1887
Volume 11, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2212-8433
  • E-ISSN: 2212-8441

Abstract

Abstract

Based on fieldwork and interviews, we explore five teachers’ views about their teaching of Swedish as a second language in an early immersion school in Finland (Larch) and a linguistically heterogeneous primary school in Sweden (Chestnut). Drawing from ecological perspectives, we aim to contribute new knowledge on how second language teachers express their goals, teacher experiences and expertise depending on language and education policy as discursive-material reality. We discuss how societal, discursive and material differences were entangled with the teachers’ discourses, for example, the fact that Swedish immersion at Larch enjoyed a higher social status than Swedish as a second language at Chestnut. Concomitantly, the teachers adhered to pedagogical principles and the value of students’ linguistic and cultural repertoires in similar ways. We specifically discuss teacher autonomy as entwined with prevailing discursive-material realities, including distinct language education policies.

Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.21032.hed
2023-09-12
2024-06-23
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jicb.21032.hed.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.21032.hed&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Baker, C., & Wright, W. E.
    (2021) Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/BAKER9899
    https://doi.org/10.21832/BAKER9899 [Google Scholar]
  2. Björklund, S., Mård-Miettinen, K., & Savijärvi, M.
    (2014) Swedish immersion in the early years in Finland. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 17(2), 197–214. 10.1080/13670050.2013.866628
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2013.866628 [Google Scholar]
  3. Boyd, S., & Palviainen, Å.
    (2015) Building walls or bridges? A language ideological debate about bilingual schools in Finland. InM. Halonen, P. Ihalainen & T. Saarinen (Eds.), Language policies in Finland and Sweden: Interdisciplinary and multi-sited comparisons (pp.57–89). Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Canagarajah, S., & De Costa, P. I.
    (2016) Introduction: Scales analysis, and its uses and prospects in educational linguistics, Linguistics & Education, 341, 1–10. 10.1016/j.linged.2015.09.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2015.09.001 [Google Scholar]
  5. Canagarajah, S.
    (2021) Materializing narratives: The story behind the story. System, 102(102610), 1–10. 10.1016/j.system.2021.102610
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102610 [Google Scholar]
  6. Canale, M., & Swain, M.
    (1980) Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47. 10.1093/applin/1.1.1
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/1.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  7. Copland, F., & Creese, A.
    (2015) Linguistic ethnography: collecting, analyzing and presenting data. Sage. 10.4135/9781473910607
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473910607 [Google Scholar]
  8. Cummins, J.
    (2017) Teaching minoritized students: Are additive approaches legitimate?Harvard Education Review, 87(3), 404–425. 10.17763/1943‑5045‑87.3.404
    https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-87.3.404 [Google Scholar]
  9. Cummins, J., & Swain, M.
    (2014) Bilingualism in education. Aspects of theory, research and practice. Routledge. 10.4324/9781315835877
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315835877 [Google Scholar]
  10. De Fina, A.
    (2019) The interview as an interactional event. InP. Patrick, M. Schmid & K. Zwaan, (Eds.), Language analysis for the determination of origin (pp.21–40). Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑79003‑9_2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-79003-9_2 [Google Scholar]
  11. Finnish National Agency for Education
    Finnish National Agency for Education (2016) National core curriculum for basic education 2014. (Publications 2016:5). Finnish National Agency for Education
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Ganuza, N., & Hedman, C.
    (2015) Struggles for legitimacy in mother tongue instruction in Sweden. Language and Education, 29(2), 125–139. 10.1080/09500782.2014.978871
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2014.978871 [Google Scholar]
  13. Gibbons, P.
    (2006) Bridging discourses in the ESL classroom. Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Harju-Luukkainen, H., & Stolt, S.
    (2016) Språkbadet är vägen till funktionell tvåspråkighet i Finland. [Immersion is the road to functional bilingualism]. Kognition & Pædagogik, 16(99), 68–77.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Hedman, C., & Magnusson, U.
    (2021a) Researching the complexities of the school subject Swedish as a second language: A linguistic ethnographic project in four schools. Languages, 6(4), article id 205. 10.3390/languages6040205
    https://doi.org/10.3390/languages6040205 [Google Scholar]
  16. (2021b) Introductory classes for newcomer primary school students in Sweden. Pedagogical principles and emotional understanding. Multicultural Education Review, 13(1), 85–105. 10.1080/2005615X.2021.1890309
    https://doi.org/10.1080/2005615X.2021.1890309 [Google Scholar]
  17. (2023) Adjusting to linguistic diversity in a primary school through relational agency and expertise: A mother-tongue teacher team’s perspective. Multilingua – Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication, 42(1), 139–164. 10.1515/multi‑2021‑0070
    https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2021-0070 [Google Scholar]
  18. Heller, M., Pietikäinen, S., & Pujolar, J.
    (2018) Critical sociolinguistic research methods: Studying language issues that matter. Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Hudson, B.
    (2002) Holding complexity and searching for meaning – teaching as reflective practice. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34(1), 43–57. 10.1080/00220270110086975
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270110086975 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hult, F. M., & S. Pietikäinen
    (2014) Shaping discourses of multilingualism through a language ideological debate: The case of Swedish in Finland. Journal of Language and Politics, 13(1), 1–20. 10.1075/jlp.13.1.01hul
