Hard Time Seeing the Relevance

Abstract

Perceptions of linguistic deficiency represent an extension of the devaluation of Black and racialized speakers which impacts their participation and representation, particularly within language classrooms. Though racism is directly challenged in current education research, language education remains a fertile space for weaponizing seemingly race-neutral terms like ‘culture’ and ‘identity’ as a means of minimizing the importance of race and other sociocultural factors on classroom language learning. Through semistructured interviews, this critical qualitative case study investigates the racial ideologies of three language teacher educators (LTEs) at Franklin University. Findings suggest the de-racialization of ‘culture’ and ‘identity’ influences the goals, design, and execution of instruction in this language teacher preparation program. Implications include guidance for language teacher preparation research and practice inclusive of centering race and clarifying the roles of race and power in language teacher preparation. Critically confronting who benefits or suffers when we use the term ‘culture’ in lieu of race in teacher preparation is also recommended.

The presence and absence of race in world language education literature

“…Systemic or structural racism occurs when societal structures (re)produce inequitable access to power, resources, and opportunities. These inequities are invisibilized through social forces in policy, media, and schooling such that those racialized as White often enact colorblindness, race evasiveness, or post-racial discourses to avoid grappling with race (see Austin, 2022aAustin, , 2022bBaggett, 2018;Tatum, 2021). However, such ideologies erase the realities and lived experiences of racially minoritized individuals for whom racial realities are far from invisible (Bonilla-Silva, 2017).…”

“…These contexts contrasted significantly with my first position as a French teacher at a diverse urban public middle school in a large mid‐Atlantic U.S. city. This teaching context highlighted for me the inseparability of race and WL education as I experienced, but could not name at the time, racialized tensions between myself, some of my students, and our curriculum (see Austin, 2022a, 2022b for a discussion of racialized ideologies and tensions in WL curriculum and teacher preparation). As I continue to interrogate my own identity as a continued learner, this analysis is part of an on‐going journey to understand the role of race in WL teaching and learning.…”

“…Learners in WL classrooms are socially racialized themselves and experience differential access to power and privilege based on the operation of systemic whiteness in U.S. education. Yet recent research has shown that in WL contexts, the notion of “culture” often becomes a coded term to avoid addressing race directly (Austin, 2022a). Furthermore, addressing issues of race in WL classrooms requires specific training as part of WL teacher preparation, but this training is often lacking (Austin, 2022b).…”

“…These preliminary findings indicate that much can be learned from the voices and stories of racially minoritized groups in WL. Further historical analyses can complement efforts of scholars to center contemporary experiences of racially minoritized groups, such as recent work focused on anti‐Blackness in WL learning (e.g., Anya, 2011, 2020, 2021; Austin, 2022a, 2022b).…”

Toward humanizing SFL praxis: Coconstructing language teachers' understandings of their intersectional identities via language use

“…The present study is part of an on‐going collaborative self‐study of teacher educator practices (e.g., Austin, 2022a, 2022b; Peercy & Sharkey, 2020; Peercy & Troyan, 2017) in which we are collaboratively examining our development of a humanizing SFL praxis, moving back and forth between our language teacher education program and the classrooms where the language teachers teach (e.g., Sembiante et al, 2021; Troyan & Sembiante, 2021; Troyan et al, 2021). Because of the centrality of identity work in engaging in humanizing praxis, we position this reflexive work as a means for holding ourselves accountable, as teacher educators, to the language teachers we work with (Johnson, 2015; Troyan & Peercy, 2018).…”