Revisiting Code-Switching Practice in TESOL: a Critical Perspective

Asia-Paciﬁc Edu Res (2017) 26(6):407–415 DOI 10.1007/s40299-017-0359-9

REGULAR ARTICLE

Revisiting Code-Switching Practice in TESOL: A Critical Perspective

1 2 Hao Wang • Behzad Mansouri

Published online: 23 October 2017 Ó De La Salle University 2017

Abstract In academic circles, the English Only view and debate about code-switching, and provide some tangible Balanced view have established their grounds after vol- pedagogical implications in ELT classrooms. umes of work on the topic of code-switching in TESOL. With recent development in Critical Applied Linguistics, Keywords Code-switching Á Criticality Á Pedagogy Á poststructural theory, postmodern theory, and the emer- Identity Á Capital gence of multilingualism, scholars have begun to view ELT as a constantly shifting dynamic approach to questions of language in multiple contexts, rather than a method, a set Introduction of techniques, or a fixed body of knowledge (Lin in Appl Linguist Rev 4(1):195–218, 2013). Therefore, this paper With the rise of global travel, immigrants, economic, and represents a crucial step in addressing the paucity of military contact, multilingualism is a phenomenon that has research on the criticality and sociopolitical nature of code- been observed in many societies. In these societies, hun- switching in TESOL by drawing from the constructs of dreds of languages and varieties are used in daily com- identity (Peirce in TESOL Q 29(1):9–31, 1995), capital munications. This sign of multilingualism is however (Bourdieu in Soc Sci Inf 16(6):645–668, 1977), and critical viewed as a problem from nationalism and monolingualism pedagogy (Freire in Pedagogy of the oppressed, The perspectives because it is claimed to cause ‘‘civil unrest, Continuum Publishing, New York, 1970). The purpose of social segregation, family breakdown, educational failure this article is to draw connections between code-switching, and financial burden to the state’’ (Blackledge and Creese constructs of identity, and capital and reveal the power 2010, p. 5). Both nationalism and monolingualism are dynamics embedded in language learning process. We ideologies that use language as a tool of communication to suggest that language teachers be cognizant of the serve interest groups in our society. Bourdieu (1991) for sociopolitical aspect of code-switching and pay more example discussed how a standardized and monolingual attention to the multiple, fluid, and contradictory identities ideology marginalized other linguistic variants and speak- that are assigned, claimed, and negotiated by students in ers and bestowed power upon those who were able to speak classrooms. In this paper, we elaborate on studies that view the standard language. Thus, standard language ideology classroom codes-witching as social indexicality and iden- could be seen as the force of nation-state in support of tity construction, discuss the missing gap in the ongoing nationalism discourse. As a result, there is tension between multilingualism practice and the forces that discourage its development. Recently, influenced by poststructural, postmodern, and multilingual turn that foreground social & Hao Wang injustice, inequality, and oppression, and problematize the [email protected] orthodoxy in the way research and knowledge is concep- 1 School of Applied Foreign Languages, Zhejiang International tualized, scholars in Critical Applied Linguistics (CALx) Studies University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China have challenged a positivistic view of language as an 2 The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, USA enclosed system and embraced notions of heterogeneous 123 408 H. Wang, B. Mansouri language practice that recognizes the discourse of multi- ongoing debate about code-switching and provide some lingualism and the plurality of languages in everyday life. tangible pedagogical implications for TESOL profession. These scholarly contributions, fueled by the paradigmatic shifts, include alternative and more critical understanding English Only View of language practice as translanguaging (Lin 2013), heterography (Blommaert 2008), codemeshing (Canagara- As its name suggests, in an English Only perspective the jah 2006), metrolingualism (Otsuji and Pennycook 2010), medium of instruction in any TESOL contexts should be and multiliteracies (Cope and Kalantzis 2000). English language. Pedagogically and ideologically, one of In ELT classrooms, the phenomenon of using more than the main reasons of arguing for this view is the belief that one language has been documented in the ‘‘code-X’’ ter- exclusive use of the target language (TL) will significantly minology (Lin 2013) such as code-switching, code-mixing, increase learners’ TL exposure, thus developing compre- code-meshing, and code-alternation. Researchers in TESOL hensible input (Krashen 1985), which would then facilitate have pointed out the detriment of English only or maximal learners’ understanding of and production in TL. A similar English language use in language classrooms and illumi- view prevalent in the discussion of the English only nated the potential role of code-switching in learner identity movement is L2 maximum, which considers maximizing development, because both the students’ native languages L2 use to be effective in providing learning opportunities and English language are important for the maintenance of and experiences for learners (Kim and Elder 2005). This their memberships in different communities (Ellwood 2008; English Only view is reflective of a linguistic purism (Lin Liang 2006). While this body of work certainly touches on 2013) that could impact on learners’ linguistic practices the construct of identity in relation to learners’ second lan- and potentially be norm setting in TESOL. Take the guage acquisition in classrooms, there is a scarcity of the- communicative language teaching (CLT) method for oretical research that prominently features critical example, this is a center-based method as in Kachruvian engagement with code-switching practice in TESOL. sense that places salience mostly on L2 use in classrooms, Additionally, a recent survey of code-switching practice in which could potentially privilege language and culture TESOL suggests that researchers are still engaged in open produced by speakers from inner circle countries, debates regarding the extent and form of teacher-led code- marginalizing linguistic and cultural resources practiced by switching (Dailey-O’Cain and Liebscher 2015). Closer nonnative English speakers (Kumaravadivelu 2016). At the examination of the debates indicates that most discussions policy level, many Asian countries have adopted the frame language as skills instead of repertories and there is a rhetoric of CLT despite the fact that there is a gap between dearth of research that foregrounds code-switching practice this rhetoric and reality (Nunan 2003). In China for from a critical pedagogy informed perspective. A critical example, although no written guidelines regarding class- view of code-switching practice is needed because language room code-switching is materialized, teachers especially at use in classroom and beyond is identity positioning, ideo- tertiary level, are expected to adopt the maximum L2 logical, and invested in inequalities and injustices (Kubota approach in their teaching (Guo 2007). 