Special Issue 2014 - Social Class and Language Learning - Journal of Language, Identity and...

Journal ofLanguage, Identity,

and EducationVolume 13, Number 2, 2014

SPECIAL FORUM:

Social Class in Language Learning and Teaching

Guest Editors:

Yasuko Kanno & Stephanie Vandrick

ARTICLESThe Role of Social Class in English Language Education 85

Stephanie Vandrick

Social-Class Identity and English Learning: Studies of Chinese Learners 92Feng Gao

Social Class, Habitus, and Language Learning: The Case of Korean EarlyStudy-Abroad Students 99

Hyunjung Shin

Social Class in English Language Education in Oaxaca, Mexico 104Mario E. López-Gopar and William Sughrua

Social Class, Identity, and Migrant Students 111Ron Darvin and Bonny Norton

Forum Commentary 118Yasuko Kanno

BOOK REVIEWSArticulate while Black: Barack Obama, language, and race in the U.S., by Alim,H. Samy, & Smitherman, G. 124

Ersula J. Ore

Language, ethnography, and education: Bridging New Literacy Studies and Bourdieu,by Grenfell, M., Bloome, D., Hardy, C., Pahl, K., Rowsell, J., & Street, B. V. 127

Ron Darvin

English language as hydra: Its impact on non-English language cultures, byRapatahana, V., & Bunce, P. (Eds.) 131

Ahmed Kabel

We would like to thank Sara Kangas and Bonny Norton for their help with reviewing andediting the manuscripts for this forum.

This article was downloaded by: [Temple University Libraries]On: 14 December 2014, At: 15:39Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Click for updates

Journal of Language, Identity &EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hlie20

The Role of Social Class in EnglishLanguage EducationStephanie Vandricka

a University of San FranciscoPublished online: 16 May 2014.

To cite this article: Stephanie Vandrick (2014) The Role of Social Class in English Language Education,Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 13:2, 85-91, DOI: 10.1080/15348458.2014.901819

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2014.901819

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1080/15348458.2014.901819&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2014-05-16

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hlie20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/15348458.2014.901819

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2014.901819

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions


Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 13: 85–91, 2014Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 1534-8458 print / 1532-7701 onlineDOI: 10.1080/15348458.2014.901819

ARTICLES

The Role of Social Class in English Language Education

Stephanie VandrickUniversity of San Francisco

English language educators are often advocates for social justice and often focus on learners’ identi-ties, such as their race, gender, and ethnicity; however, they tend not to employ a social class lens inanalyzing students, teachers, classrooms, and institutions. Yet social class plays a significant, if unac-knowledged, role in the field. Scholars do not often examine the whole range of social class (high tolow) or ways in which English language teaching (ELT) reproduces and reinforces privilege, or lackthereof. This article briefly looks at existing literature and relevant theory on social class; exploresways in which power and privilege play out in English-language education; queries the roles of colo-niality and neoliberalism in exacerbating social stratification; notes intersections of social class withother identities; and recommends increased attention to social class in English language educationresearch, teacher education, and language classrooms.

Key words: social class, English language education, priviledge, identity, status

This article provides a very brief introduction to the topic of social class. It outlines some histor-ical and theoretical background relating to the concept of social class, first in general terms, thenin the field of education, and finally in the field of English language education. This introductionthus serves as context for the other contributions to this forum on social class in language learningand teaching.

INTRODUCTION

English language educators and scholars are often advocates for social justice and often focuson learners’ identities, such as their race, gender, and ethnicity; however, these educators tendnot to employ a social class lens in analyzing students, teachers, classrooms, and institutions.

Correspondence should be sent to Stephanie Vandrick, Department of Rhetoric and Language, University of SanFrancisco, 2130 Fulton St., KA-204, San Francisco, CA 94117. E-mail: [email protected]

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014

mailto:[email protected]

86 VANDRICK

Yet social class plays a significant, if largely unacknowledged, role in the field (Collins, 2006).In some countries, the existence of class is openly discussed. In others such as the United States,on which I focus here, discussing or even acknowledging class often causes discomfort, as theexistence of class differences seems to contradict Americans’ traditional and treasured view thatin the United States everyone is equal and has an equal chance to succeed. A few theorists havealerted us to the increasing effects of social class divisions. For example, hooks (2000) warns that“our nation [the United States] is fast becoming a class-segregated society where the plight of thepoor is forgotten and the greed of the rich is morally tolerated and condoned. As a nation we areafraid to have a dialogue about class” (p. vii).

In recent years, due to the increasing gap between the wealthiest and the poorest in the UnitedStates and elsewhere, and due to political responses to that gap from many, there is slightly moreopen acknowledgement of social class and its effects, both in society and in academe.

Social class is an amorphous term, but can generally be defined as an unofficial hierarchicalstratification of people in a given society, who are ranked according to their social, economic,occupational, and educational statuses. The systems of categorization vary, from Marx’s bour-geoisie versus proletariat (e.g., Marx & Engels, 1998) to the classic much-discussed three levelsof upper, middle, and lower class, to more elaborate schemes such as variations on a six-leveldivision into upper, upper-middle, middle, and lower-middle class; working poor; and the under-class (e.g., Gilbert, 2002). These categories, like most categories referring to social structuresand/or identities, lack distinct boundaries and are contingent on many factors. As Kubota (2003)and others have cautioned, class is often a shifting rather than fixed identity.

