Conference Agenda
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 19th Aug 2026, 21:29:27 EET
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
31 SES 07 A: Educators in Multilingual Contexts
Paper Session | ||
    | ||
31. LEd – Network on Language and Education
Paper Designing Professional Learning for Multilingual Classrooms: Dialogic Pedagogy and Teachers’ Orientations to Linguistic Diversity 1: University of Reading, United Kingdom; 2: Indiana University Indianapolis, USA; 3: University of Nebraska Lincoln, USA Presenting Author:This paper reports the outcomes of a participatory action research project in which a teacher educator collaborated with a team of expert advisory teachers to design an online professional learning toolkit for primary school (ages 4–11) teachers of multilingual learners. The toolkit was underpinned by principles of critical socio-cultural pedagogy (Teemant et al., 2016; Vygotsky, 1978) and sought to promote dialogic, talk-rich classroom practices alongside more positive, asset-based orientations to linguistic and cultural diversity. The research had two aims: (1) to combine research and practitioner expertise in the development of an online professional learning toolkit for teachers supporting multilingual learners; and (2) to explore the extent to which, and ways in which, this toolkit might promote positive orientations to diversity within schools serving multilingual populations. Accordingly, the research questions asked: (1) What are schools’ and teachers’ perceptions of the social and English language learning needs of multilingual pupils? and (2) Can an online professional learning tool for teaching multilingual learners enhance schools’ positive orientations towards these pupils? Multilingual pupils—those learning English as an additional language—now constitute approximately 21% of England’s primary school population, yet persistent patterns of under-attainment remain (Strand & Hessel, 2018). Provision for these pupils is constrained by limited and short-term funding, teachers frequently report feeling under-prepared to meet their needs, and there is a lack of classroom-based research to inform pedagogical practice (Burner & Carlsen, 2023). These challenges are not unique to England but are shared across Europe and by other English-speaking contexts where classrooms are increasingly linguistically and culturally diverse (Raud & Orehhova, 2022). Research indicates that schools with positive orientations to diversity are more likely to invest in pedagogical change, respond effectively to multilingual learners, and promote their social and academic success (Aldridge & McChesney, 2018; Heikamp et al., 2020). However, there is limited understanding of how professional learning opportunities might actively cultivate such asset-based orientations among teachers. As a result, multilingual pupils’ school experiences remain uneven and inequitable. This study is informed by a growing body of transnational research (US and Europe) demonstrating that when teachers design classroom experiences that are intentionally collaborative, talk-rich, and culturally sustaining, critical socio-cultural practice can transcend national curricula and lead to improved social and academic outcomes for multilingual learners (see for e.g. Flynn et al., 2024; Teemant et al., 2011). Complementary work by Viesca et al. (2024) identifies specific teacher orientations as necessary conditions for school climates that affirm, advocate for, and sustain diverse learners. Theoretically, this paper brings together critical socio-cultural pedagogy and positive orientations to diversity, linking pedagogical practice with the broader belief systems and dispositions that shape school environments. Critical socio-cultural pedagogy provides a lens for understanding classroom talk as a socially situated practice. This perspective informed the toolkit’s emphasis on dialogic oracy practices that position multilingual pupils as active meaning-makers and recognise their full linguistic repertoires as pedagogical resources rather than deficits (Freire, 1970,1993). Theories of positive orientations to diversity complement this focus by foregrounding the role of teacher beliefs, dispositions, and affective stances in shaping how linguistic and cultural difference is interpreted and enacted in practice: openness, interconnectedness, agency, curiosity and creativity (Viesca et al., 2024 p. 64). These ideas underpinned the toolkit’s explicit attention to fostering asset-based mindsets among teachers, encouraging multilingualism to be viewed as cognitive, cultural, and linguistic capital. Together, these theoretical strands frame the toolkit not simply as a collection of strategies, but as an intervention aimed at reshaping teachers’ understandings of language learning and classroom interaction within a more inclusive and dialogic school culture. