Conference Agenda

Attitudes towards language and multilingualism play a central role in students’ academic achievement and in the acquisition of the language of instruction. Teachers’ expectations, shaped by their knowledge and attitudes, have been shown to influence students’ academic performance (Rosenthal, 2010). Consequently, the learning trajectories of multilingual students are affected by teachers’ beliefs about pupils’ home languages and their perceived usefulness (Barros et al., 2020). Research in language education has documented a wide range of teacher attitudes towards multilingualism. Some studies report that teachers consider pupils’ home languages to have no place in the classroom (De Angelis, 2011) and believe that incorporating other languages into the curriculum hinders the acquisition of the language of schooling (Pulinx et al., 2015). Other studies, however, indicate generally positive views of multilingualism as a concept, alongside negative perceptions of migrant languages or concerns about practical constraints (Lee & Oxelson, 2006; De Angelis, 2011).

Previous research shows that multilingual training and experience are associated with more positive teacher attitudes towards multilingualism: pre-service teachers with multilingual backgrounds are more likely to value pupils’ home languages as resources (Peercy, 2016), and targeted professional development can further strengthen such views (Ellis, 2004; Lee & Oxelson, 2006; Fischer & Lahmann, 2020). Teaching context also plays a role, with more favourable attitudes reported in schools with higher numbers of multilingual students (Bosch & Doedel, 2024), as well as schools where multilingual practices are actively promoted (Van Ruijven & Ytsma, 2008). Accordingly, challenging monolingual beliefs is essential for developing both positive attitudes and effective multilingual pedagogies that build on learners’ full linguistic repertoires (Garcia & Wei, 2014).

Against this backdrop, the current symposium approaches recent developments in the field language attitudes and multilingual educational practices, focusing on situations where research on multilingual pedagogies is less readily available: longitudinal studies on the implementation of multilingual strategies in primary education, teachers’ views on multilingual practices in vocational education, and translanguaging in EFL writing classrooms in higher education. With this symposium, researchers from Finland, Norway, and the Netherlands convene to critically appraise the implications that their research has for teaching in linguistically diverse classrooms across European countries.

The first paper reports on a longitudinal qualitative study of a professional development intervention on multilingualism in Dutch primary schools. Based on repeated interviews with teachers across multiple schools, the study traces how teachers’ attitudes towards pupils’ linguistic repertoires evolve over time, identifying multilingualism as an individual asset, a challenge, and a pedagogical priority, while also revealing the difficulties of translating positive attitudes into sustained classroom practices.

The second paper examines vocational teachers’ views on multilingualism and potential language-restrictive policies in upper secondary classrooms in Norway and Finland. Comparing two Nordic contexts, the findings show differing beliefs about whether only the language of schooling should be used or whether students’ first languages support learning, with justifications ranging from inclusion and learning support to strengthening proficiency in the language of instruction.

The third paper presents an experimental study conducted in Chinese higher education that compares translanguaging and traditional EMI pedagogies in English writing classrooms. Drawing on questionnaires and students’ written texts, the study demonstrates that translanguaging pedagogy may lead to higher writing performance and shows that increased motivation and reduced anxiety fully mediate this effect.

Teachers’ attitudes towards pupils’ linguistic repertoires significantly affect multilingual pupils’ academic achievement, making it critical to examine teachers’ attitudes, knowledge, and practical skills in this area. Often, migrant and minority languages are viewed negatively and considered detrimental for education (Pulinx et al., 2017). Implementing inclusive multilingual practices that value pupils’ home languages requires further professional development to equip educators with the necessary resources and knowledge for teaching in linguistically diverse settings (Kirsch et al., 2020). Such professional development modules that cover multilingual practices have been shown to foster more positive attitudes towards multilingualism in schools directly after (Gorter & Arocena, 2020; Lorenz et al., 2021; Schroedler & Fischer, 2020; van der Wildt et al., 2017). However, despite the positive impact on attitudes towards multilingualism, there is little longitudinal data on the sustainability of these attitudinal changes. Our study therefore explores teachers' attitudes towards multilingualism over time and emphasises the significance of professional development and extensive collaboration with teachers in developing and enacting multilingual approaches like translanguaging (García & Baetens-Beardsmore, 2009). Using thematic analysis on 15 longitudinal qualitative semi-structured interviews with 12 teachers across six different schools and two interview rounds, we showed three dominant themes in participants' perceptions of multilingualism: as an individual asset, a challenge, and a priority. We found varying degrees of attention to and engagement with multilingualism in schools over time. Despite positive attitudes towards multilingualism, integrating these attitudes into daily routines remains challenging. We highlight the complex interplay of teacher attitudes within the broader educational context, emphasizing the importance of continuous longitudinal studies of how attitudes towards multilingualism evolve and are enacted in educational practices.