2014). Such a perspective asks researchers to question and In its implementation, the coercive nature of an English challenge ‘‘naturalized and normalized assumptions and only view to ELT becomes more visible as it sets out to practices…….power and inequality……..[and] fixed regulate language use in classrooms and create a mono- knowledge’’ (Kubota and Miller 2017, p. 4). Thus, to enrich lingual language learning environment for students. To the ongoing dialogue about code-switching in TESOL pro- echo our introduction on criticality of code-switching, the fession and inform language teachers with theoretical languages that students are capable of articulating are not framework and principles in guiding their pedagogy, this bounded and fixed; instead, they are meshed together in article addresses the theoretical and pedagogical aspects of nonlinear fashion. If only English is allowed, then the code-switching using constructs of identity (Peirce 1995), students will have to peel off the multiple layers of lan- capital (Bourdieu 1977), and critical pedagogy (Freire guages together with the linguistic and sociocultural iden- 1970). For the purpose of discussion, we use code-switching tities that they possess and present themselves with the as an umbrella term in denoting the practice of channeling remaining English language layer. Interestingly though, between languages in classroom. We begin by briefly research has shown that teachers who believe in English reviewing the two stances towards code-switching practice: only or L2 maximum approach are engaging code- English only and Balanced view of English, being aware switching practice in classrooms, with the emotional dis- that as teaching practices they are not mutually exclusive to tress of guilt due to language policy police (Copland and each other. We then elaborate our critical theoretical Neokleous 2010). Similarly, language teachers who sup- framework and its relationship to code-switching practice in port a balanced view of language teaching are being rep- TESOL. In what follows, we discuss the missing gap in the rimanded for not using English only approach (Li 2017). 123 Revisiting Code-Switching Practice in TESOL: A Critical Perspective 409

Thus, there is a disparity between teachers’ stated belief in discussed a discourse view of language as social practice, classroom language use and actual linguistic practice. The how discourse and ideologies are in service of power, and contestation along with such moments of emotional dis- how language embodies social orderings, class, and power. turbance in code-switching practice are problematics we Once the ideological assumptions in English only view seek to challenge. become normalized, they become common sense that makes power inequalities invisible to learners (Fairclough Balanced View 1989). To problematize the practice that affects learners’ linguistic expression, we seek to denormalize this linguistic While the English only movement is strong and pervasive purism ideology that learners should only be given in TESOL all across the globe, its linguistic purism pre- opportunities to use the TL in classrooms because it best mise is questioned by scholars who believe in a balanced simulates real-life communication. Such denormalization and flexible view of L1 use (Garcıá and Wei 2014). Under process is invariably a critical stance taking in that it a balanced and flexible view, language teachers encourage questions the taken for granted language practice and raises students’ uses of their native languages in conjunction with learners’ consciousness of the interplay between language the target language in recognition of the fluid nature of and power. It resonates with Freire’s (1970) remark that language practice and the multiple language resources that education is always political as it serves as a site for students bring to the classrooms. Current researchers struggle between modes of domination and other social working in the area of code-switching believe that this groups. Likewise, we consider language learning and view of balancing the use of TL and student’s mother teaching to be political because they involve learners’ tongues would not only assist in their second language investment (Peirce 1995), unequal educational opportuni- acquisition process cognitively, but also foster the devel- ties, pedagogy, language standardization/homogenization, opment of bilingual or multilingual speakers (Dailey- and social class, which are all intertwined with the power O’Cain and Liebscher 2015). While this view of code- dynamics circulating in the society. Thus, grounded in switching is widely recognized for its credit, how to carry it poststructuralism and critical pedagogy, this paper dis- out in class remains a topic of discussion. Some question cusses the significance of integrating identity, capital, and teachers’ deliberate modeling of learners’ code-switching critical pedagogy into the current debate of code-switching practice and suggest a pure laissez-faire approach that in TESOL. As scholars in the field have pointed out, requires no teacher intervention but gives students consent identity, capital, and critical pedagogy as theoretical con- of using their mother tongues and the TL (Chavez 2003). structs and classroom practices in language learning are To counter that, Levine (2014) from an ecological stand- integrally related under the critical paradigm; they provide point suggests that pedagogy needs to be conscious enough