Conference Agenda

The continuous rise in both the number and the diversity of newcomer students in Canada, The Netherlands and Germany along with the imperative of recognizing minority languages in post-colonial educational contexts like Canada and New Caledonia^[1], are frequently presented as considerable challenges for educators and school stakeholders. This symposium aims to spotlight the potential inherent in these new student populations to renew classroom dynamics proposing a reevaluation of pedagogical approaches. In these demographically diverse classrooms, teachers navigate a wide range of student profiles, encompassing linguistic, cultural and experiential knowledge while adhering to the school curriculum. In Canada, the Ontario Ministry of Education (2008) emphasizes that all teachers should be capable of supporting language learners. In New Caledonia, the Noumea Accord (1998) acknowledges the importance of indigenous Kanak culture and identity and sustains their re-introduction within the educational system as part of the decolonization process. In all contexts however, most teachers are trained to handle monolingual student populations, leaving them unprepared for the significant linguistic diversity in classrooms and often in denial of its didactic value (Razafimandimbimanana, 2022).

This symposium addresses the critical need for teachers to acquire updated skills for the effective practice of linguistically and culturally responsive pedagogy. By presenting perspectives derived from research conducted in diverse contexts, the session aims to address the global similarity of challenges in supporting teachers in the implementation of inclusive pedagogy. The symposium will delve into innovative solutions, drawing from cutting-edge research across the globe, underlining the didactic value of languages as resources for learning and advocating for the recognition of minority languages rights in education (Ruiz, 1984). The objectives of the symposium include:

- Enhancing our understanding of how to provide support to pre-service and in-service teachers in addressing discrimination faced by students with a migration, minority or indigenous background;

- Providing insights into strategies for ensuring the sustainable implementation of inclusive and equitable teaching practice;

- Discussing the implications for the international applicability and transferability of the proposed strategies.

The papers in this symposium showcase pioneering research grounded in both language as a right and as a resource for learning. All authors share the project of building culturally sensitive educational institutions by empowering silenced cultures and minorities. The first paper discusses the Language Friendly School approach that promotes linguistic inclusion and creates inclusive environments. The analyses based on interviews with educators from Canada and The Netherlands highlight factors contributing to the network's success in impacting engagement and belongingness. The second paper addresses challenges in implementing multilingual pedagogies in Germany, proposing that involving student teachers with civil society organizations can enhance their understanding and integration of multilingualism. The third paper advocates for the use of pluriartistic mediation to decenter linguistic expertise in (post)colonial contexts, emphasizing the principle of epistemic justice and the promotion of cultural sensitivity among future teachers. The fourth paper focuses on challenges faced by educators in Western Canada regarding newcomer students' disempowerment. It presents a project that provides tools for exploring and shaping the intersectional identities in terms of language, culture and literacy development.

Structure of the session. After a brief introduction, we will transition into paper presentations. Then, in discussion with the audience, we will explore, across the diverse contexts (Canada, The Netherlands, Germany, New Caledonia) how the variety of experiences shared enhances our understanding and practice of implementing sustainable pedagogies that are linguistically and culturally responsive. What strategies really promote change through inclusive pedagogy and social activism? Are they applicable to both pre-service and in-service teacher professional development?

^[1] A French-governed archipelago located in the South Pacific.

The first paper will center on the Language Friendly School approach, introduced by Le Pichon and Kambel in 2019 to advance linguistic inclusion and equitable educational access. Currently, more than 50 schools worldwide hold official certification as Language Friendly Schools (Le Pichon & Kambel, 2022). Grounded in a comprehensive school-wide strategy, each school commits to refraining from penalizing students for using their own languages and leveraging the linguistic and cultural expertise of their student body. Notably, the network's inclusivity spans diverse educational institutions on four continents, including indigenous, public and private schools, international schools, and schools in refugee centers. Despite contextual differences, these schools share a collective goal: fostering inclusive and culturally responsive environments. This presentation will explore the factors perceived by teachers as contributors to the success of the Language Friendly School network. Amidst challenging work conditions for educators, how do these schools implement a holistic strategy that integrates research-based practices to champion linguistic and cultural inclusion? What impact do teachers believe the network has on their respective schools? Using an inductive grounded theory method (Glaser & Strauss, 1967), we analyzed the interviews conducted with school stakeholders (teachers and principals) from two schools in Ontario (primary and secondary schools) and four in The Netherlands, both at the start and after 6 to 12 months of participation in the network. In this presentation, we will show how the collaborative action approach empowered teachers and cultivated an environment conducive to diversity, ultimately benefiting students and their families. The presentation will showcase the impact of the network on student participation, engagement, and the sense of belonging for students, their families, and teachers according to teachers and administrators. We will highlight the results by showing artifacts shared by educators. The discussion will address the factors that empower educators and create an environment conducive to diversity, along with a consideration of the approach's limitations.

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press. Le Pichon, E. & Kambel, E.R. (2022). The Language Friendly School: An Inclusive and Equitable Pedagogy, Childhood Education, 98:1, 42-49, DOI: 10.1080/00094056.2022.2020538

Research into the implementation of multilingual pedagogies shows that even when teachers have positive attitudes towards the linguistic diversity of societies and their students, they still often choose not to implement them in the classroom (De Angelis, 2011; Haukås, 2016; Huxel, 2018). The reasons can be related to a lack of professional preparation, a lack of resources (time, materials, etc.) and skepticism about learning outcomes (Melo-Pfeifer, 2020). This presentation assumes that greater involvement of student teachers with association of civil society working with multilingual populations, through service learning (Aramburuzabala, McIlrath & Opazo, 2019), can lead to a more concrete experience of multilingualism outside the classroom and the university, becoming part of their professional “funds of knowledge”. These professional experiences have the potential to bridge the gap between the lives of the students they will encounter in the classroom and their initial training, thus reducing student teachers’ skepticism towards multilingual pedagogies and overcoming the monolingual habitus they have been through during their education path. Engaging in community service projects that require multilingual communication and the full use of linguistic repertoires, might lead student teachers to see the immediate impact of their language skills, fostering a sense of social responsibility, through the emotionally loaded living of multilingual strategies in their daily lives. This presentation draws on this educational framework, using service learning to promote linguistic activism and the subsequent integration of multilingual pedagogies across diverse academic disciplines (Duarte, Gerritsen, Lourenço, Melo-Pfeifer & Pinto, forthcoming). The proposed approach, developed in the scope of the project BOLD (Building on Linguistic and Cultural Diversity), seeks to empower student teachers of different school subjects as linguistic activists by engaging them in meaningful community service projects that require the application and celebration of individual and societal multilingualism. By intertwining service learning, language education across the curriculum and initial teacher education programs, BOLD aims to foster a deeper understanding of linguistic diversity, linguistic responsive practices at school and beyond school, and social responsibility. In the scope of BOLD, we developed resources about linguistic and cultural diversity to ensure social justice. We will present these resources along with responses of student teachers to them, gained through thinking-aloud protocols. We will show how crisscrossing service learning, linguistic activism, and multilingual pedagogies in initial teacher education programs offers a holistic strategy to prepare student teachers from different school subjects for active participation and implementation of multilingual pedagogies across the curriculum.

Aramburuzabala, P., McIlrath, L., & Opazo, H. (Eds.). (2019). Embedding Service Learning in European Higher Education. Developing a Culture of Civic Engagement. Routledge. 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. Duarte, J.; Gerritsen, N.; Lourenço, M.; Melo-Pfeifer, S., & Pinto, S. (forthcoming). Service learning for linguistic and cultural diversity in Higher Education: proposals for initial (language) teacher education. Education Sciences (Featured paper) Haukås, Å. (2016). Teachers’ beliefs about multilingualism and a multilingual pedagogical approach. International Journal of Multilingualism, 13(1), 1-18. DOI: 10.1080/14790718.2015.1041960 Huxel, K. (2018). LehrerInsein in der Migrationsgesellschaft. Professionalisierung in einem widersprüchlichen Feld. ZIZU, 7, 109-121. Melo-Pfeifer, S. (2020). “Plurale Ansätze werden mich in der zukünftigen Unterrichtsvorbereitung beeinflussen.” - Unsicherheiten und Dilemmas künftiger Spanischlehrkräfte in Bezug auf plurale Ansätze. In S. Morkötter, K. Schmidt & A. Schröder-Sura (Eds.), Sprachenübergreifendes Lernen. Lebesweltliche und schulische Mehrsprachigkeit (pp. 97-117). Narr Verlag.

As a “nomad researcher”, I will draw from multiple migration experiences (Madagascar, Kenya, Canada, France, England, New Caledonia, Martinique) as well as a plurilingual standpoint to promote creatively inclusive teacher education. Inclusive pedagogy generally means student-centered approaches. If it equally refers to the principle of epistemic justice (Medina, 2011; Mohanty, 1989; Fricker, 2007), then educators, professors, scientists, trainers – in a word “experts”– have to concede to sharing their expertise status with students, trainees and members of larger society. In this paper, decentering linguistic expertise will be discussed as an ethical education posture especially when it comes to teaching in (post)colonial contexts or with communities that are minorized based on linguistic features. It is also a highly efficient way of preparing future teachers to integrate the didactic value of their classrooms’ cultural, linguistic and experiential diversity. Finally, on a long-term basis, the proactive inclusion of students’ expertise in pre-service teacher education contributes to (re)building every students’ self-esteem. However little it may be, such impact always repercusses to empowering minorized children, families, communities and decision-makers for we are dealing with the preparation of culturally-sensitive professionals in the field of education. As a concrete illustration of decentered language expertise and epistemic justice, I will present a creatively inclusive project carried out in a pre-service teacher program at the University of New Caledonia (2018-2020). In collaboration with local artists, the aim was to foster a better understanding of “linguistic micro-aggressions” (Razafimandimbimanana & Wacalie, 2020) both within student body and larger society. One of the innovative dimensions here was the use of pluriartistic mediation (photography, narrative biographies, street-art) at university level. Decentering linguistic expertise also calls for us researchers to rethink how we produce, share and embody scientific knowledge.

Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Clarendon Press. Medina, J. (2011). The Epistemology of Resistance: Gender and Racial Oppression, Epistemic Injustice, and Resistant Imaginations. Oxford University Press Mohanty, C. (1989). « On Race and Voice: Challenges for Liberal Education in the 1990s”. Cultural Critique, no. 14: 179-208. Razafimandimbimanana, E., Wacalie, F. (2020). « Une forme insidieuse de mépris : les micro-agressions linguistiques en Nouvelle-Calédonie », Lidil, 61. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/lidil/7477

This presentation will focus on addressing educators who have been acutely and globally impacted by demographic shifts in their classrooms. Both pre-and in-service educators have been witness to increased sentiments of disempowerment and marginalization of newcomer students and have felt the widening chasm between curricula and practices. In this session I describe how a grassroots initiative conducted through a series of studies with educators in Western Canada examined the potential that culturally and ethnically diverse newcomer adolescent students bring to the classroom. The studies included workshops, multimodal and multilingual initiatives, with a heavy emphasis on an arts-based framework and walking methodologies. It led to the opportunity for educators to center, affirm, and develop the potentiality of these students as they enter the classroom in terms of their intersecting language, culture, and religion and how this can be used proactively in an educational setting. This intersectionality, as it has come to be known, involves students’ language, race, gender, sexuality, and religion, and it tends to overlap interdependent systems of discrimination and disadvantage (Núñez, 2014). Pre- and in-service educators’ efforts to help newcomer students to integrate and socialize into classrooms and society has become a challenge. They witness their students cast into various situations where they frequently confront racialization and the inevitable face-to-face reality of power imbalances as they negotiate their multiple and overlapping identities (Compton-Lilly, et al., 2017; Núñez, 2014). These form a fundamental component of the racism and imbalances that are often felt by this demographic, and have the potential to lead to individual denigration and inequalities in society and among power hierarchies (Kubota, 2021). As Creese (2019) suggests, the intersectionality of race and identity are an important component in examining how newcomer students succeed. I discuss an intervention that involves critically engaged literacy workshops (CELWs), a research methodology (Ørngreen & Levinsen, 2017) that pre-/in-service educators can use to explore participants’ lived experiences through a multimodal and multilingual framework (Zaidi & Sah, 2024). CELWs include experimenting with focus groups, walking narratives and sharing stories that all work toward acknowledging newcomer students’ intersectional identities as they develop their language and literacy development (Storvang et al., 2018). I showcase how this research will provide an excellent opportunity for pre-/in-service educators to experiment with and implement curricular changes and models that help shape their newcomer students' linguistic, cultural, and literacy trajectories.

Compton-Lilly, C., Papoi, K., Venegas, P., Hamman, L., & Schwabenbauer, B. (2017). Intersectional identity negotiation: The case of young immigrant children. Journal of Literacy Research, 49, 115–140. Creese, G. (2019). “Where are you from?” Racialization, belonging and identity among second-generation African-Canadians. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 42(9), 1476-1494. Kubota, R. (2021). Critical antiracist pedagogy in ELT. ELT Journal, 75(3), 237–246. Núñez, A. (2014). Employing multilevel intersectionality in educational research: Latino identities, contexts, and college access. Educational Researcher, 43(2), 85 –92. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X17724740. Ørngreen, R., & Levinsen, K. (2017). Workshops as a research methodology. The Electronic Journal of eLearning, 15(1), 70-81. Zaidi, R., & Sah, P. K. (2024). Multilingual and multimodal literacy interventions to explore youth’s intersectional identities and racialized experiences: A scoping review. SAGE Open.

Although racism and racial injustice are globally common phenomena, there are internationally considerable differences in this topic’s discourses based on different national histories. For example, in response to the Holocaust, official German-speaking countries like Germany and Austria, have refrained from thematizing ‚race’ for many decades for historical reasons (Alexopoulou 2023). In demarcation from the National Socialist biologistic ‘race doctrine’, the term ‘race’ was and is generally not used, instead preference has been given to the term ‘racialization’ to stress the constructionist aspect of race.

