to teacher attrition (the process of leaving teaching), from which I have drawn inspiration. This chapter contributes to the existing literature not only by addressing teacher resilience from a narrative conceptual perspective, but also by exploring stories of resilience during remote teaching through visual means: it provides snapshots of Brazilian EFL teachers’ resilience in the early stages of remote teaching.

2.2 Teaching languages remotely in Brazil

As a result of the pandemic, remote teaching had to be implemented at short notice. Here, I summarise a number of studies on remote language teaching in Brazil from this period. Braga et al. (2021) used a quasi-structured questionnaire to understand how digital technologies were integrated into the practices of language teachers across Brazil. Có et al. (2020) developed a mixed-method approach to analyse language teachers’ experiences of using online tools during the pandemic. Coscarelli (2020) discussed the improvisation of remote teaching in Brazil as she reflected on desperate help requests received from teachers. Ludovico et al. (2021) carried out a longitudinal study focusing on the narratives of a private school English teacher describing her first months of remote teaching. Ribeiro (2020) discussed teachers’ struggles using online tools during remote teaching.

These studies highlight recurring issues for remote language teaching in its initial stages in Brazil. Pre-existing deficiencies in technology, skills and IT support were exacerbated. Reliable internet access was problematic for both teachers and students, particularly in the state sector. Computer equipment was likewise deficient. Thus, the IT infrastructure was not fit for this purpose. On top of this, teachers themselves were mostly inexperienced in integrating technology into their practice.

The studies also expose the entire education system’s ill-preparation to transition to online teaching when the pandemic arrived. Understandably, no prior plans had been drawn up for such an unprecedented event. Teachers reported overwhelming workloads as they tried to readapt their practice online at short notice. They had to learn to use online platforms, mostly without IT support. Remote classes were unfamiliar for teachers and students alike. Often students were simply invisible, either because of poor internet coverage or because the students switched off their cameras. Classroom interaction was therefore greatly impoverished, and many of the teaching methods that worked in face-to-face settings translated poorly online. Sitting in front of computer screens for hours on end was tiring. The abrupt uncertainty of this new situation was considerably stressful for teachers.

However, the trauma of teaching during the pandemic has potential positive outcomes, as Coscarelli (2020) highlights: teachers were afforded opportunities to experiment with technology, revisit the curriculum, and reconsider how students are grouped or evaluated. Going forward, technology in classrooms has been normalised. But how and at what cost? By exploring remote teaching through a teacher resilience lens, this chapter addresses these issues.

3 Research Methodology

This study takes the form of a narrative inquiry (Clandinin, 2013; Clandinin & Connelly, 2000). EFL teachers’ experiences of exercising their resilience are studied as storied phenomena. Narrative is both the phenomenon (the stories participants live and tell) and the methodology (a way of understanding experience). Analysis involves identifying narrative threads, ‘particular plotlines that threaded or wove over time and place’, in order to construct participants’ overall accounts (Clandinin, 2013: 132).

Narrative inquiry is ‘a way of honouring lived experience as a source of important knowledge and understanding’ (Clandinin, 2013: 17). The methodology provides a means of learning about teachers’ lives, taking into account their perspectives and perceptions and the context of their environment. A storied approach to studying teachers’ experiences recognises the value of real-life accounts provided by these professionals, answering the call for ‘a more responsive [teacher education] practice with narratives about teachers, for teachers and by teachers’ (Sinner, 2013: 9).

I explore EFL teachers’ stories of remote teaching through drawings, contextualised by recorded conversations. As I argue in Brandão (2019: 210), ‘by drawing their stories, teachers can holistically express their experiences, dilemmas and struggles, and also creatively make sense of who they are becoming’. Visual methods can also help research participants share feelings and communicate the ineffable (Bach, 2007; Kalaja et al., 2013; Weber, 2008). They are useful tools ‘to see as a participant sees’ (Riessman, 2008: 142).

3.1 Participants and their context of remote teaching

The participants of this study are two state school EFL teachers from different parts of Mato Grosso, Brazil, Laura and Tamara (not their real names), who taught remotely in 2020. Because of the pandemic, Laura’s employment status was uncertain until she was rehired in July. Tamara was tenured in any case. Both began teaching remotely in August 2020. An overview of their profiles is given in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1 Participants’ profiles

Pseudonym

Gender

Age

Teaching experience

Groups taught in 2020

Type of employment

Laura

Female

31

7 years

Sixth form (year 13) and EJA (Youth and adults education programme)

Contract

Tamara

Female

37

19 years

Secondary education (years 7–10)

Tenure

To qualify for the study, teachers must have taught English remotely between August and December 2020. My interactions with Laura and Tamara took place online because of social distancing rules. Before gathering the field texts (the narrative term for data), I met each of them via Google Meet to explain the purpose of the study and what their participation would demand. I got to know about their backgrounds and the format for their remote teaching. I told them the study was about remote teaching and avoided the word resilience so as not to bias the outcome.

As mandated by the state, all teachers had to accommodate students with three levels of internet coverage: (1) full, (2) limited, or (3) none, which determined the use of (1) Microsoft Teams, (2) WhatsApp and (3) printable materials, respectively. The state only provided handouts for the first month, whereafter teachers had to design their own. Reports were required for all the teachers’ activities. Compulsory WhatsApp groups mediated between teachers, schools and parents.

Before teaching began, the little preparation offered by the state focused on Microsoft Teams, guidelines for remote teaching, and distance education.

3.2 Field texts

The field texts include drawings and recorded conversations. They were gathered in January 2021, covering EFL teachers’ perceptions of their first months of remote teaching (August–December 2020). Excerpts presented in the Findings section have been translated into English. An overview of the process of gathering field texts is given in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2 The process of gathering field texts

Participant

Drawing sent by email

Recorded conversation via Google Meet

Laura

21 January 2021

26 January 2021

Tamara

18 January 2021

21 January 2021

I asked each participant to draw their experience of teaching English remotely by hand. The drawings were returned by email before recorded conversations took place via Google Meet, which lasted about two hours each. In our conversations, I asked each participant to (1) talk about their reactions to the announcement of remote teaching, (2) describe their drawings and the underlying experiences, and (3) explain how they were affected by those experiences. Drawings took the form of an arts-based elicitation method (see Bagnoli, 2009; Rose, 2016): they facilitated my participants’ reflection on remote teaching, and their conversations about the depicted stories and happenings shaping them.

3.3 Analysis procedures

Analysis was developed in four stages:

(1)I analysed the drawings by identifying the visual elements and noting their spatial arrangements.

(2)I analysed the transcribed conversations first by coding them narratively (in terms of people, events, tensions and shifts), and then by enumerating challenges, responses and outcomes.

(3)I related drawings to conversations, identifying narrative threads.

(4)I wrote overall narrative accounts for each participant.

I present the findings of this study in the form of overall narrative accounts, one per teacher. They are interpretative accounts, structured around narrative threads articulating challenges, responses and outcomes that shape the teachers’ depicted stories of teaching English remotely and exercising their resilience: ‘Coping with heavy workload and frustration’ and ‘Coping with physical and mental tiredness’.

4 Findings

4.1 Laura: Coping with heavy workload and frustration

Laura was relieved that her contract had been renewed after months of uncertainty, owing to pandemic disruption. However, she was scared and anxious about remote teaching. ‘How are we going to develop our work?’ she wondered.

In Figure 4.1, Laura draws her experience of teaching English remotely. It depicts both ‘the positive and negative points I encountered throughout this period’.

Figure 4.1 Laura’s drawing: A visualisation of her experience of teaching English remotely

Laura centred her drawing around a teacher, who is clearly overwhelmed with a long list of responsibilities. These read: ‘skills’, ‘planning’, ‘portfolio’, ‘handouts’, ‘teacher development’, ‘printable activities’, ‘videos’, ‘to encourage’, ‘audio messages’, ‘records’, ‘evaluation’, ‘to supervise’, ‘inequalities’, ‘to record’ and ‘forms’. Question marks surround an anonymous-looking avatar. To the right, she drew the familiar thumbs up, WIFI and WhatsApp icons. To the left, no WIFI signal and thumbs down icons, and a book of some kind.

As she explains, the thumbs up and WIFI icons represent positive experiences with technology:

I think this period made us teachers learn more, develop our technological side more, get to know more tools … So, I was able to share a lot of materials with my students: PDFs, e-books, videos … It was also an important moment for me to rethink my teaching practice. Because there, at school, we usually end up using the whiteboard more … I like taking them to the ICT lab. I like using the projector … but this is hard … the day you want to use it, it’s not available, and we have only one [English] class [per week] … sometimes, you end up wasting a lot of the class just to set up the equipment.

As an outcome of remote teaching, digital technology was finally normalised in Laura’s pedagogical practice. But there were ‘more down sides than up sides’, she admitted. Laura had to cope with a number of adversities. For example, she had to assume a large number of additional roles. This is represented by ‘the teacher with the mouth open, scared, thinking about the number of things she has to do’, depicted in the centre of her drawing. As she explains, ‘there was planning, and student portfolios to update every week. Then, suddenly, you have to record classes, send audio messages to the students. We also had to design our own handouts’. In fact, accommodating differences in students’ internet coverage made her work double:

We had students that had internet connection and students that didn’t … so I had to record classes … and upload them on the platform, and design handouts and send audio messages, get in contact via WhatsApp with students that had internet – but not enough to login to the platform … and yet we had to assist others [students], that had no internet connection … They only studied with the printable materials they picked up at school.

Essentially, Laura had to perform the role of three different teachers for the same class to accommodate the digital divide among her students. The thumbs down and no WIFI signal icons summarise this divide:

I had students that only had internet access at work. I had students that only bought the cell phone data package for downloading the materials … some had to go to their neighbours … it [technology] includes but, at the same time, excludes because we have this big social inequality among our students … if they all had access, I believe my classes would have been better.

Laura’s own internet could also let her down: ‘sometimes I couldn’t access the platform myself because of my connection … and the students would start asking on WhatsApp “won’t there be any classes today?” This made me despair’.

Throughout remote teaching Laura had to design a large quantity of materials to assist students that had no internet connection, hence the book on the left-hand side of the drawing. As she explains, this book is also a reference to a meagre four-page printing limit imposed on English: ‘The most valued subjects were Portuguese and Mathematics, they had more pages [in the monthly printable materials]’, she complains.

WhatsApp, depicted on the right-hand side of the image, also increased her workload significantly as groups proliferated, and she could not avoid teaching on the app. However, Laura could see some advantages in using WhatsApp: ‘we got closer to them … but at the same time I felt that my privacy was invaded … there were students sending messages on a Saturday at 10 pm … on Sunday, at lunch time … they got angry [when I didn’t reply to them]’. Collaboration with colleagues was also made easier through the app: ‘we, English teachers, have a WhatsApp group … we exchange a lot of materials there’. This ambivalent representation of technology illustrates that increased interaction and collaboration come at the cost of blurring the limits between the professional and personal, and going beyond the level of one’s duties.

For Laura, the experience of remote teaching was ‘frustrating’, as represented by the anonymous avatar on the right-hand side of the drawing: ‘It was very difficult for me not knowing my students … I asked them to leave the cameras on but nobody did … I didn’t get to see their faces … very few left the camera on … they didn’t interact … they didn’t ask anything’. Some students were too embarrassed to switch on their cameras, while others had connection issues. It felt to Laura like she was only talking to herself. Because of such a lack of interaction, she could not develop other skills apart from reading and writing. Although the internet facilitated contact with students during the pandemic, she nevertheless felt distant from her students given their lack of participation.

Laura’s drawing reflects the outcome of a very abrupt transition to remote teaching. As she highlights, ‘there wasn’t enough time to assimilate everything that was coming … things went on and you were there lost … I left meetings not knowing where to go … I didn’t feel prepared at all’. Despite feeling lost, Laura remained committed to her students’ learning and wellbeing:

I thought about me, my mental health, but I also thought about my students … What about those finishing sixth form [high school]? They have challenges, dreams. They want to get into a university … they also have their personal challenges … the classroom became a screen … Everything was new and novelty is scary … it was difficult for them too … I cared a lot about what I was offering them in terms of formal knowledge.

Overall, Laura’s drawing depicts stories of feeling overwhelmed by challenges, such as the lack of effective teacher development initiatives, heavy workload, and lack of resources and privacy. It also depicts stories of feeling frustrated by students’ lack of participation, social inequality and the low status of English in the curriculum.

Laura exercised her resilience, meeting these challenges in a number of ways. She developed her relationship with peers:

Sometimes, I found something that I knew would help … other teachers and sent it to the group, and vice-versa. It was a very nice exchange … We managed to establish a dialogue, a very nice collaboration … The [emotional] support I had from other teachers was very important too … we could share our feelings there in our group. There was always someone to lift you up: ‘it’s tough but we’ll overcome it’ … the same applies to our coordinators … They lifted us up.

Laura preserved her personal space by not replying to students after working hours: ‘I’m not at their disposal at any time … but we have to be careful when explaining this to the student in order not to offend them. I even put in my drawing [the verb] “to encourage” in the sense of making this boy stay’. Finally, she was aware of her limits: ‘I learned that sometimes I cannot do everything given the system, the public policies … we have to think in terms of “what am I able to do? Did I do my best given the context?” And I think I did’.

Reflecting on the outcomes of navigating the challenges faced during remote teaching, Laura explains:

I learned so much in this process … I learned I’m always developing. Obviously, I knew it before the pandemic but during these four months this became more evident to me … I learned that I can adapt to this [digital] environment, I can learn from my colleague, I can learn from my students, I can reconstruct myself as a teacher … I also learned that I miss the interaction with my students a lot … I miss knowing who this boy is, what he aims for in life, what his story is.

Adapting to remote teaching shaped Laura as a professional in different ways. It gave her some agency and experience in normalising technology in her English teaching practice. It also reassured her about the important role co-learning and support play in her own development as a teacher, and the meaning that student–teacher interaction gives to the profession.

4.2 Tamara: Coping with mental and physical tiredness

The prospect of teaching remotely worried Tamara: ‘even in face-to-face classes we can’t reach some students … how would they take it? How would I get their attention?’ She was also concerned about her lack of preparation: ‘we’ve never had any preparation for this at school … I think I’ve never felt so afraid … I’ve never had so many butterflies in my stomach’. Tamara wondered: ‘How am I going to upload content on the platform? And give classes there? … How am I going to make the kids understand what I am trying to teach?’

In Figure 4.2, Tamara draws her experience of teaching English remotely.

Figure 4.2 Tamara’s drawing: a visualisation of her experience of teaching English remotely

Tamara drew a grimacing face emoji in the centre accompanied by a thought balloon with squiggles. Underneath, a balloon over the laptop reads ‘remote classes’. On the right, there is an open book lying face down, and an English handout. There are also unhappy emojis of a sleeping girl and a crying boy. On the left, there are WIFI icons and a mobile phone with apps. There are 300 unread messages on WhatsApp.

The WIFI icons and the mobile phone represent the immediate necessity of getting WIFI from another company: ‘a better WIFI for me to work … [and] another mobile phone’. As she explains, ‘I had to install apps I didn’t use before … mine didn’t have enough storage space’. She was then quickly overwhelmed: ‘basically, it was like this: 300 messages per day … we had to join 10 different groups … initially, it didn’t cross my mind to buy a sim to have a different number’. Tamara had to find her own means to adapt to online teaching. She also had to cope with the increase in her workload due to the compulsory use of WhatsApp. Yet there were other challenges concerning technology use:

Many students had my mobile phone number, not to mention these kids’ parents. It was a great invasion of privacy because messages came at any time … sometimes, at 1am there was a student sending me messages, asking about something, asking for an explanation even after we made clear that messages could only be sent during working hours.

Tamara struggled to protect her privacy and establish limits between her professional and home life. Like Laura, she experienced the downsides of technology use. The grimacing face emoji, depicted in the centre of the drawing, illustrates her discontent. The emoji represents the ‘various thoughts about what to do, how to do it’, given that:

a million things crossed my mind … and in the beginning, I confess I didn’t know how to organise these thoughts. I couldn’t set a routine. Why? First, because we had our personal lives invaded … everybody was calling us all the time, there wasn’t that routine like on a certain day, you have a meeting, on a certain day, teacher development, on a certain day, planning … It got all mixed … and we had to write monthly reports … to prove we worked … [besides] I don’t have any vocation for being a blogger or youtuber … I struggled a lot to record classes … one of my main difficulties was to be in front of the camera recording a video explaining something without the student’s feedback.

The teaching format presented Tamara with a number of adversities. For example, the format lacked routine and she had to meet new demands. She bemoaned the limited student interaction, hence the unhappy emojis on the right-hand side of the drawing. As she explains, ‘few opened their cameras and the ones that did were like this … like the blue one, sad, unhappy because they didn’t understand anything, or like the other one, sleeping in front of the camera and hardly participating’.

Microsoft Teams, the teaching platform adopted by the state, did not help. The endlessly updating laptop in the centre of the drawing accounts for Tamara’s dissatisfaction with the platform: ‘many times it didn’t work, it updated and updated, and didn’t allow us to sign in … there were also embarrassing situations of people who didn’t belong to the groups … invading the classes and posting inappropriate content’. Besides, ‘it was difficult to develop listening activities and the speaking ones were impossible. For example, if I set three speaking activities, one got done’. The state provided few resources for online teaching, while the students struggled with their internet coverage.

The lack of involvement of parents also disappointed Tamara: ‘there were parents that didn’t help, didn’t understand our difficulties’. One parent even told her that teaching his kid was ‘not my job’. Other parents were simply unable to help: ‘some parents got in contact to say their kids wouldn’t study that year, that they wouldn’t help them with their homework because they didn’t know how to read and write’.

The teaching format posed other challenges. For instance, Tamara had to design her own materials for students who did not have internet access – despite the availability of ready-to-use materials. Tamara referenced this by having the textbook lying face down in the top right-hand side of the drawing: ‘this took away my sleep, my peace … if we have ready-to-use materials why can’t we optimise our time? … it took me a while to adapt and design my own materials’. Tamara resented this given all her effort adapting to remote teaching overnight.

Long hours in front of computer screens took its toll: ‘I got a lot of headaches, migraine, … and backache … it was physical tiredness too … not to mention the mental tiredness’. Remote teaching was both mentally and physically demanding for her.

Tamara felt ‘powerless’ and ‘incapable’ because of the teaching format. She was frustrated she could not be the English teacher she wanted to be:

resources, teacher training, professional, psychological and emotional preparation were lacking … I had to reinvent myself. Working from home isn’t easy when you live with other people … I’m much better than what I was able to offer … I’m conscious about what I’m able to offer as a teacher and this pandemic teaching somehow limited what I could offer.

Lack of support, resources and proper working conditions meant that Tamara had to exercise her agency throughout the initial stages of remote teaching. She learned by doing, reinventing herself as a teacher. Despite the limitations, she remained committed to her students’ learning throughout: ‘I helped everybody that sought my help. I replied to messages outside working hours, on the weekends, because I had students on maternal leave, for example, that only had time on weekends when their mothers could help take care of the baby’. Tamara understood that it was not easy for her students either and tried to help them in spite of the obstacles posed by remote teaching.

In summary, Tamara’s drawing depicts stories of experiencing emotional tiredness given challenges, such as heavy workload, lack of resources and teacher preparation initiatives, students’ lack of participation, invasion of privacy, the low status of English, and students’ background inequality. It also depicts stories of physical tiredness from long hours in front of screens.

Tamara exercised her resilience by responding to these challenges in different ways. For example, she accepted her limits under the circumstances:

I wouldn’t be able to solve all the problems of remote teaching … I got to this understanding. Otherwise, I would be sick like many colleagues … I thought ‘I’ll do my best … [but] I won’t try to carry the world on my back’ … it was a way of protecting myself … I’m not a wonder woman.

Tamara also sought opportunities to collaborate with colleagues and gained confidence with digital technology:

I joined a (WhatsApp) group of teachers from the state … they shared activities and we designed materials collaboratively … it wasn’t an initiative of the school … It was from a course I took on digital technologies [during the pandemic] … colleagues that were more knowledgeable with technology helped me a lot there.

Finally, Tamara took up exercise to offset long hours at the screen. Taking stock of her experience of teaching English remotely, Tamara reflects on the outcomes:

I learned it’s necessary to take care of our physical health, our mental health, take care of myself as a professional, cooperate and collaborate … it [remote teaching] made me diversify my classes, think of different activities, [and] how to work in a different way … I worked from home so I had the opportunity to see things I wouldn’t see if I wasn’t at home, this is a fact, like watching my kids grow up.

Teaching English remotely reverberated in both Tamara’s professional and personal life. She discovered the important role collaboration plays in her development as a teacher and experienced technology normalisation in her teaching practice. She learned to maintain an equilibrium between her professional and personal life.

5 Lessons Learnt

As visual journals, Laura’s and Tamara’s drawings give a holistic view of their experiences of exercising resilience while adapting to remote teaching. The drawings capture the teachers’ attempts to do their best despite feeling lost, overwhelmed and powerless. In coping with the abrupt transition to a different teaching format, Laura and Tamara struggled with excessive workloads, inadequate resources, unengaged students, and a lack of privacy. Similar challenges were identified in other studies (see Braga et al., 2021; Có et al., 2020; Coscarelli, 2020; Ludovico et al., 2021; Ribeiro, 2020).

Laura and Tamara responded to challenges by taking care of their wellbeing and seeking help from peers, as did language teachers in Braga et al.’s (2021) study. These are coping strategies adopted by participants from research on teacher resilience as well (see Fan et al., 2021; Gu & Day, 2013; James & Brandão, 2019; Lu & Zhu, 2022). Overall, they managed to keep a sense of commitment and agency, a necessary condition for teacher resilience (Gu & Day, 2013). In doing so, they did more than survive remote teaching. Consequently, the experience of teaching English remotely shaped Laura and Tamara as professionals: they learned how to diversify their teaching practices, adapt to online teaching formats, collaborate and develop strategies to enhance their wellbeing.

Teacher resilience requires, in part, self-efficacy (Gu & Day, 2007). In this sense, Laura and Tamara felt that remote teaching compromised their performance as teachers. While the sheer abruptness of the pandemic was unprecedented, pre-existing challenges were exacerbated in the language teaching landscape of Brazilian state schools. These include:

(1)The poor implementation of technology in schools, given the lack of adequate resources and teacher training (Ribeiro, 2016, 2020).

(2)The lack of consistent professional development opportunities (Celani, 2010).

(3)The low status of English in the curriculum and students’ lack of interest in the language (Assis-Peterson & Cox, 2007; British Council, 2015; James & Brandão, 2019).

Thus, remote teaching depicted in Laura’s and Tamara’s drawings tells an old story: of state school teachers and students being ‘lonely, abandoned in the task of teaching/learning English’ (Assis-Peterson & Cox, 2007: 12).

If teachers meet these challenges by exercising their resilience, then how can resilience be fostered? At the general level, teacher education initiatives that develop skills in emotional wellbeing, classroom management, collaboration and self-reflection, can promote teacher resilience (see Fernandes et al., 2020; Silva et al., 2018; Wosnitza et al., 2018). In addition, allowance should be made for the inherent uncertainty of the profession. Therefore, teachers should be given opportunities to reflect on their own practices. Drawings, and the exercise of contextualising them, can help towards this end.

While the pandemic exposed the wholly inadequate digital infrastructure, lack of digital skills, and lack of preparedness for online teaching, it also, in a baptism of fire, presented teachers with opportunities to explore the potential of digital technology. However, as this study highlights, technology alone will not make language classes better and accessible, nor teachers more resilient. Digital resources are merely tools, requiring supporting conditions and skilful teachers to use them. In adopting technology, teachers could discover fresh insights into teaching and learning. With the challenges and opportunities technology brings, teachers will be able to reflect on their resilience in this increasingly digitised world.

Laura’s and Tamara’s stories of resilience were set against the backdrop of the low status of English in the curriculum and large levels of social inequality in Brazilian state schools. They reported on limits on printer usage, illiterate parents and teenage pregnancy, for example.

For Brazilian low-income students, state schools represent the main opportunity to learn a foreign language. Also, as praised by national educational guidelines, foreign language access drives cultural and socioeconomic mobility. The digital divide, which exposes the social inequality of Brazilian society, restricted access to English during the pandemic, as this study illuminates. Interaction, which plays an important role in language classes, was compromised. This was something both Laura and Tamara resented. Besides, students had unequal learning opportunities: those without internet access could neither interact with teachers nor experience the language as a social practice. Laura and Tamara did what they could to minimise this gap with limited resources and little experience in distance/online education.

Brazil has a long way to go to promote social justice and equity through foreign language access via state education. Initiatives include providing language teacher development opportunities and giving more space to English in the curriculum by increasing the number of classes per week at state schools. English is the key to accessing education and information. By having better prepared English schoolteachers and more chances to practise the language, like those who can afford it, state school students will have this access improved. Hopefully, experiences of remote teaching during the pandemic make the call for social justice and equity even more evident and urgent.

Arts-based methods provide opportunities to examine ‘the everyday in imaginative ways that draw attention to the cruelties and contradictions inherent in neoliberal society’ (Foster, 2016: 1). Essentially, they ‘enable a diversity of experiences to be communicated in ways that disrupt “common sense” understandings and act as a reminder that there are possibilities for things to be otherwise’ (Foster, 2016: 1). They do so by providing alternative ways of seeing and experiencing the world. Through creative expression, such as visual arts, music or dance, individuals can explore and challenge dominant narratives and reveal the complexities and contradictions of everyday life. By using visual materials to examine the everyday, Laura and Tamara, for example, can develop critical consciousness and become more aware of the ways in which teaching policies shape their lives and experiences. They can also challenge dominant narratives and reimagine alternative futures.

Dedication

I dedicate this work to Danielle, one of the many victims of Covid-19 in Brazil. She was a committed doctor and, above all, my best friend – a sister I had the privilege to spend time with ever since we met at school as teenagers. Danielle taught me so much about resilience.

References

Assis-Peterson, A.A. and Cox, M.I.P. (2007) Inglês em tempos de globalização: para além de bem e mal. Calidoscópio 5 (1), 5–14.

Bach, H. (2007) Composing a visual narrative inquiry. In D.J. Clandinin (ed.) Handbook of Narrative Inquiry: Mapping a Methodology (pp. 280–307). Sage.

Bagnoli, A. (2009) Beyond the standard interview: The use of graphic elicitation and arts-based methods. Qualitative Research 9 (5), 547–570. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794109343625

Beltman, S. (2015) Teacher professional resilience: Thriving not just surviving. In N. Weatherby-Fell (ed.) Learning to Teach in the Secondary School (pp. 20–38). Cambridge University Press.

Beltman, S. and Mansfield, C.F. (2018) Resilience in education: An introduction. In C. Wosnitza, F. Peixoto, S. Beltman and C.F. Mansfield (eds) Resilience in Education: Concepts, Contexts and Connections (pp. 3–9). Springer.

Beltman, S., Mansfield, C.F. and Price, A. (2011) Thriving not just surviving: A review of research on teacher resilience. Educational Research Review 6 (3), 185–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2011.09.001

Braga, J., Martins, A.C.S. and Racilan, M. (2021) The elephant in the (class)room: Emergency remote teaching in an ecological perspective. Revista Brasileira de Linguística Aplicada 21 (4), 1071–1101. https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-6398202117890

Brandão, A.C.L. (2019) Imagining second language teaching in Brazil: What stories do student teachers draw? In P. Kalaja and S. Melo-Pfeifer (eds) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words (pp. 197–213). Multilingual Matters.

British Council (2015) O Ensino de inglês na escola pública brasileira. São Paulo, SP: British Council. Retrieved from: https://www.britishcouncil.org.br/sites/default/files/estudo_oensinodoinglesnaeducacaopublicabrasileira.pdf (accessed 12 July 2022).

Britzman, D.P. (2007) Teacher education as uneven development: Toward a psychology of uncertainty. International Journal of Leadership in Education 10 (1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603120600934079

Celani, M.A.A. (2010) Perguntas ainda sem respostas na formação de professores de línguas. In T. Gimenez and M.C.G. Monteiro (eds) Formação De Professores De Línguas Na América Latina e Transformação Social (pp. 57–67). Pontes Editores.

Clandinin, D.J. (2013) Engaging in Narrative Inquiry. Routledge.

Clandinin, D.J. and Connelly, F.M. (2000) Narrative Inquiry: Experience and Story in Qualitative Research. Jossey-Bass.

Clandinin, D.J. and Huber, M. (2005) Shifting stories to live by: Interweaving the personal and professional in teachers’ lives. In D. Beijaard, P.C. Meijer, G. Morine-Dershimer and H. Tillema (eds) Teacher Professional Development in Changing Conditions (pp. 43–59). Springer.

Clandinin, D.J., Long, J., Schaefer, L., Downey, C.A., Steeves, P., Pinnegar, E., Robblee, S.M. and Wnuk, S. (2015) Early career teacher attrition: Intentions of teachers beginning. Teaching Education 26 (1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2014.996746

Có, E.P., Amorim, G.B. and Finardi, K.R. (2020) Ensino de línguas em tempos de pandemia: Experiências com tecnologias em ambientes virtuais. Revista Docência e Cibercultura 4 (3), 112–140. https://doi.org/10.12957/redoc.2020.53173

Coscarelli, C.V. (2020) Ensino de línguas: Surtos durante a pandemia. In A.E. Ribeiro and P.M.M. Vecchio (eds) Tecnologias Digitais e Escola: Reflexões no Projeto Aula Aberta Durante a Pandemia (pp. 15–20). Parábola Editorial.

Day, C. and Gu, Q. (2014) Resilient Teachers, Resilient Schools: Building and Sustaining Quality in Testing Times. Routledge.

Fan, L., Ma, F., Liu, Y.M., Liu, T., Guo, L. and Wang, L.N. (2021) Risk factors and resilience strategies: Voices from Chinese novice foreign language teachers. Frontiers in Education 5, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.565722

Fernandes, L., Gouveia, M.J., Silva, J.C. and Peixoto, F. (2020) ‘Positive education’: A professional learning programme to foster teachers’ resilience and well-being. In C.F. Mansfield (ed.) Cultivating Teacher Resilience: International Approaches, Applications and Impact (pp. 103–124). Springer.

Foster, V. (2016) Collaborative Arts-based Research for Social Justice. Routledge.

Freire, P. (2016) Pedagogia da Autonomia: Saberes Necessários à Prática Educativa (53rd edn). Paz e Terra.

Gu, Q. and Day, C. (2007) Teachers’ resilience: A necessary condition for effectiveness. Teaching and Teacher Education 23 (8), 1302–1316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.06.006

Gu, Q. and Day, C. (2013) Challenges to teacher resilience: Conditions count. British Educational Research Journal 39 (1), 22–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411926.2011.623152

Hiver, P. (2018) Teachstrong: The power of teacher resilience for second language practitioners. In S. Mercer and A. Kostoulas (eds) Language Teacher Psychology (pp. 231–246). Multilingual Matters.

James, G. and Brandão, A.C.L. (2019) ELT Teachers’ Stories of Resilience. British Council ELT Research Papers.

Kalaja, P., Dufva, H. and Alanen, R. (2013) Experimenting with visual narratives. In G. Barkhuizen (ed.) Narrative Research in Applied Linguistics (pp. 105–131). Cambridge University Press.

Kostoulas, A. and Lämmerer, A. (2018) Making the transition into teacher education: Resilience as a process of growth. In S. Mercer and A. Kostoulas (eds) Language Teacher Psychology (pp. 247–263). Multilingual Matters.

Lu, X. and Zhu, H. (2022) Teacher resilience and triple crises: Confucius Institute teachers’ lived experiences during the Covid-19 pandemic. Applied Linguistics Review 15 (1). https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2021-0193

Ludovico, F.M., Nunes, M.B. and Barcellos, P.S.C.C. (2021) Trajetórias de uma professora de língua inglesa em ensino remoto emergencial. Revista Brasileira de Linguística Aplicada 21 (4), 1103–1134. https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-6398202117884

MacIntyre, P.D., Gregersen, T. and Mercer, S. (2020) Language teachers’ coping strategies during the Covid-19 conversion to online teaching: Correlations with stress, wellbeing and negative emotions. System 94, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102352

Mansfield, C.F., Beltman, S., Price, A. and McConney, A. (2012) ‘Don’t sweat the small stuff’: Understanding teacher resilience at the chalkface. Teaching and Teacher Education 28 (3), 357–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.11.001

Moorhouse, B.L. and Kohnke, L. (2021) Responses of the English-language-teaching community to the COVID-19 pandemic. RELC Journal 52 (3), 359–378. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882211053052

Naidoo, L. and Wagner, S. (2020) Thriving, not just surviving: The impact of teacher mentors on pre-service teachers in disadvantaged school contexts. Teaching and Teacher Education 96, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103185

Ribeiro, A.E. (2016) Tecnologia digital e ensino: Breve histórico e seis elementos para a ação. Revista Linguagem & Ensino 19 (2), 91–111. https://doi.org/10.15210/rle.v19i2.15260

Ribeiro, A.E. (2020) Tudo o que fingimos (não) saber sobre tecnologias e educação. In A.E. Ribeiro and P.M.M. Vecchio (eds) Tecnologias Digitais e Escola: Reflexões no Projeto Aula Aberta Durante a Pandemia (pp. 111–117). Parábola Editorial.

Riessman, C.K. (2008) Narrative Methods for the Human Sciences. Sage.

Rose, G. (2016) Visual Methodologies: An Introduction to Researching with Visual Materials (4th edn). Sage.

Silva, J.C., Pipa, J., Renner, C., O’Donnell, M. and Cefai, C. (2018) Enhancing teacher resilience through face-to-face training: Insights from the ENTREE project. In C. Wosnitza, F. Peixoto, S. Beltman and C.F. Mansfield (eds) Resilience in Education: Concepts, Contexts and Connections (pp. 255–274). Springer.

Sinner, A. (2013) Unfolding the Unexpectedness of Uncertainty: Creative Nonfiction and the Lives of Becoming Teachers. Sense Publishers.

Vinz, R. (1997) Capturing a moving form: ‘Becoming’ as teachers. English Education 29 (2), 137–146.

Weber, S. (2008) Using visual images in research. In J.G. Knowles and A.L. Cole (eds) Handbook of the Arts in Qualitative Research: Perspectives, Methodologies, Examples, and Issues (pp. 41–53). Sage.

Wosnitza, M., Delzepich, R., Schwarze, J., O’Donnell, M., Faust, V. and Camilleri, V. (2018) Enhancing teacher resilience: From self-reflection to professional development. In C. Wosnitza, F. Peixoto, S. Beltman and C.F. Mansfield (eds) Resilience in Education: Concepts, Contexts and Connections (pp. 275–288). Springer.

Yan, C. and Wang, L. (2022) Experienced EFL teachers switching to online teaching: A case study from China. System 105, 102717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102717

Yuan, K. and Liu, S. (2021) Understanding EFL instructor identity changes during online teaching in the COVID-19 pandemic: A case study in China. RELC Journal. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882211066622

Part 2

Describing the Present of Multilingual Pedagogies

5Language Ideologies in Primary School Pupils’ Drawings of the Finnish Language

Heidi Niemelä

1 Introduction

This chapter is motivated by the multilingual turn in Finnish society and education.1 The society has been perceived as monocultural and monolingual, and the aims of the Finnish educational system have traditionally been quite monolingual and uniform (e.g. Paunonen, 2020). The constantly increasing multilingualism challenges the old ways of thinking and highlights education as the sphere in which language ideologies are circulated (e.g. Gal, 2006: 20). Language ideologies influence how different languages, variations, and language use are perceived (e.g. Gal, 2006; Piller, 2015; Rosa & Burdick, 2017), and, circulating from education, they have an effect on all society and the realisation of social justice (see Introduction to this volume).

In this chapter, I focus on the language ideologies on Finnish since it is the de facto majority language of the country and the medium of instruction in all Finnish-medium schools.2 Finnish is also the mutual language of everyday school life despite the pupils’ plurilingualism (individual multilingualism). In this context, the ideologies on Finnish determine who is considered Finnish speaking and perhaps even a Finn and what kind of language is regarded as proper. These are also questions of social justice (for the definitions, see Introduction to this volume): access to Finnish or becoming part of the speaker group depends on the language ideological structures of the Finnish-speaking majority. Social justice sheds light on the linguistic hierarchies and biases which prevail in society at large but also in educational settings (see Introduction to this volume). As Avineri et al. (2019) note, education is a process that is basically mediated through language that embeds all the interests of larger social structures, being maintained by ideological assumptions.

The National Core Curriculum for Basic Education by the Finnish National Agency of Education (2014) has promoted a language-aware perspective in all education since 2016. The curriculum takes multilingualism as a basic quality of every individual. Still, research shows that, in the everyday reality of schools, the demand for language awareness often collides with monolingual ideologies (Alisaari et al., 2019). From the point of view of this multilingual objective, it is important to observe how the dominant language of the society and education is represented in schools, in what kind of discourses it is present, and what kind of ideologies around it are circulated. Understanding ideologies on Finnish enables advancing social justice in education and the rest of society. Despite the criticism of the concept of social justice by Pennycook (2021: 53; see also Introduction to this volume), I consider it a valuable companion to the study of language ideology, since the latter aims at understanding language related inequalities in society and the former to highlight group language rights, creating together a natural continuum.

In the study reported in this chapter, I observed the prevailing and circulating language discourses and ideologies on the Finnish language in the context of Finnish primary education. The data for this study consisted of drawings of ‘the Finnish language’ produced by primary school pupils in two different parts of Finland. The following research questions were addressed in this study: (1) what kind of language discourses are constructed in the drawings, and (2) what kind of ideologies materialise in the discourses? The study aimed to broaden the understanding of the reproduction and circulation of language ideologies regarding the Finnish language in Finnish primary education.3 Section 2 provides the social, theoretical and methodological background of the study. Section 3 introduces the participants and explains the data collection and analysis, and Section 4 presents the findings. Section 5 summarises the lessons learnt.

2 Background to the Study

Finland has two national languages, Finnish and Swedish, of which Finnish is the de facto language of the majority (Salo, 2012; Saukkonen, 2012; Ihalainen et al., 2019). In addition, the speakers of the official minority languages of Northern, Inari and Skolt Sámi have law-secured rights to maintain their language and culture. The rights of the users of the Finnish and Finland-Swedish sign languages, as well as the Romani language, are decreed by law (Institute for the Languages of Finland, n.d.). The number of speakers of foreign languages has been increasing in Finland since the 1990s due to growing immigration (Paunonen, 2020). At the end of 2021, more than 458,000 inhabitants living in Finland registered a foreign language as their first language,4 which is 8.3% of the total population (Statistics Finland, 2021).

However, Finland could be categorised as a country of parallel monolingualism, despite its official bilingualism. Most Finns are quite monolingual, and the official bilingualism in Finland is not straightforward. Bilingualism has a history of a power struggle between Finnish and Swedish since the 19th century because it has been in contradiction with the ideal of a monolingual nation-state (Salo, 2012; Saukkonen, 2012; Ihalainen et al., 2019; Paunonen, 2020). Like many other countries, Finland is also affected by the ideology of one nation and one language, in spite of the bilingual context. The ideologies are alive on both sides: Finnish nationality can be tightly associated with only the Finnish language, or it can be seen as something shared between the two languages. The increase in immigration during the past 30 years has highlighted the connection between language and nationality in a new way. Despite naturalisation or official policies, some people can still be considered more Finnish than others. In general, the Finnish language and minority policies provide a good example of a case where there is a large gap between the legal and symbolic constructions of the nation (Saukkonen, 2012: 9–11).

Language discourse and language ideology are the key terms of this study. The concept of discourse carries many meanings, but in this study, discourse is understood as the social actions of language use. Discourses are different ways of constructing knowledge and social practice. Not only do discourses reflect and represent social relations and entities, but they also construct and ‘constitute’ them (Fairclough, 1992: 3). As meaningful symbolic behaviour (Blommaert, 2005: 2), discourses stem from what people have said, heard, seen and written about languages before (Johnstone, 2018: 2). Discourses are both the source and the knowledge as well as the result of it: generalisations about language are based on the discourses people participate in, and they also apply their knowledge and, in this way, interpret and create new discourses (Johnstone, 2018: 2).

Language ideologies are thoughts, beliefs and feelings about and/or values on language. They are language users’ systems of sociocultural values and beliefs (Kalliokoski, 1996), in which language and social structures are also related in a moral and political sense (Irvine, 1989: 255). Due to this, language ideologies are intertwined with power. Among other dimensions, language ideologies are always multiple and might even be contradictory, and the members of a society have varying awareness of the prevailing language ideologies (Kroskrity, 2000).

Language ideologies and language discourses can be considered intertwined. In addition to being ways of describing reality, discourses also shape the way reality is interpreted (Johnstone, 2018), and the power of discourses is based on their ability to produce, renew, naturalise and change the understanding of reality and social practice (Fairclough, 1992: 67). In this way, ideologies materialise in discourses, and discourses renew language ideologies (Blommaert & Verschueren, 1998: 26; Blommaert, 2005: 26).

3 Research Methodology

For the analysis of visual data in this study, I combined two types of discourse analysis: multimodal discourse analysis (MMDA) and critical discourse analysis (CDA). MMDA interprets text broadly as a base for immaterial discourses to appear (Kress, 2012: 35–36). In MMDA, the text and the parts that create coherence can be multiple, e.g. gestures, speech or images. Text is understood as a multimodal semiotic entity that gets its coherence from the social coherence of the environment. MMDA aims to describe and analyse all kinds of texts, semiotic entities, what is going on in the text, and what kind of power is being used.

CDA is also interested in language and power, especially in the inequality caused by the prevailing discourses (Fairclough, 1992, 2012). CDA observes the meanings produced by discourses and how they relate to other social elements, such as social structures, courses of action, and events (Fairclough, 2012: 11). I utilise CDA alongside MMDA since CDA offers a great tool to analyse such layers of power that otherwise might not be reached. CDA is traditionally very interested in the examination of power and ideology (Blommaert, 2005: 27).

Arts-based methodologies offer a medium for expressing one’s experiences, emotions and histories through visual art (as noted in Introduction to this volume). Visual and multimodal data offer an excellent premise for studying language discourses and language ideologies. Drawing is a way of describing the world, its structures, and phenomena (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 1996), and especially drawings produced in different institutions represent the ideologies and prevailing discourses of the institution in question. Different institutions, especially educational institutions, are considered places where social relations, representations and identities are reproduced and circulated (Blommaert, 2005: 26; see also Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990). Language ideologies also belong to the same sphere of reproduction and circulation (e.g. Silverstein, 1998: 138; Gal, 2006: 20), which makes education one of the key contexts for understanding social justice (and injustice) and for pursuing social change (Avineri et al., 2019; see also Introduction to this volume).

Visual data, especially drawings, have previously been used in Finland to study Finnish, mainly in the context of learners of Finnish with an immigrant background (e.g. Scotson, 2018, 2019, 2020). The data of the study reported in this chapter differ from the previous studies in the abstractness of the drawing task: when one studies the language identity or language learning of an individual, the premise of the visual output is the individual. In this study, the premise, however, is an abstract concept – a language.

3.1 Data collection

The participants of this study are primary school pupils from Finnish-medium schools in two different areas in Finland: Oulu is a city of approximately 200,000 inhabitants in North Ostrobothnia, and Helsinki, the capital, is a city of more than 600,000 inhabitants in southern Finland. The distance between the two areas is approximately 600 km. There are also great differences in urbanity and demography between these two areas: the Oulu region is more rural and less multilingual and multicultural than Helsinki (City of Helsinki, 2021: 11; Statistics Finland, 2018). In the Oulu region, data were gathered from two different places: a school in the city area, which has students from different social backgrounds but mainly from Finnish-speaking homes with a few exceptions (Oulu1 and Oulu2), and a school in a small neighbouring municipality, which is a rural area and has pupils from different social backgrounds and mainly Finnish-speaking homes (Lampela).5 In Helsinki, data were gathered from two schools: one in North Helsinki (NH), in which the student body is comparable to the one in the two Oulu groups, and the other in East Helsinki (EH),6 which is located in an area that has a lower income and education level than the city on average (Helsinki by District, 2019).7

At the time of data collection, the participants were between 11 and 13 years old. Most participants came from Finnish-speaking homes, but the East Helsinki group was a clear exception: in the group, the participants spoke 14 different home languages, including Finnish. In addition, almost all participants reported proficiency in languages other than their home language. The participants were both boys and girls, but gender was not considered a variable for the analysis. The participant groups and their languages are summarised in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1 The participant groups and their languages

Oulu region

2 groups from the city (21)

1 group from Lampela (19)

Mostly Finnish speaking + 5 other home languages

Language proficiency in 7 languages other than the reported home languages

Helsinki

2 groups from North Helsinki (41)

1 group from East Helsinki (21)

North: Mostly Finnish speaking + 6 other home languages East: 14 different home languages (including Finnish)

North: Language proficiency in 4 languages other than the reported home languages East: Language proficiency in 10 languages other than the reported home languages

The data were collected in the Oulu region in autumn 2016 and in Helsinki in spring 2017. Each data collection had the same steps. The pupils wrote their background information on paper (first name, age, living abroad, home language, knowledge of other languages).8 After the background information, I asked them to draw ‘the Finnish language’ on the other side of the same sheet of paper. The task was always challenging and abstract for the young participants, and for that reason, I used supporting questions to help them get started with their drawings. The following were the prompt questions: Where is Finnish spoken? Who speaks Finnish? What kind of language is Finnish, e.g. what does it sound like? What have you learned about the Finnish language in school? Is the Finnish language important to you or not? Any further comments? The use of the prompt questions was, of course, voluntary. During data collection, I also emphasised that the drawing task is not a test or a drawing competition and that all sorts of images of the Finnish language are welcome. All the groups drew on clean A4 sheets of paper with coloured crayons and marker pens.

The data gathered consisted of different visual and textual elements. They were multiple in expression, but certain shared ways of illustrating and describing Finnish existed (for a more detailed analysis of the drawings, see Niemelä, 20209). In the following section, I move on to the analysis.

3.2 Data analysis

The analysis had two phases. I used MMDA to categorise the drawings as entities. This was based on the dominant elements in each drawing. After this, I applied the typical three-phase way of progressing in CDA (Blommaert, 2005: 29–30; Fairclough, 1992: 73–91):

(1)Discourse-as-text: The visual and textual choices of the drawings are systematically described and analysed.

(2)Discourse-as-discursive-practice: Interpretation of the categories and structures that the participants offer and analysis of the discourses found in the drawings as something that is produced, circulated, distributed, and consumed in society.

(3)Discourse-as-social-practice: The ideological effects and language ideological process behind the discourses are brought forward and explained (Blommaert, 2005: 29–30). For the explanations, the processes of iconisation, erasure and axes of differentiation are used (Irvine & Gal, 2000; Gal, 2016).

The phases of the analysis presented above led to answering the research questions of this study: (1) what kind of language discourses are constructed in the drawings, and (2) what kind of ideologies materialise in the discourses?

Section 3.2.1 describes the process of the visual analysis, which led to the categorisation of the drawings. In the sections that follow, I further examine the visual elements of the different categories and their texts.

3.2.1 Categorisation of the drawings

I analysed a total of 102 drawings applying MMDA. In MMDA, all modes of text and cohesion affect the analysis, which means that a text is analysed as a semiotic entity (Kress, 2012). Therefore, all the elements in the drawings, the synergy and the ‘message’ influenced the categorisation process.

The drawings were categorised according to the appearing elements and texts. However, since the visual was the actual target of the data collection, the drawn elements had more importance in this process, and the texts later underwent a similar classification of their own . The categorisation process was qualitative and data-driven, and it was implemented several times to find the proper category for each drawing. The categories were not determined in advance (Eskola & Suoranta, 2014; Tuomi & Sarajärvi, 2018), and they are presented in Table 5.2.

Table 5.2 The data divided into categories

Category

Oulu1 (10)

Oulu2 (11)

Lampela (19)

NH (41)

EH (21)

Total (102)

Finland and Finns

5

4

12

21

–

42

The Finnish flag and blue-cross figures

5

6

1

15

3

29

Everyday surroundings

–

–

2

–

12

14

Human being

1

–

2

6

–

9

The Finnish flag in nature

–

–

–

1

4

5

Sports

–

–

–

–

2

2

The drawings were divided into six different categories in this phase of the analysis. It is noteworthy that, besides the fact that the categories are different in size, the drawings by the participant groups do not divide evenly between different categories. There was most variation between the East Helsinki and the other groups, in which most participants were Finnish speaking. In these groups, the drawings consisted mainly of elements such as the map of Finland, the Finnish flag, and Finns, whereas the East Helsinki group, the most multilingual participant group, focused on illustrating their everyday surroundings.

In the following sections, I present the three largest categories and the visual and textual elements they consist of.

3.2.2 Finland and Finns

The largest of the categories was Finland and Finns, covering almost half of the data with 42 drawings. The category consisted of drawings that focused on the map of Finland, Finnish people, or Finnishness (for details, see Table 5.2). The drawings came from all other participant groups but the East Helsinki group. Figures 5.1–5.3 are examples of this category.

Figure 5.1 Eemeli, Oulu1

Figure 5.2 Henna, Oulu1

Figure 5.3 Elsa, Lampela

In this category, the map of Finland and different descriptions of Finns were often presented together. The texts in the drawings were also quite well in line with the visual representation and complemented it. The texts in this category went through a classification of their own and are reported in Table 5.3.

Table 5.3 Texts regarding drawings in the category of Finland and Finns

Topic

Examples

The Finnish language, the speakers of Finnish, where Finnish is spoken

I am a Finn and I speak Finnish (Minä olen suomalainen ja puhun suomea) – Ilpo, Lampela

Finnish is easy for us, but it is difficult for others to learn (suomi on meille helppo kieli mutta muiden on vaikea oppia sitä) – Asmo, Oulu2

The Finnish language is important for Finns but not for foreigners (suomen kieli on suomalaisille tärkeä, mutta ei ulkomaalaisille) – Jemina, Lampela

Descriptions of Finnish

In my opinion, Finnish is important because it is a quite fine and rare language (minun mielestä suomi on tärkeää koska se on aika hieno ja harvinainen kieli) – Eemeli, Oulu1

Mentions of Finland

Finland is in the north and it is cold in Finland (suomi on pohjoisessa ja suomessa on kylmä) – Ville, Oulu 1

The variation in spoken language

Are you from Oulu? (ookkonää oulusta?10) – Silja, NH

I speak the dialect of Lappeenranta (Puhun Lappeenrannan murretta) – Anton, Lampela

Language and emotions

Finnish is important to me (suomi on minulle tärkeä) – Asmo, Oulu2

School

I learned to pronounce the words (opin lausumaan sanat) – Elmo, NH

Mikael Agricola11 – Hertta, NH

The structures of language

Compound words and sentences (yhdyssanat ja lauseet) – Anton, Lampela

Cultural characteristics

Sauna – Juuso, NH

Finland is a country of a thousand lakes (suomi on tuhansien järvien maa) – Mette, Oulu2

Most texts in this category belonged to the first topic, The Finnish language, the speakers of Finnish, where Finnish is spoken. The second in size is the topic Descriptions of Finnish, and the rest were notably smaller in size.

3.2.3 The Finnish flag and blue-cross figures

This category consisted of 29 drawings in which the Finnish flag or blue-cross figures in some other shapes were dominant in the visual representation (for details, see Table 5.2). In most of the drawings, there was more than just one flag, and the flag appeared together with such figures and elements as hearts, people, maps, speech bubbles, and saunas.12 Also, blue-cross figures were used to illustrate hearts, speech bubbles, tongues, and body silhouettes. Drawings came from all participant groups. Figures 5.4–5.9 are examples of this category.

Figure 5.4 Aleksiina, Oulu2

Figure 5.5 Arttu, Oulu2

Figure 5.6 Säde, North Helsinki

Figure 5.7 Oiva, Oulu2

Figure 5.8 Juuli, North Helsinki

Figure 5.9 Nea, North Helsinki

This category included less text than the previous one. The results of the categorisation are summarised in Table 5.4.

Table 5.4 Texts regarding drawings in the category of the Finnish flag and blue-cross figures

Topic

Examples

The Finnish language, the speakers of Finnish, where Finnish is spoken

Finns speak Finnish (suomalaiset puhuvat suomea) – Henni, Oulu1

People speak Finnish, but there are people in Finland who do not speak Finnish (Ihmiset puhuvat suomea, mutta Suomessa on ihmisiä myös jotka eivät puhu) – Jemina, Oulu2

Finnish is spoken in Finland (Suomea puhutaan Suomessa) – Henni, Oulu1

Descriptions of Finnish

Finnish is one of the most difficult languages in the world (Suomi on yksi maailman vaikeimmista kielistä) – Arttu, Oulu2

Finnish is a good language; the Finnish language is important (Suomi on hyvä kieli; Suomen kieli on tärkeä) – Elvi, Lampela

Finnish is nice and easy (suomen kieli on kivaa ja helppoa) – Henni, Oulu1

The Finnish language is difficult!!!!! (Suomen kieli on vaikee!!!!!) – Hewdem, EH

Language and emotions

Finnish is important to me (Suomi on minulle rakas kieli) – Arttu, Oulu2

Cultural characteristics

Ice hockey (Jääkiekko) – Hasan, EH

Independence (Itsenäisyys) – Hatice, EH

Sauli Niinistö (the president of Finland) – Hewdem, EH

Places

Finland (Suomi) – Hatice, EH

Oh Our Land Finland Fatherland (‘Oi maamme Suomi, synnyinmaa…’)13
– Nea, NH

Amusement parks and grocery stores (Särkäniemi, Lintsi K-market, Prisma, Tokmanni) – Hewdem, EH

School

I have learned many things (Olen oppinut monia asioita) – Matin, Oulu2

Many of the topics in this category were identical to the ones in the category of Finland and Finns. In addition to the texts presented in Table 5.4, there were some greetings and texts that were directed to the researcher or texts that were without a clear topic.

3.2.4 Everyday surroundings

The category of everyday surroundings consisted of 14 different drawings, where a scenery of everyday surroundings or a collage of elements of everyday surroundings were depicted. The Finnish flag appeared very frequently in the drawings, but since the other elements created another kind of dominance, the flag was not a determining detail in the visual analysis. However, as it often appeared in the centre of the drawing, it seemed to highlight the presence of the language (Niemelä, 2020).

The participants whose drawings were classified into this category came from the East Helsinki and Lampela groups. This was interesting because these two groups were most apart from each other geographically. The participants of the East Helsinki group lived in an urban multicultural and multilingual neighbourhood. In contrast, the participants of the Lampela group lived in the countryside in quite a small municipality and in a mostly monolingual and monocultural environment. Figures 5.10–5.13 are examples of this category.