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The study adopted a participatory action research (PAR) design, involving iterative consultation with teachers and school leaders in primary schools (ages 4–11) with at least 10% multilingual learners in one county in the south of England. Ground-up planning for research activity was driven by collaborative conversations between the researcher and the advisory team of seven expert multilingual teachers. PAR was selected because it actively involves those most affected by the research outcomes in shaping the focus, design, and development of the project, and because its cycles of action and reflection align closely with practitioner enquiry and professional learning (Cornish et al., 2023) . The project was conducted across four phases. Phase 1 involved semi-structured interviews (n = 15) with leadership teams and coordinators responsible for multilingual pupils in 15 primary schools. These interviews explored schools’ perceptions of multilingual pupils’ social and academic needs, their decision-making processes in response to these needs, and their preferences for professional learning design. In parallel, the research team initiated a series of reflective knowledge-exchange meetings with the expert advisory teachers, which continued throughout the project. Phase 2 focused on the collaborative design of the online toolkit, integrating schools’ articulated needs with research on critical socio-cultural pedagogy. The toolkit was hosted on a password-protected platform already familiar to schools within the county. Phase 3 comprised a three-month pilot in which nine schools used the toolkit in ways aligned with their school development priorities. Data collected during this phase included a pre-pilot survey capturing schools’ intentions for toolkit use, and structured classroom observations conducted by the research team (n = 15). Phase 4 centred on reflection and evaluation, involving post-pilot interviews with leadership teams in the nine pilot schools (n= 9) and reflective interviews between the researcher and the expert advisory teacher team (n=4) . Data sources included interview transcripts, pre-pilot surveys, structured classroom observation records, and reflective notes from the ongoing knowledge-exchange meetings. Qualitative analysis focused on identifying indications of change in teacher mindset and practice over time. Pre- and post-pilot interview data from the nine pilot schools were compared and triangulated with classroom observation and reflective meeting data. A hybrid coding approach was employed (Swain, 2018), using domains derived from Viesca et al.’s framework of positive orientations to diversity for deductive coding, alongside inductive coding to capture contextualised nuances in teachers’ beliefs, dispositions, and pedagogical practices. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The toolkit was designed around five interrelated principles—School Belonging, Talk-Rich, Inquiry-Led, Collaborative, and Small-Group learning—which participating schools were required to engage with explicitly to use the resource. These principles reflected and acknowledged existing empirical evidence that oracy-oriented, culturally sustaining pedagogies support multilingual learners’ social and academic development (Teemant et al., 2024). Although schools used the toolkit in different ways, all reported shifts in classroom practice were characterised by increased pupil talk and a corresponding reduction in teacher talk. Teachers observed that these changes supported multilingual learners more confident participation in small-group interactions, using new vocabulary, articulating questions when meaning was unclear, and listening actively while contributing opinions. Across schools, greater use of structured talk created more opportunities for multilingual pupils to position themselves as contributors to collective meaning-making. Teachers also reported changes in their professional practices and dispositions, indicating shifts towards more positive orientations to linguistic diversity. Working with smaller groups and speaking less prompted teachers to adopt more active listening roles and to attend more closely to pupils’ linguistic and conceptual resources, reflecting greater openness, curiosity, and respect for pupils’ meaning-making. Teachers described feeling greater ‘permission’ to prioritise talk-based learning activities, signalling increased agency in enacting asset-based pedagogies without concern for written evidence. Overall, the findings demonstrate how structured knowledge exchange between researchers and practitioners can support shifts in both mindset and practice through an online professional learning tool grounded in dialogic, critical socio-cultural pedagogy. The study contributes insight into how professional learning design can encourage positive orientations to linguistic diversity, while also illuminating the individual, school, and district-level conditions that may enable or constrain such change. As such, the paper offers practice-oriented evidence relevant to teachers, teacher educators, and policymakers concerned with professional learning and multilingual education across Europe. References Aldridge, J. M., & McChesney, K. (2018). The relationships between school climate and adolescent mental health and wellbeing: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Research, 88, 121-145. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2018.01.012 Burner, T., & Carlsen, C. (2023). Teachers' multilingual beliefs and practices in English classrooms: A scoping review. Review of Education, 11(2), e3407. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3407 Cornish, F., Breton, N., Moreno-Tabarez, U., Delgado, J., Rua, M., de-Graft Aikins, A., & Hodgetts, D. (2023). Participatory action research. Nature Reviews Methods Primers, 3(1), 34. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-023-00214-1 Flynn, N., Teemant, A., Viesca, K. M., & Perumal, R. (2024). Effective Teachers of Multilingual Learners: A Mixed‐Method Study of UK and US Critical Sociocultural Teaching Practices. TESOL Quarterly, 58(1), 195-221. Freire, P. (1970,1993). Pedagogy of the Oppressed (M. Ramos Bergman, Trans.). Penguin Random House. Heikamp, T., Phalet, K., Van Laar, C., & Verschueren, K. (2020). To belong or not to belong: Protecting minority engagement in the face of discrimination. International Journal of Psychology, 55(5), 779-788. