Globalising literacy: the challenge of ethnolinguistic diversity in New Zealand

Abstract

This paper positions local literacy issues against a backdrop of increasing global ethnolinguistic diversity. National language choices are generally influenced by wider debates on the politics of location, so decisions about language(s) associated with teaching literacy in schools tend to occur at the intersection of national and international interests. The tensions that exist at this intersection may underlie the fact that, while schools in New Zealand have been keen to embrace the multimodal literacy opportunities offered by new technologies and greater global connectivity, increased ethnolinguistic diversity has been slower to impact on literacy pedagogy. As a result, New Zealand's educational policies have tended to reinforce literacy practices that are largely English dominant, and New Zealand teachers are often found to be negotiating literacy‐related pedagogy within intercultural classrooms by trial and error. This paper provides insights into this situation and presents three literacy scenarios involving young English language learners to illuminate some of the critical literacy challenges that face New Zealand education. Ultimately, it is argued that more emphasis on transliteracy experiences will be required to meet the educational aim of greater participation in future global contexts.

Multilanguage, Multipurpose: A Literature Review, Synthesis, and Framework for Critical Literacies in English Language Teaching

“…Therefore, while interviews were still a key form of data collection, these studies typically prioritized classroom observations and analysis of student work. The studies composing Group B-1 (Alford & Jetnikoff, 2011; Arce, 2000; Cummins, 2015; Dixon & Peake, 2008; Flores-Dueñas, 2005; Fredricks, 2012; Haworth, 2011; Henry, 1998; Kramer-Dahl, 2001; McLaughlin, 1994; Morgan, 2009; Roy, 2016; Sepúlveda, 2011) had a shared focus in recommending critical literacy as a foundation for courses, units, or overall educational policies. In general, these researchers asked, “How can critical literacies serve as a foundation for designing a policy or pedagogical approach?” and “How do such approaches impact multilingual learners and their critical engagement?” Such questions necessitated a clear operant definition of critical engagement and methods by which to highlight whether classroom practices aligned with this definition.…”

“…Other authors framed their research toward multilingual advocacy on a policy level. Cummins (2015), Dixon and Peake (2008), Haworth (2011), and McLaughlin (1994) all outlined the benefits of multilingual approaches to critical literacies, particularly in counteracting the detrimental impact of English-emphatic educational policies on speakers of minoritized languages, both in terms of academic achievement and cultural disenfranchisement.…”

Building a whole school approach and teacher efficacy with English language learners

“…In total, School B included 35% ELLs, which was substantial for this region of New Zealand where schools generally have just 10% or below of ELLs (Haworth, 2009). Pasifika ELLs are currently a particular focus for New Zealand school improvement initiatives as these students are disproportionately represented in the lower 25th percentile for literacy (Haworth, 2011). As Timperley and Parr (2009) (Mathews, 2012) The situation may be of even greater concern internationally.…”

Critical Literacy Practice

“…Despite the increasing attentions to global issues among literacy scholars in Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa (e.g., Haworth, 2011;Luke, Luke, & Graham, 2007;Nixon & Comber, 2009), global perspectives have not been a consistent focus nor a major framework for scholars and practitioners in the United States in particular (Hull, Stornaiuolo, & Sahni, 2010). Despite the increasing attentions to global issues among literacy scholars in Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa (e.g., Haworth, 2011;Luke, Luke, & Graham, 2007;Nixon & Comber, 2009), global perspectives have not been a consistent focus nor a major framework for scholars and practitioners in the United States in particular (Hull, Stornaiuolo, & Sahni, 2010).…”