Abstract
This article reports on a qualitative investigation into the ways that speakers of other languages negotiate their identities in an English-medium international school. As elective-bilinguals, it is generally assumed that such individuals are exempt from unfavourable positioning. As beginning speakers of English, however, older participants in this study find that they are marginalized. This article offers an account of the ways that the student participants resist this positioning and how they individually and in groups exhibit agency in negotiating more empowering identity positions.
Introduction
The children and young people who attend the international school that is the setting for this study may generally be characterized as ‘elective’ or ‘elite’ bilinguals. This term is used to describe children and young people whose parents have opted to educate them in another language with a view to enhancing their life’s career and social chances. Such parents tend to come largely from advantageously situated socio-economic groups in their home societies and for them, as confirmed by a small-scale study carried out in the same school (Sears, 2011b), English is the language that is perceived to carry essential linguistic capital. However, while the student participants in this study function in two or more languages across the totality of their lives, at school they assume the role of language learner. To achieve in any aspect of school life, they must first face the challenge of learning English. The student accounts in this study were gathered while the memory of this process was vivid and continuing, with the aim of garnering the participants’ perceptions of the ways that their positioning as learners of English affected their identity status in the school. Much of the literature relating to the negotiation of identity in multilingual and multicultural settings is based on the premise of such contexts as sites of disempowerment and struggle. In contrast, some commentators, such as Kamada (2010), writing about the lives of adolescent girls of mixed Japanese/foreign parentage attending Japanese schools, make the assumption that international schools offer wholly benign environments in which ‘ethnic difference is the norm’, and where presumably the need to negotiate a favourable identity position is obviated. The aim of this article is to offer a fresh, more nuanced view of the process of identity negotiation in such a setting. The students in this study were clearly advantageously positioned in many ways; however, according to their own accounts, life as a learner of English involves active strategic positioning on their own part, if they are to be ascribed favourable identity positions in an English-medium school.
A foundational approach of this study was a desire to generate theoretical conclusions on the basis of evidence in the data rather than to predicate the direction of the study from the outset. The following research questions were designed to inform data-driven chains of evidence, rather than act as an initial prescriptive framework:
(1) What is the linguistic profile of the student participants in this study and how does the school support their learning?
(2) How do speakers of other languages perceive the identity positions available to learners of English in the setting?
(3) How do learners of English react to this positioning?
Conceptual framework
The social construction of the self
The approach to identity that underpins this article was set out in earlier publications (Grimshaw and Sears, 2008; Sears, 2011a). The authors’ view, situated within the symbolic interactionist tradition (Mead, 1934; Blumer, 1969), holds that identity is socially constructed, being an ‘on-going negotiation between the individual and the social context or environment’ (Hawkins, 2005: 59). In a world where there is increasing movement from a ‘settled’ way of living to the so-called ‘postmodern’ lifestyle of social and geographical mobility, there is a need to move away from ‘a notion of an integral, original and unified identity’ (Hall, 1996: 1). A social constructionist approach offers a theoretical position that accounts for the dynamic identity positions and possibilities that are the experience of the students in this study.
Within a social constructionist framework Harré and van Langenhove (1999), among others, have proposed expanded theorizations of the nature of the self. These include the ways that an individual’s personhood, or personal identity, is maintained, and the ways that an individual’s identity is constituted in society. Harré and van Langenhove (1999) suggest a self that is comprised of three aspects. Self1 and self2 relate to the ‘I-ness’ of the self and the self-concept, or ‘an individual’s complete mental image of him or herself’ (Harré and Moghaddam, 2003: 200). Self1 and self2 might be described as expressing elements of personal identity. Self3, conversely, deals with an individual’s identity within a social context. Here, identity is described as a ‘function of the social situation’ (2003: 252): that is, the multiplicity of social positions created in response to social experience. According to the authors, ‘one’s personal identity persists “behind” the publicly presented repertoire of one’s personae’ (Harré and van Langenhove, 1999: 7). It is the investigation of how the student participants create and maintain their identities within the social context of the school that is the focus of this study.
Agency and the self
According to the view of identity set out above, globally mobile individuals constitute their view of themselves in response to their changing circumstances. Two key conceptualizations, those of social agency and negotiation, are viewed in the literature as being implicated in this process. According to Weber’s theory of social action (1991), individuals exert control over their own actions rather than being passive recipients of society’s directives. They have the ability as agents to vary their actions according to social contexts and to respond reflexively in the face of the behaviour of others. In line with this viewpoint is the body of theory that links identity and presentation of the self with theatrical performance and the taking of social roles (Goffman, 1990). Within any social context, individuals present themselves in ways that provide information to their social interlocutors. Performances are subsequently reinforced or modified depending on the reactions of the audience. ‘Guidelines for behaviour’ (Layder, 1994: 65) exist for the social actor in a given field, who may choose to follow these or reinterpret their roles to more advantageous effect. There is a strong emphasis in this approach on the individual’s agency in managing his/her social roles. The interest to this study of the possibility of agency and reflexivity lies in exploring the ways that the respondents contest or transform the identity positions assigned to them.
Symbolic capital and the negotiation of identity
In so-called post-structuralist theories of identity, language practices are considered to play a crucial role in influencing the nature of available identity positions (Pavlenko and Blackledge, 2004), with identity positions being negotiated according to the social possibilities and constraints of a given context. Schools are widely recognized in the literature as sites where issues of language usage and identity are played out. For many researchers (Miller, 2003; Pavlenko and Blackledge, 2004; Kubota & Lin, 2009), the interplay of language and identity in schools is situated within a nexus of power relations. Students from multilingual backgrounds, within this conceptualization, negotiate new identity options according to those made available to them within the prevailing discourse. Their command of the type of English considered desirable in both the academic and social arenas of school life is a key element in this process. As Pennycook states: ‘English is not so much a language as a discursive field: … English is globalization, English is human capital’ (2007: 112, original emphasis).
