No abstract

No abstract

This study explores how principals of dual language (DL) programs draw on two dominant societal discourses around language education—linguistic instrumentalism/neoliberalism and equity/social justice—to make sense of their programs. Through in‐depth interviews with 19 principals of Spanish‐English elementary school DL programs in Arizona and California, the researchers examine (1) the ways in which the two discourses manifested in the principals’ talk, and 2) the consequences for English learners of each discursive framing. The researchers found that framing a program within each discourse led principals to different conclusions about the purpose of DL, its goals, and who should be included in it. Principals adopting a predominantly neoliberal frame understood DL as a way to gain a competitive edge, both for their schools (competing with other schools for students) and for their students (competing for future jobs at a global scale). Principals drawing primarily on social justice discourse instead understood DL as a historically contingent, collaborative movement for social transformation. The authors illustrate how the first framing can contribute to the exclusion of English learners from DL, while the latter presupposes their belonging. They also discuss future work exploring how principals come to develop their discursive framings.

Social psychologists have suggested that language-based ideologies related to 'stereotype threat' (i.e. variations in performance-based on ability perceptions of language groups) may affect students' academic achievement regardless of school language support. However, it is unclear whether efforts to support students' first language development, particularly for large populations of students whose primary language is not the dominant language, is sufficient for 'levelling the playing field' in terms of academic achievement. We analysed subsets of data from the 2011 Progress in International Reading Literacy Study and the 2009 Programme for International Student Assessment to investigate the by-country effects of officially recognised languages on reading performance. Participants represent countries with only two official languages (e.g. Canada, Israel) and primarily used one of these languages at home. Preliminary findings from hierarchical linear modelling show that the dominant official language predicts reading performance unless the minority language reflects a language internationally valued and revered by local stake holders (e.g. English in the United Arab Emirates). Implications suggest that educational resources and programmes should be sensitive to the historical context of country-specific language ideologies and related stereotypical perceptions that favour the dominant language within the school context.

No abstract