For this module, please read chapter five in the text and the article in the module by Wu and Leung. I would also like ou to watch two videos – one is on translanguaging in bilingual classrooms, please watch just until the 30 minute mark and the second video is of a world language classroom. I would like you to watch the videos and think about the instructional design cycle that is presented in chapter five. The first video walks you through translanguaging in two-way immersion classsrooms, for the second video identify ways the world language teacher uses students’ home language.
Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apczkJJRa2A&ab_channel=CUNY-NYSIEBWebinars (1 to 30Min)
Instructional Planning Board Prompt:
For this planning board please share the lesson you are designing or adapting for Micro Lesson and answer the following questions:
a) What elements of the instructional design cycle will you focus on? What type of language learner are you considering when designing the lesson? (i.e. emergent bilingual in general education, English speaker in world language class, bilingual student in TWI class?)
âItâs not my Chineseâ: a teacher and her students
disrupting and dismantling conventional notions
of âChineseâ through translanguaging in a heritage
language classroom
Ming-Hsuan Wu & Genevieve Leung
To cite this article: Ming-Hsuan Wu & Genevieve Leung (2020): âItâs not my Chineseâ: a
teacher and her students disrupting and dismantling conventional notions of âChineseâ through
translanguaging in a heritage language classroom, International Journal of Bilingual Education and
Bilingualism, DOI: 10.1080/13670050.2020.1804524
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1804524
âItâs not my Chineseâ: a teacher and her students disrupting and
dismantling conventional notions of âChineseâ through
translanguaging in a heritage language classroom
Ming-Hsuan Wu a and Genevieve Leung b
aTESOL & Bilingual Education, Adelphi University, Garden City, USA; bDepartment of Rhetoric and Language,
University of San Francisco, San Francisco, USA
ABSTRACT
Translanguaging theory re-conceptualizes the linguistic systems and
practices of multilinguals as well as multilingual classroom pedagogies.
While many studies have documented translanguaging in bilingual
classrooms, there is little discussion about how translanguaging can
advance the field of heritage language education. This paper shares
findings from a qualitative investigation of a Mandarin heritage program
in the U.S. enrolling ethnic Chinese students from various Chinese
language backgrounds. Drawing on ethnographic fieldnotes and
interviews, we argue that the teacherâs flexible use of linguistic resources
provided the basis for productive classroom exercises among heritage
students who struggled with Mandarin as an imposed identity. Through
activities that enabled students to use multiple Chinese languages,
students critically examined the diversity of Chinese languages within
the U.S. context. This, in turn, facilitated their Mandarin learning in the
classroom, as they actively engaged in disrupting and dismantling
conventional notions of âChinese.â The teacher also reflected on her
translanguaging practices and the challenges she faced in class. While
Mandarin is currently heavily emphasized in the language teaching
arenas, translanguaging as a pedagogical heuristic helps create space to
liberate the voices of these language minority students who are often
left out under the generic category of heritage âChineseâ speakers.
ARTICLE HISTORY
Received 12 February 2020
Accepted 15 July 2020
KEYWORDS
Heritage language;
translanguaging; language
maintenance; metalinguistic
knowledge
Introduction
Translanguaging theory re-conceptualizes the linguistic systems and practices of multilinguals as well
as multilingual classroom pedagogies. Teachers who embrace translanguaging as a pedagogical
stance encourage students to draw on their full range of communicative resources to engage with
academic materials (GarcÃa and Sylvan 2011). Researchers have demonstrated that translanguaging
as a multilingual pedagogy for teaching and learning provides educators with a tool and framework
to create more equitable classrooms (GarcÃa and Leiva 2014). While many studies have documented
translanguaging in bilingual classrooms, there is still relatively little discussion about how trans-
languaging can advance the field of heritage language (HL) education, especially in the case
where multiple varieties of a language like âChineseâ (co-)exist in the classroom. This paper shares
findings from a qualitative investigation of a Mandarin HL program at a public school that enrolled
ethnic Chinese students from various Chinese language backgrounds, including Mandarin, Canto-
nese, Fujianese, Taishanese, Hakka, or a combination of these languages. Drawing on ethnographic
fieldnotes, interviews, and documents, we argue that the teacherâs flexible use of linguistic resources
provided the basis for productive classroom exercises among heritage students who struggled with
Mandarin as an imposed identity. We analyze the various ways in which the teacher drew on stu-
dentsâ linguistic repertoires and how students drew on personal and community resources in
response to the translanguaging tasks. Through activities enabling students to use multiple
Chinese languages, students critically examined the diversity of Chinese languages within the U.S.
context. This, in turn, facilitated their Mandarin learning in the classroom as they simultaneously
engaged in disrupting and dismantling conventional notions of âChinese.â The teacher also
reflected on her translanguaging practices and the challenges she faced in class. As our data illustrate,
it was not easy for the teacher to shift from a Mandarin-only pedagogy to a translanguaging one, and
documenting the teacherâs own struggles and concerns about this shift offers key insights into a
language teacherâs decision-making process. We argue that while Mandarin is currently heavily
emphasized in the language teaching arenas, translanguaging as a pedagogical heuristic helps
create space to liberate the voices of these language minority students who are often left out
under the generic category of heritage âChineseâ speakers.
Translanguaging as a pedagogical stance
Translanguaging as a theory and pedagogical stance has received growing scholarly attention in the
field of language education. Translanguaging represents an approach to language pedagogy that
affirms and leverages studentsâ diverse and dynamic language practices in teaching and learning
(Vogel and GarcÃa 2017, 1). Translanguaging is an umbrella concept that refers to a theory of bilingu-
alism, communicative practices, and a pedagogical stance, all of which have the potential to be trans-
formative to the way that we understand and approach multilingualism and multilingual education
(Mazak 2017).
The academic and affective benefits of translanguaging pedagogies have been widely acknowl-
edged among previous research. To date, most of these benefits were documented through class-
room-based qualitative research. Academically, a more flexible and strategic use of studentsâ
multiple languages can increase their class participation, deepen their understanding of the
course materials, ease the cognitive demands of the tasks, help students develop their metalinguistic
awareness, and make the instructional time more effective. Affectively, translanguaging helps build
rapport between teachers and students (even when teachers are at early acquisition stages of stu-
dentsâ L1s), increase studentsâ sense of belonging in class, affirm their bilingual/bicultural or multilin-
gual/multicultural identities, and open spaces for students to navigate their socio-emotional
2 M.-H. WU AND G. LEUNG
challenges associated with learning academic knowledge (Creese and Blackledge 2010; GarcÃa, Flores,
and Woodley 2012; GarcÃa and Kano 2014; GarcÃa and Leiva 2014; GarcÃa and Kleyn 2016; Palmer et al.