The human capital of which Pennycook speaks draws on Bourdieu’s (1991) theory of capital as representing the desirable resources in a given social ‘field’ that have the power to define the structure of social positions in that field. In the case of educational institutions, Bourdieu sets out the types of capital potentially available (Bourdieu and Passeron, 1977: 204–5). He includes intellectual achievement (exemplified by gaining good grades for instance), social prestige, evidence of acquaintance with prestigious cultural artefacts (lifestyle items, for instance) and speaking a language or type of language that comprises linguistic capital in the field. Individuals in the field are described as ‘concerned with the preservation or improvement of their positions’ (Jenkins, 2002: 85) with respect to the defining capital in the field. A further term – what Bourdieu calls ‘habitus’ – describes the ‘disposition, practices and behaviours’ (Días, 2009) that individuals may possess or acquire that allows them to access the desired capital. Thus, it would seem that the notion of symbolic power attached to the dominant discourse of a setting and its associated ‘capital’, as conceived by Bourdieu (1991), offers a valuable tool in conceptualizing the ways that the respondents in this study might negotiate their identities. In an English-medium school, linguistic capital via the acquisition of the right type of English is an essential element in the path to school-wide achievement and acceptance – and thus in how second language students contest and reconstitute their social identities.
Positioning and discourse theory
The ways that speakers of other languages use English and perceive their standing in relation to other English-speakers are salient factors in how they are positioned by their interlocutors, or position themselves. Positioning theory (Davies and Harré, 1990; Harré and Van Langenhove, 1999; Harré and Moghaddam, 2003) offers a further conceptual resource in theorizing the ways that such speakers negotiate their identities or have identities assigned to them. For van Langenhove and Harré (1999: 14), a position is contrasted with the notion of role, with positioning being a more dynamic identity ascription within a social context. The notion of discourse is also integral to positioning theory, with discourse comprising not only conversational events, but also institutional practices and local social narratives. For Davies and Harré (1990) conversational discourse, even when internal and unvoiced, is contingent upon and influenced by the socio-cultural and ideological narratives that pertain in the setting. The identity positions that are ascribed to individuals and to which they perceive themselves to be assigned are thus contingent upon the social and discursive context in which they are situated. Even if, as Davies and Harré propose, speakers are considered to have agency in the ways that they negotiate their life events, they remain defined within the terms of the prevailing linguistic and cultural discourse.
Resistance to identity positioning
A thread in the current discussion surrounding the negotiation of identity in contested sites is centred on ways that individuals may challenge and resist the identities ascribed to them. A post-structuralist approach to the role played by English in the post-colonial world as conceived by critical applied linguists (Phillipson, 1992; Pennycook, 1994, 1998; Canagarajah, 1999) has largely concerned itself with the discursive power of English to impose unfavourable identity positions on disempowered speakers of other languages. Within this paradigm, the status of the subordinate community and language is discursively defined in relation to the dominant language and culture. For some authors, such as Phan Le Ha (2008) however, the debate has moved on and away from its preoccupation with the relationship between so-called ‘inner circle’ users of English and those on the periphery. As she argues: ‘postcolonial theories have not taken into account sufficiently the degrees of appropriation, resistance and active reconstitution from the non-West sides, particularly the colonised’ (Ha, 2008: 37). As Canagarajah (2002) points out, much communication in English now takes place between second language speakers of English and thus becomes significant to the way those individuals present themselves, independently of first-language speakers. Many second language speakers of English, as Norton Pierce (1995: 13) suggests, now use English to negotiate ‘a sense of self within and across different sites at different points of time’. These viewpoints resonate with the situation of the student participants in this study as speakers of other languages in a discursive context where English prevails.
Methodology
The aim of this study was to gather evidence relating to the nature of identity positioning and contestation among speakers of other languages in an English-medium context. A further objective was to allow the evidence from collaboratively-created accounts to guide the generation of theory and conclusion. Thus, a qualitative approach was chosen as the most effective method of gathering the ‘emic’ data that would serve to enable this outcome. That is, illuminating instances (Holliday, 2002: 88) supplied by the participants themselves would as far as possible provide chains of evidence relating to the focus of the enquiry. A further aspect of the study was the interpretative nature of the methodology. Such interpretations were subjected to constant reflection on my part via an on-going written analysis of the state-of-play, and throughout the study I shared emerging themes and conceptual understandings with experienced members of the school community. I also revisited the literature where appropriate. A key feature of the process was to note areas where distinctive patterns were emerging that reflected existing theory or were suggestive of fresh insights. Finally, data was selected that contributed effectively to chains of evidence relating to the broad research questions. The authenticity and claims to knowledge of a qualitative/interpretive approach essentially rely on resonance and an objective view of the data. Constant re-evaluation and a search for counter-indications of emerging potential conceptual understandings are foundational if this approach is to offer worthwhile conclusions.
The rationale that underpinned the selection of participants was to gain multiple perspectives on the experience of being a new learner of English in the school. Thus I made the decision to interview not only students, but also parents, teachers and administrators. Semi-structured interviews were chosen as the means of gathering data, since they offered a framework that allowed young second-language speakers of English to contribute in as effective a way as possible (Lewis and Lindsay, 2000). The aim on my part was to offer queries and supportive comments rather than to dictate the way the conversation would run. I did this by offering an opening question for each section of the interview which might then allow each participant to offer her or his own views. The aim was always to view the participants as collaborative partners in the interview process rather than as ‘vessels of answers’ (Gubrium and Holstein, 2003: 30).