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12706 Raud, N., & Orehhova, O. (2022). Training teachers for multilingual primary schools in Europe: key components of teacher education curricula. International Journal of Multilingualism, 19(1), 50-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2020.1718678 Strand, S., & Hessel, A. (2018). English as an Additional Language, proficiency in English and pupils’educational achievement:An analysis of Local Authority data. The Bell Educational Trust Limited. Swain, J. (2018). A Hybrid Approach to Thematic Analysis in Qualitative Research: Using a Practical Example. SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526435477 Teemant, A., Hausman, C. S., & Kigamwa, J. C. (2016). The effects of higher order thinking on student achievement and English proficiency. INTESOL, 13(1). https://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/intesol/article/view/21254 Teemant, A., Sherman, B., & Tyra, S. (2024). The long arc of learning: Perspectives and innovations from 20 years of U.S. National Professional Development Program projects. TESOL Quarterly, 15(e872). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.872 Teemant, A., Wink, J., & Tyra, S. (2011). Effects of coaching on teacher use of sociocultural instructional practices Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 683-693. Viesca, K. M., Ailsaari, J., Flynn, N., Hammer, S., Lemmrich, S., Routarinne, S., & Teemant, A. (2024). Orientations for co-constructing a positive climate for diversity in teaching and learning. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society : the development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.). Harvard University Press 31. LEd – Network on Language and Education
Paper Supporting Educator Agency in Multilingual Preschool Settings: A Qualitative Study University of Primorska, Slovenia Presenting Author:In contemporary educational contexts marked by increasing linguistic and cultural diversity, early childhood education plays a crucial role in shaping learners’ attitudes towards languages and diversity. Globalisation, migration, and transnational mobility have contributed to the growing presence of multilingual and multicultural settings, making language awareness and plurilingual competence key educational objectives from the earliest stages of schooling. Research consistently highlights that children begin forming perceptions about languages and speakers at a very young age, which underscores the importance of systematically fostering positive attitudes towards linguistic diversity in preschool education (Bratož & Sila, 2022; Kozina et al., 2024). Language awareness is commonly understood as a reflective and conscious sensitivity to language as a system, including an awareness of linguistic diversity, similarities and differences between languages, and the social and cultural meanings attached to them. Promoting language awareness in early childhood supports not only children’s linguistic development but also their intercultural understanding, empathy, and openness towards others. Pluralistic approaches to language education, which expose learners to multiple languages and cultures without prioritising a single target language, have been identified as particularly effective in achieving these aims (Beacco et al., 2016; Kozina et al., 2024). While much of the existing research has focused on children’s responses and learning outcomes, increasing attention is being paid to the role of educators as key mediators of multilingual and plurilingual practices. Teachers’ beliefs, attitudes, and professional competences significantly shape how linguistic diversity is addressed and valued in educational settings. Reflective practice and teacher agency are therefore central to the successful implementation of multilingual pedagogies, particularly in contexts characterised by sociolinguistic complexity, such as border regions or multilingual communities (Baloh & Bratož, 2019; Žefran et al., 2025). Educators who are supported in reflecting on their own linguistic identities and pedagogical roles are more likely to adopt inclusive and linguistically responsive practices (Rutar, 2014). Professional development has been identified as a critical factor in empowering educators to implement multilingual approaches with confidence. Studies conducted in early childhood education settings show that targeted professional development programmes can foster educators’ awareness of multilingualism, encourage experimentation with plurilingual activities, and strengthen their sense of agency in multilingual classrooms (Kirsch et al., 2020). Within this context, the Erasmus+ project Agentive builds upon existing research in language awareness and plurilingual education by placing a strong emphasis on educator agency in linguistically and culturally diverse learning environments. The project aims to support both pre-service and in-service teachers in developing the knowledge, skills, and reflective capacities needed to implement multilingual and intercultural practices in early childhood and primary education. Agentive develops innovative, research-informed multilingual teaching materials and activities designed to foster language awareness, plurilingual competence, and early literacy across multiple languages. A key feature of the project is its focus on professional learning through workshops, collaborative reflection, and classroom-based implementation, positioning educators not merely as users of prepared materials but as active agents in adapting and shaping pedagogical practices to their specific educational contexts. The present study integrates language awareness research, plurilingual education, and teacher professional development. By focusing on preschool educators’ experiences with implementing multilingual activities developed within the Agentive project, the study seeks to contribute to a deeper understanding of how educators perceive, enact, and evaluate plurilingual practices in early childhood education. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The study adopts a qualitative research design aimed at gaining an in-depth understanding of preschool educators’ experiences with implementing multilingual and intercultural activities in their everyday practice. The sample consists of 20 educators employed in Slovenian preschool institutions, representing diverse professional backgrounds and levels of teaching experience. Participation in the study was voluntary and embedded within a professional development initiative conducted as part of the Erasmus+ project Agentive. Data collection is organised into three interconnected phases. In the first phase, participants attend a structured professional development workshop in which they are introduced to selected multilingual and intercultural activities developed within the Agentive project. The workshop combines theoretical input on language awareness and plurilingual education with practical demonstrations, collaborative tasks, and opportunities for guided reflection. In the second phase, educators implement the presented activities in their own teaching practice over a defined period, allowing them to adapt the materials and approaches to their specific institutional contexts and to the needs of their children. This phase enables educators to engage actively with the activities and to reflect on their feasibility, relevance, and pedagogical impact. In the final phase, data are collected through focus group discussions conducted online. All discussions were audio-recorded to ensure accuracy of the information. The recordings were then summarised into structured analytical memos that capture key themes, educators’ reflections, and illustrative quotes relevant to the research questions. The data were subsequently analysed using thematic analysis, following an inductive approach to identify recurring patterns and themes across the dataset. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The findings indicate predominantly positive attitudes towards the multilingual activities, highlighting increased awareness of linguistic diversity, and perceived benefits for children’s engagement and inclusion. At the same time, educators identified areas for further development, including the need for additional training and practical guidance. The results point to the importance of sustained professional support and reflective practice in fostering educators’ agency in multilingual early childhood education. References Bratož, S., & Sila, A. (2022). Analysing preschoolers’ awareness of linguistic and cultural diversity through the DivCon model. Baloh, B., & Bratož, S. (2019). Refleksija vloge učitelja v čezmejnem prostoru. Razprave in Gradivo: Revija za Narodnostna Vprasanja, (83), 5-19. Beacco, J.-C., Byram, M., Cavalli, M., Coste, D., Cuenat, M. E., Goullier, F., & Panthier, J. (2016). Guide for the development and implementation of curricula for plurilingual and intercultural education. Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/16806ae621 Kirsch, C., Aleksić, G., Mortini, S., & Andersen, K. (2020). Developing multilingual practices in early childhood education through professional development in Luxembourg. International Multilingual Research Journal, 14(4), 319-337. Kozina, Š. J., Bratož, S., & Žefran, M. (2024). Fostering Language Awareness in a Plurilingual Learning Environment. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 14(3), 13-33. Rutar, S. (2014). Multilingual learning and teaching as a principle of inclusive practice. Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies/Sodobna Pedagogika, 65(1). Žefran, M., Bratož, S., & Rutar, S. (2025). Evaluation of a Multilingual Kindergarten Model in Slovenia: Insights from teachers, parents and children. Neofilolog, (64/1), 166-184. 31. LEd – Network on Language and Education
Paper Rethinking Collective Teacher Efficacy for Language Support in Multilingual Early Childhood Education 1: University of Antwerp, Belgium; 2: KU Leuven, Belgium Presenting Author:Collective Teacher Efficacy (CTE) has become a prominent construct in educational effectiveness research and is increasingly invoked in discussions on language education and language support (e.g. Haworth, 2015). CTE refers to the shared belief of a school team in its collective capacity to positively influence student learning (Hattie, 2016). While research frequently associates CTE with improved learning outcomes (Eells, 2011), its conceptual transfer to multilingual educational contexts - particularly early childhood settings - raises important theoretical questions that remain insufficiently addressed. This paper critically examines the applicability of CTE to language support for multilingual learners in early childhood education. Dominant interpretations of CTE in this regard typically rely on relatively stable, school-level conditions such as shared goals, professional coherence, and collective responsibility (Vanbuel & Van den Branden, 2021). However, language development in multilingual contexts is characterised by substantial variability and complexity, shaped by differences