Along alternative categories of difference such as ethnicity, migration background or multilingualism, educational inequalities have been identified in many European countries for decades (OECD 2023). If the categories are not viewed naively as individual risk factors, it becomes clear that the inequalities are in part the effects of structural and institutional discrimination (Gomolla & Radtke 2009, Gomolla 2023) and 'racism without race' (Hall 1989). Language-based discrimination linked to racist discourses is referred to as linguicism (Skutnabb-Kangas 2015), which means "ideologies, structures and practices which are used to legitimate, effectuate, regulate and reproduce an unequal division of power and resources (both material and immaterial) between groups which are defined on the basis of language" (Skutnabb-Kangas 1988, p. 13).

Based on contributions from Austria, Canada, Germany and Spain, this symposium will focus on and discuss how the category of language is used discursively in the various countries in the sense of linguicism in order to legitimize and (re)produce educational inequality. Based on reconstructive qualitative analyses, in particular critical discourse analyses (CDA, Foucault 1991, Wodak & Meyer 2016), of historical documents on the topic of autochthonous and allochthonous minority languages and multilingualism in educational institutions, current school and higher education laws, educational policy papers and classroom observations, it will become clear how linguicism works as a structural phenomenon at the various levels of education systems.

The first contribution analyses the discourses on migration-related multilingualism and regional minority languages (especially Danish and Frisian) in various educational policy documents and evaluations of the last 50 years using the example of the German federal state of Schleswig-Holstein.

The second contribution focuses on policies and strategies of segregation and exclusion of students based on language in Austrian schools. Using CDA, it is examined how, under the guise of specific programs for second language learning in Austrian educational policy and practice, structural linguicism is transferred into discriminatory school practice that excludes immigrant students.

The third contribution focuses on immigrant students at universities in the Canadian province of Québec. While in most Canadian provinces immigrant students and linguistic minorities in the education system do not show any disadvantages in terms of their performance (OECD 2023), in Quebec, which implements a very repressive language policy, disadvantages for immigrant students are relatively severe (Elez 2023). Using interview data from international engineering students, CDA is conducted to examine how language power relations are reproduced in higher education.

The symposium will be concluded with a look at the micro level of the education system. The focus is on the question of whether and how (language) teaching can be organized from a critical, anti-linguistic perspective. The anti-linguistic potential of translanguaging is examined using a Spanish secondary school as a case study.

By comparing the results, which are interpreted in the context of the different national frameworks, it becomes clear that linguicism is deeply rooted in the involved countries and occurs directly or indirectly. In order to reduce linguicist discrimination, it is necessary to create an awareness of linguicism, linguicist mechanisms and routines in pedagogical practice, educational research and educational policy, and to aim for ongoing critical reflection.

Germany's population has become more multilingual due to immigration in recent decades. For the economic reconstruction of Germany after World War II, workers from Southern and Eastern Europe had been recruited in the 1970s. They and their descendants have become residents and still speak their languages of origin in everyday family life. In addition, there are immigrants from countries of the European Union, who are free to work and live in Germany without any restrictions, and refugees. Overall, about one-fifth of the German resident population speaks languages beyond German in their families (destatis 2022), and the proportion of multilingual students at schools is currently 23 percent (Geis-Thöne 2023). For more than 20 years, national and international comparative studies have shown that this group of multilingual students performs significantly worse at school than monolingual students and that the disadvantage is particularly strong in Germany (Weis et al. 2019, OECD 2023, Stubbe et al. 2023). Various compensatory support programs that have been implemented, especially German language support, seem to be only marginally effective. The results of a study on institutional discrimination by Gomolla & Radtke (2009) show that the disadvantage of immigrant students in Germany is at least partly due to discriminatory structures in the educational system. Using the example of the German federal state of Schleswig Holstein, where not only immigrant minorities live, but also autochthonous minorities (Danish minority, Frisians, Sinti and Roma), we investigate the question to what extent discriminatory structures can be identified specifically in the context of multilingualism or family languages other than German. To do so, we present the results of a reconstructive critical discourse analysis (Wodak & Meyer 2016) on structural inclusion and exclusion of first languages other than German in the Schleswig-Holstein education system. The object of the analysis is legislation, school laws, and reports on bi-/multilingual education programs since the 1970s. On the one hand, the results show different forms of linguicism, i.e., "ideologies and structures which are used to legitimate, effectuate and reproduce an unequal division of power and resources [...] between groups which are defined on the basis of language" (Skuttnab-Kangas 1988, p. 13). On the other hand, it becomes apparent that structural linguicism in the educational system is closely linked to the increase of linguistic assimilationist orientations (Döll 2019) of German educational policy in response to the September 11 attacks.

destatis (2023). Bevölkerung mit Migrationshintergrund. Wiesbaden. Döll, M. (2019). Sprachassimilativer Habitus in Bildungsforschung, Bildungspolitik und Bildungspraxis. ÖDaF, 1+2/2019, 191-206. Geis-Thöne, W. (2022). Kinder mit nicht deutschsprechenden Eltern. IW-Trends, 49./1, 111-132. Gomolla, M., & Radtke, F. O. (2009). Institutionelle Diskriminierung. Wiesbaden. OECD (2023). PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The State of Learning and Equity in Education, PISA. Paris. Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (1988). Multilingualism and the Education of Minority Children. In T. Skutnabb-Kangas & J. Cummins, Jim (Eds.), Minority education: from shame to struggle. Clevedon, Avon. Stubbe, T. et al. (2023). Soziale und migrationsbedingte Disparitäten in der Lesekompetenz von Viertklässlerinnen und Viertklässlern. In McElvany, N. et al. (Eds.), IGLU 2021. Münster. Weis, M. et al. (2019). Soziale Herkunft, Zuwanderungshintergrund und Lesekompetenz. In K. Reiss et al. (Eds.), PISA 2018. M Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (Ed.) (2016). Methods of critical discourse studies (3rd edn). London.

Borderlines become effective not only at the edges of nation states but also in social systems, institutions, and the everyday life in the migration society. Schools are social spaces that are themselves crisscrossed by various borders. The effect of these boundaries in Austrian schools is particularly evident for children with German as second language, mostly when the educational and socio-economic resources in their families are low. (Biedermann et al. 2016) The school system in officially German speaking countries strongly support social segregation through early selection processes and institutional discrimination. (Gomolla 2015, Bruneforth et al. 2016) However, racism and evidence-based knowledge about the contribution of the education system to social inequality has rather intensified segregative strategies among schools and parents: Schools manage “difference” in order to attract privileged families. (Karakayali 2020) Despite iconographies of diversity and its celebration, public schools are motors of segregation. Further, intra-school segregation, the separation of pupils within a school, is a phenomenon that has hardly been researched or discussed publicly, both scientifically and academically. (Biedermann et al. 2016, Blaisdell 2016) By interrogating the dispositive of segregation from an intersectional perspective we ask how linguicism in particular shapes policies and strategies of segregation in Austrian schools. Based on discourse analysis (Foucault 1991) and autoethnographic work, on the one hand, we examine the micropolitics of segregation in urban schools. On the other hand, we introduce the scientific and political discourse on recent policies of segregation in language support: Policies such as the “Deutschförderklassen” (separated support classes for German language) are widely criticized for their segregative impact. (Dirim & Füllekruss 2019) In our conclusion we discuss the link between Austrian politics, structural discrimination, and the culture of segregation in schools.

Biedermann, H. et al. (2016). Auf die Mitschüler/innen kommt es an? Schulische Segregation – Effekte der Schul- und Klassenzusammensetzung in der Primarstufe und der Sekundarstufe. In M. Bruneforth et al. (Eds.), Nationaler Bildungsbericht Österreich 2015, Band 2 (pp 133–174). Graz. Blaisdell, B. (2016). Schools as racial spaces: understanding and resisting structural racism. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 29:2, 248-272. Bruneforth, M. et al. (Eds.) (2016). Nationaler Bildungsbericht Österreich 2015, Band 2. Graz. Dirim, İ., & Füllekruss, D. (2019). Zur Einführung der Deutschförderklassen im österreichischen Bildungssystem. Eine diskriminierungskritische Analyse der Bildungspläne der Bundesregierung Kurs. In S. Schmölzer-Eibinger et al. (Eds.), Mit Sprache Grenzen überwinden. Sprachenlernen und Wertebildung im Kontext von Flucht und Migration (pp 13-28). Münster. Foucault, M. (1991). Die Ordnung des Diskurses. Frankfurt/M. Gomolla, M. (2015). Institutionelle Diskriminierung im Bildungs- und Erziehungssystem. In R. Leiprecht & A. Steinbach (Eds.), Schule in der Migrationsgesellschaft (pp 97-109). Schwalbach/Taunus. Karakayali, J. (Eds.) (2020). Unterscheiden und Trennen. Die Herstellung von natio-ethno-kultureller Differenz und Segregation in der Schule. Weinheim.

The global adoption of English as the primary medium of instruction in higher education has become increasingly significant, particularly in the context of international and regional scientific atmosphere, which are predominantly conducted in English (Altbach 2004, p. 10). This process of internationalization has led to a growing emphasis on English language familiarity and dominance within academia worldwide. In North America, Quebec presents an intriguing case, by retaining French as its sole official language and enacting legislation to support international francophone students. Amidst the implementation of Bill 96, the Act on Respecting French, the Official and Common Language of Quebec, we will examine the language of instruction in STEM education in Quebec. This legislation seeks to strengthen the use of French within English schools, raising concerns about linguicism that may potentially isolate international students and English-speaking individuals from essential resources and support in Quebec. Our investigation will delve into the linguistic impact of Canadian and Quebec's language policies on international students in higher education from a decolonial/anti-colonial perspective. Building on existing work on linguicism (Skutnabb-Kangas 2015) in Canada and particularly in Quebec (Bourhis & Carignan 2010, Tomic 2013, Jean-Pierre 2018, Kubota et al. 2021), we will utilize the recent example of Bill 96. Decolonial scholars, predominantly Indigenous and Global South scholars, are referenced extensively, particularly those critiquing the establishment of colonial higher education institutions globally (Battiste 2013, de Sousa Santos 2007, Grosfoguel 2013, Maldonado-Torres 2007). In our contribution we will examine linguicism in Canadian and in Quebec’s international higher education. By incorporating a decolonial framework, we analyze linguicism in internationalization as a potential perpetuator of coloniality, driven by economic, social, and political power dynamics through the experiences of international engineering students. Our data include interviews with international students enrolled in engineering programs as well as university documents. Critical discourse analysis (CDA) will be applied to identify (i) how international engineering students are experiencing linguicism in Quebec, (ii) how language politics and policies are influencing their aspirations, motivations, and choices, (iii) how the students’ understanding of success is shaped by linguicism, (iv) and how an “ideal international student” is constructed through their willingness to conformity, non-resistance, and assimilation. The results illustrate how linguistic power relations in Quebec are upheld and maintained through language and in the construct of the “ideal international student”.

Altbach, P. G. (2004). Globalisation and the university: Myths and realities in an unequal world. Tertiary Education and Management, 10(1), 3–25. Battiste, M. (2013). Decolonizing education: Nourishing the learning spirit. Vancouver. Bourhis, R., & Carignan, N. (2010). Linguicism in Quebec and Canada. Our Diverse Cities. Volume 7, 156-162. de Sousa Santos, B. (2007). Beyond abyssal thinking: From global lines to ecologies of knowledges. Review (Fernand Braudel Center), 30(1), 45–89. Grosfoguel, R. (2013). The structure of knowledge in westernized universities: Epistemic racism/sexism and the four genocides/epistemicide of the long 16th century. Human Architecture: Journal of the Sociology of Self-Knowledge, 11(1), 73–90. Jean-Pierre, J. (2022). The Experiences of and Responses to Linguicism of Quebec English-Speaking and Franco-Ontarian Postsecondary Students. Toronto Metropolitan University. Kubota, R. et al. (2021). “Your English is so good”: Linguistic experiences of racialized students and instructors of a Canadian university. Ethnicities, 0(0). Maldonado-Torres, N. (2007). On the coloniality of being. Cultural Studies, 21(2–3), 240–270. Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2015). Linguicism. The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Malden, MA. Tomic, P. (2013). The Colour of Language: Accent, Devaluation and Resistance in Latin American Immigrant Lives in Canada. Canadian Ethnic Studies, 45, 1-21.

School-based language instruction is (also) a political act that (re)produces linguicist standards, regulates language use and language norms. Therefore, the question arises of how language instruction can be designed from a critical anti-linguicist perspective, where language and power relations are not considered separately, and where creative, 'self-empowering' language acquisition and the linguistic competences of the learners are at the forefront. To explore this question, I turn to the concept of translanguaging, which, in its so-called strong version, departs from the idea that named languages exist only on a sociocultural level, but not within the individual itself (García & Lin 2016, Creese 2017). A translingual pedagogy is characterized by recognizing and incorporating the multilingualism of students. Instead of adhering to a standardized norm and focusing on perceived deficiencies, it acknowledges and includes the diverse language practices of students in the classroom (Garcia & Kleyn 2019). Educational approaches that primarily emphasize the transformative potential of translanguaging, rather than focusing solely on the direct benefits for learning the target language, underscore that translanguaging expands opportunities for learners' participation and challenges the hegemony of named languages (García & Leiva 2014, García et al. 2017, García & Kleyn 2019, Ortega 2019). While the benefits of translanguaging pedagogy in the context of second language learning of immigrant minorities are widely discussed (García & Kleyn 2016), this is not the case for the foreign language learning context so far. In my contribution, I would therefore first like to theoretically outline the potential of translanguaging for power-critical, anti-linguicist foreign language teaching. Following this, a study will be presented that implemented a teaching concept based on translingual pedagogy for German as a Foreign Language in a secondary school in Madrid over the course of a school year. Finally, insights into the collected data (including group discussions, students' work products, research diary notes and audio recordings of lessons) analyzed through a grounded theory approach (Charmaz 2014) are used to present and discuss initial results from a critical anti-linguicist perspective.

Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing Grounded Theory. Los Angeles. Creese, A. (2017). Translanguaging as an Everyday Practice. In B.A. Paulsrud et al. (Eds.), New Perspectives on Translanguaging and Education (pp 1-9). Bristol. García, O. et al. (2017). The translanguaging classroom: Leveraging student bilingualism for learning. Philadelphia, PA. García, O., & Kleyn, T. (2016). Translanguaging Theory in Education. In: ibid.: Translanguaging with Multilingual Students (pp 9-33). New York. García, O., & Kleyn, T. (2019). Translanguaging as an act of transformation: Restructuring teaching and learning for emergent bilingual students. In L.C. de Oliveira, (Eds.), Handbook of TESOL in K-12 (pp 69-82). Malden. García, O., & Leiva, C. (2014). Theorizing and enacting translanguaging for social justice. In A. Blackledge & A. Creese (Eds.), Heteroglossia as practice and pedagogy (pp 199-216). Dordrecht. García, O., & Lin, A. (2016). Translanguaging and bilingual education. In O. García et al. (Eds.). Bilingual and multilingual education. Encyclopedia of Language and Education (pp 117-130). New York. Ortega, Y. (2019). "Teacher, ¿Puedo Hablar en Español?" A Reflection on Plurilingualism and Translanguaging Practices in EFL. Revista PROFILE: Issues in Teachers' Professional Development, 21/2, 155–170.

Multilingualism in Europe often contrasts with a seemingly monolingual society. This tension can present obstacles, especially in terms of education and advancement (e.g. Gogolin 1997). Despite the undeniable growth of multilingualism caused by migration movements and its continued existence, monolingualism dominates educational structures. According to Peleman (2023), this is "reinforced by feelings of alienation and dislocation and the fear of losing a national identity in response to the growing complexity of diversity within the society". Regardless to that, several studies have noted the advantages of multilingualism, such as those conducted by acknowledging multilingualism as an advantage rather than a disadvantage can prove particularly beneficial, particularly in the field of education (see Ağırdağ 2014 and Bialystok 2018).

Dirim & Khakpour (2018) attribute the ralation between the multilingual society and the monolingual institutions as a power asymmetry among languages, where certain languages are considered legitimate while others are seen as illegitimate. Consequently,this reproduces power relations, which will be discussed in this symposium by focusing on, how do these power relations affect educational contexts, especially with regard to so-called heritage languages?

In order to discuss this question, the symposium first thematises general structures and organisational forms of heritage language education (in Austria, Switzerland, Sweden). Furthermore will be argued, that a tight interdisciplinary collaboration between all teachers will improve the standing of HL teachers as well as the HL in the school hierarchy (for exclusion of HLE teachers in Germany, see Ayten & Atanasoska 2020).

In a second step, we look how Translanguaging can be used as an empowering tool for students and in teaching, in order to enhance multilingualism for the individual and in the school settings.

Thirdly, in the last section we will discuss the predominance of research on Chinese as a heritage language originating from English-speaking regions, which cannot be directly applied to the European context.

In the symposium, we present various perspectives on didactics, including those at the level of teachers and students' literacy, as well as translanguaging. We examine the hierarchical position of Home Language Education (HLE) in the school system of languages, particularly with regard to second language development. Finally, we broaden the understanding of HLE in Europe by discussing the situation of one of the recently migrated languages. In conclusion, considering multiple perspectives can aid in moving away from a monolingual stance. Monolingualism does not reflect the reality of school or society. Embracing multilingualism as the norm from a broad perspective is crucial for social prosperity in Europe.

The linguistic repertoire of bilingual and multilingual pupils is one of their strongest resources. However, schools still make little use of these multilingual skills in (specialised) teaching, even in an officially quadrilingual country with a long history of immigration such as Switzerland. School teaching is orientated towards the norm of monolingualism in the language of instruction, although the social reality is characterised by linguistic superdiversity (Blommaert, 2015; Vertovec, 2007). Pupils who grow up bilingual or multilingual are disadvantaged by monolingual language practice, the concept of "monolingual habitus", as Ingrid Gogolin (1994) called it, and are unable to utilise their entire repertoire of linguistic resources for learning. Based on Bourdieu's distinction between legitimate and illegitimate languages (Bourdieu, 1982/ 1991), the delegitimisation of languages of migration in the Swiss education system is the starting point for subsequently addressing the untapped pedagogical potential of multilingualism in the growing migrant population (Martin-Rojo, 2011). The practical-orientated research project "From A, like Arabic to Z, like Zulu. Language diversity in post-migrant Switzerland" explored the question of how teachers of the heritage language (HL) and regular teachers can work together to practise integrated language support (Zingg & Gonçalves, 2022). As part of the project, the HL and mainstream teachers observed each other. This qualitative approach by means of observations was continuously reflected upon, supplemented with further training sequences and resulted in documentation of the jointly designed teaching units (Heller, Pietikäinen & Pujolar, 2018). The project, supported by the Federal Office of Culture (Switzerland), aimed to use action research (Altrichter, Posch & Spann, 2018) and the model inclusion of HL teachers in the mainstream structure to overcome monolingual superiority and break down the linguistic stigmatisation of these illegitimate languages of migration, and to critically rethink current models of teaching the so-called legitimate languages.

Altrichter H., Posch, P. & Spann, H. (2018). Lehrerinnen und Lehrer erforschen ihren Unterricht. 5. grundlegend überarbeitete Auflage. Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt. Blommaert, J. In K. Arnaut, J. Blommaert, B. Rampton M. & Spotti (Eds.). (2015). Language and Superdiversity (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315730240 Bourdieu, P. (1982). Ce que parler veut dire. L’économie des échanges linguistiques. Paris: Fayard. English version 1991: Language and Symbolic Power (J.B. Thompson (ed.), Cambridge: Polity Press. Gogolin, I. (1994) Der monolinguale Habitus der multilingualen Schule. Münster: Waxmann. Heller, M., Pietikäinen, S. and Pujolar, J. (2018). Critical Sociolinguistic Research Methods. Studying Language Issues That Matter. New York: Routledge. Martin-Rojo, L. (2013). (De) capitalising Students Through Linguistic Practices. In Language, Migration and Social Inequalities, edited by Alexandre Duchêne, Melissa Moyer and Celia Roberts. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Vertovec, St. (2007). Super-diversity and its implications. Ethnic and Racial Studies 30 (6), 1024–1054. Zingg, I., & Gonçalves, M. (2022). Línguas (i)legítimas ou 'o que falar quer dizer': o caso da Suíça. Sisyphus, Journal of Education 10 (3): 265–293. https://doi.org/10.25749/sis.27255

In schools in Germany, the prevailing "monolingual habitus" (Gogolin 1994, translated) collides with the pupils’ plurilingual' (*) reality while simultaneously creating a language hierarchy (Dirim/Khakpour 2018, 215). By conferring legitimacy upon certain languages considered foreign and denying it to other languages categorized as migrant, like Arabic, Farsi, Turkish or Yoruba, a discriminatory power dynamic emerges. This dynamic reinforces the notion that some languages, are intrinsically superior to others. In the context of schools, especially concerning learning and academic achievement, this hierarchical system leads to a deficit-oriented perspective on pupils' abilities, which is often associated with their migrational multilingualism. This situation results in to the underutilisation of existing resources and creates tension between the plurilingual reality of pupils and the monolingual habitus of schools. Therefore, it is important to find ways to resolve this tension through pedagogical and didactic means in the classroom. It introduces at least five different patterns of children's use of Translanguaging in written narrations, which were generated as part of my doctoral research (Savaç, forthcoming). This presentation examines Translanguaging as a didactic strategy to address the issue of developing and enhancing literacy skills in classrooms. The presentation aims to explore the didactic and pedagogic use of these patterns in skill-based approaches. Secondly, it will illustrate that children's translanguaging is not only a problem-solving or coping mechanism but can also be an aesthetic stylistic device for writing fictional texts. Thirdly, it will demonstrate how translanguaging can be beneficial in learning situations for acquiring knowledge of genres in different languages and for composing texts aesthetically using their entire language repertoire. From an educational perspective, this highlights how Translanguaging can assist in transcending the dominant monolingualism in learning contexts by embracing plurilingualism. - ---------------------------- *: The term plurilingual is referring to the different kind of languages and language varieties like dialects or accents at the same time (e.g. García, Barlett, Kleifgen 2007).

Canagarajah, A. (1999). Resisting linguistic imperialism in English language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dirim, İ./ Khakpour, N. (2018): Migrationsgesellschaftliche Mehrsprachigkeit in der Schule. In: Dirim, İ./ Mecheril, P. (Hgg.): Heterogenität, Sprach(n), Bildung. S. 201-225. García, O., Bartlett, L. & Kleifgen, J. (2007). From biliteracy to pluriliteracies. In P. Auer & L. Wei (Ed.), Handbook of Multilingualism and Multilingual Communication (pp. 207-228). Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110198553.2.207 Gogolin, I. (1994): Der monolinguale Habitus der multilingualen Schule. Münster: Waxmann. Jenkins, J. (2006): Current perspectives on teaching world Englishes and English as a lingua franca. In: TESOL Quarterly 40 (1), 157-181. Savaç, A- (forthcoming): Mehrsprachiges Schreiben. Dissertation. University of Hamburg.

Statistically, the status of heritage language education in Austria (currently: Muttersprachlicher Unterricht/Erstsprachenunterricht) is well documented; there are a few recent studies on certain aspects of heritage language education in Austria (Hawlik 2021; Schrammel & Geldner 2022; Unterköfler-Klatzer et al. 2022), however in-depth studies are not yet available. This topic has received little attention in Austria, both from a scientific and a social point of view (Dalton-Puffer, Boeckmann & Hinger 2019). A research project by four universities of teacher education in the Austrian provinces of Carinthia, Styria, and Burgenland aims to fill these gaps. Using qualitative and quantitative research methods, heritage language teachers and school administrators have been interviewed about the training and professional development of heritage language teachers, their role and position in school teams and the organisational and methodological implementation of heritage language education. This presentation firstly sheds light on the most important project results. They are one more step towards scientific and systematic research into heritage language teaching in Austria and are aimed on developing measures to professionalise teachers and strengthen the role of heritage language education in research and practice. Secondly, a further focus of this presentation is on the tension between heritage language education and “German as a second language education” in Austria, which - politically promoted and propagated - increasingly occupies the most important position in the Austrian educational landscape concerning "intercultural education" (by a wide margin). For some time now, a trend can be observed: The number of schoolchildren with first languages other than German is rising, while the number of enrolments in heritage language education is falling. The latest political drafts for curricula at teacher training colleges only propagate German as a second language. This seems problematic from the perspective of critical intercultural pedagogy.

Dalton-Puffer, C., Boeckmann, K.-B. & Hinger, B. (2019). Research in language teaching and learning in Austria (2011–2017). Language Teaching, 52 (2), 201–230. Fleck, Elfie (2011): „Der muttersprachliche Unterricht: Schulrechtliche und schulorganisatorische Rahmenbedingungen“. In: Kroatisches Kultur- und Dokumentationszentrum (hKdc) und Landesschulrat für das Burgenland, Hg.: Der Weg zur Mehrsprachigkeit. Eisenstadt, 37–46. Rainer Hawlik (2021). How do teachers of mother tongue tuition in Austria perceive their role? In: Education in the North, Volume 28 (1) Wayfinding Conversations: rethinking education to disrupt marginality, https://www.abdn.ac.uk/education/research/eitn/journal/636/ Schrammel, B. & Geldner, A. (2022). Der Muttersprachliche Unterricht als Teil der sprachlichen Bildung in Österreich. Zeitschrift für Deutsch im Kontext von Mehrsprachigkeit, 38(1+2), 175-188. Unterköfler-Klatzer, Dagmar; Ressmann, Markus; Wutti, Daniel (2022): „Lehrer/innen des Muttersprachlichen Unterrichts in Kärnten/Koroška“. Gegenwärtige Situation und mögliche Professionalisierungsmaßnahmen. In: Elena Stadnik, Hg.: Sprachenvielfalt und Mehrsprachigkeit im Unterricht. Linguistische, sprachdidaktische und bildungswissenschaftliche Beiträge zur sprachlichen Bildung. Wien: Lit-Verlag, 263–273

With the trend of global mobility and immigration, the Finnish government has been promoting integration and multiculturality since 1990. According to the Finnish National Agency for Education (FNAE), Heritage Language (oma äidinkieli) lessons aim to protect and develop immigrant students’ competencies in their heritage languages and cultures. Among the research on different heritage language (HL) programmes in Nordic contexts, few studies have paid sufficient attention to the Chinese language. Given the increasing number of Chinese immigrant families in and beyond Finland, the past decade has witnessed a growth of immigrant pupils in the Chinese HL programme (FNAE, 2011; 2022). The enrolled number of pupils has doubled compared with that of 2010, reaching over 850 Chinese HL learners in the Autumn term of 2021 (FNAE, 2022). This article aims to systemically review 20-year publications of Chinese HL courses in European contexts. Following Cooper’s (2017) guidance for research synthesis, the author will search relevant publications in both English (e.g. Web of Science and Scopus) and Chinese (i.e. CNKI) databases according to this paper’s research scope. Then, the author will set inclusion and exclusion criteria for abstract screening and eligibility for the next phase of in-depth review. The in-depth review results will summarise the research trends (e.g. focus, sites, participants, methods, and key findings) and suggest future research directions (e.g. new speaker identity, curricula and translanguaging pedagogy, parent-teacher partnership, teacher training and inclusion). More importantly, as many studies on Chinese HL have been conducted in traditional immigration contexts, mainly in Anglophone countries (Pu, 2019), this paper is expected to shed light on the understanding of HL education in Europe – which endows with multilingualism - by showing the complexity of HL education in European contexts.