During the course of the enquiry I carried out interviews in a number of different settings. These included one-to-one conversations and a group interview with a whole class of students. A total of 76 participants were interviewed, the largest group being that of 48 students between the ages of 8 and 17 years, all speakers of languages other than English outside school. Twelve parents, including two fathers, and 16 teachers and administrators made up the remainder. The selection of participants was based on as wide a variety as possible of age, national and cultural diversity, language use and experience of mobility. All parents were contacted by means of a letter setting out the aims of the project and guaranteeing anonymity and privacy for their children. Only one parent refused permission. The interviews ranged between 40 and 90 minutes in length. All the interviews were recorded and transcribed. The names of all participants and their places of origin have been changed where necessary to preserve privacy. In every case, replacement names and locations have been chosen from very closely associated cultural and geographical contexts. The ages and gender all remain the same. The decision to retain a degree of personalization and real-life nomenclature in distinguishing the participants was made in the cause of enhancing the resonance of the data evidence and findings for stakeholders in the enquiry, and for readers familiar with the context.
Profile of the participants and the nature of the school’s commitment to these students
The international school in northern Europe that was the setting for this research enquiry is typical of English-medium schools that cater for a globally mobile student population whose parents have moved from their countries of origin for the purposes of employment. These families, as is established in the literature (Hayden, 2006) and as experienced international schools educators recognize, are characterized by their socio-economic standing in their base countries and their level of parental educational attainment.
At the time of writing, there were 1500 students in the school representing 70 nationalities, nationality generally being the means in the world of international education to describe the diversity of a school. Around one-third of the students came from countries normally viewed as English-speaking, the largest group holding American passports, while around 300 students held passports from what are considered French-speaking countries. Around 90 students held Japanese passports, with the next largest group being Israeli. In the case of the Japanese students, the majority entered the school at the ages of 14 and 15 from the local expatriate Japanese school. As with most international schools of this type, these figures do not provide a complete picture about the presence of other languages in a student’s repertoire or their ability to function in English. Within the locality in which it was situated, the school was viewed as ‘American’, although over the preceding 10 years the number of American passport holders had steadily diminished.
It is not easy to characterize the linguistic nature of a school where the prevailing language is English and the majority of the teachers come from English-speaking nations, but where speakers of other languages represent around 70 per cent of the student body. A limited number of international schools that cater for a globally mobile population offer bilingual programmes or substantial numbers of classes in languages other than English. However in the school under discussion, as with many others, English is the language used for communication with parents and for the greater part of classroom and extra-curricular activity (the exception being some foreign language classes). Within the school itself, therefore, the student participants cannot be characterized as experiencing a bilingual education, although they may function in two or more languages outside school. They may be classed in general as ‘elective’ or ‘elite’ bilinguals and enjoy the prestigious status associated with those terms (Baker and Prys Jones, 1998), but their experience within the school space is that of learners of the prevailing language rather than as discursively empowered individuals.
The school commits a good deal of resource to enabling students to learn English rapidly and effectively. This is essential since the school accepts students at any level of English up to and including the first year of the high school. For new students who are evidently speakers of languages other than English, there is a process of testing in place after which students are allocated to an appropriate English language development (ELD) class. These classes are supplemented particularly in the early part of the school by appropriate in-class support. The expressed general ethos of the school similarly aims at offering an environment for supporting students during this period, consistently describing its pedagogical and social approaches as being inclusive of all students. The school’s commitment to the International Baccalaureate (IB) Diploma as an entry qualification to higher education, alongside Advanced Placement tests and its own graduation certificate, is a practical example of the way that the school seeks to answer the needs of a diverse student population. For speakers of other languages, for instance, one of the attractions of the IB Diploma is the possibility of gaining a bilingual qualification, which provides evidence of substantial proficiency in at least two languages.
All ages of student participants expressed views about the value of English that appeared to reflect the outlook current in their families. Several spoke of English as being the international language, describing it as a means to ‘getting a better job’. Danek, aged 9, from Poland and Morten, aged 12, from Denmark described it as ‘the most important language’ and Jung-Hwa, aged 12, from Korea spoke of his father’s choice of an English-speaking school as ‘the logical decision’. Many of the students expressed the possibility of going to college in the USA, Canada, the UK or Australia, placing these options alongside high-ranking universities in their countries of origin or countries they had passed through. English for all the participants appeared to offer the requisite capital that ensured empowered social, educational and employment positions.
Participants’ perceptions of the ways that learners of English are positioned
The ways that individual student participants described their first days and months at the school varied, with the greatest apparent differences in their perceptions being linked to their age at the time of entry. Save for a single student who had felt excluded and unwelcome, participants aged between 9 and 12 described a positive experience of inclusion and openness. They felt that their difficulties with the school language were acknowledged, and felt supported by their ELD teachers and by the general teaching staff. Many described a circle of friends that included first-language speakers of English as well as other students at all stages of English proficiency. None of the students raised the issue of English as playing a part in the social groupings of their class.
Individual participants who had entered the middle school in the early years (between the ages of 12 and 14 years) recounted a similarly consistent view that the school itself offered a welcoming and inclusive environment. Ayame, a 14-year-old Japanese student, volunteered the following statement looking back at her own experience: ‘People would be very nice. When I felt comfortable to be with a person, then I would talk – well, not talk, because I couldn’t speak English – the person didn’t mind even if I couldn’t speak English.’ As with the younger students, many participants described circles of friends that included nationals from every country and at all stages of English-language proficiency.
