Microsoft Word - Soriano Florez_8.1.docx E-­‐JournALL,  EuroAmerican  Journal  of  Applied  Linguistics  and  Languages   Volume  8,  Issue  1,  March  2021,  82–86   ISSN  2376-­‐905X       http://doi.org/10.21283/2376905X.13.239   www.e-­‐journall.org   © Soriano Flórez 2021. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.   Review/Reseña:  Paulsrud,  BethAnne,  Tian,  Zhongfeng,  &  Toth,  Jeanette   (Eds.).  (2021).  English-­‐medium  instruction  and  translanguaging.   Multilingual  Matters.           IRENE  SORIANO  FLÓREZ     Universidad  Complutense  de  Madrid       Book  Review     Received  5  March  2021;  accepted  after  revision  20  March  2021   ABSTRACT EN This text reviews English-Medium Instruction and Translanguaging, edited by Paulsrud, Tian, and Toth, published this year (2021) by Multilingual Matters. The book comprises eleven empirical studies from across the globe, by different authors, raising awareness of the multiple possibilities, challenges, and considerations that emerge when addressing translanguaging in English-medium instruction (EMI) today. The authors of this volume inspire new research paths towards translanguaging theory, practice, and policy. Key words: TRANSLANGUAGING, ENGLISH-MEDIUM INSTRUCTION (EMI), LINGUISTIC REPERTOIRE, L1 USE ES Este texto es una reseña de English-Medium Instruction and Translanguaging de Paulsrud, Tian y Toth, publicado este año (2021) por Multilingual Matters. El libro recoge once estudios empíricos procedentes de todo el mundo y de distintos autores, que permiten conocer las múltiples posibilidades, consideraciones y retos que surgen al abordar el translenguaje en contextos de inglés como Medio de Instrucción (IMI) hoy en día. Los autores de este volumen abren nuevas vías de investigación sobre la teoría y la práctica asociadas al translenguaje y sobre políticas educativas que lo incorporen. Palabras clave: TRANSLENGUAJE, INGLÉS COMO MEDIO DE INSTRUCCIÓN (IMI), REPERTORIO LINGÜÍSTICO, USO DE LA L1 IT Questo testo recensisce English-Medium Instruction and Translanguaging di Paulsrud, Tian e Toth, pubblicato quest’anno (2021) da Multilingual Matters. Il libro, che raccoglie undici studi empirici di diversi autori provenienti da tutto il mondo, permette di conoscere le molteplici possibilità, le considerazioni e le sfide originate dall’occuparsi di translanguaging in un contesto di inglese come lingua d’istruzione (EMI). Le autrici e l’autore del volume indicano nuovi sentieri di ricerca sulla teoria e la pratica associate al translanguaging e sulle politiche educative che lo includono. Parole chiave: TRANSLANGUAGING, INGLESE COME LINGUA D’ISTRUZIONE (EMI), REPERTORIO LINGUISTICO, USO DELLA L1 * Irene  Soriano  Flórez,  Universidad  Complutense  de  Madrid   irensori@ucm.es   http://www.e-journall.org/ REVIEW/RESEÑA:  ENGLISH-­‐MEDIUM  INSTRUCTION  AND  TRANSLANGUAGING   E-­‐JournALL,  8(1)  (2021),  pp.  82–86 83 1.  Overview  of  the  volume   English-­‐Medium   Instruction  and  Translanguaging,  edited  by  Paulsrud,  Tian,  and  Toth,  offers  a   fresh,   global,  and  well-­‐documented  look  at  the  interplay  of  English-­‐medium  instruction  (EMI)  and  translanguaging   theory  and  pedagogy.  The  book  is  organised  in  eleven  compelling  and  comprehensible  chapters.  Together,  the   chapters  present  cutting-­‐edge  empirical   research,  which  unpacks  current  practices  and  provides  reflections   on  language  use  in  the  EMI  classroom,  from  primary  school  to  higher  education.     While   the   chapters   differ   in   the   linguistic   ecologies  and  geographical   contexts   they   address   (South   Africa,  Malawi,   Kenya,  Hong  Kong,   Japan,  Maldives,   Cambodia,   Kazakhstan,   Turkey   and   Italy),   they   point   at   common  goals  which  constitute  the  main  themes  of  this  volume.  One  of  these  themes  is  an  understanding  of   the   EMI   classroom   as   an   intrinsically   multilingual   space,   in   which   pedagogical   use   of   the   full   linguistic   repertoires  of  both  students  and  teachers  should  be  accepted  and  promoted  for  meaning  making.  