Cooper, H. (2017). Research synthesis and meta-analysis. SAGE Publications, Inc, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071878644 FNBE (Finnish National Board of Education). (2011). Omana äidinkielenä opetetut kielet ja opetukseen osallistuneiden määrät vuonna 2010. FNBE (Finnish National Board of Education). (2022). Omana äidinkielenä opetetut kielet ja opetukseen osallistuneiden määrät vuonna 2021. Pu, C. (2019). Teaching Chinese as a heritage language. In C. Shei, M. M. Zikpi, & D.-L. Chao (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Chinese Language Teaching. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315625157-11

Linguistic and cultural diversity in schools and classrooms ‘call[s] into question the language education policies and practices of teachers and schools and their capacity to respond effectively to the challenges of an increasingly linguistically and culturally diverse school population’ (Young, 2018, p. 23). Indeed, schools may be experienced as a process of othering (Szelei, Tinoca & Pinho, 2021) and linguistic injustice, of identity silencing and hierarchisation (Spotti & Kroon, 2015; Vervaet et al. 2018). Such processes endanger the materialisation of an inclusive school and the living of a full multilingual citizenship (Stroud, 2018). Piller (2016) problematises the mainstream curriculum regarding issues of linguistic justice, which emphasises that schools and teachers are asked to counter-act processes of linguistic subordination and invisibility of plural identities.

Against this background, social justice, equity, and inclusion continue to be critical topics in the field of initial teacher education and teacher professional development, in the context of which scholars advocate the adoption of social justice perspectives with transformative approaches regarding diversity in education (McDonald and Zeichner, 2009; Pantić & Florian, 2015). It is believed that this may be a route to foster future and experienced teachers’ critical awareness of sociocultural and sociolinguistic oppressive teaching structures and mindsets alongside an educational engagement against such structures (Pijanowski & Brady, 2021). García (2017) underlines the importance of all teachers to question how the concept of language is being legitimised in schools and to develop a critical multilingual awareness, which comprises, on the one hand, the awareness of plurilingualism, and on the other hand, the awareness of how plurilingualism in society may be a result of histories of colonial and imperialistic oppression, and of how language use has been naturalised.

Particularly, language teachers are asked to develop new professional landscapes, in the core of which is the need to interpret the socio-linguistic and cultural complexity of educational contexts, and to envisage the role of languages and pedagogy therein. It is not new that teacher cognition (Borg, 2018; Haukås, 2016; Paulsrud, Juvonen & Schalley, 2023) is pointed out as a driving force to understand teachers’ language awareness and conceptualizations of language teaching. Discussing the link between social justice pedagogy and cultural diversity, Pijanowski and Brady (2021), point out the importance of intellectual and dispositional work to support teachers in the adoption of equity and inclusion. Due to principles of social justice and human rights, pedagogies for linguistic and cultural diversity, such as plurilingual and intercultural education, may be disruptive in how pre-service and experience teachers understand their role and language teaching (Piccardo et al., 2022). According to Boylan and Woolsey (2015), referring to teachers’ identity space and social justice, it is important to involve teachers in the discomforting position of confronting their beliefs and dispositions. It is, therefore, important to understand pre-service and experienced language teachers’ authoring and identity work and representations of language teaching, to discuss the place of competing discourses in their identity construction and in professional learning initiatives.

In this paper presentation, we seek to analyse a set of visual narratives produced by two groups of language teachers in different national settings (Portugal and Switzerland) in order to answer the following questions:

• RQ1: 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?
• RQ2: What professional identity is in the making regarding pedagogy for linguistic and cultural diversity through the lens of social justice?

Theoretical background
Globalization and immigration worldwide have led to a culturally and linguistically heterogeneous society. More than a quarter of the German population has a migrant background, and many students grow up with knowledge of more than one family language (Berkel-Otto et al., 2021). However, German is the dominant language in school, and teachers lack competencies in Linguistically Responsive Teaching (LRT) (Lucas & Villegas, 2013). Despite the educational disadvantages of multilingual learners (Schroedler & Grommes, 2019), university courses on LRT are still not a systematic part of German teacher education (Ehmke & Lemmrich, 2018). In many countries current teacher training curricula remain unchanged regarding multilingualism and multiculturalism in school (Iwuanyamwu, 2023). To create an appropriate course offering, teachers’ beliefs should be considered as a part of professional competency affecting the actions of future teachers (Blömeke, 2017). Prospective teachers who value and include students’ multilingual identity in teaching could contribute to reduce educational disparities and support students’ acceptance and respect for themselves and others (Prasad & Lory, 2020).

Teachers’ beliefs are defined as perceptions and assumptions regarding school- and class-related phenomena, such as teaching, learning, learners, subject matter, and their role as teachers (Borg, 2001). Teachers’ beliefs guide the teachers’ actions in a professional context and can influence the quality of teaching (Buehl & Beck, 2014). To date, there have been few, mostly cross-sectional studies on professional beliefs regarding multilingualism in schools. In summary, the following influencing variables were identified: gender, individual multilingualism, teaching experience, and academic background (e.g. Martí & Portolés 2021). From a psychological perspective, the changeability of teachers’ beliefs is controversial (e.g. Nespor 1987). However, some longitudinal studies showed that the systematic influence of knowledge from academic LRT-relevant opportunities to learn (OTL) can cause positive changes in teachers’ beliefs (e.g. Schroedler et al., 2022). In the US region, studies showed that educational experiences like training in cultural diversity or teaching linguistically diverse learners had the ability to reshape teachers’ beliefs about multilingualism (e.g. Fitzsimmons-Doolan et al., 2017). As research has shown that teachers’ beliefs can improve due to OTL, this paper aims to evaluate if participants can move between those belief-based profiles by conducting a Latent Transition Analysis (LTA). To the best of our knowledge, this combination of person- and transition-centering represents an innovative approach to analyzing pre-service teachers’ beliefs on multilingualism. Filling this research gap, our study aims to evaluate and improve LRT-relevant OTL in teacher education.

Research questions

1. What professional beliefs do pre-service teachers hold about multilingualism before and after attending an LRT-relevant OTL?
2. Which characteristics regarding the pre-service teachers’ personal and academic backgrounds correlate with or predict their beliefs about multilingualism?
3. Which different profiles exist among the pre-service teachers based on their beliefs about multilingualism?
4. Are there transitions between the pre-service teachers’ profiles after they participated in an LRT-relevant OTL?

Investing in preschool children's language development is critical to adressing educational inequality (Cunningham et al., 2019; Degotardi & Gill, 2017). However, opportunities for interaction are not shared equally (Black, 2004). Teachers’ interactional behaviour is strongly influenced by their perceptions of children (Black, 2004) and the pupil’s social background (Peleman et al., 2020). A narrative review study on language learning across early childhood education (ECE) shows that overheard speech that is not directed to the child does not contribute effectively to children’s language development (Rowe & Snow, 2020). Direct interaction between teacher and child with the full attention of the teacher is therefore a critical factor in language development (Weisleder & Fernald, 2013). The study of teacher attention is an emerging field in educational research, due to the innovative technique of mobile eye tracking. These studies have shown that teacher gaze is not evenly distributed across pupils (İnan-Kaya & Rubie-Davies, 2022; Smidekova et al., 2020). In particular, novice teachers tend to give their undivided attention to a limited number of pupils rather than to all children in the classroom (Cortina et al., 2015; Dessus et al., 2016). Explanations for the uneven distribution are inconsistent. For example, Chaudhuri and colleagues (2022) found that teachers focused primarily on the lowest-achieving pupils in their classrooms, while Dessus and colleagues (2016) found that primary teachers focused significantly more on a 'steering group' consisting primarily of middle- and high-achieving pupils.

Mobile eye tracking has also been used to investigate unconscious mechanisms of inequality. While teachers can largely control their verbal messages, they cannot control their non-verbal communication in the same way (İnan-Kaya & Rubie-Davies, 2022). For instance, eye tracking has been used in previous research to measure teachers' implicit biases, including in early childhood settings (Gilliam et al., 2016; İnan-Kaya & Rubie-Davies, 2022). We hypothesise that implicit bias also influences the teacher’s gaze, given that previous mobile eye tracking research by Gilliam and colleagues (2016) has shown that teachers’ implicit biases based on race and gender influenced their eye gaze.

In attempting to explain teacher attention, a distinction can be made between intentional top-down processes, such as intentionally looking at a particular child during a particular exercise to gather information about their learning processes, and unintentional bottom-up processes, such as student behaviour that disrupts classroom activities (Goldberg et al., 2021; Theeuwes et al., 2000), or unconscious teacher mechanisms, such as teacher bias (Gilliam et al., 2016). Theeuwes and colleagues (2000) write that the intentional top-down processes only secondarily influence the direction of attention. Unintentional processes are of bigger influence.

This paper presents a single case study that examines a preschool teacher's distribution of attention and interaction opportunities during two moments of language learning, with a dual aim. First, we want to investigate the teacher's attentional distribution in the context of language learning in early childhood education, with the aim of unravelling the unconscious mechanisms of inequality at the teacher level. Second, we sought to examine the ecological validity of mobile eye tracking by triangulating eye tracking metrics with data collected from alternative sources.

RQ1. How is the teacher attention distributed among preschool children during a formal and an informal language learning activity?

RQ2. How does teacher attention relate to the quality and quantity of teacher-child interactions?

RQ3. What influences the teacher’s attention during language learning, as perceived by the teacher?

RQ4. How do the eye tracking metrics relate to the attentional distribution in a real classroom?

As the number of multilingual students continues to increase worldwide, the role of languages in learning is taking center stage in education. Studies have shown a significant gap in learning outcomes between students with a migration background and majority-language speakers in many OECD countries (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), including Finland (Hiltunen et al., 2023). Students with a migration background often face a range of educational obstacles, including learning gaps, challenges in transitions, and lower educational attainment compared with the majority peers (Borgna, 2017). Thus, it is of utmost importance to find sustainable solutions to improve the learning outcomes of students with a migrant background.

Learning a new language takes time, and attaining academic language proficiency may take up to five to seven years (Cummins, 2021). In today’s linguistically diverse schools, we must look beyond traditional language teaching to gain a deeper understanding of the role languages play in all learning. Teachers play a significant role in making instruction comprehensible for their students. According to theoretical understanding, teaching language and content simultaneously is necessary in order to help students understand and produce language in the ways it is used in different subjects (Schleppegrell et al., 2004). Thus, the Finnish national core curriculum for basic education (Finnish National Agency for Education [EDUFI], 2014) requires language aware pedagogies from all teachers, which, for instance, leads to integrating language and content in teaching. According to our previous studies, this requirement falls under the theoretical framework of linguistically responsive pedagogy (Alisaari et al., 2019; Heikkola et al., 2022; Lucas & Villegas, 2013). The core curriculum (EDUFI, 2014) also encourages teachers to use their students’ all linguistic resources for learning, namely, use multilingual pedagogies in teaching.

Although the curriculum for basic education (EDUFI, 2014) requires linguistically responsive pedagogy and multilingual pedagogies from all teachers, there are studies indicating that Finnish teachers have not been sufficiently aware of how to teach multilingual learners, especially before the requirement came into force in 2016. For example, teachers were not aware of the role of language in learning subject content nor language dimensions, i.e. the ways language varies between everyday language, academic language and subject specific language (Alisaari & Heikkola, 2020). Studies from many other countries indicate that globally, teachers’ competencies in supporting multilingual learners are still developing (e.g. Agirdag et al., 2014; Iversen, 2019; Rodríguez-Izquierdo et al., 2020). However, more recent studies are needed to indicate what is the current state of Finnish teachers’ linguistically responsive knowledge. This study focuses on what kind of linguistically responsive knowledge do Finnish teachers have after the curriculum reform.

The literature on Translanguaging has exploded in the last years, focusing on views of multilingualism, language ideologies, raciolinguistic hierarchies and pedagogical practices. Translanguaging is commonly understood as going beyond named languages, language as linguistic systems and additive bilingualism. It understands languages as social, political and cultural constructs and rejects the idea of languages as linguistic entities (Makoni & Pennycook, 2007). This perspective creates tensions for language-in-education policies and practices in many European contexts owing to curricular aims and the hierarchical position of the language(s) of instruction and home languages. For example, while policies in many European countries call for multilingualism, they simultaneously emphasize native-like competence in the dominant language(s) (Alstad & Sopanen, 2020). By contrast, translanguaging pedagogies call for inclusive, learner-centred and transglossic learning arrangements that leverage students’ entire semiotic repertoire for learning. Findings suggest that pedagogical translanguaging contributes to language learning and raises academic achievement (e.g., García & Sylvan, 2011; Lewis et al., 2012). These studies have mainly focused on school contexts and research on translanguaging in early childhood education and care (ECEC) remains rare.

The present symposium takes up the question of translanguaging as pedagogical practice in ECEC in Norway, Italy and Luxembourg and discusses ideologies, practices and interactions both theoretically and with empirical findings. While the countries differ in their linguistic landscapes and educational policies, teachers have nevertheless been found to draw on translanguaging to varying degrees and in so-called “second” and “foreign language” classes and in “multilingual education” (Kirsch & Bergeron, 2023; Pesch, 2021). In Norway, Norwegian is the main language in ECEC, while Sámi is the main language in Sámi ECEC, but all ECEC teachers are required to turn linguistic diversity into a resource for all children and encourage multilingual children to use their mother tongue. Preschool children in Italian kindergartens in the autonomous province of South Tyrol participate in L2 German and L3 English activities taught by foreign language teachers. Other home languages, however, are no taken into account. The situation differs in the officially trilingual country of Luxembourg where a program of multilingual education requires the professionals to familiarize children with Luxembourgish and French and value their home languages, for example through collaborating with parents. In sum, while different, the three countries strive to implement effective and inclusive multilingual practices. Given that all European countries need to find ways to address language diversity in education, this symposium addresses relevant questions that shape educational practices.