Figure 5.10 Annukka, East Helsinki

Figure 5.11 Ayaan, East Helsinki

Figure 5.12 Mehera, East Helsinki

Figure 5.13 Olavi, Lampela

The texts in the category of everyday surroundings are summarised in Table 5.5.

Table 5.5 Texts of drawings in the category of everyday surroundings

Topic

Example

Places

Finland (Suomi) – Annukka, EH

Neighbourhood in East Helsinki (Vuosaari) – Ayaan, EH

Shop (kauppa) – Amanda, EH

Library (kirjasto) – Mehera, EH

Metro – Harita, EH

Food and drinks

Beer (kalja) – Akhmad, EH

Rye bread (ruisleipä), Omar karkki (local butterscotch) – Ayaan, EH

Descriptions of Finnish

The Finnish language is nice; the Finnish language sounds nice (suomen kieli on mukavaa; suomen kieli on kivan kuuloista) – Olavi, Lampela

The Finnish language, the speakers of Finnish, where Finnish is spoken

It is good to know Finnish; Finnish is spoken in places where one meets people (suomea on hyvä osata puhua; suomea puhutaan sellaisissa paikoissa joissa tavataan ihmisiä) – Olavi, Lampela

Cultural characteristics

Fazer, sauna – Mehena, EH

Many of the topics were somewhat similar to the ones in the categories of Finland and Finns and the Finnish flag and blue-cross figures. However, there were also some differences. Specifically, the naming of places other than Finland is worth a closer look. Instead of naming Finland in their drawings, the multilingual participants of multi-ethnic East Helsinki named their neighbourhoods. In addition, they mentioned some Finnish food items and drinks, including a known brand, Fazer, which manufactures different food products.

In the following sections, I take a closer look at the similarities and differences in the three categories presented above.

3.3 Similarities and differences

In this section, I will analyse the similar and different ways of describing Finnish in the categories of Finland and Finns, the Finnish flag and blues-cross figures and everyday surroundings. In Section 3.3.1, I will present the similarities in the ways of describing the speakers of the Finnish and where Finnish is spoken, and in Section 3.3.2, I will present the participants’ descriptions of Finnish, the language. In Section 3.3.3, I will provide the differences in illustrating and describing Finnish.

3.3.1 The speakers of Finnish and where Finnish is spoken

In this section, I present the similarities in the ways of describing the speakers of Finnish and where Finnish is spoken. In their drawings, the participants described Finnish mainly as a language spoken in Finland by Finns. The structures for expressing this varied. The participants used:

•the passive form (Finnish is spoken in Finland) in a declaratory way

•the active form (Finns speak Finnish), which presented Finns as a united group

•the first-person singular or first-person plural (I speak Finnish, we speak Finnish). These appeared most frequently in speech bubbles, which were the voices of the Finnish-speaking people in the drawings.

Consider the examples in Table 5.6.

Table 5.6 Participants’ descriptions of speakers of Finnish and where Finnish is spoken

Example (originally in Finnish)

Participant and group

Finnish is spoken only in Finland

Hely, Oulu2

Finnish is spoken in the whole country, all around Finland

Jemina, Lampela

People speak Finnish

Jimi, Lampela

People speak Finnish, but there are people in Finland who do not speak Finnish

Elina, Oulu2

We speak Finnish

Ellen, Lampela

I am a Finn and I speak Finnish

Ilpo, Lampela

As the examples in Table 5.6 show, Finnish was largely defined as the language of Finns spoken in Finland. However, some participants brought up the possibility that anyone anywhere could speak Finnish. Consider the examples in Table 5.7.

Table 5.7 Participants’ descriptions on Finnish spoken by anyone anywhere

Example (originally in Finnish)

Participant and group

Finnish is spoken around the world always a bit somewhere

Asmo, Oulu2

Finnish is spoken around Finland/the world

Elina, Oulu2

One cannot really define who speaks Finnish. Someone in Africa can speak Finnish at this very moment; Finnish is spoken in Finland and wherever if someone has moved or studied

Noora, Oulu2

Finnish is spoken in places where one meets people

Olavi, Lampela

The examples in Table 5.7 show the different levels of language awareness among the participants: in these kinds of statements, the language is no longer fixed in nationality or a certain place (country), but it is instead constructed as part of an individual’s repertoire and a tool of interaction.

Interestingly, the texts in the Finland and Finns category also described Finns and foreigners and their different relations to Finnish. However, being Finnish or being a foreigner was not mentioned in the drawing task assigned to the participants. The fact that being Finnish arises from the data is not surprising in the context of a national language, and Finnishness was very strongly present in the data. However, including foreigners in the representations of Finnish was motivated by something other than the drawing task. The participants might have heard or participated in conversations considering the topic, e.g. in school, home, or media. Consider the examples in Table 5.8.

Table 5.8 Participants’ descriptions of foreigners and Finnish in the Finland and Finns category

Example (originally in Finnish)

Participant and group

It is difficult for many foreigners to learn to speak Finnish

Eemeli, Oulu1

Finnish is an easy language for us but difficult for others to learn

Asmo, Oulu2

Finnish is easy for Finns, but foreigners do not learn it easily because words inflect a lot

Jemina, Lampela

The Finnish language is important for Finns but not for foreigners

Jemina, Lampela

A foreigner???

Juuso, NH

A foreigner does not understand Finnish

Hely, Oulu2

It is important to know Finnish if you live in Finland

Jooa, Lampela

As presented in Table 5.8, the participants highlight the juxtaposition between Finns and foreigners. These representations come up in four different ways:

(1)The Finnish language is easy for us/Finns, but difficult for foreigners, or it is difficult for foreigners to learn Finnish.

(2)Finnish is an important language for Finns, but not for foreigners.

(3)Foreigners do not speak/understand Finnish, and this is expressed through silence and question marks (see Niemelä, 2023).

(4)It is important to know Finnish or to be able to communicate in Finnish.

In her drawing, Jemina from Lampela provides a possible explanation why it is difficult for foreigners to learn Finnish: words inflect a lot. Also, the emotional tie between the language and its speakers is offered as an explanation, as the participants do not believe that Finnish is important to foreigners.

Above, I have presented how the participants described the speakers and areas of speaking Finnish. In the next section, I concentrate on the similarities in describing the language.

3.3.2 Descriptions of Finnish

In this subsection, I discuss how the participants described Finnish in their drawings. What the Finnish language is like was a topic much commented on, especially in the categories Finland and Finns and the Finnish flag and blue-cross figures. Only three participants described Finnish in their drawings in the everyday surroundings category, and they all came from Finnish-speaking homes.

The participants described Finnish mainly using two different structures: Finnish is (suomi on …) and Finnish sounds (suomi kuulostaa …). Consider the examples in Table 5.9.

Table 5.9 Participants’ descriptions on what Finnish is like and what it sounds like

Example (originally in Finnish)

Participant and group

The Finnish language is nice

Mette, Oulu2

In my opinion, Finnish is important because it is a fine and rare language

Eemeli, Oulu1

Finnish is easy for me because it is my mother tongue; Finnish is one of the most difficult languages in the world

Arttu, Oulu2

Finnish is a very difficult language if one hasn’t got it as a mother tongue. Still, for some, it might be easier

Noora, Oulu2

The Finnish language is difficult!!!!

Hewdem, EH

It sounds complicated

Otso, Oulu2

It sounds easy

Jukka, Lampela

Regardless of the structure used, the participants’ descriptions highlighted four different matters:

(1)Finnish as a good and nice language

(2)Finnish as a rare and important language

(3)Finnish as a difficult language

(4)Finnish as an easy language for those who have it as their mother tongue

These descriptions relate to the value the language is given, and the value seems to be based at least partly on the exceptionalism of the Finnish language. Finnish is surrounded by Indo-European languages that are quite different from it. Among Finns, Finnish is regarded as a small language despite its official status and over 5 million speakers. Finns are also rather keen on the idea that Finnish is the most difficult language in the world, a myth Finns love to cherish (e.g. Miestamo, 2006; Lehto, 2018). The division between ‘native’ and ‘non-native’ speakers also appears relevant, and this is something that only appears in the texts of the category of the Finnish flag and blue-cross figures, as the participants base the ease and difficulty of the language on nativeness (e.g. Bonfiglio, 2010). This strengthens the image of Finnish being difficult, especially for foreigners.

3.3.3 Differences

The three categories presented in Sections 3.2.2–3.2.4 had similarities, but there was also a striking difference in the ways of illustrating Finnish. The way of representing places differs between the categories: in the categories of Finland and Finns and the Finnish flag and blue-cross figures, the participants named almost exclusively Finland as the area where Finnish is spoken or the area that has anything to do with Finnish. However, in the everyday surroundings category, the participants who mainly came from the multilingual and multi-ethnic East Helsinki gave more emphasis to illustrating and naming other places. These are summarised in Table 5.10.

Table 5.10 Different places in the drawings in the everyday surroundings category

Place

Examples

Name and group

1. Different areas

Finland (Suomi)

Annukka, EH

Vuosaari (neighbourhood in East Helsinki)

Ayaan, EH

Sanaz, EH

2. Commercial places

Shop (kauppa)

Amanda, EH

Tokmanni, saiturinpörssi, lidl s-market (two general stores and two grocery stores)

Mehena, EH

3. Places of everyday life

Home (koti)

Amanda, RH

Library (kirjasto)

Mehera, EH

School (koulu)

Valo, Lampela

4. Hobbies and fun

Field (kenttä), lintsi (an amusement park)

Najiib, EH

5. Means of transportation

Bus (bussi), metro

Ayaan, EH

Metro

Harita, EH

The named places were divided into five: the participants illustrated and named different geographical areas, commercial places, places of everyday life, hobbies and fun, and transportation. Finland was also mentioned, but only by pupils who were Finnish speaking. The participants with multilingual backgrounds named their neighbourhood Vuosaari instead. Previous studies show that Finns consider Finnishness important to their identity (Pitkänen & Westinen, 2018: 27–28), whereas persons of foreign origin in Finland do not identify Finnishness as strongly as they do with the city and neighbourhood they live in and their country of origin (Pitkänen et al., 2019: 26–38). This might explain why the multilingual and multicultural participants concentrated on illustrating the places where they used and heard Finnish instead of connecting the language with national unity. These places included different grocery stores, schools and libraries, and places where children spend their free time.

Based on this category, the multilingual and multicultural participants of East Helsinki had a different view and experience of the Finnish language compared to the other participants. They seemed more fixed and identified with their neighbourhood than Finland in general, which was in sharp contrast to the Finnish-speaking participants, especially in less multilingual and multicultural areas. The visual task enables one to observe the differences in the participants’ experience of the situatedness and emplacement of their linguistic realities (see Introduction to this volume).

Above, I have presented a multimodal analysis of the drawings and observed the construction of discourses on a textual level. Next, I proceed to observe the discourses as discursive practices as well as social practices by analysing the language ideologies that materialise in the drawings and summarising the findings.

4 Findings

The previous phase of the analysis showed that the participants’ drawings rested on combinations of different elements, and especially elements that expressed national connections (the map and the flag) were typical (Niemelä, 2020). Also typical were such elements and text combinations that expressed Finnishness and speaking of Finnish. An exception to these were the multilingual participants of East Helsinki, who clearly identified more with their neighbourhood than with Finland as a nation. To them, Finnish also seemed more like a language of everyday life, among many others, instead of a unifying link between the people of a nation. The unifying link was highlighted by the other participants finding Finnish difficult and rare, beliefs that were widely shared, being research results that were already well known (e.g. Miestamo, 2006; Lehto, 2018). In the category of the Finnish flag and blue-cross figures, speaking Finnish well and speaking Finnish poorly were connected with the speakers’ nativeness: has the speaker acquired the language at birth or not (e.g. Bonfiglio, 2010)? What is interesting is that, despite multimodal categorisation, similar texts recur throughout the whole pool of data, but with certain differences in emphasis.

In the following sections, I report the findings and answer the research questions.

4.1 Discourses

The first research question of this study was: What kind of language discourses are constructed in the drawings? I have interpreted the categories and constructions that the participants offer in their drawings and analysed the discourses found in the data, i.e. examined the discourses as discursive practice (Blommaert, 2005: 29). In the drawings, four different discourses on the Finnish language were highlighted:

(1)National discourse: Finnish as a national language and spoken in Finland, as the language of Finns. This is the largely dominant discourse appearing in the data, which encloses the ways of representing Finnish through the lines of a nation and as the language of Finns in Finland.

(2)Difficulty discourse: The Finnish language as a rare and difficult language unless you have it from birth. Finnish is considered nice, important, and easy to Finns, difficult to others, and rare, which is a place of pride.

(3)Everyday Finnish discourse: Finnish as a language that is used in everyday surroundings and encountered in the linguistic landscape. Most of the Finnish-speaking participants do not represent the language as a tool of communication in everyday life, but this is the perspective of the multilingual participants in East Helsinki.

(4)Multilingual discourse: Finnish as part of an individual speaker’s repertoire and a tool of interaction. This discourse challenges the national discourse and suggests that anyone could speak Finnish.

Behind the constructed discourses lie language ideologies. In the following section, I analyse the discourses as social practice (Blommaert, 2005: 29–30; Fairclough, 1992: 86–91).

4.2 Language ideologies

The second research question of this study was: What kind of ideologies materialise in the discourses? Next, I present three different semiotic processes, iconisation,14 erasure and axes of differentiation, which play a part in creating linguistic ideologies and ground the bases for these visual representations (Irvine & Gal, 2000; Gal, 2016). These processes are based on the indexical quality of language, meaning that social identities and typical activities of speakers can become indexed by the use of a certain linguistic form (Irvine & Gal, 2000: 37). As indices, linguistic features are considered to reflect and express broader cultural images of people and activities (Irvine & Gal, 2000: 37) – and this relation is maintained by language ideology, which connects the linguistic features with the images of social classification (Mäntynen et al., 2012). For example, a whole language can index a social group, and people act in relation to these ideologically constructed representations of linguistic differences (Irvine & Gal, 2000).

Based on the data, the Finnish language represented in the drawings indexed Finns as a whole. The drawings represented Finns as a social group – tight and unified. Finns were constructed as a group with an exclusive language, and their main unifying quality was the proficiency of Finnish and nativeness. In contrast, foreigners were portrayed through their lack of proficiency in Finnish. In this way, knowing Finnish was represented as essential for being a Finn, and thus the index became an icon: in the process of iconisation, a linguistic feature, or a language, becomes an icon, an image of those who use it or speak it, and the icon is loaded with qualities and expectations, which go together with it (Irvine & Gal, 2000; Gal, 2016; Rosa & Burdick, 2017; Mäntynen et al., 2012: 330). Finnish as an icon of Finnishness emphasises the position that the language acts as a gatekeeper of group membership. It also makes the ownership of Finnish seem very exclusive – are some considered more Finnish than others based on their language?

All the participants chose a certain perspective for their drawing depending on what they found relevant for representing Finnish, something was included, and something was excluded. This can be observed as a process of erasure (Irvine & Gal, 2000; Rosa & Burdick, 2017; Mäntynen et al., 2012), in which ideology ignores some people, qualities or activities. In addition, if some matters are in juxtaposition with the ideological scheme, they might go unnoticed or can be explained away (Irvine & Gal, 2000). Most of the drawings, especially the drawings in the categories of Finland and Finns and the Finnish flag and blue-cross figures, concentrated on the national symbols and the national connection of the language and, in this way, erased other dimensions of language. Finnish was represented as the unifier of the nation (Anderson, 2007 [1983]). In the East Helsinki group, in contrast, the process of erasure was nearly the opposite: Finland was presented in the form of Finnish flags, but otherwise, the representation was constructed on the illustration of everyday surroundings. The drawings of the East Helsinki group erased Finnishness – the language as a builder of national identity and national unifier.

The drawings revealed a language that was connected to different boundaries: the boundaries between different nationalities, the borders of Finland, which attach Finnish as part of something abstract, and, at the same time, the boundaries of daily life and the boundaries of a certain district, which made Finnish one language among others. Different boundaries and nationalities were constructed in juxtaposition. The line was created by real or imagined differences because the oppositions were mutually exclusive. This can be described with the language ideological process called axes of differentiation (Gal, 2016), in which different signs and the qualities they index have polarised as opposites. First, Finnish was portrayed through the nation and the people. The participants drew the borders to express the lines of similarity since what was left outside was different. Second, Finnish was also portrayed with the outlines of everyday experience, emphasising the practical and ignoring national group identities. The differentiation varied depending on the participant group and their linguistic and cultural reality.

Based on what I have reported above, it seems that the discourses on the Finnish language, as well as the language ideologies, differ in multilingual schools and more monolingual schools. The discourses highlight Finnish either as the national language or as one of the languages in the neighbourhood. Behind these lie the national ideology and understanding of Finns as a unified Finnish-speaking group, i.e. ethnolinguistic assumptions (Blommaert et al., 2012: 2–3), or the lack of it. The different linguistic realities of schools, areas and cities in different parts of the country create different understandings of language-related boundaries and language ownership.

5 Lessons Learnt

In this chapter, I have focused on the power that primary education has as the sphere of ideological circulation. Language awareness is one of the key issues of the latest National Core Curriculum (Finnish National Agency of Education, 2014), implemented in primary and lower secondary schools since 2016. Around the same time, the data of this study were collected. The curriculum emphasises the need for language awareness in all teaching, not only in teaching languages, but also in defining all societies and individuals as multilingual (Finnish National Agency of Education, 2014: 28). However, teachers’ attitudes towards multilingualism and understanding of the needs of multilingual pupils vary greatly, and the demand for language awareness for the multilingual reality often collides with monolingual ideologies (e.g. Alisaari et al., 2019; Repo, 2020; Suurniemi et al., 2021). The results of this chapter bring forward the presence of the monolingual bias in Finnish primary education. As Piller argues, ‘schools have a “hidden curriculum” for social reproduction’, which maintains the monolingual habitus of multilingual education (2016: 99). She also states that studies for social justice work toward positive changes, which however cannot take place unless the intersections of linguistic diversity and social justice are recognised (Piller, 2016: 5). This is one of the reasons why understanding ideologies on Finnish is of importance, and, to advance social justice, this is something that should be more emphasised and addressed in, e.g. teacher education (see Introduction to this volume).

Despite possible weaknesses, the study reported interesting results and succeeded in applying the multimodal methodology to study young participants in order to understand the language ideologies regarding the Finnish language that prevails in education, as well as in the participants’ lives. The data show that the ideological constructions of the Finnish-speaking majority define who is considered Finnish speaking and even a Finn. Due to this, people in Finland have very different accessibility to Finnish depending on their linguistic backgrounds. Becoming part of the speaker group, and being recognised as Finnish speaking, might not be easy, which is something the Institute for Languages in Finland (Kotus, 2018) has been concerned about.

A topical discussion in Finland at the time of writing this chapter, in early 2023, concerns the differences in learning results between Finnish-speaking children and Finnish-as-the-second-language (FL2) children (KARVI, 2023). The background of the situation is meandering and a result of many different factors, but one of them is the socio-spatial segregation of different areas and schools and ethnic differences, especially in cities. These, in turn, are partly a result of the decisions families with Finnish backgrounds make when they move from one area to the next (Bernelius & Huilla, 2021), a course of action also familiar from international contexts (e.g. Piller, 2016). The results of this chapter show that differences in multilingualism in different areas and schools (and also possible multiculturalism) influence the prevailing language ideologies. The results of this chapter show that differences in multilingualism in different areas and schools (and also possible multiculturalism) influence the language ideologies prevailing in schools. This is only one perspective that underlines the need to understand how the speakers of Finnish see the language, what they regard as proper language and who as proper speakers, and why and how these affect our educational system and possibly even segregation of schools.

The presented division of the discourses and the underlying language ideologies reveal something about the injustices prevailing in Finnish primary education. The drawings of the more monolingual schools represent an imagined community (see Anderson, 2007 [1983]), in which Finns in Finland are united by the Finnish language. This community is, however, an imagined one, because it ignores the fact that not all Finns know one another, but they are nevertheless represented as one, because of the language. In contrast, the pupils of East Helsinki represent another kind of reality, another kind of imagining of a community. From the perspective of social justice, this could be something that positive changes might require – reimagination of alternative worlds (Avineri et al., 2019; Tuck & Yang, 2018).

Notes

(1)I would like to express my gratitude to the editors of this volume, especially Paula Kalaja, for her precision in editing this chapter as well as all the support and enthusiasm my work has met with during the process. I also want to thank the anonymous referee of this volume for their suggested improvements. And of course, great thanks are also in place for the supervisors of my doctoral thesis for their guidance: thank you Niina Kunnas, Johanna Vaattovaara and Heini Lehtonen.

(2)Finland has two national languages; see Section 2 for further details.

(3)For further details, see Section 2.

(4)The Finnish statistics only recognise one first language for an individual, which erases the true multilingualism of the population.

(5)Lampela is a pseudonym.

(6)The East Helsinki data were collected in cooperation with Heini Lehtonen and the Itä-Helsingin uudet Suomen kielet project.

(7)One group of pre-service teachers from the University of Oulu also participated in data collection, but, in this chapter, I focus only on the pupils.

(8)All the names of the participants used in this study are pseudonyms.

(9)The data pool of this study was previously analysed from the perspective of the usability of the visual method, the structures of the data and representations (Niemelä, 2020), and representing Finns and foreigners in interactional encounters (Niemelä, 2023).

(10)In a regional dialect.

(11)Mikael Agricola was a bishop and a reformer. He was the first to translate the Bible into Finnish, and, in this way, he created the basis of standard Finnish. He is considered the Father of the Finnish language.

(12)Sauna is a traditionally and culturally meaningful place in Finland. It is used for bathing as well as for relaxing and socialising.

(13)From the lyrics of the Finnish national anthem.

(14)The process of iconisation is known by two names in literature: iconisation and rhematisation. Irvine and Gal have used the former in their earlier work (see, e.g. Irvine & Gal, 2000) and the latter in their more recent writings (see, e.g. Gal, 2016; Irvine, 2004). The reason for this is that rhematisation reflects the Percian inspiration of the named processes better than iconisation, albeit it being more transparent representing the process from index to an icon (Gal, 2016: 122). For the reasons of transparency, I keep to the use of iconisation in this chapter.

References

Alisaari, J., Heikkola, L.M., Commins, N. and Acquah, E.O. (2019) Monolingual ideologies confronting multilingual realities: Finnish teachers’ beliefs about linguistic diversity. Teaching and Teacher Education 80, 48–58.

Anderson, B. (2007) [1983] Kuvitellut yhteisöt: Nationalismin alkuperän ja leviämisen tarkastelua (translated by Joel Kuortti). Vastapaino.

Avineri, N., Graham, L.R., Johnson, E.J., Riner, R.C. and Rosa, J. (2019) Introduction: Reimagining language and social justice. In N. Avineri, L.R. Graham, E.J. Johnson, R.C. Riner and J. Rosa (eds) Language and Social Justice in Practice (pp. 1–16). Routledge.

Bernelius, V. and Huilla, H. (2021) Koulutuksellinen tasa-arvo, alueellinen ja sosiaalinen eriytyminen ja myönteisen erityiskohtelun mahdollisuudet. Valtioneuvoston julkaisuja 2021:7.

Blommaert, J. (2005) Discourse: Key Topics in Sociolinguistics. Cambridge University Press.

Blommaert, J. and Verschueren, J. (1998) Debating Diversity: Analysing the Discourse of Tolerance. Routledge.

Blommaert, J., Leppänen, S. and Spotti, M. (2012) Endangering multilingualism. In J. Blommaert, S. Leppänen, P. Pahta, T. Virkkula and T. Räisänen (eds) Dangerous Multilingualism: Northern Perspectives on Order, Purity and Normality (pp. 1–21). Palgrave Macmillan.

Bonfiglio, T.P. (2010) Mother Tongues and Nations: The Invention of the Native Speaker. Mouton de Gruyter.

Bourdieu, P. and Passeron, J.-C. (1990) Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture (2nd edn; translated by Richard Nice). Sage.

City of Helsinki (2021) Helsinki Facts and Figures 2020.

Eskola, J. and Suoranta, J. (2014) Johdatus laadulliseen tutkimukseen. Vastapaino.

Fairclough, N. (1992) Discourse and Social Change. Polity.

Fairclough, N. (2012) Critical discourse analysis. In J.P. Gee and M. Handford (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Discourse Analysis (pp. 9–20). Routledge.

Finnish National Agency of Education (2014) POPS 2014 = Perusopetuksen opetussuunnitelman perusteet 2014. Määräykset ja ohjeet 2014:96. https://www.oph.fi/sites/default/files/documents/perusopetuksen_opetussuunnitelman_perusteet_2014.pdf.

Gal, S. (2006) Migration, minorities and multilingualism. Language ideologies in Europe. In C. Mar-Molinero and P. Stevenson (eds) Language Ideologies, Policies and Practices (pp. 13–27). Palgrave.

Gal, S. (2016) Sociolinguistic differentiation. In N. Coupland (ed.) Sociolinguistics: Theoretical Debates (pp. 113–135). Cambridge University Press.

Helsinki by District (2019) Helsinki by District. City of Helsinki.

Ihalainen, P., Nuolijärvi, P. and Saarinen, T. (2019) Kamppailu tilasta ja vallasta – kieli- ja koulutuspolitiikan historiallisesti kierrätetyt diskurssit. In S. Pöyhönen, P. Nuolijärvi, T. Saarinen and T. Kangasvieri (eds) Kieli, koulutus, politiikka: Monipaikkaisia käytänteitä ja tulkintoja (pp. 27–59). Vastapaino.

Institute for the Languages of Finland (n.d.) Language Policy.

Irvine, J. (1989) When talk isn’t cheap: Language and political economy. American Ethnologist 16, 248–267.

Irvine, J. (2004) Say when: Temporalities in language ideologies. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 14 (1), 99–109.

Irvine, J. and Gal, S. (2000) Language ideology and linguistic differentiation. In P.V. Kroskrity (ed.) Regimes of Language: Ideologies, Polities, and Identities (pp. 35–83). School of American Research Press.

Johnstone, B. (2018) Discourse Analysis (3rd edn). Wiley Blackwell.

Kalliokoski, J. (1996) Johdanto. In J. Kalliokoski (ed.) Teksti ja ideologia. Kieli ja valta julkisessa kielenkäytössä (pp. 8–36). Helsingin yliopiston suomen kielen laitos.

KARVI (2023) Matematiikan ja äidinkielen taidot alkuopetuksen aikana. Perusopetuksen oppimistulosten pitkittäisarviointi 2018–2020. Finnish Education Evaluation Centre.

Kotus (2018) Suomi tarvitsee pikaisesti kansallisen kielipoliittisen ohjelman. Suomen kielen lautakunnan kannanotto 26.10.2018. Institute of Languages in Finland.

Kress, G. (2012) Multimodal discourse analysis. In J.P. Gee and M. Handford (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Discourse Analysis (pp. 35–50). Routledge.

Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T. (1996) Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. Routledge.

Kroskrity, P.V. (2000) Regimenting languages: Language ideological perspectives. In P.V. Kroskrity (ed.) Regimes of Language: Ideologies, Polities, and Identities (pp. 1–34). School of American Research Press.

Lehto, L.-M. (2018) Korpusavusteinen diskurssianalyysi japaninsuomalaisten kielipuheesta. Acta Universitatis Ouluensis B Humaniora 162. Kielten ja kirjallisuuden tutkimusyksikkö. Oulun yliopisto.

Miestamo, M. (2006) Suomi maailma kielten joukossa eli mikä Suomen rakenteessa onkaan erityistä? In M. Harmanen and M. Siironen (eds) Kielioppi koulussa: Äidinkielen opettajain liiton vuosikirja XLX (pp. 43–54). Äidinkielen opettajain liitto.

Mäntynen, A., Halonen, M., Pietikäinen, S. and Solin, A. (2012) Kieli-ideologioiden teoriaa ja käytäntöä. Virittäjä 116 (3), 325–348.

Niemelä, H. (2020) Piirretty suomen kieli: Piirustusmetodin käyttö kieli-ideologioiden tutkimuksessa. Virittäjä 124 (3), 380–411.

Niemelä, H. (2023) Silence and question marks in drawings of interactional encounters. In M. Frick, T. Räisänen and J. Ylikoski (eds) Language Contacts and Discourses in the Far North (pp. 229–261). Palgrave Macmillan.

Paunonen, H. (2020) Jokaisella on oikeus omaan kieleen. In K. Hippi, H. Lappalainen and P. Nuolijärvi (eds) Suomalaisten kielellistä elämää: Sata suomalaista kielellistä elämäkertaa -hankkeen satoa (pp. 51–101). Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.

Pennycook, A. (2021) Critical Applied Linguistics: A Critical Reintroduction (2nd edn). Routledge.

Piller, I. (2015) Language ideologies. In K. Tracy, C. Ilie and T. Sandel (eds) The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction, Vol. 2 (pp. 917–927). Wiley-Blackwell.

Piller, I. (2016) Linguistic Diversity and Social Justice: An Introduction to Applied Sociolinguistics. Oxford University Press.

Pitkänen, V. and Westinen, J. (2018) Sittenkin samanlaisia? Tutkimus suomalaisten identiteeteistä. The Finnish Cultural Foundation and e2 Research. https://www.e2.fi/media/julkaisut-ja-alustukset/sittenkin_samanlaisia.pdf.

Pitkänen, V., Saukkonen, P. and Westinen, J. (2019) Ollakko vai eikö olla? Tutkimus viiden kieliryhmän kiinnittymisestä Suomeen. The Finnish Cultural Foundation and e2 Research.

Rosa, J. and Burdick, C. (2017) Language ideologies. In O. García, N. Flores and M. Spotti (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Language and Society (pp. 103–123). Oxford University Press.

Repo, E. (2020) Discourses on encountering multilingual learners in Finnish schools. Linguistics and Education 60, 1–15.

Salo, O.-P. (2012) Finland’s official bilingualism: A bed of roses or procrustes? In J. Blommaert, S. Leppänen, P. Pahta, T. Virkkula and T. Räisänen (eds) Dangerous Multilingualism: Northern Perspectives on Order, Purity and Normality (pp. 25–40). Palgrave Macmillan.

Saukkonen, P. (2012) The Finnish paradox: Language and politics in Finland. Recode – Online Working Paper 5, 1–12.

Scotson, M. (2018) Toimijuus korkeakoulutettujen suomenoppijoiden visuaalisissa narratiiveissa. In L. Lehti, P. Peltonen, S. Routarinne, V. Vaakanainen and V. Virsu (eds) Uusia lukutaitoja rakentamassa. Building New Literacies. AFinLAn yearbook 2018. Suomen soveltavan kielitieteen yhdistyksen julkaisuja n:o 76. (pp. 206–230). AFinLA.

Scotson, M. (2019) Suomen kielen käyttämiseen liittyvät tunteet, käsitykset ja toimijuus. Apples – Journal of Applied Language Studies 13 (3), 107–129.

Scotson, M. (2020) Korkeakoulutetut kotoutujat suomen kielen käyttäjinä. Toimijuus, tunteet ja käsitykset. Jyväskylä University Dissertations 271.

Silverstein, M. (1998) The uses and utility of ideology. In P.V. Kroskrity, K.A. Woolard and B.B. Schieffelin (eds) Language Ideologies: Practice and Theory (pp. 123–145). Oxford University Press.

Statistics Finland (2018) Email from Statistics Finland, 22 March 2018. The speakers of foreign languages in the City of Oulu by language groups.

Statistics Finland (2021) Foreign-language Speakers. (accessed 5 April 2023).

Suurniemi, S-M., Ahlholm, M. and Salonen, V. (2021) Opettajien käsitykset monikielisyydestä: Heijastumia koulun kielipolitiikasta. In M. Ahlholm, I. Piippo and P. Portaankorva-Koivisto (eds) Koulun monet kielet. Plurilingualism in the School. AFinLA-e. Soveltavan kielitieteen tutkimuksia 13 (pp. 44–69). AFinLA.

Tuck, E. and Yang, K.W. (2018) Introduction: Born under the rising sign of social justice. In E. Tuck and K.W. Yang (eds) Toward What Justice? Describing Diverse Dreams of Justice in Education (pp. 1–17). Routledge.

Tuomi, J. and Sarajärvi, A. (2018) Laadullinen tutkimus ja sisällönanalyysi (2nd edn). Tammi.

6Using Data Visualisations in a Participatory Approach to Multilingualism: ‘I Feel What You Don’t Feel’

André Storto

1 Introduction

This chapter can be read as a double story. On the one hand, it is an account of the use of interactive digital visualisations designed to make students reflect on multilingualism based on data they had previously helped generate (Storto, 2022). On the other, it attempts to show how the use of images can be incorporated into a larger research project to address issues related to ethics, knowledge production and social justice. By addressing topics of common interest to researchers, language teachers and educators, this account aims to stimulate discussions about the challenges and potentials of exploratory approaches to multilingualism in the language classroom, and the role of visual methodologies within this context.

The visualisations discussed in this chapter were implemented in the second phase of the Ungspråk1 project, a three-year mixed methods study conducted in the Department of Foreign Languages at the University of Bergen, Norway. The main aim of the project was to investigate various aspects of multilingualism in Norwegian lower secondary schools (Haukås et al., 2021a). In the first phase of the project, 593 lower secondary students from seven schools answered the Ungspråk questionnaire (Haukås et al., 2021b), a digital tool developed to look into different aspects of multilingualism, such as the languages known and used by participants, their beliefs about and attitudes towards multilingualism and the role of language learning in developing their multilingual identities. In one of the sections of the questionnaire, participants were asked to complete the prompt ‘To be multilingual means…’, followed by the question ‘Are you multilingual?’. Data from these two questions served as the basis for the development of the visualisations which were later used in interactive sessions with 114 students in one of the participant schools (the second phase of the project). By adopting a participatory, exploratory approach to research in multilingualism in education (Storto, 2022; Fisher et al., 2018), the interactive sessions, and the data visualisations of which they are a part, represent an innovative effort to enhance the quality of findings in academic research while allowing participants to expand their own knowledge of the phenomena being researched. The implications of this methodological move to research ethics, social justice and equity (CohenMiller & Boivin, 2021; Kubanyiova, 2008) will be discussed in Section 2.2.

Motivated in great part by the increasing linguistic and cultural diversity of contemporary societies, especially in the global north, the ‘multilingual turn’ in applied linguistics (May, 2014) has produced research in various fields of expertise. Within this context, the use of visual methods in language learning and teaching (Chik & Melo-Pfeifer, 2020) has come to the fore as a prominent line of research that contributes to a more refined understanding of the interplay between multiple languages, dialects, varieties and registers in educational environments and beyond. However, ‘visual methodology is a very loose description for an eclectic collection of research approaches’ (Chik & Melo-Pfeifer, 2020: 339) that deploy a variety of visual representations for distinct research purposes and participant groups. In their meta-analysis of 43 journal articles published in English between 2000 and 2018, Chik and Melo-Pfeifer (2020) provide an overview of research in language learning and teaching using visual methodologies. In order to better situate the reader, in what follows I focus on some of their findings which are useful for our discussions and contributions to visual methods in language research.

Among their most prominent findings are the predominance of small-scale studies, mostly below 50 participants, and the use of drawings and photos as the main visual component of the studies. In relation to the former, rather than simply claiming that our study includes a larger number of participants, one of its main contributions lies in the role of the interactive sessions and data visualisations in enhancing the quality of knowledge produced by research. These issues will be addressed in detail in Section 2.2 of this chapter.

Concerning the visual component in the studies surveyed, many authors mentioned the use of a ‘drawing-only’ methodology as the most common limitation of their studies, which can be partly attributed to the small sample size and the interpretative nature of the studies. In this regard, our contributions are not restricted to the fact that, incidentally, no study so far has explored the use of digital data visualisations to engage school children in discussions about multilingualism and language learning. Rather, the use of data visualisations is increasingly common in contemporary data-driven societies (Buzato, 2019; Lankshear, 2003) and, consequently, the ability to critically interpret data presented visually has become a relevant form of literacy in recent years (Bhargava & D’Ignazio, 2015; Tønnessen, 2020; see also Introduction to this volume). As a consequence, our data visualisations were developed with the pedagogical aim of encouraging schoolchildren to interact and critically reflect on research data they helped to generate (Storto, 2022), and they were designed to be adapted to other educational settings, therefore being of potential interest to language teachers, educators and other stakeholders.

Finally, most research using visual methods in educational settings tends to focus exclusively on multilingual speakers with an immigrant background or from language minorities (see, for example, Chik & Melo-Pfeifer, 2020; Kalaja & Melo-Pfeifer, 2019). Our study broadens the profile of participants by including lower secondary school students regardless of their family or ethnic backgrounds, the languages in their repertoire or whether they learn a second foreign language at school or not.

Based on what has been discussed so far, I propose the following research questions, which will be addressed in the next sections of this chapter:

(1)How can data visualisations be integrated into a larger research project while addressing issues related to ethics, knowledge production and pedagogy?

(2)How can data visualisations be used to engage participants in discussions about multilingualism, while providing them with autonomy in interpreting research findings?

The chapter starts by contextualising multilingualism and language learning in Norwegian society. The focus then shifts to our first research question and the integration of ethics, knowledge production and pedagogy in our project, as a means of addressing social justice in research on multilingualism and language learning. The discussions then move to the design of interactive digital data visualisations based on data participants helped generate. Particular attention is paid to the interactive features of the visuals and their role in helping answer the second research question. In the findings section of this study, two interrelated aspects of multilingualism will be explored, namely, the ‘use’ and ‘proficiency’ dimensions (Cenoz, 2013), based on novel readings of the data that emerged from participants’ interactions with the visuals. The chapter concludes with some reflections on the lessons learnt from our project.

2 Background to the Study

2.1 Multilingualism in Norwegian society and education and the Ungspråk project

Norway is a country with an intrinsically rich linguistic and dialectal diversity. Apart from two official languages, Norwegian and Sami (a group of indigenous languages used in northern Scandinavia and parts of Russia), the country has three minority languages (Kven, Romani, Romanes), a national sign language (Norwegian sign language) and a host of regional dialects that are commonly used in different domains of society. Norwegian has two written variants, Bokmål and Nynorsk, which are taught simultaneously from year 8 of lower secondary school.2 In addition, most Norwegians can understand standard Swedish and Danish, due to the typological proximity between the languages (Olerud & Dybvik, 2014).

English is taught as a foreign language from the first year of primary school. At the age of 13, when students start lower secondary school (the focus of our study), they can opt for taking a second foreign language (predominantly, Spanish, French or German) or other elective subjects. According to official figures, 75% of students choose a second foreign language when starting lower secondary school (Foreign Language Centre, 2020). In the last decades, the linguistic scenario at schools has been enriched even further by a host of immigrant languages. According to Statistics Norway (2022), 18.9% of the Norwegian population is composed of immigrants and Norwegian-born to immigrant parents. Such figures imply that a significant percentage of the school population has a family language other than Norwegian. This brief outline allows us to conclude that virtually all schoolchildren in Norway can be considered multilingual, and this fact is also acknowledged in Norwegian language curricula, which portray students’ ‘multilingualism’ (and ‘flesrpråklighet’, the Norwegian equivalent) as a resource (see, for example, the Norwegian curriculum for foreign languages, Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training, 2023).

It is amidst this rich linguistic scenario that the Ungspråk project set out to investigate various aspects of multilingualism in Norwegian lower secondary schools (Haukås et al., 2021a). Following calls for research on multilingualism to be conducted multilingually (Holmes et al., 2013, 2016; see also Introduction to this volume), the Ungspråk project was composed of a team of multilingual researchers with diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds (Haukås et al., 2021b). In order to approach such a multifaceted phenomenon as multilingualism among young learners, we opted for a mixed methods design that combines the strengths of quantitative and qualitative methodologies and research instruments to enhance the overall quality of the findings (Schoonenboom & Johnson, 2017). Table 6.1 below summarises the mixed methods design of the Ungspråk project and situates the data visualisations in the chronology of the research process.

Table 6.1 Mixed methods design of the Ungspråk project3

The Ungspråk project

Phase I

(Apr./Aug. 2019)

Point of Integration (2019/2020)

Phase II4 (Dec. 2020)

Research instruments

Ungspråk online questionnaire (Quantitative component)

Design of digital visualisations based on data from the questionnaire

Interactive sessions using data visualisations (Qualitative component)

Number of participants

593 students (Year 8 lower sec. school)

Development of the interactive sessions

114 students (Year 10 lower sec. school)

Participant schools

7 schools in the city of Bergen

Piloting of visuals and sessions

1 school from the first phase

In the mixed methods design of the Ungspråk project, the point of integration (Morse & Niehaus, 2009) provides a feedback loop in the research process in which some of the data from the questionnaire are presented back to participants as a means of making them ‘reflect on their reflections’. The ethical, epistemological and pedagogical implications of such a methodological move, along with the role of the visualisations in this process, are discussed in the next section.

2.2 Data visualisations: Integrating ethics, epistemology and pedagogy in research on multilingualism

In the Ungspråk project as a whole, and particularly in the methodological rationale adopted in the development of the visualisations discussed in this study, there are three interrelated dimensions. They are ethics (or the nature and governing principles of human relationships and, particularly in our case, research ethics); epistemology (or the nature, purposes and scope of knowledge production, including academic research) and pedagogy (or the fundamentals and objectives of educational praxis). This section explains the role of data visualisations in the integration of these three dimensions, as a means of answering our first research question. By doing so, I hope to show readers why adopting visual methods in language research is more than simply using images in our studies.

The discussions start with research ethics and social justice. It is a common premise in research ethics that participants should somehow benefit from academic research. For instance, the Norwegian Guidelines for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (NESH, 2022) state that participants ‘are entitled to be informed about the results of the research’ (NESH, 2022). Even though this is acknowledged to be the case, frequently, the demands and pressures of academic life often lead researchers to restrict themselves to general ethical procedures overseen by ethics committees (such as obtaining consent from participants, guaranteeing their anonymity and protecting their well-being), rather than ‘consulting the children about their thoughts and reflections afterwards’ (Pinter & Zandian, 2015: 237; see also Alderson, 2000; Christensen & Prout, 2002).

Even though general ethical procedures are of primordial concern in any kind of research, there are always unforeseeable situations that demand researchers to be attentive to ‘ethically important moments’ (Guillemin & Gillam, 2004: 262) that emerge from their interactions with participants and colleagues along the research process. Kubanyova named such situations ‘microethics’ to refer to ‘everyday ethical dilemmas that arise from specific roles and responsibilities that researchers and research participants adopt in specific research contexts’ (Kubanyiova, 2008: 504). As a side note, I believe the concept of microethics in research not to be very far from the ethical classroom dilemmas teachers are often confronted with. In retrospect, an ‘ethically important moment’ happened during my first face-to-face meeting with my research supervisor, at the beginning of the project in 2018. On that occasion, she mentioned that we should start thinking of how to give something back to participants as a way of wrapping up our activities at the end of the project. Eventually, her recommendation matured into the idea of presenting participants with findings during the research process as a means of redressing a recurrent gap, especially in research conducted with a large number of participants.

The idea of presenting participants with findings from the Ungspråk questionnaire also had important implications for the quality of the knowledge produced by research. For the purposes of promoting meaningful discussions on multilingualism, participants’ responses to the prompt ‘To be multilingual means …’ can be considered as their own analytical framework (O’Kane, 2008) to the phenomenon in question. Rather than starting from pre-determined, scholarly-centred concepts and categorisations, using participants’ own data is potentially more engaging and, therefore, more likely to make them ‘relate the new knowledge to themselves and their lives’ (Fisher et al., 2018: 461). Similarly, we decided to include data from the question ‘Are you multilingual?’ because of their potential to make students draw inferences from the percentage of the responses (Storto, 2022). The methodological move of confronting participants with the plurality of their own voices addresses calls for research to focus on ‘how they themselves make sense of various aspects of their multilingualism’ (Kalaja & Pitkänen-Huhta, 2018: 158), while engaging participants in the creation and dissemination of scientific and academic knowledge (see Introduction to this volume). In the Ungspråk project, such a methodological move has the double benefit of enhancing both the participants’ and researchers’ understanding of multilingualism and the factors that contribute to the self-identification of participants as multilingual speakers, including the learning of foreign languages at school (Storto, 2022).

Finally, there was the practical question of how to accomplish all the above, and this is where the data visualisations come into play. Since the mechanics and structure of the visuals, as well as the methodological procedures adopted in their development, are discussed in detail elsewhere (Storto, 2022), the following discussion focuses on a crucial interactive feature of our visuals that requires further explanation.

As a guiding pedagogical principle, we wanted participants to have meaningful interactions with the data that stimulated critical reflection and independent action (Little, 1991; Palfreyman & Benson, 2019) in interpreting the findings. To this end, in our data visualisations information is not apprehended solely by a ‘visual’ reading of the images. Rather, they require of the users the ‘tactile’ manipulation of the visual elements, to explore different possibilities of organising, categorising, and therefore interpreting the data. Briefly, such operation involves the testing of their affordances (or ‘what the visualisations allow us to do with the data’) and the elaboration of interpretations warranted by them (or ‘what kind of readings are possible based on what the visualisations allow us to do with the data’). Drawing on insights from an interdisciplinary pool of studies from fields as diverse as phenomenology (Merleau-Ponty, 2002), anthropology of the senses (Howes, 2005; Pink, 2011, 2015), sociology (Paterson, 2007), cultural and media studies (Marks, 2002; McLuhan, 2013; Miller, 2014; Richardson, 2012), cognitive psychology (Gibbs, 2003, 2005; Shapiro, 2010) and multimodality (Bezemer & Kress, 2014; Hurdley & Dicks, 2011; Jewitt & Mackley, 2018), I argue that what fundamentally distinguishes any image in the digital medium from their analogical counterparts, including printed images, is the fact that they are never purely ‘visual’, but rather they engage users in a tactile-visual experience in which the eyes and hands coalesce (Richardson, 2012; Storto, 2021).

Based on the common underlying premise from the disciplines above that sensory engagements are vital both to ‘humans’ experiences of the world and to meaning-making’ (Lupton, 2017: 1601), our data visualisations invite users not just to ‘look at’, but literally to ‘manipulate’ the data to obtain their own readings and interpretations. From the perspective of the use of visual methods in language research, the multisensory approach to digital images adopted in our study addresses the need to pay ‘greater attention to embodiment and multimodality’ (Kalaja & Melo-Pfeifer, 2019, foreword; see also Introduction to this volume), while contributing to research that works ‘at the intersection of the sensory and the semiotic’ (Jewitt & Mackley, 2018) to explore the role of the sense of touch in digital communication (Storto, 2021).

3 Research Methodology

3.1 Details of the interactive sessions

The interactive sessions (see Table 6.1) happened on two consecutive days in December 2020. In total, 114 students from five different classes participated in the sessions, which took place in one of the schools from Phase I. Each session lasted for about one hour. Within our exploratory, participatory framework to research on multilingualism (Storto, 2022), the interactive sessions are conceived as actions through which researchers and participants in a study can engage with research data and each other in a dialogical manner (Haukås et al., 2021b). As discussed earlier, the sessions have implications for research ethics, social justice and equity (Piller, 2016; Storto, 2022; see also Introduction to this volume) and they are grounded on a methodological stance that seeks to increase the societal relevance of academic research and to reconcile research and scientific rigour with the needs and expectations of participants (Haukås et al., 2021a; Moita Lopes, 1998; Ortega, 2005). In order to achieve these aims, the data visualisations are fundamental research tools. During the sessions, I conducted the interactions and activities with the visualisations, while a colleague from our research team took observation notes. Since the main objective was to stimulate meaningful reflections based on research data, one important feature of the sessions is that participants were encouraged to work and provide answers to all the activities in pairs (Storto, 2022).

3.2 General dynamics of the data visualisations

As stated earlier, the visualisations used in the sessions were based on data from the Ungspråk questionnaire, and they represent participants’ textual data to the prompt ‘To be multilingual means …’, and numerical data for the answers to the question ‘Are you multilingual?’ (‘Yes’, ‘No’ or ‘Not sure’). Figures 6.1 and 6.2 below are illustrative images of the data visualisations. In order to better comprehend the dynamics, affordances, and different levels of interaction of the actual visuals, readers are recommended to access them via the hyperlinks in the notes section.5

Figure 6.1 First layer of the visualisation ‘To be multilingual means …’6

Figure 6.2 Different visual representations of participants’ answers to the question ‘Are you multilingual?’

The visualisation in Figure 6.1 is a bubble graph structured in four layers (Storto, 2022). The visual was designed to facilitate cognitive engagement and exploration of the data via manual, oral and written activities that allow different paths of interpretation (Bhargava & D’Ignazio, 2015). The visualisations in Figure 6.2 are an ensemble of more conventional forms of representation (such as a pie chart, a bar graph and an ‘icon crowd’) that encourage participants to explore different aspects of the same dataset by drawing on the specific affordances of each visual (Storto, 2022). In what follows, we focus our analysis on the data obtained from participants’ interactions with the bubble graph (Figure 6.1), which are related to two interrelated dimensions of multilingualism that have been explored in academia: the ‘proficiency’ and the ‘use’ dimensions of multilingualism (Cenoz, 2013).

3.3 Data collection

In the interactive sessions, participants were asked to group the categories in the middle of the bubble graph according to what they thought they had in common (as in the example in Figure 6.3).

Figure 6.3 Categories being grouped together using the ‘drag and drop’ functionality of the visualisation

Visual data of their groupings were stored in a server for later analysis. When the task was completed, participants were encouraged to share and explain the reason for some of their groupings with the whole class. Afterwards, they were invited to contrast their own groupings with those done by the researchers (see Figure 6.4). Rather than presenting participants with the ‘right’ responses, the purpose of this task was to explain how we had made sense of the data they had helped to generate, thus providing extra input to stimulate the discussions (Storto, 2022).

Figure 6.4 Layer of the visualisation showing the grouping of the categories done by the researchers7

After comparing their own groupings with the researchers’, participants were presented with textual prompts that invited them to reflect on further aspects of multilingualism implied by each grouping (as an example, see Figure 6.5). Finally, participants chose a prompt they wanted to interact with and wrote their reflections in an online mini survey, which were also saved for later analysis.

Figure 6.5 Example of a textual prompt for the categories ‘to use different languages in different situations’ and ‘to use several languages everyday’

3.4 Data analysis

In order to provide input to answer the second research question, in this section I narrow down the focus of the analysis to participants’ interactions and reflections with the categories ‘to use different languages in different situations’ and ‘to use several languages everyday’8 (see Figure 6.6). These two categories were grouped together by researchers because they address two interrelated, commonly mentioned aspects of multilingualism in individuals, namely, frequency and contexts of use of languages. For example, the European Commission defines multilingualism as ‘the ability of societies, institutions, groups and individuals to engage, on a regular basis, with more than one language in their day-to-day lives’ (European Commission, 2017, italics added). The practical, ‘use dimension’ (Cenoz, 2013) of multilingualism mentioned by some of the respondents to our questionnaire is also seen among scholars as one of the main defining characteristics of bi- and multilingual individuals (Cenoz, 2013; Grosjean, 2010).

Figure 6.6 Detail from Figure 6.4 showing the two categories discussed in this section

In relation to the engagement of participants with the data, an outstanding finding from the interactive sessions is the high co-occurrence of the two categories: out of a dataset comprising 31 groupings9 done by participants in pairs, 20 (64.5% of the total) combined the two categories together. Out of the 20 groupings, seven paired up the two categories alone, in the same way done by researchers (Figure 6.6) and the remainder (n = 13) added a third category to the pair. Considering that the groupings were the result of participants’ experimentations with the data and discussions with peers, it seems reasonable to claim that a significant number of participants consider that frequently using different languages in different situations are two interrelated aspects that define multilingual individuals. However, this general assertion does not account for the rationale adopted for grouping the two categories together in each individual case, and should therefore be approached with caution.

In the next section, we explore some of the findings from the groupings of these categories done by participants. The discussions are complemented by participants’ responses to the textual prompt for the categories ‘to use different languages in different situations’ and ‘to use several languages everyday’ (Figure 6.5).

4 Findings

As argued earlier, a prominent design feature of our data visualisations is that they facilitate novel readings of the data emerging from categorisations conducted by participants. In relation to our second research question, the 13 groupings that added a third category to the pair in Figure 6.6 offer a glimpse into unexpected readings of the data that do not conform with the ones done by researchers. An example is five groupings that joined the two categories above with the category ‘to speak several languages fluently/really well’ (see Figure 6.7).

Figure 6.7 Illustrative image of five groupings in the dataset including the category ‘to speak several languages fluently/really well’

From a theoretical perspective, such groupings are interesting because they conflate the practical, ‘use’ dimension with the ‘proficiency’ dimension of multilingualism (Cenoz, 2013). The level of proficiency required in the different languages in order to characterise individuals as multilingual has been the object of long discussions in the academia (for example, Baker, 2011; Bassetti & Cook, 2011; Cenoz, 2013). Following Bassetti and Cook (2011), Cenoz argues that most academic definitions of multilingualism focusing on proficiency tend to fall into two groups: ‘One considers maximal proficiency to be necessary, while the other accepts minimal proficiency’ (Cenoz, 2013: 6). In recent years, claims have been made for a practice-oriented, usage-based view of language knowledge and proficiency (Canagarajah, 2013; Hall et al., 2006) that sees contexts of use both shaping and shaped by the language practices of multilingual speakers (Pennycook, 2010).

Based on these observations, the groupings represented in Figure 6.7 can be interpreted as readings of the data that conflate the three categories in a spectrum between the incremental and co-occurrent (‘To be multilingual means to speak several languages really well AND use them regularly in different contexts’) and the causational-inferential (‘To be multilingual means to speak several languages really well BECAUSE they are used regularly in different contexts’).

Another relevant aspect of multilingualism that brings together the dimensions of proficiency and use emerged in the participants’ reflections based on the textual prompts to the category (see Figure 6.5). Out of 52 written reflections collected during the sessions, six replied to the prompt for the grouping of the two categories we have been discussing.10 The prompt in the visualisation is the following:

People use the languages they know in different contexts and situations. Are there any languages you only use with your family or to talk to your friends? Are there any languages you understand but do not speak? Do you have examples of situations when you use more than one language at the same time, for example, when speaking or on social media?

To the prompt above, one participant provided the following reflection:11

It’s not necessary at all to use a language almost every day to call yourself multilingual. I know speak (sic) English fluently, yet I don’t need to use it every day to be considered as multilingual. Some students also answered that if you’re able to understand more than one language you’re multilingual. I understand both Swedish and Danish, but I rarely use that (sic). Still, that would make me multilingual even though I rarely hear both of them.