That  theme   is  highlighted  all  over  the  volume,  together  with  an  opposition  to  dominant  monolingual  ideologies  and  their   colonial   underpinnings   regarding   English   as   the   only   medium   of   instruction   in   EMI.   A   second   theme   addressed  in  the  volume  is  the  need  to  acknowledge  and  to  raise  awareness  of  the  fluidity  of  language  use  that   happens   inside   classrooms,   as  well   as   to   encourage   EMI   stakeholders   to   recognise   the   role   of   the   home   languages  as  a  valuable  tool  for  learning.  This  giving  of  prestige  to  local  languages  also  implies  a  demand  to   determine   policy   from   a   bottom-­‐up   approach   that   reflects   and   legitimises   such   translanguaging   reality.   Finally,  the  editors of  the  volume  point  out  that  research  on  practices  in  EMI  university  classrooms—practices   that   address   learners   and   teachers’   beliefs   and   that   transcend   the   monolingual   medium   of   instruction   principle—is  still  very  limited  and,  hence,  they  encourage  it.      As   Paulsrud,   Tian,   and   Toth   foreground   in   the   introduction,   the  main   contribution   and   primary   innovation  of   this  book   lies   in  presenting  a  pedagogical  approach   that  allows  room  to  understand  different   possibilities  when   translanguaging   and   EMI   coexist,  not   only   for   communicating   and   learning,   but   also   for   challenging  monolingual   ideologies  and  existing  hierarchies,   fostering  social   justice,  and  developing  identity   and  educational  policy.  The  volume  closes  with  a  fantastic  epilogue,  a  reflection  by  Ute  Smit,  which  places  the   focus   on   “translanguaging   EMI”   (p.   257)   and   on   the   transformative   potential   that   translanguaging   encompasses  for  English-­‐medium  educational  settings.     2.  Individual  chapters     In  Chapter  1,  Sahan  and  Rose  advocate  for  a  broader  interpretation  of  the  “E”  in  EMI:  one  that  does   not   restrict   itself   to   English-­‐only   language   practices,   but   that   also   embraces   and   normalises  multilingual   practices.  Their  understanding  of   the  EMI  classroom  as  an   inherently  bi-­‐/multi-­‐lingual  space,  co-­‐created  by   non-­‐monolingual   students   and   teachers,   is   supported   by   the   various   empirical   studies   they   review,  which   point  at  the  advantages  of  fluid  language  use,  namely  L1  use.  Translanguaging  practices,  conceptualised  in  this   chapter  as  an  educational  tool,  are  shown  to  engage  the  entire  linguistic  repertoire  of  students  and  teachers,   who   make   meaning   simultaneously   in   different   languages   to   support   content   knowledge   learning   and   teaching.   In  Chapter  2,  Adamson  and  Fujimoto-­‐Adamson  explore  pedagogical  practices  of   translanguaging   in   the   Japanese  higher   education   (HE)   context,   through   an   intrinsic   case   study   at   a  university   established   in   2009,   whose  main   field   of   study   is   regional   development   and   international   studies.   The   authors   combine   multiple  methods,  such  as  semi-­‐structured   interviews,  questionnaires,  recordings  of  student-­‐to-­‐student  and   language  advisor-­‐to-­‐student  interaction,  discourse  analysis  and  a  collaborative  autoethnography  from  which   to   draw   EMI   findings.   The   authors   report   L1   and   L2   interaction   practices   to   be   apparent   within   content   faculty   to   address   international   issues,   to   provide   scaffolding,   for   classroom   management   and   in   their   teaching  materials,  among  others.  The  authors  consider  that  teaching  and  learning  in  EMI  programmes  with   mixed  proficiency  levels  brings  to  light  the  opportunities  and  challenges  of  translanguaging  practices  and,  in   this   sense,   they   view   the   scaffolding  of   the  L2   content   as  necessary   in   order   for   less  proficient   students   to   access  that  content.  In  this  context,  this  chapter  aims  at  highlighting  the  need  of  regarding  translanguaging  as   student-­‐determined  (p.  69)  and  of  regulating  policies  apropos  of  translanguaging.     