The first paper by Anja Maria Pesch and Gunhild Tomter Alstad from Norway explores the ongoing international discussion on translanguaging as appropriate for supporting multilingual children in their language development in ECEC in Norway. They discuss which important challenges translanguaging brings to ECEC, how translanguaging relates to central elements such as the view of the child, and how the concept needs to be contextualized when applied in the Norwegian ECEC. The second paper by Marjan Asgari and Renata Zanin examines children's multilingual language acquisition in Italian kindergartens. The findings show that the teachers' support for translanguaging between the L1 Italian and the target languages L2 German, L3 English varies, with very limited inclusion of heritage languages. Secondly, the authors found a disparity between teachers’ low complexity of output prompting and children’s high receptive competence during L2 and L3 activities. The final paper by Claudine Kirsch and Valérie Kemp explores children’s use of their linguistic repertoire and the roles they play when parents come to the ECEC setting to read in home languages. The findings show that translanguaging, which depends on the educators’ pedagogy, empowers children who act as mediators and encourage the participation of peers and adults.

The starting point for our presentation is the ongoing international discussion concerning the significance of translanguaging, the underlying view on language(s) and the ontological stance this implies for research and teaching practice (Cummins, 2021; García & Li Wei, 2014; Makoni & Pennycook, 2007). The discussion involves the question of language ideology, views on multilingualism and, as a consequence, which teaching and pedagogical practices are appropriate for supporting multilingual children and students. Central elements concern the question of monoglossic and heteroglossic ideologies, the hegemonic positioning of languages and power relations. In Nordic ECEC contexts, translanguaging as phenomenon has been applied to varying degrees and in various ways in second and multilingual language research (Pesch, 2021). Studies show that educational and language policy guidelines on multilingualism in education seem to be vague and ambiguous and that multilingualism as a concept is promoted in Northern-European education politics, while simultaneously native-like language competence appears as the norm (Alstad & Sopanen, 2020; Giæver & Tkachenko, 2020; Palviainen & Curdt-Christiansen 2020). Steering documents for ECEC involve conflicting discourses with some being characterized by more monoglossic and others by more heteroglossic ideologies. Language ideologies, on which pedagogical translanguaging is based, may be significant for both research and pedagogical practice in ECEC. In our presentation, we discuss the relevance of translanguaging and the connected language ideological debate for Norwegian ECEC. We point out how central elements, as the transfer from translanguaging in specific bilingual classrooms to linguistically diverse ECECs, raciolinguistic hierarchies and the concept of the listening subject and whitness (Flores & Rosa, 2015), need to be contexutalized in the transition from a US-American to a Norwegian and European context. Based on studies applying the concept of translanguaging in the Norwegian ECEC context, we discuss both the potential and challenges that tranlanguaging may bring to pedagogical linguistic practice in superdiverse ECECs on the one hand and on ECECs in Indigenous Sámi contexts on the other hand. While translanguaging practices may be in line with central pedagogical and professional ethical perspectives in the Norwegian ECEC context and bring with them important challenges to the language policy in the Norwegian education system, we also argue for the importance of norm-critical perspectives on translanguaging as pedagogical linguistic practices in ECEC.

Alstad, G. T., & Sopanen, P. (2020). Language orientations in early childhood education policy in Finland and Norway. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/20020317.2020.1862951 Cummins, J. (2021). Rethinking the Education of Multilingual Learners: A Critical Analysis of Theoretical Concepts. Multilingual Matters. Flores, N. & Rosa, J. (2015). Undoing Approprateness: Raciolinguistic ideologies and Language Diversity in Education. Harvard Educational Review, 85(2), 149-171. García, O. & Li Wei. (2014). Translanguaging. Language, Bilingualism and Education. Palgrave Macmillan. Giæver, K., & Tkachenko, E. (2020). Mot en ny satsing på flerspråklighet – en analyse av språkpolitiske føringer i barnehagens styringsdokumenter. Nordic Studies in Education, 40(3), 249–267. Makoni, S. & Pennycook, A. (2007). Disinventing and Reconstituting Languages. Multilingual Matters. Palviainen, Å. & Curdt-Christiansen, X. L. (2020). Language Education Policies and Early Childhood Education. I M. Schwartz (Red.), Handbook of Early Language Education. Springer International. https://doi.org/https://doi.org./10.1007/987-3-030-47073-9_7-1 Pesch, A. M. (2021). "They call me anneanne!" Translanguaging as a theoretical and pedagogical challenge and opportunity in the kindergarten context of Norway. Acta Borealia. A Nordic Journal of Circumpolar Societies. 10.1080/08003831.2021.1911200

The language acquisition of multilingual children is synchronous and complementary (Panagiotopoulou 2019: 32), therefore, translanguaging as an inclusive pedagogical approach aims to recognize all languages (Becker 2023: 204). The reconceptualization of multilingualism has shaken the deeply rooted belief of the educational system that languages should be strictly separated (Creese 2017: 6). This descriptive field study investigates children's translanguaging and interactional moves during foreign language learning activities in Italian kindergartens. The study is based on the research project "Observation of L2 German and L3 English linguistic input quality" (Asgari & Zanin 2022). School administrators, teachers and parents were informed in advance about the aims of the field study and their consent was obtained. The names of the children and any references to the participating kindergartens were anonymized in the transcripts. During two recording sessions in 7 Italian-speaking kindergartens, 74 L2-German and 14 L3-English activities (approx. 10 minutes each) were observed, videotaped, and analyzed with regard to the children's use of their heritage language (RQ1). A total of 20 exemplary activities were then transcribed and analyzed in terms of the children's meaning making process mediating between their L1 Italian and their L2 German/L3 English (RQ2). The qualitative analysis based on the methods of conversation analysis (Sacks 1992; Deppermann 2020) yielded the following results: In relation to RQ1, we found that the children resort to bilingual practices – but only between the official kindergarten L1 Italian and the L2 German/L3 English, and not in their heritage languages. The kindergarten teachers support this translanguaging to varying degrees (Asgari & Zanin 2023), but do not include the children's various other heritage languages. Regarding RQ2, we found a discrepancy between the low complexity of the teachers' output prompts and the high receptive competence of the children during the meaning-making processes. During guided acquisition of L2 German and L3 English, the children repeated isolated words in a thematic context according to the teacher's instructions. Less structured foreign language activities and everyday language situations, on the other hand, showed a much higher level of children's receptive competence in the L2/L3. The current focus on lexis during L2 and L3 activities in Italian kindergartens is to be extended to more holistic approach to language teaching through action-based communication. This would at the same time call for translanguaging strategies (García & Otheguy 2021) of teachers and children to navigate through meaning making processes in foreign languages in ECEC contexts.

Asgari, M. & Zanin, R. (2022). Language Input Observation Scheme I. Beobachtung sprachlicher Inputqualität mit dem Beobachtungsbogen LIOS I und verbalen Deskriptoren. Germanistische Mitteilungen 48, 141–168. Asgari, M. & Zanin, R. (2023). Korrektives Feedback während Kindergarten-Aktivitäten in Deutsch als Fremdsprache. Deutsch als Fremdsprache 3, 161–173. Becker, A. (2023). Identity, Power, and Prestige in Switzerland's Multilingual Education. Transcript. Creese, A. (2017). Translanguaging as an Everyday Practice. In B. A. Paulsrud, J. Rosén, B. Straszer & Å. Wedin (eds.), New Perspectives on Translanguaging and Education (pp. 1–9). Multilingual Matters. Deppermann, A. (2020). Konversationsanalyse und diskursive Psychologie. In: Mey, G. & Mruck, K. (eds.), Handbuch Qualitative Forschung in der Psychologie (pp. 1–24). Springer. García, O. & Otheguy, R. (2021). Conceptualizing Translanguaging Theory/Practice Juntos. In CUNY-New York State Initiative on Emergent Bilinguals, CUNY-NYSIEB Project (eds.), Translanguaging and Transformative Teaching for Emergent Bilingual Students: Lessons from the CUNY-NYSIEB Project. Routledge, 3–24. Panagiotopoulou, J. A (2019). Mehrsprachigkeit und Bildung in der KiTa. In E. Montanari & J. A. Panagiotopoulou (Hrsg.), Mehrsprachigkeit und Bildung in Kitas und Schulen. Eine Einführung (S. 25–79). Narr Francke Attempto. Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on conversation. Blackwell.

Children’s early literacy experiences at home and in Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) positively influence their language development and early literacy skills (Skibbe et al., 2011). Nevertheless, literacy experiences in ECEC tend to be short and seldom include children’s home languages (Michel & Kuiken, 2014). Furthermore, practitioners rarely encourage translanguaging although it facilitates communication, meaning-making and learning (Garcia & Kleifgen, 2019). One way of supporting the use of home languages in ECEC is to collaborate with parents and organise “joint literacy events”. Such events have been documented in multilingual Luxembourg where two-thirds of the young children speak more than two languages at home. To address language diversity, the Education Ministry introduced in 2017 a multilingual programme in ECEC that requires practitioners in non-formal education sectors to familiarize children with Luxembourgish and French and value their linguistic and cultural resources, as well as collaborate with families and engage in networking activities. In the project “Collaboration with parents and multiliteracies in ECEC” we have analysed joint literacy activities and the actors’ use of one or multiple languages (Aleksić et al., 2024; Kirsch & Bergeron-Morin, 2023). This presentation zooms in on two private ECEC centres, one Luxembourgish, one French, with different pedagogical approaches. We investigate, firstly children’s use of their linguistic repertoire in joint literacy activities and, secondly, the roles of two- to three-year-olds when interacting with peers and adults during these special moments. Data stem from nine video-recorded joint events of two hours in which parents communicated in their home language(s). The data were subjected to a conversation analysis (Seedhouse, 2005). The findings show that the languages in these activities were either strictly separated or used dynamically. In the former events, the children whose parents were present behaved like guests. They showed strong emotions, closed in on their parents and participated less than in the daily ECEC activities where parents were absent. In the latter situations, the children translanguaged, thereby encouraging participation and mediating between peers and adults. We concluded that parental involvement in literacy activities can have different outcomes depending on the pedagogy of the educators. Furthermore, the findings confirm that translanguaging can be transformative and contribute to well-being (Kleyn & García, 2019) as well as stimulate children’s language-based agency (Kirsch & Mortini, 2021). We conclude with implications for professionals.

Aleksić, G., Bebic-Crestany, D. & Kirsch (2024). Factors influencing communication between parents and early childhood educators in multilingual Luxembourg. International Journal of Educational Research. García, O., & Kleifgen, J. A. (2019). Translanguaging and Literacies. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(4), 553–571. Kleyn, T. & García, O. (2019). Translanguaging as an Act of Transformation. Restructuring Teaching and Learning for Emergent Bilingual Students. In L.C. de Oliveira (Ed.), The Handbook of TESOL in K-12. Wiley & Sons. Kirsch, C., & Bergeron-Morin, L. (2023). Educators, parents and children engaging in literacy activities in multiple languages: an exploratory study. International Journal of Multilingualism. Kirsch, C. & Mortini, S. (2021). Engaging in and creatively reproducing translanguaging practices with peers: a longitudinal study with three-year-olds in Luxembourg. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. Michel, M. C., & Kuiken, F. (2014). Language at preschool in Europe: Early years professionals in the spotlight. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2(1), 1–26. Seedhouse, P. (2005). Conversation Analysis as Research Methodology. In K. Richards & P. Seedhouse (Eds.), Applying Conversation Analysis. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Skibbe, L., Connor, C, Morrison, F., & Jewkes, A. (2011). Schooling effects on preschoolers' self-regulation, early literacy, and language growth. Early Child Res Q, 26(1), 42–49.

Migration-related multilingualism has been increasing in many European countries over the past few decades (Eurostat, 2024). As a result, classrooms often consist of students who are proficient in multiple languages, including their home language(s) and the local language. The multilingualism of students related to migration contrasts with school systems dominated by majority language(s). However, it can be considered fundamental from various perspectives to include the family languages of multilingual students in the classroom. For example, it can be argued that this is crucial from a holistic understanding of language, which regards language as an integral part of identity (Cummins, 2001). From a cognitive or communication-oriented perspective that views all language-related competencies as part of an individual's entire linguistic repertoire, it is fundamental that all languages can be used flexibly for communication and learning (García 2009). Translanguaging involves seamlessly navigating between languages and treating diverse linguistic repertoires as an integrated system (Canagarajah, 2011; Creese, 2017). Educators' purposeful adoption of strategies to facilitate students' translanguaging, thereby augmenting their learning, is denoted as pedagogical translanguaging (Cenoz & Gorter, 2021; Prilutskaya, 2021). Pedagogical translanguaging aims to improve students' metalinguistic awareness, helping them to organise and elaborate on content for a deeper understanding of the subject matter (ibid.).

However, not all students use their family languages as a communicative resource in otherwise monolingual educational settings, even if they are explicitly invited to (Meyer & Prediger, 2011; Reitenbach et al. 2023; Schastak et al., 2017; Storch & Wigglesworth 2003). From Grosjean's (2008) theory on the language modes of bilingual speakers, three overarching factors can be derived for (not-)using the full language repertoire: individual, communication partners and the teaching context. Individual factors mainly relate to the linguistic repertoire encompassing vocabulary, literacy access, and language preferences. They may vary in multilingual individuals across languages and specific language domains such as academic language. In self-reports, students referred to individual factors by pointing to their language skills and perception of usefulness as well as their language affinity (Reitenbach et al., 2023; Schastak et al., 2017; Storch & Wigglesworth, 2003). According to Grosjean (2008), the multilingual mode is activated during interactions with other multilingual individuals who share more than one language and accept mixed-language interactions. Therefore, the chosen language mode is also influenced by the communication partners’ linguistic competencies, language preferences, linguistic habits, or power dynamics between the speakers (Grosjean 2008). Students mentioned language skills, perception of usefulness, and language affinity when referring to their communication partners as relevant factors for using or not using their entire linguistic repertoire (Reitenbach et al., 2023; Schastak et al., 2017; Storch & Wigglesworth, 2003). Grosjean (2008) argues that contextual factors at the meso-level (e.g., instruction) and macro-level (e.g., educational system and society) account for speakers’ language mode. Classroom interactions, which are influenced by structural elements such as time, space, goals, content, and methods (e.g. task types and materials), constitute meso-level contextual factors that influence (not-)using the full language repertoire. In self-reports, students refer to the teaching context as perceiving the language use being either an offer, obligation or prohibition (Reitenbach et al., 2023; Schastak et al., 2017; Storch & Wigglesworth, 2003).

