Session Information
31 SES 03 C, Is English Key to Mobility in a Multilingual World?
Paper Session
Contribution
Learning English is increasingly touted as the key to wider social, economic and educational mobility in a globalised world (Crystal, 2003; Graddol, 2007). This is so at two levels. English, as the current world language, is regularly preferred as the language of wider communication and social engagement in multilingual contexts (Brutt Griffler, 2002; Edwards, 2010; Schulzke, 2014; Van Parijs, 2011). In such contexts, English is promoted as the most prestigious and instrumentally useful language, particularly, in key public domains such as education, while other languages, most often described as "local", are delimited to diglossic lower status, private language domains (May, 2014a, 2015).
The association with the acquisition of English and (subsequent) social and economic mobility is thus taken as a sine qua non – as an irrefutable demonstration of linguistic cosmopolitanism and globalisation. Conversely, the maintenance of “local” languages is, more often than not, associated with cultural and linguistic isolationism and social and economic stasis or retrenchment – as specifically (and wilfully) disadvantageous for bi/multilingual speakers (Archibugi, 2005; Barry, 2001).
The educational consequences of these broad understandings linking English ineluctably to wider social and economic mobility are also readily apparent. English-medium education is expanding exponentially across the world, even (and, perhaps, especially) in contexts where English is not widely spoken (see, e.g., Heugh, 2008; Hornberger & Vaish, 2009). This includes not only compulsory schooling but, increasingly, tertiary education as well (Coleman, 2006, 2012; Doiz et al., 2013; Kirkpatrick & Gill, 2013; Tollefson & Tsui, 2004). Both developments are invariably at the specific expense of first language (L1) education in local and/or national languages, as well as bi/multilingual education provision for other language speakers (Canagarajah, 2005; May, 2014b)
In this paper, I will critique the discourses of linguistic cosmopolitanism that privilege English as the key to individual mobility and wider individual and societal engagement, as well as the associated promotion and expansion of English-medium education at the expense of L1 education and bi/multilingual programmes. I argue that the former tend to entrench linguistic homogeneity and existing linguistic "hierarchies of prestige" (Liddicoat, 2013), while the latter provide both a stronger basis for, and the potential expansion of, linguistic diversity in relation to social, cultural and educational mobility in this globalised world.
Method
Drawing on Van Parijs’s (2011) discussion of linguistic cosmopolitanism in the European context, I will critique the privileging of English as a global language, at the expense of local languages, in linguistic cosmopolitan discourses, as well as associated arguments promoting English as the key to individual mobility and wider individual and societal engagement. In the process, I will examine questions of language ‘status’ and ‘reach’, along with what can (and cannot) be accomplished via languages such as English. At the macro level, this includes highlighting how existing class and linguistic hierarchies actively delimit the claims of cosmopolitans that globalisation ‘proceeds in English’ (Archibugi, 2005). At the micro level, it involves exploring how the instrumental benefits of English for individuals are often wildly overstated, particularly for the poor, marginalised and/or disadvantaged. This critique will also necessarily entail a (re)appraisal of the effectiveness of educational policies that promote English at the expense of other languages vis-à-vis L1 and more overtly bi/multilingual education approaches.
Expected Outcomes
I argue that the rush to privilege English in more and more educational contexts, on the grounds of perceived enhanced educational and wider social mobility, is overstated and needs to be critically reappraised – both theoretically and in relation to educational policy and implementation.
References
Archibugi, D. (2005). The language of democracy: vernacular or Esperanto? A comparison between the multiculturalist and cosmopolitan perspectives. Political Studies 53, 3, 537-555. Barry, B. (2001). Culture and Equality: an egalitarian critique of multiculturalism. Cambridge Brutt-Griffler, J. (2002). Class, ethnicity and language rights: an analysis of British colonial policy in Lesotho and Sri Lanka and some implications for language policy. Journal of Language, Identity and Education 1, 3: 207-234. Coleman, J. (2006). English-medium teaching in European higher education. Language Teaching 39, 1, 1-14. Coleman, H. (ed.) (2011). Dreams and realities: developing countries and the English language. London: British Council. Crystal, D. (2003). English as a Global Language. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Doiz, A., Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (Eds.) (2013). English-medium instruction at universities: global challenges. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Edwards, J. (2010). Minority Languages and Group Identity: cases and categories. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Graddol, D. (2007). English Next: why global English may mean the end of ‘English as a Foreign Language’. London: British Council. Heugh, K. (2008). Language policy in Southern Africa. In S. May and N. Hornberger (eds.), Encyclopedia of Language and Education, 2nd ed., Vol. 1: Language Policy and Political Issues in Education, (pp. 355-367). New York: Springer. Hornberger, N., & Vaish, V. (2009). Multilingual language policy and school linguistic practice: globalization and English‐language teaching in India, Singapore and South Africa. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education 39, 3, 305-320. Kirkpatrick, A., & Gill, S.K. (2013). English in higher education in the postcolonial world, in C. Chapelle (Ed.) The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell. Liddicoat, A. (2013). Language-in-education policies: The discursive construction of intercultural relations. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. May, S. (2014a) Contesting public monolingualism and diglossia: Rethinking political theory and language policy for a multilingual world. Language Policy 13, 4, 371-393. May, S. (2014b). Justifying educational language rights. Review of Research in Education, 38, 1, 215-241. May, (2015). The problem with English(es) and linguistic (in)justice. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy. Schulzke, M. (2014). The prospects of global English as an inclusive language. Globalizations 11, 2, 225-238. Tollefson, J. and Tsui, A. (eds.) Medium of Instruction Policies: Which agenda? Whose Agenda?. Mahwah, NJ:. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Vaish, V. (2008). Biliteracy and Globalization: English language education in India. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. Van Parijs, P. (2011). Linguistic justice for Europe and for the world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.