2014; Selzer and Collins 2016; Woodley 2016). In light of these academic and affective benefits for the
language minority students, Vogel and GarcÃa (2017) argue it is socially unjust when bilingual stu-
dents are forced to learn or perform academically with less than half of their full linguistic repertoire.
Existing translanguaging research in the U.S. primarily focuses on bilingual or monolingual tea-
chers working with English Language Learners (ELLs) or emergent bilinguals on their English in
various subjects and of different grade levels. While some research on translanguaging in HLs
does exist, most work tends to focus on the learning of Spanish. In either scenario, the use of multiple
languages in the classrooms is deemed to be necessary to bring studentsâ full range of linguistic
repertoires to move the classes along. However, it should be noted that the subject matter being
taught and learned in English classrooms is often more challenging than what is being taught and
learning in the HL classrooms. This is related to the ideology that English is considered critical for aca-
demic success and is the language of prestige and power in the U.S., whereas teaching and learning
an additional language other than English is not required in most U.S. primary schools. As a result,
instructional time, resources, and opportunities are unequally allocated for teaching and learning
English and/or a HL among language minority students. We argue that what can be achieved in multi-
lingual classrooms involving teaching and learning a societal language (like English) through trans-
languaging, as documented in prior research, might not be fully replicated in classrooms involving
teaching and learning of a minority language (like âChineseâ) for various contextual factors.
âChineseâ heritage education: the need for a translanguaging approach
In current socio-political-economic contexts, the term âChineseâ often refers to Mandarin, the official
language of Peopleâs Republic of China and Taiwan, and thus teaching Chinese as a HL oftentimes
means teaching Mandarin. However, in many Chinese diasporic communities that have experienced
extensive periods of immigration from Southern China, residents often speak other varieties of
Chinese, such as Cantonese, Fujianese, or Hakka. In fact, the famed Lau v. Nichols case of 1974,
which led to bilingual education and more meaningful educational experiences for bilingual students
with limited English proficiencies, was driven by Cantonese-speaking Chinese American families who
challenged the San Francisco Unified School District, and San Francisco is home to several established
bilingual CantoneseâEnglish language programs. Current Chinese HL programs, however, often place
ethnic Chinese students, regardless of their HL in the âChinese as a HLâ track that teaches Mandarin
and uses Mandarin as the medium of instruction. Such tracking is highly contested because it fails to
recognize that these Chinese varieties are not mutually intelligible. Through the linguistic lens of
mutual unintelligibility, these varieties are separate languages from Mandarin, but have enough over-
lapping in phonology, intonation and particularly in grammar and script, which allow the knowledge
of these varieties to become assets for understanding Mandarin. However, sociolinguistically speak-
ing, âwe usually do not speak of Chinese in the pluralâ (Ramsey 1987, 17). The fact that standard
written Chinese matches most closely to spoken Modern Standard Mandarin than other varieties
of Chinese yields statements like, âCantonese is only an oral languageâ or âwords in my dialect
cannot be written down,â which propels Mandarin-as-standard ideologies and discounts and delegi-
timizes other varieties of Chinese. Other scholars have stated similarly that in order to uphold a one-
nation one-language language ideology, nation states tend to ignore language diversity (Bauman
and Briggs 2003; Blackledge 2008), though language educators and researchers have called for
heightened awareness of the ways that language teaching of âstandard languagesâ have disenfran-
chised communities of speakers of marginalized languages and varieties (Delpit 1996; Lin 2004). In
the case of the Chinese context, a comprehensive analysis of language policies involved with the
learning of Chinese, foreign languages and minority ethnic languages in the Peopleâs Republic of
China since its establishment in 1949, Lam (2005) argues that a multilingual approach is essential
given the multilingual linguistic realities of this country. Following Lam, we contend that such an
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BILINGUAL EDUCATION AND BILINGUALISM 3
approach is also essential for teaching of Chinese in Chinese diasporic communities because many
members are multilingual in multiple Chinese varieties; not doing so disadvantages speakers of
other non-Mandarin Chinese varieties and discounts their lived experiences.
In fact, growing Chinese HL research has revealed that students speaking other varieties often
experienced much alienation and frustration in learning a language that is assumed to be their HL
(Wu and Leung 2014, 2015; Wu, Lee, and Leung 2014; Kelleher 2008; Wiley 2008; Wong and Xiao
2010). We argue that a truly translanguaging approach to Chinese HL education has to take into
account the linguistic realities in which the heritage students reside and build upon the studentsâ
multilingual knowledge in multiple Chinese varieties. This is in line with Wong and Xiaoâs (2010)
call to rethink âChineseâ HL pedagogy and the emotional ties HL speakers may have to non-Mandarin
varieties, such as Cantonese as well as Liâs (2013) documentation of Cantonese-speaking studentsâ
skillful use of their knowledge of Cantonese in the complementary classrooms in Britain. Specifically,
Li argued that ethnic Chinese studentsâ local linguistic and cultural knowledge (i.e. Cantonese
language knowledge and British cultural knowledge) can provide important learning opportunities
for Mandarin-speaking teachers, who were usually foreign nationals from China and had lived in
Britain for a limited period of time. Li (2013) noted that even while the status of Mandarin is outpow-
ering other varieties rapidly among the Chinese diaspora in Britain, Cantonese remains powerful and
influential at the local level; along similar lines, Wong and Xiao (2010) also reported that the language
hegemony of Mandarin results in non-Mandarin HL speakers to be âcaught in the webs of power
structures and social discoursesâ (324). As a result, studentsâ experiences with and proficiency in Can-
tonese, though oftentimes muted, remain particularly relevant in Mandarin HL classrooms.
At a time when the emigration patterns from China to the U.S. has changed with Fujian province
surpassing Guangdong province to become the number one emigrate province in China since the
mid-1990s (Liang and Morooka 2004), we anticipate that the Chinese HL classrooms will continue
to be linguistically diverse and that Chinese HL teachers will have to grapple with challenges
different from other HL teachers, who, by and large, work with students whose home languages
are at least intelligible to the designated HL. These challenges are also different from ESL teachers
or content area teachers working with learners from multiple linguistic and ethnic backgrounds on
a societal-dominant language because ESL students may not have any heritage identification or
the same strong emotional connections with English. In this paper, we share some translanguaging
practices that were documented in a multilingual Chinese HL classroom and their impacts on
language minority studentsâ learning of Mandarin. A closer look at how the teacher went from a Man-
darin-only approach to including multiple Chinese languages to facilitate her studentsâ learning of
Mandarin expands the scholarly discussion of what translanguaging practices might look like in a
Chinese HL class and the transformative potential of a translanguaging approach, providing new pos-
sibilities for us to rethink Chinese HL education.