Social groupings in the upper part of the school
From the age of around 14, however, the majority of respondents spoke of circumstances where their status as speakers of other languages led to exclusion from groups of more proficient English speakers. Galina, aged 15, from Russia spoke of sitting at lunch ‘with a group of girls from different countries’. When questioned further she made these comments:
And did any people speak English at home – British or American?
No. I think that’s the problem, because we talk only in, not easy words, but common words, and we don’t have a chance to talk a lot with native speakers.
Do you think these English-speaking people keep themselves separate? Or does it just happen?
They’re always together.
If you spoke excellent English, could you mix with that group?
I think, yes.
And how do you feel about that?
I’m not sure. Sometimes I think this group of people is cool, and I want to … [Galina came to a stop here]
Like Galina, several students gave evidence of realizing that they were prevented from improving their English if they could not mix with proficient users. One Japanese mother described how her daughter had tried to ‘get in touch’ with other nationalities, but there were not many chances to do so. She could talk to people who were also early learners of English, but ‘not to native’. Because, as the student told her mother, ‘native speakers always get together … she could almost understand but she could not laugh with them’.
The annex group
A number of the older student participants referred consistently to a social grouping from which they felt excluded. This circumstance was first described during a group session held with members of an ELD class in which the eight students in the group, all in their second year at the school, were aged 16 and 17. Subsequently, other individuals, including students, parents and teachers, confirmed the existence of the group referred to, which tended to meet in an area of the school known as the annex. Ofelia, a Chilean student within the group session, was the first to mention the situation:
And what is it about the school that makes you able to make friends here?
I don’t know. They’re used to having new people – everyone is so open.
What does everyone else think?
Some are not! Not always! No!
What makes them open or not open?
American! Yes, American! American! [Accompanied by laughter].
A stereotype!
You can see them anyway. He said that it’s a stereotype, but they still look like who they hang out with, they’re all Americans.
Do you have to be an American? What is it that makes Americans stick together?
Football, lifestyle!
On being asked for a more considered explanation of these comments, the students answered in the following way:
It’s like in the annex, is the American English. There’s a club. It’s supposed to be like for everybody.
A place for chilling.
Nobody goes there except for Americans, because – I don’t know – you feel strange if you’re not.
Is that about language or about lifestyle?
I think both.
It’s easier to speak with people who are not American. Because if you say something wrong …
They’re not used to meeting someone who’s not a complete English speaker, so it’s strange to them.
Several individuals, including Galina from Russia, subsequently gave evidence of having similar perceptions about the group that was described as ‘the Americans’.
Because some people, they don’t like to spend their time teaching people English. They like to have fun.
So who do they talk to?
I actually think that Americans – they stay together, but they can also mix with people who are really good with English.
Leticia, the sister of Ofelia in the ELD class, expanded on the topic in the following interchange during a one-to-one interview:
So, you’re surrounded by people who’ve had many different experiences.
I think it’s much better than being with people who are all the same. Because many American people they just stay with Americans.
I have heard people say that before, but to be honest with you, I believe they are not all American.
I know they’re not.
Is that a group you could join if you wanted to?
Yes, but I wouldn’t feel comfortable there.
Why not?
Because they’re not open to other people because they’re used to American – like speaking with the accent, speaking really quickly and not paying attention to different cultures.
A subsequent interview with a long-term teacher involved with the second-language speakers of English on a daily basis gave further evidence relating to the social groupings in the upper part of the school. As he put it, a group of the older students ‘hung out’ in the annex, using an idiomatic form of American English and consciously wearing what were perceived as ‘American-style’ clothes. The teacher emphasized, however, that members of the group were by no means all American, but rather students of other nationalities who had been educated previously in American-style international schools and who could command the particular register of English that was current in the group. He described them as ‘loud’ and using a ‘great deal of American slang’. As he pointed out, however, the percentage of Americans in the school was relatively small. There were sufficient students from other backgrounds for all students to find friendship groups, and indeed some other groups of students (the French speakers and the Japanese students) also tended to ‘stick together’.
The Japanese groups
A notable number of participants – students, parents and teachers – spoke of the Japanese students as being separate from mainstream social life at the school, describing them as choosing to spend out-of-class time together. In response to a question about social activity in the school, Gilles, aged 14 and from Belgium, made the following comments:
It’s hard for Japanese.
Why?
Because they have a totally different alphabet. So it’s very hard to study English for them. So they tend to be with Japanese people.
It became apparent that the perception of it being uniquely difficult for Japanese students to learn English prevailed among participants from other backgrounds. Morten, aged 12, from Denmark made the following statement:
Japan is such a completely different country than Europe. And it’s a completely different language so they speak to each other.
Ofelia from Chile expanded further on the topic:
Tell me more about what you think [about the Japanese students].
They don’t speak enough English so they find it easier to go with the languages they can speak. And then they get used to that and they don’t try learning English. I have a South Korean and a Japanese friend and they both came to the school at the same time. My Japanese friend would talk more to the Japanese so she wouldn’t have to speak in English all the time. But my South Korean friend would speak English all the time. I believe that people who are Japanese have a harder time learning English.
As has been mentioned, a feature of the middle school is that numbers of Japanese students aged 14 or 15 arrive mid-year from the local Japanese expatriate school, this being the point at which the Japanese school ceases to offer tuition. The Japanese parents who had chosen to send their children to the school did so with the intention of improving their English, perhaps because they themselves had experienced some part of their education in English, or were accustomed to working in English-speaking business environments. This circumstance accounts for the increased presence of Japanese students, most of whom had taken some English classes within the Japanese school system. Several student participants mentioned that Japanese students who came in to the middle school, having already been at the school for some years in earlier grades, kept themselves separate from this incoming group. They already spoke English well and were accustomed to mixing with students of every nationality.
