Conference Agenda

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qualitative analyses, in particular critical discourse analyses (CDA, Foucault 1991, Wodak & Meyer 2016), of historical documents on the topic of autochthonous and allochthonous minority languages and multilingualism in educational institutions, current school and higher education laws,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.