Interrogating “Racial and Linguistic Equity” in Mandarin-English Dual Language Immersion Programs

• In Event: “Spoilers” for or Against Equity? Implications of Asian American Racialization Across Regional and Institutional Contexts

Abstract

Purpose: Studies on the gentrification of dual language immersion (DLI) often critique the influx of middle class, White “consumers” into language programs that decenter goals of linguistically equitable bilingual education for heritage language learners (Flores & Garcia, 2017; Valdés, 1997; Valdez et. al, 2016). However, most of these studies focus on Spanish-English DLI, where students are racialized as Latine. This paper seeks to understand how racial and linguistic equity is conceptualized when heritage language speakers are racialized as Asian American, in the second largest but heavily under-researched Mandarin-English DLI (MEDLI) programs.

Theoretical Framework: This paper highlights the intersections of literature on school choice (Billingham & Kimelberg, 2013; Posey-Maddox et. al, 2014), and relative racialization of Asian Americans (Kim, 1999; 2023) with studies of bilingual education. Analytically, positioning theory (Harré & Van Langenhove 1991) helps figure the dynamic discursive positionings of Asian Americanness and equity amidst local political and economic conditions of urban schooling.

Methods: The project takes data from a larger ethnographic case study of a MEDLI in Northern California, involving around 200 hours of observation at parent/district levels, 45 parent interviews. This paper focuses on audio recordings of board meetings and interviews discussing how MEDLI serves district populations at large. Recordings were transcribed, and analyzed with field notes via open-ended coding for thematic patterns (Saldaña, 2021).

Results: Under political and economic conditions of school choice, urban segregation, and accompanying resource discrepancies of the housing-schooling nexus, middle and upper middle class Asian, and especially Chinese American parents are sought after “consumers” of schooling. However, equity in MEDLI is construed as serving lower-income, ELL, and Black students, in line with funding structures of the state. District level conceptualizations of equity were shaped by racialized and classed frames of 1) Asian Americans as higher SES, high achievers, and with “involved” parents with “ethnic capital” (Zhou and Lee, 2015) as well as 2) transnationally mediated understandings of Mandarin as a powerful language rather than a language for equitable education.

As such, district leaders often adopted discourses of linguistic and racial equity that excluded heritage Mandarin learners. Lower SES, especially Cantonese speaking Chinese heritage im/migrant families were rendered invisible, as Asian Americans were relatively positioned as “not high need” compared to other minoritized groups. Ironically, these very discourses of “not high need” made MEDLI more attractive to other minoritized parents, perpetuating gaps of choice and ensuing resources between the “Mandarin school” and schools that serve Black and Brown communities.

Significance: This case illuminates interwoven power structures of race, class, and languages that reproduce understandings of Asian Americans relative to other minoritized groups within educational systems. Due to intersectional and relative positioning processes, language programs meant to serve heritage language families are considered inequitable if serving Mandarin speakers. As such, this project highlights the limits of “Asian achievement” frames posed against Black/Latineness; the very frames that also position schools that serve more Black and Brown families as “unattractive.” Broadening how we define racial and linguistic equity in education benefits not only Asian Americans but also other minoritized groups who strive for multilingual schooling.

Author

• Catherine Park, University of California - Berkeley