Introduction to Volume 47, Issue 2

The second issue of 2024 in the Bilingual Research Journal showcases a diverse set of empirical studies that explore issues in the education of bi/multilingual students from the perspective of students, parents, and educators. Unique to this issue is the unusual range of multilingual contexts from early childhood education through the university level. Authors of these articles use a variety of research methods including qualitative (case study, ethnographic methods, narrative inquiry), quantitative, and mixed methods to explore how bilingual practices are initiated and sustained across settings with and for different actors. Manuscripts focus on topics, such as teacher self-efficacy, translanguaging, critical consciousness, and parental involvement. All of the studies highlight contextual aspects to consider when teaching bilingual learners. Bilingual education is manifested in different forms, shaped by the contexts in which teachers and students interact. The articles underscore the specific challenges and possibilities that can emerge in these contexts as teachers work to affirm students’ identities and ensure the right of children and students to be bilingual.

Our first article explores the variability of early childhood education teachers’ sense of self-efficacy in relation to children’s language status (monolingual English-speaking and Spanish-speaking dual language learners). Christina Wood, Patricia Manza, Brook Sawyer and Qiong Fu examine the student–teacher relationship as a moderating variable between the student language and teachers’ self-efficacy. Previous studies have suggested that teachers’ positive relationships with their students contribute to their feelings of self-efficacy as teachers. Most teachers involved in the study were White, monolingual English speakers with high levels of education relative to early childhood teachers in the U.S. Participating teachers had received professional development on the language development of children from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds and worked in settings with a high proportion of young dual language learners. Findings revealed that teachers, in general, felt competent teaching both monolingual English-speakers and Spanish-speaking dual language learners. They reported feeling prepared to manage the children’s behavior and to provide emotional support regardless of children’s language status. However, they felt less efficacious providing instructional support and engaging dual language learners compared to monolingual children. Unlike other studies, this study found that the student–teacher relationship did not significantly moderate the relationships between students’ language and teacher self-efficacy. Teachers reported positive relationships with both monolingual and bilingual children, which limited the opportunity to identify moderating relationships.

In a second article that highlights bilingual education at the elementary school level, Yeji Kim and Jungmin Kwon’s case study explores translanguaging from the perspective of a migrant Asian fourth-grade teacher who drew from her own experiences and identities to inform her translanguaging stance. Nearly all of Ms Tao’s students are Chinese identifying, and Ms Tao nimbly traverses various varieties of Chinese including Cantonese, Mandarin, and Taishanese as she engages with her multilingual classroom. While her school culture ascribed and promoted an English-only instructional agenda, Ms Tao brought resources and books into her classroom that represented the racial, ethnic and linguistic identities of her students, creating the conditions for translanguaging. Her lessons frequently incorporated both English and Chinese, and she described how this enhanced children’s access to the content. Ms Tao also argued that their multiple identities could be affirmed, galvanizing opportunities for richer connections within their learning and creating a heteroglossic community of deeper inclusion. Ms Tao also drew from her transnational funds of knowledge by bringing in resources from China and drawing from ways of knowing that were distinct to her Chinese identity. This physical and ideological traversing demonstrates how ethnolinguistic identities can distinctly shape the curriculum and instruction of a classroom community. Importantly, Kim and Kwon are developing a unique line of inquiry focused on the greater Asian diaspora represented within our multilingual communities.

