Introduction

Diversity and Critical Multicultural Education is a concern in schools and the public. The research and
analysis of the designated vignette explores the linguistic pluralism of educational and public spaces
in forming a diverse and multicultural community in understanding identity as a construct of human
interaction, external events, and reflection of ourselves. As such, an exploration of identity through
our linguistic presence reveals sociologically the crafting of identity as an entity of multiple factors.

Observation

Inside the library at 11am on Tuesday (26/09/2023), I observed a presumed motherly figure,
grandmotherly figure, and male primary school student. The student was working on a booklet that
covered Math and English work. It is worthwhile to note that it is the school holidays, and that the
student is doing some studying outside of the functioning school term. The student sought for help
mainly towards English based questions by the mother which they attempted to explain to him in
both English and Cantonese alternatingly. The student spoke proficiently in English which trivialises
the significance of his seemingly Asian ethnic backgrounds to their language. He only gravitated to
speaking in Cantonese when it was difficult for him to describe the problem to the mother and
grandmother so that they could understand. The mother showed strong attempts to speak in English
but withdrew to Cantonese when she could not explain a concept to the student which happened
frequently during the study session and tried to help with the English work. The grandmother spoke
mainly in Cantonese and only able to help with the Maths work.

Diversity and Critical Multicultural Education

Given that diverse groups of (im)migrants, refugees, and their descendants form Australia’s
population, it implies that there are many people from non-English speaking backgrounds. Schools
have the role of supporting English Language [EL] learners who range in circumstances and can be
classified as Limited English Proficient [LEP], English as a Second Language [ESL], non-English
speaking Background [NESB], language background other than English [LBOTE], and English as an
additional language [EAL]. The term EL learner is an umbrella term addressing both new and old
waves of im(migration) and refugee backgrounds. While these terms of classifying EL learners are
generally used in school settings, it is suitable to apply it outside of contexts of a school since the
learning of English is lifelong and can be outside of a school. Effectively with these labels onto
(im)migrants and refugees and their descendants, it becomes the role of schools to acknowledge the
linguistic diversity and linguistic multiculturalism as well as enact cultural competence within
pedagogy surrounding this issue. Contrarily, public spaces act as a stage of performativity of linguistic
identities such that those that are of English+ backgrounds make conscious choices to represent
their linguistic identities.

There is an English-speaking gap between English-only monolinguists and English+

multilinguists where the threshold for said multilinguists to acquire English is more strenuous
compared to an English-only monolinguist. This is due to Foreign Language Anxiety [FLA] which is
“the feeling of tension and apprehension specifically associated with second language contexts,
including speaking, listening, and learning” (Dryden, Tankosic & Dovchin, 2021; MacIntyre & Gardner,
1994, p. 284).” After all, Australian schools rely predominantly on linguistic imperialism towards
English as a vehicle to teach students secondary schooling disciplines other than English. Linguistic
Imperialism “aims to explain the hierarchy of languages, address why some languages are more
dominant than others, identify what structures and ideologies facilitate this process, and determine
language professionals’ roles.” (Zeng, Ponce & Li, 2023, p. 1) From this, English has the function to
connect foreigners of (im)migrant and refugee backgrounds whilst being used a segregating force
amongst those of different English fluency.

Linguistic diversity consequently dwindles in Australian education spaces where academic

language and conversational language are segregated. While Australia’s conversational language
adopts a linguistic neo-imperialist conception where English is Australia’s lingua franca, the remains
of other languages in conversation are localised versions of English so that speakers maintain the
economic value of English within their own vernacular. To elaborate, “linguistic neo-imperialism
departs from the former notion that colonizers impose and determine the use of capital, in this case,
their language. The speakers in the postcolonial communities themselves are the ones maintaining
the status of once a colonial language. (Zeng, Ponce & Li, 2023, p.3)” The difference between
academic and conversational language is therefore determined by the fluency of English within
language use. As such, English-only monolinguists, and English+ multilinguists are hierarchically
ranked as linguistic neo-Imperialism becomes the default state emphasising use of English in daily
and academic language spaces.

When considering the curriculum and its implementation, it aims to make “intelligent attempts to
make a viable existence for human beings in the midst of the very considerable limitations that are
endemic to human life” (May & Sleeter, 2010; Nussbaum, 1997, p.138) With responsibility to
diversity and multiculturalism, schools have the following objectives:

“(1) To remedy ethnocentrism in the traditional curriculum; (2) to build

understanding among racial and cultural groups and appreciation of different
cultures; (3) to defuse intergroup tensions and conflict; and (4) to make the curricula
relevant to the experiences, cultural traditions, and historical contributions of the
nation’s diverse population” (May & Sleeter, 2010; Webb, 2003-2005).