Research context
Data were from drawn from a larger school ethnography conducted by the first author that investi-
gated the schoolâs culturally relevant pedagogy and its impacts on minority studentsâ academic
success and interracial/interethnic friendships. The school is a K-8 multiracial, multilingual charter
school located in a northeastern U.S. city that taught Chinese in the form of Mandarin to all students.
At the time of data collection, about 70% of the total 440 students were Asian students and 20% were
African American students. Similar to other Mandarin programs in the U.S., the school offers two
tracks of Mandarin. Students of Chinese heritage were often placed in Chinese as a HL track with Man-
darin as the medium of instruction and non-Chinese students were placed in Chinese as a world
language track with English as the medium of instruction. In the 2009â2010 academic year, the
6th to 8th graders had three weekly sessions of Mandarin, but the classes were reduced to 1.5 ses-
sions a week during 2010â2011 year due to the elimination of funding from the Foreign Language
Assistance Program.
4 M.-H. WU AND G. LEUNG
In this paper we focus on the experiences of Teacher Meihua (a pseudonym) and her multilingual
Chinese HL students, whose linguistic repertories included a variety of Chinese languages. As the only
HL teacher at school, Teacher Meihua taught roughly 200 K-8 graders (about 40% of the total student
population) in the heritage track. According to Meihua, about one-third of her students were from
Fujianese-speaking families, one-third from Cantonese-speaking backgrounds, and the remainder
from mixed backgrounds (i.e. a combination of Mandarin, Fujianese, Cantonese, Taishanese, Indone-
sian, or Vietnamese). She estimated that grades K-2 had a higher percentage of Fujianese speakers,
but some classrooms in Grades 3â5 had a higher percentage of Cantonese speakers. Meihua grew up
in China and came to the U.S. for higher education in her late twenties. She had lived in the U.S. for
more than five years at the time the project was conducted. It was her second year teaching at the
school, but it was her first year in charge of all HL classes. Her home language is Teochew, a language
she still used to communicate with her parents even after she immigrated to the U.S. She learned
Mandarin at school since it is the official language of China and the medium of instruction at all
schools that she had attended in China. Later, when she attended college in Guangdong province,
she learned Cantonese because, in her own words, Cantonese is essential for living in Guangdong.
Meihua was a conscientious, reflective teacher who strived to develop engaging lessons for all of
her 200 students from K-8th grades. She wrote different lesson plans per week for all 18 heritage
classes that she taught and was often seen using her lunchtime or teaching break to revise her
lesson plans. She constantly asked for Wuâs feedback and wanted to learn more about the research
in HL education. Meihua was particularly adept at creating age-appropriate arts and crafts activities
for her students to learn Mandarin, and Wu observed that these art projects provided a safe space in a
Mandarin-only classroom for students from non-Mandarin speaking backgrounds. Meihua also had a
strong rapport with her students and she often had students come to her classroom during lunch-
time to socialize with her or check out Chinese books from her bookshelves.
Methods
Wu observed Meihuaâs heritage classes two hours a week over a ten-month period as part of a larger,
school-based ethnography project. Wu conducted extensive participant observations of the Man-
darin classes and 15 semi-structured interviews with students and Meihua during the 2010â2011 aca-
demic year. Field notes and interview transcriptions went through an iterative process of open
coding, initial memos, focused coding, and integrative memos (Creswell 2013; Maxwell 2013).
Leung was invited to observe Meihuaâs class during the middle of the research project at a time
when Meihua experienced much frustration with her students from non-Mandarin speaking back-
grounds. As a Cantonese speaker who learned Mandarin as an additional language in school,
Leungâs linguistic trajectory mirrored many of the non-Mandarin students in Meihuaâs class.
Because of this connection, Wu hoped that Leung could provide insightful feedback from the per-
spective of an HL education researcher, educator, and learner. It should be noted that translangua-
ging was not the original focus of the school-based research project that Wu conducted. This
paper is a result of revisiting Wuâs data in an effort to use a translanguaging lens to (re-)examine
the complexity of a multilingual Chinese HL classroom. In particular, we took two excerpts from pre-
viously examined field notes to view through a translanguaging lens, which we will identify in the
discussion section.
We used ATLAS.ti to organize multiple data sources. For the work presented here, prominent
codes identified include âstudentsâ linguistic reality,â âstudentsâ learning and not learning Mandarin,â
ânon-Mandarin Chinese,â âteacherâs concern for translanguaging,â âteacherâs resistance of translangua-
ging,â âparentsâ concerns,â and âmultiple Chinese.â Both authors conferred carefully on the interpret-
ation of data within each code. We used a grounded theory framework (Strauss and Corbin 1990)
and narrative analysis (Riessman 2008) to understand the participantsâ meaning-making processes
and building theory from the data itself. We looked out for instances where different languages
were used and switched (e.g. English, varieties of Chinese), pronouns, dialogic voicing, and co-
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BILINGUAL EDUCATION AND BILINGUALISM 5
construction of narratives in group discussions. Viewing our participantsâ words not as objective
accounts but as significant recounted events told to us, signifying tellersâ evaluations of their experi-
ences and ideological beliefs about language. When we did not agree upon the themes or codes, we
went back to the data for another run of the analysis.
Researchersâ positionalities
Wu is an immigrant and is a speaker of Mandarin, Taiwanese Hokkien, and Hakka with extensive
experiences teaching Mandarin as a foreign or a heritage language in the United States. Leung is
a Cantonese and Taishanese heritage speaker and had learned Mandarin in college. At the time of
the research, both of us were graduate students in a language education program in a northeastern
U.S. city. As speakers of multiple Chinese languages, we have found value in every variety that we
speak, with each one connecting us with members of various communities. With our proficiency
in Mandarin and other varieties of Chinese, we have been able to connect with many Chinese HL lear-
ners in the U.S. through the totality of our linguistic repertoires. Together, we have published several
articles focusing on non-Mandarin Chinese speakersâ experiences and identity development with the
hope of drawing more scholarly attention to this groupâs experiences, especially since this group is
sizable in overseas Chinese communities.
Findings: classroom context
In this section, we present major findings that emerged from the data. To better contextualize the
findings, we first present the struggles that students faced when learning Mandarin as an imposed
HL from our previous work.