tremendous value in helping researchers, educators, and in exerting code-switching practice and recognizing teachers reconsider language as social practice and identity learners’ potential to become bilinguals. developing, education as political, and teaching as libera- It is to the concretization of the balanced view in ELT tory (Freire 1970; Norton 2008; Pennycook 2004). Thus, that we would like to contribute with a Freriean-based the integration of these three constructs into code-switch- critical pedagogy view that unveils the interplay of lan- ing practice will add to the existing discussion with a guage, identity, and regimes of power. Such an orientation critical pedagogy view that considers the legitimacy of also responds to Lin’s (2013) observation that a significant languages other than English in classrooms and the prac- number of code-switching studies tend to operationalize on tices of code-switching as potential forms of ‘‘enlighten- a ‘‘normalizing mission’’ (Rampton et al. 2002, p. 375), ment, empowerment, or emancipation’’ for its users which places constraint on the type of studies that do not (Pennycook 2004, p. 343). align to the dominant research approaches or theoretical orientations and call for more critical inquiry in code- switching practice. Identity as Capital

Identity from a poststructuralist perspective has moved An Alternative Working Ground from a stable core self of a person to dynamic, contradictory, and multiple dimensions of a person (Pavlenko and In this article, English only view in language classrooms is Norton 2007). Based on a poststructural line of inquiry, conceptualized as a normative practice that builds on the identity is dynamic as it transitions into a space in which assumption of linguistic purism and homogenization, boundaries of identities become blurry, mixed, and fluid which could exert hegemonic influence on learners with (Darvin and Norton 2014). It is performative in that our less favorable social conditions. Fairclough (1989) expression of who we are in language, gesture, and other 123 410 H. Wang, B. Mansouri modes is inseparable to our embodiment of daily conver- chase, in which they are beaten before they start… sations (Butler 1988). This poststructural nature of identity implicitly recognize the legitimacy of the goals pursued by calls for a broader research scope that encompasses the those whom they pursue, by the mere fact of taking part’’ social space in which the construct of identity is juxtaposed (Bourdieu 1984, p. 165). In other words, students from with other constructs such as class, gender, race, language, middle class families have internalized the importance of and discourse. Such a framework is a reflection of the main speaking fluent English in their professional life and pos- argument that power dynamics account for a crucial aspect sess capital to obtain that goal via parents, English media, in the discussion of identity development in language and participation in classroom with valuable educational learning process. resources; however, working class students have less Bourdieu (1977) introduced the concept of capital as favorable learning environment in which English is being accumulated labor, which bears similarities to economic used exclusively or to the maximum because of their theory but goes beyond this material exchanging form to insufficient socioeconomic capital and the misrecognition immaterial and noneconomic forms of capital. Building on that English language is the strongest currency in different Bourdieu’s conception of capital, identity capital refers to sociocultural fields (Lin 1999). On the other hand, in the tangible and intangible resources strategically used by balanced view, the non/less privileged students i.e., those individuals in their social interactions (Coˆte´ and Levine who do not have access to the optimum levels of various 2002). Thus, language, as an important component of one’s types of capital can have opportunities to develop their TL identity capital, plays a crucial role in meaning-making through code-switching. Therefore, the issue of code- processes (Ho and Bauder 2012). In an English language switching is deeply rooted in the socioeconomic ordering class, students’ L1 serves as resources both tangible and in the society where asymmetric power relations influence intangible to the accumulation of their identity capital, school policy about whether one should create an English facilitating the fluid movements of languages in practice. only environment for the students or adopt a balanced, While a language class that is taught entirely in English flexible, and multilingual language policy. It is the articu- may appeal to the norm seeking and authenticity yearning lation of the power asymmetry and critical pedagogies language policy, it could also be viewed as a homogenizing informed ways to challenge that in classroom to which we mechanism in which learners’ identities are subsumed into turn now. one universal identity which is arguably Western culture driven. Students who aspire to become ‘‘good learners’’ will need to align with the conventions that are institu- Critical Pedagogy tionally recognized, such as doing their best to understand the purpose of a certain classroom activity in their native Within the field of TESOL, critical pedagogy has received languages and seeking clarifications in English from the robust scholarship from researchers such as Canagarajah teacher (Ellwood 2008). The received understanding of (2005), Norton (2008), Kumaravadivelu (2006), and Pen- ‘‘good learners’’ is problematic not only because it has a nycook (2004) who consider language to be an embodi- narrow view of good learners by examining their willing- ment of discourses and ideologies that are heavily engaged ness to conform to institutional discourses such as prefer- with power dynamics. Such an approach to ELT moves ence for English language use in classrooms, but it also from a banking model of schooling towards a democratic fails to recognize student identity as complex, indefinable, educational view in which teachers and students prob- and nonlinear, and more importantly, the relation between lematize the taken-for-granted knowledge of what should the identities students imagine, resist, or desire and their be their medium of instruction and examine the sociopo- learning opportunities in class. As the most popular lan- litical implications of code-switching practice (Freire guage in the business world, English competence has 1970). The relevance of Critical Pedagogy in code- become one of the most sought-after skills in an increas- switching thus lies in its capability to produce coun- ingly neoliberalized globe where economic development is ternarratives that disturb the hegemonic narratives of prioritized and global competitiveness is emphasized (Pil- English language as a homogenizing tool. The use of ler and Cho 2013). In such a condition, English only counterdiscourse in this case helps learners negotiate with approach would produce more economic value than a ‘‘the historical and socially constructed identity of learners balanced and flexible approach simply because the former [which] influences the subject position they take up in the caters to the notion of internationalization and global language classroom’’ (Norton 2000, p. 142). A critical excellence. As a result, elite students who are already orientation to code-switching in classrooms would allow familiar with the discourse of globalization and have access students to probe deeper into the inner workings of lan- to English language resources would have an initial guage, power relations, and normalization in the society. In advantage of cultural capital over ‘‘those who enter this addition, it facilitates students’ critical language awareness 123 Revisiting Code-Switching Practice in TESOL: A Critical Perspective 411 which is crucial for developing their perspectives towards discuss a critical perspective of implementing code- both TL and their native language practice. As Reagan switching practice in TESOL. While we acknowledge that (2004, p. 54) pointed out, teachers would try to use English only or maximum L2 approach in their teaching, research has found that such Language awareness is critical when one is concerned approaches may not necessarily enhance learners’ target with the social, political, economic, historical, and language proficiency (Li 2015). Studies have also ques- ideological context in which language is used, and in tioned the validity of setting up language boundaries when which language must be metalinguistically and learning a language in the hope that a language is best metacognitively understood… critical awareness learned when it is separate from other languages (Sayer must also be understood to be not only an outgrowth 2013). What we have outlined above provided an alterna- of critical pedagogy…, but a necessary element of tive and critical perspective that views classroom language critical pedagogy in the foreign language context. uses as complex sociopolitical actions in which issues of Thus, discussions of language awareness have the relations of power, students’ subjectivity, dominant prac- potential benefit for students to think about the embedded tices, counter-narratives, maintenance of educational meanings of speaking English only in classrooms and its inequalities are questioned and problematized. Through implications in everyday life. Such critical reflexivity also critical pedagogies, we provide an alternative view of transforms classroom space into sites of empowerment and code-switching which is empowering and humanizing to resistance in which they negotiate their identities and students who are alienated from their mother tongue due to agency in their situated language learning environment. Of their socioeconomic ordering and critical in creating con- relevance to our discussion here is the notion of third space ditions for questioning. This approach matters because it is (Gutie´rrez et al. 1999) that has been highlighted in litera- related to our critical pedagogical underpinning of code- ture on code-switching practice among bilingual and mul- switching that foregrounds individual liberation in educa- tilingual users. Third space has been theorized as spaces tion and challenges the status quo through schooling; it is that ‘‘provide the terrain for elaborating strategies of self- also pertinent to the paucity of research that discusses hood that initiate new signs of identity, and innovative sites code-switching from a critical perspective. of collaboration and contestation’’ (Bhabha 1994, pp. 1–2). We know from the previous introduction and discussion In third spaces, learners bring in diverse linguistic and that power relations play an important role in knowledge cultural forms as they negotiate the official forms of legitimation. In ELT, numerous examples illustrate the knowledge and cultural production, representation, and contingency of power dynamics including language learn- reproduction. Code-switching, thus, could be viewed as a ing through communicative activities within the target third space in which students, particularly the ones men- language environment, the ideology of native speakerism tioned earlier who are disadvantaged in their initial share of and linguistic purism in the broad social and educational cultural capitals, are introduced to linguistic hybridity as a milieu, and the discourse of othering that fuels one’s desire legitimate form of language practice and offered with to be related to Angloness in various ways. Code-switching opportunities in their meaning/agency making process. practice as a pedagogy is embedded in the discourses of In the preceding theoretical framework outline, we have knowledge legitimation, ideology, and power. Thus, the demonstrated language learners’ identities as contested and criticality of code-switching lies in examining the interest contradictory and are inextricably linked to the power groups that are represented by these discourses and the relations permeating the social field. Given the roles of groups that are marginalized in the process. As English power and hegemony in education, it is necessary to take language learners, and emergent bilinguals or trilinguals, into account learner identity, capital, and conscientization students whose socioeconomic positioning is on the con- and democratic view of education envisioned in Critical tinua from being well resourced and elite class to language Pedagogy when examining code-switching practice. In the minorities with less sociocultural/linguistic capitals, could next section, we discuss the importance of much needed all be encouraged to participate in the articulation of code- criticality in code-switching practice. switching pedagogy and curriculum. Classrooms are not necessarily disconnected from the outside multilingual and