Through   Chapter   3,   Reilly   shares   a   linguistic   ethnography   of   language   beliefs   and   practices   in   Malawian   universities   to   pinpoint   university   classrooms   as   spaces   created   by   translanguaging,   where   students   and   staff   can  make   use   of   their  multilingual   repertoires   (12  Malawian   languages,  with  Chichewa,   Chinyanja,  and  Chiyao  being  the  most  commonly  spoken  languages)  for  the  purposes  of  both  socialising  and   engaging  with   course   content.   Despite   this  multilingual   reality,   the   strict   English-­‐only   EMI   language   policy   SORIANO  FLÓREZ   E-­‐JournALL,  8(1)  (2021),  pp.  82–86  84 does  not   acknowledge  universities   as   translanguaging  spaces.   The   author  underlines   the  need   to   challenge   monolingual  ideologies  and  to  legitimise  this  multilingual  reality  by  embracing  a  translanguaging  perspective.   Such  a  perspective  would  value  student  and  staff  languages  and  guarantee  that  learners  acquire  the  essential   skills  to  thrive  in  both  a  global  context  and  the  local  environment.  This  shift,  Reilly  argues,  would  represent  a   valuable  decolonising  move,   an   opportunity   to   “disrupt   and   transcend   language   ideologies   from   the  Global   North”  (p.  78).   Chapter   4,   by   Luckett   and   Hurst-­‐Harosh,   addresses   how   translanguaging   pedagogies   in   the   humanities  and  social  sciences  in  South  Africa  can  support  student  engagement,  motivation,  meaning-­‐making,   and   conceptual   relationships.  They   focus   on   a   first-­‐year   course   in   a  degree   programme   in   the   Humanities   Faculty  at  the  University  of  Cape  Town.  Students  in  this  degree  come  mainly  from  disadvantaged  schools  and   the   programme   aims   at   redressing   previous   inequalities   “effected   during   apartheid   and   structurally   reproduced   through   the  continued  poor  quality  of  education   for  black  people   living   in   townships  and  rural   areas”   (p.   96).  The   authors   carefully   choose   13  essays  which   incorporate   instances   of   translanguaging  and   which   had   been  written   by   students   as   part   of   a   language   history   task.   Six   of   the   essays   were   written   in   English  and   isiXhosa;   two   in  English,   isiXhosa,  and  Sesotho;   three   in  English   and  Afrikaans;   one   in  English,   Afrikaans,   and   isiXhosa;   and   one   in   English,   Afrikaans,   and   Arabic.   Luckett   and   Hurst-­‐Harosh   analyse   the   different  meanings  students  make  when  they  are  allowed  to  write  using  their  full   linguistic  repertoires.  The   authors   group   the   data   into   four   “constellations”   (p.   98)   that   are   charged   by   sets   of   values   and   beliefs:   language  attitudes,   language  and   identity,   language  education  policy,  and   language  and  cultural  knowledge.   Based  on  their  findings,  Luckett  and  Hurst-­‐Harosh  assert  that  a  pedagogical  approach  that  regards  language   as  repertoire  and  resource   fosters  social   justice.  They  state   that,   in   this  case,   this  approach   is   implemented   despite   the   lack   of   a  multilingual   language   policy  at   this  higher   education   institution,  but   that   educational   language  policy  should  be  created  to  “respond  to  bottom-­‐up  practice”  (p.  94).  The  study  is  noteworthy  in  how   it   highlights   the   value   students   give   to   home   languages   as   conveyors   of   cultural   knowledge   and   how   it   foregrounds  multilingualism  as  the  future  for  language  practice  in  South  Africa.     In  Chapter   5,   Crisfield,   Gordon,   and   Holland   present   a   case   study   of   an   international   English-­‐only   programme  at  a  private   junior  school  (Grades  1-­‐5)   in  Kenya   that   implemented  a   translanguaging  pedagogy   balancing  Kiswahili  and  English.  The  authors  demonstrate  how  such  an   international  programme  facilitates   learning  while  providing  strong  bonds  with  the  local  culture  and  language.  