A striking feature of the segment above is the fact that the participant does not start by addressing any of the questions in the prompt but instead chooses to challenge the idea of frequency in the use of languages implied by the category ‘to use several languages everyday’. Only later, as a development of the reflections, does the participant indirectly answer the second question (‘Are there any languages you understand but do not speak?’), by stating the ability to understand Swedish and Danish. Curiously, Scandinavia is often mentioned in the literature as a paradigmatic example of ‘receptive multilingualism’ (Zeevaert & Ten Thije, 2007), or the phenomenon of inter-comprehension among speakers of typologically related languages, and partial knowledge of Swedish and Danish was often mentioned in the Ungspråk questionnaire and in the interactive sessions as a component of the participants’ multilingualism, and not just in the example above.

Receptive multilingualism brings together the ‘proficiency’ and ‘use’ dimensions of multilingualism (Cenoz, 2013) while factually challenging the notion of maximal proficiency in and active use of all the languages in the repertoire of multilingual speakers. In the case of the participant above, these aspects of receptive multilingualism could be paraphrased thus: ‘I am multilingual also because I understand both Swedish and Danish, even though I rarely use these languages’. In relation to the aim posed by our second research question, namely, the development of data visualisations that facilitate autonomy in interpreting the findings, the passage above is noteworthy because it shows how the participant’s own interpretation of the information in the visualisation (‘Some students also answered that if you’re able to understand more than one language you’re multilingual’12) led to the conclusion that the receptive knowledge of Swedish and Danish would qualify her/him as a multilingual speaker, in spite of the lack of frequency in using the languages.

5 Lessons Learnt

In relation to our second research question, the discussions above served as a brief example of the potential of using data visualisations in research on multilingualism and language learning. Our analysis attempted to show how, via their engagement with the data visualisations, their peers and researchers, participants questioned the data and provided novel readings that have the potential to enhance their knowledge of what it means to know and learn several languages. Following calls from proponents of visual methods to go ‘beyond words to access the lives and worlds of these multilinguals through visual medium’ (Kramsch, 2019, foreword), the data analysis also combined visual elements (groupings of the categories) and textual ones (participants’ written reflections) to enhance research knowledge on multilingualism. In addition, just as ‘going beyond words’ does not mean ‘leaving them behind’ in our analyses, I argue that adopting a theoretical and methodological stance that goes beyond the purely ‘visual’ aspects of digital images can be a fruitful route to understand how sight and touch, ‘eyes’ and ‘hands’ are integrated into the meaning-making and learning processes in digital media (Storto, 2021). To this end, this chapter provides evidence that the ‘visual-haptic’ interaction of the participants with the data facilitated the emergence of novel readings and reflections.

The use of data visualisations poses a theoretical question about the status of our exploratory approach to multilingualism. To a certain extent, it can be argued that the visuals presented in this chapter are a powerful tool for ‘objectifying’, not just a complex and nuanced phenomenon such as multilingualism, but more importantly, the participants themselves and their subjective, lived experiences of language (Busch, 2015; Kramsch, 2009; see also Introduction to this volume). Such claims move our discussions beyond the design process of our data visualisations, or their ‘content history’, to their ‘material and rematerializing history’ (Iedema, 2003), or the account of the visualisations as abstract ‘objects of thought’ produced by researchers with their own agendas and interests. From such a perspective, the value of the visualisations as research and pedagogical ‘objects’ can only be assessed according to the extent to which they ‘affect (enable and constrain) interaction and the formation of subjectivity’ (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 1996: 39 quoted in Iedema, 2003). Only then would the visualisations cease to be simply ‘objects of thought’ and become ‘objects for thinking’ about multilingualism and language learning; objects whose meaning-making potentials are constantly changing as they are used ‘from context to context, from practice to practice, or from one stage of a practice to the next’ (Iedema, 2003: 41).

Even though the visualisations can be seen as an objectification of a complex phenomenon (especially because of the nature of the data they represent), they are an important component of a subjective approach to multilingualism (Kalaja & Melo-Pfeifer, 2019; Kramsch, 2009) that attempts to explore how schoolchildren themselves ‘feel about becoming or being multilinguals, or what the different languages and their uses might mean to them personally’ (Kalaja & Melo-Pfeifer, 2019: 3). In relation to answering our first research question, this chapter also provided an account of how our exploratory, participatory approach involved the design of interactive data visualisations (pedagogical dimension of research) aimed at enhancing both the researchers’ and participants’ knowledge of multilingualism (epistemological dimension of research), while simultaneously engaging participants in the research process (ethical dimension of research).

From the perspective of visual methods in language learning, the interactive sessions, and the visuals of which they are a part, contribute to broadening the repertoire of research methodologies, while addressing issues related to ethics, knowledge production and social justice in research on multilingualism and language learning, which were posed by our first research question. In relation to the pedagogical challenges involved in the development of digital visual tools, I argued for the need to consider the potential of visual-haptic interaction with the data, as a means of engaging participants with the findings and facilitating novel and unexpected readings. In addition, the sessions and the visuals represent an effort towards more structured pedagogical interventions aimed at enhancing participants’ awareness of multilingualism, which ultimately might have a positive influence on their future language learning trajectories (Fisher et al., 2018; Storto, 2022). Such an effort also addresses calls in current Norwegian curricula13 for harnessing pupils’ previous linguistic knowledge and learning experiences as a resource in the language classroom.

Like in most lessons learnt, the visuals and the sessions were also useful for determining the gaps and limitations of our exploratory approach. In retrospect, the sessions could have profited from a closer collaboration between the researchers and the language teachers at schools. Unfortunately, due to the busy agendas of all involved and the broader context of a global pandemic in which the sessions took place, such a goal was not achievable. In relation to practical aspects of the visuals, the grouping of the categories in the bubble graph (Figure 6.1) proved to be a bit challenging to participants, especially because of the number of categories they were asked to sort. During the sessions, this limitation was remediated by providing them with practical examples of sorting the categories. As for the aims posed by our second research question, the visuals and the sessions proved to be effective in engaging participants with the data and generating meaningful discussions. Even though participation in the sessions was voluntary, due to the large number of students involved, not all of them were equally interested (nor were they supposed to be) in the topics proposed by the sessions and the visuals. After all, multilingualism is not an uncontested value (Blackledge & Creese, 2010; Fisher et al., 2018).

The modular design of the visuals, along with their interactive features, make them promising pedagogical tools that have been tested in real classroom contexts and that can be adapted to other learning environments with different language backgrounds, therefore facilitating potentially different learning outcomes. In addition, the visualisations presented in this chapter are a step towards visual methodologies that draw on the potential of digital tools in exploring multilingualism and language learning. In this respect, one possible future direction for research would be the design of digital tools that model the language practices of individuals and groups and that allow stakeholders to input their own data (Storto et al., 2023).

The agentive role of teachers in language learning processes cannot be overstated. In relation to the development of multilingual pedagogies that draw on the linguistic repertoire of students as a resource for language learning (for example, Council of Europe, 2020; García & Flores, 2012), such a crucial role quite often overburdens teachers with high expectations about their own transformative power, without much material and methodological support from language policy planners, academic researchers and other stakeholders. From this perspective, this report aimed to contribute by offering some tangible ‘objects for learning’ that can be adapted and used by teachers to promote discussions about multilingualism and language learning in their classrooms. Regarding methodological issues, the discussions in this chapter can be read as an attempt to foster a productive dialogue between practitioners and researchers. After all, it does not take much empirical evidence to realise that, prior to being researchers, the vast majority of academics working on language research are (or have been) language teachers themselves, and as a consequence, theoretical advancements in the field emanate primarily from classroom practice. Ultimately, I see such dialogue as a fundamental component of research practices that would broaden the scope of social justice beyond parity of participation in cultural, economic and political domains (see Introduction to this volume) to include parity of participation in knowledge production and academic research.

Notes

(1)The coined term Ungspråk is made of the words ung (‘young’), and språk (‘language’), both in the singular and plural forms. The ambivalence of the term alludes to the linguistic diversity of the learners and the possibility of their self-identification as monolingual or multilingual individuals.

(2)The Norwegian educational system is structured as follows: primary school (years 1 to 7, age group 6–13). Lower secondary school (years 8 to 10, age group 13–16) and upper secondary school (years 11 to 13, age group 16–19).

(3)Adapted from Storto (2022).

(4)Phase II of the project has another strand that comprises interviews with language teachers based on some of the findings from the questionnaire.

(5)https://org.uib.no/multilingual/Engelsk/Betyr.html
https://org.uib.no/multilingual/ErDu/ErDu.html

(6)For easier comprehension, a translated version in English of the bubble graph is provided. During the interactive sessions, the wording in the visuals was in Norwegian.

(7)The figures in each category represent the number of the participants’ answers from the Ungspråk questionnaire (n = 593).

(8)In Norwegian, the wording for the categories is the following, respectively: ‘å bruke ulike språk i ulike situasjoner’ and ‘å bruke flere språk i hverdagen’.

(9)Due to technical problems during data collection, only data related to the groupings from the second day of the interactive sessions are available.

(10)Importantly, the participants’ choices for a textual prompt are independent of their category groupings. In the case of the example provided, just because the participant chose to respond to the prompt, it does not necessarily mean that s/he had previously grouped these categories together when experimenting with the data.

(11)The answer was originally in English. Minor spelling, punctuation and capitalisation adjustments have been made by the author.

(12)The participant is referring to the category ‘to understand several languages’, located at the bottom left of the visualisation in Figure 6.4.

(13)See for example, the Norwegian Curriculum for Foreign Languages – FSP01-03 (Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training, 2023).

References

Alderson, P. (2000) Children as researchers. In P. Christensen and A. James (eds) Research with Children: Perspectives and Practices (pp. 241–257). Routledge-Falmer.

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

Bassetti, B. and Cook, V. (2011) Language and cognition: The second language user. In V.J. Cook and B. Bassetti (eds) Language and Bilingual Cognition (pp. 143–190). Psychology Press.

Bezemer, J. and Kress, G. (2014) Touch: A resource for making meaning. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy 37 (2), 77–85.

Bhargava, R. and D’Ignazio, C. (2015) Designing tools and activities for data literacy learners. In Data and Literacy Workshop at Web Science. University of Oxford. https://www.media.mit.edu/publications/designing-tools-and-activities-for-data-literacy-learners/

Blackledge, A. and Creese, A. (2010) Multilingualism: A Critical Perspective. Continuum.

Busch, B. (2015) Expanding the notion of the linguistic repertoire: On the concept of Spracherleben – the lived experience of language. Applied Linguistics 38 (3), 340–358. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amv030

Buzato, M. (2019) Dadificação, visualização e leitura de mundo: quem fala por nós quando os números falam por si? Revista Linguagem em Foco 10 (1), 83–92.

Canagarajah, S. (2013) Translingual Practices: Global Englishes and Cosmopolitan Relations. Routledge.

Cenoz, J. (2013) Defining multilingualism. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 33, 3–18.

Chik, A. and Melo-Pfeifer, S. (2020) What does language awareness look like? Visual methodologies in language learning and teaching research (2000–2018). Language Awareness 29 (3–4), 336–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2020.1785481

Christensen, P. and Prout, A. (2002) Working with ethical symmetry in social research with children. Childhood 9 (4), 477–497.

CohenMiller, A. and Boivin, N. (2021) Questions in Qualitative Social Justice Research in Multicultural Contexts. Routledge.

Council of Europe (2020) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. https://rm.coe.int/common-europeanframework-of-reference-for-languages-learning-teaching/16809ea0d4

European Commission (2017) High Level Group on Multilingualism, Final Report. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/b0a1339f-f181-4de5-abd3-130180f177c7

Fisher, L., Evans, M., Forbes, K., Gayton, A. and Liu, Y. (2018) Participative multilingual identity construction in the language classroom: A multi-theoretical conceptualisation. International Journal of Multilingualism 17 (4), 448–466. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2018.1524896

Foreign Language Centre (2020) Elevane sitt val av framandspråk på ungdomsskulen 2019–2020 [Pupils’ choice of a foreign language in lower secondary school 2019–2020]. https://www.hiof.no/fss/sprakvalg/fagvalgstatistikk/elevanes-val-av-framandsprak-i-ungdomsskulen-19-20.pdf

García, O. and Flores, N. (2012) Multilingual pedagogies. In M. Martin-Jones, A. Blackledge and A. Creese (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Multilingualism (pp. 232–246). Routledge.

Gibbs, R.W. (2003) Embodied experience and linguistic meaning. Brain and Language 84 (1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(02)00517-5

Gibbs, R.W. (2005) Embodiment and Cognitive Science. Cambridge University Press.

Grosjean, F. (2010) Bilingual: Life and Reality. Harvard University Press.

Guillemin, M. and Gillam, L. (2004) Ethics, reflexivity and ‘ethically important moments’ in research. Qualitative Inquiry 10, 261–280.

Hall, J.K., Cheng, A. and Carlson, M. (2006) Reconceptualizing multicompetence as a theory of language knowledge. Applied Linguistics 27 (2), 220–240.

Haukås, Å., Storto, A. and Tiurikova, I. (2021a) The Ungspråk project: Researching multilingualism and multilingual identity in lower secondary schools. Globe: A Journal of Language, Culture and Communication 12, 83–98. https://doi.org/10.5278/ojs.globe.v12i.6500

Haukås, Å., Storto, A. and Tiurikova, I. (2021b) Developing and validating a questionnaire on young learners’ multilingualism and multilingual identity. The Language Learning Journal 49 (4), 404–419. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2021.1915367

Holmes, P., Fay, R., Andrews, J. and Attia, M. (2013) Researching multilingually: New theoretical and methodological directions. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 23 (3), 285–299.

Holmes, P., Fay, R., Andrews, J. and Attia, M. (2016) How to research multilingually: Possibilities and complexities. In H. Zhu (ed.) Research Methods in Intercultural Communication: A Practical Guide (pp. 88–102). Wiley.

Howes, D. (ed.) (2005) Empire of the Senses: The Sensual Culture Reader. Berg.

Hurdley, R. and Dicks, B. (2011) In-between practice: Working in the ‘thirdspace’ of sensory and multimodal methodology. Qualitative Research 11 (3), 277–292. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794111399837

Iedema, R. (2003) Multimodality, resemiotization: Extending the analysis of discourse as multi-semiotic practice. Visual Communication 2 (1), 29–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357203002001751

Jewitt, C. and Mackley, K.L. (2018) Methodological dialogues across multimodality and sensory ethnography: Digital touch communication. Qualitative Research 19 (1), 90–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794118796992

Kalaja, P. and Melo-Pfeifer, S. (eds) (2019) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words. Multilingual Matters.

Kalaja, P. and Pitkänen-Huhta, A. (eds) (2018) Double special issue ‘Visual Methods in Applied Language Studies’. Applied Linguistics Review 9 (2–3), 157–473.

Kramsch, C. (2009) The Multilingual Subject: What Foreign Language Learners Say about Their Experience and Why It Matters. Oxford University Press.

Kramsch, C. (2019) Foreword. In P. Kalaja and S. Melo-Pfeifer (eds) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words (pp. xix–xx). Multilingual Matters.

Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T. (1996) Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. Routledge.

Kubanyiova, M. (2008) Rethinking research ethics in contemporary applied linguistics: The tension between macroethical and microethical perspectives in situated research. The Modern Language Journal 92, 503–518.

Lankshear, C. (2003) The challenge of digital epistemologies. Education, Communication & Information 3 (2), 167–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/14636310303144

Little, D. (1991) Learner Autonomy 1: Definitions, Issues, and Problems. Authentik.

Lupton, D. (2017) Feeling your data: Touch and making sense of personal digital data. New Media & Society 19 (10), 1599–1614.

Marks, L. (2002) Touch: Sensuous Theory and Multisensory Media. University of Minnesota Press.

May, S. (ed.) (2014) The Multilingual Turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL and Bilingual Education. Routledge.

McLuhan, M. (2013) Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. Gingko Press.

Merleau-Ponty, M. (2002) The Phenomenology of Perception. Routledge.

Miller, J. (2014) The fourth screen: Mediatization and the smartphone. Mobile Media & Communication 2 (2), 209–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050157914521412

Moita Lopes, L.P. (1998) A transdisciplinaridade é possível em linguística aplicada? In I. Signorini and M.C. Cavalcanti (eds) Linguística Aplicada e Transdisciplinariedade (pp. 113–128). Mercado de Letras.

Morse, J.M. and Niehaus, L. (2009) Mixed Method Design: Principles and Procedures. Left Coast Press.

NESH (2022) Guidelines for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities. https://www.forskningsetikk.no/en/guidelines/social-sciences-humanities-law-and-theology/guidelines-for-research-ethics-in-the-social-sciences-humanities-law-and-theology/ (accessed 22 September 2022).

Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2023) Curriculum for Foreign Languages (FSP01–03). https://www.udir.no/lk20/fsp01-03/om-faget/kjerneelementer?lang=eng

O’Kane, C. (2008) The development of participatory techniques: Facilitating children’s views about decisions which affect them. In P. Christensen and A. James (eds) Research with Children: Perspectives and Practices (pp. 125–155). Routledge.

Olerud, A.K. and Dybvik, I.M. (2014) Holdninger til og forståelse av nabospråk: En undersøkelse av holdninger til og forståelse av dansk og svensk gjort ved tre norske ungdomsskoler [Attitudes and comprehension of neighboring languages: A survey of attitudes comprehension of Danish and Swedish conducted at three Norwegian upper secondary schools]. M.A. thesis, Høgskolen i Buskerud og Vestfold.

Ortega, L. (2005) For what and for whom is our research? The ethical as transformative lens in instructed SLA. The Modern Language Journal 89 (3), 427–443. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2005.00315.x

Palfreyman, D.M. and Benson, P. (2019) Autonomy and its role in English language learning: Practice and research. In X. Gao (ed.) Second Handbook of English Language Teaching (pp. 661–682). Springer International.

Paterson, M. (2007) The Senses of Touch: Haptics, Affects, and Technologies. Berg.

Pennycook, A. (2010) Language as a Local Practice. Routledge.

Piller, I. (2016) Linguistic Diversity and Social Justice. Oxford.

Pink, S. (2011) Multimodality, multisensoriality and ethnographic knowing: Social semiotics and the phenomenology of perception. Qualitative Research 11 (3), 261–276. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794111399835

Pink, S. (2015) Doing Sensory Ethnography. Sage.

Pinter, A. and Zandian, S. (2015) ‘I thought it would be tiny little one phrase that we said, in a huge big pile of papers’: Children’s reflections on their involvement in participatory research. Qualitative Research 15 (2), 235–250. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112465637

Richardson, I. (2012) Touching the screen: A phenomenology of mobile gaming and the iPhone. In L. Hjorth, J. Burgess and I. Richardson (eds) Studying Mobile Media: Cultural Technologies, Mobile Communication and the iPhone (pp. 133–151). Routledge.

Schoonenboom, J. and Johnson, B. (2017) How to construct a mixed methods research design. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 69, 107–131.

Shapiro, L.A. (2010) Embodied Cognition. Routledge.

Statistics Norway (Statistisks Sentralbyrå). (2022) Immigrants and Norwegian-born to immigrant, by country background. https://www.ssb.no/en/befolkning/innvandrere/statistikk/innvandrere-og-norskfodte-med-innvandrerforeldre

Storto, A. (2021) Fingerprints: Towards a multisensory approach to meaning in digital media. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy 16 (3–4), 132–143. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.1891-943x-2021-03-04-04

Storto, A. (2022) ‘To be multilingual means…’: Exploring a participatory approach to multilingual identity with schoolchildren. International Journal of Multilingualism. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2022.2082441

Storto, A., Haukås, Å. and Tiurikova, I. (2023) Visualising the language practices of lower secondary students: Outlines for practice-based models of multilingualism. Applied Linguistics Review. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2022-0010

Tønnessen, E.S. (2020) What is visual-numeric literacy, and how does it work? In M. Engebretsen and H. Kennedy (eds) Data Visualisation in Society (pp. 189–206). Amsterdam University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9789048543137-01

Zeevaert, L. and ten Thije, J.D. (2007) Introduction. In J.D. ten Thije and L. Zeevaert (eds) Receptive Multilingualism (pp. 1–21). John Benjamins.

7Seeing the Unseen: Representations of Being and Feeling in Plurilingual International Students’ Adjustment Experiences

Vander Tavares

1 Introduction

Since the mid-2010s, the global landscape of international higher education has been impacted by significant political and cultural changes. The flows of international student mobility have shifted in response to these changes, including those informed by the presidency of Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro, the exit of the United Kingdom from the European Union, and more recently, the coronavirus pandemic, from which strong sentiments of nationalism, neo-racism and xenophobia have propagated (Weimer & Barlete, 2020). Such trends have complexified the experiences of international students, particularly racialised, plurilingual international students from the Global South, within a space already historically marked by unequal power relations and divisive hierarchies. Considering that discourses and images of deficit have been traditionally associated with international students in higher education (Tavares, 2021a), the current political and cultural environment – both within and outside academia – has only amplified the structural challenges that international students tend to face as a categorical group.

This chapter contributes to the need to understand the experiences of international students from a more critical and emic perspective. It focuses on the domain of sociocultural adjustment, a ‘site’ of many intersecting structural and individual challenges for international students with respect to linguistic and cultural differences. Through a qualitative design, conceptualised through the lens of ethnography-oriented portraiture (Lawrence-Lightfoot & Davis, 1997), this chapter considers the experiences of three plurilingual international students at a Canadian university. Photographs provided by the students are included in an attempt to enhance the representation of students’ experiences in Canada, a geopolitical context often recognised for its welcoming, safe and multicultural environment for international students that has gained prominence in the last decade (Tavares, 2021b). This investigation is guided by the following questions: How did the international students experience their sociocultural adjustment at the university? How do photographs help represent the feelings and experiences of the students? The chapter begins by discussing sociocultural adjustment from both theoretical and empirical perspectives. Subsequently, the methodology of the chapter is presented. The discussion of findings is meant to inform teaching, research, and support of plurilingual international students.

This chapter is conceptually situated in notions, discussions and movements toward social justice as presented in the introductory chapter of the book. Following the discussion by the editors of this book (see Introduction to this volume), this chapter conceives of social justice as a contextual process-goal that originates with each individual’s own story and voice and that has the potential to confront systems of marginalisation. Yet, even though social justice here may be first seen as local, it is inextricably connected to the global, for social experiences, particularly in higher education, do not transpire in a vacuum, and consequently have the power to influence institutional policies and practices on both national and international levels. For Kayi-Aydar (2022: 150), social justice in education can only be achieved when ‘diverse (cultural) identities are recognized, accepted, and appreciated’. This chapter works toward such a goal by critically and creatively exploring the diverse and complex experiences of plurilingual international students, which are often obscured by the political label of ‘international student’ (Tavares, 2021c). By focusing on plurilingual international students’ experiences of sociocultural adjustment, this chapter foregrounds moments of critical thinking, feeling and acting, through which the students (attempt to) reconstruct their stories with language and education.

2 Background to the Study: Sociocultural Adjustment of International Students in Higher Education

The experiences of adjustment of plurilingual international students in institutions of higher education and their host communities remains a central area of concern for international and higher education scholarship. Schartner and Young (2016) have identified three domains in which the adjustment of international students occurs: the psychological, academic and sociocultural. This chapter is concerned with the social and cultural experiences of international students at the institutional and the host society levels. As such, it focuses on the sociocultural domain of adjustment, which can be understood as the ‘cognitive and behavioural factors associated with effective performance in the host country, such as the ability to “fit in” and interact successfully with others’ (Schartner & Young, 2016: 374). Experiences of adjustment may be explored and represented through qualitative approaches to research (Schartner & Young, 2016), as will be discussed later in this chapter.

Research has continuously demonstrated that sociocultural adjustment for international students is complex and multifactorial. In the context of English-medium institutions, one key factor for plurilingual international students who speak English as an additional language (EAL) is language proficiency (Sawir et al., 2012). Proficiency in English is traditionally considered when academic adjustment is in focus as it is considered ‘crucial to academic success’ (Schartner & Young, 2016: 378). For instance, previous research has shown that academic adjustment and academic success go hand-in-hand with English language proficiency: higher levels of proficiency lead to higher levels of adjustment and success (Kukatlapalli et al., 2020; Lee et al., 2016). However, despite the emphasis on language proficiency, it is never the sole factor in play (Tavares, 2021b). Individual factors contribute to academic adjustment and so do structural factors that have to do with the institution as a whole (Phakiti et al., 2013).

International students in English-medium higher education often speak EAL. These students have been traditionally categorised as English as a Second Language (ESL) speakers in comparison to those who speak English as a first language, or ‘native speakers’ of English. In this comparison, being a speaker of EAL is construed as an inferior position in light of native-speakerism, an ideology that positions the speaker of English as a first language as the best speaker of the language by virtue of having acquired the language at birth (Dewaele, 2018). Native-speakerism as an ideology, however, can only be sustained if important cognitive and sociocultural factors intertwined in individual language proficiency are dismissed (Slavkov et al., 2021). Nevertheless, language ideologies tied to native-speakerism have not only remained prevalent in second and foreign language education, but have also permeated into higher education teaching and learning through the linguistic and political expansion of English.

International students of an EAL background can therefore encounter manifestations of native-speakerism in any or all domains of their academic studies. Whether in the curriculum, instruction, support services or interpersonal interaction (Tavares, 2022c), such representations of inferiority detrimentally impact how international students see themselves and are seen by the community. Even when language proficiency is not a barrier to sociocultural adjustment, the stereotypes assigned to being an EAL speaker – to being the other – can hinder the students’ adjustment because of their social consequences. In addition to strong images of deficit and lack, being an international student of an EAL background has been associated with passive behaviour, lower intelligence, uncritical thinking and fragility (Fell & Lukianova, 2015; Zhu & O’Sullivan, 2020). International students of a racialised background are particularly vulnerable to such stereotypes as native-speakerism is also interlaced with issues of racial and ethnic discrimination (Tavares, 2022b).

A focus on the relationship between language and adjustment points to the urgency to (re)present language proficiency in English through the lens of plurilingualism. Plurilingual pedagogies focus on a ‘holistic view of a speaker’s plurilingual competence’ (Prasad, 2020: 903) in which linguistic and cultural knowledges are not only integrated, regardless of ‘proficiency levels within and across languages’ (Chen et al., 2022: 2, emphasis added), but also redefined as assets rather than deficits. Chen et al. (2022) explain that plurilingualism ‘validates the long existing social phenomenon of flexible language use as documented in many parts of the world’ and makes space in the traditional English language classroom to fuse the ‘social realities [of learners] and language teaching and learning’ (2). International students’ very experiences of plurality (with)in language help confront the ideologies which impact their language use and sense of identity; however, higher education and language education generally do not take into account the students’ social realities when designing curricula, teaching and learning.

Despite this structural gap, it is important to approach international students’ experiences from a perspective of agency. Such a stance contributes to our understanding of how international students’ behaviour challenges discourses, attitudes and perceptions grounded in a deficit view. International student agency can be complex, being ‘revealed through how they [international students] think they are expected to respond … and how they personally want to respond’ to the challenges around them (Tran & Vu, 2018: 168). Since international students’ behaviours are informed by and responsive to the sociocultural context in which they are embedded, agency is enacted in context. In the classroom, silence was largely discussed as a sign of insufficient language proficiency, while now it may be seen as a form of resistance to (expected) participation (Skinnari, 2014). Agency is not enacted only at the individual level (Tran & Vu, 2018). Structural issues in higher education that affect international students as a categorical group also result in collective agency, such as campus protests, signature-gathering, and involvement in the news (Tavares, 2021a).

Within the sociocultural domain, the level of adjustment of international students is dependent on social interaction and support. Social connections specifically with local students are important as these lead international students to experience ‘higher levels of satisfaction, contentment, and significantly lower levels of homesickness’ (Hendrickson et al., 2011: 290). Socialisation with local students fulfils multiple purposes for international students, such as ‘reducing feelings of loneliness and homesickness and increasing a sense of satisfaction with the international experience’ (Arthur, 2017: 891). However, international and local students may approach socialisation differently based on their positioning in the host community. For instance, local students tend to have social networks already established, while international students do not (McKenzie & Baldassar, 2017). Although studying in university for the first time is a novel experience for all students, the availability of a support and emotional network already in place can influence how much students may invest in new friendships (Tavares, 2021b).

The differentiated institutional positioning between local and international students exists within a dichotomy in which being international is a marked position. The local culture and language are maintained as the ‘standard’ ones, to which international students are not only compared to, but also expected to embody (Tavares, 2022a). This dichotomy – local or international – is one mechanism by which international students may be othered or marginalised (Anderson, 2019; Arthur, 2017). Neo-racism has been conceptually employed to illustrate and problematise the multiple ways in which cultural and linguistic ideologies fuel marginalisation towards international students (Lee & Rice, 2007). Discrimination can be implicit or explicit; however, it is not based on race alone, but rather the hierarchy of cultures and languages. In this sense, some cultural behaviours are seen as superior to others, and in the name of maintaining ‘good cultural traditions’, international students’ behaviour, dress code, accent and other customs are targeted. Lee and Rice (2007) explain that:

Discrimination becomes, seemingly, justified by cultural difference or national origin rather than by physical characteristics alone and can thus disarm the fight against racism by appealing to ‘natural’ tendencies to preserve group cultural identity – in this case the dominant group. Underlying neo-racism are notions of cultural or national superiority and an increasing rationale for marginalizing or assimilating groups in a globalizing world. Neo-racism does not replace biological racism but rather masks it by encouraging exclusion based on the cultural attributes or national origin of the oppressed. (2007: 389, italics in original)

Neo-racism directly interferes with international students’ experiences of sociocultural adjustment. Since the local culture remains elevated, international students who maintain their cultural traditions may be marginalised and criticised for ‘failing’ to integrate by means of adopting the way of being of the local culture (Wei & Bunjun, 2021). Within this social context characterised by unequal power relations, monoculturalism is still favoured, despite discourses that, on the surface, acknowledge the importance of diversity for the community and institution. Based on the hierarchy of cultures and languages, international students who form stronger bonds with co-nationals, through which the students may find stronger emotional support, are often criticised for supposedly hindering their own adjustment (Tavares, 2021b). Successful adjustment is therefore framed as being like a local student and surrendering one’s own cultural and linguistic identities.

Experiences navigated within the process of sociocultural adjustment can evoke a range of possible emotional responses in international students. Despite the excitement associated with studying abroad, international students are known to face potential issues of loneliness and homesickness. Lack of opportunities to socialise with other students consistently and meaningfully can significantly impact the ways in which international students experience their stay abroad, and maintain their mental and physical well-being. Lack of socialisation can also interfere with their academic performance (Bek, 2017). Walsworth et al. (2021) have shown that friendships with local students are essential for international students to feel satisfied, even if such friendships are based on ‘weak’ ties. Although many international students may find socialisation opportunities within their co-national peer groups, such bonds do not always offer the same sense of satisfaction and inclusion that international students gain from socialisation with local students (Xing & Bolden, 2021). Hence the importance of institutional support in connecting international and local students both within and outside the classroom (Ammigan, 2019).

Despite the availability of support services, not all international students resort to these as they cope with their emotional challenges. In a recent study, Wawera and McCamley (2020: para. 43) found that international students experiencing loneliness ‘would first isolate themselves, staying at home and doing something comforting, followed by talking to close family members and friends back home’. The use of institutional support services was a later choice by the students, taken up once the students felt better. The students who took part in the services reported finding them helpful. For those international students who did not engage in such services, the format in which the services were offered (e.g. large groups, less personalised) was identified as intimidating, and thus a barrier, for students who did not know anybody else to attend with. Because emotional challenges can emerge at any point during an international student’s journey, Warera and McCamley (2020) have argued that universities need to better inform international students about these occurrences and the resources available to deal with them.

3 Research Methodology

The study on which this chapter is based took a qualitative orientation anchored in portraiture. Pioneered by Lawrence-Lightfoot and Davis (1997), portraiture is an ethnographic approach to research that is also concerned with the meanings people ascribe to their lived experiences within a particular cultural context. As discussed previously, the experiences of plurilingual international students who speak English as an additional language have been heavily influenced by discourses and attitudes stemming from language ideologies. Portraiture has as one of its main goals to find and document goodness and success in participants. In exploring participant experiences, challenges and issues are also considered, but not made the priority. Another feature of portraiture is its attempt to bring science and art together. The standards of qualitative research are adhered to from data collection to analysis. In presenting the findings, however, the portraitist pays attention to the aesthetic – the physical and social settings contextualising participant experiences – and includes textual depictions of it in the findings. The aim of doing so is to enter into dialogue with a broader audience that is not restricted to the scientific domain. Moreover, an attention to the aesthetic also seeks to offer a more evocative presentation of the research setting and participants. Thus, from a more holistic perspective, portraiture ‘guides the construction of a story and then relates the story to its wider contexts in society and culture’ (Quigley et al., 2015: 22). Portraiture has been mainly employed in education research, especially that with a social justice orientation. However, it has also been taken up in other fields, such as leadership development in higher education and arts curricula (e.g. Power & Klopper, 2011; Raffoul et al., 2020).

3.1 Participants

The research setting for the study was Star University, the pseudonym for a large, research-oriented university in Canada. According to the university’s webpage, about 6,000 international students were studying at the university at both undergraduate and graduate levels. The study began once research ethics approval was granted by the institution. An invitation to participate was shared with an international student group at the institution. Two criteria were in place: being an international student and a plurilingual speaker of English as an additional language. An international student was defined as having a study permit and being enrolled in an academic program at Star University for at least one semester. In this chapter, the experiences of three students are shared. Working with three students meant that their experiences could be explored in more detail (Creswell & Poth, 2016) given the time constraints and the volume of data gathered in this project (Leavy, 2017).

All identifiable information related to the participants has been pseudonymised. The participants were: Celine, a 19-year-old student from France enrolled in a Bachelor of Arts (BA) in international studies; Fernando, a 22-year-old student from Colombia enrolled in a Bachelor of Arts in criminology; and Lee, a 24-year-old student from Macau enrolled in a Bachelor of Arts in linguistics. Fernando had been a student at Star University for three and a half years at the time of the study. The other two students had spent four months there. These students were chosen in order to increase representativity in research on international students, since their countries of origin were not the majority groups at Star University, such as China, Korea and India. The findings presented do not reflect the experiences of the overall international student population at Star University and are meant to generate a contextualised and rich understanding of the three participants only.

3.2 Data collection

This study drew on interviews and photographs to explore students’ experiences of sociocultural adjustment. Four semi-structured interviews were recorded with each participant over the course of one academic semester, each interview lasting about 60 minutes on average. The interview questions were informed by the themes, issues and concerns identified in the review of literature. Questions touched upon the topics of language learning, social life, academics, and the emotional responses to the experiences the students encountered. The interviews afforded me, as the researcher, the opportunity to understand the students’ experiences more deeply in interaction with the students. Considering that interviewing is a social practice influenced by time, place and positioning, the content shared by the students should be seen as accounts of experience.

Photographs complemented the interviews as a way of documenting and representing lived experience. Photographic and interview data were collected simultaneously. An approach of participatory photography was employed, which is ‘a visual method in which research participants are encouraged to visually document their social landscapes through photography’ (Allen, 2012: 443). Asking participants to collect data on their own through photographs holds the potential to empower them in their choice of what to share with the researcher, in addition to inviting them to be co-researchers (Leavy, 2017). The students were instructed to document representations of experience connected to their sociocultural adjustment, such as a particular place, event, activity or object that held meaning for them. Instructions were broad in order to avoid giving the students an idea of what should be documented (Allen, 2012). As for the number, the expectation was that the students would share one photograph weekly by email over the course of four months.

3.3 Data analysis

A thematic analysis approach was employed to analyse the content from the transcribed interviews. Thematic analysis is concerned with ‘collective or shared meaning and experiences’ (Braun & Clarke, 2012: 57). In this study, shared meanings and experiences were analysed in relation to the umbrella category of sociocultural adjustment. Each line of the transcribed content was coded descriptively. The codes were organised into themes which were, in turn, expanded through comments in order to define ‘what is unique and specific about each theme’ (Braun & Clarke, 2012: 66). The themes were considered from two perspectives: individual (i.e. being unique to a participant) and collective. Individual themes were used to help craft a ‘profile’ for each participant, and consequently, a narrative that departed from the collective themes, but was further contextualised with individual ones. In each narrative, thick descriptions are presented along with verbatim content in English from the transcribed interviews as a way to establish trustworthiness (Loh, 2013).

A semiotic approach was employed to analyse the photographs. Due to the ethical concern of ensuring participant anonymity and right to privacy, participants were asked to provide photographs of places and things only. A consequence of this choice was that participants’ ability to self-express more freely might have been limited. However, it was indispensable that no identifying information was made available. By the end of the study, 16 photos had been shared, on average, by each participant. A semiotic approach was appropriate because it considers ‘two fundamental questions: the question of representation (what do images represent and how?) and the question of the “hidden meanings” of images (what ideas and values do the people, places and things represented in images stand for?)’ (Van Leeuwen, 2004: 92). Thus, understanding possible meanings of an image entailed an analysis of two layers through the processes of denotation and connotation.

Denotation involves describing what the image shows, though an attention to its surrounding context is important (Van Leeuwen, 2004). The context may be singular or plural – in other words, it may evoke one or multiple interpretations by the viewer. Conversely, connotation is about the possible ideas and values represented when one considers people, places and things, and what meanings these stand for. Connotation considers meanings to be broad and ideological, for instance, when representations are supposed to be taken ‘objectively’ to show how things are in the ‘real’ world. As such, photographs can also imply different meanings. Implying can be done by styling the photograph. The colour, angle, lighting, focus, distance, shadows and framing of a photograph can be used to either show or hide a possible meaning. Because photographs can be edited easily today, styling can take place (intentionally) at the moment of capture or afterwards, through editing.

The analyses of interviews and photographs were triangulated in order to strengthen the interpretation of the data. Triangulation can be seen as ‘the combination of two or more data sources, investigators, methodologic approaches, theoretical perspectives or analytical methods within the same study’ (Thurmond, 2001: 253). The choice of which photographs to include was based on their degree of connection to the themes identified from the process of data analysis. Quality was also another factor in the selection of photographs. While all photographs were used for analysis, only those whose resolution and clearness were adequate were included in the next section. Since data collection and analysis took place concurrently, as the researcher I was able to discuss the participants’ meanings and intentions behind the photographs in relation to mine in subsequent interviews in order to enhance my analysis.

4 Findings

This section presents the portraits of the three participants. It is important to note that the portraits aim to provide a rich and contextualised description of each student’s experience, though portraits, as creative narratives combining science and art (Lawrence-Lightfoot & Davis, 1997), do not embody the format of a more traditional qualitative study grounded in thematic analysis where descriptions follow repeatedly from isolated excerpts (e.g. Quigley et al., 2015). However, in doing so, each portrait will naturally generate new questions, some of which cannot be answered given the scope and word limit of the chapter. The epistemological claims advanced in the portraits are a product of a holistic analytical engagement with the data (i.e. four hours of interviews with each participant along with approximately 16 photographs supplied by each participant). The claims should therefore not be seen as a result of an analysis only of the quotes or photographs presented in the portraits, which are included rather to illustrate and contextualise important, but specific moments of each student’s overall experience.

4.1 Celine: Encounters with loneliness and solitude

Inspired by an idealised view of studying abroad, Celine expected to have a socially eventful and academically fulfilling experience at Star University. In France, she learned about studying in Canada from Canadian recruiters who travelled through French high schools to promote Star University. The vision of studying in Canada disseminated by the recruiters was one in which international students were presented as being actively surrounded by new friends and involved in exciting, appealing social activities. Recruitment brochures showed photographs of international students of diverse backgrounds together, who appeared cheerful with smiles on their faces under sunny skies. This was the very scenario which Celine imagined herself in once she made the choice to study at Star University. However, she encountered the complete opposite during her time at the university, particularly in her first semester.

Despite multiple attempts at socialising, Celine found herself mostly alone. In the first month, she looked for opportunities to connect with other students, both local and international, by turning to student clubs and associations on campus. However, these were mostly unavailable as the programming for social activities on campus was given a late start into September. Indeed, Celine had joined Star’s smaller, bilingual campus, located in a residential area where little activity took place. The campus looked inviting on the outside with its European-inspired architecture and lush green trees that changed colours in the autumn. Still, Celine experienced that most local students, who were either Francophone or bilingual, lived off campus and rarely frequented the premises beyond the bare minimum required – that is, coming for the purpose of attending classes. For her, the campus was a place of quietness and solitude.

In the first semester, Celine’s main emotional state fluctuated between being bored and being lonely. Of course, at times these two states intermixed, culminating in deep-hearted feelings of frustration, irritation and disempowerment from being unable to change the situation and, simultaneously, from feeling so impacted by these feelings, despite trying to dispel them on a daily basis. ‘It’s really hard. Like at the beginning of the year in September, there was no association, no student clubs, because it’s very lonely here, to start. So, I was very bored. It was hard’, she expressed in sorrow. Inserted in this sociocultural configuration was (also) the fact that most of her peers spoke French as a first language. As such, Celine found few opportunities to practise her English consistently and naturalistically, since the lectures in English involved timed and structured interaction with peers. As the winter season reached its peak, Celine found herself even more isolated, spending hours in her dormitory room by herself.

Celine felt a profound, multifaceted distance from her academic community: physical, social and emotional (see Figure 7.1). She felt neglected by her institution at all levels. The campus was bilingual, but predominantly Francophone, and Celine felt as though the university had forgotten about those who needed to develop their proficiency in English. Lacking meaningful social interaction, she turned to atypical ways to practise her English, such as in participating in research projects and volunteering in campus events. She understood her own needs for social interaction and devised plans to meet them, like going to the theatre (see Figure 7.2) and exhibitions downtown. However, these were always done on her own. The campus felt cold, physically, socially and emotionally. Gradually, the feeling of loneliness was such that it obscured the natural beauty of the campus. Her overall experience was far from what she had hoped for.

Figure 7.1 A snapshot of solitude and loneliness (photo provided by the student)

Figure 7.2 Inserting the self in social experiences (photo provided by the student)

4.2 Fernando: Constructing an identity through English

Fernando’s experiences of sociocultural adjustment revolved primarily around the English language. Fernando studied and lived on Star University’s main campus, a vibrant and active space with dozens of restaurants and shops that were open during the day and night to the convenience of students residing on campus. The campus had direct access to the city’s downtown through public transport, in addition to other attractions in the city, such as parks, shopping malls and museums that were located adjacent to many of the transit stations located between Star and the city centre. Fernando enjoyed socialising with other students, most of whom were also plurilingual international students at Star living in residence on campus. In fact, Fernando’s involvement in the international student group was such that he was viewed as a leader by many, since he initiated numerous social activities for the international students at Star.

Developing friendships with Canadian students had always been Fernando’s initial hope as an international student at Star. He loved learning new languages, and when it came to further developing his proficiency in English, his hope was that Canadian students could offer him the best outcome in this regard. Yet this dream never materialised. In his view, Canadian students were not as interested in developing and maintaining intercultural relationships with international students. Although Fernando had gotten closer to some Canadian students who were also a part of his program as a result of frequent classroom contact, their interactions never extended beyond the boundaries of campus, which he then characterised as ‘casual’ friendships. He explained: ‘My [Canadian] classmates, I think I told you, all of my [Canadian] classmates … they don’t make any friends, they just come to school and they go back home. That’s it’.

Such an experience led him to re-conceptualise the role the campus played in his process of adjustment. The campus became first a social, rather than academic, place for him. He was particularly fond of going to restaurants with friends in the evenings (see Figure 7.3). Students living in residence organised social gatherings spontaneously on the first floor almost every night – a space designed for student entertainment. These events were points of contact for international students, bringing new and veteran students together informally and safely. Fernando explained why he chose to live on campus throughout his entire time at Star by focusing on its social aspect: ‘I feel like you make friends, you feel like you are always with someone. So … it’s really fun, the campus at night, it’s really fun’. Yet the emotional state of satisfaction and fulfilment came at a cost.

Figure 7.3 Experiencing connectedness in sharing a meal with friends (photo provided by the student)

Fernando progressively constructed an identity for himself through English that, in his view, could not coexist with his Colombian identity. Speaking English was tied to a cosmopolitan and globalised identity, which brought him closer to international experiences and peers on campus. Conversely, he felt as though speaking Spanish had little social value and could only offer him a kind of social experience in connection with other speakers of Spanish, a language that was not as valued and recognised at Star in the same way that English was. He expressed: ‘I feel like English is my life. I feel like it’s my real life. And when I’m speaking Spanish, it’s just like, a side. Like, my family and vacation and that’s it. But like, my friends, like, everything to me now is English. So, I don’t even think about making Spanish friends anymore’. In this sense, his adjustment depended largely on the English language, though this was not a neutral choice as English displaced parts of his identity.

4.3 Lee: Longing for a social life

Prior to moving to Canada, Lee lived in California, where he attended college as an international student. Being on the west coast, he grew accustomed to warm and sunny weather almost all year round, which facilitated his access to outdoor opportunities he only rarely found while previously living in in-state New York, where he went to high school. Students at the college, both local and international, would often make their way to one of many local beaches to play sports, share a meal, and get to know one another after class. Although Lee was an international student, the novelty in the college experience, plus the informality with which he and his peers socialised, contributed to his social network developing quickly and effortlessly. He experienced a great sense of satisfaction from this lifestyle to such an extent that his academic studies gradually became less of a priority. The number of international students at the college was almost equal to that of local students. As a result, Lee felt like he belonged since the international student group was a prominent and diverse one.

Lee came to Canada shortly before his student visa expired in the United States. The choice of Canada was influenced primarily by the fact that his best friend, whom he met at the college, was also moving to Canada to continue his studies. The ease with which the logistical part of his move unfolded, especially as in obtaining a student visa for Canada and transferring his credits to Star University, contrasted sharply with his sociocultural adjustment. For Lee, the new Canadian city had a fast, business-oriented pace, and an uninviting, solemn character reflected off the grey buildings and cloudy skies (see Figure 7.4). More noticeable, though, was for him the experienced unfriendly and boring personality of local Canadians, who seemed uninterested in new friendships, unlike the locals he met formerly in California. When the winter came, Lee felt the greatest impact on his social life and emotional well-being. He struggled to adapt to the cold, snowy and windy days of the new environment. The more the winter days progressed, the more he felt isolated, alone, and melancholy when comparing his previous life in California (see Figure 7.5).

Figure 7.4 A blurry prospect (photo provided by the student)

Figure 7.5 An outsider’s perspective (photo provided by the student)

His growing feeling of unhappiness and dissatisfaction affected every aspect of his experience in Canada. He began to dislike the city, the university, the people and the weather. He also felt frustrated by the reticence embodied by his peers at Star University every time he attempted to interact with them. He shared: ‘first day in class, they’re [local students] fairly strict. I can see their face that maybe they’re not saying something. “You’re asking too much questions”, something like that. But in Cali … you would just like, we can hang out right after this class, even the first day we met’. Against this backdrop, California and Canada existed in a dichotomy: California was good and fun, while Canada was bad and tedious. Because opportunities to socialise with local students were difficult to find and maintain, Lee felt as though he had been denied the chance to be fully himself. He was gregarious, curious and outgoing, but could not act upon these traits in the same natural way he did in California.

By the time I met Lee, his dissatisfaction was such that he confessed, though jokingly, that moving to Canada was a mistake. ‘I’m kind of more like a[n] outgoing person. When I was in New York, people were more like, sort of checked out, just not as open as like, in the west coast. You can easy make friends [on the west coast], very easily. Yeah, and people just less judge [you]. That’s why. The weather is always so nice. Actually, I miss it so much’, was the summary for the reasons why. Indeed, multiple factors contributed to Lee’s overall feeling of estrangement: the culture, weather, his linguistic profile, and the ways in which multiculturalism was experienced contrastingly in California and in that region of Canada. Following the winter season, spring brought life back to the city; still, Lee found himself mostly alone. His dog had become his companion on a number of daily activities he engaged in to pass time and explore his surroundings. Lee had one more term to complete before concluding his studies at Star, but he had already decided, at least for the time being, that returning to Macau would be the best thing to do for himself.

5 Lessons Learnt

This chapter explored the experiences of sociocultural adjustment of plurilingual international students at a Canadian university. The findings represent, both textually and photographically, a glimpse of each student’s broader journey at Star University. All three students considered socialisation with local students central to feeling included and appreciated in the host environment. Walsworth et al. (2021) showed that even superficial friendships with local students have a meaningful role to play in the extent to which international students feel satisfied. However, all students experienced local students as generally uninterested in intercultural friendships. Though disinterest was not the sole factor behind the lack of interaction and friendship with local students, it was one with the greatest impact on the international students’ experiences of adjustment. As a result, the students sought out different, but not necessarily equally fulfilling, opportunities to meet some of their social and emotional needs. These opportunities included investing more in socialisation with other international students as well as participating in local events, typically alone.

From the students’ point of view, language proficiency was not tied to the outcomes of their attempts and investments into socialising with local students. In fact, Celine spoke French, one of the official languages of Star’s smaller campus, but still found it difficult to connect with local students. While Fernando enjoyed a socially active and satisfying life, it was one that transpired only in the presence of other plurilingual international students. These findings point to a difference between how local and international students envision intercultural relationships with one another. One reason behind such differences may be related to the fact that local students tend to have pre-existing and well-established friendships from previous socialisation (McKenzie & Baldassar, 2017). Another factor is the sociocultural and physical set-up of campus, which also plays a role in how social opportunities are created for both groups (Arthur, 2017). Celine’s stay at a small, suburban campus offered considerably less opportunity for her to connect with local students, while Fernando, living and studying on Star’s university main campus, experienced it as a site of many social possibilities.

The students’ photographs open a window into the emotional side of their experiences of sociocultural adjustment. Celine’s and Lee’s photographs depict places and things that correspond primarily with feelings of despondency, isolation and loneliness. For example, the empty bench (Celine), the view of a campus building from a distance surrounded by snow (Celine and Lee), and the grey skies over the city buildings (Lee) depict experiences, perceptions and feelings related to or reflective of hardship, struggle and affliction. On the contrary, Fernando’s photograph illustrates the sharing of a meal at a restaurant, a social event which occurred in interaction with his peers. Although only one of Fernando’s photographs is included, all of his photographs reflected themes of a positive sociocultural adjustment. Thus, photographs help us visualise, recognise and identify, from a student perspective, a diversity of experiences of sociocultural adjustment.

From a social justice perspective, the students’ experiences reinforce the need for structural reform in higher education to promote equity for international students. At Star University, discourses celebrating diversity were prevalent. Campus events designed to celebrate international students’ cultures, especially through the selling and tasting of ethnic food, were common. However, materialisations of such discourses to an extent that they empowered students in the community and challenged the status quo were absent from the students’ experiences. In higher education, neoliberal frameworks recognise the importance of diversity, but do not engage with issues of social justice to disrupt the hierarchical fabric of institutions that privilege local, Western forms of knowledge and language (Kubota, 2015). In the classroom, instructors need to teach through a pedagogy that leads students to reflexivity, critical awareness and better cross-cultural understanding as these are beneficial to all students, but especially to local students.

The findings have direct implications for language and content instructors in institutions of higher education. The classroom continues to be a site where productive opportunities to facilitate intercultural socialisation between international and local students can be found. An internationalised curriculum with inclusive and diverse teaching and learning methods are starting points for instructors to plan and initiate inter-group collaboration. Instructors can take the lead in grouping students for collaborative work, rather than leaving the choice up to students themselves, who often self-select into groups based on familiarity (Trahar & Hyland, 2011). Additionally, a pedagogy that invites and recognises international students’ cultural and linguistic skills as assets is important, but insufficient if it does not lead local students to critically reflect on their own culture toward change. Lastly, it is pivotal that universities provide meaningful and responsive support for international students. This includes emotional, social and academic support with initiatives that involve students from the very beginning of their studies, rather than only when challenges become such that they hinder the mental well-being and academic performance of international students.

References

Allen, Q. (2012) Photographs and stories: Ethics, benefits and dilemmas of using participant photography with Black middle-class male youth. Qualitative Research 12 (4), 443–458.

Ammigan, R. (2019) Institutional satisfaction and recommendation: What really matters to international students. Journal of International Students 9 (1), 262–281.

Anderson, T. (2019) News media representations of international and refugee postsecondary students. The Journal of Higher Education 91 (1), 1–26.

Arthur, N. (2017) Supporting international students through strengthening their social resources. Studies in Higher Education 42 (5), 887–894. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2017.1293876

Bek, H. (2017) Understanding the effect of loneliness on academic participation and success among international university students. Journal of Education and Practice 8 (14), 46–50.

Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2012) Thematic analysis. In H. Cooper, P.M. Camic, D.L. Long, A.T. Panter, D. Rindskopf and K.J. Sher (eds) APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology: Research Designs: Quantitative, Qualitative, Neuropsychological, and Biological (pp. 57–71). American Psychological Association.

Chen, L., Karas, M., Shalizar, M. and Piccardo, E. (2022) From ‘promising controversies’ to negotiated practices: A research synthesis of plurilingual pedagogy in global contexts. TESL Canada Journal 38 (2), 1–35.

Creswell, J.W. and Poth, C.N. (2016) Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches. Sage.

Dewaele, J.M. (2018) Why the dichotomy ‘L1 versus LX user’ is better than ‘native versus non-native speaker’. Applied Linguistics 39 (2), 236–240.

Fell, E.V. and Lukianova, N.A. (2015) British universities: International students’ alleged lack of critical thinking. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 215, 2–8.

Hendrickson, B., Rosen, D. and Aune, R.K. (2011) An analysis of friendship networks, social connectedness, homesickness, and satisfaction levels of international students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (3), 281–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2010.08.001

Kayi-Aydar, H. (2022) Multicultural social justice education through the lens of positioning: English language learners in K-12 contexts. In M. Mantero, J.L. Watzke and P.C. Miller (eds) Language and Social Justice (pp. 147–160). Information Age Publishing.

Kubota, R. (2015) Race and language learning in multicultural Canada: Towards critical antiracism. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 36 (1), 3–12.

Kukatlapalli, J., Doyle, S. and Bandyopadhyay, S. (2020) An investigation into the English language experiences of Indian international students studying in New Zealand universities. Higher Education Research & Development 39 (3), 485–499. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1685940

Lawrence-Lightfoot, S. and Davis, J.H. (1997) The Art and Science of Portraiture. Jossey-Bass.

Leavy, P. (2017) Research Design: Quantitative, Qualitative, Mixed Methods, Arts-based, and Community-based Participatory Research Approaches. The Guilford Press.