In our other work (Wu, Lee, and Leung 2014; Wu and Leung 2014, 2015), we have reported that
learning Mandarin as a HL is highly contested among Chinese students because in reality, many stu-
dents did not hear much Mandarin in their linguistic ecologies. As a result, studentsâ real HL back-
grounds are highly related to their performance in the class. Mandarin-dominant students often
became the de facto leaders in the classrooms. Throughout different grade levels, it was obvious
that Cantonese or Fujianese-dominant students participated in the Mandarin class far less frequently
than the Mandarin-dominant students; the former groupâs verbal participation was only documented
at the word or phrasal level. In student interviews with 7th and 8th graders, 20 out of 26 students
identified Mandarin as their least favorite subject, and some characterized Mandarin learning as
âmostly guessing meaning.â A few students commented on liking the Mandarin class because they
got to do arts and crafts and the teacher is nice. In the following excerpt, two students share the
difficulty of being a Cantonese or Fujianese speaker in the Mandarin classroom:
Wu: Is there anything else that you hope the teacher can do to help you learn?
April: Well, I am hoping that she [Teacher Meihua] can translate [what she says] in English because I have no
idea sometimes what she says because I am not 100% Chinese, you know.
Wu: What do you mean?
April: I was born in America and at home we donât speak Mandarin. We speak Fujianese.
Monica: And we speak a different type of Chinese [Cantonese] at home ⦠Most of the time, I donât understand
what she [the teacher] says.
Toward the end of our conversation, April reiterated her difficulty in the Mandarin only classroom and
hoped for more English instruction because âIt [Mandarin] is not my Chinese.â (cited in Wu, Lee, and
Leung 2014, 28)
We believe Aprilâs quote, which we cited once before in our 2014 work, is worth another look. We
argue that April and Monicaâs difficulties stemmed not just from the mere difference between their
HL and Mandarin, but were also related to their struggles of learning an ascribed HL they did not
necessarily identify with. When ethnic Chinese students are assumed to have some or default knowl-
edge of Mandarin, their unique needs as non-Mandarin heritage learners are not recognized. Thus, it
6 M.-H. WU AND G. LEUNG
does not come as a surprise to hear that few non-Mandarin heritage students showed interest in con-
tinuing learning Mandarin beyond the current school context. Instead, they mentioned they would
rather study a language such as French or Spanish that they could at least learn on an equal
footing with other non-heritage students entering high school or college. This might be related to
the feeling of isolation these students experienced in a Mandarin-only classroom where the âone-
size-fit-allâ pedagogy was geared toward Mandarin-speaking speakers (Wu, Lee, and Leung 2014;
Wu and Leung 2014).
In this current paper we add in Teacher Meihuaâs perspective. As a conscientious language
teacher, Meihua became more aware of her studentsâ struggles during her second year of teaching
at school. The following fieldnotes captured the challenge she faced when teaching multilingual
Chinese HL classes.
When I met with Meihua during lunch break, she brought up a question that she hopes I can give her some
advice. The question is how she can better teach her Cantonese-speaking kids. She was very upset when one
lower grade studentâs auntie came to her and accused her of teaching nothing to this student because she
doesnât speak English in her heritage class. According to the aunt, this student couldnât understand anything
in class because Meihua only teaches the class in Mandarin but the student only understands Cantonese.
Meihua doesnât think the accusation is fair because she has spent so much time planning the lessons. The stu-
dentâs parents are thinking about transferring her to the other track so she could learn something. I asked
Meihua to give me an estimate of Cantonese-speaking kids in the heritage track, and I was very surprised to
hear that probably half of her students across K-8th speak Cantonese. Meihua is struggling with whether or
not she should increase her English use in class. However, she also remembers the last coordinator told her
that she was not hired to teach kids English, but to teach them Mandarin. Meihua said that she doesnât care
what others tell her to do, but only cares about what would be best for her students to learn Mandarin âin a pro-
fessional way.â It seems that the struggles faced by the Fujianese or Cantonese students are greater than Iâve
expected. Meihua told me that some of her Fujianese speaking kindergarteners even cried in her class during
the first few weeks of the semester!. (Field notes, 10/12/2010)
Meihuaâs request came at a time when Wu also noticed the lack of verbal participation and engage-
ment among the Cantonese or Fujianese-speaking students in the 7th and 8th grade classrooms. Part
of the school ethnography allowed Wu to follow the same group of students to other classes (includ-
ing English Language Arts and Social Studies) and examine their classroom participation in classes
beyond the Mandarin classroom. Wu documented very few tokens of Mandarin utterances produced
by students whose only Chinese exposure at home is Cantonese. For these students, their inability to
express themselves in Mandarin made them invisible and inaudible in the Mandarin classroom.
However, these same students interacted actively with their peers in small group assignments and
classroom discussions in English Language Arts and Social Studies. It seemed that language
played a determining factor among many HL studentsâ participation in the Mandarin classroom.
Per Meihuaâs request, Wu invited Leung to observe her class and give her suggestions on how to
reach out to non-Mandarin HL students.
Leungâs observation confirmed the struggles faced by these students. Her post-observation notes
confirmed that the non-Mandarin-dominant students were ânot on the same pageâ with the Man-
darin-dominant students on several activities and when the class was reading aloud in Mandarin,
these students oftentimes did not participate. One was âmumbling words,â another âshow disengage-
ment by putting her head down while another showed disengagement by not being on task and
speaking out of turn, or fiddling with pencils or scribbling.â However, Leung also noted the great
student-teacher rapport and the advantage of Meihua being proficient in both Cantonese and Man-
darin. As a result, Leung suggested that Meihua do the following in her future teaching:
(1) Using a contrastive analysis method to explicitly draw connections between different varieties of
Chinese or show differences between them to make it clear to the non-Mandarin speaking stu-
dents that their real HL is still valuable in helping them understand Mandarin and the knowledge
of multiple varieties of Chinese is an asset. Sample contrastive analysis questions include, âthis is
how this word/phrase is said in Mandarin; here is how itâs said in Cantonese. Have you ever heard
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BILINGUAL EDUCATION AND BILINGUALISM 7
of this before, or heard your parents/family members use it?â Or âThis is how X is pronounced in
Mandarin. It sounds a little bit like Cantonese word X, doesnât it?â
(2) When working with students of other linguistic backgrounds, do contrastive analysis by asking
them how they might say it in their home language to create a sense of expert feeling among
them and make them feel more invested in their language learning in the class (Personal Com-
munication, 2/20/2011).
Critical moments where teacher Meihua integrates translanguaging pedagogy
In the following sections, we analyze Teacher Meihuaâs reactions to the suggestions as well as the
process that she went through in integrating translanguaging pedagogy into her Mandarin class-
room. We recognize that the process was delineated ex post facto by ourselves as researchers, but
we explicitly chose these key moments as illustrative of the maximal range of what multilingual stu-
dents were capable of doing when Teacher Meihua allowed them to more fully draw on the linguistic
resources they brought to the classroom. We believe that these critical vignettes clearly capture the
ways Meihua incorporated translanguaging practices. We do not mean to call these moments repre-
sentative of every classroom interaction Wu observed but aim to show how translanguaging prac-
tices have much to offer in revisioning a new future for Chinese HL education.