In the third article, written by Nuo Xu, the construct of critical consciousness is applied to a Mandarin dual language program in a secondary school. Using narrative inquiry and ethnographic methods, Xu identifies and describes the missed opportunities for the cultivation of critical consciousness among three Mandarin teachers. Drawing from interviews, class observations, classroom resources, and training materials, Xu discusses how teachers discuss topics of criticality and how they fit within the context of a dual language program. Xu found that one teacher consistently used words and cultural references indicative of the nation state of China when teaching vocabulary terms such as foods or traditions. Hispanic students seldom had their identities included within content as there was a hyperfocus on the language as attached to the partner language and culture. The program was intensely focused on language and literacy development, in part driven by the goal of the Advanced Placement (AP) exams the students would soon take. While AP topics included discussion of family and global challenges, this was not framed in a way that invited students to explore oppression and power structures. One teacher experienced discomfort among some students who assumed that she ate dog meat. Not wanting to engage in this racist ascription, the teacher walked away from the situation to “avoid conflicts.” She described such encounters as “personal” and not to be discussed with children, but Xu posits that such avoidances reinforced negative stereotypes, dismissing the opportunity for critical consciousness. One teacher held to a pluralistic stance, and translanguaging was regularly practiced, providing for the possibilities of critical consciousness (albeit not fully realized). Xu’s discussion demonstrates how Chinese dual language programs are situated within Chinese-US relations and thus positions Mandarin teachers to under-address students’ problematic racializations, as any confrontation of criticality may polarize such tensions. Like Kim and Kwon, Xu is also contributing to the greater representation of Asian languages within bi-, multi-, and dual language education.

The fourth article is an international study on translanguaging and students’ perceptions of translanguaging conducted in Egypt at the college level. Using a mixed method approach, Amira Ali explores translanguaging practices involving languages with different writing systems, such as English and Arabic. Ali argues that translanguaging practices can be leveraged for learning and language development in multilingual university contexts, both in student-led and teacher-led interactions. Quantitative analysis showed significant improvements in English language skills for the two experimental groups, but no significant within-group differences were found. Students’ perceptions of translanguaging practices revealed that translanguaging was not viewed as an obstacle to language learning or as indicative of linguistic inadequacy. Rather, the study highlights the various ways in which translanguaging strengthened the development of language skills through the use of translating, paraphrasing, and cross-language comparisons. Students also engaged in translanguaging practices for content learning when brainstorming and note-taking. Moreover, students demonstrated positive attitudes toward the use of translanguaging by the instructor. The study contributes to the conversation about the complexity of language use in multilingual and multicultural contexts and the need of moving beyond prevailing monolingual ideologies to embrace a translingual stance that recognizes the value of linguistic plurality in multilingual communities.

Our last article examines Latinx and non-Latinx parents’ perceptions of involvement in their children’s dual language bilingual education (DLBE) program in Catholic school contexts. Taking a national perspective, Laura Hamman-Ortiz, John Reyes, and Elena Sada considered parents’ experiences with the school and DLBE program along a continuum of activities ranging from traditional parent involvement through authentic parent engagement. Parents were asked to identify the ways they were invited to participate, their actual participation, and their overall satisfaction with the program and the school. Findings indicate high levels of parent involvement and satisfaction for both Latinx and non-Latinx parents. They also note, however, that most activities that parents were invited to participate in were on the involvement rather than engagement end of the continuum and that Latinx parents were less likely to be invited to participate in school leadership. High satisfaction may thus hide other kinds of inequities, and the researchers call on DLBE school leaders to consider parent engagement efforts and invite Latinx parents into decision-making structures.

Throughout the polemic history of bilingual education, monolingual language ideologies have permeated decisions on policies, programs, and practices regarding language use in educational settings. These decisions are reflective of the inequities prevalent in society. Yet committed educators, responding to what they observe in their daily interactions with children and students, resist language dominant hegemony and find ways to affirm students’ right to speak more than one language, to participate in the cultural practices of their communities, and to have a sound education. Their efforts are situated in the educational structures in which they teach which are filled with inequities, so they are not free of obstacles. However, educators persist. Guided by the professional development they have received, their life experiences and commitment to educational equity, educators creatively experiment with learning experiences in their classrooms to honor the goals of bilingual education. The articles included in this issue illustrate this quest.

In this issue, we also include a review of the book titled Educating Emergent Bilingual Youth in High School: The Promise of Critical Language and Literacy Education by author Jie Y. Park that was written by Andi Hidayat Thamrin. The work presented addresses the importance and relevance of integrating critical language and literacy pedagogies with emergent bilingual students at the high school level.