They  argue  that  a  genuinely  ethical   model   of   education   should   consider   and   take   care   of   the   linguistic   needs   of   the   students,   “as   a   necessary   element  of  their  overall  development”  (p.  107).  The  authors  express  the  ethical  imperative  to  create  bilingual   programmes   that   incorporate   a   translanguaging   pedagogy   in   their   curriculum,   so   that   local   and   home   languages  and  students’  cultural  capitals  can  be  brought  to  light  and  developed  together  with  English.   Throughout  Chapter  6,  Mohamed  explores  translanguaging  practices  in  the  Maldives  through  a  case   study  based  on  storytelling  tasks.  In  this  context,  she  evaluates  how  four  children  (6-­‐11  years  old),  who  are   exposed  to  Dhivehi,  Arabic,  and  English,  use  their  linguistic  resources  to  both  create  and  tell  stories.  She  then   examines  how  the  children’s  narrations  are  influenced  when  their  language  use  is  limited  to  Dhivehi,  Arabic,   or   English.   In   general,   she   found   that   children   deliberately   shift   languages   for   reasons   of   “clarifying,   elaborating,   seeking   agreement,   using   specific   terminology,   confirming   and   self-­‐monitoring”   (p.   142).   Restraining  the  use  of  one  language  then  was  detrimental  to  children’s  linguistic  competence,  as  well  as  to  the   development  of  children’s   identity.  As  a  result,  Mohamed  argues  that  educational  policies  ought  to   integrate   translanguaging  pedagogy  and  practice.   In  Chapter  7,  in  the  context  of  content-­‐based  EMI  lab  classes  in  secondary  schools  in  Hong  Kong,  Pun   introduces   how   translanguaging   provides   a   space   to   scaffold   higher-­‐order   thinking   and   the   acquisition   of   abstract   scientific   knowledge.   The   author   judiciously   analyses   classroom   interactions   to   point   at   the   pedagogical  functions  of  students’  L1  (Cantonese)  and  L2  (English)  translanguaging  to  develop  higher-­‐order   thinking  and  scientific  English.  Pun  found  that  the  teachers  made  flexible  use  of  the  L1  to  formulate  higher-­‐ order  questions  that  facilitated  the  understanding  of  both  complex  scientific  concepts  and  of  the  L2,  through   repetition  of  L2  content.  Pun  emphasises  the  need  to  acknowledge  the  key  value  of  translanguaging  for  EMI   teacher   training   and   pedagogy,   arguing   that  more   attention   should   be   paid   to   form-­‐focused   instruction,   in   order   “to  provide  students  with  more  opportunities   for  L2   learning  alongside   the  development  of   scientific   knowledge”  (p.  169).   In  Chapter  8,  Boun  and  Wright  present  English/Khmer  translanguaging  perceptions  and  practices  in   a  Master  of  Education  (MEd)  programme  at  a  university  in  Cambodia.  In  so  doing,  they  address  the  views  of   both  faculty  members  and  students  regarding  attitudes  and  academic  and  linguistic  needs  regarding  the  use   REVIEW/RESEÑA:  ENGLISH-­‐MEDIUM  INSTRUCTION  AND  TRANSLANGUAGING   E-­‐JournALL,  8(1)  (2021),  pp.  82–86 85 of  Khmer  and  English  in  the  programme.  Their  findings  suggest  that  the  use  of  Khmer  occurs  mainly  in  group   discussions,  in  presenting  new  information,  in  describing  key  aspects  after  a  presentation  in  English,  or  to  use   humour  in  class.  The  authors  observe  that,  because  of  Khmer’s  function  in  humourous  interactions,  students   are  eager  to  use  Khmer,  together  with  English.  Interestingly,  the  authors  also  observe  that  students’  literacies   and   language   learning   benefit   from   these   translanguaging   practices,  which   facilitate   academic   content   and   offer  “greater  opportunities  for  success  than  if  the  programme  is  conducted  entirely  in  Khmer  or  English”  (p.   191).     In  Chapter   9,   Dalziel   and   Guarda   focus   readers’   attention   on   a   European,   Italian   higher   education   setting  to  analyse  translanguaging  patterns  in  student  language  practices  and  the  function  of  these  patterns  in   EMI.  