Translanguaging outside of the Mandarin classroom: learning basic Fujianese from
students
Meihuaâs first reactions to the suggestions included suspicion, worry, and insecurity. She was worried
that using more Cantonese might disadvantage her Mandarin and Fujianese-speaking students. In
addition, she thought her not speaking Fujianese might mean her inability to reach out to her Fujia-
nese-dominant students. Lastly, she held the belief that a Mandarin language class meant exposing
students to Mandarin as much as possible during class time. After several back and forth discussions
with Wu, Meihua finally decided to step out of her comfort zone and do something outside of her
regular class. The excerpt below documents Meihuaâs first step to learn basic Fujianese from her
older students beyond her regular Mandarin class.
During lunch break, some 7th graders came back to Meihuaâs room to finish their posters. Meihua stood next to a
table of four students and was learning how to count from 1-10 in Fujianese from April. April was busy correcting
Meihuaâs tones while the rest were working on their posters. April was very patient with Meihua and she pro-
nounced the numbers in Fujianese several times for Meihua to imitate. Occasionally, Andrew joined in the con-
versation and corrected her pronunciations while he was writing down the characters on the poster. Meihua
shouted out at one point, âOh my god! This is so hard.â She felt the tones were particularly difficult and she
had to practice the tones several times with the students. Even after much practice, she was still not able to
count from 1-10 in Fujianese by herself. Meihua also asked students how to say âsit down,â âbook,â âcome
here,â âlook at meâ in Fujianese and she was very surprised to hear how different the pronunciations and
usages are from Mandarin. For example, for pronouncing âyouâ, there are two different ways of saying it, depend-
ing on the gender, which is different from Mandarin. At first, I thought she just wanted to learn random phrases in
Fujianese, but later when there were only two of us, she told me that she wants to learn some classroom com-
mands in Fujianese because she has many Fujianese speaking younger learners in her class and she would like to
better communicate with them. At the end of our conversation, Meihua shared, âI didnât know that Fujianese is so
different from Cantonese. Itâs like a totally different language. I can see why my Fujianese students struggle in my
class.â She also thought itâs important for her to feel what her students might feel. (Field notes, 4/14/2011)
We argue what happened above confirms prior translanguaging research on the importance of trans-
languaging in social space (Milu 2013) as well as advancing teacher-student rapport (Li and Luo
2017). Since Meihua did not feel comfortable including non-Mandarin Chinese varieties in her Man-
darin classroom, lunch time became a good alternative for her to engage students in non-Mandarin
varieties. Even though it was an âunofficialâ space and time in school, doing so still yielded important
results. When Meihua took on a learner role and showed increased interest in learning studentsâ
8 M.-H. WU AND G. LEUNG
home languages, it not only helped her better understand her studentsâ struggle but it also helped
students see there was space at school for their home language and their knowledge is validated,
which led to their heightened willingness to engage in their home language and Mandarin. The fol-
lowing vignette captured the studentsâ active participation at this important moment.
Andrew and April are the two students who took the lead to tell Meihua how to say phrases in Fujianese and the
other girl, Maggie, who can speak Cantonese, Fujianese, Hoisanese, and Mandarin, joined the conversation by
commenting on how to best learn Fujianese if one knows Cantonese. Since she knows Meihua also speaks Can-
tonese, she often told Meihua to compare and contrast phrases in Fujianese with Cantonese. She often threw in
equivalent phrases in Cantonese to help Meihua learn. While she was doing that, she also explained to me in Can-
tonese that this is how she learns Mandarin, that is, through comparing and contrasting it with her more domi-
nant language Cantonese. Interestingly, she forgets that I actually donât speak Cantonese so when she gives me
several examples of equivalent phrases in Cantonese and Fujianese, I can only nod my head with a big smile on
the face. I could sort of guess what she said because of the context and because she said âcompare and contrastâ
in English. This is the first time that I heard her speaking full sentences in Cantonese and giving me wonderful
examples in Mandarin!. (Field notes, 4/14/2011)
It became clear that April, Andrew and Maggie, who were rarely seen participating in the Mandarin
classroom, had a vast knowledge base that their teacher could tap into. While Cantonese and Fujianese
are not mutually intelligible to Mandarin, they share similarities in syntax and thus studentsâ knowledge
of Cantonese and Fujianese was still very helpful in learning Mandarin. Students were eager to share
what they knew when the opportunity was provided and with such an important opportunity, they
no longer viewed themselves or were viewed as invisible and inaudible participants.
Including minority Chinese languages in the Mandarin class
In the past, Meihua used mostly Mandarin in her class with some translation to English when she saw
students confused or lacked participation from students. However, after she had witnessed the lin-
guistic capacity of her âquietâ students during lunch time, she became more willing to include minor-
itized Chinese languages in her Mandarin class. Her various ways of including minority Chinese
languages in class went beyond the compare and contrast activity that was described earlier. In
one class that Wu observed, she started out by asking her older students how to say âææ說ä¸æâ
(I can speak Chinese) in Fujianese. At first, studentsâ Fujianese translations varied. She went on to
explain the linguistic situation of Guangdong province, highlighting that not everyone from Guang-
dong province speaks Cantonese or speaks Cantonese the same way. She posited that a similar lin-
guistic phenomenon could be found in Fujian province. Fujianese-dominant students then went on
to compare and contrast several tokens in Mandarin and Fujianese to see if their Fujianese trans-
lations do sound differently and the Cantonese-dominant and Mandarin-dominant students also
joined this discussion by serving as âjudges.â It didnât take long for the students to reach the con-
clusion that not everyone from Fujian province spoke the same variety of Fujianese.
Meihuaâs willingness to learn studentsâ home languages and openness to include discussion of
different varieties enable her students to develop not only metalinguistic awareness of different
Chinese varieties but also critical language awareness that challenged the hegemonic language
policy in multilingual societies. We argue that Meihuaâs translanguaging pedagogy opened up âideo-
logical and implementational spacesâ (Hornberger 2002) for multiple languages in the local ecology,
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BILINGUAL EDUCATION AND BILINGUALISM 9
and seemed to make an important impact on the language minority students in her Mandarin
classroom.