Japanese participants themselves appeared to hold the view that it was difficult for Japanese people in general to learn a new language. Ayame, the student mentioned earlier, was quite clear why this was the case: ‘It’s because of our culture. And the other reason is that, as normal, Japanese people can’t speak English like other countries.’ One adult Japanese participant, referring to the issue, said of the Japanese community as a whole: ‘And we have no confidence about language.’
Analysis
Among the younger participants interviewed, there was a general view of the school as providing a welcoming atmosphere that made them feel included and respected despite their lack of English. They gave no evidence of considering their status as language learners as positioning them negatively with respect to effective speakers of English. Students who moved up to the middle school from earlier grades continued to feel favourably positioned with regard to other students, both speakers and non-speakers of English.
Older student participants, however, described more mixed experiences on entering the upper years of the school from elsewhere. A few such incoming students felt that existing students had made efforts to accommodate their lack of English, but by the ages of 14 or 15 most exhibited an awareness that they were excluded from proficient groups of English speakers. For most, their inability to engage in rapid, playful, humorous talk was the problem. They recognized that they were positioned with the group of ‘other’ people, who did not have access to certain circles of ‘cool’ students. Several participants recognized that exclusion from socializing with colloquial English speakers in out-of-class situations, such as lunchtime, restricted their English to a more limited and simplistic form of the language.
The annex group
An awareness of language as the cause of exclusion was most marked in relation to the ‘annex group’ of students described as ‘the Americans’. The student participants in the ELD class were outspoken in expressing their views on this subject, perhaps because they had a forum where they could speak their minds in private to an outsider. There was a sense in many of the interviews that participants were expressing views that they rarely expressed openly (the family circle excepted), something that might have been due to the pervasive ‘difference-blind egalitarian’ discourse of the school, as conceptualized by Kubota and Lin (2009: 13). For the participants in the group session, as for several individual students, the reasons for ‘not feeling comfortable’ or feeling ‘strange’ in the presence of the so-called ‘Americans’ were given under the headings of language and lifestyle. Most of the older student participants and two adult respondents described the type of English employed by the annex group as rapid, idiomatic and with a high use of American slang. Within the group itself, this type of language served as a marker of membership and as the means of discursively delineating the identity positions of its members. The older student participants recognized the status of this type of English within the annex group as representing desirable linguistic capital. It was necessary to speak this form of English in order to be part of the group, since a further characteristic of the ‘Americans’ was that they were noticeably unwelcoming of English-language learners. The participants recognized also that certain cultural elements, such as the right kind of dress and a preoccupation with American football, were essential attributes for inclusion in group membership. Having not acquired, or being unwilling to take on, the necessary ‘habitus’ that would give them access to the linguistic and cultural capital of the group, they were positioned by ‘the Americans’ as ‘others’.
The Japanese groups
A further group of second-language speakers in the school appeared to be ascribed identity positions and to take up identity positions themselves on the basis of their status as English-language learners. The Japanese groups were viewed uniformly, as if it were an established and provable fact, as finding English more difficult to learn than other nationalities; they had a totally different alphabet, it was a completely different language and they had a harder time than other nationalities in reaching any sort of proficiency. The participants were also quite clear that this difficulty was the reason that the Japanese kept together, even though by doing so they prevented themselves from having access to English speakers and thus gaining experience of the language. When asked if they ‘minded’ the Japanese students behaving in this way, the invariable response of students interviewed was that they felt sympathy for them and understood the cause of their self-imposed separation. Several Japanese participants, both adult and student, concurred with these views of their linguistic capability. The Japanese students who chose to restrict themselves to the group were thus positioned by other English language learners (albeit without malice) as individuals with inherent linguistic deficiencies. Because of what was perceived by onlookers as no fault of their own, they were positioned outside the group of effective learners of English, a positioning that some Japanese participants appeared to accept. There was a general view that Japanese students who came into the middle school from earlier grades at the school were outside this group and thus appeared to be exempt from this disempowering position.
Contesting unfavourable identity positions: agency, resistance and appropriation
We have seen that many of the older students were aware that they had been ascribed identity positions related to their relative inability to speak a certain type of English. There was evidence, however, that activity on the part of individuals and groups had the effect of mitigating the negative impact of the identity positions they had been ascribed. In the case of individuals, several student participants who arrived in the middle school from elsewhere with limited English spoke of strategic choices they had made in order to improve their English. Most students mentioned that they had socialized at first with speakers of their own languages; a number of these recognized, however, that they must make the conscious choice to change their social behaviour if their command of English was to move to the next level. Hakim, aged 14 and of Japanese/Saudi parentage, realizing that he was talking only to Japanese students ‘decided to share my time, and then I began to speak with English-speakers’. Ayame, 14-years-old, talked things over with her mother who advised her ‘to be with people from other countries and she told me how to do that’. When asked what her mother’s advice had been, Ayame answered: ‘She said you have to leave the Japanese, and then if you are alone, the other people can come to you’. Twins from Israel (Navah and Elah), interviewed separately, had mixed exclusively with Israeli students in their first year when they were 9-years-old. When they entered their second year, however, they not only moved away from the Israeli contingent, but from each other. One twin embraced sport, specifically because of the possibility it offered of meeting proficient speakers of English in a different social context.
