Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Mandarin Chinese in London education: language aspirations in a working-class secondary school

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Language Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As the Council of Europe is shifting its traditional focus on learning European languages towards emphasizing the importance of speaking other languages of the wider world, an increasing number of schools are offering Mandarin as part of their official curriculum in the United Kingdom. This is being financially supported by transnational/inter-institutional networks headed by Confucius Institutes and linked to the Hanban in the People’s Republic of China. In addition, learning of this language is being legitimised by appealing to discourses of “social cohesion” and “internationalism”. This article draws from a sociolinguistic ethnography carried out in a London secondary school located in a working-class area. This school converted itself into a Language Specialist School teaching Mandarin when it faced difficulties recruiting the institutionally required minimum number of students for being entitled to receive public educational funding. In the framework of a partnership with the Confucius Institute, which requires affiliated schools to ensure that the success rate of students learning Mandarin meets a given ratio, this paper takes a closer look at the resulting local uncertainties, with a focus on the everyday discursive practices of “collusion” (McDermott and Tylbor 1986) through which teachers and students create a sense of smooth language learning environment, even when the majority of the students have difficulties in achieving outcome targets.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1991). The social construction of reality. London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackledge, A., & Creese, A. (2010). Multilingualism. London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blommaert, J. (2010). The sociolinguistics of globalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Blommaert, J., & Rampton, B. (2011). Language and superdiversity. Diversities, 13(2), 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • British Council. (2013). Languages for the Future Report. Retrived from http://www.britishcouncil. org/sites/britishcouncil.uk2/files/languages-for-the-future-report.pdf.

  • Cazden, C. B. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cicourel, A. (1973). Cognitive sociology: language and meaning in social interaction. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cicourel, A. (1980). Three models of discourse analysis: the role of social structure. Discourse Processes, 33, 101–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cicourel, A. (1992). The interpenetration of communicative contexts: Examples from medical encounters. In Charles Goodwin & Alessandro Duranti (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 291–310). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • CILT. (2005, 2008, 2010). The National Centre for Languages. Annual Report: http://www. cilt.org.uk/home/about_us/financial_and_annual_reports.aspx.

  • Cortazzi, M., & Lixian, J. (1997). Cultures of learning: Language classrooms in China. In H. Coleman (Ed.), Society in the classroom (pp. 169–206). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of Europe. (2007). From linguistic diversity to plurilingualism: Guide for the development of language education policies in Europe. Strasbourg.

  • Council of Europe. (2008). Recommendation on the use of the Council of Europe’s Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) and on the promotion of plurilingualism. Strasbourg.

  • Duchêne, A., & Heller, M. (Eds.). (2012). Language in late capitalism: Pride and profit. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, F. (1992). Ethnographic microanalysis of interaction. In M. LeCompte, W. Millroy, & J. Preissle (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research in education (pp. 201–225). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2008). Multilingualism: An asset for Europe and a shared commitment. COM (2008) 566. 18/09/2008. Brussels.

  • European Commission. (2012). Key data on teaching languages at school in Europe 2012. Brussels.

  • Fenoulhet, J., & Ros i Sole, C. (Eds.). (2011). Mobility and localisation in language learning. A view from languages of the wider world. Oxford: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual. Essays on face-to-face behaviour. New York: Pantheon Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay in the organization of experience. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 1489–1522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gumperz, J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, R., & Rampton, B. (2009). Ethnicities without guarantees: An empirical approach. In M. Wetherell (Ed.), Identity in the 21st century: New trends in changing times. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heller, M. (2007). Distributed knowledge, distributed power: A sociolinguistics of structuration. Text & Talk, 27(5/6), 633–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heller, M., & Martin-Jones, M. (Eds.). (2001). Voices of authority: Education and linguistic difference. Westport/Connecticut/London: Ablex Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hua, Z., & Wei, L. (2014). Geopolitics and the changing hierarchies of the Chinese language: Implications for policy and practice of Chinese language teaching in schools in Britain. Modern Language Journal, 98(1), 326–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hymes, D. (1996). Ethnography, linguistics, narrative inequality: Toward an understanding of voice. London: Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krzyzanowski, M., & Wodak, R. (2011). Political strategies and language policies: The European Union Lisbon strategy and its implication for the EU’s language and multilingualism policy. Language Policy, 10, 115–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzo, F., & Moore, P. (2009). European language policies in monolingual southern Europe: Implementation and outcomes. European Journal of Language Policy, 1(2), 121–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martín-Rojo, L. (2010). Constructing inequality in multilingual classrooms. Berlin: Mouton.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, R. & Tylbor, H. (1986). On the necessity of collusion in conversation. In S. Fisher & A. Dundas-Todd (Eds.), Discourse and institutional authority: medicine, education and law (pp. 123?139). New York: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • McPake, J., Sachdev, I., Carroll, T., Birks, T., & Mukadam, A. (2008). Final report: Community languages in higher education: Towards realising the potential. Southampton: Routes into Languages.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, R. (2011). Standardisation, diversity and enlightenment in the contemporary crisis of EU language policy. Working papers in language & literacies 74.

  • Pérez-Milans, M. (2013). Urban schools and english language education in late modern China: A critical sociolinguistic ethnography. New York & London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rampton, B. (2006). Language in late modernity. Interaction in an urban school. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rampton, B., Tusting, K., Maybin, J., Barwell, R., Creese, A., and Lytra, V. (2004) UK linguistic ethnography: A discussion paper, Unpublished, www.ling-ethnog.org.uk.

  • Roberts, C. (2009). Institutional discourse. In: The Routledge Companion to English Language Studies (pp.181–195).

  • Romaine, S. (2013). Politics and policies of promoting multilingualism in the European Union. Language Policy, 12, 115–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Said, E. (1978). Orientalism. New York: Pantheon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarangi, S., & Slembrouck, S. (1996). Language, bureaucracy and social control. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seedhouse, P. (2004). The interactional architecture of the language classroom: A conversation analysis perspective. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. (2005). Institutional ethnography: A sociology for people. Lanham: Altamira Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, A. B. M. (1995). Introducing classroom interaction. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wei, Li. (2013). Negotiating funds of knowledge and symbolic competence in the complementary school classrooms. Language and Education, 28(2), 161–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wei, Li, & Hua, Zhu. (2013). Translanguaging identities: Creating transnational space through flexible multilingual practices amongst Chinese university students in the UK. Applied Linguistics, 34(5), 516–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wodak, R. (2007). ‘Doing Europe’: The discursive construction of European identities. In R. C. M. Mole (Ed.), Discursive constructions of identity in European politics (pp. 70–95). Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Miguel Pérez-Milans.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pérez-Milans, M. Mandarin Chinese in London education: language aspirations in a working-class secondary school. Lang Policy 14, 153–181 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-014-9345-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-014-9345-8

Keywords

Navigation