multicultural world that both students and teachers are part Discussions of. Thus, code-switching practice needs to integrate the dialogic aspect of Critical Pedagogy that is more inclusive In this section, we first discuss the relevance of identity, as students co-participate in their language learning expe- capital, and critical pedagogy in code-switching practice rience and recognize the ‘‘sociolinguistic reality and sym- and then engage in a critique of power relations in ELT. bolic competence of emergent bilingual students’’ (Sayer The focus of this article is to invite ELT professionals to 2013, p. 85). While students may not be well versed in 123 412 H. Wang, B. Mansouri language policy, planning, and theoretical underpinning of Pedagogical Implications critical code-switching, their views on language use, constraints, and classroom performance in the code-switching The current theoretical discussion of code-switching in curriculum design however would be reflective of the TESOL aims at challenging ideological assumption of humanizing aspect of Critical Pedagogy that nurtures the linguistic purism and developing learners’ critical aware- multiple identities development. In the eyes of the insti- ness about language use and power relations. In this sec- tution, there are ‘‘good’’ students, ‘‘bad’’ students, students tion, we provide teaching strategies that problematize who resist English language only approach, and students notions of language as neutral, education as apolitical, and who prefer balanced and flexible pedagogy. Additionally, method and theory as Western driven. Informed by Critical there are ‘‘good teaching practices’’ that are considered to Pedagogy, we discussed the relevance of identity and be helpful for English language learners. The question that capital in code-switching practice for ELLs and the benefits is worthy of contemplating is the production and mainte- of a participatory classroom setting in which students are nance of these various student identities, teaching prac- invited to express their language needs, views on code- tices, and their implications in language education. switching, and share their life history with others. In the Through scaffolding in both the students’ native lan- following section, we provide some reflections on the guages and English, students could develop an under- importance of creating code-switching space for ELLs. To standing that their native languages are learning tools begin with, classroom activities such as group discussion rather than barriers to their language development (Coady and interactions between teachers and students could be et al. 2016). Nowadays, a growing number of schools oriented more towards recognizing and problematizing the become invested in using an English only approach for the commanding role of linguistic purism and its relationship English language learners (ELLs) both in English language to schooling. In practice, teachers may adopt an identity of class and content class as a way to expedite their interna- bilingualist or multilingualist in the sense of identity as tionalization and establish a monolingual learning envi- pedagogy (Morgan 2004) to challenge taken for granted ronment (Botha 2014). It is not difficult to imagine that language assumptions such as using only one language in when school internationalization process and the pro schools. This is a reconceptualization of languages not as English language policy is taking place, the grand narrative instruments that are closed systems and language education of which language is more valuable and needs more not as mere knowledge transmission process. Within this attention will be constructed. In case of Choi’s study type of educational culture, linguistic purism easily gains (2010) of language policy in higher education in Hong its footing because it produces the notion of language Kong, university officials’ belief in using English instead singularity and standardization, upon which the system of of Chinese as medium of instruction is heavily influenced evaluation is based. It is this standard as correctness view by their desire for internationalization and academic capi- that is in accordance with the static, unitary, determined, talism. Incorporating Bourdieu’s thoughts here, despite the and noncritical positions teachers and students are diverse language speakers, the languages that have less imposed. Besides the institutionally produced identities of capital in terms of facilitating an institution’s marketization teachers and students, there are other identities that they process on a global stage are likely to be marginalized perform either voluntarily or with struggle. Thus, what is because of their limited sociopolitical influence. English needed in classrooms is perhaps a multilingual space that language, on the other hand, has outperformed its coun- views code-switching from a positive light and language as terparts with its colonial legacy in this globalizing and hybrid, complex, transformative, and identity construction neoliberalized world and has been assigned as an important (Paquet-Gauthier and Beaulieu 2015). It would serve as a language to be taught through schooling. The reinforce- third space for students who come from historically and ment from the unbalanced view of languages based on their socioeconomically marginalized groups such as refugees or sociopolitical values compromises educational equity by working class families to have a sense of inclusion about making students believe that to become cosmopolitan and their languages and empowerment about their identities. successful, one needs to speak English. In classrooms, As the educational contexts in the world become occu- students could internalize the English only discourse and pied with the complexity of ideologies including linguistic self-regulate the use of other languages. Another concern purism (Lin 2013), instrumentalism (Kubota 2011), and relating to an English only approach lies with the utilitarian neoliberalism (Piller and Cho 2013), the need to recognize perspective that views language as a tool that improves the classroom as an important component in the production of outreach, competitiveness, academic performance, and this enterprise that assigns priority to economic develop- overall education quality of an institution, but not neces- ment becomes increasingly important. To better inform sarily for individuals with limited social mobility.