The annex group
Among the students who had commented on their feeling of being excluded from the ‘American’ group with its use of rapid, colloquial and slang-rich English, other strategies were brought into play. The mechanism that they appeared to deploy was that of derision, both as a defensive and an offensive device. In general, their scorn appeared to be directed at various sporting, academic and lifestyle activities that they perceived to be attached to an American way of life, rather than directed at the type of language that prevailed. American football and several of the cultural activities related to it were raised in this connection. Among the older European girls cheer-leading was used as a totemic feature in summing up aspects of the annex-group’s lifestyle. The tone used could more properly be described as sardonically amused and resigned rather than angry. This atmosphere was marked in the ELD class session, with all the members of the group (except Dae-Jung, the Korean student who made the comment about stereotyping quoted above) making confirmatory remarks of the points made. The following exchange was typical of the conversation with this group of students:
You’ve talked to me about cheer-leaders. It’s obviously something the Americans feel is important.
Yeah, team spirit!
Is that so?
Yeah, there’s too much team spirit!
There’s team spirit about everything, you know. [General nodding of heads in agreement and laughter!] School spirit – we should be cheering and…. [Inaudible sardonic remark. More laughter].
As one German mother said:
The thing is that there is really this division here. There is a division in sports – the American kids, some of them are still doing this American football thing. Most of these other kids look down on this now. They say, huh, macho stuff!
A further subject that was raised in this distancing of the ‘Americans’ from students of other nationalities was the difference in academic programmes pursued by the two groups. Most speakers of other languages in the school (including the student participants of this study) were taking individual courses or the entire programme that led to the IB Diploma qualification. Most members of the annex group, in contrast, were assumed by the student participants to be aiming at the school’s graduation certificate or to be taking Advanced Placement courses targeted at entry to US universities. As Leticia from Chile said: ‘Many of the people taking IB courses, they have to study more and so they don’t really hang out with…[unfinished thought] and most of them, speaking English and who are going back to America, take APs.’ The tone of voice implied that the ELD student participants felt that the IB programme was more substantial and prestigious than the other offerings, although the teacher informants felt that there were no grounds for this view. It was, however, generally agreed that the difference in students’ academic programmes was the cause for a separation within the student population as the German mother quoted above spelt out: ‘Well, there is a natural division, because lots of these American kids are still taking AP courses, so they go different ways.’
A third aspect that was commented upon by the ELD class student participants was the out-of-school activities of the annex group. There was much nodding of heads when Ariana, from Italy, made the following comments:
Americans in the high school – it’s all about alcohol. Drinking. It’s true. They drink a lot, they go out to drink a lot. I’ve been out with American people and people from other countries.
And they always drink?
We Italians drink a lot, but not that much.
Establishing the truth of Ariana’s statement was not within the remit of this investigation; the point of interest is that this feature was presented as a means of distancing Ariana from feeling the need to be included in the group.
The Japanese groups
The Japanese students who mixed exclusively with fellow Japanese speakers seemed to be using different means to resist their sense of disempowerment within the school community. When they met together with Mr Sumita, one of the Japanese-language teachers in the High School, they evidently used the opportunity to discuss their situation, as explained when he was interviewed:
Yes, my class, in Japanese class – always noisy, but I mean not negative noisy. They can communicate and they can ask in detail about everything. Not even my subject. They always ask – it’s their relaxed time.
There was evidence in the same account that the Japanese students felt shame and humiliation at the position in which they found themselves in the school. Most had imagined that English classes in their Japanese schools would enable them to participate immediately in academic and social life in the new school. As they found, however, their English was ‘like kindergarten level’. The standard in the high school, for instance, was ‘so high, they always had steps they couldn’t climb’. Their expectations about life in Europe also proved to be ill-founded, as the same teacher participant spelt out:
Their friends always envy them because they live in Europe. But Europe is not like that. Some of it is good. Sometimes we have to stand apart. We cried.
The result, the teacher said, was that the students within the high school Japanese group expressed disappointment and frustration about ‘Western ways’:
At first they hate Western things.
And which bit of Western life did they hate?
Because even if they tried, they couldn’t succeed, so we hated everything.
And do they talk about hating everything?
Yes, they criticize everything.
It appeared that subjects for criticism raised by the Japanese students when alone covered a number of aspects of school life. One boy who spoke ‘very fluent’ English remained in the Japanese group, because of the differences in ‘laughing point of view’. When he told jokes, or was told jokes by non-Japanese students, he could not join in. He was tired of trying to make himself understood ‘even in small things’. The Japanese students as a whole were dismissive of the attitude of the ‘Western guys’. They were always ‘lazy and impolite to teachers’, so they wondered: ‘why did they come here? This is school, the aim is studying, but they don’t want to!’ The efforts of the school to include all the students were seen as insufficient:
The rest of the students, I don’t know, they are always satisfied with their situation. They don’t want change.
Really, because this school always seems to me to be changing.
Even if change, it’s just in aid of Westerners. They don’t think about other people, for example, Eastern people.
Despite the efforts of the adults around them, many students in the Japanese groups evidently remained resistant to the idea of leaving the group. A reason for this unwillingness to leave the middle school Japanese group was suggested by two Japanese-speaking participants:
First I had to depend on them, because they were very helpful to me. But after a few weeks, or a few months, even if I could do everything for myself, like because they helped me before, I have to be together with them.
Would it be a problem if you had friends who were not Japanese?
Can be.
Is it a big problem or a little one?
I think a big problem.
Hakim, with his Japanese mother and Saudi father, confirmed this view:
If you’re like always with them, and then one day you go with other people, like English-speakers, they will think he’s weird. Like all the time he was with us, but not now.