Overall, there is little evidence in the teaching context. In particular, the relative importance of students’ reasons for using family languages has not been sufficiently empirically investigated. This article therefore uses data from an intervention study to investigate

(1) which reasons increase the probability of students using family languages and

(2) the extent to which these differ in their predictive power.

As Northern Europe is becoming increasingly multilingual, new challenges are posed to public institutions. In Finland, schools have not yet managed to turn students’ multilingual resources into an advantage. The Finnish national core curriculum of basic education (The Finnish National Agency for Education 2014) encourages a language aware school culture and mentions the parallel use of different languages in the school. However, the use and definition of these concepts are vague, and it is not clear how they should be implemented in schools. Teachers' attitudes may also be strongly driven by monolingual ideology (Alisaari et al. 2019), which is not conducive to promoting everyday multilingualism in classrooms. According to recent studies (Suuriniemi 2021, Repo 2022, Alisaari et al. 2023), linguistically responsive teaching (e.g. Lucas & Villegas 2013) and practices supporting multilingual learning have not yet become mainstream in Finnish comprehensive education, even if many teachers express both the need and the positive attitude (Harju-Autti & Sinkkonen, 2020) towards acquiring new teaching methods for their linguistically diverse classrooms. These questions are not only specific to Finland or the Nordic countries, but to all Western countries with recent increase in immigration.

Educational system and especially basic and upper secondary education have a key role in integrating young people into the society, by providing qualifications for transition to working life, and by creating a sense of belonging and possibilities for democratic participation and agency in the Finnish society. The PISA results have shown that the learning outcomes of students with an immigrant background are remarkably lower than those of students with a Finnish background (Harju-Luukkainen et al. 2014). My presentation will investigate the individual and structural challenges multilingual students with migrant background face. Effective school language learning is key to academic success, but Finnish educational system does not seem to promote a truly multilingual society, where all the language resources of individuals are treated as an asset rather than an obstacle. Supporting the students’ individual identities calls for valuing their previous knowledge, including their language skills (Alisaari et al. 2023, Cummins, 2021).

The languages of the students are present in the classroom in one way or another, whatever agreement was made between the teacher and the students regarding their use. Research about the importance and means of pedagogical translanguaging (Cenoz & Gorter 2022) are still scarce in the Finnish school context. My research investigates the everyday realities of multilingualism at the Finnish educational system, specifically teacher’s perceptions on supporting multilingual learning. My research asks, 1) how do teachers see their role in supporting multilingual students’ linguistic and academic development, and 2) how are these ideas promoted in everyday classroom practices in linguistically diverse 9th grade classrooms? This study will give new knowledge on how to promote truly multilingual learning in linguistically diverse classrooms, where the teacher typically is a native speaker of the school language.

Across Europe, school classrooms are more linguistically diverse than in the past. Because of this, research encourages the implementation of pedagogical approaches that embrace the diversity of students and the increasing role of home languages in the school curriculum (Aronin & Singleton, 2012; Cenoz & Gorter, 2015; May, 2014). As a result, the changing demographics and composition of students have also altered teachers’ classroom settings from traditionally homogenous to those that are more diverse in nature (Lorenz et al., 2021; Rosnes & Rossland, 2018). However, some EAL classrooms have not been adequately prepared to cater to the needs of multilingual students as their settings have essentially been defined as homogeneous by the educational systems in which they work (Lorenz et al., 2021).

According to Wernicke et al. (2021), attention should be paid to multilingualism and multiculturalism in educational settings to increase awareness and recognition of linguistic and cultural diversity at individual and societal levels. Further, research articulated that historical, ideological, social, economic, and political factors need to be taken into consideration, as well as language policy and the diverse language practices of teachers and students (Choi & Ollerhead, 2018). Multilingual education presupposes not only the teachers’ proficiency in several languages but also their knowledge and understanding of language acquisition processes, theoretical and pedagogical models, approaches focused on the development of multilingual competence (Hammond, 2014), teaching strategies, language, and content integration (Palincsar & Schleppegrell, 2014), and language policies and ideologies related to language teaching and language use (Flores & Rosa, 2015).

Recent research on multilingualism and language education has mainly been conducted with a focus on the learning and teaching of the English language, or in English-speaking contexts (Burns & Siegel, 2018;Matsuda, 2017). This study looks at two increasingly multilingual EAL settings, namely, Norway and Cyprus, whose recent reports (Statistics Norway, 2022 for reports on Norway and Annual Report of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport, and Youth, 2021 for reports on Cyprus) identified an increase in linguistic diversity and testified to the need for effective and efficient multilingual pedagogies that would assist in optimizing the student learning experiences.

The researchers aimed to investigate pre-service EAL teachers’ beliefs, perceptions, and reflections regarding the use of students’ HLs in increasingly linguistically diverse EAL classrooms in Norway and Cyprus. Fifty-nine teachers were observed during their teaching practicum and were interviewed with respect to their views, beliefs, and self-reflections on the impact and role of HL for EAL teaching and learning purposes. In both countries, data were collected through classroom observations and semi-structured interviews. The field notes enabled the researchers to reflect on the documented events and the behaviors observed in practice to produce meaning and understanding. The research question the study sought to address was:

1. Do Norwegian and Cypriot pre-service EAL teachers share similar attitudes towards HL integration in the EAL classroom or are there any differences between them?

The findings revealed that more than half of the participants in both countries were in favor of employing multilingual pedagogies. However, most of them acknowledged certain challenges in their practical implementation and the need for further training. The study concludes with the authors stressing the catalyst role teacher educators could play in making EAL classrooms more inclusive for multilingual learners (Neokleous & Karpava, 2023). The significance of this study is in its comparative nature and in its potential for providing further evidence in the exploration of linguistically and culturally responsive teaching and deeper insights into EAL teachers beliefs and cognitions but also how teacher training can effectively prepare pre-service teachers on enhancing learning in linguistically diverse settings (Kart et al., 2022).

Networks hold a meeting during ECER. All interested are welcome.

Minority language maintenance or shift occurs at the individual, family, and societal levels through the interplay of psychological and social factors in the community in which the language minority members are situated (Spolsky 2004; Curdt-Christiansen & Huang 2020; Vuorsola 2022a). A range of factors influence language maintenance in diverse ways in different contexts; thus, it is impossible to formulate a single universally accepted theory that predicts whether language transmission will occur in any bilingual environment (Aalberse, et al., 2019). In recent years, the family has become the focus of attention in sociolinguistic studies on minority languages in the field of Language Policy (Curdt-Cristiansen & Huang 2020; Schwartz 2020).

In this study, we use Curdt-Christiansen’s and Huang’s (2020) Family Language Policy Model as our theoretical background. In this model, family language policies are influenced by external and internal factors: External factors are 1) socio-economic, 2) socio-political, 3) socio-cultural, and 4) socio-linguistic factors, and the internal factors are 1) emotional, 2) identity and 3) cultural factors, 4) parental impact beliefs and 5) child agency (Curdt-Cristiansen & Huang, 2020). However, the scope the current study does not allow for implementation of the entire FLP model and thus, we focus on the internal factors.

Although the sociolinguistic situation of Sweden’s national minority languages, Finnish, Meänkieli, Sami, Yiddish and Romany Chib, has improved slightly since Sweden ratified the Council of Europe’s European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages and the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities in 2000 (SOU 2017:91), they are still under serious threat, partly due to the fact that teaching in these languages has not been organized sufficiently. Moreover, there has been a long-standing process of forced language shift and Swedishisation, which has led to a steady decline in the number of speakers of these languages (SOU 2017:91). Thus, in their daily lives, minority language families in Sweden often face the consequences of lack of adequate language policies in schools (SOU 2017:91) and negative attitudes towards minority languages in society in general (Vuorsola 2022b). Consequently, family language policy, family’s ability to resist external pressures to speak majority language with their children, and language practices and attitudes of family members are crucial factors in maintenance of heritage language. Although Sweden is committed to the preservation and revitalisation of minority languages in its minority policy and legislation, there are major shortcomings, particularly in the field of education, which has drawn criticism by the supervisory authorities of the Council of Europe (SOU 2017:91). Therefore, the families’ language policies still seem to determine the maintenance of minority languages in Sweden (King et al., 2008).

Sweden Finns are the largest national minority group in Sweden, and the number of those with a Finnish background is estimated to be around 800 000 (Salö & Milani 2023: 30). Although family language policies in different minority language groups and contexts have been studied in recent decades, there are only a few studies on the factors influencing the language policies of Sweden Finnish families over the past decade (see Lainio & Pesonen 2021). In this study, we examine Sweden Finnish heritage language policies and language practices through semi-structured interviews in 10 Sweden Finnish families where the Finnish language has been successfully passed on to the subsequent generation(s). The research question is:

How do the parents describe their language policies and how emotional, identity and cultural factors, as well as parental impact beliefs and child agency have influenced language practices in the Sweden Finnish families where the Finnish language has transmitted to the next generation(s)?

The aim of the research is to determine to what extent elementary schools in the Basque Autonomous Community can reduce gender differences in learning the Basque and Spanish language. This study seeks to characterize the most equitable Elementary schools in terms of performance in the Basque and Spanish language obtained by the students. The discourse of the professionals working in these schools are studied.

Even though one of the important purposes of the European Union is to promote gender equity in educational institutions (European Institute for gender equality. EIGE, 2023), there are still gender differences in performance, individual motivations, or professional aspirations (Kollmayer et al., 2018). Likewise, the existing research on the study of gender differences within the educational context is increasing, intending to respond to the need to create educational responses to narrow such differences (Quenzel & Hurrelmannb, 2013; Cervini et al., 2015; Van Hek et al., 2016). Horizontal segregation theory explains the differences that still exist in vocational options and choice of specialist subjects, with girls continuing to opt more for qualifications linked to caring for others, which enjoy a lower level of professional prestige (EIGE, 2019).

The factors that promote gender inequity in the education system are multifaceted. These factors involve the interaction of institutional environments, the social climate, motivation patterns, orientations regarding gender roles, family resources, parental decisions, school structure, and teacher evaluations and decisions (Hadjar et al. 2014). This indicates that, in addition to individual factors or contextual circumstances in education, these factors may be relevant to a person's educational achievement (Van Hek et al., 2016). School culture, teaching practices, and home and social environment can promote differences in students regarding educational achievement (Mensah & Kiernan, 2010).

Research seems to agree that one of the most prominent gender gaps is found in literacy and language, favoring girls over boys (Gustavsen, 2017; Quinn, 2018; Soto et al., 2019) also in PISA (Quenzel and Hurrelmannb, 2013; Manu et al. 2021) and in terms of attitude and motivation to reading (Artola et al., 2017). But it is necessary to identify if this trend also takes place in bilingual contexts such as BAC, , in a diglossia situation; 14.13% of the population speak Basque at home (Eustat, 2016). Other studies found that girls have a higher level of Linguistic Communicative Competence (LCC) in Basque than boys (Basque Government, ISEI-IVEI, & Soziolinguistika Klusterra, 2019), whereas boys have a marginally higher level of LCC in Spanish (Intxausti et al., 2023). That might indicate a feminization of the Basque language or the construction of masculinity through Spanish language (Altuna, 2023). Altuna (2017) argues that boys associate the minority language with the formal domain, such as the school context, with one way of challenging formal school rules being to speak in Spanish (Altuna & Hernadez, 2018). Other studies on minority language context as Wales have observed a trend among young males to use the more prestigious language (Price & Tamburelli, 2016) in informal social domains. Therefore, a deeper approach to the gender gap in LCC is required, taking the cultural-social and linguistic context into account, since, although studies have generally found that girls score higher in LCC than boys, this finding may not apply to bilingual contexts.

This study covers a research gap on the efficiency of elementary schools in relation to the outcomes in linguistic competence in intersection with gender in specific bilingual scenario. It is important to investigate if schools are successful in achieving fair results in bilingual context regardless of the gender of the students in order to understand better language learning and its intersection with issues of gender disparity.

This paper presents preliminary findings from the research project, A Part and Apart? Education and social inclusion of refugee children and youth in Iceland (ESRCI).

The project generally aims to critically explore the education and social inclusion of Syrian and Iraqi refugee children and youth at pre-, compulsory and upper secondary levels and the structures created for their learning and wellbeing in their social and educational settings. Groups of socalled quota refugees from Syria and Iraq arrived in Iceland from 2015 onwards, invited to the country in collaboration with the UNHCR. These refugees settled in eleven different municipalities as part of state agreements with those municipalities.

Findings of previous research in Iceland have revealed multiple challenges that refugee children face in Icelandic schools and society, but also educational and social success (Hama, 2020; Hariri et al., 2020; Ragnarsdóttir &Hama, 2018). While there has been some research with refugee groups in Iceland, ESRCI is the first extensive research with these refugee groups. The project is directed by the overarching research question: How do the education system and socio-cultural environments in Iceland contribute to the education and social inclusion of refugee children and youth?

The project is divided into four pillars, the second of which is Language learning and multilingualism at home and at school. Drawing on data related to the theme in this pillar, the paper aims to explore the refugee children’s and youth’s language use, language learning and multilingualism.
Research questions include:

1: What is the nature of refugee children’s and youth’s language use and language learning (Icelandic and heritage language/s) in school and at home?
2: How does refugee children’s and youth’s language use impact their social and educational development?
3: How do schools build on these children‘s linguistic resources and which linguistically and culturally responsive practices are in place?

This paper draws on theoretical approaches within fields such as second language learning, multilingualism, and heritage languages. Burns (2008) argues that language proficiency may well be regarded as a proxy indicator for inclusion. Schools as sites of language teaching and learning therefore become key facilitators in the inclusion of refugee children. The work of Nusche (2009) provides helpful insights into some of the most important elements required to properly address the language learning needs of migrant and refugee children. Many of these are addressed at the level of school policies and include early language assistance, for example in preschool education and care, individual monitoring of language development and systematic support for language learning throughout school and teachers trained in second language teaching.

