Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Room
Browse By Unit
Browse By Session Type
Search Tips
Annual Meeting Registraion, Housing and Travel
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Translanguaging is a natural occurring phenomenon and an identity marker in bilingual and multilingual communities (Mazak & Caroll, 2017). Recently, translanguaging pedagogies have been defined as a political act as they challenge traditional monoglossic views of bilingual education and leverage students’ linguistic repertoire (García & Wei, 2014; Palmer, et al., 2014). Studies addressing the pedagogical implications of integrating translanguaging practices in higher education contexts are lacking, particularly regarding teacher candidates' perceptions of linguistically inclusive pedagogies (Musanti & Rodriguez, 2017). The study contributes to emerging conversations and pedagogical innovations that tap into Latinx bilingual students’ full linguistic repertoire arguing for a translanguaging stance (García, Johnson & Seltzer, 2017), and a translingual model (Cavazos, 2017; Donahue, 2016) to designing undergraduate courses involving a predominantly bilingual student population. Informed by recent explorations on translingual practices in higher education (Canagarajah, 2013; Cavazos, 2017; Horner and Tetreault, 2017; Mazak & Herbas-Donoso, 2015; Musanti & Rodriguez, 2017; Walt & Dornbrack, 2011), the study explores how bilingual education and writing studies faculty members teaching undergraduate courses at an HSI attempt to move from a language-compartmentalized approach of instruction to a dynamic approach that leverages students’ bilingualism (García & Wei, 2014) while preparing them to produce and use “formal, academic, and professional forms of discourse across social contexts” (Aquino-Sterling, 2016, p. 54).
Participants in the study were undergraduate students in ENGL 1301 (N=10), a First-Year Writing course, and EDBE 3322 (N= 25), a Foundations of Bilingual Education and ESL course. The study involved a mixed methods approach and data collection included: (a) Survey on Experiences and Practices with Spanish and English (N= 35), (b) Metalinguistic Awareness Assessment (N= 35), (c) Instructors’ planning notes and materials, (d) Classroom observations (3 observations in each course), (e) Written assignments from both courses.
Findings illustrate instructors’ translanguaging stance through specific features in the course design as well as in instructors’ pedagogical moves. Specifically, instructors designed activities that involved metalinguistic awareness and identified and reflected on translanguaging events and pedagogical implications. Additionally, instructors and students opened spaces for translingual communication, especially through sharing experiences and establishing cross-linguistic connections in course readings and projects. Tensions were evident in translanguaging pedagogical moves that showed how English dominates as the language of knowledge in IHEs (Mazak & Carroll, 2017), while Spanish was frequently preferred or chosen to share experiential knowledge. Finally, the study identifies key pedagogical moves, such as reflection as a rhetorical tool, that teacher educators used to promote translanguaging as a tool for learning and as a way to support academic language development.
Sandra I. Musanti, The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley
Alyssa Cavazos, The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley
Alma D. Rodriguez, The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley