Pedagogical Translanguaging

Cenoz, Jasone; Gorter, Durk

doi:10.1017/9781009029384

Cited by 124 publications

(103 citation statements)

References 103 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Translanguaging is a term that has gained currency in recent years to refer to different realities in educational and non-educational contexts around the world (Cummins, 2021; García and Li, 2014; Liu and Fang, 2020; Makalela, 2019; Zavala, 2019). Translanguaging is a polysemic word nowadays and can be understood as an umbrella term that refers to a number of theoretical and practical proposals (Cenoz and Gorter, 2020, 2021; Jaspers, 2018; Leung and Valdés, 2019). In this article we look at pedagogical translanguaging that is defined as follows: ‘planned by the teacher inside the classroom and can refer to the use of different languages for input and output or to other planned strategies based on the use of students’ resources from the whole linguistic repertoire’ (Cenoz, 2017: 194).…”

Section: Translanguaging and Pedagogical Translanguagingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pedagogical Translanguaging and Its Application to Language Classes

Cenoz

Gorter

2022

RELC Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pedagogical translanguaging refers to the use of different planned strategies based on activating students’ resources from their whole linguistic repertoire . The aim of this article is to examine the theoretical foundations of pedagogical translanguaging and its application in the classroom. The core characteristics of pedagogical translanguaging will be discussed in relation to the languages, students and programmes. Pedagogical translanguaging embraces different practices, but they all share the characteristic of being planned by the teacher with a pedagogical purpose and using resources from the students’ whole linguistic repertoire. In this way it is different from spontaneous translanguaging. Translanguaging practices aim at activating the students’ multilingual and multimodal repertoires so that they can benefit from their own multilingualism. Translanguaging practices can have strong or weak forms depending on the degree of pedagogical intervention that takes place in the process of learning and the use of two or more languages in the same class session. Some strong translanguaging practices use resources from different languages in the same class so as to develop metalinguistic awareness, while other weaker forms are based on the cross-linguistic coordination of activities carried out in different classes. The article will also discuss the challenges that the implementation of pedagogical translanguaging poses for language teachers.

show abstract

Section: Translanguaging and Pedagogical Translanguagingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pedagogical Translanguaging and Its Application to Language Classes

Cenoz

Gorter

2022

RELC Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, translanguaging aims to activate multilinguals’ resources and to expand language and content learning. A well-planned, systematic pedagogy of translanguaging can emphasize the fluidity of linguistic practices at its core, opposing the tendency that promotes the separation of named languages (Cenoz and Gorter, 2021; Sah and Li, 2022). Second, translanguaging pedagogical lenses help teachers understand the complex ways in which their plurilingual students communicate, looking at their different levels of proficiency as one of the features of translanguaging, and not as a deficiency that needs remediation.…”

Section: Exploring Potentials Of Translanguaging In Clilmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this regard, language in CLIL refers to the language of subject matter that is highly relevant to academic language and literacy and schooling. Subsequently, there has been growing interest in functional and pragmatic uses of language (Dalton-Puffer and Nikula, 2006; Llinares et al, 2012) to further understand how language in CLIL classrooms becomes a meaning-making resource for learning. For example, Llinares et al (2012) combined Vygotskyan sociocultural theory of learning and systemic functional linguistics (SFL) to demonstrate the roles of language in classroom communication and in genres and registers where subject-specific knowledge is constructed.…”

Section: Development Of the Construct Of Language In Clilmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translanguaging and Trans-Semiotizing for Critical Integration of Content and Language in Plurilingual Educational Settings

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Arising in Europe in the early 1990s, content and language integrated learning (CLIL) has become a popular educational approach. CLIL involves a dual focus on content and language learning with an additional language used as the medium of instruction. Although CLIL has received much attention and spread widely around the world, there is limited discussion that critically examines CLIL in relation to its core construct of integration between content and language learning. In particular, the phrasing of ‘content and language integrated learning’ gestures towards viewing language and content as separate entities. With these fundamental issues in mind, we discuss ways in which translanguaging pedagogies can provide a fruitful direction towards a critical integration of content and language learning in multilingual settings. With a view to contributing to a dynamic integration of content and language learning, we argue that CLIL pedagogies informed by translanguaging allow fluidity in meaning-making practices and critically re-examine the construct of language in CLIL. This approach responds to recent calls for more critical approaches to CLIL in order to challenge ‘English-only’/target-language-only pedagogies, ‘native-(English-)speakerism’, and unequal power relations between content and language teachers in many CLIL programs. Implications of this approach to CLIL classrooms in diverse settings are also discussed.

show abstract

“…Research that takes into account linguistic resources from the entire linguistic repertoires of multilingual speakers represents the core background of this study. Furthermore, this study seeks to echo Cenoz and Gorter’s (2020 , 2021) pedagogical translanguaging principles which consider it fundamentally problematic to fail to utilise learners’ prior knowledge to support emerging discourses. This study also endorses Cummins’ (2021) theoretical views on crosslinguistic educational practices that explicitly challenge the exclusion of some of the linguistic resources of multilingual learners whilst calling for more explicit attention to the development of multilingual language awareness by focussing on crosslinguistic similarities and differences amongst students’ varieties.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teachers’ language use in United Kingdom Chinese community schools: Implications for heritage-language education

Yiakoumetti

2022

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study deals with teachers’ language use as it is manifested in community-based heritage-language classes. Specifically, it focuses on the functions of students’ dominant variety (L1, English) when harnessed by teachers for the purposes of teaching their ethnic language (L2, Mandarin Chinese). Empirical investigation was conducted at two Chinese community schools in the United Kingdom and data demonstrate that students’ L1 was utilised naturally and systematically by teachers to facilitate students’ L2 learning. Various L1 facilitative functions were identified and these generally accord well with functions recorded in other studies. In addition, this study underlines the potentially unique characteristics of community-based heritage-language education: while the target variety of students (Mandarin Chinese) is routinely the native variety of teachers, teachers struggle to explain new linguistic information in Mandarin because of students’ low proficiency while they concurrently struggle with at least some elements of students’ native or dominant variety (English). Teachers explained that the fact that students’ dominant language of English is a global language makes their use of it all the more likely. Teachers demonstrated a strong tendency to feel ill-prepared for their language teaching role. There is thus a clear need for heritage-language teachers to receive training that is sociolinguistically informed. This training should emphasise the potential utility of exploiting students’ full linguistic repertoires by drawing in particular on the crosslinguistic similarities and differences between the varieties of which students are cognisant. Teacher-training programmes that promote such awareness may well hold the key to better heritage-language education which will continue to have a crucial role in maintaining and developing minority community languages.

show abstract

Pedagogical Translanguaging

Cited by 124 publications

References 103 publications

Pedagogical Translanguaging and Its Application to Language Classes

Pedagogical Translanguaging and Its Application to Language Classes

Translanguaging and Trans-Semiotizing for Critical Integration of Content and Language in Plurilingual Educational Settings

Teachers’ language use in United Kingdom Chinese community schools: Implications for heritage-language education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About