Lee, B., Farruggia, S.P. and Brown, G. (2016) Academic difficulties encountered by East Asian international university students in New Zealand. Higher Education Research & Development 32 (6), 915–931.

Lee, J.J. and Rice, C. (2007) Welcome to America? International student perceptions of discrimination. Higher Education 53 (3), 381–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-005-4508-3

Loh, J. (2013) Inquiry into issues of trustworthiness and quality in narrative studies: A perspective. The Qualitative Report 18 (33), 1–15.

McKenzie, L. and Baldassar, L. (2017) Missing friendships: Understanding the absent relationships of local and international students at an Australian university. Higher Education 74 (4), 701–715. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0073-1

Phakiti, A., Hirsh, D. and Woodrow, L. (2013) It’s not only English: Effects of other individual factors on English language learning and academic learning of ESL international students in Australia. Journal of Research in International Education 12 (3), 239–258.

Power, B. and Klopper, C. (2011) The classroom practice of creative arts education in NSW primary schools: A descriptive account. International Journal of Education & The Arts 12 (11), 1–26.

Prasad, G. (2020) ‘How does it look and feel to be plurilingual?’: Analysing children’s representations of plurilingualism through collage. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 23 (8), 902–924.

Quigley, C., Trauth-Nare, A. and Beeman-Cadwallader, N. (2015) The viability of portraiture for science education research: Learning from portraits of two science classrooms. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 28 (1), 21–49.

Raffoul, J., Hamilton, B. and Andrews, D. (2020) Narratives of embodied practice: Using portraiture to study leadership. In N. Fenton and W. Ross (eds) Critical Reflection on Research in Teaching and Learning (pp. 93–106). Brill Sense.

Sawir, E., Marginson, S., Forbes-Mewett, H., Nyland, C. and Ramia, G. (2012) International student security and English language proficiency. Journal of Studies in International Education 16 (5), 434–454. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315311435418

Schartner, A. and Young, T.J. (2016) Towards an integrated conceptual model of international student adjustment and adaptation. European Journal of Higher Education 6 (4), 372–386. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2016.1201775

Skinnari, K. (2014) Silence and resistance as experiences and presentations of pupil agency in Finnish elementary school English lessons. Apples: Journal of Applied Language Studies 8 (1), 47–64.

Slavkov, N., Melo-Pfeifer, S. and Kerschhofer-Puhalo, N. (eds) (2021) The Changing Face of the ‘Native Speaker’: Perspectives from Multilingualism and Globalization. De Gruyter Mouton.

Tavares, V. (2021a) Multilingual international students at a Canadian university: Portraits of agency. American Journal of Qualitative Research 5 (2), 92–117.

Tavares, V. (2021b) International Students in Higher Education: Language, Identity, and Experience from a Holistic Perspective. Rowman & Littlefield.

Tavares, V. (2021c) Feeling excluded: International students experience equity, diversity and inclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2021.2008536

Tavares, V. (2022a) Exploring the impact of notions of success based on native-speakerism, individualism and neoliberalism on ESL students’ identities. In A.J. Daghigh, J.M. Jan and S. Kaur (eds) Neoliberalization of English Language Policy in the Global South (pp. 153–172). Springer.

Tavares, V. (2022b) Neoliberalism, native-speakerism and the displacement of international students’ languages and cultures. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2022.2084547

Tavares, V. (2022c) Multilingual international students’ perceptions of support services from an identity perspective. In M. Mohamad and J. Boyd (eds) International Student Support and Engagement in Higher Education: Exploring Innovative Practices in Campus, Academic and Professional Support Services (pp. 146–158). Routledge.

Thurmond, V.A. (2001) The point of triangulation. Journal of Nursing Scholarship 33 (3), 253–258.

Trahar, S. and Hyland, F. (2011) Experiences and perceptions of internationalisation in higher education in the UK. Higher Education Research & Development 30 (5), 623–633. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2011.598452

Tran, L.T. and Vu, T.T.P. (2018) ‘Agency in mobility’: Towards a conceptualisation of international student agency in transnational mobility. Educational Review 70 (2), 167–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2017.1293615

van Leeuwen, T. (2004) Semiotics and iconography. In T. van Leeuwen and C. Jewitt (eds) The Handbook of Visual Analysis (pp. 92–118). Sage.

Walsworth, S., Somerville, K. and Robison, O. (2021) The importance of weak friendships for international student satisfaction: Empirical evidence from Canada. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 80, 134–146.

Wawera, A.S. and McCamley, A. (2020) Loneliness among international students in the UK. Journal of Further and Higher Education 44 (9), 1262–1274.

Wei, M.L. and Bunjun, B. (2021) ‘We don’t need another one in our group’: Racism and interventions to promote the mental health and well-being of racialized international students in business schools. Journal of Management Education 45 (1), 65–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562920959391

Weimer, L. and Barlete, A. (2020) The rise of nationalism: The influence of populist discourses on international student mobility and migration in the UK and US. In L. Weimer and T. Nokkala (eds) Universities as Political Institutions (pp. 33–57). Brill.

Xing, D. and Bolden, B. (2021) Learning at half capacity: The academic acculturation reality experienced by Chinese international students. In V. Tavares (ed.) Multidisciplinary Perspectives on International Student Experience in Canadian Higher Education (pp. 41–61). IGI Global.

Zhu, H. and O’Sullivan, H. (2020) Shhhh! Chinese students are studying quietly in the UK. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 59 (3), 275–284.

8Interpreting Multilingual Spaces through a Lens: Linguistic Landscape Projects for Cultivating Intercultural Competence

So-Yeon Ahn

1 Introduction

With much research on the linguistic landscape in various disciplines, a growing body of research in the field of education has attempted to explore its theoretical and pedagogical applications, indicating its potential in educational settings (Brinkmann et al., 2022; Chern & Dooley, 2014; Laihonen & Szabó, 2018; Malinowski, 2016; Menken et al., 2018; Sayer, 2010). Concerned with the scenery of language within specific geographical locations, linguistic landscape essentially explores how ‘the language of public road signs, advertising billboards, street names, place names, commercial shop signs, and public signs on government buildings combines to form the linguistic landscape of a given territory, region, or urban agglomeration’ (Landry & Bourhis, 1997: 25). As Gorter (2006) notes, compared to the constant exposure to the linguistic landscape, people do not pay much attention to the presence, linguistic characteristics, and functions of languages found in social communication contexts. However, attending to the visibility and salience of language displayed in a public area, Backhaus (2007) claims that linguistic landscape research can be analyzed by considering three main questions: ‘linguistic landscaping by whom?’, ‘linguistic landscaping for whom?’, and ‘linguistic landscaping quo vadis?’. The focus of these questions involves the sign writers, the sign readers, and the temporal and spatial environment in which these signs are embedded. For example, the question of ‘linguistic landscaping for whom’ inquires about the interpretation of the sign readers, whom these signs are mainly targeted at (or not). Considering the intended recipients of the linguistic messages observed in the landscape, the use of different languages can signal different levels of inclusivity or exclusivity. With such signs being publicly available, offering information and symbolic value, linguistic landscape research questions ‘ethnolinguistic vitality, language contact and change, social protest, tourism, and other domains of language use in public life’ (Malinowski, 2016: 101). This line of inquiry naturally extends to issues of social justice, as it examines how public signage can reflect and either perpetuate or challenge societal inequalities and injustices. The visibility and representation (or lack thereof) of different languages and linguistic communities in public spaces directly tie into broader discussions about equity, access, and the recognition of marginalized groups.

These signs, frequently accompanied by visual elements, display intricate and complex connections to the immediately situated surroundings and the broader sociocultural, historical, and sociopolitical contexts. In other words, the social nature of semiotic resources is ‘shaped by the norms and rules operating at the moment of sign-making, influenced by the motivations and interests of a sign-maker in a specific context’ (Jewitt, 2009: 16). In this vein, the linguistic landscape is not solely dependent on the linguistic elements but rather encompasses an integration of multiple modes found in the locus in which the sign is created, utilized, and understood at both macro and micro levels. While the micro level may involve the more specific local context in which the linguistic landscape is situated, the macro level could include the larger social and cultural context, such as national language policies, historical language conflicts, and the population’s demographics. By taking all of these factors together, we can gain a more comprehensive understanding of how language and other forms of communication are used and negotiated in the public space, thereby examining the power dynamics and social justice within a society (Perugini & Wagner, 2022; Piller, 2016). In other words, the linguistic landscape has the potential to either reinforce or challenge social injustices and inequalities as it pays attention to the representation of different languages and linguistic communities, the distribution of linguistic resources, and the recognition of linguistic diversity in the public space.

The present study examines how South Korean undergraduate students’ participation and engagement in a linguistic landscape project aids their development of intercultural competence, particularly the cultivation of critical language and cultural awareness. Backhaus (2007) argues that analyzing the linguistic landscape by considering the three parameters can provide insights into how language and power are negotiated in public spaces. Thus, the study seeks to capture how the student’s exploration of a context via a linguistic landscape project guides their learning trajectory as they critically analyze and synthesize the information, become more aware of their semiotic surroundings, and attend to social justice issues. Grounded in the belief that linguistic landscape projects can foster awareness of social justice and equity, the study aims to capture how the students deepen their critical awareness of the use and role of language in society and thereby cultivate their intercultural competence. The study seeks to answer two research questions:

(1)How does participating in a linguistic landscape project impact South Korean undergraduate students’ development of intercultural competence, specifically their critical language and cultural awareness?

(2)In what ways does the linguistic landscape project contribute to students’ understanding of the cultural and linguistic diversity within their community?

Section 2 discusses the background of the study, and Section 3 describes the data collection and analysis methods. Then, by examining the students’ work using Byram’s (2021) model of intercultural competence (ICC), Section 4 investigates how students’ exploration of the neighborhood promotes skills of interpretation, attitude, and critical reflection on the cultures of their own and others. Section 5 also considers the concept of equity, drawing implications for social justice based on the findings.

2 Background to the Study

2.1 Multilingualism and multimodality

With linguistic landscape research dealing with the signs used in the public sphere, various modes come into play including language, font, font size, color, and images (Jaworski & Thurlow, 2010). Recent semiotic approaches have broadened our understanding of these elements by emphasizing not just their multimodal integration but also their materiality – the physical form and substance that contribute to the communicative impact of these signs (Pütz & Mundt, 2019). In these landscapes, the multimodal integration of various linguistic and visual modes observed in public signs engages the onlookers in the interpretation of the meaning as embedded in a larger social semiotic context. The appropriation of these signs is neither arbitrary nor unintentional, as they are deliberately and contextually grounded within a particular geographical location. Viewing language as one among many modes (Kress, 2010), language found in the public sphere could be examined not only by its literal meaning but also based on its relationship with other surrounding modes. This comprehensive view of public signs sees them as part of a larger social semiotic context, where their interpretation involves more than just the visual and linguistic. It includes the spatial arrangement, materiality, and even the wear and tear of these signs, all contributing to the overall meaning. Jewitt and Kress (2003: 3) explain that

there are always many modes involved in the event of communication (say, speech, gesture, posture, maybe images) then all of these modes together will be representing significant meanings of the overall message. The meaning of the message and discourse is distributed across all of these different modes, not necessarily evenly, increasing the complexity and inter-relationship of modes. In short, different aspects of meaning are carried in different ways by each mode.

The understanding of these multimodal semiotic signs can yield insights into varying discourses found in the area, informing us about the informative and symbolic functions of these signs. This decision reflects the social grounding of semiotic resources, influenced by the norms, motivations, and interests of the sign-maker in a specific context. According to Landry and Bourhis (1997), the informative function refers to a particular language or languages available for communication and the symbolic function indicates the status and value of these languages as they are understood and perceived by the members of the community.

Semiotic signs are understood to ‘arise out of our interest at a given moment, when we represent those features of the object which we regard as defining of that object at that moment’ (Kress, 1997: 11). Therefore, the sign-maker’s decision to articulate such linguistic and non-linguistic resources is not solely dependent on his or her will or intent but also relies on the social grounding. This perspective sees language in the public sphere as a mode that interacts with other modalities, not just in conveying literal meaning but also in representing complex sociopolitical dynamics, where the social, cultural and political contexts influence both the creation and interpretation of signs. For instance, the sign-maker may decide to put the Korean alphabets bigger than English in Koreatown in New York attempting to attract Korean consumers, and at the same time contributing to the co-construction of a Korean town identity alongside other neighboring stores. In this vein, viewed as a mode that interacts with other modalities, language does not merely convey literal meaning but also represents complex sociopolitical dynamics. The social nature of semiotic resources is ‘shaped by the norms and rules operating at the moment of sign-making, influenced by the motivations and interests of a sign-maker in a specific context’ (Jewitt, 2009: 16). Therefore, the understanding of linguistic and visual semiosis yields insights into both the sign-makers’ or users’ intents and motivation, and also their interpretation of signs as situated within a broader sociocultural and sociopolitical context.

2.2 Intercultural competence

In his multidimensional model of intercultural competence, Byram (2012, 2021) describes intercultural competence as the ability to understand, be conscious of, and relate to cultures of one’s own and others, as well as gain understanding using both linguistic and non-linguistic resources to successfully perform in communication (see Figure 8.1). The model indicates how an interculturally competent person could navigate in intercultural situations and establish and maintain relationships with individuals who may or may not share the same language or culture.

Figure 8.1 Byram’s (2021) model of intercultural communicative competence

The model offers five competencies including knowledge, skills of interpreting and relating, skills of discovery and interaction, attitudes, and critical cultural awareness. According to this model, as language learners develop their knowledge about the target language, culture, and society, they cultivate various skills to discover, analyze, and interpret texts and further operate these competencies and perform in interaction and real-time communication. Through the skills of interpreting and relating, students can ‘interpret a document or event from another culture, to explain it, and relate it to documents from one’s own’ (2021: 87). Skills of discovery and interaction would also offer the students the ability to ‘acquire new knowledge of a culture and cultural practices and the ability to operate knowledge, attitudes, and skills under the constraints of real-time communication and interaction’ (2021: 88). Moreover, the attitudes competency encapsulates how learners can relativize their own beliefs, values and behaviors and value others with curiosity and openness as they are ready to suspend disbelief about other cultures. Thus, learners can gain a deeper understanding of otherness and simultaneously reflect on their own cultural values. These competences are understood to prepare learners with the required knowledge and skills for effective communication grounded on mutual respect.

2.3 Language and cultural awareness

Language awareness refers to one’s knowledge of and conscious awareness of the nature of language and its functions. The notion of language awareness captures how an individual presents conscious perception and sensitivity to the form and use of language (Carter, 2003; Garrett & James, 2000). Through one’s exposure to and mediation of various languages and cultures, language learning is understood to broaden one’s understandings of self and others, contributing to the cultivation of greater awareness. Fairclough (1992) proposed a critical approach to language awareness, suggesting that students examine social inequalities. Additionally, positioned in the center of Byram’s (1997) model, critical cultural awareness refers to ‘an ability to evaluate critically and on the basis of explicit criteria, perspectives, practices and products in our own and other cultures and countries’ (1997: 53). The means by which to raise critical cultural awareness are through the development of critical engagement with culture and the ability to analyze, de-center and reflect on the self and the world in which one has grown and been educated. At the core of this framework is the emphasis on criticality, which serves as a potent tool for social change. It challenges the status quo and advocates for a more inclusive society. In this regard, Byram’s framework holds the potential to empower learners not only to recognize and understand social injustices but also to actively engage in addressing them. This approach integrates intercultural communicative competence with a commitment to social justice, fostering a proactive stance towards creating a more equitable world.

This notion of criticality is understood to function as the pre-condition and foundation of learning that contributes to learners’ social engagement and action. Critical awareness and engagement stimulate reflection on the relationship between language and its broader social, cultural and political context, as well as how such understanding inhabits within learners’ conceptualizations of the world, and further allows language learners to develop the path to global citizenship via language education, intercultural citizenship education (Clark et al., 1990, 1991; Fairclough, 1992, 1999; Guilherme, 2002). Recently, a growing body of research in the field of education has attempted to explore its pedagogical applications in the teaching of languages and enhancing language awareness (Gorter et al., 2021). Especially in this regard, the present study explores how the students’ participation in linguistic landscape projects might enhance their awareness of social justice in their community, fostering critical language and cultural awareness that transcends traditional learning boundaries.

3 Research Methodology

3.1 Participants

Four male students and two female students participated in the study. These students participated in a course which concentrated on the relationship between language and culture and decided to conduct linguistic landscape projects as a part of their requirement. All participants were Korean undergraduate students attending a university in the fifth-largest city in South Korea. They were enrolled in science majors, including biological sciences, electrical engineering, and chemistry (see Table 8.1). All participants reported that they spoke Korean as their first language (L1) and that they had been born in Korea.

Table 8.1 Participant demographics

Student #

Gender

Major

1

Male

Biological Sciences

2

Male

Chemistry

3

Male

Electrical Engineering

4

Male

Computing

5

Female

Engineering

6

Female

Engineering

3.2 Data collection and analysis

The participation in the study involved mainly three stages. In the first stage, prior to the launch of their projects, the students were introduced to the concept of linguistic landscape and a multimodal semiotic analytic framework, which they would use for their projects. Next, they learned about how to undergo linguistic landscape projects and how to analyze the multimodal data collected. They participated in several activities in class to analyze and discuss different examples of linguistic landscapes from around the world. Then the students were asked to choose a location or area of personal interest to analyze. These locations included a wide array of different areas, ranging from public parks to university campuses, and hospitals.

The second stage involved the students’ active participation in a linguistic landscape project. Over a period of three weeks, the students made several visits to their locations and documented the multimodality and multilingualism that marked the public sphere using digital cameras and/or videos. The students collected photographs or video clips of the area and analyzed the data, tracking and recording how and what languages and other semiotic signs were used and displayed (or not) in the chosen location. They observed signs and discussed the languages, scripts, and visual features used. This step sought to help them recognize the different types of semiotic resources used in the signs. They could also create maps of the neighborhood, identifying and locating multiple linguistic signs and resources, to develop observational skills and understand how such resources are distributed in their environment. To analyze their data, they asked questions such as ‘What modes are used in those signs?’, ‘What languages were present?’, ‘Did languages convey the same or different messages?’, and ‘Where was the placement of signs?’. They also examined the placement and order of the languages used in the selected location and questioned the underlying messages. Additionally, they paid attention to linguistic and non-linguistic markers such as images and symbols in different contexts or surrounding areas they had visited. By exploring how the use of multiple semiotic resources conveyed attitudes towards languages, language users, and the community, they gained insights into the broader sociocultural and sociopolitical contexts of the locations.

The final stage engaged the students in the reflection process where they presented their findings as a final project in the form of an oral presentation and a written report. At the end of the semester, the students shared their findings with other peers about the linguistic landscape of their location. They described their own experiences with, and analysis of, various multimodal signs found in the locus and shared their insights and observations. The oral presentation occurred before the written report, which allowed the students to revisit their findings after sharing their findings and receiving feedback from other peers and the instructor.

The following reflection and data present the students’ words and expressions in their original form. This study primarily explores the artifacts they produced during the final stage of their participation. To analyze the students’ engagement with the linguistic landscape project, thematic analysis was employed, identifying recurring patterns and themes that emerged from a systematic examination of their reports. The study focused on how they approached the linguistic landscape project, the themes they explored, and the connections they made to the broader sociocultural context. By coding the data and organizing it into categories, a deeper understanding of the students’ experiences and insights was obtained. Through this analysis, the study aimed to reveal how their engagement in the project contributed to the development of intercultural competence. The analysis provided a structured approach to explore the students’ skills, knowledge and attitudes, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of their thought processes and the impact of the linguistic landscape project on their learning experiences.

4 Findings

Overall, a thematic analysis of student reports suggests that their participation in the linguistic landscape project guided them to become more conscious of their neighborhood and make connections between the content and representation of signs in the chosen public spheres. By paying attention to public signs, the students were able to explore how these multimodal signs worked together to represent not only the users of the space but also the underlying messages regarding the community. They could observe and capture both explicit and implicit messages that were embedded in the context through the medium and mode used, taking a specific target audience into consideration. Thus, through their participation, the students gained a new perspective on their environment.

4.1 Attitudes – Developing sensitivity towards the local community

In the linguistic landscape projects undertaken by the students, a mere observation of language distribution evolved into a nuanced exploration of the sociolinguistic dynamics at play in public spaces. This shift from observation to critical analysis is pivotal in understanding how language in public signs is not just a means of communication, but a reflection of broader social, cultural and political forces. That is, rather than simply listing languages observed in the public signs, the students further researched to find out the factors that may have triggered the selection of the languages and the design of the sphere. In most cases, the students attempted to determine the target audience for whom the signs were intended to communicate, recognizing the role that sign-makers and sign-readers play in shaping and presenting the signs. For instance, Student 1 conducted the project on university campuses located in two different cities, Seoul and Daejeon. Concentrating on the neighborhoods surrounding the two campus sites, this male student further gathered demographic makeup of the international student body of each university in an attempt to understand how specific languages were used (or not) in the signs to reflect the student body. This approach demonstrated how Student 1 grounded his analysis on the basis of the relationship between the languages in the signs and the users of the region (see Figure 8.2).

Figure 8.2 Student 1’s investigation into the demographics of the regions

Student 1 observed that most signs in the area included Korean. In addition to Korean, he noted that English, as a marker of globalization, was not just a communicative tool but signified a connection to global networks and modernity. This resonates with theories of linguistic imperialism, where the dominance of English can overshadow local languages and cultures. By recognizing the significance of language as a symbolic marker, the student deepened his understanding of the complex interplay between language, culture and society. This understanding, in turn, allowed the student to gain insights into the cultural values, beliefs and norms that underpin linguistic landscapes within a particular community. He also suggested that the languages used in public signs partially reflected the demographic information. The inclusion of certain languages in public spaces can signal the recognition and value of diverse cultural backgrounds, fostering a sense of belonging and inclusiveness among different language communities. Through his participation, he discovered how linguistic landscape projects could also shed light on the distribution of linguistic resources, such as the availability of services in different languages.

Nonetheless, Student 1 emphasized that these signs did not fully reflect the diverse population navigating the area. He critiqued that ‘meaningful language usage in the linguistic elements was highly restricted to Korean and English for both regions, failing to reflect the diverse demographics of international audiences’. He suggested that meaningful information conveyed by the signs was mainly displayed in two languages, Korean and English. While Korean is the official language in South Korea, the presence of English was argued to signal its power within the country. In contrast, he stated that these signs failed to consider and reflect the diverse population that he researched, and he suggested the need for greater language diversity in the community’s public spaces. Specifically, Student 1 highlighted how the absence of certain languages sent a message about whether their speakers were appreciated or regarded as legitimate residents or commuters in the region. Through this analysis, the student argued that the absence of certain languages in the linguistic landscape was not a mere oversight but a reflection of societal attitudes towards different linguistic and cultural groups. He further drew attention to the idea that signs not sufficiently reflecting the users of the space can signal messages about legitimacy and belonging, aligning with the concept of symbolic annihilation. His reflection is particularly connected to the issues of social justice and equity as it concerns the recognition and validation of linguistic diversity. When linguistic diversity is recognized, represented and valued in the public space, this can lead to a greater sense of social inclusion, empowerment, and the celebration of cultural differences. Conversely, when linguistic diversity is ignored or stigmatized, this can lead to a sense of discrimination and a denial of cultural identity. In conclusion, the students’ projects, particularly as exemplified by Student 1, demonstrate how linguistic landscape studies can serve as a powerful tool for social justice advocacy. By critically analyzing the choices and implications of language use in public spaces, these projects shed light on broader sociocultural dynamics and provide insights into how public signage can either reinforce or challenge existing social inequalities.

4.2 Skills of interpretation – Capturing the transformation of signs and history

When conducting a linguistic landscape project, the focus extends beyond a snapshot of the present linguistic environment to a dynamic examination of its evolution over time. This approach aligns with the concept of diachronic linguistic landscape analysis, where the transformation of public signage is studied to understand historical, sociocultural and political shifts in a given area (Moore, 2019). As the students revisited the context several times for the purpose of this study, they also traced the history of the geographic location and its sociolinguistic importance. In addition, with the help of technological development and archives, one student not only presented and discussed the signs of a specific location but also examined how they had transformed over time. As shown in Figure 8.3, Student 5 examined the Itaewon region. This area was designated as the first special tourist zone in Seoul, South Korea in 1997, attracting international visitors. As she highlighted the diverse languages and cultures discovered during her project, Student 5 aligned her findings with the history of the location by describing that the area ‘was formed into a US military entertainment area with shops, temporary pubs, and base villages’ after the Korean War. Throughout her project, she was able to discuss the relationship between broader societal events and the population demographics in the region, arguing that the landscape is not just a random assemblage of signs but a tapestry woven from the region’s complex past. Student 5 argued that ‘the coexistence of people induces the coexistence of various actions and times, which leads to the coexistence of various images. This dynamic relationship of coexistence forms the characteristics of Itaewon’s unique landscape.’ Rather than focusing on the linguistic landscape at a single point in time, examining the synchronic aspect, she sought to capture the diachronic perspective, discovering changes and transformation in the linguistic landscape over time, offering insights into the historical, social and cultural factors that have shaped the region.

Figure 8.3 Student 5’s collection of images of Itaewon in the past

With the region particularly attracting many international residents from around the world, she examined the transformation of the signs in the area from the past to the present, which highlighted the close connection between the linguistic landscape and the sociocultural and sociopolitical factors shaping the region. Student 5 described the overt appearance of diverse languages including English, Japanese, Chinese and Arabic that have contributed to the construction of a space over time. During her discussion, she further stressed ‘the need to create a unique landscape by looking at the diverse cultural coexistence of Itaewon with an attitude of understanding and respect’. Student 5’s project demonstrates the value of interpreting linguistic landscapes as historical documents, offering a window into the sociocultural transformations of a region and revealing the intricate relationship between language, space and history. Moreover, her reflection echoed the attitudinal dimension highlighted in Byram’s ICC model, where one can relativize oneself with an attitude of curiosity and openness. Furthermore, the student’s attention to the territory suggested that linguistic landscape involves more than an individual sign-maker’s language use or attitudes towards the anticipated sign-readers, but also includes how the collective perceptions of an area are shaped, underpinned by social and cultural values. By examining linguistic landscapes, one can gain valuable insights into the historical processes and sociopolitical dynamics that have shaped the region’s unique character.

4.3 Questioning the missing information and the invisible sign-readers

By capturing the subtle differences in the public display of languages in a specific location, the students also referred to the intricate relationship between the surroundings and the larger sociocultural contexts. Not only did they investigate the link between the variety of languages and the population of the region as discussed in Section 4.1, but they also examined the extent and nature of information conveyed through these languages. That is, by conducting linguistic landscape projects, the students were able to determine not only what languages were available to some but not to others, but also what messages or information were transferred or missing, causing some linguistic communities to be deprived of some information, as a result. In doing so, they noted the inclusion and exclusion of languages in public signs to be viewed as decisions that affect accessibility and visibility of different linguistic communities, contributing as an act of power (Yao & Gruba, 2022). In the following example, Student 3 studied the Central City Terminal, one of the largest express bus terminals in South Korea. This terminal served as ‘a major transportation hub, and over 40 million passengers use the terminal’ every year. Alongside the exploration of various signs shaping the location, Student 3 further paid attention to the signs relevant to Covid. With the spread of Covid, this student categorized the types of messages delivered in each language.

The student discussed two posters both providing information and guidelines regarding Covid. The poster on the left was primarily in Korean, except for the English word information at the top. The poster described the campaign and a list of three practices that the city was promoting at the time. These three practices explained that (1) one would refrain from going out and postpone gatherings, limiting interactions with others, (2) one would communicate with one’s acquaintances through phone calls, the internet, and social media, keeping bodies distant but hearts close, and (3) one would always follow personal hygiene guidelines by wearing a mask and washing hands. The poster expresses the strong will of individuals by describing the three practices with a singular personal pronoun I and a modal verb will. In the middle of the layout, the campaign referred to the momentary pause initiative that took place over two weeks, emphasized in bold letters. The underlying message was to take a break from social life, believing that social-distancing measures would help prevent the spread of the coronavirus epidemic. The idea of a pause was reiterated by the pause button of music player buttons. With the play button absent, the pause button was highlighted through its blue color and larger size compared to the adjacent buttons. The signage on the right also conveyed a similar message, stressing the actions recommended during this critical period. While the images partially captured the essence of each recommended action, the written information below was entirely in Korean.

Here, Student 3 further indicated the issue of exclusivity, as the omission of languages limited the information to certain groups of people with the available lexical resources. For instance, without the ability to interpret the written Korean language, some might, in fact, consider the poster on the left having to do with a music player. The student argued that the abstract symbolic meaning found in the music player, originally urging people to pause in terms of their social activities, could cause misunderstanding of the campaign’s main purpose. Student 3 argued that the governmental message seemed to only ‘target Korean people’, and therefore, some important messages could be accessible only to those who speak Korean. Student 3 stated that ‘foreign people who cannot understand Korean will have no idea what the sign says since the pause button describes covid campaigns related to distancing very abstractly’. That is, without knowledge of Korean, one might assume the poster was related to music or a music player. Such an absence of other languages, resulting in the failure to deliver information, was understood to impact the immediate lives of those without knowledge of Korean. During a period when information was directly connected to one’s health, the student discussed that ‘since the main purpose of these signs are to spread important news, the only people who can hear the news would be Korean’. Student 3 analyzed not only language but also other modes, including images and symbols, and examined how the concept of semiotic resourcefulness came into play as he interpreted these signs, regardless of whether these modes successfully captured and delivered the intended meaning.

In addition, Student 3 discussed the difficulty of accessing information for foreigners without knowledge of Korean, as well elderly individuals who are not tech-savvy, particularly when using the kiosk desk. This aspect of the study connects to the broader discourse on digital inclusion, highlighting how technological advancements in public spaces can inadvertently exclude certain demographic groups, particularly the elderly who may lack digital literacy. The student further discussed the languages displayed on top of the ticket booth (see Figure 8.5). As shown in the image on the left, the word tickets in English was written in a larger font than the Korean description that followed. In the given example, the font size of the English word was almost double the size of the Korean description. This larger font size makes the English text more visually dominant and noticeable, drawing the viewer’s attention more quickly than the smaller Korean text. As a result, the English language appears more prominent in the sign, which may lead to an increased focus on the English content, potentially overshadowing the Korean text. Moreover, English was written on the left, with Korean on the right. Considering the writing direction in both Korean and English, English could be regarded as the more dominant language in this sign. As this example demonstrates, the spread of English due to globalization can be observed in South Korea, which is often viewed as a monolingual country.

Figure 8.4 Student 3’s collection of images of information on Covid found in a central bus terminal

Figure 8.5 Student 3’s collection of images found in a central bus terminal

Although English might have been used for the international travelers at the bus terminal, Student 3 further suggested that the elderly, who might lack knowledge of English, could experience difficulty finding where to purchase the ticket from a distance. The student argued that ‘since kiosks can be difficult for the elderly, they would prefer ticket booths. But as we have seen from the analysis, signs related to ticket booths tend to use larger English, or they lack detailed information’. Student 3 paid attention to the population disadvantaged or excluded from accessing essential information and facilities. In addition to these signs, the student indicated that the relatively new medium, an automated kiosk desk, could be challenging for the elderly. Student 3 empathized with the elderly as they would not only need to understand English to approach these machines but also have their digital literacy to purchase the tickets they need. From a social justice perspective, the lack of accessible information for diverse populations, such as non-English speakers and the elderly, highlights an equity issue.

In his reflection, the student expressed empathy towards those who may be excluded or have difficulty accessing the information effectively stating that ‘in the case of elderly, they will have a hard time accessing the following services’. Through this project, his awareness was raised towards the foreigners as well as the older generation in South Korea. He recollected how language in the public sphere functions both as a barrier and a helpful guide to different groups of people. The student described how the messages, depending on the mode and medium, may be limited to some groups of people. In this regard, the student’s participation in the project seemed to have fostered his sensitivity towards who the readers of the signs were, and at the same time, how their experiences might unfold due to knowledge of languages as well as familiarity with technology. The issue of inclusivity and exclusivity, in this case, was not merely an issue that described who the users of the space were, but rather dealt with the users’ capabilities. By analyzing and interpreting the semiotic resources found in the public space, the student was able to demonstrate an understanding of the ways in which these resources are used to reinforce or challenge social inequalities, where a particular group is disadvantaged or excluded from accessing essential information and facilities.

5 Lessons Learnt

Through their mediation of a geographical location, the students examined various linguistic and non-linguistic elements in a setting in which they were situated, using a critical perspective. Their participation in the linguistic landscape project enhanced their awareness and sensitivity towards the local community and enabled them to explore how multimodal signs produce cultural perspectives. They could empathize with those who would encounter difficulty in the location due to a lack of linguistic knowledge or whose languages were not included in the public space. Rather than simply viewing and accepting the space as given, their engagement in the project allowed them to understand and relate to those who would interact and navigate in the given space, in similar or different ways, and further critically examine the underlying messages and values behind language use. That is, they were able to de-center and examine a context from the point of view of others, imagining the experiences of others with different linguistic abilities. In this regard, they evaluated the practices and the multimodal products available in the locus to discuss who might benefit or be disadvantaged. Their engagement in the project fostered awareness of social justice and equity by promoting a greater understanding of the distribution of multimodal resources and encouraging critical reflection on the role and display of these signs in society (see Section 2.3 of the Introduction to this volume). Investigating such a complex interplay of linguistic, symbolic, sociocultural and sociopolitical factors, the students could think creatively and analyze the context critically on the use of languages to become more aware of their semiotic surroundings.

During their participation, the students uncovered both the multilingualism and multiculturalism, as well as the lack thereof, in their community and gained deeper insights into the underlying beliefs, attitudes and perspectives. Their hands-on experience did not merely involve displaying photographs of the neighborhoods, but rather encompassed a deeper understanding of complex values, ideologies and potential issues associated with the area. One common finding in the students’ projects was the global spread of English in South Korea. Most of them highlighted how English was frequently observed alongside Korean. With the growing number of English speakers, English has an ever-greater influence, to the extent that many Asian governments have proclaimed English education a ‘national mission’ (Tsui & Tollefson, 2007: 7). Understanding the relationship between English and other languages found in a seemingly monolingual context may unveil the beliefs and attitudes that are disseminated in the community, which these domestic residents create, navigate and maintain.

The findings demonstrate the benefit of integrating linguistic landscape projects as pedagogical tools into classrooms, as they enable students to critically examine the situatedness of multimodal resources and reflect upon the semiotic and multilingual environment. The students’ participation in the project helps enrich their learning experiences, cultivate their intercultural communicative competence, and promote their critical awareness. Importantly, it also fosters an understanding of social justice, as students learn to discern and question the power dynamics and societal inequities represented in these linguistic landscapes. During this process, they can interpret the linguistic and visual semiosis observed in the multifaceted nature of signs. They not only examine the medium, mode and message but also reflect upon the relationship between the speaker and the audience. By viewing a landscape composed of language and visual elements, students can analyze various semiotic cues observed in a setting while critically examining other aspects, including geographical location, history, and alignment with adjacent signs. Most importantly, this approach goes beyond understanding the temporal and spatial situatedness of signs. It encourages students to recognize that these signs are created by sign-makers who interpret space through their own lens, influenced by the broader societal context. This understanding allows students to see how linguistic landscapes can either reinforce or confront existing social norms and structures, thereby becoming more attuned to the nuances of social justice and equity in their immediate and extended communities.

Acknowledgements

This study has been supported by Elice. My deep appreciation goes to the editors for their insightful comments and suggestions on an earlier version of this chapter; any remaining errors are my own.

References

Backhaus, P. (2007) Linguistic Landscapes: A Comparative Study of Urban Multilingualism in Tokyo. Multilingual Matters.

Brinkmann, L.M., Duarte, J. and Melo-Pfeifer, S. (2022) Promoting plurilingualism through linguistic landscape: A multi-method and multisite study in Germany and the Netherlands. TESL Canada Journal 38 (2), 88–112. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v38i2.1358%20

Byram, M. (1997) Teaching and Assessing Intercultural Communicative Competence. Multilingual Matters.

Byram, M. (2012) Language awareness and (critical) cultural awareness: Relationships, comparisons and contrasts. Language Awareness 21 (1–2), 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2011.639887

Byram, M. (2021) Teaching and Assessing Intercultural Communicative Competence: Revisited. Multilingual Matters.

Carter, R. (2003) Language awareness. ELT Journal 57, 64–65. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/57.1.64

Chern, C.-L. and Dooley, K. (2014) Learning English by walking down the street. ELT Journal 68 (2), 113–123. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cct067

Clark, R., Fairclough, N., Ivan, R. and Martin-Jones, M. (1990) Critical language awareness part I: A critical review of three current approaches to language awareness. Language and Education 4, 249–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500789009541291

Clark, R., Fairclough, N., Ivanič, R. and Martin-Jones, M. (1991) Critical language awareness part II: A critical review of three current approaches to language awareness. Language and Education 5, 41–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500789109541298

Fairclough, N. (ed.) (1992) Critical Language Awareness. Longman.

Fairclough, N. (1999) Global capitalism and critical awareness of language. Language Awareness 8, 71–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658419908667119

Garrett, P. and James, C. (2000) Language awareness. In M. Byram (ed.) Routledge Encyclopedia of Language Teaching and Learning (pp. 330–333). Routledge.

Gorter, D. (2006) Linguistic Landscape: A New Approach to Multilingualism. Multilingual Matters.

Gorter, D., Cenoz, J. and van der Worp, K. (2021) The linguistic landscape as a resource for language learning and raising language awareness. Journal of Spanish Language Teaching 8 (2), 161–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/23247797.2021.2014029

Guilherme, M. (2002) Critical Citizens for an Intercultural World: Foreign Language Education as Cultural Politics. Multilingual Matters.

Jaworski, A. and Thurlow, C. (eds) (2010) Semiotic Landscapes: Language, Image, Space. Continuum International.

Jewitt, C. (2009) An introduction to multimodality. In C. Jewitt (ed.) The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis (pp. 14–27). Routledge.

Jewitt, C. and Kress, G. (2003) Multimodal Literacy. Peter Lang.

Kress, G. (1997) Before Writing: Rethinking the Paths to Literacy. Routledge.

Kress, G. (2010) Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication. Routledge.

Laihonen, P. and Szabó, T.P. (2018) Studying the visual and material dimensions of education and learning. Linguistics and Education 44, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2017.10.003

Landry, R. and Bourhis, R. (1997) Linguistic landscape and ethnolinguistic vitality: An empirical study. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 19 (1), 23–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X970161002

Malinowski, D. (2016) Localizing the transdisciplinary in practice: A teaching account of a prototype undergraduate seminar on linguistic landscape. L2 Journal 8 (4), 100–117. https://doi.org/10.5070/L28430422

Menken, K., Pérez Rosario, V. and Guzmán Valerio, L. (2018) Increasing multilingualism in schoolscapes: New scenery and language education policies. Linguistic Landscape 4 (2). https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.17024.men

Moore, I. (2019) Linguistic, ethnic and cultural tensions in the sociolinguistic landscape of Vilnius: A diachronic analysis. In M. Pütz and N. Mundt (eds) Expanding the Linguistic Landscape: Linguistic Diversity, Multimodality and the Use of Space as a Semiotic Resource (pp. 229–263). Multilingual Matters.

Perugini, D.C. and Wagner, M. (2022) Enacting social justice in world language education through intercultural citizenship. In B. Wassell and C. Glynn (eds) Transforming World Language Teaching and Teacher Education for Equity and Justice (pp. 41–64). Multilingual Matters.

Piller, I. (2016) Linguistic Diversity and Social Justice. Oxford University Press.

Pütz, M. and Mundt, N. (2019) Multilingualism, multimodality and methodology: Linguistic landscape research in the context of assemblages, ideologies and (in)visibility: An introduction. In M. Pütz and N. Mundt (eds) Expanding the Linguistic Landscape: Linguistic Diversity, Multimodality and the Use of Space as a Semiotic Resource (pp. 1–22). Multilingual Matters.

Sayer, P. (2010) Using the linguistic landscape as a pedagogical resource. ELT Journal 64 (2), 143–154. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp051

Tsui, A. and Tollefson, J. (2007) Language policy and the construction of national cultural identity. In A. Tsui and J. Tollefson (eds) Language Policy, Culture, and Identity in Asian Contexts (pp. 1–21). Lawrence Erlbaum.

Yao, X. and Gruba, P. (2022) Power through the semiotic landscape. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 43 (5), 373–386.

9Language Teachers’ Professional Identity in Visual Narratives: Depicting Pedagogy for Linguistic and Cultural Diversity through a Social Justice Lens

Ana Sofia Pinho and Maria de Lurdes Gonçalves

1 Introduction

Social justice, equity and inclusion are enduring topics in the field of education and teacher professional development. The challenge for teacher education programmes is how to incorporate such concepts into their curriculum, guidelines and frameworks. It is also expected that teachers who attend these programmes recognise their role or responsibility as change agents, and intentionally include social justice practices in their work (Pantić & Florian, 2015; Pijanowski & Brady, 2021). Social justice as a concept may be approached in several ways, making its definition elusive. Still, the connection between social justice and culturally (and linguistically) diverse educational contexts is strongly acknowledged. McDonald and Zeichner (2009) advocate the combination of social justice perspectives with social action and transformative approaches to diversity, to overcome the mere celebration of linguistic and cultural diversity in education. Such a stance would imply the promotion of future and experienced teachers’ critical awareness of sociocultural and sociolinguistic oppressive structures alongside an educational activism against such structures. Particularly at schools and in classrooms, this would entail asking language teachers to critically analyse ‘how education plays a role in developing and maintaining a socially just society’, but also ‘what a socially equitable education system would look like’ (Pijanowski & Brady, 2021: 61).

The long-acknowledged challenges of linguistic and cultural diversity in education make the case for the growing interest in studying teachers’ professional identity from the perspective of social justice. International evidence-based reports, such as Herzog-Punzenberger et al. (2017), reinforce the paramount role of teachers in the development of inclusive pluri/multilingual education practices in schools, and acknowledge that teacher education and professional development initiatives are structural conditions to support teachers’ pedagogical learning in such a context.

It is commonly agreed that teacher identity and teachers’ cognition influence the decisions teachers make in their daily work (Borg, 2003; Jenlink, 2021b). When language teachers are challenged to think about their professional identity and their representations of linguistic and cultural diversity in education, such a process may have a disruptive role. Therefore, teacher identity needs to be interrogated in the face of the intersection of the teaching of specific languages – in our case, English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and Portuguese as a Heritage Language (PHL), and linguistic and cultural pedagogies, particularly plurilingual and intercultural education (Beacco et al., 2010).

In this chapter, we seek to analyse a set of visual narratives produced by two groups of language teachers in different national settings. In so doing, we intend to answer the following research questions:

(1)What are pre-service and in-service teachers’ representations of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and of Portuguese as a Heritage Language (PHL) regarding linguistic and cultural diversity, and how do such representations compare to each other?

(2)What professional identity is in the making regarding pedagogy for linguistic and cultural diversity through the lens of social justice?

The chapter is divided into four parts. Section 2 provides the background to the study and gives an overview of the main theoretical frameworks guiding the research. Section 3 describes the data collection and analysis procedures, as well as the participants in the study. Section 4 presents and discusses the main findings regarding the language teachers’ representations of EFL and PHL in their visual narratives. The last section, ‘Lessons Learnt’, considers the implications of this study to language teachers’ professional learning and identity development regarding linguistic and cultural diversity, as well as equity and social justice in education.

2 Background to the Study

2.1 Teachers’ professional identity and social justice

Despite the various perspectives on teacher identity and the difficulty in finding a single definition, researchers seem to agree about the complex nature of such a process, describing it as dynamic, changing or ongoing, and integrating both personal and professional dimensions (Barkhuizen, 2017; Beauchamp & Thomas, 2009; Beijaard, 2019; Hong et al., 2018). Jenlink (2021b) reinforces that identity is not a stable process, but it is constructed and reconstructed throughout teachers’ lives. The same author argues that teacher identity is influenced by many factors: not only teachers’ personal history, emotions and tensions, but also by the interaction between such personal dimensions, and the social, cultural and institutional environments experienced by teachers. This perspective is shared by Barkhuizen (2017: 4), who states that language teacher identity changes over time ‘discursively in social interaction with teacher educators, learners, teachers, administrators, and the wider community, and in material interaction with spaces, places and objects in classrooms, institutions, and online’.

Focusing on the articulation between social justice in education and teacher identity, Boylan and Woolsey (2015: 63) argue that ‘adopting a complex understanding of identity is necessary to theorise teacher education for social justice and to inform pedagogy’. The authors offer the concept identity space, defining it as a psychosocial arena where multiple identities are shaped and interrelate. Accordingly, teachers should be placed in the discomforting position of challenging their (granted) representations, beliefs, knowledge and dispositions in relation to social justice. Boylan and Woolsey (2015: 63) state that ‘the identity work needed to negotiate changing identity is rooted in personal histories and … some of the underlying fixed positions are deeply held ethical positions’. Jenlink argues that teachers, particularly in teacher education programmes, should develop a ‘conception of their current self-image, how the image is formed, and their responsibility for working on their professional identity to learn what kind of teachers they want to become’ (Jenlink, 2021a: ix).

Similarly, Beijaard (2019) advocates that be(com)ing a teacher goes beyond the learning of content/subject matter, pedagogy, and action skills, but that teacher learning should be conceptualised as the making or the learning of a teacher identity. As such, professional learning needs to incorporate identity work, and research is asked to capture the complexity of such an ‘authoring’ process, particularly when placed in the intersection of the continuum oneself-others/community-environment/context. Pantić and Florian (2015) claim that a teacher committed to social justice would need to develop a sense of purpose (which involves their own sense of identity and agents of social change), and competence to address students’ diversity and enact inclusive pedagogy, autonomy and reflexivity. Pijanowski and Brady (2021), who establish a link between social justice pedagogy and cultural diversity, also highlight the importance of intellectual and dispositional work to support teachers in the adoption of equity and inclusion. Authors such as Beacco et al. (2010), García (2017), Herzog-Punzenberger et al. (2017), argue for the promotion of language teachers’ critical awareness and learning in relation to pluri/multilingualism in education to ensure the enactment of more inclusive and just language education in schools. This would be a pathway to counteract the language classroom as a site for linguistic stratification, linguistic subordination, and invisibility of pupils’ plural identities (Piller, 2006). To go deeper into the discussion, Piccardo et al. (2022) underline that plurilingual education is linked to principles of social justice and human rights by accentuating the recognition and valuing of the plural, multifaceted nature of individuals’ identities and repertoires in schools and educational processes, but also an openness to the world and the adoption of a critical stance which would allow for the analysis of different layers of social (in)justice regarding languages, cultures and their communities. As we see it, this may dialogue with Stroud’s (2018) perspective of multilingualism as a space of vulnerability in which individuals are challenged to get involved in ‘disruptive and unsettling encounters that interrupt the status quo … and more equitable linguistic engagement with others’ (2018: 18, emphases in original) may be privileged, thus paving the way towards a transformative linguistic citizenship. Transferring this understanding to the field of education, language teachers should think of their classrooms as legitimate spaces for acts of linguistic, plurilingual identity and agency. The discussion of social justice led Soler and Morales-Gálvez (2022) to stand for ‘liberating-empowering’ conceptualisations of the English language in the pursuit of linguistic justice in communication and education.

Accordingly, the authoring process of teacher identity may involve a negotiation process between the autobiographical self (conceptions, beliefs and values linked to the teacher’s life experience and personal history), the discursive self (emerging from dialogue with the social, cultural and institutional contexts, and manifested in the narrated identity) and the pedagogical self (corresponding to the authorship established in the teaching practice) (Chen et al., 2022, following Bakhtin, 1981). For this reason, it is particularly relevant to analyse if and how teachers manage competing discourses, and select and appropriate authoritative discourses, i.e. how these are filtered out of the social contexts and settings and interpreted through identity work in authoring spaces.

2.2 Representations of language education/teaching

One of the topics informing the study of language teacher identity is that of teachers’ cognition (representations, beliefs, attitudes, etc.) of language teaching (Borg, 2003), particularly regarding linguistic diversity and pluri/multilingualism and pedagogy (see Introduction to this volume). Haukås (2016) explored a group of Norwegian language teachers’ beliefs about multilingualism and the use of a multilingual pedagogical approach in the third language classroom, in focus group discussions. Findings point out that although teachers regard multilingualism as a positive asset and even acknowledge that it has benefited their own language learning, they do not necessarily consider multilingualism an asset to students. Besides, teachers also revealed that learning a second language would be different from learning a third one, which has implications for how they encourage the transfer of learning strategies in the classroom.

Paulsrud et al. (2023), in a study developed in the Swedish context, problematise the fact that the enactment of existing national education policies supportive of multilingualism is difficult. The authors resorted to semi-structured interviews to study teachers’ attitudes and beliefs regarding multilingualism. Briefly, regarding pre-service and in-service teachers, the authors conclude that in-service teachers reveal both positive and negative attitudes and beliefs, moving between monolingual and multilingual mindsets, whereas pre-service teachers seem to display a more ‘positive attitude towards multilingualism, albeit without clear beliefs about whether multilingualism offers possibilities or hindrances in the classroom, or an understanding of the enactment of language-as-resource’ (Paulsrud et al., 2023: 13). Both pre- and in-service teachers emphasized the role of teacher education processes. Krulatz et al. (2022) studied the effects of an in-service professional development programme on teachers’ cognition and multilingual teaching practices. Through a questionnaire and classroom observation of two teachers, the authors unveiled individual trajectories and differences in the teachers’ cognition and practices. The findings show that one of the teachers revealed changes over time, while the other kept them more stable. The authors conclude that family background, education, and teaching experience may be influential in such change processes.

In this chapter, we make the case that learning about pre-service and in-service teachers’ representations of EFL and PHL may be helpful to discuss the place of competing discourses in their identity construction and in professional learning initiatives. For this purpose, we will delve into how they manage, select and appropriate discourses of linguistic and cultural diversity, and of pluri/multilingualism. When referring to teachers’ cognition, we use the term representations, conceptualised as a meta-level and organising construct bringing together various elements of the content of the teachers’ personal and professional, experiential knowledge (Connelly & Clandinin, 1988). Previous research has made clear the interdependence of language teacher identity and teachers’ representations of language teaching, both informing each other dynamically. For instance, in a study by Pinho (2008), student teachers idealised professional identity which pertained to their understanding and views of EFL teaching. As student teachers learnt about contrasting pedagogical discourses, such as intercomprehension and plurilingual education, they revised both their language teaching representations and their self-image as teachers-to-be, i.e. their EFL teacher identities. The author suggests the development of pedagogical knowledge about plurilingual education, the process of revising one’s representations of language teaching, and the re-construction of one’s professional identity, to be analysed systemically. As such, both teacher identity and teacher representations of language teaching are evolving and discursively constructed. Current research on language teacher identity has taken advantage of visual narratives (Kalaja & Melo-Pfeifer, 2019; Pinho, 2019), particularly drawings, as a mediating tool to capture participants’ personal and professional representations, subjective positionings and identities, particularly as regards pluri/multilingualism and language education. Such visual, multimodal material is at the core of the present study’s methodology, to be described next.

3 Research Methodology

3.1 Data collection: Participants and contexts

The participants include both pre-service (Group 1) and in-service teachers (Group 2).

Group 1 consists of 13 pre-service EFL teachers enrolled on a professional MA programme for Teaching English in Primary School at the University of Lisbon, in Portugal. The programme lasts three semesters (corresponding to 90 ECTS), and data collection took place in the context of two subject courses – one in the first and the other in the third and last semesters of the degree. These courses were taught by the first author of this chapter. The dataset consists of 39 drawings, collected from 2016 to 2021 (totalling four cohorts of pre-service teachers). Considering the national context and formal language learning trajectories, pre-service teachers’ language paths may include English, French, German and Spanish, besides Portuguese. The participants of Group 1 were all women, and they may or may not have had previous teaching experience, depending on their age and previous professional path or academic qualifications (Pinho, 2019; Pinho, forthcoming).

Group 2 included 53 in-service PHL teachers who work for the Portuguese Teaching Abroad (PTA) network in Switzerland. They teach PHL to pupils from six to 18 years old, from A1 to C1 competence levels, and they have varying teaching experience in PTA (from two to more than 20 years). Due to the national context in which these in-service PHL teachers work, linguistic and cultural diversity is part of their daily lives. The dataset comprises 64 visual narratives (and their written explanations) and was collected in the context of a three-year professional development project ‘Manhãs Transformadoras’ (Transformative Mornings), coordinated by the second author. The project intended to foster teachers’ collaborative work, share and debate teaching experiences, expand and (re)construct professional knowledge, and to support and enhance teaching practice.

The data were collected at different times with both groups, and specific instructions were given to the production of the visual narratives, as described in Table 9.1. Regardless of the differences in the timeline, the data collection aimed at gathering the pre- and in-service teachers’ thinking both at the beginning and end of the professional development situations they were involved in. With this purpose in mind, similar instructions were given to the teachers, thus allowing some comparability.

Table 9.1 Production of visual narratives: instructions per group

Group 1

Group 2

Beginning of 1st semester

‘Think of a metaphor that illustrates your view of what it means to be a EFL primary school teacher. Write it down and explain it. Make a drawing depicting your view and metaphor.’

Beginning of the project, in 2017

‘Think of a metaphor to illustrate the way you see yourself as a PHL teacher. Describe and draw it.’ [Vision as a teacher].

End of 1st semester

‘Revisit your initial metaphor and drawing. If you still agree with it, explain why. If not, make a new drawing, explain, and justify it.’

End of the project, in 2020

‘Revisit your metaphor and visual narrative. You may add new elements to it or reformulate it completely. Explain your decisions.’

[Vision as a teacher – revisited]

Beginning of 2nd semester

‘Draw yourself teaching English in primary school. Explain your drawing in detail.’

End of 2nd semester

‘My class in three years’ time. Describe and explain your drawing in detail.’

Ethical procedures were ensured in the processes of data collection. The pre- and in-service teachers gave their informed consent to the participation in the study, and their names were codified to safeguard their identity and guarantee anonymity (pre-service/in-service teacher, plus a number, e.g. PST1 or IST1).