Some Japanese students, it appeared, never felt at home. In the view of Ayame – the middle school student who, as mentioned earlier, had strategically moved away from the Japanese group – this was because they stayed with that group and kept talking about Japan. As the Japanese teacher expressed it, there was continued resistance among the Japanese high school students to relinquishing their Japanese identities. They did not want to take on some of the behaviour and attitudes that were required of them to succeed at the school. ‘They always criticized’ students who ‘spoke directly’ as being ‘impolite’. They would say: ‘Oh, she is half Japanese, only half – always criticize’.
Appropriation: laying ownership to English
One young student gave evidence of having chosen strategically to adopt a form of English that he perceived as carrying social advantage and prestige in the school setting and wider world. Morten, aged 12 and from Denmark, had spent time at a British independent school in the UK. On relocating to the present school he had consciously maintained his British English accent, pointing out first that ‘In this school, most people speak American.’
You have got a British English accent. And you’re not losing it, that’s weird, isn’t it?
Yes. That’s a good thing.
Perhaps as a European, yes.
I’m very proud of it. The people with the most English accents are me, George and Freddie. And in our way, sounding English makes me feel intelligent in one way. Type of posh and rich and when you’re rich you’re usually intelligent.
I’m not sure that’s true, but anyway.….
Well, it sounds like you’ve had a good education.
You might have been to a good school.
And that makes people think you are – intelligent.
Morten’s appropriation of a type of English that he perceives as bringing him status indicates the degree to which speakers of other languages assume the power to appropriate for themselves the capital of English. The long-term teacher mentioned earlier appeared to confirm this view when he made this comment about his students’ attitude to English:
They will take from you what they can use and dismiss immediately that they learnt it from you. Now it’s theirs.
Analysis
There was evidence, from many student accounts, that individuals and groups of English-language learners were employing a variety of mechanisms to offset the disempowerment caused by being placed in marginalizing categories. As we have seen earlier, the children and young people in this study, together with their parents, did not come from groups who considered themselves disadvantaged in life. On the contrary, they were accustomed to exercising agency in their life choices. Thus, as individuals they did not submit unresistingly to their imposed identity positions.
Individual agency
Individuals acted strategically in breaking away from less proficient users of English and adopted strategies that brought them into contact with proficient English speakers. These acts of agency not only distinguished them in the eyes of their interlocutors from the broader group of English language learners among whom they had been positioned previously, but were recognized by the participants as a means of acquiring the type of English that carried the most capital in the social setting.
The annex group
The older student participants, as learners of English, contested the excluding identity positions that they perceived themselves to have been allocated by the annex group. They did this by deriding the cultural belief system that they perceived the so-called ‘Americans’ to be embracing. This included a dismissive view of American football and the various aspects of ‘American’ sporting culture, such as ‘team-spirit’, cheer-leading and so on. The student participants also spelt out the distinction between the academic programmes that they and the annex group students were pursuing. They and their families perceived the IB Diploma to be more substantial and challenging than the Advanced Placement and other courses associated with entrance to US universities. The IB, via its bilingual examination offerings, also had the advantage of offering an enhanced status to speakers of other languages by giving them explicit measurable credit related to their ability to function in two or more languages. Thus they were able to position themselves favourably by drawing on broadly based, more ‘international’ criteria of what constituted capital in their globalized world.
The student participants also drew on their own lifestyle experiences, as socially well-established individuals in the context of their family and wider national community, as a means of distancing themselves from the lifestyle of the annex group. In this connection they mentioned the style of dress and the attitude to alcohol. They thus resisted a less prestigious identity position by asserting the perceived superiority of aspects of their own culture and social mores. The effectiveness of this strategy was enhanced by the presence of high numbers of speakers of other languages in the school, as opposed to the numbers of students who were classed as ‘American’. There were substantial numbers of students with whom to socialize and to form networks outside the annex group. This process of challenging the value of the capital pertaining to what might be considered the high-status group is in line with Luke’s (2009) notion of altering the nature of the most valued capital in the school. In the light of the historically diminishing numbers of Americans within the setting, it might be also be argued that members of the annex group were themselves acting in defence of their identities in the ways they ‘otherized’ students who could not speak the requisite form of English or who did not act in accordance with certain cultural expectations.
The way in which English was appropriated for their own uses by the student participants had the effect of placing them outside the constraints of the power/dominance paradigm potentially present where English is spoken by the empowered majority in a setting. It is arguable that this appropriation was made possible by their advantageous socio-economic status in the wider community outside school. In this broader group, their increasing command of English and ability to function effectively in the multicultural, English-speaking setting of the school offered them access to favourable identity positions notwithstanding their exclusion from the annex group.
The Japanese groups
The data gives evidence of the variety of ways that Japanese students at the school are positioned and position themselves. Individual students exhibited strategic agency in opting to separate themselves from exclusive socialization with the so-called Japanese groups in the middle and high schools. They were thus enabled to take up identity positions reflecting the internationally peripatetic, globalized lifestyle of many of the families whose children attended the school.
Japanese students who felt less able, or who were disinclined, to move away from their compatriots were positioned as members of the Japanese groups by both student and adult participants. [Mertin (2006), in her unpublished PhD thesis, ascribes this disinclination to engage with both the language and culture to a mis-match of understandings and expectations among Japanese students.] It is not certain from the evidence that the group was as clearly defined as the “Japanese group” name would suggest. Neither is it established that students in these groups were aware that other members of the school community viewed them as having difficulty with English. It is clear, however, that they felt personal humiliation at not being able to participate at a satisfactory level in English-speaking classes and activities. Their method of resisting the disadvantageous identity position ascribed to them in the school appears to lie in embracing their identity as exemplars of the Japanese language and culture. Their talk, when alone with their fellow speakers, appears to deride the behaviour and attitudes of the ‘Westerners’ and to emphasize the superiority of the ‘Japanese way’. There is also the possibility, as Kamada (2010) explains in her book on ‘being half’ in Japan and as the Japanese teacher mentioned in his account, that there is resistance among some Japanese individuals to the notion of being something less than wholly Japanese.
