To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The chapter presents an updated overview of translanguaging studies in Chinese university classrooms. It starts with a briefing of development of translanguaging research in China. Followed are systematic reviews of translanguaging studies on Chinese foreign language classrooms, English medium instruction classrooms and international students classrooms respectively. Based on review of these studies, the chapter ends by outlining the future directions of translanguaging research in Chinaand beyond.
While previous research has highlighted similarities between classroom codeswitching and pedagogical translanguaging in terms of affordances, there are also emerging commonalities in terms of constraints. Recent work conducted in multilingual classrooms in different parts of the globe reveals that the unplanned use of multilingual pedagogies can negatively affect students’ development of language proficiency. Furthermore, the non-strategic use of these pedagogies may result in the exclusion of Indigenous languages or varieties that have historically been subjected to linguistic discrimination and erasure. In light of these findings, we argue that multilingual pedagogies need to be conscious, structured, and planned for.
This chapter provides an overview of Japanese language education in diasporic communities linked to Japan, concentrating on five key English-dominant regions with established Japanese communities. The key guiding principle used for comparison is the distinction between hoshuko schools, which offer components of the compulsory curriculum in Japan, and keishogo schools, which are community-operated heritage language programmes. The chapter discusses key features and affordances of the programming in these schools as well as their concomitant challenges, many of which are intrinsically connected to the diversification of the student demographic.
This chapter provides an overview of Japanese-as-a-heritage language (JHL) education in the USA, where the number of Japanese residents and Nikkei (Japanese immigrants and their descendants) stands out. The chapter starts by reviewing two conventional ways of conceptualising HL learners. This is followed by a discussion of Japanese diasporas around the globe, especially those in the USA. The chapter then examines the issues and challenges of teaching and learning JHL in the USA. It also discusses identity issues in relation to HL development in general and JHL in particular. The chapter concludes by recommending future JHL education and research endeavours.
Originally conceptualised as a pedagogical practice of language alternation in the Welsh/English bilingual classroom, translanguaging has acquired new meanings over the past decades. In this chapter, I highlight the transformations of the term and show how translanguaging research in Canada has pushed it outside bilingual boundaries. Increasing multilingualism in the Canadian context, coupled with calls to decolonise education and empower speakers of minoritised languages, including in Indigenous and immigrant communities, make translanguaging within a bilingual framework no longer viable, nor inclusive. In Canada, translanguaging pedagogy is implemented within an overarching social justice plurilingual framework and has developed new tenets which must be considered in translaguaging research moving forward: disaffiliation of translanguaging from its bilingual origins, embracing multilingualism, and viewing language users as dynamic plurilinguals rather than emergent bilinguals.
This chapter examines multilingual education in Australia, focusing on Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL), immersion, and bilingual programmes. It highlights the profound impact of these programmes on individuals, emphasising various purposes around fostering linguistic diversity, intercultural understanding, and cognitive benefits. The chapter explores the diverse implementations across Australian states, with a special focus on the Queensland Model and its unique second language immersion programmes. The chapter underscores the need for effective implementation and support, acknowledging bilingual education’s niche but crucial role in this predominantly English-speaking context.
The fragility of heritage languages (HL) and the challenges immigrant minority learners had in maintaining their home linguistic and cultural assets have been long detected in existing research, calling for more attention toward immigrants’ HL maintenance and education in non-HL-speaking societies. To respond to the call and better understand the status quo of HL preservation, the chapter provides an overview of research developments, pedagogical innovations, and persistent issues salient to heritage language education for K-12 students from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds in both mainstream school settings and out-of-school contexts during the previous decade (2012–2022). The chapter highlights several critical factors that contribute to the prevalent heritage language loss including the ‘officially unilingual’ ideology, the absence of heritage/home languages and cultures in the mainstream curriculum, and the lack of collaboration between mainstream and HL schools and families. The chapter concludes with future directions for researchers, policymakers, and practitioners devoted to HL education and preservation.
Despite the fact that bilingual instruction in the United States of America pre-dates its nationhood, educational policy has undulated its allowance and support for dual language education, marked by both selective preferential treatment of certain (primarily European) languages and through broad opposition to the endeavour as a whole. This brief review of the history and scholarship of dual language education in the USA recaps the ebbs and flows of bilingual education over time and the accompanying shifts in discourses about the purposes and benefits of bilingual education with subsequent implications for how bilingual education is implemented.
Within the timespan of one decade, there have been numerous publications on the viability and educational benefits of translanguaging. In this chapter, I will focus on two publications (Block, 2018 and Jaspers, 2018) that appear to offer conflicting arguments about the shortcomings and perils of pursuing the agenda proposed by translanguaging. That is, whereas Jaspers argues that its ‘transformative’ claim ‘is becoming a dominating rather than a liberating force’, Block argues that the ‘transformative’ agenda advanced by researchers and practitioners of translanguaging does not go far enough to address the systematic and damaging effects of social injustice.
This chapter advocates the translanguaging approach to language education where all languages are valued, and all knowledge that has been acquired through different languages and in different cultural conditions is valued. Translanguaging sees language learning as cultural translation. Learning a new language is about learning a different way of making meaning as well as achieving an understanding of the world around us with people from different linguistic and cultural backgrounds. This requires co-learners’ willingness to to adapt and unlearn, to trust and respect each other, and to support each other on a journey of transpositioning.
Since Herdina & Jessner (2002) published the Dynamic Model of Multilingualism(DMM), applying dynamic systems theory to language development research, interestin multilingual development and multilingual awareness has been growing. Thepresent contribution discusses DMM concepts, e.g., complexity and interdependenceof levels and factors, with a special emphasis on multilingual awareness as a keycomponent of multilingual learning. These concepts are then linked to DMM-basedlanguage learning and teaching approaches that focus on language management,language maintenance, and the training of multilingual awareness. Finally, someselected multilingual/plurilingual teaching practices that apply DMM in combinationwith other holistic approaches are presented.
This chapter focuses on the development of trilingual education in the Basque Country where Basque, a minority language, is used along with other languages. Nowadays, Basque is the main language of instruction in pre-primary, primary, and secondary school. Education through the medium of Basque has had an enormous effect on increasing the number of Basque speakers among young people. The increasing importance of English and the diversity of home languages in a multilingual society create the need for changes in language policy and teaching approaches. In this chapter, recent trends to integrate language subjects in the curriculum, the integration of language and content and pedagogical translanguaging are alsodiscussed.