3.2 Data analysis

Data analysis followed an interpretative approach, according to which we tried to infer and give meaning to the participants’ multimodal discourses (Barkhuizen, 2011). Our analytical focus was on the content of the multimodal narratives, complemented by the corresponding written explanations. In this ‘analysis of narratives’, as Barkhuizen describes it, we coded for themes, which we then grouped into categories. We also tried to find patterns of association among them. Although in Section 2 of this chapter we alluded to the evolving and dynamic nature of teacher identity and language teaching representations, our decision in the present study was to provide an overview of the participants’ experience. This methodological option is useful to obtain a ‘state-of-the-art’ perspective of the two groups, considering the collective and shared nature of the representations of EFL and PHL as social constructs. In this case, the representations of EFL and PHL depicted in the visual narratives are analysed regardless of the social interaction contexts where they occurred, and with the intent of ‘photographing’ the participants’ interpretations (Andrade et al., 2007). This would mean that despite the temporality associated with the instruction-giving in both groups, for the purpose of the current study, the time dimension will not be considered in the analysis, nor will the sociocultural context of production be deeply analysed. The findings thus achieved allowed us to then discuss EFL and PHL teachers’ identity in relation to linguistic and cultural diversity through a social justice lens overall.

We explored the corpora of drawings of both teacher groups to identify the ones that explicitly address the theme ‘Linguistic and cultural diversity in language education’. To identify such drawings, we examined what is represented in each drawing, and compared it with the written explanation for clarity (almost all the written explanations were produced in Portuguese and translated into English). Out of the 39 (100%) drawings of Group 1, 16 (41%) were coded under the theme ‘linguistic and cultural diversity in language education’, while 8 (12.5%) were selected out of the 64 (100%) drawings of Group 2. After this first step, we moved to the identification of patterns and the definition of categories (Table 9.2). The drawings that fitted into the theme mention aspects related to curricular content (such as language/culture, values, or transversal competences) and communication in the classroom (notably, the co-existence of EFL or PHL and other languages).

Table 9.2 Categories of analysis

Theme: Linguistic and cultural diversity in language education

Subject matter

Categories

Occurrences

Total no. of drawings

English as a Foreign Language

Monolingual/-cultural view of classroom communication

13

16

(Inter)Cultural dimension of foreign language teaching

8

Pluri/Multilingualism in the classroom

3

Portuguese as a Heritage Language

Oneself as a curator of Portuguese culture

7

8

PHL as a site for shared intercultural knowledge construction

1

A final note on the analysis procedures should be made. It is sometimes difficult to draw clear boundaries between categories, as a single drawing may fall into more than one category. This was the case of the drawings of Group 1, as some of them were coded both under ‘Monolingual/-cultural view of classroom communication’ and ‘(Inter)Cultural dimension of foreign language teaching’ (Table 9.2). This means that a single drawing (e.g. Figure 9.2) would include a monolingual view of the classroom communication articulated with an intercultural dimension of language teaching. This is an example of the dynamic and sometimes contrasting nature of teachers’ representations, which ultimately integrate multiple layers of how they perceive the language classroom.

4 Findings

The findings will be reported in two stages to answer the guiding research questions. Given the specificity of the participants’ profiles (phase in teacher education/development, national context, and target language), we will first report the findings based on each teacher group, seeking to answer the first research question (What are pre-service and in-service teachers’ representations of EFL and of PHL regarding linguistic and cultural diversity, and how do such representations compare to each other?) We will then move on to the discussion of the findings, considering the second research question: What professional identity is in the making regarding pedagogy for linguistic and cultural diversity through the lens of social justice?

4.1 Representations of English as a foreign language

This section presents EFL teacher’s representations, organised around the three main categories and illustrated with data samples: (1) monolingual/-cultural view of classroom communication; (2) (inter)cultural dimension of foreign language teaching, and (3) pluri/multilingualism in the classroom.

4.1.1 Monolingual/-cultural view of classroom communication

The focus on English as the target and dominant language in the classroom is a consistent trend in the category. Pre-service teachers consistently refer to a particular foreign language classroom, whose primary purpose is the development of pupils’ communicative competence in a given language, mainly English.

Figure 9.1 is illustrative of such representations. Through a metaphorical picture (the gardener and the garden), the pre-service teacher pleasantly (with a smiling face) takes on the role of one who fosters pupils’ willingness to learn English. This interpretation is represented in the seeds she plants and that grow to become trees and flowers. As she explains, ‘Being an English language teacher in primary school is to “cultivate” a taste for the learning of a second language’ (PST5, written explanation, translation). Although the idea of motivating learners is at the core of her explanation, one cannot overlook the strong symbolic dimension linked to the Union Jack flag, and accordingly to the British English variety, and link it to the standard language the pupils seem to be expected to learn. Eventually, the flag at the core of the tree may also signify that she desires that such EFL becomes part of pupils’ language knowledge and identity as speakers.

Figure 9.1 Planting the taste for learning EFL (PST5)

The drawings that fall into this category tend to depict a monolingual perspective of the EFL classroom both in terms of content and communication, and a sociolinguistic and sociocultural perspective, whose purpose is preparing pupils to interact with native speakers and specific English-speaking countries.

4.1.2 (Inter)cultural dimension of foreign language teaching

Figure 9.2 reinforces the monocultural representation of the EFL classroom discussed above. The pre-service teacher performs the role of a tourist guide and depicts the classroom as a cultural journey. Symbolically, she also alludes to the United Kingdom, notably through a set of cultural items (a double-decker bus, a teacup and a teapot, Big Ben and the Houses of Parliament, a traditional telephone box). Culture is here understood as a set of practices and artifacts, somehow resembling a collective way of acting, as if there were no other cultural manifestations in each country. When reflecting on her drawing, the teacher remarks

Figure 9.2 Cultural journey, tourist guide and global citizenship (PST2)

… every time when thinking of an English language class [I feel like a] ‘children’s tourist guide’ or a native person of English who, when in the classroom, takes her culture with her and everything it embraces, the language and its cultural dimension. I imagine myself (and wish to be seen as such by the pupils) as someone who was born in that country, usually in England, and that tries to show them how the language is spoken there, how people live …’ (PST2, written explanation, translation).

Although she also makes a reference to other English-speaking countries, the idea of a touristic perspective of teaching still prevails. Culture is then displayed as something static, homogeneous, ‘almost frozen in time’, and not as a co-construction between peoples. Yet, interestingly, the pre-service teacher also includes a terrestrial globe and words such as peace, love, human rights, children’s rights, citizenship, friendship, empathy, solidarity, respect, equality, freedom and justice; choices that are part of a democratic culture and global citizenship education.

From this perspective, despite the monolithic approach to the teaching of culture in the EFL classroom, this pre-service teacher recognises the paramount role of the language teacher in the development of pupils’ values and interpersonal skills as global citizens, even though she does not acknowledge in her written account that existing ideologies of global citizenship may have different implications for pedagogical work in the classroom and the student as a citizen. She clarifies that

From the English class, as they [pupils] come into contact with a different culture, it is my hope that they all acquire the notion that, deep down, we are all equal … and that by approaching the topic of education for global citizenship, they understand that all have the same concerns, needs, rights and duties, as global citizens (PST2, written explanation, translation).

While the drawing in Figure 9.2 is in-between two images of EFL teaching (monocultural vs. global), Figure 9.3 clearly represents an intercultural perspective of the EFL classroom. The coloured shades cladding the globe, and the human figures holding hands around the world, intend to symbolise togetherness and diversity. As the student teacher explains,

Figure 9.3 Preparation for intercultural encounters through EFL (PST1)

… I am to bring insight to the pupils about knowledge, different perspectives of life, diverse cultures, the production of opinions, and the ability to convey these personal thoughts. … and transmit them [pupils] that English is an important tool to open many doors in the entire world (PST1, written explanation, originally in English).

To sum up, the visual narratives under this category point to a broader image of the EFL classroom as a site to prepare pupils for intercultural encounters. Yet pre-service teachers still need to adopt a critical lens as to what stands as culture in their images of EFL teaching.

4.1.3 Pluri/multilingualism in the classroom

The drawings in this category unveil a multilingual perspective and the willingness of pre-service teachers to incorporate pluri/multilingual pedagogies into their EFL teaching. Yet the image of an EFL classroom that recognises, treasures, resorts to, and expands pluri/multilingualism is a less salient one compared to the previous two representations, when analysing the 39 drawings (see Table 9.2 above).

Figure 9.4 represents a ‘projected’ image of the EFL classroom and illustrates the view of a pluri/multilingual classroom. The blackboards on the top of the paper sheet display the learning principles (written from the pupil’s perspective) that the pre-service teacher wishes will guide her teaching. They exemplify some of the I-statements, ‘I respect myself and others’, ‘I learn about other languages and cultures’, ‘I share my similarities and celebrate my differences’ or ‘My language biography is important in my English classes’. Besides a happy and welcoming atmosphere, the classroom environment presents several learning and interactional situations. On the bottom left-hand corner, there is a group of pupils talking to each other and greeting each other using different languages, and two of them say ‘We are all the same’ and ‘We learn together’. In the centre, we have a desk and a group of children elaborating their language biographies in the form of flowers. On the right side of the drawing, we may find an interdisciplinary, language and content integrated learning corner, with several subject matter books titled in English. Finally, on the bottom right, near the classroom door, the teacher is welcoming two newly arrived immigrant pupils.

Figure 9.4 Pluri/multilingual and intercultural EFL classroom (PST6)

This drawing illustrates a much more complex pedagogical understanding of the EFL classroom, as the pre-service teacher adopts ethical principles that show awareness and inclusivity of the linguistic diversity of the classroom, while also embracing teaching practices that are responsive to such diversity. Also, the corner based on integrative teaching practices may be a hint that she understands that plurilingual education should be pervasive to curriculum development in school.

4.2 Representations of Portuguese as a heritage language

This section focuses on teachers’ representations of PHL: (1) oneself as a curator of the Portuguese culture; and (2) PHL as a site for shared intercultural knowledge construction.

4.2.1 Oneself as a curator of the Portuguese culture

The drawings falling into this category clearly identify the Portuguese culture as the content of teaching. The strong reference to the Portuguese national culture as the heritage culture to be addressed in Portuguese language classes would be totally expected considering the migrant context, the curriculum guidelines and education policy linked to the teachers’ mission in the Portuguese Teaching Abroad network.

Figures 9.5 and 9.6 illustrate the image of the teacher as a curator and the PHL classroom as a cultural discovery journey. In Figure 9.5, the drawing portrays a caravel, a symbol of Portuguese maritime history, and, according to the in-service teacher, it represents the Portuguese monument ‘Padrão dos Descobrimentos’ (‘Monument to the Discoveries’), located in Lisbon, the country’s capital. This allusion to such a symbolic monument goes back to the country’s striking historical role in maritime navigation, something the teacher seems to value as part of their cultural identity. As one may see, the teacher takes on the leading role in the cultural exploration (as person situated at the ship’s fore and wearing a hat, like a captain commanding their crew, i.e. the pupils).

Figure 9.5 A caravel (IST4)

Figure 9.6 Connecting to Portuguese culture (IST24)

Figure 9.6 reinforces this connection to the cultural routes, here represented by the map of Portugal on the left side, the bridge symbolising the Portuguese language and the car representing the Portuguese teacher as the carrier of Portuguese culture to the Portuguese migrant community in Switzerland. It is also striking that the means of transport is a car, which is still a common travel practice of many Portuguese emigrant families when they visit Portugal for the holidays. Although the bridge would signify a two-way course, the fact is that the arrows referring to Portuguese culture (under the bridge) are unidirectional. This considered, the mediating role of the teacher, at least in the drawing, is between the heritage culture and the pupils, with no explicit reference being made to the pluricultural nature of the pupils or the country they live in. As supported by the in-service teacher’s own words, ‘PHL teacher, a vehicle for the dissemination of the Portuguese language and the foundation of the cultural bridge between the country and the immigrant community’.

Overall, the drawings in this category convey a static conception of culture, linked to the development of the pupils’ sociocultural learning about their or their parents’ home country, and the promotion of an affective and identity dimension as regards family routes, which is a striking characteristic of Heritage Language Teaching. In fact, teachers assume the role of cultural delegates (representatives) whose job is to deliver Portuguese cultural assets to their pupils. Thus, besides history, the drawings refer to literature (Luís Vaz de Camões, Fernando Pessoa, José Saramago) or to geography (the map of Portugal).

This effort to connect pupils to what is perceived as Portuguese culture is also reflected in how the in-service teachers emphasise the learning of the Portuguese language and the importance of preserving it. Further details in the written explanations of the drawings point to the competition with other languages. Teachers refer to the fact that apart from the four national languages, and the learning of EFL in Swiss schools, Switzerland provides facilities to the teaching of many other heritage languages, and one of the tasks of PHL teachers is to foster the pupils’ motivation to learn Portuguese (Zingg & Gonçalves, 2022).

Additionally, the development of personal values and interpersonal skills through the teaching of the Portuguese language and culture are also embedded in this representation, as explained by the in-service teacher’s authoring of Figure 9.5:

It (the caravel) symbolizes the sense of orientation, the ability to adapt, caring, risking, and providing yourself with the necessary tools. The need for a sustainable boat, to follow new paths, to invent new paths. It symbolizes solidarity, respect for others, the attention needed to bring the boat to a safe harbour, to stimulate, take risks, and face fears and the tide. The need to be organized, to be independent and to know how to work in a team (IST4, translation).

4.2.2 PHL as site for shared intercultural knowledge construction

Even though Figure 9.6 refers to the teacher’s mediating role, this mediation process seems to be one-way. Yet there was a drawing that expanded this understanding (Figure 9.7). Despite being the single drawing explicitly alluding to the inter-cultural aspect, we considered its discussion worthwhile. The picture reveals a fountain with water dropping and a set of three circles (the one on the left, the teacher; the middle one, the knowledge; and the one on the right, the pupils). The in-service PHL teacher clarifies that ‘I feel like an “intercultural mediator” where possible, I encourage an intercultural dialogue with the students. I don’t just teach, there is an exchange of knowledge’ (IST22, translation).

Figure 9.7 Knowledge construction (IST22)

Even if tacitly, the teacher is aware of the diversity in the classroom, and that learning should be a shared enterprise between the pupils and the teacher, thus showing the teacher’s awareness of a bidirectional learning process: ‘the water from this fountain comes from the exchange of knowledge between the pupils and the teacher’. Such a statement invokes a fluid conception of culture as co-constructed knowledge, resulting from exchanges between people.

4.3 Representations of EFL and PLH in dialogue

This section discusses the results, by comparing the pre- and in-service teachers’ representations of EFL and PHL and addressing the second research question (What professional identity is in the making regarding pedagogy for linguistic and cultural diversity through the lens of social justice?).

When comparing pre-service and in-service teachers’ images of EFL and PHL, it is possible to identify similarities and differences. While the former may be connected to historically situated theories and social discourses pervading (foreign) language teaching and learning (Corbett, 2022; Crozet et al., 1999), the latter may be mainly related to contextual and socio-professional factors. Another reason may be linked to their professionalising degrees, as almost all were enrolled on teacher education programmes taking place in Portugal, despite the different timelines. Yet it is plausible to affirm that all the EFL and PHL representations emerge from the pre- and in-service teachers’ lived experience and how they manage to author themselves in an ecology of proliferating discourses about the language teaching profession and the place of linguistic and cultural diversity in education (Chen et al., 2022; Krulatz et al., 2022; Pinho, forthcoming).

A common pattern to the representations of the pre- and in-service teachers is the role allocated to culture in the teaching of EFL or PHL. They all acknowledge that language and culture are educationally intermingled, and that it is important that culture does not subordinate to the instrumental objectives of language teaching, that are solely focused on the promotion of the pupils’ linguistic competence and activation of language skills. The cultural component of language teaching is strongly embedded in the PHL teachers’ imagery, who ostensibly take as their priority to mediate between the heritage language and culture and pupils’ awareness and knowledge of it (Figures 9.5 and 9.6). In this case, it is felt to be an essential curricular objective. As for the pre-service EFL teachers, culture is also envisaged as a central focus in the classroom, the privilege being conferred to the so-called authentic and symbolic materials and practices (Figures 9.1 and 9.2).

Although there is a range of conceptualisations of culture, which makes it a disputed concept (Corbett, 2022; Crozet et al., 1999), both teacher groups share a similar understanding when contrasting the EFL representation ‘Monolingual/-cultural view of the classroom communication’ and the PHL one, ‘Oneself as Portuguese culture curator’. The purpose of the teaching of culture is to develop pupils’ (socio)cultural knowledge in a given target language and country, while displaying a closed, crystallised view of the cultural phenomena or realities. The perspective of one language, one culture, one nation seems to predominate. Macedo (2019) would describe this representation as a colonised view of language teaching, according to which there is a hierarchization of knowledge. Yet this takes a different configuration whether we speak of EFL or PHL. While the pre-service EFL teachers aspire to a native-speaker-like model, the PHL teachers (although following the European Portuguese standard) see culture as a tool to strengthen the ties between the migration-background pupils and the Portuguese community in Switzerland, and the heritage country, thus pursuing a bi-cultural mindset linked to affective and identity purposes, since the current PHL pupils are mainly born in Switzerland. Consequently, no reference is made to cultural manifestations in Portuguese-speaking countries, which may lead to a colonised view of PHL curriculum development.

In contrast, pre-service EFL teachers try to accommodate an inter-cultural discourse (Figures 9.2 and 9.3). Even though the monolithic view of culture seems to prevail, the pre-service teachers also advocate for the language classroom as an intercultural encounter or a space for the development of intercultural citizenship competences. This interpretation may be aligned with Abdallah-Pretceille (2006) and her view of culturality, which would imply thinking of cultural learning in a context of diversity, multidimensionality and interactions between peoples and groups. Figure 9.3 specifically emphasises the idea of togetherness and the joint construction of ‘culturality’, according to which cultures are not perceived as independent entities, but as socially and politically situated and resulting from communication-based realities. As such, EFL teaching would create opportunities to learn with and from others (Corbett, 2022). In the case of PHL teaching, such an intercultural approach is still emerging (Figure 9.7), when compared to the unquestionable role of the Portuguese culture in the teachers’ imagery.

Another topic worthy of attention is the place accorded by teachers to linguistic diversity in the EFL and PHL classrooms. Both groups of teachers convey a monolingualised understanding of classroom communication, or as Gogolin (1997) would put it, a monolingual habitus and homogenised classroom. Whereas the pre-service EFL teachers seem to value specific language standards (e.g. British English) (Figure 9.1), the PHL teachers implicitly ascribe the main role to the European variety of Portuguese as the formal curricular content. Neither of the groups seem to explicitly acknowledge that English and Portuguese languages are socially, culturally and geographically diverse, and that such intralinguistic diversity can be an asset in language teaching and learning. In addition, given the sociolinguistic features of the Swiss context, there is no explicit reference to such linguistic diversity, except for Figures 9.5 and 9.6, in the context of which in-service teachers present themselves as the ‘defenders’ of the Portuguese language, regarding other co-existing contextual and personal languages. Concerning future EFL teachers, the mainly exclusive presence of the English language in the classroom, either as educational content, or a means of communication/interaction between pupils, and pupils and the teacher, may be a result of the appropriation of the myth of the harmful use of the mother tongue(s) in the language classroom, alongside the national context in which the EFL teaching is occurring, on the one hand, and the lack of or little awareness and pedagogical know-how about pluri/multilingual teaching and communication practices, on the other hand (Paulsrud et al., 2023; Pinho, forthcoming). Such arguments may explain why the representation of a pluri/multilingual classroom is not so prevalent in the pre-service EFL teachers’ imagery, and almost non-existent as regards PHL teachers involved in the present study. This result underlines the relevance of professional learning in plurilingual/multilingual education (Krulatz et al., 2022; Zingg & Gonçalves, 2022). Finally, the perspective that language teaching should pursue educational objectives, and the development of personal, interpersonal and citizenship competences is a transversal pattern in both teacher groups and is aligned with long-time authoritative discourses on language education (Corbett, 2022; Herzog-Punzenberger et al., 2017).

In brief, the teachers’ visual narratives reflect a teacher identity based on ingrained representations of EFL and PHL teaching. The pre-service EFL teachers convey more diverse shades of such representations, opening up avenues for an identity project as a teacher. One may also ascertain the co-existence of polarised views of EFL teaching, which may mean that they are trying to make sense of competing discourses and eventually negotiate conflicting subject positions. EFL student teachers thus usually rely on their tacit understanding of language teaching, which is in many cases a result of their experiences as language learners and of a default perspective of the teacher’s work. Pinho (2008) pinpoints that when student teachers are asked about their main representation of EFL, they refer to the teaching of grammar and language as a system, combined with an English-only language policy in the classroom and the native-speaker model as the one to aspire to. The discourse of plurilingualism and plurilingual education becomes disruptive, as it triggers a questioning process about the EFL representations and the self-image of language teachers.

In-service PHL teachers display a solid attachment to the social, cultural and institutional contexts where they come from, and live and work in, and particularly with the nature of the learner population (Beauchamp & Thomas, 2009; Hong et al., 2018). Such a contextual dimension seems to interact with their authoring space and the construction of their identity as PHL teachers, since they are asked to negotiate the latter with the demands of the mission they were ascribed abroad. Clearly, the disciplinary field and the conceptualisations teachers develop about it may affect their identity work (Hong et al., 2018; Chen et al., 2022).

To conclude, the EFL and PHL teachers’ representations may be understood as being part of an overarching (sometimes conflictual) identity space (Boylan & Woolsey, 2015), since such representations co-exist and co-relate, depending on how the pre- and in-service teachers experience their trajectories, and how they socially and contextually negotiate the authoring process in relation to pedagogy for linguistic and cultural diversity. Yet our snapshot analysis uncovers the need to engage pre- and in-service teachers in the agentive transformation of their storylines and identities, from a social justice lens. This will be addressed in the following section.

5 Lessons Learnt

In our roles as a teacher educator and a coordinator of teacher professional development plans, it was very important to us to learn about the pre- and in-service teachers’ interpretative frameworks considering pedagogy for linguistic and cultural diversity and how these may be shaping their identity development. Despite the existing knowledge base on (language) teacher learning and identity, there are no clear-cut answers, nor miraculous solutions as to how to address such a topic.

Taking Pijanowski and Brady (2021) into account, it is important to combine core tenets of a social justice framework as part of the very act of being a language teacher, with intentional practices as part of their work as educators. The comparative discussion in the previous section highlighted that pre-service and in-service teachers would benefit from learning situations that support the development of their critical multilingual awareness (García, 2017; Piccardo et al., 2022). This would entail not only be(com)ing aware of plurilingualism and appreciating linguistic diversity, but also being conscious of ‘the histories of colonial and imperialistic oppression that has produced the plurilingualism in society’ (García, 2017: 268), and of how their representations of language teaching may, or may not, be perpetuating linguistic and cultural invisibility and exclusion. For instance, McDonald and Zeichner (2009) and Boylan and Woolsey (2015) suggest that teachers analyse curriculum guidelines and practices to see to what extent these embrace issues related to social justice, and to linguistic and cultural diversity. Particularly regarding pre-service teacher education, it is suggested that the assessment of student teachers’ learning incorporates ‘knowledge of multicultural, antibias curriculum planning’ (McDonald & Zeichner, 2009: 603).

One of the implications of this study to the field and to our work involves designing and implementing challenging learning situations about pedagogies for linguistic and cultural diversity. Such situations would allow teachers to experience and critically reflect upon their vulnerability vis-à-vis authoritative discourses, and to gain conceptual and practical tools that integrate plurilingual education and social justice, hopefully embracing linguistic justice (Piller, 2016), or ‘liberating-empowering’ conceptualisations (Soler & Morales-Gálvez, 2022) of language education, and hopefully fostering the language classroom as a space for linguistic citizenship and agency (Stroud, 2018).

This is consistent with Barkhuizen’s standpoint (2017), which envisions, among others, the need to study further the aspirations and imagined (future) identities of teachers, as well as their long-term professional development, also in multilingual contexts. In devising future research directions in teacher identity, and particularly in the development of subject-specific teacher identities, we believe it is important to look into the larger historical, politico-educational and cultural forces that shape pre- and in-service teachers’ imagery and agency (McDonald & Zeichner, 2009; Pantić & Florian, 2015), to understand how the narrative experience is produced (Barkhuizen, 2011) in the ‘learning-to-teach journey’ (Jenlink, 2021a, 2021b). For instance, the pre-service EFL teachers were attending two subject courses that intentionally addressed citizenship, intercultural and plurilingual education in EFL teaching. The study of such lived experience would certainly add to the findings of this study (see Pinho, forthcoming). In-service PHL teachers were involved in the project ‘Manhãs Transformadoras’ and worked in micro-communities of practice. Learning about if and how such dynamics influenced their teaching representations could be productive, as one of the pillars of social justice education would be collaborative work towards linguistic equity and inclusion (Pantić & Florian, 2015). Therefore, the analysis of the teacher education curriculum, broadly speaking, may help to better understand how EFL and PHL teachers conceptualise, and engage in, the practice of pedagogies for linguistic and cultural diversity from a social justice perspective.

All in all, visual narratives have proven to be rich, powerful research tools to capture teachers’ representations of EFL and PHL, and how these relate to professional identity. Further research would then benefit from the combination of visual narratives with comprehensive interviews, reflective (digital) portfolios, or even podcasts or vodcasts. Even if visual narratives uncover significant ontological representations, EFL and PHL teaching practices are far more complex and messier. Studies like the one reported in this chapter would also gain from resorting to classroom observation procedures, and/or from the intersection with research that considers temporality as a criterion for analysis of the drawings (see Pinho, forthcoming).

References

Abdallah-Pretceille, M. (2006) Interculturalism as a paradigm for thinking about diversity. Intercultural Education 17 (5), 475–483. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675980601065764

Andrade, A.I., Araújo e Sá, M.H. and Moreira, G. (eds) (2007) Imagens das línguas e do plurilinguismo: princípios e sugestões de intervenção educativa. Cadernos do LALE – Propostas n.° 4. Universidade de Aveiro. https://www.ua.pt/pt/cidtff/lale/page/12923

Bakhtin, M. (1981) The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays (trans. M. Holquist). University of Texas Press.

Barkhuizen, G. (2011) Narrative knowledging in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly 45 (3), 391–414. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2011.261888

Barkhuizen, G. (2017) Language teacher identity research: An introduction. In G. Barkhuizen (ed.) Reflections on Language Teacher Identity (pp. 1–11). Routledge.

Beacco, J.-C., Byram, M., Cavalli, M., Coste, D., Cuenat, M., Goullier, F. and Panthier, J. (2010) Guide for the Development and Implementation of Curricula for Plurilingual and Intercultural Education. Council of Europe/Language Policy Department.

Beauchamp, C. and Thomas, L. (2009) Understanding teacher identity: An overview of issues in the literature and implications for teacher education. Cambridge Journal of Education 39 (2), 175–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640902902252

Beijaard, D. (2019) Teacher learning as identity learning: Models, practices, and topics. Teachers and Teaching 25 (1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2019.1542871

Borg, S. (2003) Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching 36 (2), 81–109. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444803001903

Boylan, M. and Woolsey, I. (2015) Teacher education for social justice: Mapping identity spaces. Teaching and Teacher Education 46, 62–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.10.007

Chen, S., Zhang, L. and Parr, J.M. (2022) Authoring selves in language teaching: A dialogic approach to language teacher psychology. Frontiers in Psychology 13, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.839152

Connelly, F.M. and Clandinin, D.J. (1988) Teachers as Curriculum Planners: Narratives of Experience. Teachers College Press.

Corbett, J. (2022) An Intercultural Approach to English Language Teaching (2nd edn). Multilingual Matters.

Crozet, C., Liddicoat, A. and Lo Bianco, J. (1999) Intercultural competence: From language policy to language education. In J. Lo Bianco, A. Liddicoat and C. Crozet (eds) Striving for the Third Place: Intercultural Competence through Language Education (pp. 1–22). Language Australia.

García, O. (2017) Critical multilingual language awareness and teacher education. In J. Cenoz, D. Gorter and S. May (eds) Language Awareness and Multilingualism (pp. 263–280). Springer.

Gogolin, I. (1997) The ‘monolingual habitus’ as the common feature in teaching in the language of the majority in different countries. Per Linguam 13 (2), 38–49. https://doi.org/10.5785/13-2-187

Haukås, Å. (2016) Teachers’ beliefs about multilingualism and a multilingual pedagogical approach. International Journal of Multilingualism 13 (1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2015.1041960

Herzog-Punzenberger, B., Le Pichon-Vorstman, E. and Siarova, H. (2017) Multilingual Education in the Light of Diversity: Lessons Learned, NESET II Report. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2766/71255

Hong, J., Francis, D. and Schutz, P. (2018) Research on teacher identity: Common themes, implications, and future directions. In P. Schultz, J. Hong and D. Francis (eds) Research on Teacher Identity (pp. 243–251). Springer.

Jenlink, P. (2021a) Preface. In P. Jenlink (ed.) Understanding Teacher Identity: The Complexities of Forming an Identity as Professional Teacher (pp. ix–xii). Rowman & Littlefield.

Jenlink, P. (2021b) The development of teacher identity. In P. Jenlink (ed.) Understanding Teacher Identity: The Complexities of Forming an Identity as Professional Teacher (pp. 1–12). Rowman & Littlefield.

Kalaja, P. and Melo-Pfeifer, S. (eds) (2019) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words. Multilingual Matters.

Krulatz, A., Christison, M., Lorenz, E. and Sevinç, Y. (2022) The impact of teacher professional development on teacher cognition and multilingual teaching practices. International Journal of Multilingualism 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2022.2107648

Macedo, D. (ed.) (2019) Decolonizing Foreign Language Education: The Misteaching of English and Other Colonial Languages. Routledge.

McDonald, M. and Zeichner, K. (2009) Social justice teacher education. In W. Ayers, T. Quinn and D. Stovall (eds) Handbook of Social Justice in Education (pp. 595–610). Routledge.

Pantić, N. and Florian, L. (2015) Developing teachers as agents of inclusion and social justice. Education Inquiry 6 (3), 333–351. https://doi.org/10.3402/edui.v6.27311

Paulsrud, B., Juvonen, P. and Schalley, A.C. (2023) Attitudes and beliefs on multilingualism in education: Voices from Sweden. International Journal of Multilingualism 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2022.2153851

Piccardo, E., Germain-Rutherford, A. and Lawrence, G. (2022) An introduction to plurilingualism and this handbook. In E. Piccardo, A. Germain-Rutherford and G. Lawrence (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Plurilingual Education (pp. 1–15). Routledge.

Pijanowski, J.C. and Brady, K. (2021) Defining social justice in education. In C.A. Mullen (ed.) Handbook of Social Justice Interventions in Education (pp. 59–82). Springer.

Piller, I. (2016) Linguistic Diversity and Social Justice. Oxford.

Pinho, A.S. (2008) Intercompreensão, identidade e conhecimento profissional na formação de professores de línguas. [Doctoral dissertation, Universidade de Aveiro]. Repository of Universidade de Aveiro. http://hdl.handle.net/10773/8216

Pinho, A.S. (2019) Plurilingual education and the identity development of pre-service English language teachers: An illustrative example. In P. Kalaja and S. Melo-Pfeifer (eds) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words (pp. 214–231). Multilingual Matters.

Pinho, A.S. (forthcoming) Pre-service teachers’ professional identity and representations of English as a Foreign Language: Toward a dominant language (teaching) constellation? In L. Aronin and S. Melo-Pfeifer (eds) Dominant Language Constellations: Language Awareness and Identity. Springer.

Soler, J. and Morales-Gálvez, S. (2022) Linguistic justice and global English: Theoretical and empirical approaches. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 2022(277), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl-2022-0026

Stroud, C. (2018) Linguistic citizenship. In L. Lim, C. Stroud and L. Wee (eds) The Multilingual Citizen: Towards a Politics of Language for Agency and Change (pp. 17–39). Multilingual Matters.

Zingg, I. and Gonçalves, M.L. (2022) (I)Legitimate languages or ‘What talking means’: What space(s) for didactic collaboration between heritage language teaching and compulsory education in Switzerland? Sisyphus – Journal of Education 10 (3), 265–293. https://doi.org/10.25749/sis.27255

10Visualizing Translanguaging Awareness in Language Teacher Education: A Case Study

Josh Prada

1 Introduction

Language teacher cognition refers to what language teachers think, know or believe, and their relationship with what they do in their teaching practices (Borg, 2003). Starting in the 1970s through the works of Dunkin and Biddle (1974), this area of research has covered themes such as judgments, decision-making, grounds for specific interactions, and practical knowledge, among many others. For language teachers specifically, as well as for teachers working with multilingual students in their classrooms, language attitudes and ideologies are two fundamental elements in their cognitive toolbox (Young, 2014). Language attitudes and ideologies constitute the bedrock informing the nature of what teachers think about named languages (e.g. Arabic, Spanish, Frisian) and their speakers, and in so doing shape their understanding of appropriateness (Gorter & Arocena, 2020; Prada, 2022a). Typically, monolingual mindsets, the embracement of standard language culture, and the understanding that language learners should aspire to monolingual-likeness in their ‘additional language’ are central notions which teachers bring into the classroom and disseminate through their practices. This is particularly problematic among teachers working with language minoritized and racialized multilinguals, such as US Latinxs/Hispanics, members of the transnational Turkish community in Germany, or Chinese speakers in Australia, who may have already internalized deficit discourses about the social value of these forms of multilingualism.

Multilingual students of immigrant backgrounds populate public education, and increasingly so, making their recognition as rightful multilingual users a pressing issue for educators across subjects. To be clear, multilingualism in the classroom, and the development of equitable pedagogical approaches for language-minoritized youths, should be a focus for all educators, not just language educators, at all levels. The number of immigrant residents in the US has been growing exponentially over the last five decades contributing to cultural and linguistic diversification of the country’s population (Suárez-Orozco & Osei-Twumasi, 2019), a pattern that has defined US society for decades. Similarly, countries such as Germany and Australia have seen an increase in school-age children who have arrived in particularly high numbers (Terhart & von Dewitz, 2018) as refugees and asylum seekers. Multilingualism in educational contexts has become the norm in many regions, and students from different backgrounds are enrolling in schools and bringing with them languages (and dialects) in addition to the language(s) of instruction, thus transforming the sociolinguistic realities of classrooms (Hélot et al., 2018). Through the poststructuralist lens that characterizes this chapter, the organic multilingual collages shaping the landscapes of many classrooms are part of an ever-in-flux linguistic (and broader semiotic) repertoire that grows and changes in dialogue with contextual and individual features: a repertoire that is misrepresented by traditional linear, additive descriptions of language(s) as named entities (García & Otheguy, 2020; García & Li, 2022; Prada, 2022a).

At this stage, it is important to emphasize that multilingualism in the classroom is not new, nor extraordinary. What indeed is relatively recent is its recognition (even if still in its infancy) in mainstream education classroom dynamics in the Global North. Identifying strategies to help practitioners move towards despertares críticos, i.e. ‘(critical awakenings)’? is of utmost relevance to teacher educators (Prada, 2023). From the early years, multilingual students from immigrant backgrounds are often categorized based on their linguistic deficiencies. Well-intended (or at least, not ill-intended) descriptive labels such as English language learner and heritage language learner may serve such a purpose (Flores et al., 2015). The same applies to colleges and universities; in these contexts, Kibler et al. (2011: 205) explain that ‘Students’ multilingualism is often perceived as a “problem” … that can be “diagnosed” through placement tests and “treated” in appropriate language courses’. Such categorizations are strengthened by approaches that articulate monolingual oppressive and stigmatizing actions such as appropriateness discourses, certain types of corrective feedback provision, and the use of materials that privilege the linguistic practices of educated monolinguals (Poza et al., 2022).

More holistic and critical understandings of multilinguals are, therefore, in order, as we seek out ways to make language (in) education more solidly aligned with the realities of our classrooms while embracing equity as a social justice issue. Alongside critical multilingual ideologies, mindset shifts towards holistic understandings of our multilingual students, as complex people, are of the essence. For example, in addition to literacy and academic needs, students frequently have important emotional, mental health and well-being needs developed through a traumatic past, which may naturally lead to significant behavioral difficulties (Oliver et al., 2009). Similarly, other students may have internalized deficit discourse which can emerge as classroom anxiety and lack of engagement and participation (Prada et al., 2020). Teaching practices that emphasize standards and objectives while disregarding care, wellbeing and growth may add to the negative experiences of these students in education, perpetuating cycles of injustice while contributing to achievement gaps (Prada et al., 2020).

Reflecting on the brief snapshot presented above, changes in our approaches to teacher development and professional learning are long overdue. My work with pre- and in-service teachers takes place in a variety of contexts. Most commonly, I work with teachers enrolled in undergraduate and graduate programs in teacher education, world language teaching and TESOL, in-service teachers completing professional development credits in school districts, and novice and seasoned teachers attending seminars, institutes and workshops with specific thematic emphases, such as heritage language education, critical pedagogies or participatory action research.

Drawing from critical pedagogies, translanguaging, embodiment and language-arts approaches, this chapter contributes to this area of practice. Specifically, the chapter describes a proyecto final (final project) completed within the context of an international workshop to develop critical language teachers. The international workshop brought a cohort of pre- and novice teachers from Germany to Indianapolis for a week of experiential learning. The proyecto described herein was the capstone element following a series of e-exchanges and online conversations between the teachers and a group of bilingual US Latinxs/Hispanics, readings, discussions, ethnographic observations in a local school, and critical reflections. The objective of the proyecto was to use arts-based approaches to construct an object that visualized a key lesson learnt during the workshop. A central recurring theme emerging in the proyectos was the fluidity, flexibility and changing nature of our repertoires, their relation to our identities and experiences, and the need to be aware of this emergent nature as practicing teachers. After completion, students individually presented their proyectos to the rest of the cohort. At the heart of these presentations was the notion of translanguaging awareness (originally presented in Prada, 2021), a concept that had only briefly been mentioned during one of the lectures, but which was a guiding objective in the design and implementation of the international workshop.

As my own understanding of translanguaging awareness continues to evolve, an important source of insight are the people I work with: my students, collaborators and community members. While I introduce the notion of translanguaging awareness below, an important issue to present at this stage is that my definition of translanguaging awareness remains open to further saturation through my ongoing work with multilingual youths, teachers and professionals, creating the rationale for this study. To illustrate how this takes place on an ongoing basis, in the present chapter, I report on my engagement with Marie’s ideas and shifting worldviews through her proyecto final piece. At the time this study was conducted, Marie was an experienced PhD student in language didactics. I have chosen to report on Marie’s proyecto because it incorporates the reflexivity, criticality, interdisciplinary thinking and openness to growth that characterize good novice teachers. Her humility and kindness, coupled with a dedication to learning and curiosity, make Marie a good representative of her cohort. Moreover, Marie’s proyecto combines several elements introduced by other cohort members, and in doing so illustrates visualizing strategies, metaphors and rationales also included by many of her fellow novice teachers. Before delving into Marie’s proyecto, I lay out the bedrock to and present the notion of translanguaging awareness.

2 Background to the Study

2.1 Cognitive justice, multilingualism and embodiment

As stated by Sousa Santos (2007, 2018), social justice cannot exist without achieving cognitive justice first. Elsewhere (e.g. Prada, 2022a, 2022b, 2023), I have discussed how a key type of cognitive injustice affecting the field of language education is the deeply-rooted monolingual ideologies that sustain the general lack of critical awareness among teachers who are often unequipped to understand and to work with the grassroots multilingualism characterizing multilingual communities. Language ideologies guide what language teachers do in the classroom and inform pedagogical practice. Typically, these language ideologies are forged through a recognition of the superiority of monolingual language standards. In doing so, teachers reveal their histories of socialization into thinking of some ways of using language as naturally better than others, and by extension, situate certain speaker groups in more prominent positions than others.

Moving away from thinking about multilingualism (and about multilinguals) in this way and embracing an understanding of multilingualism from below (as organic and fluid behavior) constitutes an important step forward in language teacher development towards just change (Prada, 2022a). Therefore, offering students the tools to rethink multilingualism from below may equip them to engage with their students’ multilingualism (and often, with their own) through a lens that foregrounds a first-person approach, as described by Kalaja and Melo-Pfeifer (2019). By privileging the perspectives of multilingual people in our conceptualizations of multilingualism, the meaning-making practices, transnational histories and fluid, intersecting identities of our students become the models that re-shape our knowledge, beliefs and instincts about multilingualism. This reshaping has tremendous implications for education, including teacher education, as it informs the concepts of language as something we make (as an action) rather than something stable. In doing so, language is better captured as languaging.

With its origins in the works of Swain (2006, 2010), languaging has recently been redeveloped by a number of scholars working on distributed language (Cowley, 2011a; Linell, 2013; Love, 2004; Pedersen, 2012; Steffensen, 2012). These takes on languaging, though, build heavily on Becker’s work in the 1980s and 1990s. Through this line of work, Becker describes how he moves from the word ‘language’ to ‘languaging’ as a way to ‘shift from the idea of language as something accomplished … to the idea of languaging as an ongoing process … a movement away from language as something accomplished, apart from time and history, to language as something that is being done and reshaped constantly …. [Language is] always being created’ (Becker, 1991: 25).

Additionally, in recent years, the term has been furthered by Thibault (2005, 2011), who within distributed language studies, argues that there is a need for:

a renewed attempt to better understand the materially embodied, culturally/ecologically embedded, naturalistically grounded, affect-based, dialogically coordinated, and socially enacted nature of languaging as a form of whole-body behavior or whole-body sense making. (2011: 211)

This decentering of (named) language(s) within our understanding of meaning-making, the emphasis on action and the ongoingness of languaging, and its embeddedness into individual bodily resources are key for the definition of translanguaging awareness I formulate below.

As Jensen (2014) put it, studies separating language-as-a-system from language use create a boundary between what has historically been referred to as language vs. body-language and verbal vs. non-verbal communication. By conceiving of language as emanating from more general behavior, it is possible to view other important (yet underrepresented aspects) such as emotion and affect as integral parts of languaging. This brings emotion and affect into dialogue with language through an embodied perspective. The recent theoretical developments carving the way for such a proposal have taken place within a variety of new approaches to language, cognition and social interaction such as distributed language and cognition (Cowley, 2011; Jensen, 2014; Kravchenko, 2009; Pedersen, 2012; Steffensen, 2012; Thibault, 2005, 2011; Vallée-Tourangeau, 2013), dynamical systems and interpersonal coordination (Fowler, 2014; Fusaroli et al., 2013b), dialogism (Linell, 2005, 2009), ecological psychology (Hodges, 2009, 2011), and embodied and enacted cognition (Anderson et al., 2012; Di Paolo et al., 2013). Its implications for the education of multilingual youths are severely undertheorized. By attending to the dynamic interplay between language as action, embodiment, cognition and space, new complex, ecological approaches with great applications for teacher education emerge. Elsewhere, I have referred to the critical awareness of this interplay as central to the notion of translanguaging awareness (Prada, 2022b).

2.2 Translanguaging awareness: A working definition

While an exhaustive description of critical language awareness is beyond the scope of this article, a definition is in order. Originally developed by Fairclough (1994), critical language awareness (CLA) is a theoretical framework that helps individuals to critically examine how language shapes our understanding of the world and influences social power dynamics. CLA views language as a social practice that cannot be separated from the social and cultural context in which it is used, describing language use and language structure as influenced by social power dynamics and with potential to reinforce existing social hierarchies (Pennycook, 2010). Because of that, CLA recognizes that language can be a powerful tool for social change. By raising awareness of how language use reinforces social inequalities, individuals can use language to challenge dominant narratives and promote social justice (Razack, 2017). CLA emphasizes that language learning is a political act that involves learning about the social and cultural context in which language is used, and as such, language learning should involve critical reflection on how language is used to reinforce social power dynamics and promote social justice (Kramsch, 2018).

CLA is, however, not without critiques. One critique of CLA is that it places an overemphasis on language and disregards other factors such as economic, political, and historical aspects that shape social power dynamics (Blommaert, 2018: 136). This argument suggests that CLA may oversimplify the complexity of social dynamics by solely focusing on language. Some scholars argue that CLA overemphasizes the role of language in shaping social power dynamics and overlooks the agency of individuals to resist or challenge dominant narratives (Hornberger & Johnson, 2007), suggesting that CLA may be too deterministic and does not engage with the potential of individuals to resist language conventions. Another critique of CLA is the lack of empirical evidence to support its validity as a construct (Block, 2015). While CLA is widely used as a theoretical framework in language education and applied linguistics, there is a lack of empirical studies that have tested the effectiveness of CLA in promoting social justice in language education.

As a translanguaging scholar, my main critique of CLA stems from its emphasis on language(s) as named entities, as well as its inattention to the embodied and emplaced resources at work in meaning-making. While I find CLA to be a fundamental development in the advancement of applied linguistics and education towards more critical realities, it fails to capture language users as agents whose repertoires are embodied, and whose bodies are embedded in context. Because of this discrepancy, which cuts across the onto-epistemological, theoretical, and practical levels, I have shifted to developing translanguaging awareness, as opposed to adding to CLA. In Prada (2021), I provided an early definition of translanguaging awareness as a natural progression from critical language awareness through the lens of translanguaging.

Translanguaging awareness refers to one’s critical understanding of the relationships between the different elements conforming one’s linguistic and semiotic repertoire (e.g. named languages, dialects, modalities), their formation as sociopoliticized objects, and their interfaces with individual and social processes such as identity work, attitudinal and ideological structures, emotion, memory and belonging. Translanguaging awareness situates individuals (as historically developed) at the center of the observer’s conceptualization of others, orienting the observing towards an attention to how others make sense and meaning, and the reasons why individual communicative practices emerge in such particular ways. Additionally, translanguaging awareness incorporates attention to how knowledge about meaning and sense making is formed, their sources and socially-situated values, and their relation to identity and the self.

One of my priorities in teacher education is stimulating a translanguaging awareness that folds together criticality, transdisciplinarity and a complex understanding of how named language(s) and modalities are sociopolitically and sociohistorically developed concepts that reflect (and reinforce) disciplinary and political lenses. Other objectives in my teacher preparation initiatives include bringing students’ attention to how meaning- and sense-making interact with the body, with space and with sociocultural norms, their flexible and organic nature, and one’s agency in re-formulating policy and knowledge. In the classroom, and particularly when working with teachers, an important issue is to identify pedagogies that stimulate this transdisciplinary, embodied and multimodal perspective. As emphasized by Paula Kalaja and Silvia Melo-Pfeifer in the Introduction to this volume, I have found arts-based approaches to offer multiple strengths.

Because of their potential to involve instructors in self-reflective and life-changing learning experiences, arts-based approaches to teacher education have drawn more attention in recent years. By engaging with the arts, teachers can develop empathy and emotional connections with diverse learners and communities, which can foster more inclusive and culturally responsive teaching practices (Taylor & Ladkin, 2009). The arts can provide a space for critical reflection on social issues and promote social justice by challenging dominant narratives and power structures (Grushka & Young, 2014). By incorporating the arts into teacher education, teachers can develop their creativity and innovative thinking, which can lead to more dynamic and effective teaching practices (Irvine, 2020).

Arts-based approaches to teacher education have been shown to promote criticality and awareness among pre-service and in-service teachers. According to Grushka and Young (2014), arts-based inquiry can provide a space for teachers to critically reflect on their own experiences and identities, as well as on social and educational issues. Through activities such as drawing, painting, and creative writing, teachers can explore complex issues and challenge their own assumptions and biases. Kraehe and Brown (2011) argue that arts-based pedagogies can promote awareness of social justice issues, as teachers engage with diverse cultures and perspectives through the arts. By engaging with the arts, teachers can develop their empathy and understanding of diverse learners and communities. Moreover, according to Irvine (2020), arts-based methods can enhance critical thinking and problem-solving skills by encouraging teachers to take creative risks and explore alternative approaches to teaching and learning.

The present chapter describes a case study focusing on how a focal participant utilized arts-based approaches to develop a visualization of an important lesson learnt during the international workshop. Beyond the pedagogical value of arts-based approaches, I draw upon previous proposals on visualization in applied linguistics and language studies (e.g. Chik & Melo-Pfeifer, 2020; Kalaja & Melo-Pfeifer, 2019; Kalaja & Pitkänen-Huhta, 2018; Melo-Pfeifer & Chik, 2022; Melo-Pfeifer & Schmidt, 2019). Taken together, from the researcher-practitioners’ perspective, these proposals argue for the potential of research designs that capitalize on the affordances of arts-based approaches to data generation through the use of metaphors, visual narratives, and other multimodal flows. Through this lens, the chapter is framed within the exploratory research question: How does translanguaging awareness emerge in Marie’s proyecto final through visualization?

3 Research Methodology

3.1 Context and participants

As foreshadowed, this study focuses on translanguaging awareness as developed within the context of an international workshop for pre-service teachers. The seminar brought a cohort of postgraduate students from the University of Hamburg (UH) to Indiana University, Indianapolis (IUI) through an international workshop for critical teachers. The workshop included two parts. The first part took place online and connected the cohort of students from UH to a group of Spanish~English bilingual Latinx/Hispanic students enrolled at Indiana University through an online platform. Members from each group were paired up and used the platform to exchange weekly essays, videos and other narrative documents including a linguistic biography, perspectives on language mixing, their experiences as racialized people, and issues of immigration and belonging, among others. While all US students identified as Hispanic and/or Latino/a, the UH cohort included Turkish, Spanish, Venezuelan and German students, some of whom were parents, identified as queer, and had different statuses as migrants or the children of migrants. Their linguistic repertoires were also different, with some of them having developed Spanish as a heritage language in Germany, others as a co-official language in Spain, and others as an additional language, later in life through studying or immersion. This case study centers around the experiences of one focal student from UH.

This international workshop was co-designed and co-directed by me and a colleague at the UH. We both agreed that this was an important opportunity to impact the students, many of whom wanted to become teachers or had a curiosity for the teaching profession, and by extension, the lives of their future students. Building on the objectives of the program in which they were enrolled at UH, we sought out ways to immerse them into a curriculum characterized by transdisciplinarity, criticality and experiential learning. In short, the international workshop included: (1) daily lectures with experts in multilingualism, Spanish in the United States, language education in urban schools in the United States, and other related issues; (2) presentations by campus leaders directing initiatives related to diversity, inclusion and equity; (3) a visit to a local school which included shadowing and ethnographic note-taking; (4) group reflections at the end of each day; (5) the completion of a multimodal e-portfolio; and (6) a culminating proyecto final through arts-based approaches created in an arts studio on campus. In this chapter, I focus on describing Marie’s proyecto final.

At the time this workshop took place, Marie was a PhD student in the Romance Language Didactics program at the UH. I met Marie prior to her involvement in the international workshop through our shared professional network. Marie was born and raised in Germany, and her linguistic repertoire includes German, Spanish and French, all of which she uses routinely. Currently based in Hamburg, she has lived and studied around Europe, including France and Spain, as well as in Mexico. Her partner is Mexican, and they communicate with one another mainly in monolingual Spanish. Marie has an interest in critical pedagogies and a commitment to the betterment of education as a space where all students can thrive. Beyond her professional interests, she is artistically oriented and a dexterous painter. Marie’s personality combines seriousness and dedication, humility and curiosity, and attention to detail. She is ambitious but honest, hard-working and aware of her limitations. Marie listens before speaking and seeks help and clarifications when needed, yet she is dependable and autonomous. Marie came into the international workshop well aligned with the critical orientation of the curriculum. She had previously worked with her director at UH, who is critically oriented herself. Despite her well-rounded background, Marie had not previously completed any of the activities conducted in the seminar, and so everything was new to her.

I approach the analysis of Marie’s proyecto as a space where trans-semiotic flows are deployed to shape her visualization of her emergent understanding of translanguaging awareness. Marie’s perspective, as captured by her proyecto, advances my own understanding of translanguaging awareness, and its linkages to the pedagogical structures in place in the seminar for critical teachers. All of the proyectos were accompanied by a written essay that described the process and meaning of the object, as well as a presentation done in front of the cohort on the last day of the workshop. In the remainder of the chapter, I shift the focus to presenting and analyzing Marie’s proyecto through a case study.

The last day of the seminar, the cohort took four hours to complete the proyecto de arte at an art studio on campus. At the beginning of the seminar, students were asked to keep a digital portfolio combining texts, photographs, videos, and audios of their experience and learning trajectories. Early on, they were informed that the proyecto final would require their detailed description of one key idea they learnt during the seminar, and so they were advised to keep this journal as a resource to go back to before doing the proyecto final. When they were told that the proyecto would be an art piece, some students were hesitant as they did not consider themselves artists. However, the objective, as explained to them, was to create a piece they could describe orally during a presentation, not necessarily an aesthetically beautiful piece. The piece itself did not need to boast artistry but to convey meaning within the context of an oral presentation. By doing so, I sought out to unlock the participants’ repertoires and provide a space for multiplex flows of meaning to emerge. The proyectos were created individually.

The available materials included virtually anything an artist can ask for, from colored papers, cardboard of different types, colors and textures, stamps and ink of many colors, paints of different types, fabrics, threads and ropes, wire and wood, various kinds of glue, hundreds of small tokens, beads and small figurines, as well as hundreds of magazines to do cutouts, different types of clay, and much more. The room had large tables, and a sink with a tap and running water. The students asked to play music on the speakers for everybody to enjoy. They chose to listen to música en español.

3.2 Design

Case study design is a research methodology that involves an in-depth investigation of a particular individual, group, or event within a specific context. According to Yin (2018), the objective of a case study is to provide an in-depth understanding of a phenomenon or issue, typically through the analysis of multiple sources of data. Case study design is often used to explore complex and dynamic phenomena in real-life settings, where it is difficult to manipulate or control variables (Yin, 2018). Single case study design focuses on one specific case to illustrate a phenomenon, instead of drawing from a larger sample: an approach that can useful when exploring particularly unique or complex phenomena (Creswell, 2014) or when a case is particularly representative or illuminating of a larger phenomenon or theory, allowing to draw broader conclusions that apply to other cases.

3.3 Data analysis and discussion

In what follows, I approach Marie’s proyecto as a platform to explore her evolving translanguaging awareness, and by extension, as a resource to derive implications for translanguaging awareness as a practical theoretical concept. To that end, I turned to three data sets: the proyecto itself, her personal notes taken during the art session, and her journal notes taken throughout the workshop1. I began by doing a close reading of her 16-page journal document to identify instances of changing attitudes and ideologies, and growth and shifts in her mindset reflecting translanguaging awareness. I then repeated this process while engaging with her handwritten notes taken during the session in the arts studio. A total of 38 segments were identified in the texts. Examples included realizations of how personhood and intersectionality interact with one’s multilingualism and dictate how a person lives their multilingualism; recognizing that not all multilingualisms are treated equally in education; and attending to how language teaching is connected to emotions and identities yet these linkages are not present in how we approach our students’ multilingualism. Marie appeared to have been particularly interested in the idea of transknowledging, a concept that I briefly introduced to them in a seminar, and which she highlighted in her notes. This conceptual meshwork helped me approach Marie’s development of her proyecto while making sense of it as a space reflecting her growing translanguaging awareness.