Resistance to unfavourable identity positioning in this group took the form of deriding what were generally seen as advantageous identity positions in the context. However, the disapproval shown to individuals who left the Japanese groups in order to widen their social circle also underlines the defensive nature of their chosen identity stance.
Strategic appropriation
Morten, the Danish boy with a British English accent, has adopted a further strategy to negotiate what he perceives as a favourable identity position within the school. Along with two other boys with similar British English accents, he perceived himself to speak an English that carried a superior form of capital as compared with what he called ‘the American’ of most of the other students. There was no evidence in the data to indicate whether other students viewed this usage in the same light as did Morten. However, he himself felt such a strong entitlement to the capital of English that he was able to choose the identity position he wished to occupy within the school. For Morten, English was a tool that he had the right to appropriate and whose usage he could manipulate to his own advantage.
Summary and conclusion
English is a key factor in the identity positions that are discursively made available to speakers of other languages in this international school. As always when considering a qualitative study, it must be acknowledged that in different schools there may be a different pattern in what is considered to comprise linguistic capital and consequently what are viewed as empowering identity positions. For the participants in this study, English represents both a practical necessity and a powerful discursive tool that carries symbolic capital in this setting. Both aspects of English usage are implicated in the ways that speakers of other languages are positioned in their own eyes and in the view of others.
At school, it did not appear that the younger participants were assigned marginalizing identity positions specifically associated with their use of English. The evolved ethos of the school was able to provide a sustaining and supportive environment that included speakers of other languages. However, the ability to use English proficiently or in a particular manner was implicated in the identity positions that were made available to participants as they reached the age of 14 or thereabouts. Speakers of other languages were aware of being excluded from social interaction with proficient English speakers, and in the case of the annex group were denied access unless they not only spoke in a certain way but also adhered to certain cultural norms. They were thus discursively assigned to marginalized identity positions in relation to these groups. One group of students was singled out by the participants as being uniquely marginalized. These were the Japanese students who chose to remain separate from the mainstream social activity of the school. The reasons for this decision were held by others to relate to the perceived inherent difficulty for the Japanese in learning English. Individual Japanese students concurred with this perception.
Both individuals and groups of students exhibited strategic approaches in the ways that they resisted and contested their assigned identity positions. Individual students chose to break away from national groups, or groups solely comprised of speakers of other languages, in order to enhance their command of English and to position themselves more favourably within the school community. Other participant students drew upon their family’s favourable positioning within their national communities to contest the imposition of linguistic and cultural norms associated with speaking a certain type of English, or so-called ‘American’ or ‘Western’ lifestyles. Thus, those students who were aware that they were not accepted by the annex group employed strategic derision in belittling the habits and customs of the ‘Americans’, and instead drew upon a broader prestigious discourse associated with their lives as a globalized, English-speaking elite. They thus discursively appropriated to themselves favourable identity positions by accessing symbolic capital that prevailed in a wider setting. The students in the Japanese groups similarly drew upon their shared esteem for their own language and culture, although in their case it was largely to construct a defensive identity position in the face of an apparently non-negotiable disadvantageous positioning within the school. By embracing their Japanese identity, these students were able, symbolically, to set aside their marginalized position within the school community and to draw upon their shared understanding of what comprised linguistic and cultural capital within their own socio-cultural setting. Finally, one student gave evidence of appropriating the capital of English to assign to himself what he perceived as a highly favourable identity position. In making the decision to position himself as a British English speaker within a community where other norms prevailed, Morten was agentally managing his relationship with English to his best advantage.
Several overall conclusions are suggested by this study. Beginning speakers of other languages, regardless of advantageous family circumstances and a sense of entitlement with regard to the target language, are subject to potentially marginalizing identity positions in the new discursive setting. The prevailing ethos of the environment may affect positively or negatively the nature of the identity positions made available to speakers of other languages. Individuals are capable of challenging unfavourable identity positions by agentally appropriating symbolic capital available in the wider national or global context.
Future research and final thoughts
This study suggests at least two further areas for research enquiry. The first of these is an investigation into the precise function that English performs within the school itself and in the wider community to which this group of students and their parents belong. Enquiry based on conceptualizations such as English as an International Language (EIL) and English as a ‘lingua franca’ (ELF) is clearly indicated here. A second area of interest might be a closer examination of the ways that groups such as the personally advantaged Japanese students mentioned in this study sustain an identity position within a second discursive territory. This would have relevance when considering the nature of identity negotiation among individuals from such economically powerful nations as China who, nevertheless, at present may be unfavourably positioned in the wider world by their need to function through the globally empowered discourse of English.
The overarching conclusion to be derived from this study is that we must move on in our thinking about the ways that speakers of other languages negotiate their identities in an English-medium context. There remain many situations where speakers of other languages are marginalized and disempowered, with the resulting ascription of unfavourable identity positions. With the advent of the Internet and other technological media, however, even speakers in those situations are building their own relationship with English and have the means to appropriate the symbolic capital of English to enhance their life chances. For many groups, as evinced by the students in this study and in such contexts as Europe where English is now overwhelmingly the second language taught in schools, there exists the possibility of negotiating discursive identities – not in response to positioning imposed by others, but rather by means of individual agency.