In recent years, the benefits of bi- and multilingualism for individuals and societies have been explored and discussed by many scholars (Chumak-Horbatsch, 2012; Cummins, 2004; Ragnarsdóttir & Schmidt, 2014). However, the multiple resources which ethnic minority students, immigrants and refugees bring to schools tend to be overlooked and ignored. Cummins (2004) has addressed the need for investing in practices affecting social justice in a positive way in educational communities and gaining understanding of how school policy and teachers’ attitudes, beliefs and exclude some children while welcoming others. According to Cummins, in order to create learning spaces that respond to the needs of linguistically and culturally diverse groups of children and families, schools need to consider how to implement socially just and inclusive practices that welcome diverse backgrounds and identities. Additionally, to develop inclusive and linguistically appropriate practices (Chumak-Horbatsch, 2012; Cummins, 2004; Gay, 2010) it is important to build on children’s prior experiences and knowledge.

To establish sustainable and inclusive education (IE), it is imperative to “overcome barriers limiting the presence, participation and achievement of learners” (UNESCO, 2017, p. 7). Realization of this objective requires a concerted effort from education policy and practice stakeholders to identify and address barriers that impede students’ access to quality education and opportunities (Alexiadou & Essex, 2016). Given the proliferation of migration and refugee movements worldwide, there has been a notable increase in linguistic diversity (European Commission/Eacea/Eurydice, 2019). As a result, the need for school inclusion of students with migration biography and refugee experience has been identified as a crucial objective of educational policy and practice (European Commission/Eacea/Eurydice, 2019).

While the presence of linguistic diversity in schools is not a new phenomenon and has been extensively documented for many years (UNHCR, 2023), numerous countries in Europe and beyond continue to adhere to a monolingual approach by separating students based on their language proficiency (Herzog-Punzenberger et al. 2020). Specifically, according to a report by the European Commission, EACEA, and Eurydice (2019), in 24 of the 27 countries within the European Union, students who have recently arrived in a new country and do not yet speak the language of instruction are temporarily placed in pull-out language support or preparatory classes. This separation of students with beginning or emergent skills in the language of instruction, which follows the structured immersion approach, is often presented as a means of promoting their overall academic and linguistic growth. However, international comparative studies have consistently revealed significant disparities in achievement between students with and without migration biography or refugee experience (OECD, 2018). Moreover, research suggests that the conventional approach of segregating students based on their language proficiency levels does not align with the most effective language support practices employed by skilled teachers during mainstream classes (Erling et al., 2022).

Despite ongoing challenges in achieving educational equity caused by the continued use of segregated language support in various European nations, this symposium aims to provide a transnational perspective on current approaches and practices related to addressing linguistic diversity. It will feature insights from those closely engaged in the task of professional language instruction. The symposium reveals a common thread among the three represented countries - they all implement some form of a segregated approach when integrating newly arrived children and young people (European Commission/Eacea/Eurydice, 2019). Furthermore, each contribution emphasizes unique aspects pertinent to addressing linguistic diversity in educational institutions. Specifically, contribution one examines the language ideologies of educators in Austria, contribution two analyzes the practical application of inclusive teaching methods for newly arrived immigrant students in Germany, and contribution three explores the creation of strategies to assist teachers in instructing linguistically diverse classrooms in Finland.

The first contribution provides a thorough examination of the elements that Austrian educators deem beneficial to their students' linguistic growth in the language of instruction. It delves into the significance that teachers place on their students' linguistic repertoire and investigates how they incorporate it into their daily teaching practices. The second contribution intends to analyze the inclusive approaches that educators in Germany adopt to address the diverse requirements of students who have fled from Ukraine. Finally, the third contribution utilizes information gathered from Finnish teachers in preparatory and mainstream classrooms, focusing on their approaches to multilingualism in the classroom. Based on this data, an educational game has been developed to assist teachers in recognizing and meeting the needs of all students, regardless of their linguistic prerequisites. Overall, the results presented in this symposium contribute to the expansion of knowledge in the field of language sensitive instruction.

Despite the multilingual reality in classrooms, the Austrian school system follows a monolingual orientation (Erling et al., 2022), which perceives the linguistic repertoire of students from a deficit-oriented perspective and focuses on changing learners’ educational requirements rather than on educational offers (Prinsloo & Krause, 2019). Accordingly, German language learners are “pulled out” of the mainstream classes and are taught in so-called German language support classes (GLSC) (BMBWF 2019). GLSC are heavily criticised by education and language experts because they do not consider the students’ linguistic repertoire (Erling et al. 2023). Furthermore, they do not correspond to examples of 'best pedagogical practices' such as translanguaging and adaptive teaching that can effectively support multilingual students (García & Otheguy, 2021). Similarly, serious obstacles have been identified for multilingual students when it comes to learning the language of instruction or teachers’ attitudes towards students’ linguistic repertoires (Haukås et al., 2022). Building on this, the aim of the present study was to examine which factors teachers consider to be conducive to students’ linguistic development in German (RQ1), and what value teachers place on students’ linguistic repertoire and how, if at all, they integrate it into lessons (RQ2). To this end, 19 semi-structured guideline interviews were conducted with GLSC teachers in 12 primary and 3 secondary schools in Vienna were conducted and analyzed using Mayring’s (2022) summarizing qualitative content analysis. Findings for RQ1 indicate that teachers perceive German language role models, parental encouragement, and knowledge of first language as favourable factors for students to learn German. However, the teachers’ perceptions of students’ linguistic repertoire (RQ2) were either positive, auxiliary, or hesitant. While some indicated that the students’ language repertoire was beneficial and that other languages were actively included in the lessons, others stated that students’ linguistic repertoire was a necessary tool to improve their German language skills. Moreover, some teachers stated that a focus on students’ linguistic repertoire is associated with less time available for practising German. In this context, a hierarchisation of languages was analysed, with Turkish and Chechen being rated unfavourably by teachers. Hence, some of the participating teachers were in favor of the monolingual orientation of the Austrian school system which is contradictory to the linguistic diversity in Austrian schools. This study emphasizes the need to adapt the legal requirements of GLSC to linguistic diversity and to educate teachers to employ translanguaging and adaptive teaching to support students with a broad linguistic repertoire.

BMBWF. (2019). Deutschförderklassen und Deutschförderkurse. Leitfaden für Schulleiterinnen und Schulleiter. Bundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft und Forschung. https://www.bmbwf.gv.at/dam/jcr:f0e708af-3e17-4bf3-9281-1fe7098a4b23/deutschfoerderklassen.pdf Duarte, J. (2020). Translanguaging in the context of mainstream multilingual education. International Journal of Multilingualism, 17(2), 232–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2018.1512607 Erling, E. J., Gitschthaler, M., & Schwab, S. (2022). Is Segregated Language Support Fit for Purpose? Insights From German Language Support Classes in Austria. European Journal of Educational Research, 11(1), 573–586. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.11.1.573 Erling, E. J., Radinger, S., & Foltz, A. (2023). Understanding low outcomes in English language education in Austrian middle schools: The role of teachers’ beliefs and practices. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 44(5), 412–428. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2020.1829630 García, O., & Otheguy, R. (2021). Conceptualizing Translanguaging Theory/Practice Juntos. In CUNY-New York State Initiative on Emergent Bilinguals (Ed.), Translanguaging and transformative teaching for emergent bilingual students: Lessons from the CUNY-NYSIEB Project (pp. 3–24). Routledge. Haukås, Å., Mercer, S., & Svalberg, A. M.-L. (2022). School Teachers’ Perceptions of Similarities and Differences between Teaching English and a Non-Language Subject. TESOL Quarterly, 56(2), 474–498. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3062 Mayring, P. (2022). Qualitative Content Analysis: A Step-by-Step Guide (1st ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd. Statistik Austria. (2023). Bildung in Zahlen 2021/22. Tabellenband. Verlag Österreich GmbH.

Currently, refugee Ukrainian students attend German mainstream schools, leading to growing heterogeneity in learning groups. More than 90,000 Ukrainian students admitted to Germany since the start of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine through May 2022 need to be swiftly integrated (Deutschlandfunk Kultur, 2022). A topical concern for education policymakers and school practices is the problem of how best to integrate them into the German school system, with the objective of having them transition successfully into mainstream classes. Successful integration largely depends on how quickly refugee students can learn the German language and participate in the education system’s normal offerings (Freudenberg-Findeisen et al., 2021). Systematic research data on the school integration or inclusion of refugees is scarce (Preuß, 2018), but has already shown that social and ethnic segregation of students with migration backgrounds and refugee biographies works to the educational disadvantage of this vulnerable group (Baur & Gröpler, 2020). Refugee students are further disadvantaged among other things by the lack of appropriate pedagogical approaches (Schwaiger & Neumann, 2014) and by teachers feeling inadequately prepared for dealing with refugee students in the classroom (Schuelka, 2018). To help shrink the gap between the right to inclusive education and the potential educational disadvantage of refugee students, schools and teachers are encouraged to provide inclusive teaching offerings (UNESCO, 2023), for example, by employing a range of differentiation models and practices. Against this background, the aim of the present study was to examine which inclusive practices teachers implement to cater the needs of Ukrainian students and what limits the inclusion of Ukrainian students. To explore the research question, eight semi-structured guided interviews with (four) elementary and (four) advanced secondary school teachers were conducted and analyzed (intercoder reliability coefficient of .87 [Holsti, 1969]) using qualitative content analysis (Mayring, 2014). Findings reveal that teachers employ certain differentiated practices such as tiered assignments and tutoring systems. In contrast, differentiated practices such as mastery learning or open education, are seldomly implemented. Additionally, teachers reported a manifold of difficulties ultimately limiting the implementation of differentiated practices. The main difficulty teachers mention is the language barrier. These results, practical implications as well as future lines of research are discussed.

Deutschlandfunk Kultur. (2022). Mehr als 90.000 Schülerinnen und Schüler aus der Ukraine an deutschen Schulen. Körperschaft des öffentlichen Rechts. https://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/mehr-als-90-000-schuelerinnen-und-schueler-aus-der-ukraine-an-deutschen-schulen-100.html#:~:text=Seit%20Beginn%20der%20russischen%20Invasion,Watzinger%20d er%20%E2%80%9ERheinischen%20Post%E2%80%9C. Freudenberg-Findeisen, R.; Harsch, C.; Middeke, A. (2021). Zur sprachlichen und gesellschaftlichen Integration neu zugewanderter Menschen. Eine Bilanz. Universitätsverlag Göttingen. Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities. Addison- Wesley. Mayring, P. (2014). Qualitative Content Analysis: Theoretical Foundation, Basic Procedures and Software Solution. Basic Procedures and Software Solution. https://nbn- resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar395173 Preuß, B. (2018). Inklusive Bildung im schulischen Mehrebenensystem: Behinderung, Flüchtlinge, Migration und Begabung. Research. Springer VS. http://www.springer.com/ Schuelka, M. (2018) Implementing Inclusive Education. Helpdesk Report. https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/bitstream/handle/20.500.12413/14230/374_Impl ementing_Inclusive_Education.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Schwaiger, M. & Neumann, U. (2014). Junge Flüchtlinge im allgemeinbildenden Schulsystem und die Anforderungen an Schule, Unterricht und Lehrkräfte. In M. Gag & F. Voges (Hrsg.), Bildung in Umbruchsgesellschaften: Bd. 10. Inklusion auf Raten: Zur Teilhabe von Flüchtlingen an Ausbildung und Arbeit (Bd. 10, S. 60–79). Waxmann. UNESCO (2023). Inclusion in Education. https://www.unesco.org/en/inclusion-education UN-Generalversammlung. (1966). Internationaler Pakt über wirtschaftliche, soziale und kulturelle Rechte (ICESCR). https://www.institut-fuer- menschenrechte.de/menschenrechtsschutz/deutschland-im- menschenrechtsschutzsystem/vereinte-nationen/vereinte-nationen- menschenrechtsabkommen/sozialpakt-icescr

In the last decade, Finland has seen a wave of immigrants that it is struggling to integrate (Rovamo et al., 2023). However, between the political and economic discussions on the subject, school teachers’ voices continue to call for assistance (Sinkkonen & Kyttälä, 2014; Taylor, Wingren, et al., 2023). They speak of problematic language programs, leading to inequitable outcomes (Helakorpi et al., 2023). Our research sheds light on the issues they face and a means of support (Acquah & Katz, 2020; Taylor, 2024; Taylor, Acquah, et al., 2023; Taylor, Wingren, et al., 2023). For example, results from a thematic analysis highlighted a lack of support regarding materials, training, or cooperation with a system that views immigrants as workers, not students (Taylor et al., 2023). Further classroom observations confirmed teachers’ statements, shedding further light on practices not aligned with Finnish bildung or research (Taylor, 2024). However, research into digital resources gave direction for student-centered designs but highlighted the need for material to be teacher-oriented (Acquah & Katz, 2020; Taylor, Acquah, et al., 2023). The current study examines Finnish educator’s perspective on teaching newly arrived immigrants. Our ongoing research involves three data types focused on teacher’s perspectives. The first is a continuance and then a re-evaluation of interviews with immigrant preparatory and mainstream subject teachers. These interviews will aid content development. We will combine this with data from a Swedish-speaking teacher focus group in a Finnish municipality with high immigrant numbers. This data provides further insight into teachers’ current situation as they support student integration. Lastly, re-evaluating the observational data collected from teachers across Finland in light of these themes will help create a practical design for classroom environments. Unable to change the economic forces driving immigration, we focus instead on modernizing education via technology. We aim to create a language-learning game called Sprok, which is meant to act as a digital workbook for teachers and a role-playing game for students. By analyzing municipal curricula, the current materials used in language learning, and understanding classroom teachers’ needs, we are designing practical support material for teachers based on their perspectives. This, in conjunction with the resultant thematic analysis, will provide insight into what features are required for students to receive educational content in a way that benefits not only them but teachers as well.