García, O. and Baetens-Beardsmore, H. (2009). Bilingual education in the 21st century: a global perspective. Wiley-Blackwell. Gorter, D. and Arocena, E. (2020). Teachers’ beliefs about multilingualism in a course on translanguaging. System, 92:102272. Kirsch, C., Aleksic, G., Mortini, S., and Andersen, K. (2020). Developing multilingual practices in early childhood education through professional development in Luxembourg. International Multilingual Research Journal, 14(4):319–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2020.1730023. Lorenz, E., Krulatz, A., and Torgersen, E. N. (2021). Embracing linguistic and cultural diversity in multilingual eal classrooms: The impact of professional development on teacher beliefs and practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 105:103428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103428. Pulinx, R., Van Avermaet, P., and Agirdag, O. (2017). Silencing linguistic diversity: The extent, the determinants and consequences of the monolingual beliefs of Flemish teachers. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 20(5):542–556. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2015.1102860. Schroedler, T. and Fischer, N. (2020). The role of beliefs in teacher professionalisation for multilingual classroom settings. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(1):49–72. https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2019-0040. Van der Wildt, A., Van Avermaet, P., and Van Houtte, M. (2017). Opening up towards children’s languages: Enhancing teachers’ tolerant practices towards multilingual. School Effectiveness and School Improvement: An International Journal of Research, Policy and Practice, 28(1):136–152.

The right to use one’s first language is a part of linguistic human rights, and all languages have intrinsic value (Skutnabb-Kangas, 2017). Furthermore, it is widely acknowledged that first languages have an important influence on learning (Cummins, 2021). Moreover, strong first language skills are positively associated with learning the language of schooling (Relyea & Amendum, 2019). This study is part of a larger research project investigating teachers’ beliefs, knowledge, and practices related to teaching culturally and linguistically diverse learners. For this sub-study, we focused on one open-ended question from two online surveys (conducted in Norway 2023–2024 and in Finland 2021) that elicited teachers’ self-reported views on multilingualism and, in particular, on potential policies that would restrict the language used in lessons to only the language of schooling. We also investigated the participants’ justifications for these policies. The aim was to compare attitudes and practices in two Nordic countries with similar educational values and curricula. We surveyed vocational teachers in upper secondary schools in Norway (n = 114) and Finland (n = 614). Our preliminary results indicate that teachers have varying understanding of whether the language of instruction should be used as the only language for learning, or if they allow the students to use other languages. Views on multilingualism: use of L1 support learning, those who wanted to restrict the use of language, justified by learning the language of instruction better. In the presentation, we discuss the similarities and differences between the two contexts in more detail.

Cummins, J. (2021). Rethinking the education of multilingual learners: A critical analysis of theoretical claims. Multilingual Matters. Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2017). Language rights. In W. E. Wright, S. Boun, & O. García (Eds.), The handbook of bilingual and multilingual education (pp. 185–202). Wiley. Relyea, J. E., & Amendum, S. J. (2020). English reading growth in Spanish-speaking bilingual students: Moderating effect of English proficiency on cross-linguistic influence. Child Development, 91(4), 1150–1165. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13288

In the last two decades, the traditional monolingual ideology of foreign language teaching is being challenged as growing societal and educational multilingualism has received increasing attention from applied linguistics (Jiang & Zhang, 2023). As a result, traditional English Medium Instruction (EMI) programs are being reassessed based on new insights into multilingual learners' language development. Pedagogical translanguaging (Cenoz & Gorter, 2021), as a relatively new multilingual paradigm that emphasizes multilingual speakers' comprehensive use of their linguistic resources, may provide new perspectives for foreign language teaching in settings that were traditionally monolingual. This paper focuses on writing in a foreign language in Chinese higher education, as it is a complex productive skill that challenges students (Fang et al., 2023). To explore teaching and acquisition of these complex skills, we compared translanguaging and EMI pedagogies in 5 classes of learners following an English writing class at a Chinese university. With an experimental design including questionnaires and students' compositions, we explored the differences between the translanguaging and EMI groups in terms of their writing performance, motivation and anxiety. The results indicated that: 1) the translanguaging group scored higher in writing than the EMI group; 2) students were more motivated and less anxious post-intervention; 3) linear regression analysis indicated that higher motivation and lower anxiety were associated with better performance; 4) the effects of EMI and translanguaging teaching methods on performance were fully mediated by motivation and anxiety. The study illustrates how EMI writing classes can be enriched by a pedagogical translanguaging perspective.

Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. (2021). Pedagogical translanguaging. Cambridge, UK: University Press. Fang, F., Jiang, L., & Yang, J. (2023). To impart knowledge or to adhere to policy: Unpacking language ideologies and practices in Chinese EMI courses through a translanguaging lens. Language Teaching Research, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688231183771 Jiang, A. L., & Zhang, L. J. (2023). Understanding knowledge construction in a Chinese university EMI classroom: A translanguaging perspective. System, 114, 103024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2023.103024