123 Revisiting Code-Switching Practice in TESOL: A Critical Perspective 413 practitioners about code-switching and create educational language learners as deficient in target language equity, a number of questions need critical reflections: competence. In their recent discussion, Garcıá and Wei (2015, p. 227) argued that ‘‘there can be no way of • How the shifting discourses of ideology could impact educating children inclusively without recognizing on language learners’ identity construction? their diverse language and meaning-making practices • In what way is code-switching practice obstructing the as a resource to learn and to show what they know, as monolingualism agenda? well as to extend these.’’ Thus, the critical pedagogies • How is teacher positioned by students, schools, poli- on code-switching we advocate ask teachers to trans- cies, and social institutions? gress the linguistic boundaries in teaching and ‘‘create • How do students negotiate and develop their identities pedagogical spaces where students are able to make as they shuttle from one language to another skillfully? links between their L1 and target language for socially • Why should we consider identity as power driven, meaningful and cognitively demanding learning situa- classrooms as sites of symbolic struggles, and knowl- tions’’ (Lau et al. 2017, p. 121). For example, teachers edge as discursive? may ask the students to role play characters with • How does economy and internationalization play into different levels of code-switch and then ask the students the implementation of code-switch? to critique the code-switching practice and its implica- In answering these questions, teachers enter the tions to characters. Additionally from a linguistic sociopolitical realm of language learning in which attention perspective, teachers could use students’ L1 or ask is turned to learner agency/identity, symbolic resources, students to use their mother languages when introduc- social factors, power relations, and critical pedagogy. The ing, explaining, or translating new L2 knowledge such praxis that we propose disrupt the hegemonic ways of as grammar, lexicon, and pragmatics. language use so that learners understand the meaning of • Restructure language assessment in a way that incor- proper voice and production of forbidden voices in class- porates the sociopolitical aspect of the language. This rooms. Additionally, reflections of hegemonized language movement could denormalize the conventional mono- use allow learners to see language learning not only as lingualism language tests to critically oriented tests that processes of acquiring linguistic signs but also highly aims towards multilingualism. For example, in written dialectic and contingent upon learners’ socioeconomic exams, students could be given a moderate amount of position, life history, and identity. Below, we delineate this opportunities to use their L1 when the item they are list of praxis that echo with the preceding discussions. going to describe does not exist in the L2 lexicon. In oral exams, the examiners could tweak the rules in a • Design activities that would lead students to the way that students do not perceive it to be frowned up, exploration of the sociopolitical nature of language for example the oral topic could be given in a code- learning. For example, critically oriented reading switching fashion or that deduction will not be made if materials or recent news articles such as political the students choose to code-switch at times. campaigns or government documents that reflect the • Be reflexive about everyday discourse and their con- power/hegemony in language education could help nections to classroom instruction. For example, teach- students gain some knowledge in sociolinguistics. In ers could keep a classroom journal and use electronic this sense, the solidarity of language learners and devices to document their own reflections of code- teachers are maintained and identities are negotiated switching practice and its role in language learning. through establishing a common communication tool Using written texts and videos as their data sources for avoiding the establishment of ethnocentricity created in their reflection and action, teachers are more informed the absence of L1. and conscious of a critical analysis approach to English • Create hybrid language practice in classrooms to language teaching and begin possible transformations enhance students’ English language learning experi- of current classroom language practice towards a code- ence and reflect the linguistically pluralistic environ- switching engagement that raises teachers’ and stu- ment in our society. While many students in the dents’ consciousness about existing language ideolo- expanding circle countries would want to learn a gies, language use as sociopolitical, and relations of standard variety of English instead of a hybrid variety, power and develops students’ critical thinking abilities. a critically infused view of code-switching practice does not negate the target language learning objective, Early in 1995, Pierce provided a list of learner-based but instead emphasizes the use of languages for optimal activities that developed their critical awareness about the communication, abandoning a compartmentalized view relationship between language use, identity development, of languages and the perceived view of English and social structure. The current praxis builds on Pierce’s