in learners’ linguistic repertoires, exposure patterns, and interactional opportunities across contexts (Byers-Heinlein, 2025; Paradis, 2023). These features challenge assumptions of uniform pathways between collective professional capacity and language learning outcomes (Vanbuel & Van den Branden, 2021). The paper argues that the commonly used operationalisation of CTE risks oversimplifying the nature of language support in linguistically diverse classrooms. While strong (collective) beliefs concerning stimulating language development and organisational alignment may be present, they do not necessarily translate into language-support practices that provide learners with sufficiently rich, varied, and sustained linguistic interactions (Duthois & Van Oss, 2025). Language-stimulating interactions are characterised by rich language input, opportunities for language production, and language-related teacher feedback (Peleman et al., 2020; Verhallen & Walst, 2011). Although research has indicated the importance of such interactions for children’s long-term language learning and academic outcomes (Langeloo et al., 2019; Rowe & Snow, 2020), they are less frequently directed at children with additional language needs (Peleman et al., 2020). Moreover, in practice, language support for such learners often relies on a limited range of interactional strategies, restricted syntactic complexity, and a narrow focus on isolated skills (Duthois et al., 2025; Justice et al., 2008). Such practices may inadvertently reinforce dominant norms of language use and competence, rather than engaging with learners’ full linguistic repertoires (Peleman et al., 2020). From this perspective, CTE can be understood as a necessary but insufficient condition for effective language support. The construct captures important aspects of collective professional functioning, yet remains conceptually under-specified with regard to the linguistic and interactional processes through which language learning occurs. In particular, it does not explicitly account for how shared professional beliefs interact with questions of linguistic legitimacy, variation, and responsiveness to individual learner trajectories. The paper proposes a conceptual refinement of CTE for language education by foregrounding the centrality of classroom interaction, linguistic diversity, and meaning-making practices. It argues that the five commonly identified drivers of CTE (Donohoo et al., 2020) require domain-sensitive reinterpretation when applied to language support. Shared goals must include explicit understandings of language development beyond narrow proficiency benchmarks; cohesive teacher knowledge must encompass awareness of linguistic variation and interactional quality; and reflective practices must attend not only to learner outcomes, but also to the nature of classroom discourse and participation as facilitated by the teacher (Vanbuel & Van den Branden, 2021). By repositioning CTE within a framework that foregrounds the complexity of language learning in multilingual contexts, this contribution aims to bridge school-effectiveness research and language education research. The paper does not present empirical data, but offers a theoretical and conceptual analysis intended to stimulate dialogue on how collective professional capacity can be conceptualised in ways that better reflect the realities of multilingual early childhood classrooms. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used This paper adopts a conceptual-analytical methodology, combining theoretical synthesis with reflective analysis of existing research frameworks. Rather than reporting empirical findings, the study interrogates the conceptual alignment between Collective Teacher Efficacy (CTE) and contemporary insights from language education and bilingual development research. The analysis proceeds in three steps. First, a targeted review of the literature on CTE is conducted, with specific attention to how the construct has been operationalised in school-effectiveness research and subsequently applied within language education contexts. This includes an examination of the five commonly identified drivers of CTE and the assumptions underlying their relationship with learning outcomes. Second, insights from research on multilingual language development and individual differences are synthesised to identify points of conceptual tension with dominant CTE frameworks. This body of research highlights substantial variability in learners’ language trajectories, shaped by both child-internal and child-external factors, including quantity and quality of linguistic input, interactional opportunities, and contextual exposure across settings. These insights are used as an analytical lens to evaluate the explanatory scope of CTE when applied to language-support practices. Third, the paper engages in a conceptual mapping exercise, aligning core dimensions of language-support effectiveness - such as interactional richness, linguistic complexity, and responsiveness to individual learners - with the five drivers of CTE. This mapping serves to identify which aspects of language-support practice are captured by existing CTE frameworks and which remain insufficiently theorised. Throughout the analysis, the focus is on early childhood education in linguistically diverse contexts, where language-support trajectories are often embedded within broader classroom practices rather than delivered through isolated interventions. The methodological stance is interpretive and theory-driven, aiming to generate conceptual clarity rather than empirical generalisation. By adopting this approach, the paper contributes to methodological reflection within language education research, illustrating how established school-effectiveness constructs can be critically examined and refined through dialogue with domain-specific theories of language development. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings This paper has argued that Collective Teacher Efficacy, while highly influential in educational effectiveness research, requires conceptual refinement when applied to language support in multilingual early childhood contexts. The analysis suggests that CTE captures important organisational and motivational conditions for collective action, but does not sufficiently account for the linguistic and interactional mechanisms through which language development occurs. For multilingual learners with additional language needs, effective language support depends on more than shared beliefs and professional cohesion. It requires sustained access to high-quality linguistic input, rich interactional opportunities, and pedagogical responsiveness to individual learner trajectories. These elements are only partially addressed within dominant CTE frameworks, which tend to assume relatively uniform pathways between collective capacity and learning outcomes. The paper therefore proposes repositioning CTE as a foundational, but not exhaustive, component of language-support effectiveness. Integrating insights from bilingual development and individual-differences research allows for a more nuanced understanding of how collective professional capacity interacts with language-learning processes. Such an approach foregrounds the importance of explicitly theorising linguistic quality, interaction, and learner heterogeneity within school-level effectiveness models. For research, these conclusions point to the need for closer alignment between school-effectiveness theories and language acquisition research. Future studies should explore how collective efficacy interacts with specific language-support practices and how these relationships vary across learner profiles and contexts. For practice and professional development, the findings highlight the importance of moving beyond generic notions of efficacy towards shared, research-informed understandings of language development. By reframing CTE within a language-sensitive conceptual framework, this paper contributes to ongoing debates within language education on how schools can effectively support multilingual learners, and how collective professional capacity can be theorised in ways that reflect the complexity of language learning in real classrooms. References Byers-Heinlein, K., Kircher, R., & Lew-Williams, C. (2025). A systems framework of bilingual language acquisition: How development, experience, and contexts interact to shape outcomes. Annual Review of Developmental Psychology, 7. Donohoo, J., O'Leary, T., & Hattie, J. (2020). The design and validation of the enabling conditions for collective teacher efficacy scale (EC-CTES). Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 5(2), 147-166. Eells, R.J. (2011). Meta-analysis of the relationship between collective teacher efficacy and student achievement [doctoral dissertation]. Loyola University. Hattie, J. (2016). Third Visible Learning Annual Conference: Mindframes and Maximizers. Washington, DC, July 11, 2016. Haworth, P., McGee, A., & MacIntyre, L. K. (2015). Building a whole school approach and teacher efficacy with English language learners. Teachers and Teaching, 21(2), 164-177. Duthois, T., Montero-Perez, M., Van Avermaet, P., & Vanderlinde, R. (2025). Early childhood education teachers' professional vision of language-stimulating interactions: a mixed-method mobile eye-tracking study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 166, 105199. Duthois, T., & Van Oss, V. (2025). Through the teachers’ eyes: barriers to equitable language stimulating environments in early childhood education a qualitative mobile eye-tracking study. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 1-15. Justice, L. M., Mashburn, A. J., Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2008). Quality of language and literacy instruction in preschool classrooms serving at-risk pupils. Early childhood research quarterly, 23(1), 51-68. Langeloo, A., Mascareño Lara, M., Deunk, M. I., Klitzing, N. F., & Strijbos, J. W. (2019). A systematic review of teacher–child interactions with multilingual young children. Review of Educational Research, 89(4), 536-568. Paradis, J. (2023). Sources of individual differences in the dual language development of heritage bilinguals. Journal of Child Language, 50(4), 793–817. doi:10.1017/S0305000922000708 Peleman, B., Vandenbroeck, M., & Van Avermaet, P. (2020). Early learning opportunities for children at risk of social exclusion. Opening the black box of preschool practice. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 28(1), 21-42. Rowe, M. L., & Snow, C. E. (2020). Analyzing input quality along three dimensions: interactive, linguistic, and conceptual. Journal of child language, 47(1). Vanbuel, M., & Van den Branden, K. (2021). Promoting primary school pupils’ language achievement: investigating the impact of school-based language policies. School effectiveness and school improvement, 32(2), 218-240. Verhallen, M., & Walst, R. (2011). Taalontwikkeling op school: handboek voor interactief taalonderwijs (Tweede herziene druk). Coutinho. 31. LEd – Network on Language and Education
