This paper reports on a study of parental involvement of a group of Chinese parents in their children’s heritage language (HL) development in the UK. Parental involvement (PI) is not a new phenomenon. It is widely considered a critical predictor in children’s educational achievement, including their language proficiency (Epstein 2018; Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler 1997). Chinese immigrant parents, tend to be more involved explicitly in their children’s academic development through structured home-education practices (Curdt-Christiansen 2020;  Guo 2014). With regard to HL education, it is reported that they tend to send their children to community schools (Curdt-Christiansen 2009; Li & Ma 2017). But how parents respond to the changing educational contexts in the pandemic era and what support, if any, they provide to help their children learn HL requires an in-depth investigation.

The study is situated in the context of the pandemic lockdowns, where it has been observed that children from transnational families not only spend more time with their parents but are also more exposed to their heritage languages (Hardach, 2020). Through the lens of family language policy (FLP), this study explores the driving forces behind the parental decisions on their involvement in their children HL development and the types of involvement in the learning activities. FLP is defined as “explicit and overt, as well as implicit and covert, language planning by family members in relation to language choice and literacy practices within home domains and between family members” (Curdt-Christiansen, 2018, p. 421).Much of current FLP research draws on Spolsky’s (2009) triadic model of language policy which consists of three interrelated components: language ideology, language practices, and language management (intervention). Parental involvement, in this regard can be considered part of the explicit and overt FLP which can be directly reflected in parents’ conscious investment in providing linguistic conditions and deliberate engagement in language learning and literacy development (Curdt-Christiansen, 2018, 2020). While research into FLP has flourished in recent years, from studying why parents make certain decisions on what languages to learn (e.g., Curdt-Christiansen, 2016; Lanza & Lexander, 2019) to how they facilitate home language practices (e.g., Curdt-Christiansen & Lanza, 2018; Said & Zhu 2019), few studies have examined how parents are involved in their children’s online heritage language learning during the lockdowns.

Involving seven Chinese families of different home country origins, this study looks into why parents choose to enrol their children in a particular online heritage language learning programme, the Language Link. It further examines what roles parents play during the online learning sessions and how children perceive parental involvement in the online learning of Chinese as HL. The study adopts the netnographic approach to data collection (Kozinets, 2015) in response to school closure during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Involving seven families and their children (n=14), this study adopts netnographical approach to data collection (Kozinets, 2015). Netnography is a specific approach to conducting ethnography on the internet, examining online cultures and life and focusing on online social interactions in a changing world. It is a qualitative, interpretive research methodology developed from the traditional ethnographic techniques to the study of social media through participant-observation. Netnography provides tools of inquiry, including online observation, participation, communication and archives, to enable researchers to conduct an “ethical and thorough ethnographic research” in the digital world (Kozinets, 2015, p.3). In this study, Data were collected from September 2020 to August 2021 through the following measures: 1) online classroom observations; 2) parents’ focus group interviews; 3) parent-teacher interactions; and 4) semi-structured interviews with children. Data are coded through emerging patterns and presented in the following types of parental involvement: parents as emotional supporters, co-educators, teaching assistants, and technical supporters.

The findings suggest that parental involvement needs to be reconceptualised in relation to FLP. With online learning in particular, it goes beyond the three elements of language ideology, language practices and language management to include why they are involved in and how they select specific types of involvement. Building on existing studies, we propose a new model of parental involvement (PI) that includes PI as a commitment, PI as a process, and PI as a practice. This conceptualisation of PI will enhance our understanding of FLP by concretely manifesting what parents do and the ways they do it in their children’s heritage language development.

Curdt-Christiansen, X.L. (2020). Educating migrant children in the UK: Language and educational practices in home and school environments. International Multilingual Research Journal, 14(2), 163-180. Curdt-Christiansen, X. L. (2018). Family language policy. The Oxford handbook of language policy and planning, 420-441. Curdt-Christiansen, X.L. (2016). Conflicting language ideologies and contradictory language practices in Singaporean bilingual families. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 37(7), 694-709. Curdt-Christiansen, X.L. (2009). Visible and invisible language planning: Ideological factor in the family language policy of Chinese immigrant families in Quebec. Language Policy, 8(4), 351-375. Curdt-Christiansen, X.L. and Lanza, E. (2018). Language management in multilingual family: Efforts, measures and choices. Multilingua: Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication, 37(2), 123-130. Epstein, J. L. (2018). School, family, and community partnerships in teachers’ professional work. Journal of Education for Teaching, 44(3), 397–406. Guo, K. (2014). For a Better Life: The Aspirations of Chinese Immigrants in Parenting, Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 12(3), 293-310. Hardach, S. (2020). In Quarantine children pick up parents’ mother tongues. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/10/parenting/family-second-language coronavirus.html Hoover-Dempsey, K. V, & Sandler, H. M. (1997). Why do parents become Involved in their children’s education ? Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 3–42. Kozinets, R. (2015). Netnography: Redefined (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE. Lanza, E., & Lexander, K. V. (2019). Family Language Practices in Multilingual Transcultural Families. In Montanari, S., & Quay, S. (eds.) Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Multilingualism (pp. 229-252). De Gruyter Mouton. Li, G & Ma, W (2017). Educating Chinese-Heritage Students in the Global-Local Nexus: Identities, Challenges, and Opportunities. New York: Routledge. Said, F., & Zhu, H. (2019). “No, no Maama! Say ‘Shaatir ya Ouledee Shaatir’!” Children’s agency in language use and socialisation. International Journal of Bilingualism, 23(3), 771-785. Spolsky, B. (2009). Language management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.