1887
Volume 5, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2212-8433
  • E-ISSN: 2212-8441
GBP
Buy:£15.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This case study explores the questions of how national and local education policies address languages of instruction for a Swedish compulsory school offering English-medium instruction (hereafter EMI) as well as how these policies are interpreted and implemented in practice. Critical discourse analysis provides a framework for examining the relationship between stated and enacted policies at the various institutional levels. Methods from linguistic ethnography yielded rich data including classroom observations, interviews, and artifact collection over a period of three school years in grades four through six. Findings from the study reveal discourses of language hierarchies, a native speaker ideal privileging English and practices that reflect varying degrees of language separation. While Swedish is occasionally used to support English-medium content learning, there is little space for students’ mother tongues in the mainstream classroom. The findings from this study have implications for how stakeholders may put language-in-education policies into practice in EMI programs.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.5.2.03tot
2017-11-06
2018-10-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Amir, A.
    (2013) Doing language policy: A micro-interactional study of policy practices in English as a foreign language classes. (Doctoral dissertation). Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. doi: 10.3384/diss.diva‑100202
    https://doi.org/10.3384/diss.diva-100202 [Google Scholar]
  2. Baker, C.
    (2011) Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism (5th ed.). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Berg, E. C. , Hult, F. M. , & King, K. A.
    (2001) Shaping the climate for language shift? English in Sweden’s elite domains. World Englishes, 20, 305–319. doi: 10.1111/1467‑971X.00217
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-971X.00217 [Google Scholar]
  4. Blackledge, A.
    (2008) Critical discourse analysis. In L. Wei & M. G. Moyer (Eds.), The Blackwell guide to research methods in bilingualism and multilingualism (pp.296–310). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Blommaert, J.
    (2005) Discourse. A critical introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511610295
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610295 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bonacina, F. , & Gafaranga, J.
    (2011) “Medium of instruction” vs. “medium of classroom interaction”: Language choice in a French complementary school classroom in Scotland. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 14, 319–334. doi: 10.1080/13670050.2010.502222
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2010.502222 [Google Scholar]
  7. Cabau-Lampa, B.
    (2007) Mother tongue plus two European languages in Sweden: Unrealistic educational goal?Language Policy, 6, 333–358. doi: 10.1007/s10993‑007‑9055‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-007-9055-6 [Google Scholar]
  8. Canagarajah, S.
    (2006) Ethnographic methods in language policy. In T. Ricento (Ed.), An introduction to language policy: Theories and methods. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Cenoz, J.
    (2015) Content-based instruction and content and language integrated learning: The same or different?Language, Culture & Curriculum, 28(1), 8–24. doi: 10.1080/07908318.2014.1000922
    https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000922 [Google Scholar]
  10. Cook, V.
    (2001) Using the first language in the classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 57(3), 402–423. doi: 10.3138/cmlr.57.3.402
    https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.57.3.402 [Google Scholar]
  11. Copland, F. , & Creese, A.
    (2015) Linguistic ethnography: Collecting, analysing and presenting data. Los Angeles, CA: Sage. doi: 10.4135/9781473910607
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473910607 [Google Scholar]
  12. Council of Europe
    (2001) Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Creese, A. , & Blackledge, A.
    (2010) Translanguaging in the bilingual classroom: A pedagogy for learning and teaching?The Modern Language Journal, 94, 103–115. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2009.00986.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00986.x [Google Scholar]
  14. (2011) Separate and flexible bilingualism in complementary schools: Multiple language practices in interrelationship. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 1196–1208. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.006 [Google Scholar]
  15. Creese, A. , Blackledge, A. , & Takhi, J. K.
    (2014) The ideal ‘native speaker’ teacher: Negotiating authenticity and legitimacy in the language classroom. Modern Language Journal, 98(4), 937–951. doi: 10.1111/modl.12148
    https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12148 [Google Scholar]
  16. Cromdal, J.
    (2000) Code-switching for all practical purposes: Bilingual organization of children’s play. (Doctoral dissertation). Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Cummins, J.
    (2005) A proposal for action: Strategies for recognizing heritage language competence as a learning resource within the mainstream classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 89(4), 585–592.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. (2008) Introduction to volume 5: Bilingual education. In J. Cummins & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education. Vol. 5, Bilingual education (2nd ed., pp.xii–xxiii). Dordrecht: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Dalton-Puffer, C.