They  illustrate  how  translanguaging  promoted  content  knowledge  and  prevented  domain  loss  of  Italian   for   EMI   students   and   that   translanguaging   also   helped   international   students   to   assimilate   into   the   local   society  by  discussing  meaning  with   their  classmates.  The  authors  note   that   these   translanguaging  practices   were   commonplace,   regardless   of   teachers’   and   students’   stated   belief   in   using   only   English.   However,   learners   regarded   these   practices   as   fully   acceptable   solely   in   student-­‐to-­‐student   and   group   work   interactions.   Yet,   in   these   interactions,   translanguaging   was   used   for   meaning-­‐making   functions,   task   instructions,   fostering   cooperation,  verbalising  academic   content,  and   indicating   cultural   identity,   therefore   ultimately  strengthening  content  and  language  learning.  In  this  line,  the  authors  underline  the  relevance  and   usefulness  of   “transliteracy   practices”   (p.   204),  by  which   students   access   their   full   linguistic   repertoire   for   literacy  input  and  output  in  a  flexible  manner.   Chapter   10,   written   by   Goodman,   Kerimkulova,   and   Montgomery,   explores   how   translanguaging   practices  are  regarded  by  Kazakhstani  students  in  an  English-­‐medium  university.  Goodman,  Kerimkulova,  and   Montgomery   state   that   students,   who   have   strong   proficiency   levels   in   English,   do   not   consider   translanguaging  a  helpful  pedagogical  practice.  Nevertheless,  after  graduation,  alumni  translanguage  actively   at  work  by  adapting   their  use  of  Russian,  Kazakh,  or  English   flexibly  and  strategically.  This   translanguaging   allows  them  to  reuse  and  modify  academic  practices  that  they  have  previously  acquired,  transferring  them  to   a  new,  working  context.  In  this  way,  despite  struggling  to  produce  different  textual  genres  in  Russian,  due  to   “absence   of   experience   and   training   in   writing   and   doing   research   in   the   language,   unawareness   of   terminology   and   unfamiliarity   with   structure”   (p.   230),   the   alumni   are   able   to   use   their   shifting   among   languages   to  adjust   to   the  employer   requirements.  This   chapter   shows   that   translanguaging   is   an   effective   strategy  towards  enhancing  transfer  of  academic  skills  beyond  EMI.   In   the   last   chapter   of   this   book,   Chapter   11,  Probyn   reveals   the   controversy   surrounding   EMI   and   linguistic  ecologies  in  South  African  schools,  where  most  of  the  speakers  of  African  languages  are  almost  only   exposed   to   English   inside   the   classroom.   Probyn   ably   analyses   planned   and   spontaneous   in-­‐class   translanguaging  practice  to  ponder  how  these  practices  may  inform  the  development  of  “context-­‐appropriate   translanguaging   pedagogies”   (p.   250)   and   change   “entrenched   language-­‐in-­‐education   ideologies”   (p.   255)   towards  social  justice  in  South  African  education.  Moreover,  in  the  face  of  a  lack  of  teaching  guidelines  around   the   functions   of   students’   local   languages   in   learning,   the   author   advocates   for   a   teacher   training   that   incorporates  a  translanguaging  pedagogy  that  can  be  followed  and  scaffolded,  for  student  teachers  to  learn  a   flexible  translanguaging  practice  dependent  on  different  linguistic  environments.     3.  Conclusiones  (Translingual)   Together,   the  chapters  above  highlight   the  main  theme  of  this  review:  the  need  to  place  students  at   the   centre   of   translanguaging   pedagogies   and   to   normalise   multilingual   practices   in   content   learning   environments,  thereby  challenging  monolingual  ideologies  and  preserving  local  languages.  Yet,  these  chapters   also  make  clear  the  need  for  more  empirical  research  conducted  at  the  university  level,   in  order  to  describe   the  operationalisation  of  a  translanguaging  pedagogy  in  higher  education  contexts,  with  a  focus  on  students’   strategies   and   disciplinary   views   of   their   learning.   