123 414 H. Wang, B. Mansouri through improving learners’ awareness about the intimacy Bourdieu, P. (1977). The economics of linguistic exchanges. Social between identity and the sociopolitical aspect of language Science Information, 16(6), 645–668. doi: 10.1177/053901847701600601. use. More recently, Kumaravadivelu (2016) delineated the Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of hegemonic forces in subaltern TESOL communities and taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. some teaching strategies that could empower these com- Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Cambridge: munities to decolonize from the methods and theories that Polity Press. Butler, J. (1988). Performative acts and gender comstitution: An essay have Western marks. The list of praxis above answers his in phenomenology and feminist theory. Theatre Journal, 40(4), call for more teaching strategies that critique top-down 519–531. doi:10.2307/3207893. teaching approach and takes into consideration of ‘‘local Canagarajah, S. (2005). Critical pedagogy in L2 learning and historical, political, social, cultural, and educational exi- teaching. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 931–949). Mahwah, NJ: gencies’’ (p. 81). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Canagarajah, S. (2006). Negotiating the local in English as a lingua franca. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 26, 197–218. doi: Conclusion 10.1017/S0267190506000109. Chavez, M. (2003). The diglossic foreign-language classroom: Learners’ views on L1 and L2 functions. In C. Blyth (Ed.), Code-switching in TESOL is a topic of discussion that has The sociolinguistic of foreign language classrooms: Contribu- been going on for almost three decades. As Lin’s review tions of the native, near-native, and non-native speaker (pp. (2013) of the three decades of research suggests, it is time 163–208). Boston: Heinle and Heinle. Choi, P. K. (2010). ‘‘Weep for Chinese university’’: A case study of to incorporate more research that adopts a critical paradigm English hegemony and academic capitalism in higher education that examines learner identity, autonomy, sociocultural in Hong Kong. Journal of Education Policy, 25(2), 233–252. opportunities, and boundaries. The current theoretical dis- Coady, M. R., Harper, C., & De Jong, E. J. (2016). Aiming for equity: cussion of code-switching serves such a purpose by Preparing mainstream teachers for inclusion or inclusive classrooms? TESOL Quarterly, 50(2), 340–368. doi:10.1002/tesq.223 exploring the salience of code-switching on learner iden- . tity, capital, and the role of Critical Pedagogy in guiding Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2000). Multiliteracies: Literacy learning TESOL professionals in creating empowering and and the design of social futures. New York: Routledge. humanizing classrooms. On a larger scale, the issue of Copland, F., & Neokleous, G. (2010). L1 to teach L2: Complexities and contradictions. ELT Journal, 65(3), 270–280. code-switching is also pertinent to understanding language Coˆte´, J., & Levine, C. (2002). Identity formation, agency and culture: as fluid, power laden, and contested. While the forces of A social psychological synthesis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence nation-state and globalization are negotiating, the linguistic Erlbaum Associates Publishing. boundaries of many societies have become less demarcated Dailey-O’Cain, J., & Liebscher, G. (2015). Primary language use in foreign language classrooms. In M. Bigelow & J. Ennser- and more multilingual, which is a welcoming sign for the Kananen (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of educational marginalized languages and their users. It would also be linguistics (pp. 327–338). New York: Routledge. liberating and equity promoting to establish a multilingual Darvin, R., & Norton, B. (2014). Transnational identity and migrant classroom where students who are resistant to linguistic language learners: The promise of digital storytelling. Education Matters: The Journal of Teaching and Learning, 2(1), 55–66. colonization or come from lower socioeconomic back- Ellwood, C. (2008). Questions of classroom identity: What can be ground are able to code-switch between their mother ton- learned from codeswitching in classroom peer group talk? The gues and English language. Such a code-switching Modern Language Journal, 92(4), 538–557. doi: pedagogy is meaningful and inclusive in creating a lan- 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00786.x. Fairclough, N. (Ed.) (1989). Language and power. London: Longman. guage learning environment that is sensitive to diversity, Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: The knowledge production, institutional constraints, and ten- Continuum Publishing. sions in language education. Garcıá, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education. Palgrave Macmillian. Garcıá, O., & Wei, Li. (2015). Translanguaging, bilingualism, and bilingual education. In W. E. Wright, S. Boun, & O. Garcıá (Eds.), The handbook of bilingual and multilingual education References (1st ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Guo, T. (2007). A case study of teacher’s codeswitching behaviours in Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The location of culture. New York: Routledge. mainland China’s university EFL classrooms and students’ Blackledge, A., & Creese, A. (2010). Multilingualism: A critical reactions to the codeswitching. Doctoral dissertation, University perspective. New York: Continuum International Publishing of Oxford, UK. Group. Gutie´rrez, K. D., Baquedano-Lo´pez, P., & Tejada, C. (1999). Blommaert, J. (2008). Grassroots literacy: Writing, identity and voice Rethinking diversity: Hybridity and hybrid language practices in Central Africa. London: Routledge. in the third space. Mind, Culture and Activity, 64(4), 286–303. Botha, W. (2014). English in China’s universities today. English Ho, M., & Bauder, H. (2012). ‘We are chameleons’: Identity capital Today, 30(01), 3–10. doi:10.1017/S0266078413000497. in a multicultural workplace. Social Identities, 18(3), 281–297.