At the beginning of the art session, Marie began her piece by choosing a set of key elements: a piece of fabric for the base, several colored soft wool balls, a piece of white clay, and 11 wooden beads, thread, and a piece of cardboard (Figure 10.1). Once the early selection of materials had been concluded, she sat at her desk and started untangling the wool. She used the clay to create long pegs and mounted the beads on top to build representations of people. She chose beads in different shades of beige and brown as a means to include ethno-racial diversity.

Figure 10.1 Marie’s early material selection and her first steps untangling colored wool

Once the 11 figurines were built and 11 colored wools had been untangled, she began to assemble the pieces (Figure 10.2). In line with Marie’s reflective approach, she kept her journal near (Figure 10.2) and continued to take notes throughout the session. Marie’s engagement with the materials as she untangled the wool, while she pressed and shaped the cold clay, and her careful manipulation of the beads caught my attention. She was careful and methodical, but she was not too focused on making anything look perfect. It seemed like she understood that meaning transcends aesthetic perfection–perhaps because the pursuit of aesthetic perfection may be more limiting than liberating in most cases. The wool material was soft, and she began to fluff it up on purpose to represent a cloud.

Figure 10.2 Marie has built 11 figurines, untangled 11 colored wools and is ready to combine them.

Ethno-racial diversity was important because the 11 people represented in the piece are the 11 cohort members with different profiles and experiences. An acknowledgement of differences in ethno-racial identities and experiences was at the heart of Marie’s piece. In her journal, she wrote and highlighted the word ‘PERSONHOOD’ as a concept that helped her bring together the complexity that makes up people’s selves as wholes. In one journal entry, she reflected on one of the cohort’s members’ experience as site of complexity and struggle by writing: ‘Eva: tiene madre venezolana y se fue al país, quiere ser maestra, le encanta trabajar con niñxs, nunca había oído del heritage language speaker antes, su papá estaba afuera de niña y estaba solo con su mamá y sus amigas latinas y estaba entre los dos mundos (lengua y cultura-identidad), la gente alemana me dice que nos soy alemana y la gente venezolana me dice que no soy venezolana pero entonces “Ok, qué soy?” eso es injusto porque esta pregunta no todxs se la tienen que hacer’ (Eva’s mother is Venezuelan and went back to Venezuela, she wants to be a teacher, she loves working with children, she had never heard the term heritage language speaker before, her dad was not present when she was a child and she was just with her mum and her Latina friends and she found herself between two worlds (language and culture-identity), German people tell her she is not German, and Venezuelans tell her she’s not Venezuelan, so then ‘OK, what am I?’ that is unfair because this question is not a question everybody must ask themselves).

Marie’s final piece centers the importance of understanding how intersectionality and individual differences inform the complex (and fluid) interconnections that emerge between people. This idea is captured in her journal notes in a variety of ways. For example, I found an excerpt taken a few days earlier during a talk given by the director of the Equity Center on campus where Marie wrote: ‘Intersectionality at the center: engage at the intersection of theory and practice; understanding identities + getting positioned as the Other as a way to decolonize’. Marie was interested in experiencing decentering her whiteness and her privilege to the margins of education as a means to stimulate decolonization and justice. She drew upon her interactions with the director of the Equity Center, a black queer (non-binary) person, who explained how ‘[they] need Tom’ [their assistant] as a white, cis-male, straight person who decenters himself every day, and when people start to work on themselves, we all become co-constructors in the system’ (excerpt taken from Marie’s journal). Reflecting on this idea, Marie recognized the potential of horizontal relationships in re-organizing education and in society. Her piece, while multilayered, lays flat and shows no social hierarchies. In it, everybody is connected through complex flows represented horizontally. Similarly, there is no center, with people arranged around the surface with no central axis.

In her journal, Marie also recognized how the cohort interacted with the group of US Latinx/Hispanic students in linguistically flexible ways, which she found very useful yet organic and spontaneous. Among her examples, she reflected: ‘usan todos los recursos lingüísticos que tienen: “por ejemplo el pasto” – alemana: “qué”, gringo: “el pasto” otra gringa: “Grass”, alemana: ah okay, sí’ (they use all the linguistic resources they have). Beyond a multiplicity of linguistic resources coming together in flexible ways (see Figure 10.4 for an example from Marie’s own handwritten notes), Marie also acknowledged the role of other elements conforming the students’ repertoires. Such multiplex flows are not only developed through the structures characterizing named languages, but combine multilingualism, multimodality, embodiment, social identity and personal histories. In her journal, Marie reflects on personal growth and change and emphasizes that ‘La mayoría de lxs maestrxs olvida que ellxs también eran estudiantes’ (most teachers forget that they were also students once) and how thinking back of our own experience as children and learners may help us grow).

Marie’s final piece (Figure 10.3) is a multilayered object that foregrounds visualizations of entangled, complexly connected ecologies. Marie’s piece ‘La Nube’ (The Cloud) includes four key elements: a base which is a square of fabric with a pattern that Marie described as ‘indigenous’; 11 simple figurines with different color heads (ranging from white to brown and beige); a layer of eleven fluffed up color wools (each one representing one person) softly yet chaotically placed round zigzagging around and connecting all the figurines; and a cardboard on the bottom of the base with the writing ‘x n + y’ (Figure 10.4).

Figure 10.3 Marie’s finished proyecto: La Nube (The Cloud)

Figure 10.4 x n + y – ‘I would do this infinite times’

For a short, holistic view of the meaning behind Marie’s proyecto, I turn to the presentation she gave in front of the cohort, where Marie stated (English translation below):

[En mi obra] Estamos nosotras las once personas y estamos grounded en el fundamento estadounidense. He seleccionado un fondo indígena porque es una dimensión importante que siempre hay que tener en cuenta y la mente crítica debe intentar descolonizar. Arriba de esto, y cubriendo el fundamento está la nube. Hay once diferentes colores los cuales se entremezclan … no puedes separar lo que era azul de naranja. Todo es más que la suma de cada sola, das Ganze ist mehr als die Summe seiner Teile (danke schon). Todo esto ocurrió en un momento de reflexión del viernes. Cuando salimos de la sala estaba temblando por afuera y por dentro, que se puede tener como expectativa , que se crea entre estas 11 personas. Estoy viendo a este grupo desde la perspectiva que lo organiza, como guía … Pero luego me pregunté, qué significa para mí? No solamente he dado, también he recibido algo práctico y profesional no se puede separar, por esto está abajo. Está todo integrado, y por eso dice (x n + y) porque lo quiero hacer infinitas veces. Lo bueno de los números es que pueden ser positivos y negativos. Ustedes han sido la variable y más bueno y más increíble.

([My proyecto shows] the 11 of us and we are grounded in the foundation of the United States. I have chosen a foundation that is an indigenous pattern because it is an important dimension that we must always take into account, and we must have a critical mind to decolonize. On top of this, and covering the foundation is the cloud. There are eleven different colors all of which are entangled … you cannot separate what used to be blue from what used to be orange. Everything is more than just the addition of each part, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts (thank you). All of this happened at a moment of reflection on Friday. When we left the room I was shaking outside and inside, what can you expect, what is created among these 11 people. I am seeing this group from the perspective of a co-organizer, as a guide … but then I wonder, what does this mean for me? I have not just given, I have also received something practical and professional that cannot be separated, that’s why it is below. Everything is integrated, that is why it says (x n + y) [on the bottom of the base] because I want to do this infinite times. The good thing about numbers is that they can be positive and negative. You’ve been the variable and the best and most incredible one.)

Following Marie’s reflections on the role of identity in multilingualism, in her piece and notes she captured how professional identity and professional learning are difficult to separate from personal learning and personal growth. Investment and commitment create a dynamic interface between the two, making it difficult to separate one’s personal from one’s professional growth in the teaching profession. The intensity of a pedagogy that concentrates on holistic growth, such as this workshop, has great emotional implications. In fact, beyond the elements described in the earlier paragraphs, Marie’s brief presentation powerfully captures the role of embodiment and emotions in learning and professional growth when she talks about ‘shaking’ inside and out. Her professional journey over the duration of the seminar was powerfully affected by her involvement in, and commitment to the experiences afforded by the translanguaging pedagogy governing this experience. Marie found herself shaking as a result from the intense emotional rollercoaster the cohort experienced, juntxs, learning from and with each other about the hardships of minoritized multilingualism, the interplay between privilege and oppression, the roles we all play in supporting the status quo, and the possibilities of adopting a model of education focused on liberation, well-being, and happiness.

4 Lessons Learnt

From my analysis of Marie’s proyecto, I learnt that her emerging translanguaging awareness was closely related to a growing awareness of the ecological relationships between multilingualism, identities, and histories as organic entanglements and flows that are trans-semiotic, trans-personal and trans-historical. Marie illustrates and describes an attention to how students become teachers when you listen to what they have to say, when you let them teach you (even if they do not know they are teaching you) and shows an awareness of how she must step aside and shift hierarchies as part of her leadership. Leadership, therefore, through a translanguaging awareness lens, is about seeking fruitful horizontal relationships, where guidance, mentorship, support and advice are offered from the teacher to the students, but where students may collaborate in co-exploring and co-growing, and where teachers know how to transposition as knowledge receivers.

Marie’s proyecto emphasizes a critical eye to the historical formation of our shared experiences, the history of place, and the layers of historical knowledge that are often hidden from plain view. As I enjoy Marie’s piece, I reflect on the notion of hidden curriculum. The hidden curriculum is what educators teach students without even realizing it, through their interactions, modeling, and school or classroom culture; it consists of unspoken values, beliefs, norms and culture (Jackson, 1967), and pedagogical applications of translanguaging awareness among educators must incorporate an attention to this issue. In her piece, Marie recognizes the ancestral histories of the lands we stand on, which are occupied by us: the offspring of settler-colonizers. She, however, covers it with a nube (cloud) of histories, relationships and identities made up by our own presence, the presence of 11 people (each from a different background) which, collectively, make this historical erasure an afterthought. In so doing, Marie emphasizes how reflecting on the past is important, both, with attention to our individual and to our shared pasts.

As I engaged with Marie’s proyecto, and reflected on Kalaja and Melo-Pfeifer’s words on social justice in education as enabled by agency and authorship of one’s own story in one’s own terms (see Introduction to this volume), Sousa Santos’ (2007) idea of cognitive justice became helpful. Cognitive justice refers to how different forms of knowledge should be recognized and respected, and that dominant forms of knowledge production and dissemination should not be given greater value than other forms of knowledge. Cognitive justice depends on understanding the diversity of knowledge systems and promoting dialogue between them. Santos argues that Western scientific knowledge has been privileged over other forms of knowledge, such as indigenous knowledge or the knowledge of marginalized communities (Sousa Santos, 2014). Kalaja and Melo-Pfeifer (this volume) emphasize agency, while Santos reminds us that knowledge production hierarchies prevent such agency to be enacted among minoritized people.

Importantly, Western epistemology has been used to justify colonialism, imperialism, and other forms of oppression, and so the promotion of cognitive justice necessitates challenging the idea that Western epistemology is universal and objective as there are multiple ways of knowing the world (Sousa Santos, 2018). A socially just applied linguistics, therefore, must be a space that transcends multiple knowledge representation and moves towards multiple knowledge co-creation as disempowered and silenced perspectives are situated in roles where their agency is not ‘offered’ but become incontestably unretrievable.

Translanguaging awareness aligns with this proposal as it recognizes cognitive justice as an important objective in education for liberation, and must therefore incorporate an understanding of how new ways of knowing emerge, and how knowledge (co-)creation stems from bringing together funds of knowledge in ways that undo borders. The notion of transknowledging is key here, which refers to a process of knowledge production that transcends the dominant Western epistemology and incorporates diverse ways of knowing the world. According to Santos, transknowledging involves ‘dialogue, translation, hybridization, and polycentrism’ (Sousa Santos, 2014: 17) and seeks to create new forms of knowledge that are more inclusive and democratic.

Transknowledging challenges the idea that there is a single, objective way of knowing (in) the world and recognizes that different communities have their own knowledge systems that are equally valid while breaking down the barriers between different forms of knowledge (e.g. scientific knowledge and indigenous knowledge) and creating new spaces for knowledge production that are more open and participatory. The international workshop for critical language teachers that contextualized this arts-based proyecto was developed to function as such a type of space. Marie’s visualization of how students and teachers come together in education through trans-semiotic flows that bear on individual and collective identity, historical formation, and emotional work highlights her nascent attention to the potential of conceiving of meaning- and sense-making as complex, transformative processes. Through these processes, different forms of knowledge creation and of knowing find their way into classroom practices.

Marie’s piece captures the notion that different ways of being, becoming and knowing (in) the world may serve as means to connect us, rather than to separate us. In her proyecto, she underscores how differences come together to create a social semiotic assemblage of knowledges and of meaning-making flows that have the potential to shape new ways of knowing. These new ways of knowing are collectively produced by sharing, by agreeing, by discussing, by recognizing, by listening and by being open to change. Moreover, these emerging ways of knowing, as educators, demonstrate an awareness of previous ways of knowing and being, and the identities forged through them. Transknowledging is always an ongoing, contextualized and socially distributed process. By considering knowledge as dynamic activity, it is no longer something we, as learners aim to acquire and master, but to understand and contribute to as we bring it into dialogue with our expertise, our experiential resources, and our abilities.

In this chapter, I have drawn upon Marie’s arts-based proyecto to advance the notion of translanguaging awareness. Her participation in an international workshop for critical language teachers provided the curricular and spatial space for her to grow. While engaging with Marie’s proyecto, I recognized her critical consciousness of how people, as complex beings, interact in space to make meaning to be a key idea. Alongside a very dynamic and politicized view of multilingualism as individually experienced by people from different backgrounds and profiles, Marie introduced the idea that through their interactions people create groups where new forms of knowing may emerge as collaborative efforts. There is, therefore, interaction between translanguaging awareness and the emergence of new ways of knowing through transknowledging, and both processes stimulate one another. Educators at any level may benefit from reflecting on how their own pedagogical practices produce contexts where complex assemblages of meaning, identity, knowledge and space can be appropriated by all through critical discussions.

Note

(1)Marie’s notes have been incorporated into this chapter directly from her journal. These include samples of handwritten journaling (shown in an image) and excerpts from a word document (copied and pasted verbatim). Spelling conventions, phrasing and lexical choices reflect Marie’s spontaneous meaning-making through typing and handwriting.

References

Bauman, R. (1986) Story, Performance and Event. Cambridge University Press.

Becker, A.L. (1991) Language and languaging. Language and Communication 11 (1–2), 33–35.

Blommaert, J. (2018) Durkheim and the Internet: On Sociolinguistics and the Sociological Imagination. Bloomsbury Academic.

Block, D. (2015) Social Class in Applied Linguistics. Routledge.

Borg, S. (2003) Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching 36 (2), 81–109.

Cowley, S.J. (2011) Distributed Language. John Benjamins.

Chik, A. and Melo-Pfeifer, S. (2020) What does language awareness look like? Visual methodologies in language learning and teaching research (2000–2018). Language Awareness 29 (3–4), 336–352.

Creswell, J.W. (2014) A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research. Sage.

Dunkin, M.J. and Biddle, B.J. (1974) The Study of Teaching. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Fairclough, N. (2014) Critical Language Awareness. Routledge.

Flores, N., Kleyn, T. and Menken, K. (2015) Looking holistically in a climate of partiality: Identities of students labeled long-term English language learners. Journal of Language, Identity & Education 14 (2), 113–132.

García, O. and Otheguy, R. (2020) Conceptualizing translanguaging theory/practice juntos. In City University of New York-New York State Initiative on Emergent Bilinguals (eds) Translanguaging and Transformative Teaching for Emergent Bilingual Students: Lessons from the CUNY-NYSIEB Project (pp. 3–24). Routledge.

Gorter, D. and Arocena, E. (2020) Teachers’ beliefs about multilingualism in a course on translanguaging. System 92, 102–272.

Hélot, C., Frijns, C., van Gorp, K. and Sierens, S. (2018) Language Awareness in Multilingual Classrooms in Europe: From Theory to Practice. Mouton de Gruyter.

Hornberger, N.H. and Johnson, D.C. (2007) Slicing the onion ethnographically: Layers and spaces in multilingual language education policy and practice. TESOL Quarterly 41 (3) 509–532.

Irvine, K. (2020) Arts-based methods in initial teacher education: Possibilities and tensions. International Journal of Education & the Arts 21 (13), 1–19.

Jensen, T.W. (2014) Emotion in languaging: Languaging as affective, adaptive, and ﬂexible behavior in social interaction. Frontiers of Psychology 5, 1–14.

Kalaja, P. and Melo-Pfeifer, S. (eds) (2019) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words. Multilingual Matters.

Kalaja, P. and Pitkänen-Huhta, A. (2018) Visual methods in applied language studies. Applied Linguistics Review 9 (2–3), 157–176.

Kibler, A.K., Bunch, G.C. and Endris, A.K. (2011) Community college practices for US-educated language-minority students: A resource-oriented framework. Bilingual Research Journal 34 (2), 201–222.

Kraehe, A.M. and Brown, K.D. (2011) Awakening teachers’ capacities for social justice with/in arts-based inquiries. Equity and Excellence in Education 44 (4), 488–511.

Kramsch, C. (2018) Language and Culture: Reflective Narratives and the Emergence of Identity. Routledge.

Kravchenko, A.V. (2009) The experiential basis of speech and writing as different cognitive domains. Pragmatics and Cognition 17 (3), 527–548.

Linell, P. (2013) Distributed language theory, with or without dialogue. Language Science 40, 168–173.

Love, N. (2004) Cognition and the language myth. Language Science 26 (6), 525–544.

Melo-Pfeifer, S. and Chik, A. (2022) Multimodal linguistic biographies of prospective foreign language teachers in Germany: Reconstructing beliefs about languages and multilingual language learning in initial teacher education. International Journal of Multilingualism 19 (4), 499–522.

Melo-Pfeifer, S. and Schmidt, A.F. (2019) Integration as portrayed in visual narratives by young refugees in Germany. In P. Kalaja and S. Melo-Pfeifer (eds) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words (pp. 53–72). Multilingual Matters.

National Center for Educational Statistics (2012) The Nation’s Report Card: Trends in Academic Progress. https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/subject/publications/main2012/pdf/2013456.pdf

Grushka, K. and Young, B. (2014) Using arts-based methods in pre-service teacher education: Perzine pedagogies. Studying Teacher Education 10 (3), 275–289.

Niland, A., Sadler, K. and Robson, J. (2019) Creativity and the arts in initial teacher education: Perceptions, practices and possibilities. Journal of Education for Teaching 45 (2), 215–232.

Oliver, R., Haig, Y. and Grote, E. (2009) Addressing the educational challenges faced by African refugee background students: Perceptions of West Australian stakeholders. TESOL in Context 19 (1), 23–38.

Pedersen, S.B. (2012) Interactivity in health care: Bodies, values and dynamics. Language Science 34 (5), 532–542.

Pennycook, A. (2010) Language as a Local Practice. Routledge.

Poza, L.E., García, O. and Jiménez-Castellanos, Ó. (2022) After Castañeda: A glotopolítica perspective and educational dignity paradigm to educate racialized bilinguals. Language Policy 21 (3), 451–474.

Prada, J., Guerrero-Rodriguez, P. and Pascual y Cabo, D. (2020). Heritage language anxiety in two Spanish language classroom environments: A comparative mixed methods study. Heritage Language Journal 17 (1), 92–113.

Prada, J. (2021) Translanguaging awareness in heritage language education. In S. Loza and S. Beaudrie (eds) Heritage Language Teaching: Critical Language Awareness Perspectives for Research and Pedagogy (pp. 101–118). Routledge.

Prada, J. (2022a) Approaching composition as showing–telling through translanguaging: Weaving multilingualism, multimodality, and multiliteracies in a digital collage proyecto final. Languages 7 (1), 70.

Prada, J. (2022b) Forgoing multilingualism as a collection of elite monolingualisms through trans-rhetoric. In A. Sanchez-Muñoz and J. Retis (eds) Communicative Spaces in Bilingual Contexts: Discourses, Synergies and Counterflows in Spanish and English (pp. 13–31 ). Taylor & Francis.

Prada, J. (2023) The critical awakening of a pre-service teacher in a Spanish graduate program: a phenomenology of translanguaging as pedagogy and as content. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 26 (8), 992–1005.

Razack, S. (2017) Dying from Improvement: Inquests and Inquiries into Indigenous Deaths in Custody. University of Toronto Press.

Sousa Santos, B. (2007) Beyond abyssal thinking: From global lines to ecologies of knowledges. Review (Fernand Braudel Center) 30 (1), 45–89.

Sousa Santos, B. (2014) Epistemologies of the South: Justice against Epistemicide. Routledge.

Sousa Santos, B. (2018) The End of the Cognitive Empire: The Coming of Age of Epistemologies of the South. Duke University Press.

Steffensen, S.V. (2012) Care and conversing in dialogical systems. Language Science 34 (5), 513–531.

Suárez-Orozco, C. and Osei-Twumasi, O. (eds) (2019) Immigrant-origin Students in Community College: Navigating Risk and Reward in Higher Education. Teachers College Press.

Swain, M. (2006) Languaging, agency and collaboration in advanced second language proficiency. In H. Byrnes (ed.) Advanced Language Learning: The Contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky (pp. 95–108). Continuum.

Swain, M. (2010) Talking it through: Languaging as a source of learning. In R. Batstone (ed.) Sociocognitive Perspectives on Second Language Learning and Use (pp. 112–130). Oxford University Press.

Taylor, S.S. and Ladkin, D. (2009) Understanding arts-based methods in managerial development. Academy of Management Learning & Education 8 (1), 55–69.

Terhart, H. and von Dewitz, N. (2018) Newly arrived migrant students in German schools: Exclusive and inclusive structures and practices. European Educational Research Journal 17 (2), 290–304.

Thibault, P.J. (2005) What sort of minded being has language? Linguistics and the Human Sciences 1 (2), 261–335.

Thibault, P.J. (2011) First-order languaging dynamics and second-order language: The distributed language view. Ecological Psychology 23 (3), 210–245.

Vallée-Tourangeau, F. (2013) Interactivity, efﬁciency, and individual differences in mental arithmetic. Experimental Psychology 60, 302–311.

Yin, R.K. (2018) Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods. Sage.

Young, A.S. (2014) Unpacking teachers’ language ideologies: Attitudes, beliefs, and practiced language policies in schools in Alsace, France. Language Awareness 23 (1–2), 157–171.

Part 3

Envisioning the Future of Multilingualism in Language (Teacher) Education

11The Role of Multilingualism and Multiculturalism in English Classes as Envisioned by Student Teachers in Finland

Paula Kalaja and Katja Mäntylä

1 Introduction

Finland has two national languages, Finnish and Swedish, and a growing migrant population. In the Capital area, children attending school today speak more than 100 different languages as their first language (L1), including Russian, Estonian, Somali and Arabic; and there are courses where up to 70% of students speak other than Finnish or Swedish as their L1.

Every child starts studying their first foreign language (FL, this is the term preferred in the official documents, see below) in Grade 1 (at the age of seven), and for over 90% of the pupils, the FL is English. In the past two decades education policies in the country have undergone several changes, and this has led to the decline of studying additional FLs (Mäntylä et al., 2021). Thus, even though the country is getting more multilingual through migration, the language repertoires of individual Finns seem to be narrowing down.

As for multilingualism and the multilingual student especially in second language (or additional language, L2) learning environments, a variety of issues has been addressed (e.g. Cummins, 2003; García, 2009; Hornberger, 2003) but there is little research on multilingualism in FL environments, where the language being taught or learnt has no official status or role in the society (see, however, Lo Bianco, 2014). According to Kramsch (2012), education is mostly organised for monolinguals even though the reality around us is multilingual. Furthermore, considering the current understanding of linguistic repertoires, all language users are multilingual possessing different linguistic repertoires also in their L1.

Traditionally, textbooks and other teaching materials in Finland have been designed on the assumption that learners share the same L1, and the languages used in teaching materials have been Finnish or Swedish and the target language (Kalaja et al., 2018). However, The National Core Curriculum for Basic Education (grades 1–9) and one for General Upper Secondary Education (grades 10–12) (Finnish National Agency for Education, hereafter FNAE, 2014, 2019) consider the raising of awareness of different languages and seeing culture as richness as some of the key values in education in grades 1–12, hence emphasising the role of languages in building sustainability and social justice (for details, see Introduction to this volume). Furthermore, promoting participation and democracy and promoting equity are core areas in the National Core Curriculums (FNAE, 2014, 2019). The emphasis on multilingualism and multiculturalism in the curriculums is strong, and hence, all (language) teachers should take it into account in their teaching. However, language teachers in Finland tend to rely heavily on textbooks and their materials and thus, acknowledging different languages and cultures much depends on the choices and work of each individual teacher.

The study to be reported in this chapter continues our exploration of the possibilities of visual and verbal (or multimodal) narratives in looking forward in time (for a summary, see Kalaja, 2019) or in envisioning the future by student teachers or pre-service teachers. More specifically, we seek to find answers to the following research questions: What role would student teachers assign to multilingualism, and relatedly, to multiculturalism in giving an English class of their dreams after graduation, and secondly, what role would these possibly play in the learning environment and/or teaching materials?

Section 2 provides background to the study by reviewing the notion and role of multilingualism (and multiculturalism) in FL education and contextualises the study within a research project carried out in Finland regarding visions of future FL teaching. Section 3 provides the details of the study and Section 4 its findings, reported as case studies. Section 5 discusses the findings and their implications regarding social justice and equity in FL education.

2 Background to the Study

2.1 Multilingualism in a FL classroom

In the past few years, language education (among other related disciplines) has recognised the multilingual nature of societies as well as of language users’ lives. This multilingual turn (see, e.g. Douglas Fir Group, 2016; May, 2014; Melo-Pfeifer, 2018) has been accompanied by a discussion about the monolingual bias in FL practices (e.g. Anderson, 2017; Kramsch, 2014; Ortega, 2019).

Multilingualism can be seen as a process rather than a state (de Bot, 2019). This dynamic view of multilingualism (see also Herdina & Jessner, 2002; Cenoz & Gorter, 2021) emphasises the recognition and awareness of multiple languages in our environment and in each language user’s life and repertoire. We do not need to use various languages all the time but acknowledging and valuing all languages in an equal manner and measure is essential in multilingual education. As language users we draw on the cognitive, semiotic, sensory and modal means we have available in different contexts and for a variety of purposes. The idea of translanguaging or using linguistic repertoires in a fluid manner ‘is not simply going between different linguistic structures, cognitive and semiotic systems and modalities, but going beyond them’ (Li, 2018: 23, original emphases). Translanguaging and related terms such as metrolingualism (Otsuji & Pennycook, 2009) and polylingual languaging (Jørgensen, 2008; for other terms, see also Introduction to this volume) intertwine in a language user’s personal history, experiences, attitudes, beliefs, ideologies and environment (Li, 2018). In addition, plurilingualism (e.g. Piccardo, 2020) has been added to this list of closely related terms that highlight the dynamic and/or holistic (and multimodal) nature of becoming or being a multilingual individual.

Language teachers have been found to be in a powerful position in either including or excluding languages and their users (Cummins, 2019). Translanguaging as a pedagogic practice is a means to include and recognise all languages, regardless of their role in society, thus empowering their users and promoting social justice and democracy (Li, 2018; Cummins, 2019). On the other hand, opposite teaching practices that hamper using other than the target language or the language of schooling, and suppressing or failing to recognise various languages and their users in the classroom may hinder students’ participation (Auerbach, 2016).

The National Core Curriculums (FNAE, 2014, 2019) in Finland emphasise language awareness and multilingualism. However, at the same time, they present FLs (this is the term used in these documents) each on their own, and this is naturally reflected in the teaching practices at schools: the teaching programmes include, e.g. English, German, Russian, French and Spanish. The learning goals are tied to the given language and its culture(s). Even though the aim is no longer to reach the ideal competence of a native speaker, an individual’s knowledge in a specific language is measured against the CEFR proficiency scale with the focus on intelligible communication; much of the recognition of multilingualism or translingual practices is left up to the teacher. This is not a Finnish phenomenon, but FL teachers have been found to struggle with the aim of teaching a language and its culture(s), and at the same time, try to convey and practise the principles of translanguaging (Ortega, 2019) or those of plurilingualism (Piccardo, 2020). Furthermore, when one considers various angles to sustainability, including social justice and democracy, language teachers do not necessarily possess enough tools nor time to consider and take these into account in a systematic way in their teaching (Maijala et al., 2023).

In the context of Finland, some studies have focused on teachers in multilingual classrooms. Linderoos (2016) studied multilingual learners, their guardians and teachers and found that the teachers did not necessarily know about the language backgrounds of their students and/or they did not possess tools to take their L1s into account in the FL classroom. Teachers of English have been reported to find teaching multilingual groups more challenging than those with a homogeneous L1 background (Harju-Autti, 2013), and they do not feel they are prepared to help their multilingual students (Illman & Pietilä, 2018). In all these studies, as well as in a study by Pitkänen-Huhta and Mäntylä (2021), teachers and students alike have been found to value multilingualism. Similar results have also been found in Germany (Ticheloven et al., 2020), The Netherlands (Duarte & Günther-van der Meij, 2020), Sweden (Tholin, 2014) and in Hungary (Navracsics & Molnár, 2017).

The studies above have concentrated on classrooms where learners share an L1. However, in today’s world a unitary L1 in a classroom is getting more and more rare, and perhaps when we consider multilingualism in classrooms, we should rather turn our attention to everyday practices, regardless of the L1s or their number. Questions that arise include: how does the appreciation of linguistic and cultural diversity show in everyday practices in a language classroom, and how are teachers equipped to incorporate linguistic equity into their teaching?

The National Core Curriculums (FNAE, 2014, 2019) give English a special role distinct from the other FLs: it is a lingua franca. The dominant role of English globally is indisputable, and thus, teachers of English could be considered to have a significant role in conveying the ideals of multilingualism, translanguaging and plurilingualism to their students. As for English as-a-FL classrooms there are very few studies on translanguaging practices. Cenoz and Gorter (2020) point out the discrepancy between the de-contextualised classroom and the multilingual social context in which we live. They also emphasise that all FL learners (and their teachers) are in fact multilingual (or plurilingual) and all FL classrooms have the potential to be multilingual (or plurilingual).

Our project on envisioning – with its three studies – to be summarised below is closely related to the research outlined above.

2.2 A project on envisioning an English class of one’s dreams

In the project, we approached student teachers’ visions of an ideal class of English from different points of view. We asked our student teachers to envision an English class of their dreams in two modes: verbally and visually. A further requirement was that the class should feasibly be given after graduation from an MA programme. This envisioning (Dörnyei & Kubanyiova, 2014) was our attempt to maintain the motivation of our students: most of them were only halfway into their studies before qualifying as teachers of English (and possibly other FLs) in the country.

In our first study (Kalaja & Mäntylä, 2018), we wished to find out where the teaching of the language would take place, what would be taught and how. The learning was envisioned to take place either in a traditional or modern classroom or well beyond the classroom or school premises. The contents would vary from teaching by the teacher to learning by the learners or being a joint activity by the two parties involved. In addition, the teaching would either focus on teaching English (including grammar and vocabulary; pragmatics, and communication) or on teaching in English as the medium of instruction to learn about a specific topic or another school subject (Content-and-language-integrated instruction, CLIL).

In our second study (Mäntylä & Kalaja, 2019), we sought to find out what the student teachers envisioned they would teach of the language. The contents fell into five categories, listed in order of preference by the student teachers: (1) communication, (2) culture, (3) metaknowledge about the language (e.g. aspects of sociolinguistics), (4) learning about some other school subjects, and (5) discrete elements of the language as an abstract system, including grammar and vocabulary. Considering the three main aims in teaching FLs in the country, as stated in the National Core Curriculums (FNAE, 2014, 2019), the student teachers seemed to miss one important aim, namely, learning-to-learn skills in their broader sense, including not only practising learning strategies but also being able to take responsibility for their learning, setting aims and being able to assess their own skills in the language, e.g. by making use of the standard rating scales (CEFR) (cf. also Holec, 1981).

In this chapter (and our third study), we will consider a further two issues, namely, multilingualism and multiculturalism and their possible role(s) in classroom interaction and/or in the learning environment and teaching materials in the envisioned future classes of English (for the specific research questions, see Section 1).

3 Research Methodology

3.1 Participants

The participants in this study were student teachers of English (n = 67) at a Finnish university. The students were studying English either as their major or minor in a five-year MA programme. A dozen students wanted to become elementary school teachers, qualifying to teach young children English or in English, namely, to offer CLIL courses. In addition, a couple of exchange students attended the course. All the participants had some Pedagogical Studies behind them, although second-year English majors only very little. Some, especially those minoring in English, had also completed their practical teacher training and/or worked as supply teachers. In sum, the participants were quite a heterogeneous group. No other background information was collected as it was not essential in regard to our research questions.

In their careers, the students or future teachers will be faced with two new challenges: the recent revisions in the aims of the National Core Curriculums (FNAE, 2014, 2019) and the increasing multilingualism and multiculturalism (or plurilingualism) of their students. As qualified language teachers they will have the power to decide what goes on in their language classrooms and hence, to what extent different languages and cultures are introduced to their students and how.

3.2 Data collection and analysis

A task sheet was designed based on ideas from a study by Hammerness (2003), and it was our attempt to explore further the possibilities of visual narratives for the purpose of envisioning (Dörnyei & Kubanyiova, 2014). The task sheet consisted of Tasks 1 and 2. Task 1 asked the participants to produce a picture with the title, ‘An English class of my dreams’, to depict a class that they could imagine giving after graduating from the five-year MA programme. The images could be drawn by hand or done on a computer, possibly making use of an image bank, or produced by compiling a collage out of magazine or newspaper clippings. In addition, the participants were asked to comment on the picture, writing a few sentences in response to the question, ‘What would be taking place in your class?’, followed by a justification, ‘Why?’ Task 2 on the reverse side of the task sheet asked the students to consider the envisioned English class in greater detail. This gave the students a chance to elaborate on the target group that they would like to teach, the roles of the teacher and the students, what they would teach and how, where their teaching would take place, and what equipment they wished to use.

The data were collected in the years of 2015 to 2017. The students completed the task sheet in Finnish or in English – as the last home assignment of one of the first professionally oriented courses (5 ECTS) as part of their English studies. The visions were shared and discussed in English during the very last session of the course. The students were asked for their permission in writing to use the data anonymously for research purposes. Tasks 1 and 2 were given as homework in the hope that the students would have a week to reflect on the issues addressed on the course before completing them. However, as is often the case with homework, some left it to the last minute. Of the alternative ways of producing the visual image, most of the students chose to draw a picture by hand and in black-and-white.

The pool of multimodal data was subjected to qualitative content analysis (Hennink et al., 2011; Rose, 2016) and coded thematically. The starting point of the analysis were the pictures in which we identified representations of multilingualism and/or multiculturalism. The verbal data were then consulted for further details and interpretation of the visual data.

4 Findings

We will report the findings of this study in the form of case studies or narratives. Our idea is to illustrate the qualitative variation in the future classes envisioned by the student teachers regarding multilingualism and/or multiculturalism and their role(s) in envisioning the English class(es) of their dreams. We grouped these into (1) monolingual classes, (2) bilingual classes, and (3) multilingual classes. In addition, we identified two distinct discourses that were often contrasted in the visions: the participants’ (partly frustrating) learning experiences in the past and alternative ways of giving English classes in the future.

To contextualise our findings, we will always first describe each ‘ideal’ class in broad outlines (who would be taught, what, how and where) before focusing on the possible role of multilingualism and/or multiculturalism in the envisioned class.

4.1 Monolingual classes: English

Cases 1 to 3 illustrate monolingual classes where interaction would take place in English.

Case 1 is a second-year English major. She was attending a basic course in Pedagogical Studies. In the class of her dreams (Figure 11.1), the learners would be grade 3 students, so nine or ten years of age. Thus, they would be beginners in their English studies.

Figure 11.1 A monolingual class envisioned by a second-year English major, attending a basic course in Pedagogical Studies

In her class, English would be used ‘as much as possible as the target language’ to learn vocabulary and grammar, stresses the student teacher.

On the course that the student teachers were taking, teaching approaches had been reviewed and a few video clips played in class to illustrate them in practice. One of the approaches reviewed was Total Physical Response. The approach differs from the others in that the emphasis is on functional or pragmatic aspects of learning an L2, and importantly, listening comprehension would precede immediate oral production (which is often the case in the other approaches). ‘Simon says …’, a children’s game, is a prime application of its principles. Inspired by the readings and the video clip, the student teacher intended to apply it in the English class of her dreams. She would expect her students to enjoy the game because it would involve physical activity on their part. So, in the first task the student teacher would issue commands and the students would be expected to respond by acting out accordingly. A verbal request by the student teacher ‘(Simon says), wave your hand!’ should be followed by the students’ waving of their hand(s) and without any verbal response to indicate that they would have understood the command (see Figure 11.1). In addition, but unrelated to the teaching approach the student teacher had chosen for the first task, she would have her students complete a second task to memorise vocabulary items based on a pack of picture cards.

Overall, the student teacher kept describing both these tasks in terms of ‘mimicking’, ‘memorising’ and/or ‘rehearsing grammar or vocabulary’, or formal aspects of the language instead of focusing on the functions or pragmatic aspects of using the language. In other words, she had not quite grasped the underlying principles of the teaching approach she had chosen to apply in the class of her dreams.

The teaching/learning would take place in the classroom, its type is left unspecified, however, whether a traditional or a modern one. After further thought, the student teacher points out that it could even take place beyond the classroom walls, namely, outdoors. However, the original idea of the game is that students could eventually take on the role of ‘Simon’ to attain practice in verbalising requests. At any rate, it seems that in this class the teacher would play a major role in running the two tasks (see Figure 11.1) and teaching materials only a minor role.

To sum up, this student teacher had not given much thought to aspects of multilingualism (or related multiculturalism) in envisioning the English class of her dreams.

Case 2 is a Pedagogical Studies major in the final year of her MA studies and about to graduate as an elementary school teacher. As she wished to qualify as a CLIL teacher, she had studied English as her minor (this is a government requirement). She had completed all Pedagogical Studies. She had some previous teaching experience and had been an exchange student in the UK. In the class of her dreams (Figure 11.2), the learners would be grade 3–6 students, having started their English studies from grade 3.

Figure 11.2 A monolingual class envisioned by a Pedagogical Studies major, about to graduate as an elementary school teacher

English would be used for learning about aspects of English, the language, or English-speaking culture (note: in the singular) or about some topic or content through CLIL.

The student teacher would base her teaching on the needs and interests of her students, and she would adjust her teaching to their proficiency level (or to use more professional terminology, she would apply the principles of the Zone of Proximal Development and Scaffolding in her teaching, drawing on Vygotskian thinking). She would emphasise interaction and communication, learning for life and multiculturalism but this is left unspecified: different English-speaking cultures or those of more than one language, possibly including Finnish. Among other things, she would be concerned with the motivation and agency of her students, ensure a relaxed atmosphere in the classroom and be there to make sure her students manage to make progress in learning the language.

The teaching and learning would take place in a modern classroom (comparable to the one described visually under Case 6 below) with space for the students to move around or beyond the classroom walls. In the classroom use would be made of games, a smart board, the internet, and drama.

The student teacher characterised her class as ‘partly student-centred and partly teacher-centred’, and being eclectic in her teaching approach (cf. Case 1), and so both parties seem to play important but complementary roles in the class of her dreams, and teaching materials only a minor role.

Overall, this student teacher seems to be the most aware – of all the participants in this study – that as a future professional she would have many more tasks to perform than teaching English and testing or assessing her students’ L2 skills. In addition, her job would involve many more roles depending on whom she would be interacting – not only with her students but also with colleagues, administrators, parents, etc. (see Figure 11.2).

To sum up, this student teacher envisioned multiculturalism (related to multilingualism though not explicitly mentioned) to be an issue to be addressed in the English class of her dreams; however, the issue remains unelaborated.

Case 3 is a second-year English major. She was attending a basic course in Pedagogical Studies. In the class of her dreams (Figure 11.3 is described only verbally – for copyright reasons), the learners would be ‘young adults with different cultural and other backgrounds’.

Figure 11.3 A monolingual class envisioned by a third-year English major, attending a basic course in Pedagogical Studies

In her class, English would be used as a lingua franca to learn about different cultures or places visited (or more specifically, to look for and share information about these) and to foster multiculturalism, or more specifically, to increase the students’ ‘knowledge of culture and habits, tolerance of Others, and ability to adapt to circumstances’. Travelling would be the general theme addressed in her class.

The learning would take place beyond the classroom walls or outdoors. The student teacher would have her students visit sights or interesting places, or she would take them on outings (see Figure 11.3). The idea would be to learn about these spots of interest using a variety of techniques by looking for and sharing information (e.g. by occasionally consulting smartphones), personal opinions and experiences by completing various types of tasks, either involving physical activity and/or humour. Some of the tasks could be completed individually, others would require cooperation and/or initial brainstorming. Task outcomes would be shared, e.g. by acting out or by producing drawings or some other artefacts. In addition, the student teacher wished to apply the theory of Multiple Intelligences in her class.

The student teacher would be around to help her students, and she would like to ensure their agency and a friendly atmosphere among them. When working in small groups, the student teacher would visit each, and would rather take on the role of a partner/member than that of an authority figure (namely, that of a teacher) to respect her students’ opinions and experience regarding the topics addressed in her ‘class’. Every now and then she would like to re-organize the small groups (in other words, they would not be fixed).

While outdoors, various kinds of materials would be available for the students to complete these tasks, such as paper and pencils, glue and scissors, smartphones, and possibly pictures provided by the student teacher.

It seems that the students (and their learning – with an emphasis on learning by doing and hands-on tasks, see Figure 11.3) would play a major role in the future teaching of this student teacher: her task would simply be to make sure that this would be possible in her class. The teaching materials (of various kinds, but excluding textbooks) would play some role, too.

Overall, this student teacher stands out from the rest regarding multiculturalism (closely related to multilingualism): she is the only one who managed to elaborate somewhat on this topic, but the languages involved remain unspecified, except for English (or possibly Englishes). In other words, for her multiculturalism is not just a fashionable buzzword to cite; there would be a host of issues that would need to be addressed in her class.

To sum up, this student teacher envisioned multiculturalism to be an important issue when teaching English in the years to come; however, possible multilingualism in classroom interaction remains unelaborated in her vision.

4.2 Bilingual classes: English and Finnish

Cases 4 and 5 illustrate bilingual classes where two languages, namely, English and Finnish, would be used.

Case 4 is a second-year English major. She was attending a basic course in Pedagogical Studies. In the class of her dreams (Figure 11.4), the learners would be 10–12 graders on the grounds that the student teacher simply prefers to teach students of their age (16–18 years).

Figure 11.4 A bilingual class envisioned by a third-year English major, attending a basic course in Pedagogical Studies. (Translations from Finnish: ‘That’s a nice person. I could possibly spend some time with him/her in the evening’; ‘For once we’re doing something else than sitting still and having our nose in the textbook’;’If I couldn’t speak English, I couldn’t get acquainted with them.’)

In her class, English would be used as a lingua franca. Exchange students, assumed to be native speakers of the language, would be invited to the class, be interviewed by the students, and vice versa. The idea would be to look for and share information about their lives and possibly also about culture (or possibly multiculturalism). In addition, this would be a great opportunity for her students to attain practice in oral skills, adds the student teacher. This sharing would take place in small groups to ensure that everybody would get a chance to talk and be encouraged to use English in class and hopefully also in informal gatherings with the exchange students. The student teacher would avoid correcting any mistakes made by her students. In this way, she could ensure an encouraging atmosphere in the classroom.

In contrast, Finnish would be used by the students to envision aspects of the class (or for thinking, indicated as thought bubbles in Figure 11.4). This would be a great opportunity for them: (1) to get to know exchange students from Britain and the US (the national flags are used as symbols for their countries of origin), (2) to spend some time with them even after school hours, (3) to get further practice in communicating in English, and (4) to do something else than ‘sitting still and having our nose in the textbook’.

The learning would take place in a classroom; its type, however, is left unspecified, but characterised with ‘an international atmosphere’ thanks to the visit of the exchange students (as the student teacher pointed out) and possibly also in the students’ spare time. The students would play a major role; and the teaching materials only a minor one. The student teacher suggested that pictures about the countries where the exchange students would come from could be used as stimulus for the discussions.

To sum up, this student teacher envisioned bilingualism (or even multilingualism in the sense of more than one variety of English being used in interaction in this class) and consequent bi- or multiculturalism to be issues that would need to be addressed in the English class of her dreams. However, there is a trace of native-speakerism in her vision in that only native-speakers would qualify as visitors to her class (cf. Case 3). In addition, there is a trace of monolingual ideology in that only Finnish (assumed to be the L1 of all the students) would be used for thinking, and the use of the L2 (namely, English) be limited to interaction in her class.

Case 5 is a sixth-year Russian major and English minor. He had spent a longer period in Russia as an exchange student. He had completed all Pedagogical Studies but had no previous teaching experience (e.g. as a substitute teacher). In the class of his dreams (Figure 11.5 is described only verbally – for copyright reasons), the learners could be ‘anybody, from kindergarten to hospice care’.

Figure 11.5 A bilingual class envisioned by a sixth-year Russian major and English minor with all Pedagogical Studies completed

In his class, English would be used ‘for life’, as the student teacher put it. He would have his students make observations of the use of English in different environments. In addition, English would be used for looking for and sharing information and for learning content (or CLIL).

Finnish, in contrast, could be used by the student teacher to share aspects of culture with his students, assumed to be their shared L1, if deemed necessary. In his opinion, this would be a way of ensuring that his students would gain at least something out of his English class, if not ‘language-wise, then at least culture-wise’. In other words, this would be a way of fostering biculturalism.

The learning would not necessarily be confined within the classroom walls (irrespective of the type of classroom, whether traditional or modern). As the student teacher put it, the learning could take place ‘anywhere … from a convenience store to a mortician and from Instagram to a school kitchen’ (see Figure 11.5). His class would be student-centred, based on the interests of his students and adjusted to their skills, and he would have them learn by doing (e.g. by cooking and paying visits to different places or sights). Overall, his notion of the learning environment is a very wide one, compared with the rest of the student teachers.

The materials used for teaching would be authentic, including literature and social media/internet (see Figure 11.5). The students could resort to chalk and blackboard, computers or whatever they wished in completing the tasks in class (e.g. to take notes).

The students seem to play an important role not only in the classroom but, importantly, also beyond the classroom walls, and the teacher would be around to make sure that they would seize every opportunity to learn about the use of English, as indicated by the slogan ‘Stay curious’ (see Figure 11.5).

To sum up, this student teacher envisioned both bilingualism and biculturalism to be important issues that he should address in the English class of his dreams. In fact, he seemed to consider biculturalism to be even more important than the mastering of aspects of English by his students. Interestingly, he would be prepared to switch codes from English to Finnish to ensure learning in his class but not necessarily realising that this code-switching might also be problematic as some of his students would not necessarily speak Finnish well enough – as their possible L2.

4.3 Multilingual classes: More than two languages

Case 6 illustrates multilingual classes in a limited way: as exposure to more than two languages but not yet as an aspect of classroom interaction.

Case 6 is a fourth-year French major and English minor. She had completed all Pedagogical Studies and had some experience of teaching children. The student teacher would expect the learners in the class of her dreams to be eager to learn, come from a variety of social backgrounds and be able to take responsibility for their learning (Figure 11.6). The student teacher does not specify her target group but judging by the topics (see below) they would probably be 10–12 graders.

Figure 11.6 A multilingual class envisioned by a fourth-year French major and English minor with all Pedagogical Studies completed

In her class, English would be used for looking for and sharing information, e.g. about history or visual arts, topics suggested by the student teacher; or for learning content (or CLIL). Importantly, as the student teacher noted, ‘the teacher would be the one speaking the least in class’ but she would be around for help or consultation when needed and to ensure interaction among her students.

The students would work on projects related to aspects of culture (note: in the singular), based on earlier visits beyond the classroom to foster multiculturalism (however, it remains unclear whether this means learning about different English-speaking cultures or English- and Finnish-speaking cultures compared). The project outcomes would be shared with the rest – in English.

The learning would take place in a modern classroom in its design and equipment: the students could work in groups, pairs or as individuals, sitting at desks or on chairs or a couch, or lying on the floor (see Figure 11.6). They could cooperate or work on their own. Scissors and glue, books, games, and modern technology would be available (e.g. tablet computers). The student teacher would favour, among others, games, project work, and variation in her teaching methods.

Interestingly, the classroom would be multilingual as a learning environment: posters (e.g. ‘La vie est belle …’) and project reports in different languages, including French and Spanish, would be posted on the classroom walls (see Figure 11.6). In this way the students would be exposed to a few other L2s, while studying English.

Overall, this student teacher was the most specific about the learning environment that she would prefer in teaching English in the future. So, for her the learning environment (or the type of classroom) seems to play an important role, while for the others it played only a minor role or no role at all, being left unspecified verbally and/or visually in their visions.

To sum up, this student teacher envisioned multiculturalism regarding English-speaking culture (or possibly cultures) to be an important issue to be addressed in her teaching of English in the future. However, multilingualism was only a feature of the learning environment: the students of this student teacher would be exposed to more than one L2 in the classroom (nothing is said, however, of the role of an L1 or possible L1s in her class). In short, multilingualism was not yet an aspect of classroom interaction. In fact, the student teacher seems to have had a strict English-only policy in her class. At any rate, this was the most multilingual class in the whole pool of data (but see Section 5).

5 Lessons Learnt

On the whole, there seemed to be two competing discourses that the student teachers resorted to in envisioning the English class of their dreams visually and verbally. Discourse 1 seems to be based on teaching as it had been experienced by the participants during their school careers and ten years of formal learning of English before being accepted on our MA programme. The student teachers are thus critical of some traditional teaching practices and principles, including teacher-centredness, ‘having to listen to endless monologues given by the teacher’; heavy reliance on textbooks or ‘having your nose in the textbook’; emphasis on ‘cramming’, or learning by heart; rehearsing formal aspects of the language (namely, grammar and vocabulary); having to sit still at their desks (organised in rows, making interaction challenging); and finding themselves indoors or confined within the classroom walls. In Discourse 2 the English class(es) of their dreams would be quite different in some of these respects. Among others, they would like to promote multilingualism and -culturalism, and have students and their agency in the central role. Some of the student teachers relied mostly on Discourse 1 (Case 1), others on Discourse 2 (Cases 3 and 6), and yet others drew on both – to varying degrees.

As for the notion of multilingualism, overall it turned out that the student teachers took (if at all) various, and often quite vague, stances on the role of bi- or multilingual interaction and/or bi- or multilingual resources (including the learning environment and/or teaching materials) as features of the English class of their dreams. Admittedly, the set of Tasks 1 and 2 no doubt limited the approach the student teachers chose to take. Since Task 1 had the title ‘The English class of my dreams’, it did not readily direct the participants to think about other languages as something to be addressed (or used) in their future classes. On the other hand, since the National Core Curriculums (FNAE, 2014, 2019) stress the significance of taking different languages into account and acknowledging students’ linguistic repertoires, the student teachers could have been expected to look beyond English (or its native-speaker varieties) by acknowledging the wide use of English as a lingua franca these days. The visions still contained some traces of fairly traditional thinking regarding multilingualism, including the monolingual ideology and native-speakerism.

As for the notion of multiculturalism, the teaching of English is indeed a challenge these days: whose culture or cultures to address – those of the Inner Circle (e.g. Brits or Americans, or other native speakers), or those in the Outer Circle (e.g. Indians, Singaporeans), or in the Expanding Circle (e.g. possibly Finns)? What is British or American culture – even these are far from unified concepts. The status of English as a lingua franca complicates the matter further.

Overall, the findings indicate that the more Pedagogical Studies the students had already completed and/or being other than English majors (namely, majors in some other European languages), the more likely their visions tended to indicate:

•greater awareness of English as a lingua franca, and thus even non-native speakers could act as models in learning the language, or challenging standard or regional varieties of British and American English as models or norms in teaching and assessing language skills;

•that English could be used for searching and sharing information – as opposed to practising communication or rehearsing formal aspects of the language, such as grammar and vocabulary;

•that English could be used for teaching or learning content, including aspects of culture (multiculturalism) or even other school subjects (CLIL), e.g. history.

These are all in line with the goals set specifically for teaching English in the most recent versions of the National Core Curriculums (FNAE, 2014, 2019), and in which respect the teaching of English differs from that of the other FLs in the country.

The continuing influx of immigrants to Finland from different parts of the world and for a variety of reasons will be a challenge in teaching English in the years to come, regarding, among others: (1) interaction in ELF classes: monolingual, bilingual or multilingual practices; (2) designing of textbooks and other teaching materials, (3) assessment practices, e.g. regarding translanguaging. In addition, these developments should make us reconsider the models or norms of use on different occasions: monolingual (English only), bilingual (English, Finnish) or multilingual? Overall, there is a need to consider which language varieties can serve as models or provide norms for correct use of English: traditionally, teaching English in Finnish schools and textbooks have relied on British English but in the multilingual ‘real’ world beyond the classroom, learners use and encounter different varieties, drawing on the different languages that they happen to know to different degrees or resorting to other semiotic resources (e.g. gestures).

These broader views are needed to fulfil the aims set out in the current versions of the National Core Curriculums (FNAE, 2014, 2019, for some recent critical comments, see Ennser-Kananen et al., 2023), and, for instance, in the significant role of sustainability (for further elaboration, see Conclusion of this volume). In order to be able to participate as an active member of society, to get one’s voice heard, and to listen to others, one needs language skills, or to put it in another way – to be a multilingual citizen with a repertoire of languages (and possibly other semiotic resources) that one can draw on in different spheres of life. Also, in focusing on a multilingual perspective in language teaching, we can also enhance awareness of other cultures and languages. Participating and being an active member in society also includes acknowledging others and their positions. To hear everyone’s voice, and to guarantee opportunities for learning, working, participating and being, different languages and their equal importance need to be recognised. When talking about ethically sustainable language teaching (e.g. Kuusalu et al., 2021), equity between languages and their users is one of the key issues.

