Should Standard Arabic have "the lion’s share?": Teacher ideologies in L2 Arabic through the lens of pedagogical translanguaging

12Citations
Citations of this article
33Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

With the multilingual turn in applied linguistics, translanguaging has been envisioned as a pedagogical approach in multiple contexts (Creese & Blackledge, 2010; Galante, 2020; Yilmaz, 2019). Recent discussions have turned to teachers’ perspectives to understand how teachers’ monolingual ideologies and beliefs could limit the potential of such approaches (Hillman et al., 2019; Holdway & Hitchcock, 2018; Tian, 2020). With a focus on Arabic as a multidialectal and multiglossic language, this paper examines teachers’ translanguaging ideologies and practices and their nexus to language learning and intercultural communication. It used a focused, semi-structured interview to determine to what degree teachers’ practices were consistent or in conflict with their ideologies regarding translanguaging. They were challenged with positions from translanguaging pedagogy to initiate their conceptual development. A discrepancy was found between teachers’ ideologies and practices. That is, whereas they initially hesitated to accept translanguaging as a legitimate pedagogy, they were indeed translanguaging. This discrepancy is argued to limit learning. A qualitative analysis of the interviews with some teachers showed the emergence of an internally persuasive discourse about the potential of translanguaging. In light of teacher reflections that specified legitimate challenges, we argue for the judicious adoption of translanguaging pedagogy in multilingual and multicultural settings and discuss pedagogical implications and future research directions.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Azaz, M., & Abourehab, Y. (2021). Should Standard Arabic have “the lion’s share?”: Teacher ideologies in L2 Arabic through the lens of pedagogical translanguaging. Intercultural Communication Education, 4(1), 90–105. https://doi.org/10.29140/ice.v4n1.442

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free