Positioning of the recently arrived student: a discourse analysis of Sweden’s Language Introduction Programme

Abstract

This article explores how recently arrived students are positioned and position themselves in the Language Introduction Programme in upper secondary school in Sweden using a combination of position theory with nexus analysis. The material used consists of official national documents and local school documents, observations, interviews and photographs. Circulating discourses are analysed through discourses in place, historical bodies and interaction order. The analysis revealed ambiguous and conflicting discourses at the school, where students in the Language Introduction Programme are positioned both as having rights and as being deficient, lacking what is here termed Swedishness. While principals place the responsibility on students themselves to use Swedish in social situations, official documents emphasise the duty of the principals to ensure that education is relevant. Students' voices do not appear to be important, and their agency is mainly restricted to their own learning. The identities that were made possible relied on their mastery of Swedish. Conflicting discourses circulate regarding the rights of students and their weaknesses and responsibilities. The combination of these two factors may mean that students run the risk of being positioned as having few opportunities to be successful at school.

Teacher professionality at a time of mobility:

“…The problems and challenges associated with LIP highlighted in research (Sharif, 2017, Bomström Aho, 2018Hagström, 2018;Bjuhr, 2019;Wedin & Bomström Aho, 2019: Wedin, 2021Hermansson et al 2021) and reports (SNAE 2016b, School Inspectorate, 2017a) are confirmed in this study. The ambiguities that appear regarding how teachers are positioned as competent or not means that there is a significant risk for students to not receive the education they have the right to.…”

“…In their research, Sharif (2017) and Bomström Aho (2018) show how students' prior experience and knowledge are not sufficiently attended to, something that is also found by SNAE (2016b). Organisational problems such as spatial and social borders that limit student mobility through the education system are made apparent by Hagström (2018), Wedin (2021) and SNAE (2016b). Research by the Hermansson et al (2021) highlights discrepancies in teacher competence regarding the teaching of L2-students.…”

English as a gatekeeper

“…In Sweden, various studies of LIP have been conducted, and several of these have focused on its organization. Wedin (2021aWedin ( , 2021b writes about the organizational features of LIP and the important role of principals, arguing that individual principals significantly shape the organization of LIP. Principals previous experience in second-language didactics has consequences for organizational success at LIP.…”

Introduction to the Special Issue on Swedish as a Second Language

“…(b) SSL as a societal, sociocultural and educational phenomenon, such as issues related to migration, inclusion, equity, democracy, justice, policy issues, governance and management, see, e.g., Bijvoet and Fraurud (2012); Jonsson and Milani (2009);Milani (2007Milani ( , 2008; Rosén (2013); Sahlée (2017); Siekkinen (2021Siekkinen ( , 2022. (c) Didactics, both language didactics and issues of language in relation to the learning of knowledge in various topics within SSL, see, e.g., Axelsson (2004); Bjuhr (2019); Franker (2018); Fridlund (2011); Lindberg (2003); Rydell (2018); Vuorenpää (2016); Wedin (2021); Bomström Aho (2019, 2022); Wedin and Norlund Shaswar (2021); Winlund (2021).…”

“…Regarding the first, the status of the subject and its participants, power relations have been made visible through earlier research (Hedman and Magnusson 2018;Hyltenstam and Milani 2012) and reports (NASD 2004;SNAE 2018;SI 2010), where a low status is often attributed to the subject, its teachers and its students. School leaders and teachers in subjects other than SSL have been reported to focus on perceived deficiencies among L2 students, particularly regarding Swedish language proficiency and experiences of life in Sweden (see, e.g., Wedin 2010Wedin , 2021. As teacher educators, we meet teachers who express how they in various ways are treated as less important even in questions related to L2 students, and who give examples of situations where they perceive that SSL as a subject is attributed with a lower status (see Wedin and Straszer).…”