As language educators we need to do our utmost to keep not only ourselves but also our students updated and informed of all these complexities, have them question current (or past) practices and make them aware of the principles and practices of multilingual pedagogies (e.g. Heugh et al., 2019), translanguaging practices (e.g. Cenoz & Gorter, 2020, 2021) and plurilingual education (e.g. Potts & Cutrim Schmid, 2022). In addition, it would be important for us to share with our students the recent developments in multilingual-izing or plurilingual-izing TESOL (Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages, e.g. Raza et al., 2021, 2023) and ELT (English Language Teaching, e.g. Ibrahim, 2023) and the findings of an ever increasing number of empirical studies on the application of these principles in classroom interaction with students of different ages and with different multilingual backgrounds (see, e.g. a special issue edited by Taylor & Snoddon, 2013). Furthermore, monolingual assessment practices of language skills and/or content should be considered being replaced with plurilingual practices (see, e.g. Melo-Pfeifer & Ollivier, 2024). Case 6 of our study was an attempt by a student teacher to foster elite multilingualism or the study of languages other than English (LOTEs) as advocated in the official language policies and national curriculums – in the context of a future class of English. However, the literature reviewed above illustrates the possibilities of taking into account the multilingualism of students – which may differ from that of their teachers – in classroom interaction and assessment practices even within the Finnish educational system in the years to come to advance social justice among the parties involved.

References

Anderson, J. (2017) Reimagining English language learners from a translingual perspective. ELT Journal 72 (1), 26–37. https://www.doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccx029

Auerbach, E. (2016) Reflections on ‘Reexamining English only in the ESL classroom’. TESOL Quarterly 50 (4), 936–939.

Cenoz, J. and Gorter, D. (2020) Teaching English through pedagogical translanguaging. World Englishes 39 (2), 300–311.

Cenoz, J. and Gorter, D. (2021) Pedagogical Translanguaging. Cambridge University Press. https://www.doi.org/10.1017/9781009029384

Cummins, J. (2003) Bilingual education: Basic principles. In J.-M. Dewaele, A. Housen and Li, W. (eds) Bilingualism: Beyond Basic Principles. Festschrift in Honour of Hugo Baetens Beardsmore (pp. 56–66). Multilingual Matters.

Cummins, J. (2019) The emergence of translanguaging pedagogy: A dialogue between theory and practice. Journal of Multilingual Education Research 9 (13), 19–36.

de Bot, K. (2019) Defining and assessing multilingualism. In J.W. Schwieter and M. Paradis (eds) The Handbook of the Neuroscience of Multilingualism (pp. 1–18). John Wiley.

Douglas Fir Group (2016) A transdisciplinary framework for SLA in a multilingual world. The Modern Language Journal 100, 19–47.

Duarte, J. and Günther-van der Meij, M. (2020) ‘We learn together’ – Translanguaging within a holistic approach towards multilingualism in education. In J.A. Panagiotopoulou, L. Rosen and J. Strzykala (eds) Inclusion, Education and Translanguaging: How to Promote Social Justice in (Teacher) Education? (pp. 125–144). Springer.

Dörnyei, Z. and Kubanyiova, M. (2014) Motivating Learners, Motivating Teachers: Building Vision in the Classroom. Cambridge University Press.

Ennser-Kananen, J., Kilpeläinen, E., Saarinen, T. and Vaarala, H. (2023) Language education for everyone: Busting access myths? In M. Thrupp, P. Seppänen, J. Kauko and S. Kosunen (eds) Finland’s Famous Education System: Unvarnished Insights into Finnish Schooling. Springer. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-19-8241-5_22

Finnish National Agency of Education (FNAE) (2014) Perusopetuksen Opetussuunnitelman Perusteet. [National core curriculum for basic education] https://www.oph.fi/sites/default/files/documents/perusopetuksen_opetussuunnitelman_perusteet_2014.pdf

Finnish National Agency of Education (FNAE) (2019) Lukion opetussuunnitelman perusteet. [National core curriculum for general upper secondary education] https://www.oph.fi/sites/default/files/documents/lukion_opetussuunnitelman_perusteet_2019.pdf

García, O. (2009) Bilingual Education in the 21st Century: A Global Perspective. Wiley-Blackwell.

Hammerness, K. (2003) Learning to hope, or hoping to learn? The role of vision in the early professional lives of teachers. Journal of Teacher Education 54 (1), 43–53.

Harju-Autti, R. (2013) Monikielinen luokka englannin tunnilla [A multilingual class in the EFL classroom]. Tempus 6, 16–18.

Hennink, M., Hutter, I. and Bailey, A. (2011) Qualitative Research Methods. Sage.

Herdina, P. and Jessner, U. (2002) A Dynamic Model of Multilingualism. Multilingual Matters.

Heugh, K., French, M., Armitage, J., Taylor-Leech, K., Billinghurst, N. and Ollerhead, S. (2019) Using Multilingual Approaches: Moving from Theory to Practice. A Resource Book of Strategies, Activities and Projects for the Classroom. British Council.

Holec, H. (1981) Autonomy and Foreign Language Learning. Pergamon Press. (First published 1979, Council of Europe).

Hornberger, N. (2003) Introduction. In N. Hornberger (ed.) Continua of Biliteracy: An Ecological Framework for Educational Policy, Research, and Practice in Multilingual Settings (pp. xii–xxiii). Multilingual Matters.

Ibrahim, N. (2023) Educating early years and primary English language teachers multilingually. In D. Valente and D. Xerri (eds) Innovative Practices in Early English Language Education (pp. 233–257). Palgrave Macmillan.

Illman, V. and Pietilä, P. (2018) Multilingualism as a resource in the foreign language classroom. ELT Journal 72 (3), 237–248. https://www.doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccx073

Jørgensen, J.N. (2008) Polylingual languaging around and among children and adolescents. International Journal of Multilingualism 5, 161–176.

Kalaja, P. (2019) Doing research on learner beliefs about L2 learning and teaching: Exploring the possibilities of visual narratives. In E. Ruiz Esparza Bajaras (ed.) Research on Beliefs about Foreign Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 37–67). Fontamara.

Kalaja, P. and Mäntylä, K. (2018) ‘The English class of my dreams’: Envisioning teaching a foreign language. In S. Mercer and A. Kostoulas (eds) Language Teacher Psychology (pp. 34–52). Multilingual Matters.

Kalaja, P., Alanen, R. and Dufva, H. (2018) ELT in Finland. In J.I. Liontas and M. DelliCarpini (eds) The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching. Wiley-Blackwell. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0930

Kramsch, C. (2012) Authenticity and legitimacy in multilingual SLA. Critical Multilingualism Studies 1, 107–128.

Kramsch, C. (2014) Teaching foreign languages in an era of globalization: Introduction. The Modern Language Journal 98, 296–311.

Kuusalu, S.-R., Heikkola, L.M., Maijala, M., Mutta, M., Mäntylä, K. and Rose, J. (2021) Eettisyys ja kestävä kehitys. Tempus 5, 14–15.

Li, W. (2018) Translanguaging as a practical theory of language. Applied Linguistics 39 (1), 9–30. https://www.doi.org/10.1093/applin/amx039

Linderoos, P. (2016) Mehrsprachigkeit von Lernern mit Migrationshintergrund im finnischen Fremdsprachenunterricht: Perspektiven der Lerner, Lehrpersonen und Erziehungsberechtigen. University of Jyväskylä dissertation. https://jyx.jyu.fi/handle/123456789/48034

Lo Bianco, J. (2014) Domesticating the foreign: Globalization’s effects on the place/s of languages. The Modern Language Journal 98, 312–325.

Maijala, M., Gericke, N., Kuusalu, S.-R., Heikkola, L.M., Mutta, M., Mäntylä, K. and Rose, J. (2023) Conceptualising transformative language teaching for sustainability and why it is needed. Environmental Education Research 30 (3), 377–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2023.2167941

May, S. (ed.) (2014) The Multilingual Turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL and Bilingual Education. Routledge.

Melo-Pfeifer, S. (2018) The multilingual turn in foreign language education: Facts and fallacies. In A. Bonnet and P. Siemund (eds) Foreign Language Education in Multilingual Classrooms (pp. 191–212). John Benjamins.

Melo-Pfeifer, S. and Ollivier, C. (eds) (2024) Assessment of Plurilingual Competence and Plurilingual Learners in Educational Settings: Educative Issues and Empirical Approaches. Routledge.

Mäntylä, K. and Kalaja, P. (2019) ‘The class of my dreams’ as envisioned by student teachers of English: What is there to teach about the language? In P. Kalaja and S. Melo-Pfeifer (eds) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words (pp. 254–274). Multilingual Matters.

Mäntylä, K., Veivo, O., Pollari, P. and Toomar, J. (2021) English only? Kielten opettajien käsityksiä kielivalintojen monipuolistamisen esteistä ja keinoista. Kieli, koulutus ja yhteiskunta 12 (2). https://www.kieliverkosto.fi/fi/journals/kieli-koulutus-ja-yhteiskunta-maaliskuu-2021/english-only-kielten-opettajien-kasityksia-kielivalintojen-monipuolistamisen-esteista-ja-keinoista

Navracsics, J. and Molnár, C. (2017) Multilingualism, teaching, and learning foreign languages in present-day Hungary. IRJE – Indonesian Research Journal in Education 1, 26–42.

Ortega, L. (2019) SLA and the study of equitable multilingualism. The Modern Language Journal 103 (Supplement), 23–38. https://www.doi.org/10.1111/modl.12525

Otsuji, E. and Pennycook, A. (2009) Metrolingualism: Fixity, fluidity and language in flux. International Journal of Multilingualism 7, 240–254.

Piccardo, E. (2020) ‘We are all (potential) plurilinguals’: Plurilingualism as an overarching holistic concept. Translanguaging: Opportunities and Challenges in a Global World 10. https://uottawa.scholarsportal.info/ottawa/index.php/ILOB-OLBI/article/view/3825

Pitkänen-Huhta, A. and Mäntylä, K. (2021) Teachers negotiating multilingualism in the EFL classroom. European Journal of Applied Linguistics 9 (2), 283–306. https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2018-0020

Potts, D. and Cutrim Schmid, E. (2022) Plurilingual practice in language teacher education: An exploratory study of project design and ideological change. AILA Review 35 (1), 60–88. https://www.jbe-platform.com/content/journals/10.1075/aila.22007.pot

Raza, K., Coombe, C. and Reynolds, D. (eds) (2021) Policy Development in TESOL and Multilingualism: Past, Present and the Way Forward. Springer.

Raza, K., Reynolds, D. and Coombe, C. (eds) (2023) Handbook of Multilingual TESOL in Practice. Springer.

Rose, G. (2016) Visual Methodologies: An Introduction to the Interpretation of Visual Materials. Sage.

Taylor, S.K. and Snoddon, K. (eds) (2013) Special issue: ‘Plurilingualism in TESOL’, TESOL Quarterly 47 (3), 439–662.

Tholin, J. (2014) ‘Swedishness’ as a norm for learners of English in Swedish schools: A study of national and local objectives and criteria in compulsory schools. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 58, 253–268.

Ticheloven, A., Schwenke-Lam, T. and Fürstenau, S. (2020) Multilingual teaching practices in German primary classrooms: Language comparisons. In C. Kirsch and J. Duarte (eds) Multilingual Approaches for Teaching and Learning: From Acknowledging to Capitalising on Multilingualism in European Mainstream Education (pp. 34–51). Routledge.

12Visualising Interaction in Plurilingual Situations: What Do Future Teachers Think and How Do They Approach This Reality?

Mireia Pérez-Peitx

1 Introduction

Navigating language and cultural diversity presents a substantial challenge for contemporary societies; however, it constitutes a fundamental element for fostering social cohesion. This is particularly relevant in regions where multiple languages are prevalent, including traditionally monolingual areas, due to the expanding impact of globalisation on linguistic interactions. Catalonia has never been a monolingual territory, even though the language (Catalan) was minoritised during Franco’s dictatorship. The linguistic repertoire of Catalan citizens – especially for the last 30 years – has expanded, with a wide variety of different languages increasing the complexity of linguistic repertoires. In the early 2000s, the European Commission published The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment (hereafter, CEFR) (Council of Europe, 2001) which included the explicit aim of spreading plurilingual competence. As a result of incorporating the CEFR into curricula material and teacher training for most of the last 20 years, there has been an explicit intention by European institutions to enhance public awareness of plurilingualism, while at the same time this knowledge has been slow to arrive in schools. Even though there is a new vision of linguistics in language education, with plurilingual competence being included in the Catalan school curriculum, it is often put aside because of its perceived complexity, and generally, practice is still based on an isolated view of languages. Even in the academic domain, pluralingualism has been largely overlooked, with a strong preference for English as the dominant language continuing to be widely apparent (Castellotti & Moore, 2002, 2010). In this study, three questions were addressed:

(1)What do future teachers understand by a plurilingual situation?

(2)What strategies do future teachers depict when envisioning themselves teaching in a plurilingual situation at Catalan schools?

(3)Are there notable differences between a plurilingual approach of those student teachers whose future curriculum includes a focus on plurilingual competence (Primary teachers) and those that do not (Early Childhood teachers)?

To advance the cause of social justice and equity in this study, two key principles have been emphasised. Firstly, the research team consists of both university researchers and schoolteachers, which broadens the scope and relevance of the study. As an expression of the team’s commitment to inclusivity, schoolteachers are acknowledged as a crucial component in researching educational topics, given their expertise in the practical application of research findings. Secondly, the study focuses on linguistic practices that are already occurring in schools, such as intercomprehension, where language equity is a reality, despite the fact that these practices may not always have been recognised by some of the linguistic approaches dominating the academic research arena. In a European country characterised by the coexistence of multiple languages, within a political context marked by the highest recorded number of individuals fleeing from wars, persecutions and conflicts (UN, n.d.) in the last decades, this issue emerges as a significant concern for sustainable cohabitation while preserving personal choices, such as language and culture. Bridging the divide between the academic sphere and the practical realities in schools is imperative to fostering greater social cohesion.

Section 2 of the chapter provides a general background of the study, with a particular focus on the Catalan context, plurilingual competence and teachers’ beliefs regarding this topic. In Section 3, the research methodology used in the study is explained in detail, including information about the participants, data collection methods and data analysis techniques. In Section 4, the findings of the study are presented, directly addressing the research questions that were posed. The chapter concludes with Section 5 by discussing the lessons learnt from the study.

2 Background to the Study

The theoretical background addresses three areas: a brief contextual setting for Catalan schools; an updated definition of/perspective on plurilingual competence according to the CEFR; and finally, a review of previous studies examining the degree of plurilingual competence of future teachers at the University of Barcelona.

2.1 Catalan context

In Catalonia (Spain), after democracy was established in the late 1970s, Catalan became increasingly present in schools over the years. By 1983, Catalan had become the language of instruction in the education system. At this time, immigration was mainly from other parts of Spain, and the curriculum stated that all students should, by the end of their education, become fluent speakers of either Catalan or Spanish. In order to accomplish this, an immersive linguistic programme was designed for the majority of the schools. It was a mass education programme participated in by the majority of teachers, with the acceptance of the majority of the population. In this context, teachers would use Catalan as the language of instruction even though there was a significant number of students whose first language would be Spanish. This meant that the teacher would speak in Catalan but also know Spanish, which allowed him or her to use their individual linguistic repertoire as a resource – for example, by understanding students’ demands even if these were made in the students’ first language (Spanish). It is worth noting that both languages – Spanish and Catalan – come from Romance languages and share a wide linguistic base, allowing for intercomprehension to occur. The linguistic ambit of the classroom drastically changed with immigration in the late 1990s and early 2000s, when the linguistic realities in schools became much more heterogeneous because of the variety of family origins, which meant a wider range of languages. Even though this change occurred more than 20 years ago, few strategies can be observed, either at schools or in teacher education, to acknowledge this linguistic reality and embrace it. The limited transfer of knowledge has meant that any changes that have been implemented tend to be minimal or superficial, such as celebrating a multicultural day or exploring the number of different languages spoken at home, in order to incorporate the information in school official documents. Catalan is the official language of the education system; however, the linguistic repertoires of learners have undergone significant changes due to various factors such as migration and the availability of internet content in different languages. The achievement of educational justice within schools – for students – can only occur through the promotion of linguistic equity. This necessitates an examination of the intricate and dynamic interplay of the linguistic repertories including their emotional weight both in teacher education programmes and school practices. Paulsrud et al. (2020) identify three distinct beliefs expressed by teachers in relation to multilingualism: viewing it as a right, a problem, or a resource. In teacher education programmes, the perspective of plurilingualism should be advocated as both a resource and a right for students, enabling them to empower themselves and take control of their own narratives. Nevertheless, it is important to acknowledge the challenges it presents and address them in order to transform plurilingualism into a valuable resource and a fundamental right.

The Catalan curriculum stresses the importance of social interaction for learning with the teacher’s role defined as guide or mentor, rather than leader. These aspects are reflected in both the Early Childhood and the Elementary curricula. The Catalan Early Childhood curriculum (Generalitat de Catalunya, 2008), for ages three to six, puts the emphasis on the importance of being able to communicate in different communicative situations. The curriculum is designed to invite students – and therefore teachers – to participate in conversations, gradually taking into account the different rules when engaging in linguistic exchanges; to encourage small children to participate in different types of conversations, while learning to explore the world with others and sharing hypotheses, emotions, feelings, wishes, etc. Although the Catalan Elementary curriculum, for ages six to 12 (Generalitat de Catalunya, 2015), does include a section relating to plurilingual competence, it subsequently became apparent that it was rather limited in terms of what was required by the CEFR. As a result, it was necessary to further develop this aspect of the curriculum in a supporting document (El model lingüístic del sistema educatiu de Catalunya, Departament d’Educació de la Generalitat de Catalunya, 2018) for a more effective incorporation of plurilingual competence as needed and described in the CEFR. The new Elementary curriculum, for ages six to 12 (Generalitat de Catalunya, 2022), puts significantly more emphasis on plurilingual competence. Not only is plurilingual competence one of the eight key competences for primary education and for life-long learning, but it is also recognised throughout the curriculum, with a plurilingual approach explicit in all linguistic areas.

2.2 Plurilingual competence

In this chapter, plurilingual competence is understood to be a key competence within the plurilingualism approach as defined by the European Commission (Council of Europe, 2001, 2020). In the 2001 CEFR document, no distinction is made between plurilingualism and multilingualism, and this is an issue which a number of researchers felt merits further exploration. In the 2020 CEFR document a distinction is made, with multilingualism being defined as ‘the coexistence of languages’ (2020: 30) and plurilingualism as ‘the dynamic and developing linguistic repertoire of an individual user/learner’ (2020: 30). Piccardo et al. (2022) define the plurilingualism paradigm as putting the emphasis on valuing otherness and diversity – linguistically and culturally – through the exploration of individual linguistic repertoires and the valorisation of all languages, with a special mention of home and minoritised languages:

The distinction highlights the difference between two perspectives (multilingualism and plurilingualism): the prefix multi to stress a linear additive paradigm with addition of elements like numbers in multiplication, or people in a multitude, and the prefix pluri to open to a complex, fluid paradigm, which would value and build on plurality and considered embedded difference in a more holistic way … Multilingualism is used to refer to the coexistence of different languages at the social or individual level, while plurilingualism describes the dynamic and developing linguistic repertoire of an individual user/learner. (Piccardo et al., 2022: 4)

In school classrooms, a plurilingual approach can be identified by those practices where the exploration of personal linguistic repertoires is fostered; or by the explicit comparison of connections between languages in an attempt to identify similarities and differences. On the other hand, a multilingual approach could be identified with a curriculum that puts the emphasis on attaining competence in three languages – Catalan, Spanish and a foreign language:

A multilingual classroom is one in which there are children with different mother tongues, perhaps with separate heritage language classes after school that have no connection with the mainstream curriculum. A plurilingual classroom is a classroom in which the strategy is to embrace and exploit linguistic and cultural diversity present in order to maximize communication, subject learning and plurilingual/pluricultural awareness. (Piccardo et al., 2022: 4–5)

The construction of plurilingual competence is a shared process, in that it takes place in a social context with others, both teachers and classmates. It is also an irregular process wherein no constant or equal rhythm for the people involved can be expected; and it is a personal process, since everyone has to explore their own beliefs (Pérez-Peitx et al., 2019). This plurilinguistic approach sharply contrasts with the one practised for many years, where native-speaker proficiency was the ultimate goal of language learning, and diverse individual repertoires were not valued. When talking about plurilingualism, intercomprehension is a useful concept – as an alternative to always using English as a lingua franca. The term intercomprehension refers to the capacity to understand another language that you may not have studied but, thanks to your linguistic repertoire, you can understand or, at least, partially comprehend (Carrasco, 2010). This is what the plurilingualism approach recognises as partial competence. From the perspective of language equity, intercomprehension is considered more inclusive because it allows for conversations that are not limited to a single language. A crucial element for increasing the likelihood of successful communication in this approach is where languages belong to the same family.

The introspective practice of examining individuals’ linguistic repertoires, conducted by both teachers and students, can serve as a valuable tool for promoting reflection on language learning and plurilingualism in the classroom (Cabré, 2019; Carrasco & Piccardo, 2009; Coste et al., 2009; Palou & Cabré, 2017; Pérez-Peitx et al., 2018). However, it should be noted that this practice, while valuable, is not sufficient on its own. Guaranteeing the cultivation of plurilingual competence necessitates its in-depth examination, analysis, and thoughtful contemplation, given that it embodies a novel framework for language instruction and acquisition. This transition is challenging to effect without critically questioning current linguistic practices and their repercussions, including systemic racism, social inequities, and broader societal injustices (Wassell & Glynn, 2022). This underscores the importance of researching the dynamics within teacher education programmes and schools, as it becomes one of the compelling reasons for such investigation.

2.3 Future teachers’ beliefs about plurilingual competence

In response to the increasing recognition of plurilingualism in European school curricula, several studies have been conducted both at the Universitat de Barcelona (UB) and at the Universitat Autònoma de Catalunya (UAB) with the aim of studying and promoting linguistic and culturally responsive teaching practices. At the University of Barcelona, the research group, PLURAL, has been exploring teachers’ beliefs and language acquisition with a particular focus on future teachers, in order to contribute to better education programmes. Since the early foundation of the group, the team is heterogeneous and has included both researchers from the university as well as teachers from schools. As an equity principle, schoolteachers’ participation is not only limited to data collection; they play a crucial role in the analysis of data, since they bring reflections from a field in which they are experts. Reflection is constructed and shared with them as a fundamental element in education research. Initial investigations show how guiding processes of metacognition can transform beliefs into dynamic knowledge in order to question previous frames of reference in language education (Palou & Fons, 2011); they also indicate a lack of congruence with the CEFR and teachers’ beliefs in it (Borg et al., 2014).

Birello and Sánchez-Quintana (2013) show that teachers have a compartmentalised vision of languages, which makes it difficult for them to acknowledge the similarities and differences between languages, and there is an absence of the term or the idea of plurilingualism in students’ narratives. They propose the idea that a more communicative approach, rather than one centred on grammar or memorising vocabulary, increases students’ motivation regarding language learning. In Pérez-Peitx et al. (2018), the understanding of plurilingualism was based on that of Coste (2010) – a plurality of plurilingualism depending on different elements such as the origin, whether languages are chosen or an obligation, when the acquisition has taken place, among others. The comparison between the data collected before and after a year of contact with plurilingual theories and practices showed a sharp evolution in student teachers’ views of languages. Conclusions showed changes in student teachers’ beliefs, but a concurrent resistance in the language teaching and learning manifested in practices such as a lack of representation of languages which do not form part of the formal education system; a big emotional relationship with languages, as identified by Chik and Melo-Pfeifer (2020); English standing as a professional priority; not talking about the sociopolitical dimensions of language learning (Chik & Melo-Pfeifer, 2020) – neither heritage languages nor others. The resistance to belief change may be related to a school experience where each language is taught and clearly defined in a specific space and time and where there was an absence of recognition of the plurilingualism approach (Palou & Cabré, 2019). In fact, most of the students attending universities have experienced many years of language learning following an accumulative vision, more related to a multilingual approach than one which embraces plurilingualism.

Studies conducted by researchers from the UAB also confirm the significant challenge of shifting away from monolingual-oriented practices in both schools and universities (Bergroth et al., 2022; Birello et al., 2021; Llompart et al., 2023). Birello et al. (2021) identifies teachers as a pivotal element in ensuring educational linguistic justice, as they play a fundamental role in challenging monolingual mindsets and ideologies while promoting the incorporation of a more multi/plurilingual approach. However, the hindrance lies in the lack of practical training, knowledge and experience among teacher students, despite their recognition of the value of linguistic diversity as a resource (Paulsrud et al., 2020), without the ability to translate this diversity into effective learning situations. Bergroth et al. (2022) suggest linguistically sensitive teaching (LST) as a means of addressing language and cultural diversity in classrooms through a respectful and empowering pedagogy. They also identify potential areas for implementing this approach, extending its scope beyond language teaching exclusively. Finally, according to Llompart et al. (2023), attention should be directed towards individual linguistic repertoires in order to challenge the linguistic status quo. Concepts such as privilege, social equity and neoliberal discourses should be critically examined and socially contemplated to promote a linguistically sensitive approach.

The focus of this chapter is to enhance teacher education by bridging the divide between theory, as exemplified by the CEFR, and the realities observed in Catalan public schools. It has been developed as a result of a research project funded by the Catalan government. Initially, the focus was on beliefs concerning plurilingual competence, student linguistic repertoires, and their perception of plurilingualism. Later on, attention covered the strategies that prospective educators employ when envisioning themselves teaching in plurilingual settings at schools. Consequently, the primary objective of this study is to investigate the system of beliefs held by student teachers regarding interaction in plurilingual scenarios.

3 Research Methodology

There are more than ten different groups of students per academic year in the Faculty of Teacher Education at the University of Barcelona, with students studying one of the three Education Degrees offered (either Early Childhood, Primary, or a Double Degree in both Early Childhood and Primary). Seven of the ten groups participated in the present study, which was supported by a government-funded programme explicitly aimed at building bridges between schools and research conducted at the university level. Funds from this programme are exclusively dedicated to projects predicated on collaboration between schools and university professors. The current project focused on how plurilingual competence can be observed in schools, to promote the communicative approach to language learning established by the curriculum. The ultimate objective of the project is to promote changes in the Teacher Education degree to improve future teachers’ education. It should be mentioned that, in all three degrees, plurilingualism is only part of the content of a six European Credit Transfer System (ECTS) course, out of the 240 ECTS to obtain the degree. This officially means that some reference to multilingual societies, plurilingual competence and linguistic repertoires should be made during students’ education, although this is not one of the main learning outcomes of the course.

3.1 Participants

A total of 109 students from all three degree courses participated in this study. The first group is studying for an undergraduate Primary Education degree, and consisted of 27 students in their 2nd year (of four) of the education programme. The second group is studying for an Early Childhood Education degree, and consisted of 42 students in their 4th and last year. Finally, the third group, studying both the Early Childhood and Primary degrees, consisted of 40 students, in their 4th year out of five. Students in all groups had attended periods of practice at different schools, in different grades and stages, which varied depending on the requirements of their degree.

3.2 Data collection

Data was collected simultaneously in all three groups at the beginning of the second semester (February 2019). All participants were asked to complete two different tasks, both of which included a visual narrative accompanied by an explanatory text to help the researchers to understand the visual information. The design of the data collection puts the emphasis on the visual narrative because of the power of images, and because images can incorporate data that other forms cannot (Rose, 2016). Such visual methods have been shown to be a useful approach to exploring the awareness of multilingualism (Chik & Melo-Pfeifer, 2020; Kalaja & Pitkänen-Huhta, 2020). Two tasks were designed in order to explore different contexts; one neutral and one defined (the school). In the first task - Task A - participants had to ‘represent a plurilingual situation’, while in the second one – Task B – they had to ‘represent themselves teaching in a plurilingual situation at school’.

3.3 Data analysis

In order to analyse both the visual narratives and explanatory texts in both tasks, a scheme was generated while conducting analysis and it was decided that the focus would be on context, interaction and people and actions.

At the context level: the place depicted in the visual narratives gives information about where participants imagine plurilingual situations occurring. This may be a public area, such as a metro or a museum, or a private one, such as a family living room. Other narratives situated the interaction in a foreign country, especially English-speaking ones. When envisioning themselves as future teachers, the school location depicted gives information such as, for example, the frequency with which they think they will have to address a plurilingual situation: choosing to depict a situation where the teachers are speaking with families, rather than their own classes, for example, conveys a different perception of the frequency with which they will be interacting in a plurilingual situation.

At the interaction level, the analysis took into account whether there was communicative use of the languages reflected in the narratives or simply the co-existence of those languages. This means that what in some cases may look like a communicative situation, may in fact be a succession of short, isolated conversations, occurring in a limited space, but with no interaction between them. This can happen, for example, when the situation includes two different families, each one speaking in its family language, and each family is only talking among its own members, with no further contact. If there is no explicit reference to communication – or the intention to communicate – with another person outside their linguistic group, the emphasis is on the multilingual coexistence of multiple languages rather than on embracing plurilingual competence. In the case of Task B where the focus was on the participant in a teaching situation, the analysis of the task, in some cases, revealed situations where there are no explicit strategies in the classroom to manage multiple languages being spoken at the same time.

At the people and actions level, information can be added to comprehend and give a better understanding of the previous categories. For example, despite not displaying a communicative situation, an individual is depicted as considering interacting with a plurilingual individual. In this category, it is also enlightening to observe how the participants depict themselves as future teachers, because different teacher roles can be perceived in the classrooms depicted. Some student teachers depict themselves outside the interaction between students, while others display a range of strategies, such as translating, for dealing with language contact. For this category, the presence of other people in the images (such as families, perhaps students from other courses, etc.) was also analysed.

4 Findings

Results show no remarkable differences between Primary and Early Childhood future teachers, so findings will be presented answering the other two research questions, namely, what do the participants identify as a plurilingual situation and what strategies do they depict when envisioning themselves as future teachers in plurilingual situations?

4.1 Do future teachers recognise a plurilingual situation?

Regardless of the age group that teacher students will be teaching in the future, the participants clearly recognise what a multilingual situation is. Even though the task put the emphasis on plurilingual competence, the majority of the students depicted situations where there are different languages coexisting in the same place, for example, near the bus station (see Figure 12.1).

Figure 12.1 Judit’s narrative (Early Childhood student)

Judit includes three different languages in a reduced space (in this case, a bus stop). The official information at the bus stop is written in Catalan on the screen (for a de servei – out of service), the mother and the little boy on the left are speaking in English, and finally, the two individuals at the back are speaking in Spanish and are discussing what they are going to have for dinner. Here, each conversation occurs in one language and they coexist with no further implication of contact between them, so there is no recognition of plurilingualism.

In her drawing (see Figure 12.2), Bruna depicted a building of the town where she is from. She opted not to represent human figures because ‘languages do not define us as persons’. She included the idea of several languages using different colours and different forms for representing speech bubbles. In the street, other languages can be seen, some of which coincide in colour and form, while some do not. As can be seen, some of the conversations interact – like the ones in the left corner and third-floor window on the left. In both examples, there is a communicative interaction where languages are not shared but communication does occur; a more plurilingual approach rather than having an accumulation of monolingual conversations.

Figure 12.2 Bruna’s narrative (Early Childhood student)

A widespread resource utilised by the participants is the use of standardised national symbols, especially flags, to represent the idea of one language, one nation. While using this symbol, they seem not to take into account that some countries or flags may have more than one official language or represent wider territories. This can be observed in Figure 12.3, where the flag of Great Britain is used to represent English, even though this flag includes other territories where other languages are spoken such as Welsh, Scottish or Irish, among others, not to mention the fact that a vast number of languages is used on a daily basis all over Great Britain. In this narrative, there is also an explicit manifestation of interaction, because two people are speaking to each other (and we are told their L1 is not the language they are using). The concierge speaks in English to a Spanish couple, even though he is Danish. Here, even though there are different languages represented in the same place, interaction occurs between people in the same language (English).

Figure 12.3 Joana’s narrative (Early Childhood and Primary student)

This idea that a lingua franca is needed to successfully communicate is brought to the extreme in Elena’s narrative (Figure 12.4) where, to ask for directions in the underground, an Italian speaker switches to English to communicate with a Catalan speaker. Here we see that, even between languages from the same linguistic family, such as French and Catalan, or Italian and Catalan, where intercomprehension could be an interaction strategy, English is still perceived to be necessary.

Figure 12.4 Elena’s narrative (Early Childhood and Primary student)

In the written text of this narrative, the participant even makes this explicit:

Original text: És probable que si l’italià li hagués fet la pregunta en italià, el català no l’hagués entès, malgrat ser dues llengües semblants. L’anglès, en canvi, és una llengua més coneguda, ja que és universal.

(Translation: If the Italian had formulated the question in Italian, it is probable that the Catalan would not have understood, even though they are similar languages. English, on the other hand, is a more well-known language because it is universal.)

The two following narratives (Manel’s and Lia’s) represent a shift towards a more integrated view of languages, since they recognise the partial competences of languages, although without explicitly identifying it.

Manel’s narrative (see Figure 12.5) reflects a particular anecdote that he experienced. In the written text, he explains that he is a Spanish speaker and that when he arrived in Catalonia at a young age (left unspecified), he discovered that he could understand Catalan, although he did not know it. Even though he had not studied the language, he could understand almost ‘everything’, which implicitly recognises the partial competence presented in the CEFR, particularly the intercomprehension of Romance languages. But, in the context of the narrative – a soccer game – there was a Catalan word (cama, which means ‘leg’) that means something very different in Spanish (‘bed’), and he was very confused. It was not until somebody helped him with this misunderstanding that he grasped what the other soccer player was telling him (m’ha fet la traveta amb la seva cama, meaning ‘he has tripped me up with his leg’). In the narrative, the importance of personal experiences and trajectories appears as an example of implicit knowledge, because, without naming it, he introduces the idea of partial competence and misunderstandings, especially when the same word means different things in different languages.

Figure 12.5 Manel’s narrative (Primary student)

In Lia’s narrative (see Figure 12.6), we can see a sequence of three different moments. The top two are at home, where the child is reading a book, first with her English mother (‘Once upon a time…’) and then with her Spanish father (Érase una vez). Then, at school, even though no one has taught her Catalan, she can understand ‘hi havia una vegada’ because of her linguistic repertoire. Even though there is the same sentence in three languages (in this order: English, Spanish and Catalan) the approach goes beyond the mere translation. It is also, perhaps, significant that Lia has devoted twice as much space to the English version, possibly suggesting her attributing more importance to English.

Figure 12.6 Lia’s narrative (Early Childhood and Primary student)

4.2 What strategies do participants display at the school in a plurilingual situation?

First, it should be said that there are several narratives where the emphasis is (as it has consistently been in the past) on the idea of different languages coexisting in one place, with the complication that in the school, there are three curricular languages (Catalan, Spanish and English) that commonly arise in the examples (see Figure 12.7). However, in other narratives, we see different ways of representing the teacher. These include the teacher as a translator of languages, which is significant because it recognises the variety of home languages in the classroom; however, at some point, it can also be perceived as unrealistic because of the number of different languages to translate every time. That may be one of the reasons why a significant number of narratives where the participants use this strategy (translation) display ‘the good morning greeting’ as an example (see Figure 12.8). From left to right: Chinese, Arabic, English, French, Spanish and Catalan). In other narratives there is an explicit reference to the fact that teachers should be able to give basic instructions or know key vocabulary in all the L1s present in the class.

Figure 12.7 Lola’s narrative (Primary student)

Two types of resources were identified for managing plurilingual situations. The first type included resources that are valid for any situation and which, at some point, are part of the teachers’ repertoires for dealing with a regular class, such as non-verbal communication strategies, group arrangement, or having a one-to-one conversation with the pupil once general instructions have been given to the rest of the class. The second type of resources explicitly display plurilingual competence, as the following cases show. Despite displaying similarities to Alba’s narrative (see Figure 12.8), Jordi’s narrative (see Figure 12.9) is different in that the teacher initiates a language comparison task, making the students explore their own repertoires and share how a phrase is said in ‘their language’. Even though the teacher is embracing language diversity, he is not fully recognising the language itself because he is not naming it.

Figure 12.8 Alba’s narrative (Primary student)

Figure 12.9 Jordi’s narrative (Primary student)

Another example of the same strategy is illustrated in Sonia’s narrative (see Figure 12.10). Here the teacher not only embraces exploring the origins of the families and their home languages, but the classroom setting also supports this approach by having space to make linguistic and cultural diversity visible, through a world map, a list of different origins, and so on. As long as this resource is used to make visible the pluralité de plurilingualismes, and not as a way of othering students, it can help students to explore their personal linguistic repertoires.

Figure 12.10 Silvia’s narrative (Early Childhood and Primary student)

Whereas it is common to use translation as a strategy, Maria’s narrative (see Figure 12.11) is an example of a student that makes explicit reference to resources (telephone, tablet or computer) to translate an oral conversation, while it is happening. In this particular case, students have some keywords translated on the walls but using additional tools allows the teacher to make the conversation more accessible to all students. As can be seen, the teacher and the students are sitting in a circle and the teacher is surrounded by analogue and digital resources. When reading the participant’s explanatory text, we can see that she places emphasis on these resources because she observed them during her practice period as part of her teaching degree.

Figure 12.11 Maria’s narrative (Early Childhood student)

In the following narrative, Joana depicts (see Figure 12.12) an interview taking place between a Catalan speaking teacher and two adults, whose languages are Moroccan Arabic and a Chinese language. The bridge is represented by the two pupils whose linguistic repertoire includes Catalan, Moroccan Arabic and Chinese languages. Even though there is still the idea that one flag represents one language, the flags are not physically separated (they are even overlapping) and can be seen to be sharing a space. In addition, the fact that the plurilingual repertoire is used to an advantage puts the emphasis on the potential of language diversity in plurilingual situations such as using code-switching or code-mixing in communicative situations where languages are not shared by all participants (as in the example) but, still, communication occurs.

Figure 12.12 Joana’s narrative task B (Early Childhood and Primary student)

Finally, in Carla’s narrative, there is another example of positively exploiting the linguistic capital of the classroom, using pupils’ knowledge to generate learning situations, as in the following sequence (see Figure 12.13 for the narrative and Table 12.1 for the text).

Table 12.1 Carla’s text from the narrative. Original Catalan text and translation (Primary student)

En Ming Yan Yan no sap com dir una salutació en la nostra llengua. L’ajudem?

Sí! pot dir ‘Hola, bon dia!’

Ming Yan Yan doesn’t know how to greet people in our language. Should we help him?

Yes! He can say, Hi, good morning!

Perfecte! I en castellà? Bon dia!

Hola, qué tal?

Perfect! And in Spanish? Good morning!

Hi! How are you?

I en xinès com és, Ming?

-caràcters xinesos simbòliques

Wow, què difícil!

And in Chinese? How is it, Ming?

-symbolic Chinese characters

Wow! How difficult!

Figure 12.13 Carla’s narrative (Primary student)

In this example, the emphasis is on what linguistic diversity can contribute to the rest of the classmates who speak other languages. Clearly, Carla goes beyond the coexistence of languages and turns it into a situation from which all the students can profit while simultaneously exploring differences and similarities between languages because of the teacher’s intervention.

5 Lessons Learnt

This research demonstrates that the majority of the student teachers are aware of the linguistic and cultural diversity in society, and it extends beyond school walls. Nevertheless, recognising the multilingual society we live in does not necessarily mean, by itself, that plurilingual competence is guaranteed. We have seen a persistent view of a multilingual approach based on the accumulation of languages rather than a plurilingual one (Birello et al., 2021). Students have consistently depicted strategies associated with an isolated view of languages and the lack of the idea of a repertoire, such as using national flags for representing languages, associating flags with origins, not recognising being born in a country and not speaking its official language as an L1, etc. (Pérez-Peitx et al., 2019).

Plurilingual competence based on metalinguistics is particularly apparent when exploring linguistic repertoires of the people in the classroom, which has proven to be an effective tool to raise plurilingual awareness (Palou & Cabré, 2017; Cabré, 2019). Compared with previous studies (Birello & Sánchez Quintana, 2013; Pérez-Peitx et al., 2019) there is a clear shift towards a more flexible approach to language learning by giving the students the right to talk in their L1 in the classroom as well as the positive intention to include the familiar languages in the lessons. Still, the participants need to find a way to ensure that these languages are present without putting all the obligation on the teacher: it clearly cannot be expected that teachers speak all the languages spoken by the children in their classrooms.

Even though there was a lack of systematic training in the faculty regarding plurilingual competence (Birello et al., 2021; Llompart et al., 2023), specific resources were displayed by students when envisioning themselves as future teacher, such as: exploring languages or origins of their families in the classroom; bringing cultural richness by singing songs and including books in family languages; using the internet as a resource for helping communication, especially with those languages not known by the teacher, or where the possibilities for communication are lower; and, finally, using languages of their families as linguistic capital (Carrasco & Piccardo, 2009; Coste et al., 2009). When tracking the origin of the resources, they usually depend on the personal trajectory – a personal experience during childhood, a practice attendance at school – rather than a university course (Pérez-Peitx & Sánchez-Quintana, 2019). The shift in paradigm should not rely on individual choices but must be driven by educational institutions. This is the principal resource to reevaluate existing language practices and advance the cause of linguistic justice and equity (Wassell & Glynn, 2022).

On balance, given the language diversity which exists in society, there seem to be rather few resources to take advantage of plurilingual situations. While some of the strategies suggested by the drawings may be useful for a bilingual situation, such as translation, they would be less useful for a plurilingual one. The participants’ drawings tend to represent their own experience as school learners, which occurred in a completely different context, where there was far less language diversity. An explicit effort needs to be made in teacher education programmes, for both pre- and in-service teachers, to contribute to the knowledge of plurilingualism, in order to help schools deal with plurilingual situations present in the majority of Catalan schools (Cabré, 2019; Pérez-Peitx et al., 2019). This entails offering educational programmes to both pre-service and in-service teachers in order to enhance their plurilingual competence and embrace the plurality of plurilingualisms as a means to address linguistic diversity and contribute to a most equitable and cohesive society.

Two critical points emerge from this research. On the one hand, the inclusion of future teachers in research teams or as collaborators enhances research by making the team more heterogenous. This, then, is a practice that clearly invites further incorporation and exploration. On the other hand, although this research resulted in interesting insights and understandings, it was limited to a relatively small group of participants, all studying at one university. In the future it would be worth conducting similar studies with a significantly larger group of participants, preferably including those studying at different universities in Catalonia.

There is not just one set of principles to take into account for social justice and equity; rather, each investigation has to draw the key points from asking provocative questions as suggested by CohenMiller and Boivin (2022). For the PLURAL research group there are two principles to consider in research projects. Since the research takes place at the Faculty of Teacher Education with public funds, there is a commitment to work with schools and its teachers. The challenge of working with individual teachers who have not been traditionally included by academia is to value outputs with greater impact at teacher level, rather than those that tend only to be valued in the academic arena. Another guiding principle for the group is the imperative to advance societal change and justice through research topics. As such, the group has a longstanding tradition of exploring plurilingualism as an approach that can promote greater language equity and justice than teaching and learning languages with no emphasis on the relations and consequences of how languages work – and contribute to the construction of learner identity. The group also sought to bring greater attention to practices that are already in place in Catalan schools, even though this has not been a central topic in academia for many years. In these practices, students learn languages with the guidance of their teachers and commit to inclusion in an intuitive way, since little transfer regarding plurilingual competence has been made. Educational programmes must address the importance of this topic in order to enhance the quality of teachers’ expertise from an inclusion approach. Reflection is imperative to prevent the perpetuation of injustices in language educational practices and to effect a genuine transformation within society, fostering true social cohesion. Language learning and teaching cannot rely on intuitive practices; rather, they need to be constructed and discussed with students to give everyone the opportunity to author their own story. Nevertheless, there is a growing recognition of the importance of a plurilingual approach and its manifold benefits, as demonstrated in the present book.

Notes

(1)It should be mentioned that both curriculums (Early Childhood and Primary) were currently being redeveloped while the article was being written.

(2)2017 ARMIF00014: L’acolliment linguistic: la immersió i l’educació plurilingüe i intercultural. Una proposta estratègica per a la formació inicial de Mestres.

References

Bergroth, M., Llompart, J., Pepiot, N., van der Worp, K., Dražnik, T. and Sierens, S. (2022) Identifying space for mainstreaming multilingual pedagogies in European initial teacher education policies. European Educational Research Journal 21 (5), 801–821.

Birello, M. and Sánchez-Quintana, N. (2013) Conceptualizaciones sobre las lenguas y creencias sobre el plurilingüismo de los docentes a través de sus relatos de vida lingüística. Rassegna Italiana Di Linguistica Applicata 45 (2–3), 191–205.

Birello, M., Llompart-Esbert, J. and Moore, E. (2021) Being plurilingual versus becoming a linguistically sensitive teacher: Tensions in the discourse of initial teacher education students. International Journal of Multilingualism 18 (4), 586–600.

Borg, S., Birello, M., Civera, I. and Zanatta, T. (2014) The impact of teacher education on pre-service primary English language teachers. Teaching English 14, 1–33. ELT British Council. https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/pub_E142%20ELTRP%20report_FINAL_V2.pdf

Cabré, M. (2019) The development of the plurilingual education through multimodal reflection in teacher education: A case study of a pre-service teacher’s beliefs about language education. Canadian Modern Language Review 75 (1), 40–64. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.2017-0080

Carrasco Perea, E. (2010) Introduction. In E. Carrasco Perea (ed.) L’intercompréhension(s): repères, interrogations et perspectives (Vol. 5, pp. 7–12). GERFLINT. https://gerflint.fr/Base/Europe5/europe5.html

Carrasco Perea, E. and Piccardo, E. (2009) Plurilinguisme, cultures et identités: la construction du savoir-être chez l’enseignant. Lidil 39, 19–42. https://doi.org/10.4000/lidil.2735

Castellotti, V. and Moore, D. (2002) Social Representations of Languages and Teaching: Guide for the Development of Language Education Policies in Europe from Linguistic Diversity to Plurilingual Education. Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/social-representations-of-languages-and-teaching/1680872d02

Castellotti, V. and Moore, D. (2010) Capitalising on, Activating and Developing Plurilingual and Pluricultural Repertoires for Better School Integration. https://rm.coe.int/16805a1cb2

Chik, A. and Melo-Pfeifer, S. (2020) Seeing language learner autonomy in young learners’ visual narratives. In M. Jiménez Raya and F. Vieira (eds) Autonomy in Language Education: Theory, Research and Practice (pp. 121–141). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429261336

CohenMiller, A. and Boivin, N. (eds) (2022) Questions in Qualitative Social Justice Research in Multicultural Contexts. Routledge.

Coste, D. (2010) Diversité des plurilinguismes et formes de l’éducation plurilingue et interculturelle. Recherches en Didactique des Langues et des Cultures 7 (1), 141–165. https://doi.org/10.4000/rdlc.2031

Coste, D., Moore, D. and Zarate, G. (2009) Plurilingual and Pluricultural Competence: Studies Towards a Common European Framework of Reference for Language Learning and Teaching. Language Policy Division, Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/168069d29b

Council of Europe (2001) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. https://rm.coe.int/16802fc1bf

Council of Europe (2020) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment – Companion Volume. https://www.coe.int/lang-cefr

Departament d’Educació de la Generalitat de Catalunya (2018) El model lingüístic del sistema educatiu de Catalunya. https://educacio.gencat.cat/web/.content/home/departament/publicacions/monografies/model-linguistic/model-linguistic-Catalunya-CAT.pdf

Generalitat de Catalunya (2008) DECRET 181/2008, de 9 de setembre, pel qual s’estableix l’ordenació dels ensenyaments del segon cicle de l’educació infantil. Diari Oficial de La Generalitat de Catalunya. https://dogc.gencat.cat/ca/document-del-dogc/index.html?documentId=516475

Generalitat de Catalunya (2015) DECRET 119/2015, de 23 de juny, d’ordenació dels ensenyaments de l’educació primària. Diari Oficial de La Generalitat de Catalunya. https://dogc.gencat.cat/ca/document-del-dogc/index.html?documentId=696985

Generalitat de Catalunya. (2022) DECRET 175/2022, de 27 de setembre, d’ordenació dels ensenyaments de l’educació bàsica. https://portaldogc.gencat.cat/utilsEADOP/PDF/8762/1928585.pdf

Kalaja, P. and Pitkänen-Huhta, A. (2020) Raising awareness of multilingualism as lived – in the context of teaching English as a foreign language. Language and Intercultural Communication 20 (4), 340–355. https://doi.org/10.1080/14708477.2020.1786918

Llompart, J., Dražnik, T. and Bergroth, M. (2023) ‘I am a plurilingual speaker, but can I teach plurilingual speakers?’ Contradictions in student teacher discourses on plurilingualism in Spain, Slovenia and Finland. In S. Björklund and M. Björklund (eds) Policy and Practice for Multilingual Educational Settings: Comparisons across Contexts (pp. 95–120). Multilingual Matters.

Palou, J. and Cabré, M. (2017) Beliefs regarding plurilingual competence: The perspective in Catalonia through a case study of a pre-service teacher. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods 7 (8), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.26655/mjltm.2017.8.1

Palou, J. and Fons, M. (2011) Els relats de vida lingüística en els processos de formació dels docents. In F. Hernandez, J.M. Sancho and J.I. Rivas (eds) Històrias de Vida en Educación. Biografias en Contexto: Vol. Esbrina (Issue 4, pp. 108–115). Esbrina Recerca – UB. http://hdl.handle.net/2445/15323

Paulsrud, B., Zilliacus, H. and Ekberg, L. (2020) Spaces for multilingual orientations in the national curricular of Sweden and Finland. International Multilingual Research Journal 14 (4), 304–318. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19313152.2020.1714158

Pérez-Peitx, M. and Sánchez-Quintana, N. (2019) Creencias de los docentes sobre la competencia plurilingüe. Lenguaje Y Textos 49, 7–18. https://doi.org/10.4995/lyt.2019.11460

Pérez-Peitx, M., Civera López, I. and Palou Sangrà, J. (2019) Awareness of plurilingual competence in teacher education. In P. Kalaja and S. Melo-Pfeifer (eds) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words (pp. 232–253). Multilingual Matters.

Piccardo, E., Germain-Rutherford, A. and Lawrence, G. (2022) An introduction to plurilingualism and this handbook. In E. Piccardo, A. Germain-Rutherford and G. Lawrence (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Plurilingual Language Education (pp. 1–15). Routledge.

Rose, G. (2016) Visual Methodologies: An Introduction to Researching with Visual Materials (4th edn). Sage.

UN DESA (2023) The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2023: Special Edition. New York.

Wassell, B. and Glynn, C. (2022) Transforming World Language Teaching and Teacher Education for Equity and Justice: Pushing Boundaries in US Contexts. Multilingual Matters.

13Multilingualism in First-Year Student Teachers’ Visualisations of Their Professional Futures in Finland and Brazil

Maria Ruohotie-Lyhty, Rodrigo Camargo Aragão and Anne Pitkänen-Huhta

1 Introduction

With the globalising of the world, multilingualism in education has become a major issue related to equal access to schooling and knowledge. In other words, multilingualism is inherently tied to social justice. In the midst of the diversifying populations attending schooling in different parts of the world, schools are challenged to develop practices that turn multilingual and multicultural backgrounds of all students into an asset instead of perceiving these backgrounds as a problem or even a hindrance to learning. In research on language education, multilingual approaches to teaching languages have been suggested to support this change (Chik & Melo-Pfeifer, 2023). Instead of teaching languages as separate entities in separate lessons, skills in different languages are now considered linguistic and other semiotic resources that should be used for communication and taken into account in the teaching of all subjects (Douglas Fir Group, 2016; Garcia & Li, 2014). With this change, the idea of language teaching at schools has also changed from perceiving languages merely as separate school subjects to fostering multilingualism and language awareness (Calafato, 2020). However, despite these changes in scientific evidence and thinking, schooling in different parts of the world has been found to continue to be based on a monolingual fallacy, which touches both language policies and the mindset of the educational staff. The monolingual mindset is based on a nationalistic idea of monolingual individuals as the norm (Rajagopalan, 2003; Young, 2014) and as the basis for educational policies. It has led to ‘language blind’ schools (Gogolin, 1994; Piller, 2016). As a consequence, schools have been poorly equipped to develop practices for embracing individual and societal multilingualism, which makes schools reproduce inequalities in the access to content and learning opportunities of multilingual pupils (Chik & Melo-Pfeifer, 2023). Recently, however, multilingualism has been recognised as an important topic in developing school curricula in many countries, including Finland. The National Core Curriculum for Basic Education (FNAE, 2014) in Finland, now expects schools to take into account the existing multilingualism of students and highlights the need for teacher collaboration in advancing multilingualism and language awareness. In the same vein, many language teacher education institutes world-wide have become aware of the role of multilingualism in teaching and address this issue in their teacher education programmes.

However, in order to adopt a more multilingual mindset and making education more just for all pupils, changes either in curricula on a national level or on the level of teacher education are not enough. In implementing the policies in practice, teachers play a key role: they are the ones who turn the curricular ideals into teaching practices in collaboration with other teachers. Therefore, we will look at this question on an individual level but in two different teacher education contexts to find out how multilingualism is present in the visions, or professional dreams, of our students who are studying to become language teachers. This interest in our students’ beliefs about multilingualism is motivated by our willingness to develop language teacher education that supports more equitable educational opportunities for all pupils. We believe that it is our duty as teacher educators to figure out what kind of beliefs our students have developed about multilingualism in the language teacher profession in the course of their lives. This understanding can serve us – as teacher educators – in our attempts to provide our students with the skills needed to build socially just multilingual practices. Tackling the monolingual mindset in teacher education necessitates awareness of the role of this mindset, firstly, in our own thinking, and secondly, in our students’ thinking.

This goal in mind, in this chapter, we will reanalyse data collected for a study that compared 61 Finnish and 60 Brazilian student teachers of languages and their visions of themselves as future professionals (see Ruohotie-Lyhty et al., 2021) to find out what role multilingualism might play in their teaching, when asked to envision their future professional identities. The study wished to compare and contrast student teachers’ beliefs in two different contexts, Finland and Brazil. Two sociopolitically different contexts with different takes on multilingualism in society provide grounds for examining the significance of context on teacher beliefs. Previous studies (e.g. Calafato, 2020; Chic & Melo-Pfeifer, 2023; Portolés & Martí, 2018) focusing on student teacher beliefs about multilingualism have mostly asked students directly about their beliefs about multilingualism, which demonstrates that participants have had to take a stance on this issue. Our study, in contrast, asked the students to simply envision their future work. In this way we can examine, firstly, to what extent multilingualism figures as part of their professional future visions, and secondly, in which ways they perceive multilingualism as part of their practice in the two different contexts.