Analysis

The grandmother’s EL background is LEP, the mother’s is ESL and the student’s is LBOTE. The range of
English fluency between the three people is dependent on the time they spent in educational
institutions and the workforce. The language expectations in an educational institute and the
workforce compared to domestic spaces acknowledges that the use of English as a requirement in
professionalised spaces as opposed to being a voluntary form of communication in domestic spaces.

There is a curation of self to be accepted by the wider Australian standards. Particularly, the student
speaks Cantonese as if it inconveniences him and omits speaking Cantonese because of the
underlying non-essential use of Cantonese in the wider Australian society and the FLA present in the
acquisition of Cantonese as a second language unless spoken to those that remain persistent in
speaking Cantonese. Additionally, the initiative that the student has made to study English and
Mathematics outside of the functioning school term reveals that support from schools for students
of LBOTE interchanging between their professionalised language (English) and their domestic
language (Cantonese) is insufficient and personal intervention is required to bridge LBOTE learners to
their English-only counterparts. With reference to the curriculum ‘to defuse intergroup tensions and
conflict’, this student’s lucid bilingualism is surrendered to foster intergroup connections. This arises
concerns towards this student’s own linguistic identity since it is being conflated with Anglophonic
demands.
As for the mother, being placed in a non-professional public space (the library) has meant that she
consciously dials down the intensity of her Cantonese tongue in conversation. For the student and
mother, they are transitioners of language – they omit their ethnolinguistic background of Cantonese
Chinese in public spaces to the best of their abilities to meet the expectations of Australia’s
predominantly English-speaking conversations. This implicates commentary towards Australia’s neo-
Imperialist approach to linguistic diversity and multiculturalism such that (im)migrants and refugees
and their descendants subdue to assimilation and become remnants of their culture through
physiological appearances only rather through linguistic participation. While this maintains linguistic
multiculturalism by speaking a localised version of English in the sense that there are still remnants
of generational waves of (im)migration and refugeeism, it does not encourage a fully tolerant of
speakers of interwoven linguistic backgrounds where such speakers are able to present themselves
speaking a language other than English purely in public.

Contrastingly, the grandmother communicates in Cantonese fluently. She however speaks in English
with FLA and limited proficiency. Her preference to speak Cantonese purely challenges Australia’s
linguistic neo-Imperialism that prioritises English and leave other languages/dialects scrambling for
recognition. The grandmother is a pariah to linguistic neo-Imperialist expectations where she makes
the intentional choice to reject English in a public conversation and keep her (im)migration/ refugee
status intact. Perhaps, this is due to being educated in Australia’s institutions and workforces in a
limited manner. So, she has not been integrated into a professionalised space that integrates English
in conversation and writing in a consistent manner. As such, the grandmother exists as a minority to
expand the linguistic diversity of Australia though is unable to pass on her public identity to her
daughter so her passions for linguistic diversity faces extinction.

Reflection

The linguistic ecology within this observation labels each person into a category of English-speaking
background status. The predicted outcomes by Dryden, Tankosic & Dovchin (2021) attributes FLA
only with negative responses by EL learners in the acquisition of second language and that
translanguaging is provides effective introspection to linguistic identity. Upon analysis, there are
features of each of these observed people that sections them away from being prototypical versions
of an LEP, LBOTE and ESL EL learner. Instead, this ‘natural state experiment’ disproves the efficacy of
translanguaging in attaining introspection to linguistic identity and suggests that there are more
conditions in supporting linguistic introspection and identity. As such, this presents that
generalisation of FLA in EL learners being insubordinate insufficiently explains the details of a person
as their identity is intersectional with other forms of disadvantage; in this instance it is gender and
socio-economic background. Applying Standpoint Theory which is known to analyse the inter-
subjective discourses of identity would better the quality of this research.

Conclusion

Identity is a complex manifestation of self and best understood as a charged description of us based
on the human interaction, external events, and reflection of ourselves. From this research and
analysis, it has made blanketed analysis of individuals based on a single factor (i.e., through their
linguistic identity and how it interacts in seemingly multicultural settings). It detracts in
acknowledging each person’s other identity descriptors and their lived experiences and reflections
which would therefore culminate a well-researched understanding of the identity undertaken by
each of the analysed people.
References

Dryden, Tankosic & Dovchin (2021) Foreign language anxiety and translanguaging as an emotional
safe space: Migrant English as a foreign language learners in Australia. Elsevier Ltd.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102593 (pp. 1-11)

May, S. & Sleeter, C. (2010). Critical multiculturalism: Theory and practice. In S. May & Sleeter, C.
(Eds.). Critical multiculturalism: Theory and praxis (pp. 1-16).

Zeng, Ponce & Li (2023) English linguistic neo-imperialism in the era of globalization: A conceptual
viewpoint. Psychol. 14:1149471. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1149471 (pp. 1-9)