Paper ***WITHDRAWN*** From Linguistic Knowledge to Pedagogical Action: A Critical Review of Translanguaging in Teacher Education Sharjah Education Academy, United Arab Emirates Presenting Author:Topic and Rationale Across European and international education systems, growing linguistic diversity has challenged long-standing assumptions about language, learning, and teaching. Translanguaging has emerged in education research as a response to these challenges, offering a way of understanding language use that reflects the dynamic, multilingual realities of classrooms (Donley, 2022). Rather than treating languages as separate and bounded systems, translanguaging foregrounds teachers’ and learners’ full linguistic repertoires as resources for meaning-making and learning (Costley & Leung, 2020). Despite its strong presence in academic discourse, translanguaging remains unevenly embedded in teacher education. In many contexts, it is introduced as a pedagogical option or classroom strategy, while deeper questions about linguistic knowledge, professional judgment, and teacher decision-making receive less attention. As a result, teachers may be expected to adopt translanguaging practices without being supported to understand how linguistic knowledge informs pedagogical action (Li, 2022). In line with the ECER 2026 theme Knowing and Acting, this paper examines how education research frames the relationship between linguistic knowledge and pedagogical action in teacher education. It focuses on how translanguaging is conceptualised, taught, and positioned within teacher education literature, and on the extent to which teachers are recognised as linguistic knowers who can act on this knowledge in context.
Research Questions This critical review is guided by the following questions:
Objectives The objectives of this paper are to:
Conceptual and Theoretical Framework This review is guided by a framework of teacher professionalism and epistemic agency, which views teachers as knowledgeable professionals who interpret and act on linguistic, cultural, and contextual understandings in their practice (Kim et al., 2024). From this perspective, translanguaging is not approached as a fixed method, but as a professional orientation grounded in teachers’ judgments about language use in specific educational settings. Adopting a European and international lens, the paper draws on research from diverse teacher education contexts to examine how translanguaging is framed across different policy, curricular, and institutional environments. This positioning responds directly to ECER’s interest in how knowledge is produced, legitimised, and enacted within varied educational ecosystems. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The study employs a critical narrative literature review approach to examine key strands of research on translanguaging in teacher education. It employs a focused and interpretive synthesis of how linguistic knowledge and pedagogical action are connected in the literature. Sources and Selection Criteria The review draws on peer-reviewed journal articles and policy publications, primarily published between 2010 and 2025, appearing in Scopus, ERIC, and Google Scholar. Sources are selected for their relevance to translanguaging, teacher education, and the preparation of teachers for multilingual pedagogical contexts. Analytical Approach Analysis is conducted through iterative thematic reading, focusing on how translanguaging is positioned in relation to teachers’ knowledge, preparation, and professional responsibility. Attention is given to how linguistic knowledge is framed in teacher education, how teachers are constructed as language decision-makers, and how institutional and policy contexts shape possibilities for pedagogical action. A critical stance is maintained throughout, questioning assumptions about linguistic normativity, standardisation, and authority in teacher education. Translanguaging is examined as part of a broader landscape of knowledge production that influences how teachers are prepared to act in linguistically diverse classrooms. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings This paper offers two main contributions. First, it provides a critical overview of how translanguaging is conceptualised within teacher education research, highlighting differences in how linguistic knowledge is understood and connected to pedagogical preparation. Second, it brings attention to ongoing tensions between teachers’ situated linguistic expertise and dominant monolingual or standardised frameworks within teacher education. By centring teachers as epistemic agents, the paper contributes to discussions on professional knowledge, linguistic diversity, and the role of teacher education in responding to social and educational change. It supports approaches to teacher education that recognise linguistic knowledge as a foundation for pedagogical action rather than as an optional add-on to practice. References Costley, T., & Leung, C. (2020). Putting translanguaging into practice: A view from England. System, 92, 102270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102270 Donley, K. (2022). Translanguaging as a theory, pedagogy, and qualitative research methodology. NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 12, 105. https://doi.org/10.1080/26390043.2022.2079391 Kim, S., Park, J. Y., & Zhao, M. (2024). Content teachers’ beliefs and attitudes toward working with multilingual learners through integrative approaches. Frontiers in Education, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1282936 Li, G. (2022). Toward Inclusive Translanguaging in Multilingual Classrooms. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. TESL-EJ, 26(3). https://doi.org/10.55593/ej.26103a23 | ||