This   way   forward   echoes  Mazak   and   Carroll’s   (2016)   edited   volume,   Translanguaging   in   higher   education:   Beyond   monolingual   ideologies,   which   contemplates   various  challenges  that  the  implementation  of  translanguaging  practices  pose  in  higher  education  institutions,   such   as   providing   future   teachers   with   “the   discourse   to   explain   and   justify   their   use   of   translanguaging   practices”   (p.   182).   In   order   to   consider   how   English-­‐medium   educational   realities   at   university   are   influenced   by   forces   that   operate   simultaneously   at   local   and   global   levels,   such   empirical   research  would   benefit   from   Dafouz   and   Smit’s   dynamic   ROAD-­‐MAPPING   framework   (2020),   a   sociolinguistic   and   ecolinguistic  model  to  holistically  analyse  English-­‐medium  education  in  multilingual  university  settings.     SORIANO  FLÓREZ   E-­‐JournALL,  8(1)  (2021),  pp.  82–86  86 En  conclusión,  el  presente  volumen  ofrece  una  visión  exhaustiva  y  global  de  la  teoría  y  la  práctica  del   translenguaje  en   la  actualidad,  revelando  la  necesidad  de  continuar   investigando  este   fascinante  camino.  En   este  sentido,  al  final  del  libro  los  autores  indican,  a  modo  de  colofón  a  una  lectura  fructífera,  una  serie  de  áreas   que   requieren   estudio,   entre   otras,   el   translenguaje   como   medio   de   instrucción.   Así,   los   autores   inspiran   nuevas   vías   de   investigación   sobre   la   teoría,   la   práctica   y   la   política   educativa   y   lingüística   asociada   al   translenguaje.  En  esta  línea,  se  trata  de  un  libro  relevante  para  un  amplio  público  de  lectores,  desde  maestros   a   profesores   de   secundaria   y   universidad,   futuros   profesores,   investigadores,   responsables   de   política   lingüística  y  alumnos  universitarios.  En  definitiva,  este  es  un  libro  interesante  para  todos  aquellos  que  deseen   enriquecerse   en   esta   materia   y   contribuir   positivamente   al   desarrollo   de   la   educación   desde   un   enfoque   práctico   y   socialmente   justo,   que   abarque   y   fomente   el   uso   de   los   repertorios   lingüísticos   al   completo,   incorporando  de  manera  pedagógica  las  lenguas  maternas  a  los  procesos  de  aprendizaje  y  comunicación.         References   Dafouz,   Emma,   &   Smit,   Ute   (2020).   ROAD-­‐MAPPING   English   medium   education   in   the   Internationalised   University.  Palgrave-­‐McMillan.   Mazak,   Catherine   M.,   &   Carroll,   Kevin   S.   (Eds.)   (2016).  Translanguaging   in   higher   education:   Beyond   monolingual  ideologies.  Multilingual  Matters.             Irene Soriano Flórez, Universidad Complutense de Madrid irensori@ucm.es EN Irene Soriano Flórez is a Ph.D. student in English linguistics at the Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM) and a member of the international SHIFT research project, “Understanding the Internationalisation of Higher Education from the Student Perspective.” Her main academic interest centers on multilingual practices and policies within the internationalisation of higher education. ES Irene Soriano Flórez es estudiante de doctorado en lingüística inglesa en la Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM) y miembro del proyecto de investigación internacional SHIFT, “Understanding the Internationalisation of Higher Education from the Student Perspective”. Su principal interés académico se centra en las prácticas y políticas multilingües en el contexto de la internacionalización de la educación superior. IT Irene Soriano Flórez è dottoranda in linguistica inglese presso la Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM). Partecipa al progetto di ricerca internazionale SHIFT, “Understanding the Internationalisation of Higher Education from the Student Perspective”. La sua principale area di studio è quella delle pratiche e delle politiche multilingui nel contesto di internazionalizzazione istruzione superiore. OLE_LINK4 OLE_LINK3