123 Revisiting Code-Switching Practice in TESOL: A Critical Perspective 415

Kim, S. H. O., & Elder, C. (2005). Target language use in foreign Morgan, B. (2004). Teacher identity as pedagogy: Towards a field- language classrooms: Practices and perceptions of two native internal conceptualization in bilingual and second language speaker teachers in New Zealand. Language, Culture, and education. In J. Brutt-Griffler & M. Varghese (Eds.), Re-writing Curriculum, 21(2), 167–185. doi:10.1080/07908310802287574. bilingualism and the bilingual educator’s knowledge base (pp. Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. 80–96). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. New York: Longman. Norton, B. (Ed.). (2000). Identity and language learning: Gender, Kubota, R. (2011). Questioning linguistic instrumentalism: English, ethnicity, and educational change. London, UK: Longman. neoliberalism, and language tests in Japan. Linguistics and Norton, B. (2008). Identity, language learning, and critical pedago- Education, 22(3), 248–260. doi:10.1016/j.linged.2011.02.002. gies. In J. Cenoz & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Kubota, R. (2014). Race and language learning in multicultural language and education (2nd ed., pp. 45–57). Berlin: Springer. Canada: Towards critical antiracism. Journal of Multilingual and Nunan, D. (2003). The impact of English as a global language on Multicultural Development, 36(1), 3–12. educational policies and practices in the Asia-Pacific Region. Kubota, R., & Miller, E. R. (2017). Re-examining and re-envisioning TESOL Quarterly, 37(4), 589–613. criticality in language studies: Theories and praxis. Critical Otsuji, E., & Pennycook, A. (2010). Metrolingualism: Fixity, fluidity Inquiry in Language Studies, 1, 21–39. and language in flux. International Journal of Multilingualism, Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006). TESOL methods: Changing tracks, 7(3), 240–254. doi:10.1080/14790710903414331. challenging trends. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 59–81. doi: Paquet-Gauthier, M., & Beaulieu, S. (2015). Can language classrooms 10.2307/40264511. take the multilingual turn? Journal of Multilingual and Multi- Kumaravadivelu, B. (2016). The decolonial option in English cultural Development, 37, 167–183. teaching: Can the subaltern act? TESOL Quarterly, 50(1), Pavlenko, A., & Norton, B. (2007). Imagined communities, identity, 66–85. doi:10.1002/tesq.202. and English language learning. In J. Cummins & C. Davison Lau, S. M. C., Juby-Smith, B., & Desbiens, I. (2017). Translanguag- (Eds.), International handbook of English language teaching ing for transgressive praxis: Promoting critical literacy in a (pp. 669–680). New York: Springer. multiage bilingual classroom. Critical Inquiry in Language Peirce, N. B. (1995). Social identity, investment, and language Studies, 14(1), 99–127. learning. TESOL Quarterly, 29(1), 9–31. doi:10.2307/3587803. Levine, G. S. (2014). Principles for code choice in the foreign Pennycook, A. (2004). Critical moments in a TESOL praxicum. In B. language classroom: A focus on grammaring. Language Teach- Norton & K. Toohey (Eds.), Critical pedagogies and language ing, 47(3), 332–348. doi:10.1017/S0261444811000498. learning (pp. 327–345). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Li, D. C. (2015). Discussion: L1 as semiotic resource in content cum Press. L2 learning at secondary level—Empirical evidence from Hong Piller, I., & Cho, J. (2013). Neoliberalism as language policy. Kong. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilin- Language in Society, 42(01), 23–44. doi: gualism, 18(3), 336–344. 10.1017/S0047404512000887. Li, D. C. (2017). Multilingual Hong Kong: Languages, literacies and Rampton, B., Roberts, C., Leung, C., & Harris, R. (2002). Method- identities. New York: Springer. ology in the analysis of classroom discourse. Applied Linguistic, Liang, X. (2006). Identity and language functions: High school 23(3), 373–392. doi:10.1093/applin/23.3.373. Chinese immigrant students’ code-switching dilemmas in ESL Reagan, T. (2004). Objectification, positivism and language studies: classes. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 5(2), A reconsideration. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies: An 143–167. doi:10.1207/s15327701jlie0502_3. International Journal, 1(1), 41–60. Lin, A. M. (1999). Doing-English-lessons in the reproduction or Sayer, P. (2013). Translanguaging, TexMex, and bilingual pedagogy: transformation of social worlds? TESOL Quarterly, 33(3), Emergent bilinguals learning through the vernacular. TESOL 393–412. doi:10.2307/3587671. Quarterly, 47(1), 63–88. Lin, A. M. (2013). Classroom code-switching: Three decades of research. Applied Linguistics Review, 4(1), 195–218. doi: 10.1515/applirev-2013-0009.

123