This chapter is organised in the following way. Section 2 provides background to our study followed by the methodology in Section 3. Section 4 presents the main findings and, finally, Section 5 reflects on the meaning of these results from the point of view of enhancing multilingualism in education.

2 Background to the Study

2.1 Multilingualism at school and in the teaching profession

In our study multilingualism is understood both as an individual and a societal phenomenon. Any individual can have knowledge of and use several languages in their daily lives or there can be several languages used in any specific broader or narrower context (Cenoz, 2013). In this chapter, we use multilingualism in the broad sense to refer to all multilingual practices at all levels (Cenoz, 2013).

Research on schoolscapes, i.e. the material environment of formal education (Laihonen & Szabó, 2018; Menken et al., 2018; Szabó, 2015) has shown that multilingualism is present in schools in various ways and that the visibility of multilingualism is connected to the multilingual practices of schools. Multilingualism can also be found in the documentation guiding school practices and thus the ideologies relate both to learning and teaching in schools (Paulsrud et al., 2020). From the language teachers’ point of view, multilingualism can mean accepting, appreciating, allowing and recognising multiple languages in the classroom (Haukås, 2016; Pitkänen-Huhta & Mäntylä, 2020) as well as promoting the use of all linguistic resources in the classroom through a translanguaging practice, i.e. a practice that ‘involves dynamic and functionally integrated use of different languages and language varieties, but more importantly a process of knowledge construction that goes beyond language(s)’ (Li, 2018: 15; emphasis in original). Multilingualism at school is therefore related both to the values of the community and to the pedagogical practices present in the specific communities. Furthermore, the language teacher is in a key position to support the formation of a multilingual community that provides its members with skills in encountering the global multilingual world, thus also engaging in socially just pedagogical practices.

Teaching languages can thus be seen as inherently multilingual and language teaching as the education of multilingual citizens. To promote multilingualism in the classroom, teachers would ideally share a view of languages as resources and repertoires, recognise the significance of multilingual approaches in teaching and learning languages, and have the needed pedagogical skills to implement multilingual practices. Teacher beliefs, their ways of seeing and perceiving education, are crucial in the formation of any teaching practices (Barcelos & Kalaja, 2013; Basturkmen, 2012) and therefore teachers’ understanding of multilingualism is crucial in forming the language policies and practices of the classroom (e.g. Alisaari et al., 2019; Suuriniemi et al., 2021). How teachers perceive multilingualism in their classrooms is connected to how multilingualism features in their own lives and how they see themselves as multilinguals, i.e. holding multilingual identities. There is quite an extensive body of research on multilingual identities (see e.g. Ayres-Bennett & Fisher, 2022; Kalaja & Melo-Pfeifer, 2019) and on how international connections, such as study abroad, influence teachers’ professional identities (see Barkhuizen, 2022). Research on multilingual identities of student teachers is especially important for this study. These studies have shown, firstly, that student teachers may hold very monolingual identities despite schools being increasingly multilingual (Iversen, 2022). Secondly, research has indicated that language student teachers are not readily aware of multilingualism (or plurilingualism) and that there is a need for awareness raising (Pérez-Peitx et al., 2019). Finally, there is evidence that language learning and identity construction tie together and that there are also tensions and struggles involved (Burri, 2022; Ruohotie-Lyhty et al., in press). In this chapter, we wish to build on this existing body of research and connect multilingualism to the development of student teachers’ professional identity and their future visions.

2.2 The professional identities of student teachers of languages

In our study, we understand professional identity as ‘the conceptualizations that individuals hold about themselves as professional actors’ (Vähäsantanen, 2015: 3). Language teachers’ professional identities have been a popular research topic in Applied Linguistics over the past decades. Identities are considered important for teacher development and practices since they help teachers to make sense of their environment. With the help of their beliefs about their profession, about language and about themselves as teachers, they decide which methods to apply, how to support and evaluate their pupils and what languages to use in the classroom. Professional identity also guides the ways in which teachers plan to develop their practices in the future (Barkhuizen, 2017).

Although various foci and different theoretical starting points have been presented, recent language teacher identity research has been largely unanimous about some features that are related to them. Language teacher professional identities are understood as multiple, changing and dynamic (Barkhuizen, 2017). Instead of a stable professional identity, identity can be seen as a resource of beliefs that can be used in the interpretation of the environment (Kalaja et al., 2016). Different situations in teachers’ careers might activate certain beliefs and identities might also include contradictory beliefs about oneself as a professional (Kalaja et al., 2016). Identities also change with time, they are related to various other personal identities, such as gender identity, language identity or national identities, and they are continuously under construction as their experience grows (Barkhuizen, 2017). Identities are not formed in a vacuum, but they are related to competing societal and individual discourses. Individuals are, however, not only dependent on the outside reality, but also have power in deciding which discourses, traditions and practices they accept as part of their identity and which not.

Language teacher education can be perceived as an important phase in identity development for students. Previous studies in Applied Linguistics have focused, for example, on student teachers’ beliefs about language (Kalaja, 2016a; Kalaja & Mäntylä, 2018; Mäntylä & Kalaja, 2019), language teaching (Kalaja, 2016b) and the profession itself (Ruohotie-Lyhty et al., 2021). In addition to forming their identities on the basis of their former experiences, envisioning the future forms an important part of this process (Barkhuizen, 2017; Dörnyei & Kubanyiova, 2014). Student teachers must form a desirable image of the future to continue studying. This future image of themselves as professionals also serves them in making decisions about courses and the ways in which they are willing to invest in their studies. In this study, we focus on student teachers’ visions of their professional future and in which ways multilingualism is featured as part of their professional futures. By doing so we examine some of the future visions that motivate these student teachers’ agency in language education.

3 Research Methodology

3.1 Participants

The participants in this study were a total of 61 Finnish and 60 Brazilian language teacher students. The Finnish students were studying to become teachers of various languages including English, Finnish, Swedish, German, French and Russian. The Brazilian students were all majoring in a bilingual programme to become teachers of Portuguese and English. Both Finnish and Brazilian students were at the beginning of their bachelor’s studies, but their study contexts differ in many respects. All participants of the study were first-year students, since we wanted to understand to what extent multilingualism was present in the visions of their future profession at the beginning of language teacher studies in the two contexts.

The Finnish students were at the beginning of their five-year degree programme to become language teachers in a country with rather high living standards and a stable political situation. Finland has an educational system that is based on free public education that encompasses almost all pupils regardless of their age. In relation to multilingualism, Finnish education heavily supports the principles of developing schools towards multilingual communities. It is mandatory for all schools in basic education to follow The National Core Curriculum for Basic Education (FNAE, 2014), which sets the standards and principles for Finnish education. This document describes multilingualism as follows:

Each member of the community is multilingual. The simultaneous use of different languages is normal, and languages are appreciated. In a language aware school attitudes towards languages and language speakers are discussed and the significance of language in learning, interaction, and collaboration as well as in identity construction and socialization is understood. (FNAE, 2014: 50)

To support the principles of multilingual education, all children in Finland study at least two additional languages in basic education. One of these is the first foreign language starting in the first grade, which for most children is English. English is not compulsory, but most choose it as the first foreign language. The other is the second domestic language, which is Swedish for the Finnish speakers and Finnish for the Swedish speakers (speakers of languages other than Finnish or Swedish may be exempted from studying the second domestic language). On top of these two, it is possible to choose other foreign languages in later years at school. Outside school, the use of English in addition to the L1 is an important part of youth culture in Finland and most of the adult population also uses multiple languages in their working or studying lives (Leppänen et al., 2008). When entering language teacher education, most students thus have experience in using at least two other languages (English and the second domestic language) in addition to their L1 and are usually using – actively or passively – at least two languages in their daily lives.

The Brazilian language teacher students are at the beginning of their four-year bachelor’s studies to become English and Portuguese language teachers in a country with a long history of social inequality. From 1996 to 2016 the teaching of a foreign language has been compulsory from the sixth year of primary school to the end of secondary education. Schools could choose the language to be offered in accordance with the teachers who were available. Although this legislation could foster multilingualism, in practice, English has always been the major language to be offered in schools with the distribution of textbooks and with the addition of Spanish for a short period of time. From 2017 to 2023, Spanish was excluded from the curriculum and English became obligatory in primary and secondary schools. However, there is only one class of 50 minutes per week and teacher education has not been able to prepare teachers to speak English fluently. Therefore, at the beginning of an English-Portuguese language teacher education course, most students tend to have some knowledge of English that would not be higher than the A1 level. In addition, teaching is a socially and financially undervalued profession in Brazil, which tends to attract students who are not identified with the teaching profession, but rather with the Portuguese or the English language (Aragão, 2010).

3.2 Data collection

All the participants of the study both in Finland and in Brazil were given the same task, in which they were asked to envision a desired and feared professional future in 10 years’ time in the form of a visualisation. The task was given to the students in Finnish in Finland and in Portuguese in Brazil. The instruction was (translated into English): ‘Envision yourself at work in 2026 with two images. In the first image, you work in your dream job. In the second one, you work in a job that does not reflect your dream’. The participants were also asked to write an accompanying text, in Finnish or in Portuguese, that would explain their desires and fears for the future. The task was not directly targeted to explore the participants’ beliefs about multilingualism. However, we found it interesting and relevant in this study to find out in which ways multilingualism as environments, pedagogies, encounters and ideologies would be present in the participants’ visualisations of their professional future. This is especially important for understanding the participants’ initial orientation to multilingualism as future language teachers as the focus of language education is increasingly on teaching skills needed in the multilingual global environment (Calafato, 2020).

The participants could freely choose the method of creating their visualisations. While Finnish student teachers used versatile methods to create the visualisation with some drawing by hand or by computer or making collages of different pictures and others choosing a picture from an internet source, the Brazilian students mostly used ready-made internet pictures to describe their idea. This difference could be explained by the fact that, for the Finnish participants, the task was part of a course, whereas the Brazilian students produced the visualisations voluntarily beyond a course context. All the participants were asked for consent for the data to be used in the study.

3.3 Data analysis

The analysis of the data followed the principles of data-driven thematic analysis (Vaismoradi & Snelgrove, 2019). The analysis was conducted by researchers from two different continents. We used online meeting environments for collaboration, then worked partly separately and came together to discuss the data again. This kind of virtual collaboration was possible, since we all were familiar with the pools of data and had experience of writing together in a previous writing project during which the second author of the chapter had had a research stay in Finland for half a year. First, we looked at the data – both the visualisations and the accompanying texts – together across the two data pools and looked for symbols, words and illustrations that could be connected to multilingualism. In the data, the word multilingualism was rarely mentioned. Instead, the students referred to environments with multiple languages and cultures, either by using symbols such as flags or texts or by choosing a picture that symbolised a multilingual, international environment. These visual representations were then often additionally supported with accompanying texts that confirmed these visual hints by stating their purpose. These visual elements and textual evidence were coded in a systematic way.

Second, we looked for themes within the coded data. The different themes in the Finnish and Brazilian data were identified and discussed with the research group. The findings of our analysis are reported in Section 4.

4 Findings

Based on the initial analysis of the Finnish and Brazilian data we concluded that the students’ ideas of themselves as multilingual professionals differed significantly in the two contexts. Three different themes were identified in the Finnish data but only one theme in the Brazilian data. Out of the 61 Finnish participants, 28 had references to multilingualism in their visualisations and/or accompanying texts, whereas only eight out of the 60 Brazilian participants had any references to this theme. In addition, the ways in which these references were linked to the participants’ future plans differed significantly. To give a more detailed description of these data and results, we will now present the two datasets separately. First, we will focus on the Finnish data in Section 4.1 and then the Brazilian data in Section 4.2. The data examples are translated into English from the original Finnish and Portuguese by the authors.

4.1 Analysis of the Finnish data

The three themes identified in the Finnish data were: (1) working with immigrants, (2) working abroad, and (3) working as a multilingual professional in Finland.

4.1.1 Working with immigrants

The first important theme related to multilingualism in the Finnish data was references to working with immigrants. This was also the only theme that was mentioned by the participants who aimed to become teachers of Finnish and often, this meant teaching Finnish as a second language to speakers of other languages; like Liisa says: ‘Teaching Finnish to immigrants would also be interesting’. The dreams of these participants also included the idea of working in a multicultural environment that was not necessarily a school. As Elisa describes: ‘My future workplace might not be a school, but it could be in a reception center as a Finnish teacher or in a community college teaching writing’.

In the visualisations, these multilingual environments were often described with pictures that included multiple ethnicities or a picture of the globe as in Anna’s visualisation (Figure 13.1).

Figure 13.1 Anna: Teaching immigrant children

Anna described ‘I hope that in 10 years’ time I will be teaching Finnish to immigrant children with songs and play’. She considered this more appealing than being a Finnish-as-a-first-language teacher.

In addition to teaching Finnish as a second language, some teachers also saw possibilities for working with immigrants through another language. One of the participants, Leevi, mentioned Russian as a medium in his work with immigrants: ‘In a library, I could serve customers in the sections of Russian and foreign languages and take care of the materials’. In another visualisation and the accompanying text, Alisa had a more general wish of a working community where she could ‘apply collaborative teaching that would support people with different backgrounds and ways of learning’. Typical of all the visualisations was the idea that multilingualism and multiculturalism were linked to working with people of different nationalities.

4.1.2 Working abroad

The second theme related to multilingualism in the Finnish data included visualisations that depicted work in an international environment. In these pictures, a multilingual and multiethnic environment was linked to international settings and communities abroad. As Hanna describes, ‘My dream job would be something where I could combine internationality and teaching and I could travel … It would be wonderful to work in an international environment with people from different countries and cultures’.

In the pictures, these hopes for an international environment were again often described by using pictures of the globe and people with different ethnicities. The participants also used texts in multiple languages to illustrate the presence of more than one language. In Sanna’s visualisation (Figure 13.2) we see a teacher in the middle of her happy pupils.

Figure 13.2 Sanna: Swedish and special education teacher

In the visualisation, Sanna has included both sides of the globe to depict the possibilities for international work. The picture also contains texts in two different languages. The student has cut letters to form the word svenska meaning ‘Swedish’ in Swedish. In addition, she has the word opettaja ‘teacher’ in Finnish. The two globes and the presence of two teachers may symbolise collaboration and the exchange of ideas. She describes her hopes in more detail in the text by describing her hopes and possibilities for achieving her dream:

In the picture I am in a classroom, and we are discussing a phenomenon with the group … The community is multicultural … I want to combine my Swedish studies with being a special education teacher and this could not become true if I only work in one of the fields. I feel that it might be difficult to combine these two fields, but I believe that if I keep the doors open also for the possibility to work abroad, this could come true.

In these visualisations and accompanying texts multilingual environments were understood to be somewhere else rather than in the immediate Finnish context. Being a multilingual professional could open doors to the world and international work with people from other cultures.

4.1.3 Working as a multilingual professional in Finland

The third and last theme related to multilingualism in the Finnish data was working in an international multilingual environment in Finland. Most often this work was a teaching job, but also other kinds of workplaces were considered possible. In some cases, the participants just mentioned their willingness to work as multilingual professionals by teaching multiple languages or by using multiple languages in their work. Different languages were considered a resource, as Alisa describes: ‘In my dream job I work in the office of an international logistics company and I can use my language skills broadly (Finnish, English, German, Hungarian) to solve different kinds of situations.’ In the visualisations, these languages could be mentioned or they could be described with the help of symbols such as flags of different countries or texts in different languages.

In some cases, multilingual environments were not just a feature of the environment, but the participants mentioned goals related to it. Helena’s text collage summarises some of her goals with three visually presented sentences: ‘Inspiring Teacher of English award’, ‘I my English teacher’ and ‘Life is short … Work where you’re continuously accepted, respected, appreciated, encouraged, inspired, empowered, and valued’ (Howard, 2024). She connects international contexts and different cultures to these goals in her text:

I want to see myself in an international and creative environment teaching and inspiring people that are willing to appreciate my professional skills and respect them … I want to widen my worldview with different cultures … I want to succeed in my studies and find myself an international social network that will make it easy to find new paths.

For Helena, being multilingual and interacting with people from different backgrounds was seen as a path to professional development and a way to do meaningful work and to find the necessary support for her work as a teacher.

4.2 Analysis of the Brazilian data

In the Brazilian data there was only one theme related to multilingualism, which was working abroad. Eight students referred to this theme in their visualisations.

4.2.1 Working abroad

The Brazilian data included images that represented the participants’ desires to work anywhere in the world through the use of English. This could mean any kind of mobile work; only one participant wanted to work abroad as a teacher. In all desired jobs, the learning of languages was associated with the possibility of change and of geographical and social mobility.

In the first image by Roberto (Figure 13.3), we see a man sitting on a chair with his legs on the desk in a very relaxed manner. In the background, we notice that he is in the countryside with his suit hanging on a hanger.

Figure 13.3 Roberto: Mobile work (https://www.shutterstock.com/pt/image-photo/office-outdoors-hill-195082370)

To describe his desired job, Roberto says ‘my goal of performing a professional activity may allow me to be freer, looser, producing and working anywhere in the world (with the help of technology and English)’. He also adds that this dream job must have ‘English and technology that should enable me to relate to and to get in touch with diverse people around the world!’. English as a language was often linked to the idea of connecting with other people in the world.

Two other participants used the image of a suitcase and a world map to represent their dream job of becoming a professional that would be always travelling. As we can see in Figure 13.4, the English Language Teaching course may provide them with the means to learn the international language of English.

Figure 13.4 Lilian: Traveling the world (https://www.shutterstock.com/pt/image-illustration/vintage-suitcase-on-world-map-16721527)

Lilian, who used the image of a suitcase and the world map to represent her dream job, says that ‘the image represents my dream work in which travelling the world is part of it. As a (likely) future English language teacher, interpreter, or translator, I envision myself travelling to learn more about the world, to specialize more in the English language.’ Firstly, we see the association of the profession of an English language teacher with other possibilities of a language professional. In addition, the participant says that in this desired job she should be able ‘to connect and learn from others around the world through English’.

Laura, who also used the image of a suitcase with a world map, says that ‘English is the world language and in any place in the world we can communicate in English. It can take you everywhere you wanna go!’. This participant did not refer to a specific job position, but similarly to Figure 13.3 of the man working anywhere in the countryside, what really matters is the idealised, social, economic and geographical mobility that the English language may enable.

The other two desired jobs were flight attendant and diplomat. Joseane was represented using the image of a white female flight attendant smiling, portraying a very happy and successful person with her profession (the image is from an advert for a Brazilian airline company). Beatriz represented herself as a successful diplomat. In the image she is wearing a suit and shaking hands with another diplomat while smiling. In the background there is a map of the world and other diplomats standing around them.

Finally, João Pedro used an abstract image in which four shapes depicting human heads were connected to each other. Each head is of a different colour to highlight the difference. To describe his image, João Pedro says that: ‘This image shows that my goal with English Language Teaching is to spread to the world the best form to connect people and to make peace. English teaching means connection. It is part of a solidarity world process’. This participant also mentions that ‘… I want to learn other languages because my dream is to become a polyglot. I have also realised the importance of Portuguese. You know, I also want to go to Sweden one day. I want to teach Portuguese to the Swedish, they know how to speak English and other languages, but they don’t know Portuguese’. Just like another participant, João Pedro mentions the possibility of teaching Portuguese as an additional language, and he points out the possibility of doing it abroad, in Sweden.

Typical of the Brazilian student pictures was the idea that multilingualism offered possibilities for connecting with people around the world. Multilingualism was, however, not perceived as an important part of their own environment, but it was connected to contexts outside Brazil.

5 Lessons Learnt

In this study, we aimed at understanding the ways in which first-year language teacher students in Finland and Brazil perceived multilingualism as part of their future professional identity. We examined, firstly, to what extent multilingualism figured as part of their professional future visions, and secondly, in what ways they perceived multilingualism as part of their practices in the two different contexts. Now we will move to critically considering our results from the perspective of the two contexts and previous research. We will also suggest potential adaptations and applications of our study.

The findings of the Finnish and Brazilian data revealed differences between the two contexts as to how multilingualism was considered a part of the professional identity of future language professionals. It has to be remembered that the presence of multilingualism in the students’ visions was examined indirectly, i.e. the students were not directly asked about multilingualism in the task. This provides fruitful grounds to examine whether multilingualism is (or is not) a natural and self-evident part of the visions of future language teachers. While in Finland about half of the students referred to this theme (28/61), only eight Brazilian participants (8/60) made any references to multilingualism in their professional visions. The differences between the two contexts could be understood from the perspective of the sociopolitical conditions and language ideologies in the two countries. Finland has been an officially bilingual country since its constitution in 1922. During the past decades, Finland has also become an increasingly multilingual country with 9% of the population speaking another language than one of the national languages at the end of year 2022 (Statistics Finland, 2023). Despite official multilingualism, Finland is often still depicted as a monolingual society in public discourse. Recent educational policies in Finland have, however, strongly supported the idea of the school as a multilingual community and language education as education for multilingualism (FNAE, 2014). The fact that multilingualism is more visible in the Finnish participants’ visualisation seems to support the idea of the visibility of these themes in their educational experience. However, this does not automatically mean that they would have recognised their own and all pupils’ multilingualism.

In contrast, Brazilian students’ environment can be considered even more ambivalent in terms of language ideologies and practices in relation to multilingualism. Like Finland and even more so, Brazil is a multilingual country. There are about 200 different languages used in Brazil, of which, approximately, 170 are indigenous. The others are of European or Asian descent from migrant communities that started arriving in Brazil in the second part of the 19th century (Cavalcanti & Maher, 2018). However, Brazil has had a history of repressive language policies that contributed to the grand narrative that Brazil is monolingual. Only after the promulgation of Brazil’s current Constitution in 1988 were indigenous people seen as the original inhabitants of Brazil. Since then, there has been a strengthening of bilingual education programmes for indigenous populations and for deaf people (Cavalcanti & Maher, 2018). The only official language of Brazil is, however, Portuguese, a colonial language. The making of a national identity based upon the ideology of ‘one nation, one language’ has also played a part in the monolingual narrative of a multilingual country (Rajagopalan, 2003). Although English in Brazil is accompanied by positive discourses that give it a high status, such as the language of modernity, success, globalisation, technology and progress, learning English is associated with the elites, who can afford it in private English schools or by sending students to English-speaking countries instead of being strongly supported as a realistic national goal in the public education sector. For these reasons, we could assume that Brazilian students have been less predisposed to practices and discourses related to multilingualism in their schooling and have fewer opportunities of thinking about their professional lives as language teachers from this perspective. These results point to the importance of explicitly focusing on multilingualism in teacher education to provide student teachers with a more elaborated idea of multilingualism that is not only related to a full command of two or more languages (see Section 1 of the Introduction to this volume). If students do not recognise the everyday multilingualism in their environments or see it as an inherent aspect of their professional futures, they will very likely not be prepared to create socially just, culturally sensitive and language-aware classroom practices in their evidently multilingual classrooms.

Another significant goal of this study was to explore the themes related to multilingualism and to whom and to where multilingualism was connected in the participants’ accounts. The only common theme both in the Finnish and Brazilian data connected multilingualism to a place beyond the immediate environment of the participants. When considering the Finnish students’ visions, these results align with the results of some other studies carried out in Finland. In their study about early language teaching in Finland, Mård-Miettinen et al. (2022) explored children’s beliefs about their studies in English. Already at an early stage of their language studies, the children believed that they would need the English language mostly abroad, even though 52% of the parents of these children mentioned using English as part of everyday life with the family (Mård-Miettinen et al., 2021). This might be connected to the persistence of old language policies at schools that construct languages that are naturally part of Finnish society as ‘foreign’ languages (cf. Halonen et al., 2015). Similarly to the Finnish students, the Brazilian students thought that multilingual professionalism was needed abroad. In their data, this was the only theme connected to multilingualism. It is in this scenario that the participants of the Brazilian data shared the idea that English will provide them with a geographical, economic, social and cultural change. To know English equals global mobility. We also see how this relates to jobs that may take the students ‘anywhere’. The desired jobs here are all associated with technology, travelling, aviation, diplomacy, and a teaching job that may impact educational and social mobility. This kind of imaginary goal is strongly connected to the language policies and ideologies in the Brazilian context. English is perceived as a language of privilege and prestige, a necessity that may be unattainable for many (Aragão, 2010). The belief is that English would provide greater possibilities for social ascension in a country where only 5% of the population on average can communicate in English at some intermediate fluency level (British Council, 2015).

In addition to the dream of working abroad, multilingualism was also connected to two other career prospects in Finland. Firstly, Finnish participants saw multilingualism in Finland as a phenomenon that was related to immigrants. Similarly to the dream of working abroad, this theme linked multilingualism to people and places outside their immediate environment, a perspective that is in conflict with the current definitions of multilingual pedagogies focusing on linguistic equity (for details see Section 2.2 of the Introduction to this volume). In the Finnish data, this was also the only theme that language teachers majoring in Finnish mentioned in connection to multilingualism. Lastly, our results also included Finnish participants who already at the beginning of their studies perceived possibilities for multilingual work in their home country, which shows at least the initial idea of multilingualism as part of the everyday lives of Finns. These observations imply that there is some groundwork to be done among student teachers for developing ideas of socially just and culturally sensitive teaching where multilingualism of all students and teachers is understood as a natural phenomenon in society and as an asset for learning. In many of the answers, these ideas were, however, only beginning to take shape and this points towards the need for supporting students in developing a more rounded idea of the role of multilingualism in education (see Section 2.1 of the Introduction to this volume) as a foundation for language teachers’ work, a task that European language education institutes have often neglected (De Angelis, 2011).

Now, we would like to move on to suggest some practical and methodological contributions based on this study. Firstly, this study was a reanalysis of the data that had been created previously for another purpose. Despite this starting point, the visual narratives used in the study were rich in references to multilingualism and proved the potential of visual narratives to be used in a study envisioning the future of multilingualism in education. The use of data that would have been created for the purpose of envisioning multilingual education would have undoubtedly provided a richer illustration of the understanding of this phenomenon by the first-year student teachers. Our data, however, had another kind of benefit. As it focused more generally on envisioning the professional future, we were able to examine to what extent multilingualism forms a natural part of these futures and also to what extent the socio-political contexts where student teachers live provide content for the initial understanding of multilingualism.

Secondly, based on our study, we would like to suggest that visual narratives can continue to be used as a pedagogical tool for developing multilingual pedagogies at the university level and thereby to promote social justice in language education. To us, as teacher educators, this study provided valuable insights into the beliefs and envisioned practices of our language teacher students. In addition to creating these pictures, analysing them with our students can provide a valuable opportunity to discuss multilingualism in classroom practices. Based on our comparative study, we suggest that developing multilingual pedagogies in different contexts calls for context sensitivity and critical approaches. In teacher education, our study can provide a starting point for the discussion of what multilingualism can be in a specific sociopolitical context, how this context differs from other contexts, and how recognising and acknowledging multilingualism is a path to more culturally sensitive teaching and thus to equity. Finally, to enhance social justice in language education, we want to encourage teacher educators to openly discuss with their students the possibilities of creating genuine multilingual environments, pedagogies and tools as part of their work and to keep reflecting on their own and their students’ multilayered multilingualism.

References

Alisaari, J., Heikkola, L.M., Commins, N. and Acquah, E. (2019) Monolingual ideologies confronting multilingual realities: Finnish teachers’ beliefs about linguistic diversity. Teaching and Teacher Education 80, 48–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.01.003

Aragão, R. (2010) Língua Estrangeira no Brasil: Políticas e oportunidades. [Foreign languages in Brazil: Policies, politics and opportunities.] In D. Lima (ed.) Aprendizagem de Língua Inglesa: Histórias Refletidas (pp. 135–150). Edições UESB.

Ayres-Bennett, W. and Fisher, L. (eds) (2022) Multilingualism and Identity: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. Cambridge University Press.

Barcelos, A.M.F. and Kalaja, P. (2013) Beliefs in second language acquisition: Teacher. In C. Chapelle (ed.) The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0083

Barkhuizen, G. (ed.) (2017) Reflections on Language Teacher Identity Research. Routledge.

Barkhuizen, G. (ed.) (2022) Language Teachers Studying Abroad: Identities, Emotions and Disruptions. Multilingual Matters.

Basturkmen, H. (2012) Review of research into the correspondence between language teachers’ stated beliefs and practices. System 40, 282–295.

British Council (2015) O Ensino de Inglês na Educação Pública Brasileira. [English Language Teaching in the Brazilian basic school system.] Instituto de Pesquisas Plano CDE.

Burri, M. (2022) From ESL student to teacher educator: Reflections on transnational and transcultural professional identity development. In G. Barkhuizen (ed.) Language Teachers Studying Abroad: Identities, Emotions and Disruptions (pp. 245–255). Multilingual Matters.

Calafato, R. (2020) Language teacher multilingualism in Norway and Russia: Identity and beliefs. European Journal of Education 55 (4), 602–617.

Cavalcanti, M.C. and Maher, T.M. (2018) Contemporary perspectives on multilingualism: An introduction. In M.C. Cavalcanti and T.M. Maher (eds) Multilingual Brazil: Language Resources, Identities and Ideologies in a Globalized World (pp. 1–17). Routledge.

Cenoz, J. (2013) Defining multilingualism. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 33, 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026719051300007X

Chik, A. and Melo-Pfeifer, S. (2023) Do societal and individual multilingualism lead to positive perceptions of multilingualism and language learning? A comparative study with Australian and German pre-service teachers. Language Awareness 33 (1), 182–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2023.2234288

De Angelis, G. (2011) Teachers’ beliefs about the role of prior language knowledge in learning and how these influence teaching practices. International Journal of Multilingualism 8 (3), 216–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2011.560669

Dörnyei, Z. and Kubanyiova M. (2014) Motivating Learners, Motivating Teachers: Building Vision in the Language Classroom. Cambridge University Press.

Douglas Fir Group (2016) A transdisciplinary framework for SLA in a multilingual world. The Modern Language Journal 100, 19–47.

Finnish National Agency for Education (FNAE) (2014) National Core Curriculum for Basic Education.

García, O. and Li, W. (2014) Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education. Palgrave Macmillan.

Gogolin, I. (1994) Der monolinguale Habitus der multilingualen Schule. Waxmann.

Halonen, M., Nikula, T., Saarinen, T. and Tarnanen, M. (2015) ‘Listen, there’ll be a pause after each question’: A Swedish lesson as a nexus for multi-sited language education policies. In M. Halonen, P. Ihalainen and T. Saarinen (eds) Language Policies in Finland and Sweden: Interdisciplinary and Multi-sited Comparisons (pp. 220–244). Multilingual Matters.

Haukås, Å. (2016) Teachers’ beliefs about multilingualism and a multilingual pedagogical approach. International Journal of Multilingualism 13 (1), 1–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2015.1041960

Howard, T. (2024) TyHowardQuotes, https://www.TyQuotes.com (accessed 26 February 2024).

Iversen, J. (2022) Pre-service teachers’ narratives about their lived experience of language. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 43 (2), 140–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2020.1735400

Kalaja, P. (2016a) Student teachers’ beliefs about L1 and L2 discursively constructed: A longitudinal study of interpretative repertoires. In P. Kalaja, A. Barcelos, M. Aro and M. Ruohotie-Lyhty (eds) Beliefs, Agency and Identity in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 97–123). Palgrave Macmillan.

Kalaja, P. (2016b) ‘Dreaming is believing’: The teaching of foreign languages as envisioned by student teachers. In P. Kalaja, A. Barcelos, M. Aro and M. Ruohotie-Lyhty (eds) Beliefs, Agency and Identity in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 124–146). Palgrave Macmillan.

Kalaja, P. and Mäntylä, K. (2018) ‘The English class of my dreams’: Envisioning teaching a foreign language. In S. Mercer and A. Kostoulas (eds) Language Teacher Psychology (pp. 34–52). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783099467-007

Kalaja, P. and Melo-Pfeifer, S. (eds) (2019) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words. Multilingual Matters.

Kalaja, P., Barcelos, A.M.F., Aro, M. and Ruohotie-Lyhty, M. (2016) Key issues relevant to the studies to be reported: Beliefs, agency and identity. In P. Kalaja, A. Barcelos, M. Aro and M. Ruohotie-Lyhty (eds) Beliefs, Agency and Identity in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 8–24). Palgrave Macmillan.

Laihonen, P. and Szabó, T.P. (2018) Studying the visual and material dimensions of education and learning. Linguistics and Education 44, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2017.10.003

Leppänen, S., Nikula, T. and Kääntä, L. (2008) Kolmas kotimainen: Lähikuvia englannin käytöstä Suomessa [Third National Language: Close-ups of the Use of English in Finland]. Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.

Li, W. (2018) Translanguaging as a practical theory of language. Applied Linguistics 39 (2), 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amx044

Mäntylä, K. and Kalaja, P. (2019) ‘The class of my dreams’ as envisioned by student teachers of English: What is there to teach about the language? In P. Kalaja and S. Melo-Pfeifer (eds) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words (pp. 254–274). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788922616-018

Mård-Miettinen, K., Huhta, A., Peltoniemi, A. and Hansell, K. (2022) Mitä oppilaat pitävät varhaisesta A1-kielen opetuksesta ja millainen käsitys heillä on omasta osaamisestaan? In R. Kantelinen, M. Kautonen and Z. Elgundi (eds) Linguapeda 2021 (pp. 39–69). Itä-Suomen yliopisto.

Mård-Miettinen, K., Huhta, A., Reini, A. and Stylman, A. (2021) A1-englanti suomenkielisen perusopetuksen vuosiluokilla 1–6, Oppilaiden, opettajien ja huoltajien näkökulmia. Raportit ja selvitykset 2021:12. Opetushallitus.

Menken, K., Pérez Rosario, V. and Guzmán Valerio, L. (2018) Increasing multilingualism in schoolscapes: New scenery and language education policies. Linguistic Landscape 4 (2), 101–127. https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.17024.men

Paulsrud, B., Zilliacus, H. and Ekberg, L. (2020) Spaces for multilingual education: Language orientations in the national curricula of Sweden and Finland. International Multilingual Research Journal 14 (4), 304–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2020.1714158

Pérez-Peitx, M., Civera López, I. and Palou Sangrà, J. (2019) Awareness of plurilingual competence in teacher education. In P. Kalaja and S. Melo-Pfeifer (eds) Visualising Multilingual Lives: More Than Words (pp. 232–253). Multilingual Matters.

Piller, I. (2016) Linguistic Diversity and Social Justice: An Introduction to Applied Sociolinguistics. Oxford University Press.

Pitkänen-Huhta, A. and Mäntylä, K. (2020) Teachers’ negotiating multilingualism in the EFL classroom. European Journal of Applied Linguistics 9 (2), 283–306. https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2018-0020

Portolés, L. and Martí, O. (2018) Teachers’ beliefs about multilingual pedagogies and the role of initial training. International Journal of Multilingualism 17, 248–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2018.1515206

Rajagopalan, K. (2003) The ambivalent role of English in Brazilian politics. World Englishes 22 (2), 91–102.

Ruohotie-Lyhty, M., Aragão, R.C. and Pitkänen-Huhta, A. (2021) Language teacher identities as socio-politically situated construction: Finnish and Brazilian student teachers’ visualisations of their professional futures. Teaching and Teacher Education 100, 1–11.

Ruohotie-Lyhty, M., Jääskelä, P. and Pitkänen-Huhta, A. (in press) Identity tensions in teacher education. In Z. Tajeddin and B. Yazan (eds) Language Teacher Identity Tensions: Nexus of Agency, Emotion, and Investment. Routledge.

Statistics Finland (2023) Vieraskielisten määrä kasvoi lähes 38 000 henkilöllä. Vieraskielisten määrä kasvoi lähes 38 000 henkilöllä - Tilastokeskus (stat.fi)

Suuriniemi, S.-M., Ahlholm, M. and Salonen, V. (2021) Opettajien käsitykset monikielisyydestä: Heijastumia koulun kielipolitiikasta. In M. Ahlholm, I. Piippo and P. Portaankorva-Koivisto (eds) Koulun monet kielet (pp. 44–69). AFinLA. https://doi.org/10.30660/afinla.100518

Szabó, P. (2015) The management of diversity in schoolscapes: An analysis of Hungarian practices. Apples – Journal of Applied Language Studies 9 (1), 23–51.

Vaismoradi, M. and Snelgrove, S. (2019) Theme in qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis. Qualitative Social Research 20 (3). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-20.3.3376

Vähäsantanen, K. (2015) Professional agency in the stream of change: Understanding educational change and teachers’ professional identities. Teaching and Teacher Education 47, 1–12.

Young, A. (2014) Looking through the language lens: Monolingual taint or plurilingual tint? In J. Conteh and G. Meier (eds) The Multilingual Turn in Languages Education: Opportunities and Challenges (pp. 89–109). Multilingual Matters.

Conclusion: Lessons Learnt and Future Avenues for Arts-Based Approaches in Applied Language Studies for Social Justice

Sílvia Melo-Pfeifer and Paula Kalaja

1 Introduction

This volume, Visualising Language Students and Teachers as Multilinguals: Advancing Social Justice in Education, makes the point that social justice in education requires a proactive, engaged approach, combining efforts of pre- and in-service teachers, teacher educators, curriculum developers, school directors, students, and other actors, inside and beyond the school and the higher education institutions. This is because the oppressive status quo is also collaboratively co-constructed and sustained, even if we do not see ourselves directly contributing to it and, paradoxically, even if we see ourselves as members of vulnerable communities. So, the first steps to address social injustice include, not only identifying stances and mechanisms of social injustice, but also reflecting on our own positionalities as researchers, teacher educators, authors of teaching materials, and as agents in other roles we are called to play in our daily lives in different contexts. It is not, we should make it clear, about making a mea culpa or engaging in penitence. It is about acknowledging that we might be talking from the perspective of the privileged, to say the least, and of the oppressors, those who in fact are not suffering injustices due to their linguistic competences. By naming the word privilege, we are not referring to material privilege, even if it might also be the case, as it often is, when talking about issues that evolve an intersectional stance to grasp the complexity of injustice. Rather, we are acknowledging the privilege of having the right to speak (with a job position and even with a contract to publish), of being in a position where we have been – perhaps randomly – spared the position of subaltern, of being able to write in the academia lingua franca about the languages that constitute our being. We are acknowledging the overwhelming power of the symbolic privilege that comes with knowing the right linguistic codes (even if both of us are non-native speakers of English) and knowing how to use them to accumulate more symbolic privilege. So, while the discussion has been several times around issues of privilege attached to the native speaker, we might also extend the discussion to issues of privilege attached to being plurilingual speakers of prestigious discrete languages.

Are Sílvia and Paula just fake fighters of a fight that is not theirs? We would say that we are aware of the suffering voices and that, for us, ‘multilingual lives matter’ (Melo-Pfeifer & Ollivier, 2023). This means that we decided to co-edit this book not because we or our authors were personally affected by voicelessness or social injustice based on linguistic discrimination (which, one has to say, is attached to other domains of discrimination, such as ethnic origin or religious affiliation), but because we are committed to an agenda that we see as transformative for everybody. In this concluding chapter, we delve into a personal journey across the lessons we, as co-editors of this volume, learnt, and our very personal agenda for further research.

2 Lessons Learnt from This Volume: Social (In)justice through the Magnifying Glass of Linguistic Diversity

The first lesson learnt from this volume is that visual methods are but one way to address social justice and advance the agenda. We could even claim that it also brings some frustrations, such as the fact that it makes use of ocularcentrist approaches (Prada, 2023) to research, to language education, and to language teacher education. From this perspective, the first lesson is also the first frustration. A way to push the boundaries of this ocularcentrism would be to embrace multisensorial approaches. This acknowledgement joins the discussions about avoiding and/or coping with ableism in applied languages studies, as briefly addressed in the Introduction. So, even if visual methods have the power to advance social justice further by making research methods and products more accessible to a bigger number of individuals by giving a multimodal, visual voice to people who might lack a linguistic voice, we think that these might be combined with more multisensorial approaches, which are not bonded to eyes.

In this sense, other arts-based approaches can be a way to address some perceived limitations in visual methods. Nonetheless, the use of visual methods should be heightened in accordance with the aims of the research, the participants in the study, and so on. The use of research and teaching methods is not made in the void and depends on the repertoires of the participants, be those repertoires linguistic, spatial, sensorial, or other.

If we consider the three temporalities through which this volume was organised (see Introduction), we come to very engaging conclusions. First, in Part 1, on ‘Reconstructing Histories of Individual Multilingualism’, we could address multilingualism as lived by students and teachers, and the unpredictable ways language and professional biographies unfold. Visual methods were paramount to understand, for example, how students see the connections between the languages learnt and used at school, and those used in their social environments, in the study by Karita Mård-Miettinen and Siv Björklund (Chapter 1), or to understand how student teachers find their way to the language teaching career, in the study by Melo-Pfeifer (Chapter 3). Both studies make clear how the school curriculum and educational structures form students’ linguistic practices, in a way that the individuals themselves might see as detrimental or misrepresenting their own interests as multilinguals. In yet another study, Daniel Roy Pearce, Mayo Oyama and Danièle Moore (Chapter 2) discussed how native-speakerism has to be challenged in English language programmes abroad, even by native speakers themselves, so that they can be acknowledged as multilinguals and gain access to symbolic power that comes with it.

In Part 2, ‘Describing the Present of Multilingual Pedagogies’, the authors used visual methods to analyse beliefs, ideologies and attitudes concerning individual and societal multilingualism and how these carve teachers’ professional identities and actions. To give but two examples, Heidi Niemelä (Chapter 5) managed to show how language ideologies and beliefs about the national language intermingle with ideologies about the ‘other’ languages in the territory, and those beliefs can serve including or excluding agendas and lead to othering strategies. André Storto (Chapter 6) showed how school systems and schools can gain from giving students agency and opportunities to reflect on their own multilingualism, which might have positive effects on attitudes towards social and individual multilingualism, and therefore, on identities and social cohesion.

Finally, in Part 3, ‘Envisioning the Future of Multilingualism in Language (Teacher) Education’, the different contributions made us reflect on how visual methods can support teachers’ professional development by envisioning their future selves in action, either in multilingual settings or enacting multilingual pedagogies. Paula Kalaja and Katja Mäntylä (Chapter 11), for example, make the point that student teachers of English need to move from a monolingual to a plurilingual stance to communication in a diverse world, acknowledging the values attached to going beyond the learning and use of one variety of English. In Chapter 13, Maria Ruohotie-Lyhty, Rodrigo Camargo Aragão and Anne Pitkänen-Huhta, based on their comparative study between student teachers’ beliefs about multilingualism in Finland and Brazil, conclude that there is not a one-fits-all approach in the planning and implementation of multilingual pedagogies, as these are sociopolitically, educationally and economically context-sensitive.

It is time to take stock of the publication of this volume and reflect on how we see its contribution to applied language studies, in general, and to language education and teacher education, in particular. We mostly like to acknowledge that the different contributions were able to:

•bring questions of social justice to research and to language (teacher) education practices and scenarios, by means of visual methods, both as a way to uncover social injustice anchored in language use and plurilingual repertoires, and as a way to possibly address them;

•challenge logocentric conceptions of communicative repertoires and engage with current research trends to expand the notion of multilingualism by interconnecting it to multisensorial, spatial, bodily and semiotic repertoires;

•put teachers’ reflexivity at the centre of a transformative process related to the conceptualisation, implementation and assessment of multilingual pedagogies, which are responsive to linguistic and cultural dynamics and changes at different levels: societal, classroom and individual. Those transformative processes were observed from the perspective of teacher professional development and/or considering the potential of multilingual pedagogies to transform the language classroom and school, as social structures, embedded in (language) power dynamics;

•create moments of cognitive and affective dissonance in pre-service and in-service teacher programs, by engaging participants in discussions about the tensions underlying multilingual education and the mechanisms that create and reproduce social injustices through languages;

•use visual methods to achieve a rich and nuanced understanding of the complex relationship between multilingualism and social justice, showing ways to transform the results into powerful tools for advocacy and student and teacher awareness-raising;

•pinpoint the need to be methodologically innovative if researchers want to challenge the academia’s ways of doing and its mainstream epistemic stances, and to advance methods in research that embrace a diversity of languages, languaging practices and strategies, and materialities, expanding what counts as data in research in applied language studies.

The contributions to this volume highlight the importance of addressing social justice in language and teacher education through visual methods, expanding the notion of multilingualism beyond language(s) and promoting teachers’ and students’ reflexivity and criticality. The authors of the different chapters, first of all, show how multilingual pedagogies, thematising and leveraging either individual or societal multilingualism, can transform language classrooms and schools, uncover mechanisms of creating and reproducing social injustices, and foster (professional) identity development; and secondly, emphasise the need for methodological innovation, as using visual methods can produce nuanced understandings of the complex relationship between multilingualism and social justice language (teacher) education.

3 Perspectives for Further Research: The Need to Use a Kaleidoscope

We reviewed the lessons learnt from this volume in Section 2 of this concluding chapter. While we acknowledge that the book was able to show the connections between language and teacher education and social (in)justice based on linguistic issues, by making use of visual methods, we also see the need to complement the use of a magnifying glass with a kaleidoscope that will bring different, complex, and even more dynamic interpretations to this research field in applied language studies.

In this closing section, we would like to point towards the need to criss-cross categories leading to underprivileged positions and embrace more intersectional perspectives. From this standpoint, we claim that issues around race and ethnicity, religion (and we can even think of political affiliations), ableism, ageism, gender, social-economic status, should be added to the discussion about the intersections between multilingualism and social (in)justice. They are cumulative and not exclusionary (Piller, 2016). As the literature on raciolinguistics has been discussing, linguistic prejudices and inequalities are rarely just about languages (Rosa, 2019), as they are intermingled in broader paradigms of discrimination, at school and beyond school. These issues are almost absent from the studies presented in this volume. It might be seen as a strength to focus on an issue at a time, but it narrows down the interpretative framework: we probably need a kaleidoscope to analyse social (in)justice and not just a magnifying glass, based on linguistic issues. Following Block and Corona (2016), Melo-Pfeifer and Tavares (2024) also acknowledge that, in complex settings and when analysing complex constructs, adopting an intersectional perspective is important to understand how different characteristics and dimensions enrich, alter, and add to the dynamics between the others.

Social justice in language (teacher) education might also be dealt with through the lenses of educating for sustainable development, as many problems of our time are connected to issues of forced migration due to imperilled ecosystems and menaces to traditional ways of living. Dealing with multilingualism and displacement might thus be regarded from the critical perspective of analysing why classrooms are becoming more linguistically diverse, instead of always just stating it as a matter of fact, and acknowledging the inequalities provoked by global warming, deforestation, and destruction of habitats and ecologies of being and thinking. Education for sustainable development can thus refer to sustainable linguistic development of displaced communities, meaning both providing schooling in the language of the host country, tuition of other modern languages, and protecting their linguistic heritage, while at the same time acknowledging that those languages might blend and merge during the learning processes.

Education for sustainable development can also be addressed in language (teacher) education (Burwitz-Melzer et al., 2021; Surkamp, 2022) to illustrate how language and teacher education can be used to thematise pressing themes, such as inequalities in education due to linguistic repertoires, gender gaps, or unfair distribution of material resources. Education for sustainable development has been defined by UNESCO as an approach to education that allows ‘learners of all ages’ to acquire ‘the knowledge, skills, values and agency to address interconnected global challenges including climate change, loss of biodiversity, unsustainable use of resources, and inequality’ (2023). One cannot overstress the role of language(s) as constitutive of all approaches to education, at large, and in the acquisition of knowledge, skills and attitudes, more specifically. Thus language (teacher) education should be seen as a means to promote education for sustainable development, respectful of linguistic diversities, and responsive to changes that might occur in the linguistic and cultural constitution of communities.

Research literature and empirical approaches connecting social justice, multilingualism, and education for sustainable development are still emerging. We claim that arts-based approaches, in general, and visual methods, more specifically, can play a role in connecting the dots, because of their potential for research, for being integrated in pedagogical practices, and for being part of transfer activities to reach lay audiences (through public exhibitions, citizen science, and other approaches to scientific knowledge transfer).

4 Conclusion

To summarise, the different contributions to Visualising Language Students and Teachers as Multilinguals: Advancing Social Justice in Education have shown the added value of using visual methods to research multilingualism (and multilingually) in language education and in language teacher education. The authors make it clear that visual methods can be a research instrument to debunk issues of linguistically-based inequalities (as a diagnostic instrument), as a strategy to cope with linguistic inequalities in the language classroom and in teacher education programmes (as teaching material), and as a tool to actively engage language students and language teachers in reflections on those issues (as a pedagogical reflexion tool). Visual methods can also become transfer instruments to reach out to broader audiences: the publication of this book is a step in this direction.

References

Block, D. and Corona, V. (2016) Intersectionality in language and identity research. In S. Preece (ed.) The Routledge Handbook of Language and Identity (pp. 507–522). Routledge.

Burwitz-Melzer, E., Riemer, C. and Schmelter, L. (eds) (2021) Entwicklung von Nachhaltigkeit beim Lehren und Lernen von Fremd- und Zweitsprachen. Narr.

Melo-Pfeifer, S. and Ollivier, Ch. (2023) Introduction: On the unbearable lightness of monolingual assessment practices in education. In S. Melo-Pfeifer and Ch. Ollivier (eds) Assessment of Plurilingual Competence and Plurilingual Learners in Educational Settings: Educative Issues and Empirical Approaches (pp. 1–27). Routledge.

Melo-Pfeifer, S. and Tavares, V. (2024) Introduction: Language teacher identity and education in the crossfire of evolving raciolinguistic and monolingual ideologies. In S. Melo-Pfeifer and V. Tavares (eds) Language Teacher Identity: Confronting Ideologies of Language, Race, and Ethnicity (pp. 1–19). Wiley.

Piller, I. (2016) Linguistic Diversity and Social Justice. Oxford University Press.

Prada, J. (2023) Sensescapes and what it means for language education. In S. Melo-Pfeifer (ed.) Linguistic Landscapes in Language and Teacher Education: Multilingual Teaching and Learning Inside and Beyond the Classroom (pp. 243–258). Springer.

Rosa, J. (2019) Looking Like a Language, Sounding Like a Race. Oxford University Press.

Surkamp, C. (ed.) (2022) Bildung für nachhaltige Entwicklung im Englischunterricht. Klett.

UNESCO (2023) What you need to know about education for sustainable development. https://www.unesco.org/en/education-sustainable-development/need-know

Index

ableism 10, 305, 308

adjustment 156–159, 172

agency 159, 234

arts-based approaches 5, 11–13, 18, 65, 66, 101, 111, 221, 224–225, 305

arts-based elicitation method 87, 92

assistant language teacher(s) 46–47

beliefs 13–18, 65–68, 109, 198–199, 264, 267–268, 285–288

boredom 166

career choice 66, 81–83

content analysis 33, 70, 246

critical cultural awareness 181–182

critical discourse analysis 110

critical language awareness 178, 182, 223

data visualisations in education 136–137, 139–141, 146, 148–150

drawings 5, 13, 67, 70, 87, 110, 112–113, 200, 280

emancipatory practice 62

envisioning 244, 246, 256, 271, 288, 300

exploratory methodologies 135, 141, 149

friendship 161, 168, 170, 172, 205

frustration 74, 92, 166, 306

higher education 156–159, 173

identity development 213, 288

identity texts 13

inclusion 195, 214, 280

individual multilingualism 2–7, 14, 19, 81, 107

objective approach (to individual multilingualism), 7

subjective approach (to individual multilingualism), 7

in-service EFL teachers 196, 199, 203, 210, 213, 220, 280

intercultural competence 83, 180–181

interdisciplinary learning 141, 206, 221

international students 156–161, 172–173

intersectional stance 304, 308

intersectionality 66, 83, 228, 230

language awareness 34, 38–40, 108, 130, 181–182, 223, 284

language diversity 27, 186, 276, 279

language equity 263, 266, 280

language ideology 107–109, 128, 131, 158, 221

language immersion 29

language learning 57, 67, 136, 148, 150–151, 181, 223, 266, 268, 279, 281

language teacher cognition 218

language teacher education 65, 68, 285, 288–290

languaging 222–223

linguistic equity 10, 214, 244, 264, 299

linguistic landscape(s), 177–179, 181–183

loneliness 159, 161, 165, 172

majority-language students 28–29

metaphor 199–200, 221, 226

monolingual bias 2, 130, 242

multilingual classrooms 244, 298

multilingual education 10, 13, 28, 130, 196, 212, 243, 289, 300

multilingual pedagogy/gies 10, 14, 27, 63, 68–68, 82, 151, 198, 206, 258, 299, 300, 306–307

multilingual turn 1, 107, 136, 242

multilingualism 1–2, 6–13, 18–19, 67, 81, 107, 131, 135, 148–151, 219, 221–222, 242–244, 257, 264, 265–267, 284–287

multilingualism as lived 4, 6–9, 18–19, 306

multimodal discourse analysis 110

multimodality 61, 141, 179, 231

multisensorial approaches 6, 11–12, 141, 305, 307

narrative inquiry 87–88, 90

native-speakerism 2, 15, 46, 49, 158–159, 253, 257

neo-racism 160

out-of-school language use 14, 28–29, 40–43

participant-generated data 31, 40–42

photography/s 31–32, 43, 66, 157, 163–164

plurilingual competence 6, 159, 263, 265–267, 279

plurilingualism 2, 19, 49, 61–62, 67, 107, 159, 213, 243, 264–267

portraiture 161–162

primary education 108, 130, 269

professional biography 71

professional identity 69, 196, 196–199

professionalisation 66

remote teaching 86, 88–89, 91, 100–101

representation(s), 51, 57, 62, 67–69, 128, 196, 198–199

semiotic analysis 183

semiotic signs 180

social justice 3–4, 9, 11, 81, 101, 107, 130, 136, 139, 150, 157, 178, 195–198, 213–214, 221, 223, 234, 263, 305–309

societal multilingualism 2, 285, 307

student teachers 70, 81, 199, 213, 244–245, 256–257, 267, 279, 285, 287–288

sustainable development 308–309

teacher education 3, 67, 87, 100, 195, 197, 224–225, 264, 285, 289, 307–309

teacher (professional) identity 195–200, 287

teacher resilience 87–89, 100

The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment 8, 262

transknowledging 228, 234–235

translanguaging 8, 10, 41, 220, 243–244

translanguaging awareness 220–221, 223–225, 233–235

visual biography 66

visual methodologies 11, 18, 65, 68, 136, 151

visual methods 13–14, 31, 65–69, 91, 136–137, 141, 149, 270, 305–309

(visual) polyethnography 47, 50

visual turn 1, 65