Following the above exchange, Yemin continued to tell the class that he had just learned from a
website that Fujianese actually preserves more features of Old Chinese than Mandarin and the two
languages belong to two different language families. He was so excited to learn this that he had
shared this new piece of information with his friends on the playground during recess. Meihua
acknowledged Yeminâs contribution and confirmed that in comparison to Mandarin, many âdialectsâ
are actually closer to Old Chinese in terms of pronunciation. Upon hearing this, many studentsâ faces
brightened, especially those from non-Mandarin speaking backgrounds. This was an important
teaching moment when all the students, including those who were observed to be less invested
in the class, were âhookedâ to the content being taught in the Mandarin classroom. Seeing her stu-
dentsâ interest in learning more, Meihua explained that sometimes these varieties provided more
semantic information than Mandarin in a single vocabulary word. She used the word âbedâ as an
example from Teochew, her own heritage language. In Teochew, a bed is called ç åº, literally âbed
for sleepingâ, whereas in Mandarin, one calls åº (âbedâ) without ç (âsleepingâ) as the modifier. Stu-
dents quickly noted that Fujianese also has the same way of saying âsleeping beds.â For the following
ten minutes, the whole class engaged in more structured and conscientious comparison and contrast
analysis of Fujianese, Mandarin, Cantonese, and Teochew. Unlike the earlier compare and contrast of
random tokens in Mandarin and Fujianese, this time the discussion turned to a collective effort: Fujia-
nese-speaking students took turns to offer phrases or words in Fujianese for the rest of the class to
guess the meanings and learn the pronunciations.
Toward the end of this activity which had been centered on Fujianese, a Cantonese-speaking
student volunteered to offer some random Cantonese words for his classmates to guess the
meaning. In this activity, students not only harnessed different âChinesesâ to engage one another
in metalinguistic conversations, but they also utilized various languages available to them to
perform their multilingual identities that are distinct from an imposed Mandarin-only identity. The
Fujianese or Cantonese-dominant students were no longer invisible or inaudible learners in the class-
room. Meihuaâs willingness to accept studentsâ linguistic diversity in the classroom validates who they
are, allows them to develop their repertoires of multiple âChinesesâ and creates space for them to pos-
ition themselves as multilingual Chinese speakers who know a variety of Chinese languages not just
limited to Mandarin. This moment that we were able to capture confirms existing translanguaging
pedagogy research on the importance of allowing students to draw upon all their existing language
skills. In the case of Mandarin HL education, we argue that translanguaging pedagogy should at least
start with an acknowledgement of linguistic diversity in the Chinese diasporic communities so that a
translanguaging stance can be enacted by creating spaces for multiple varieties of Chinese in the
Mandarin classroom.
Using the Mandarin classroom as a site to challenge linguistic hierarchy
Translanguaging allows teachers, regardless whether they are proficient in their studentsâ languages,
to âset up the affordances for students to engage in discursive and semiotic practices that respond to
their cognitive and social intentionsâ (GarcÃa and Li 2014, 93). Doing so not only helps students
develop metalinguistic awareness, create teacher-student bonding, but also helps challenge the
language hierarchies and inequalities (GarcÃa, Flores, and Woodley 2012; GarcÃa and Leiva 2014). Fol-
lowing the metalinguistic conversation described above during which linguistic minority students
actively shared their knowledge in Fujianese or Cantonese with their classmates came an important
moment that Meihua created for students to further voice their concerns in learning Mandarin and
explore issues related to different varieties of Chinese in their own context.
Seeing how the dynamics of the class interaction changed dramatically, Meihua quickly decided to
take a moment to ask studentsâ interest in learning other varieties of Chinese. She asked students if
they would be willing to learn Fujianese or Cantonese if they were offered at school. A Fujianese
This spontaneous, back and forth discussion among students across languages continued until
Meihua needed to stop the class and reminded them to get packed and move on to their next
class. Sharlene in particular, was still in conversation with other students about the importance of
Fujianese until Meihua headed to her and helped her pack her bag. While students were lining up,
Meihua told the students that she was impressed by how much Mandarin students used in this dis-
cussion, which she believed should be called âa debate.â She also stressed that even though the class
might have seemed rather âdisorganizedâ due to its lack of traditional teacher presentation, there was
a lot of student learning and participation. She highlighted several times that she was proud of the
students and wanted them to feel proud of themselves, too.
Examining these studentsâ exchanges reveals that Meihua âset up the affordances for students to
engage in discursive and semiotic practices that respond to their cognitive and social intentionsâ
(GarcÃa and Li 2014, 93). While she viewed the activity as not âorganized,â what she did actually embo-
died core components of translanguaging pedagogy, as defined by GarcÃa, Johnson, and Seltzer
(2017): a stance that believes in studentsâ diverse language practices as valuable, a design that inte-
grates studentsâ in-school and out-of-school or community language practices with unit plans and
assessment driven by studentsâ ways of knowing and language practices, and a teacherâs ability to
make moment-by-moment adjustment to the plans based on studentsâ feedback. When students
were provided with the opportunity to bring in their community knowledge, which was positioned
as constructive and valuable to the classroom discussion, we see how linguistic minoritized students
become active participants in the class, which in turn enhanced their Mandarin learning.
Furthermore, when classroom activities centered around studentsâ out-of-school and community
language practices, they also allowed teachers to examine studentsâ understanding of broader social
issues related to race, ethnicity, language, and class. As the above student discussion shows, many
were acutely aware of the linguistic hierarchies among different varieties of Chinese and some com-
ments reflected how language ideologies cannot be separated from current racial hierarchies in the
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BILINGUAL EDUCATION AND BILINGUALISM 11
U.S. and how they are fraught with potential to be challenged and contested; thus, the classroom can
serve as a site where these ideologies can be discussed and unpacked in depth.
Discussion and conclusion
In this paper, we have illustrated the emotional and sociolinguistic complexities that teachers and
students encounter in a âChineseâ HL classroom. As can be seen, the HL classroom is full of tensions
and potential mismatches in studentsâ linguistic realities and aspirations. By showing how Teacher
Meihua took on the vulnerable role of both teacher and learner to open the floor for her students
to showcase the knowledge they brought into her classroom, we argue that this type of pedagogy
illustrates the full transformative potential that translanguaging can offer. Her translanguaging peda-
gogy opened up not just implementational spaces for multiple Chineses to co-exist in her classroom
but also ideological spaces for students to reflect upon their stances towards different languages and
speakers of different languages in their own socio-political contexts. While the present study is only
based on some studentsâ experiences in one school in the U.S., it nonetheless still points to the need
for those who work with and in Chinese diasporic communities to move away from a âMandarin-onlyâ
pedagogy. Our data have provided evidence that translanguaging as a pedagogical stance gives
language educators ample opportunities to honor multiple varieties within the local language
ecology, which not only maximizes studentsâ experiences of learning Mandarin and/or other
Chinese varieties, but also using Chinese diasporic spaces to produce counter-hegemonic discourses.