    (2007) Discourse in content and language integrated (CLIL) classrooms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.20
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.20 [Google Scholar]
  20. (2011) Content-and-language integrated learning: From practice to principles?Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 182–204. doi: 10.1017/S0267190511000092
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190511000092 [Google Scholar]
  21. Fairclough, N.
    (1989) Language and power. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Ganuza, N. , & Hedman, C.
    (2015) Struggles for legitimacy in mother tongue instruction in Sweden. Language and Education, 29(2), 125–139. doi: 10.1080/09500782.2014.978871
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2014.978871 [Google Scholar]
  23. (2017) Ideology vs. practice: Is there a space for ‘pedagogical translanguaging’ in mother tongue instruction?In B. Paulsrud , J. Rosén , B. Straszer , & Å. Wedin (Eds.), Translanguaging and education: New perspectives from the field (pp.208–225). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. García, O.
    (2007) Multilingual language awareness and teacher education. In J. Cenoz & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education. Vol.6, Knowledge about language (2nd ed., pp.2130–2145). Dordrecht: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. (2009) Bilingual education in the 21st Century: A global perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Heller, M.
    (1996) Legitimate language in a multilingual school. Linguistics and Education, 8, 139–157. doi: 10.1016/S0898‑5898(96)90011‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-5898(96)90011-X [Google Scholar]
  27. (1999) Linguistic minorities and modernity: A sociolinguistic ethnography. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Hornberger, N. H. , & Hult, F. M.
    (2008) Ecological language education policy. In B. Spolsky & F. M. Hult (Eds.), The handbook of educational linguistics (pp.280–296). Malden, MA: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9780470694138.ch20
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470694138.ch20 [Google Scholar]
  29. Hornberger, N. H. , & Johnson, D. C.
    (2011) The ethnography of language policy. In T. L. McCarty (Ed.), Ethnography and language policy (pp.273–289). New York, NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Hult, F. M.
    (2005) A case of prestige and status planning: Swedish and English in Sweden. Current Issues in Language Planning, 6(1), 73–79. doi: 10.1080/14664200508668274
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14664200508668274 [Google Scholar]
  31. (2010) Analysis of language policy discourses across the scales of space and time. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 202, 7–24.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. (2012) English as a transcultural language in Swedish policy and practice. TESOL Quarterly, 46(2), 230–257. doi: 10.1002/tesq.19
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.19 [Google Scholar]
  33. Hyltenstam, K.
    (2004) Engelskan, skolans språkundervisning och svensk språkpolitik [English, language instruction in schools and Swedish language politics]. In O. Josephson & B. Lindgren (Eds.), Engelskan i Sverige [English in Sweden] (pp.36–110). Stockholm: Norstedts Ordbok/ePan.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Höglin, R.
    (2002) Engelska språket som hot och tillgång i Norden [The English language as threat and resource in the Nordic countries]. København: Nordiska ministerrådet.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Jalali-Moghadam, N. , & Hedman, C.
    (2016) Special education teachers’ narratives on literacy support for bilingual students with dyslexia in Swedish compulsory schools. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 2, 1–18. doi: 10.17585/njlr.v2.224
    https://doi.org/10.17585/njlr.v2.224 [Google Scholar]
  36. Josephson, O.
    (2004) Engelskan i 2000-talets Sverige [English in 21st century Sweden]. In O. Josephson & B. Lindgren (Eds.), Engelskan i Sverige [English in Sweden] (pp.7–24). Stockholm: Norstedts Ordbok/ePan.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Kulturdepartementet [Ministry of Culture]
    (2009) Språklag, SFS 2009:600 [Swedish Language Act, SFS 2009:600]. Stockholm: Kulturdepartementet.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Lasagabaster, D.
    (2013) The use of the L1 in CLIL classes: The teachers’ perspective. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 6(2), 1–21. Retrieved fromwww.unifg.it/sites/default/files/allegatiparagrafo/20-01-2014/lasagabasterthe_use_of_l1_in_clil_classes.pdf doi: 10.5294/laclil.2013.6.2.1
    https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2013.6.2.1 [Google Scholar]
  39. Lim Falk, M.
    (2008) Svenska i engelskspråkig skolmiljö. Ämnesrelaterat språkbruk i två gymnasieklasser [Swedish in an English-speaking school environment: Content related language use in two high school classes]. (Doctoral dissertation). Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. (2015) English and Swedish in CLIL student texts. In C. Dalton-Puffer & T. Nikula (Eds.), Language Learning Journal, Special issue: CLIL, 43(3), 304–318.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Lin, A. M. Y.
