Abstract

This paper argues for revisiting ways in which English Language Learners (ELLs), and the learner labels attributed to them, are negatively, racially, and pathologically framed and constructed based on, putatively, their English language competence, or their lack of it. It contends that this framing tends to give rise to a raciolinguistic profiling of these learners, as they end up being classified by their race, pan-ethnicity, nationality, immigrant/refugee status, regionality, and at times, by their skin color, in addition to their language abilities. This raciolinguistic framing often engenders other framings such as White, deficit, and poverty framings, and sub-framings like an othering framing (e.g., the racial others and the linguistic others). These framings, together with the normative ways in which ELLs’ language problems are constructed, have been characterized in this paper as misframings. Additionally, employing southern decoloniality, the paper problematizes and critiques the way ELLs are constructed and labeled, and the appropriation of Standard English (SE) as the sole touchstone of acceptable English in the midst of the other varieties of SE and of pluriversal speakers of English. Finally, the paper calls for the provincialization/localization or the deparochialization of English in keeping with its southern decolonial approach.

Highlights

  • English language teaching (ELT) literature abounds with labels ascribed to English language learners (Aguayo, 2020; Byfield, 2019; Flores & Rosa, 2015; Flores et al, 1991; Hernandez, 2017; Mitchell, 2013; Nguyen, 2021; Umansky, 2016; Umansky & Dumont, 2021)

  • Even though Dudley-Marling characterizes this as “the resilience of deficit thinking” (n.p.), she regards this persistence as the hauteur and superbia of deficit thinking that is undergirded by Whiteness, metonymic reason, and the monoculture of logic of the dominant scale, all of which manifest themselves in the monoglot Standard English as argued earlier

  • Can the converse, being articulate while white, apply here? Improbable! So, in appropriating English Language Learners (ELLs) labels to refer to ELLs in the field of English language teaching and learning – and in that of to speakers of other languages (TESOL) – there is a constant conflation of race, racism, language, and linguicism

Read more

Summary

Introduction

English language teaching (ELT) literature abounds with labels ascribed to English language learners (Aguayo, 2020; Byfield, 2019; Flores & Rosa, 2015; Flores et al, 1991; Hernandez, 2017; Mitchell, 2013; Nguyen, 2021; Umansky, 2016; Umansky & Dumont, 2021). It is a phenomenon employed to frame the levels of proficiency, fluency, and mastery of the English language that such learners display in spoken and written English It is in a way, the type of classification used to refer to and to depict the brand of English these learners speak and write. In a way, the type of classification used to refer to and to depict the brand of English these learners speak and write In this context, it is common knowledge that within the ELT arena, and within the broader educational canvas, learner labels are ascribed to learners for whom English is not a home or a first language. It offers southern decoloniality as an alternative way through which to theorize about and frame ELLs

Learner Labels and Their Purposes
ELLs and Their Putative Association with Deficit Views
Unproblematic Framings of ELLs
Southern Decoloniality
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call