In sum, to create an inclusive learning environment that fosters our diverse Chinese HL learners,
we have showcased a perspective that develops a critical language awareness of âChinese.â This view
confronts the imbalance power among different varieties of Chinese, interrogating how and why
Mandarin has enjoyed such strong support in HL programs despite the long history of non-Man-
darin-Speaking Chinese immigrants in the U.S. (Wu and Leung 2014, 2015; Wu, Lee, and Leung
2014). At a time when Mandarin is heavily emphasized in language teaching and research and is
increasingly assumed to be the HL of Chinese diasporic communities, we believe a translanguaging
approach has the power to tap into the rich linguistic resources that Chinese diasporic communities
offer and develop more effective and engaging pedagogies that help students become more com-
petent language users in their own local contexts and beyond. We close this paper echoing and
building off the very insightful quote from Yemin: why canât Chinese languages co-exist â and we
would argue, be valorized and thrive â in the Mandarin HL classroom?
Notes
1. é»é¬¼, literally translates to âblack ghostâ, is a pejorative term to refer to African Americans in some varieties of
Chinese. Similarly, the term ç½é¬¼ âwhite ghostâ refers to Caucasians. These terms are generally considered pejora-
tive, but some have argued that the cultural use of âghostâ is used to refer to âforeign-ness.â More on intra- and
interracial relationships at this school has been discussed in Wuâs 2017 work.
2. Like many other HL learners in her class, Sharlene was a former ESL student so her English sometimes did not
align with standard English.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes on contributors
Ming-Hsuan Wu is an Assistant Professor in the School of Education at Adelphi University in New York. Her work seeks to
understand teachersâ agentive roles in positively impacting immigrant studentsâ academic and social lives as well as
young peopleâs agentive roles in contesting dominant discourses on diversity. She has published her work in Inter-
national Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, Urban Education, and Journal of Language, Identity & Education.
12 M.-H. WU AND G. LEUNG
Genevieve Leung is an Associate Professor of Rhetoric and Language at the University of San Francisco. She directs the
minor in Asian Pacific American Studies and is the academic director of the MA program in Asia Pacific Studies at USF. Her
research looks at Chinese American language and cultural maintenance, particularly of varieties of Cantonese and
Hoisan-wa. Her work has been published in various journals related to language, identity, and education, teacher edu-
cation, and heritage language education.
Bauman, R., and C. L. Briggs. 2003. Voices of Modernity: Language Ideologies and the Politics of Inequality. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Blackledge, A. 2008. Language Ecology and Language Ideology. In Encyclopedia of Language and Education, edited by
A. C. P. Martin and H. H. Hornberger, 2nd ed., Vol. 9, 27â40. New York, NJ: Springer.
Canagarajah, S. 2011. âCodemeshing in Academic Writing: Identifying Teachable Strategies of Translanguaging.â Modern
Language Journal 95 (3): 401â417.
Cenoz, J., and D. Gorter. 2011. âFocus on Multilingualism: A Study of Trilingual Writing.â Modern Language Journal 95 (3):
356â369.
Creese, A., and A. Blackledge. 2010. âTranslanguaging in the Bilingual Classroom: A Pedagogy for Learning and
Teaching?â Modern Language Journal 94 (1): 103â115.
Creswell, J. W. 2013. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Traditions. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Delpit, L. 1996. Other Peopleâs Children. New York: The New Press.
GarcÃa, O., N. Flores, and H. Woodley. 2012. âTransgressing Monolingualism and Bilingual Dualities: Translanguaging
Pedagogies.â In Harnessing Linguistic Variation to Improve Education, edited by A. Yiakoumetti, 45â75. Bern: Peter Lang.
GarcÃa, O., S. Johnson, and K. Seltzer. 2017. The Translanguaging Classroom. Leveraging Student Bilingualism for Learning.
Philadelphia: Caslon.
GarcÃa, O., and N. Kano. 2014. âTranslanguaging as Process and Pedagogy: Developing the English Writing of Japanese
Students in the US.â In The Multilingual Turn in Languages Education: Opportunities and Challenges, edited by J. Conteh,
and G. Meier, 258â277. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
GarcÃa, O., and T. Kleyn, eds. 2016. Translanguaging with Multilingual Students: Learning From Classroom Moments.
New York: Routledge.
GarcÃa, O., and C. Leiva. 2014. âTheorizing and Enacting Translanguaging for Social Justice.â In Heteroglossia as Practice
and Pedagogy, edited by A. Blackledge, and A. Creese, 199â216. Dordrecht: Springer.
GarcÃa, O., and W. Li. 2014. Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
GarcÃa, O., and C. Sylvan. 2011. âPedagogies and Practices in Multilingual Classrooms: Singularities in Pluralities.â Modern
Hornberger, N. H. 2002. âMultilingual Language Policies and the Continua of Biliteracy: An Ecological Approach.â
Language Policy, 1, 27â51.
Kelleher, A. 2008. âPlacements and re-Positionings: Tensions Around CHL Learning in a University Mandarin Program.â In
Chinese as a Heritage Language: Fostering Rooted World Citizenry, edited by A. W. He, and Y. Xiao, 239â259. Honolulu,
HI: University of Hawaiâi, National Foreign Language Resource Center.
Lam, S. L. A. 2005. Language Education in China: Policy and Experience From 1949. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Li, W. 2013. âWho is Teaching Whom? Co-Learning in Multilingual Classrooms.â In The Multilingual Turn Implications for
SLA, TESOL, and Bilingual Education, edited by S. May, 167â190. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Li, S., and W. Luo. 2017. âCreating a Translanguaging Space for High School Emergent Bilinguals.â The CATESL Journal 29
(2): 139â162.
Liang, Z., and H. Morooka. 2004. âRecent Trends of Emigration From China: 1982-2000.â International Migration 42 (2):
145â164.
Lin, A. 2004. âIntroducing a Critical Pedagogical Curriculum: A Feminist Reflexive Account.â In Critical Pedagogies and
Language Learning, edited by B. Norton, and K. Toohey, 271â267. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
Martin-Beltrán, M. 2014. âWhat do you Want to say?â How Adolescents use Translanguaging to Expand Learning
Opportunities.â International Multilingual Research Journal 8 (3): 208â230.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BILINGUAL EDUCATION AND BILINGUALISM 13
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2315-2192
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7361-9838
Maxwell, J. 2013. Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mazak, C. 2017. âIntroduction: Theorizing Translanguaging Practices in Higher Education.â In Translanguaging in Higher
Education. Beyond Monolingual Ideologies, edited by C. M. Mazak, and K. S. Caroll, 1â10. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Milu, E. 2013. âTranslingual Practices in Kenyan hip hop: Pedagogical Implications.â In Literacy as Translingual Practice:
Between Communities and Classrooms, edited by S. Canagarajah, 104â112. New York, NY: Routledge.