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.13.1.01hul [Google Scholar]
  21. Mitchell, J.
    (1984) Typicality and the case study. InR. Ellen (Ed.), Ethnographic research: A guide to general conduct (pp.237–241). Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Mård-Miettinen, K., Arnott, S., & Vignola, M.
    (2022) Early immersion in minority language contexts: Canada and Finland. InM. Schwartz (Ed.), Handbook of early language education (pp.347–371). Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑91662‑6_12
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91662-6_12 [Google Scholar]
  23. Mård-Miettinen, K., & Björklund, S.
    (2019) “In one sentence there can easily be three languages”. A glimpse into the use of languages among immersion students. InA. Huhta, G. Erickson & N. Figueras (Eds.), Developments in language education. A memorial volume in honour of Sauli Takala (pp.239–249). EALTA & University of Jyväskylä.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Parkvall, M.
    (2019) Det nya Sverige: språken. Den nya mångfalden. [The new Sweden: languages. The new pluralism.] Riksbankens jubileumsfond.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Pakarinen, S.
    (2020) Språkbadselevskap i Finland och på Irland: En studie om språkpolicy och två- och flerspråkighet i skollandskap och hos elever i tidigt fullständigt svenskt och iriskt språkbad. [Language immersion in Finland and Ireland]. [Doctoral dissertation, University of Jyväskylä].
  26. Prasad, G., & Lory, M.-P.
    (2020) Linguistic and cultural collaboration in schools: Reconciling majority and minoritized language users. TESOL Quarterly, 54(4), 797–822. 10.1002/tesq.560
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.560 [Google Scholar]
  27. Salo, O. P.
    (2012) Finland’s official bilingualism – a bed of roses or of Procrustes?InJ. Blom-maert, S. Leppanen, P. Pahta, & T. Raisanen (Eds.), Dangerous multilingualism. Northern perspectives on order, purity and normality (pp.25–40). Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9781137283566_2
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137283566_2 [Google Scholar]
  28. Schleppegrell, M.
    (2016) Systemic Functional Grammar in the K–12 classroom. InE. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp.384–396). Routledge. 10.4324/9781315716893‑28
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315716893-28 [Google Scholar]
  29. Sellgren, M.
    (2011) Den dubbla uppgiften. [The twofold task]. [Lic. dissertation, Stockholm University]. Stockholm.
  30. Sjöberg, S., Mård-Miettinen, K., Peltoniemi, A., & Skinnari, K.
    (2018) Språkbad i Finlands kommuner 2017: Utredning om språkbad i de inhemska språken i småbarnspedagogik, förskoleundervisning och grundläggande utbildning. [Language immersion in Finnish municipalities 2017]. University of Jyväskylä. urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-39-7413-8
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Spolsky, B.
    (2021) Rethinking language policy. Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Spolsky, B., Inbar-Lourie, O., & Tannenbaum, M.
    (2014) Challenges for language education and policy. Routledge. 10.4324/9781315884288
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315884288 [Google Scholar]
  33. Sundman, M.
    (2013) Tvåspråkiga skolor? En analys av fördelar och risker med införandet av skolor med svenska och finska som undervisningsspråk. [An analysis of advantages and risks in Swedish/Finnish medium schools]. Magma studie, 41, 1–90. 10.21832/9781783092710‑004
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783092710-004 [Google Scholar]
  34. Swedish Language Act
    Swedish Language Act (2009) Språklag (2009:600). Ministry of Culture.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Swedish National Agency for Education
    Swedish National Agency for Education (2011) Läroplan för grundskolan, förskoleklassen och fritidshemmet 2011, Reviderad 2019 [Curriculum for the compulsory school, preschool class and the recreation centre 2011, Revised 2019]. Skolverket.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S.
    (2005) The evolving sociopolitical context of immersion education in Canada: some implications for program development. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 15(2), 169–186. 10.1111/j.1473‑4192.2005.00086.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2005.00086.x [Google Scholar]
  37. Swedish Research Council
    Swedish Research Council (2017) Good research practice. Vetenskapsrådet.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Tavakoli, P., & Jones, R.
    (2018) An overview of approaches to second language acquisition and instructional practices. Welsh Government report number 12/2018.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Tedick, D. J., & Lyster, R.
    (2020) Scaffolding language development in immersion and dual language classrooms. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Thamarana, S., & Andhra Pradesh, V.
    (2015) A critical overview of communicative language teaching. IJELLH – International Journal of English Language, Literature and Humanities, III(V), 90–100.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Uddling, J.
    (2019) Textsamtalets möjligheter och begränsningar i språkligt heterogena klass-rum. [Affordances and constraints of text talks in linguistically heterogeneous classrooms]. [Doctoral dissertation, Stockholm University].
  42. van Lier, L.
    (2004) The ecology and semiotics of language learning. A sociocultural perspective. Kluwer Academic. 10.1007/1‑4020‑7912‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-7912-5 [Google Scholar]
  43. (2008) Ecological-semiotic perspectives on educational linguistics. InB. Spolsky & F. Hult (Eds.), The handbook of educational linguistics (pp.596–605). Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470694138.ch42
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470694138.ch42 [Google Scholar]
  44. (2010) The ecology of language learning: Practice to theory, theory to practice. Procedia – Social and Behavioural Sciences, 31, 2–6. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.005 [Google Scholar]
  45. (2011) Language learning: an ecological-semiotic approach. InE. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp.383–394). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.21032.hed
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error