Acquah, E. O., & Katz, H. T. (2020). Digital game-based L2 learning outcomes for primary through high-school students: A systematic literature review. Computers & Education, 143, N.PAG-N.PAG. a9h. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103667 Helakorpi, J., Holm, G., & Liu, X. (2023). Education of Pupils with Migrant Backgrounds: A Systemic Failure in the Finnish System? Finland’s Famous Education System: Unvarnished Insights into Finnish Schooling (pp. 319–333). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8241-5_20 Rovamo, H., Pettersson, K., & Sakki, I. (2023). Who’s to blame for failed integration of immigrants? Blame attributions as an affectively polarizing force in lay discussions of immigration in Finland. Political Psychology, n/a(n/a). https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12917 Sinkkonen, H.-M., & Kyttälä, M. (2014). Experiences of Finnish teachers working with immigrant students. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 29(2), 167–183. Taylor, B. B. (2024). Policy Effects on Immigrant Integration Education in Finland-Swedish Schools [Manuscript submitted in preparation]. Taylor, B. B., Acquah, E. O., & Hilli, C. (2023). Interactivity and Digital Learning Resources: A Scoping Review [Manuscript submitted for publication]. Taylor, B. B., Wingren, M., Bengs, A., Katz, H., & Acquah, E. (2023). Educators’ perspectives related to preparatory education and integration training for immigrants in Finland. Teaching and Teacher Education, 128, 104129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104129

As a result of migration from Arabic-majority countries to Europe over the past decades, there is currently a significant Arabic-speaking population in Europe (UNESCO, 2019; Walldoff, 2017). This has important implications for the maintenance of the Arabic language in the European diaspora and, in turn, also for schools across Europe. Currently, Arabic is taught as a ‘mother tongue’ in mainstream schools in several European countries, such as Finland, Germany, and Sweden (Alisaari et al., 2023; Soukah, 2022). In fact, Arabic is the language within so-called mother tongue education in Sweden with the highest number of participants (Walldoff, 2017). Meanwhile, in countries such as Belgium and Norway, Arabic language teaching is relegated to community-based supplementary schools in the evenings and afternoons (Steenwegen et al., 2022; Vedøy & Vassenden, 2020). As such, access to Arabic language teaching varies significantly between countries (ElHawari, 2021). As a response to the limited access to Arabic language education combined with the increased access to digital resources and the COVID-19 pandemic, an increasing number of students are enrolling in online Arabic language education (Hilmi, 2021). Across the diverse provisions for Arabic language learning in the European diaspora, there is significant variation in the instruction’s content, objectives, and organisation. For example, ‘mother tongue teaching’ in Finland and Sweden is regulated by a government-developed and standardised curriculum. Community-based education provided in supplementary schools – either online or onsite – has much greater autonomy to develop the content, objectives, and organisation (Baldridge et al., 2017; Steenwegen et al., 2022).

Based on four distinct ethnographic research projects exploring Arabic teaching in different settings, this symposium offers extensive empirical insight into and analyses of Arabic ‘mother tongue teaching’ in Finland and Sweden, supplementary Arabic language teaching in Belgium, and transnational online Arabic language teaching. Based on findings from the four studies, the symposium explores how different forms of organising Arabic teaching shape the teaching of Arabic, students’ and teachers’ experiences and identity formation. Furthermore, we discuss the ethical dimensions of ethnographic research into Arabic teaching in Europe, considering the increasingly politicized environment where research focusing on languages associated with recent migration operates in today’s Europe.

Community-based educational initiatives (CBEI) serves as an umbrella term to encompass all types of complementary and/or supplementary education, organised by and for various ethnic-cultural minoritized groups. These initiatives are bottom-up learning environments offering not only support for minoritized youth in their mainstream academic studies, but also providing (positive) recognition of their ethno-cultural identity and familial and community heritage (Baldridge et al., 2017; Steenwegen et al., 2022). Existing ethnographic studies have documented the classes organised in these initiatives, which range from homework support (Hall, 2002) and mathematics instruction, to language classes. These last type of classes, mother tongue or heritage language learning (under which we can document Arabic supplementary schooling), serve as an important example of minoritized communities organising their own (supplementary) education specifically to fill in gaps they experience in their children’s education; This is particularly important in contexts where mainstream education often caters to the cultural (religious and linguistic) needs of dominant ethnic majority groups but fail to be as sensitive to similar needs among minoritized communities (Clycq, 2017; Van Praag et al., 2016; Yosso 2005). Some research has been conducted to document both the organisational nature of these CBEI and the motivations of minoritized communities to organise these schools (Steenwegen et al., 2022). Yet, the processes within these initiatives, the resources they provide, and the potential impact on the educational trajectories of minoritized youth, all remain largely unknown. The paper(s) presented as part of this symposium on Arabic schooling offer new insight into the bottom-up, grassroot, educational organising various (Arabic) communities are involved in. The research took place in Flanders, a particularly interesting context to study educational initiatives as this Flemish speaking region of Belgium is notably marked by one of the largest, and quite tenacious, ethnic achievement gaps in education in Europe. Through extensive qualitative observations and interviews conducted with students, teachers, and organisers, across various CBEI, we offer new insight into how these initiatives serve as important networks of support for minoritized youth. We present these CBEI through the lens of the community-cultural wealth framework (Yosso, 2005) and offer an expansion of this framework with resources that contain the transnational nature of many of the CBEI included in this research. We also attempt to showcase the importance and impact of these (third) spaces through centring the words and experiences of minoritized young people attending these Arabic schools.

Baldridge, B., Beck, N., Medina, J., & Reeves, M. (2017). Toward a New Understanding of Community-Based Education: The Role of Community-Based Educational Spaces in Disrupting Inequality for Minoritized Youth. Review of Research in Education, 41, 381-402. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X16688622 Clycq, N. (2017). ‘We value your food but not your language’: Education systems and nation-building processes in Flanders. European Educational Research Journal, 16(4), 407-424. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904116668885 Hall, K. A. O., K.: Zulfiqar, M.: Tan, J. E. C. (2002). 'This is our School': provision, purpose and pedagogy of supplementary schooling in Leeds and Oslo. British Educational Research Journal, 28(3), 399-418. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920220137467 Steenwegen, J., Clycq, N., & Vanhoof, J. (2022). How and why minoritised communities self-organise education: a review study. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2021.2022458 Van Praag, L., Stevens, P. A. J., & Van Houtte, M. (2016). ‘No more Turkish music!’ The acculturation strategies of teachers and ethnic minority students in Flemish schools. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 42(8), 1353-1370. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2015.1103171 Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69-91. https://doi.org/10.1080/1361332052000341006

In countries where heritage language education is not accessible through mainstream education, diaspora communities rely on community-based heritage language education. For example, Arabic-speaking children across Europe attend community-based heritage language education to maintain their heritage language. With the development of communication technologies, the number of heritage language schools offering digital Arabic language education is increasing (Hilmi, 2021). However, there is still a lack of research on community-based digital Arabic heritage language education. Hence, the current paper investigates the following research question: What characterizes the linguistic repertoire of five heritage language learners of Arabic and how does their teacher capitalize and expand on these repertoires in her teaching? This research question was explored through a digital linguistic ethnography over four months in an online Arabic heritage language school. Digital linguistic ethnography is interested in how people use language, interact, and construct communities, knowledge, and identities, through and influenced by digital technologies (Varis & Hou, 2020). The digital linguistic ethnography was conducted through observation, interviews with one teacher and five students, and the collection of identity portraits and other relevant documents. The participating school was located in the USA and offered Arabic lessons both onsite and online with students and teachers participating from different parts of the world. The participant students were participating from different parts of the USA, while the teacher was participating from Italy. In the analysis of the empirical material, we adopted a translinguistic perspective on language, which means that language and bilingualism are considered dynamic and must not be seen as two separate systems and structures (García & Li, 2014). Thus, multilinguals only have one linguistic repertoire from which they strategically draw from to make sense of their multilingual. The analysis shows that the five students had a complex linguistic repertoire, including competence in English, Levantine Arabic, Modern Standard Arabic, and Spanish. Moreover, the analysis shows how the teacher capitalized and expanded on the students’ linguistic repertoires through the use of Modern Standard Arabic, varieties of Levantine Arabic and English. Hence, translanguaging was purposely used as a pedagogical strategy to teach the multiglossic and multidialectal Arabic language. This lead to a teaching characterized by flexible language use, where teacher and students drew on all of their resources to promote language learning and support the students in making sense of their translingual world (Garcia & Wei, 2014).

Garcia, O., & W. Li. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education. Palgrave Macmillan. Hilmi, D. (2021). Impact of Arabic online learning in the perspective of how the brain learns. Ijaz Arabi Journal of Arabic Learning, 4, 59-73. Varis, P. & Hou, M. (2020). Digtial approaches in linguistic ethnography. In K. Tusting (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of linguistic ethnography. Routledge.

In this presentation, the concept translanguaging space (Li, 2011; Zhu et al., 2017) is used to study classroom interaction in an Arabic Mother Tongue Instruction (MTI) classroom in Sweden. MTI is an elective school subject with its own syllabus. Students in primary and secondary school have the right to MTI with some restrictions: For example, the students need to already have basic knowledge in the language in question and at least five students have to enrol in MTI in order for the municipality to be required to organize it. The case of MTI in Arabic here makes translanguaging space relevant for the study of classroom interaction in relation to the diglossic situation between Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) and colloquial varieties of Arabic. The aim of this paper is to study classroom interaction in MTI in Arabic as a translanguaging space. The study is part of a larger project on MTI in Sweden which is carried out in the form of action research combined with linguistic ethnography. The material used is from one Arabic MTI teacher and students in grade three and consists of fieldnotes, audio recordings from classroom observations and one teacher interview. The use of the concept translanguaging space, understood as an arena for translanguaging and a space created through translanguaging (Li, 2011), highlights the seamless shuttling between different varieties of Arabic, which is natural and necessary in Arabic MTI classrooms. The diglossic situation in Arabic means that while all students need to learn MSA, the challenges are greater for students with varieties that diverge more from the teacher’s variety. In the current case, the teacher’s Levantine variety was closer to that of some of the students, while other dialects diverged more. The critical and creative aspects inherent in translanguaging space put issues of student engagement and participation in focus. In this case, the teacher was in the centre and students were rather passive, answering questions and performing given tasks. Although the dominance of MSA and Levantine may be interpreted as a monolingual classroom policy, the fact that both Swedish and other dialects were accepted shows that the diglossic situation opened up the classroom as a translanguaging space.

Li Wei (2011). Moment analysis and translanguaging space: Discursive construction of identities by multilingual Chinese youth in Britain. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 1222–1235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.07.035 Zhu, H., Li, W. & Lyons, A. (2017). Polish shop(ping) as translanguaging space. Social semiotics, 27, 411-433. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2017.1334390

Minority mother tongue instruction is a part of the Finnish school system (see Tainio & Kallioniemi 2019) yet there is relatively little participatory research on the subject. When it comes to subjects such as Arabic, traditional disciplinary foci and researchers’ linguistic repertoires partly explain the situation. However, also the ethical frameworks that regulate classroom research play a role: especially for studies that are interested in interactional data, obtaining necessary research permits is cumbersome and embarking on a research project requires considerable resources both time- and funding-wise. In this presentation, we reflect on our experiences from MIGDIA project, a five-year ethnographic research project with a focus on minority mother tongue instruction in Arabic. We discuss research ethics both in the data collection phase and in connection with publishing research results in terms of everyday ethics and formalised research ethics (cf. Smette 2019). We open up linguistic and cultural challenges of data collection by asking what kind of research projects the current ethical guidelines have been created for and what kind of participant they assume (see Everri et al. 2020). We also ask whether the current regulations and research ethical practices actually contribute to the ethical implementation of research in multilingual and multicultural contexts. The ethical considerations of the research are not limited only to the data collection, but also to the publication of the research results. By this we do not mean just ethical treatment of research participants, but the increasingly politicized environment where educational research on Arabic mother tongue instruction operates for instance in Finland. The increased political influence of far-right parties has brought services provided for linguistic and cultural minorities under scrutiny and criticism (for background, see Petterson 2020). Against this background, we reflect on our research findings. Although optional mother tongue instruction is a part of the mainstream education, in many ways it operates in the fringes of Finnish educational system (see Ylijokipii et al. 2022). With our ethnographic lens, we are in a position of seeing also the linguistically and culturally specific details more clearly. We discuss researcher’s ethical role in knowledge production and identify ethically sustainable practices for research in increasingly polarized societies.

Everri, M., Heitmayer, M., Paulius, Y.-S. & Saadi, L. (2020). Ethical challenges of using video for qualitative research and ethnography. State of the art and guidelines. In T. Lähdesmäki, E. Koskinen-Koivisto, V. L. A. Čeginskas, & A. K. Koistinen (eds.), Challenges and solutions in ethnographic research. Ethnography with a twist, 68–83. London: Routledge. Pettersson, K. (2020). The discursive denial of racism by Finnish populist radical right politicians accused of anti-muslim hate-speech. In Norocel, O.C., Hellström, A. & Jørgensen, M.B. (eds.) Nostalgia and hope: Intersections between politics of culture, welfare, and migration in Europe, 35–50. IMISCOE Research Series. Springer, Cham. Smette, I. (2020). Ethics and access when consent must come first. Consequences of formalised research ethics for ethnographic research in schools. In Bushner, H. & Fox, A. (eds.) Implementing ethics in educational ethnography. Regulation and practice, 51–63. London: Routledge. Tainio. L. & Kallioniemi, A. (eds.) (2019). Koulujen monet kielet ja uskonnot. Selvitys vähemmistöäidinkielten ja -uskontojen sekä suomi ja ruotsi toisena kielenä -opetuksen tilanteesta eri koulutusasteilla. Valtioneuvoston selvitys ja tutkimustoiminnan julkaisusarja 11/2019. Yli-Jokipii, M., Rissanen, I. & Kuusisto, E. (2022) Oman äidinkielen opettaja osana kouluyhteisöä. Kasvatus, 53(4), 350–363.