The Interactions between Anti-Refugee Rhetoric, Monolingual Language Ideologies, and Refugee Literacy in the United States and Australia

• In Event: Dissertation workshop session
  In Special Session: Refugee Education

Proposal

I attend George Mason University. My faculty advisor is Dr. Kristien Zenkov.

The purpose of my study is to examine the interactions between anti-refugee rhetoric and discourse and monolingual language ideologies and refugee literacy. I will use a comparative case study (CCS) approach (Bartlett & Vavrus, 2017) to explore how broader English language education policies impact what happens in the reading classroom with refugees in Australia and the United States. The CCS design offers a deeper look at the teaching of reading to refugees in both countries. I will explore the following research questions:

1) Historically, what is the interaction between policies designed to help refugee
students learn English and reading and anti-refugee rhetoric in the United States
and Australia?
2) What is the interaction between anti-refugee rhetoric and the implementation of
language policy in reading classrooms in the United States and Australia?

I will use Critical Race Theory to explore the interactions between structures of power and privilege in applications of language policy in the reading classroom in the U.S. and Australia. I will use Yosso’s (2005) concept of community cultural wealth to identify the strengths of refugee students. My epistemology lies with constructionism. I understand the world as a former ESOL teacher, and this background influences how I interpret meaning. My role as a novice researcher affiliated with a Western institution necessitates self-questioning regarding how I understand truth and power in relation to refugee education.

A critical comparison of the two contexts will problematize the historical interaction between language policy and its implementation in public school reading classrooms and cast light upon the ways that teachers shape language policy from the grassroots level (Ricento & Hornberger, 1996). The school systems in the U.S. and Australia are similar as they both prioritize the learning of English to assimilate refugee students, and are situated within contexts influenced by negative portrayals of refugees in the media (McBrien, 2017; Sidhu, Taylor, & Christie, 2011). Both are multilingual countries in which bilingual education is contentious (Scarino, 2014; Schmidt, 2000; Tse, 2001). A comparison may serve to challenge the deficit discourses in both countries.

The CCS design (Bartlett & Vavrus, 2017) involves an exploration of the horizontal, vertical, and transversal axes of the case. The horizontal axis involves the tracing of a historical phenomenon in a comparison of groups and sites with units of analysis that are similar (Bartlett & Vavrus, 2017). I will compare heterologous groups, which occupy different spaces and work to meet different needs: a school and administrative office of a public school system.

The horizontal axis can be developed through interviews and observations. I will interview teachers and administrators at public schools in both countries, which could yield data showing how teachers influence language planning (Ricento & Hornberger, 1996) and are affected by anti-refugee rhetoric in teaching refugees in reading classrooms.

The vertical axis should capture the ways policy is implemented, enacted, and written at all levels. I will follow language acquisition policies in education to examine how they are implemented by actors in district offices and local schools. I will look for connections between the discourse in language policies and the interpretations of these policies by teachers who interact with refugee students learning English.

The transversal axis requires tracing a phenomenon over different time periods which Bartlett and Vavrus (2017) contend connect the horizontal and vertical axes. They note that the history behind a phenomenon reveals how it takes root within social institutions. This is important in exploring what happens in the reading classroom with refugees, as language acquisition policies fluctuate over time based upon language ideologies within a nation (Crawford, 2000). The move away from bilingual education in the United States and the preference for English-only education in both the United States and Australia have many influencing factors, and these must be explored to understand what happens with refugees in the reading classroom.

I will include a study of three periods of history relating to the education of refugees in both countries: post-World War II, the Vietnam War, and the present. These periods illustrate the changing ideas about refugee protection and the increase in legislation and policy related to refugee protection (Orchard, 2014; Zucker, 1983). An analysis of policy documents could illuminate the direction of education reform (Liddicoat, 2009) regarding refugees. I hope my study contributes to this growing body of work and adds greater context.

I am currently in the data collection phase. I have begun discourse analysis, but have not yet begun interviews and observations.