    (1996) Bilingualism or linguistic segregation? Symbolic domination, resistance, and codeswitching in Hong Kong schools. Linguistics and Education, 8, 49–84. doi: 10.1016/S0898‑5898(96)90006‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-5898(96)90006-6 [Google Scholar]
  42. (2015) Conceptualising the potential role of L1 in CLIL. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 74–89. doi: 10.1080/07908318.2014.1000926
    https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000926 [Google Scholar]
  43. Milani, T.
    (2007) Debating Swedish. Language politics and ideology in contemporary Sweden. (Doctoral dissertation). Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Nikula, T.
    (2015) Hands-on tasks in CLIL science classrooms as sites for subject-specific language use and learning. System, 54, 14–27. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2015.04.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.04.003 [Google Scholar]
  45. Phillipson, R.
    (1992) Linguistic imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. (2006) Language policy and linguistic imperialism. In T. Ricento (Ed.), An introduction to language policy: Theories and methods (pp.346–361). Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Ricento, T. K. , & Hornberger, N. H.
    (1996) Unpeeling the onion: Language planning and policy and the ELT professional. TESOL Quarterly, 30(3), 401–427. doi: 10.2307/3587691
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3587691 [Google Scholar]
  48. Rosén, J. , & Bagga-Gupta, S.
    (2015) Prata svenska, vi är i Sverige! [Talk Swedish, we are in Sweden!]: A study of practiced language policy in adult language learning. Linguistics and Education, 31, 59–73. doi: 10.1016/j.linged.2015.05.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2015.05.003 [Google Scholar]
  49. Salö, L.
    (2016) Languages and linguistic exchanges in Swedish academia. (Doctoral dissertation). Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Skolverket [The Swedish National Agency for Education]
    (2010) Undervisning på engelska. Utvärdering av en försöksverksamhet i grundskolan. Rapport nr. 351 [Instruction in English. Evaluation of a trial implementation in compulsory school]. Retrieved fromwww.skolverket.se/publikationer?id=2450
    [Google Scholar]
  51. (2015) Elever och skolenheter i grundskolan läsåret 2014/15 [Students and school units in compulsory school during the school year 2014/15]. Retrieved fromwww.skolverket.se/om-skolverket/publikationer/visa-enskild-publikation?_xurl_=http%3A%2F%2Fwww5.skolverket.se%2Fwtpub%2Fws%2Fskolbok%2Fwpubext%2Ftrycksak%2FBlob%2Fpdf3408.pdf%3Fk%3D3408
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Spolsky, B.
    (2004) Language policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Sundqvist, P.
    (2009) Extramural English matters: Out-of-school English and its impact on Swedish ninth-graders’ oral proficiency and vocabulary. (Doctoral dissertation). Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Sylvén, L. S.
    (2013) CLIL in Sweden – why does it not work? A metaperspective on CLIL across contexts in Europe. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16(3), 301–320. doi: 10.1080/13670050.2013.777387
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2013.777387 [Google Scholar]
  55. Talmy, S.
    (2011) The interview as collaborative achievement: Interaction, identity, and ideology in a speech event. Applied Linguistics32(1), 25–42. doi: 10.1093/applin/amq027
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amq027 [Google Scholar]
  56. Throop, R.
    (2007) Teachers as language policy planners: Incorporating language policy planning into teacher education and classroom practice. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 22(2), 45–65.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Utbildningsdepartementet [Ministry of Education and Research]
    (2010) Skollagen, SFS 2010:800 [The Swedish Education Act, SFS 2010:800]. Stockholm: Utbildningsdepartementet.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. (2011) Skolförordning 2011:185 [The Ordinance for Compulsory School, SFS 2011:185]. Stockholm: Utbildningsdepartementet.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Vetenskapsrådet [Swedish Research Council]
    (2011) Good research practice. Retrieved fromhttps://publikationer.vr.se/en/product/good-research-practice/
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Washburn, L.
    (1997) English immersion in Sweden. A case study of Röllingby High School 1987–1989. (Doctoral dissertation). Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Yoxsimer Paulsrud, B.
    (2016) English-medium instruction in Sweden. Perspectives and practices in two upper secondary schools. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 4(1), 108–128. doi: 10.1075/jicb.4.1.05pau
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.4.1.05pau [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.5.2.03tot
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.5.2.03tot
Loading

Data & Media 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