Palmer, D. K., R. A. MartÃnex, S. G. Mateus, and K. Henderson. 2014. âReframing the Debate on Language Separation:
Toward a Vision for Translanguaing Pedagogies in the Dual Language Classroom.â Modern Language Journal 98 (3):
757â772.
Poza, L. 2017. âTranslanguaging: Definitions, Implications, and Further Needs in Burgeoning Inquiry.â Berkeley Education
Review 6 (2): 101â128.
Ramsey, S. R. 1987. The Languages of China. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Riessman, C. K. 2008. Narrative Methods for the Human Sciences. Los Angeles: Sage.
Sayer, P. 2013. âTranslanguaging, TexMex, and Bilingual Pedagogy: Emergent Bilinguals Learning Through the
Vernacular.â TESOL Quarterly 47 (1): 63â88.
Selzer, K., and B. Collins. 2016. âNavigating Turbulent Waters: Translanguaging to Support Academic and Socioemotional
Well-Being.â In Translanguaging with Multilingual Students: Learning From Classroom Moments, edited by O. GarcÃa, and
T. Kleyn, 140â159. New York: Routledge.
Strauss, A. L., and J. M. Corbin. 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Vogel, S., and O. GarcÃa. 2017. âTranslanguaging.â In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education, edited by G. Noblit.
Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.181
Wiley, T. G. 2008. âChinese âDialectâ Speakers as Heritage Language Learners.â In Heritage Language Education: A new Field
Emerging, edited by D. Brinton, O. Kagan, and S. Bauckus, 91â106. New York: Routledge.
Wong, F. K., and Y. Xiao. 2010. âDiversity and Difference: Identity Issues of Chinese Heritage Language Learners From
Dialect Backgrounds.â Heritage Language Journal 7 (2): 153â187.
Woodley, H. H. (2016). From Pain to Healing in Language Teacher Education. Modern Language Journal 100(2), 570-572.
Wu, M.-H. 2017. âA Critical Examination of Asian Studentsâ Interracial and Interethnic Friendships at a Multiracial Urban
School.â Urban Education doi:10.1177/0042085917690206.
Wu, M.-H., K. Lee, and G. Leung. 2014. âHeritage Language Education and Investment among Asian American Middle
Schoolers: Insights From a Charter School.â Language and Education 28 (1): 19â33.
Wu, M.-H., and G. Leung. 2014. âRe-envisioning Heritage Language Education: A Study of Middle School Students
Learning Mandarin Chinese.â Heritage Language Journal 11 (3): 207â223.
Wu, M.-H., and G. Leung. 2015. âContemporary Chinese American Language Maintenance: Perspectives of Youth and
Young Adults in Philadelphia and San Francisco.â Chinese America: History & Perspective 69â74.
Introduction
Translanguaging as a pedagogical stance
âChineseâ heritage education: the need for a translanguaging approach
Research context
Methods
Researchersâ positionalities
Findings: classroom context
Critical moments where teacher Meihua integrates translanguaging pedagogy
Translanguaging outside of the Mandarin classroom: learning basic Fujianese from students
Including minority Chinese languages in the Mandarin class
Using the Mandarin classroom as a site to challenge linguistic hierarchy
Discussion and conclusion
Notes
Disclosure statement
Notes on contributors
ORCID
References
What Will You Get?
We provide professional writing services to help you score straight A’s by submitting custom written assignments that mirror your guidelines.
Premium Quality
Get result-oriented writing and never worry about grades anymore. We follow the highest quality standards to make sure that you get perfect assignments.
Experienced Writers
Our writers have experience in dealing with papers of every educational level. You can surely rely on the expertise of our qualified professionals.
On-Time Delivery
Your deadline is our threshold for success and we take it very seriously. We make sure you receive your papers before your predefined time.
24/7 Customer Support
Someone from our customer support team is always here to respond to your questions. So, hit us up if you have got any ambiguity or concern.
Complete Confidentiality
Sit back and relax while we help you out with writing your papers. We have an ultimate policy for keeping your personal and order-related details a secret.
Authentic Sources
We assure you that your document will be thoroughly checked for plagiarism and grammatical errors as we use highly authentic and licit sources.
Moneyback Guarantee
Still reluctant about placing an order? Our 100% Moneyback Guarantee backs you up on rare occasions where you aren’t satisfied with the writing.
Order Tracking
You don’t have to wait for an update for hours; you can track the progress of your order any time you want. We share the status after each step.
From brainstorming your paper's outline to perfecting its grammar, we perform every step carefully to make your paper worthy of A grade.
Preferred Writer
Hire your preferred writer anytime. Simply specify if you want your preferred expert to write your paper and we’ll make that happen.
Grammar Check Report
Get an elaborate and authentic grammar check report with your work to have the grammar goodness sealed in your document.
One Page Summary
You can purchase this feature if you want our writers to sum up your paper in the form of a concise and well-articulated summary.
Plagiarism Report
You don’t have to worry about plagiarism anymore. Get a plagiarism report to certify the uniqueness of your work.
Free Features $66FREE
Most Qualified Writer
$10FREE
Plagiarism Scan Report
$10FREE
Unlimited Revisions
$08FREE
Paper Formatting
$05FREE
Cover Page
$05FREE
Referencing & Bibliography
$10FREE
Dedicated User Area
$08FREE
24/7 Order Tracking
$05FREE
Periodic Email Alerts
$05FREE
Our Services
Join us for the best experience while seeking writing assistance in your college life. A good grade is all you need to boost up your academic excellence and we are all about it.
On-time Delivery
24/7 Order Tracking
Access to Authentic Sources
Academic Writing
We create perfect papers according to the guidelines.
Professional Editing
We seamlessly edit out errors from your papers.
Thorough Proofreading
We thoroughly read your final draft to identify errors.
Thorough Proofreading
We thoroughly read your final draft to identify errors.
Delegate Your Challenging Writing Tasks to Experienced Professionals
Work with ultimate peace of mind because we ensure that your academic work is our responsibility and your grades are a top concern for us!
We Analyze Your Problem and Offer Customized Writing
We understand your guidelines first before delivering any writing service. You can discuss your writing needs and we will have them evaluated by our dedicated team.
Clear elicitation of your requirements.
Customized writing as per your needs.
We Mirror Your Guidelines to Deliver Quality Services
We write your papers in a standardized way. We complete your work in such a way that it turns out to be a perfect description of your guidelines.
Proactive analysis of your writing.
Active communication to understand requirements.
We Handle Your Writing Tasks to Ensure Excellent Grades
We promise you excellent grades and academic excellence that you always longed for. Our writers stay in touch with you via email.
Thorough research and analysis for every order.
Deliverance of reliable writing service to improve your grades.