Further, social class, like any identity, seldom operates in a vacuum. Kubota (2003) states thatclass differences “need to be unpacked in relation to power and discourse” (p. 38). Class intersectsand interacts with other identities, such as race, gender, ethnicity, religion, and sexual identity, asLuke (2010) and others have reminded us. The positive or negative effects of one’s social classstatus may be partially counterbalanced by another identity; for example, a working-class Whitemale may sometimes experience prejudice because of his class identity but may at other timesexperience racial and gender privilege.

THEORETICAL CONTEXT

As with most scholars who discuss social class, my views and definitions are rooted at leastbroadly in the work of Marx. Although it is still essentially true that the world is divided intoowners (capitalists, even when they are in ostensibly communist or socialist societies) and work-ers, various theorists over the years have pointed out that the divisions that Marx spoke of havebecome more complex. Weber (1978) offered a more nuanced concept of class that includedattention to factors other than simply economics, such as politics and religion. He also assertedthat stratification was based not only on class but also on status, a concept associated with educa-tion and prestige. More recently, Ebert and Zavarzadeh (2008) question Marx’s analysis as theyspeak of the increasing diversity of the owners of the means of production and state that class “isnot simply inequality that can be overcome by providing further opportunities for all within theexisting social system because the system itself produces inequality. . . . To make everyone equalunder capitalism simply means to exploit everyone equally” (p. 15).

There is a body of scholarship about social class and education. A major emphasis in this lit-erature is the concept of social reproduction. As Bourdieu and Passeron (1977) and others have

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014

SOCIAL CLASS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION 87

argued, academic institutions themselves reproduce class differences. Other influential work onsocial reproduction includes that of Bowles and Gintis (1976), who argue that schools reproducesocial class status—and thus the capitalist division of labor—and socialize people to function intheir places in the corporate world. Also illuminating is the scholarship of Lois Weis. For exam-ple, her edited book, The Way Class Works, includes useful essays by such leading authors onsocial class and education as Aronowitz, Lareau, Fine, and Weis herself; together these 24 essaysprovide a good overview of class and education (Weis, 2008). Persell (1997) agrees that “socialclass has been consistently related to educational success through time” (p. 88). She posits that“three features of U.S. education increase educational inequalities” (p. 88). First is “the structureof schooling,” which refers to such matters as “differences among urban, rural, and suburbanschools, and differences between public and private schools” (p. 88); students of similar back-grounds tend to attend similar schools, thus perpetuating class differences. Second is “the beliefsheld by many members of U.S. society and hence by many educators,” such as “beliefs about IQ(intelligence quotient) and cultural deprivation, two sets of ideas that have been offered to explainwhy lower-class children often do less well in school” (p. 88). The third feature that exacerbatesinequality in education, according to Persell, is “certain curricular and teaching practices in U.S.schools” (p. 88), by which she means such practices as tracking children into various curricula.

The contentions of these educational theorists are demonstrated very explicitly in the researchof Anyon (1981), who states that social class differences in education are “an important aspect ofthe reproduction of unequal class structures” (p. 3). In her research project involving five elemen-tary schools in various social settings, she found “subtle as well as dramatic differences in thecurriculum . . . among the schools” (p. 3). Luke (2010) argues that the implications of Anyon’scompelling research data are still applicable today. This assertion is reinforced by research inhigher education as well, research that shows that affluent students now form an even largerproportion of U.S. students earning bachelor’s degrees than they did in the past (Clark, 2010).

Because many teachers are middle class, and educational systems emphasize middle-classnorms and values, students from working-class or lower-class backgrounds are often disadvan-taged when they do not understand the system, or are wrongly regarded as purposely floutingexpectations. Palmer (2009), for example, writes that in the increasingly popular two-way-immersion bilingual classrooms in elementary schools, there is often a sort of culture clashbetween the middle-class, mostly White English-speaking students and the mostly working class,Spanish-speaking students of immigrant families. The middle-class children often dominate theclasses, taking a disproportionate share of the teachers’ attention and class time.

SOCIAL CLASS PRIVILEGE IN APPLIED LINGUISTICS AND ELT

Turning from general education to, more specifically, applied linguistics and English languageeducation, it can be seen that scholarship on social class is fairly meager. Block (2012a, 2012b,and, most comprehensively, 2014) discusses social class and both its marginalization and its man-ifestations in applied linguistics. Ramanathan and Morgan (2009) assert that the field of TESOL(Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages) does not adequately acknowledge class;for example, Ramanathan’s work “with English and vernacular-medium teachers in Gujarat hasmade [her] acutely aware of the extent to which English teaching is . . . a class-based endeavor”despite being “seen to ostensibly have the power of splintering class-based enclaves” (p. 155).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014

88 VANDRICK

Lin (1999) urges educators to understand the educational consequences of social class differencesthat play out in schools and to interrogate the “rules laid down by the privileged classes” (p. 411).Other language-education scholars who, directly or indirectly, allude to social class issues in theUnited States and around the world include Auerbach and Burgess (1985), who remind us thatESL (English as a Second Language) classrooms and texts, especially those aimed at “survivalEnglish” for poorer immigrants, often “prepare students for subservient social roles” (p. 475).Kanno’s (2008) research in five very different schools in Japan reveals that schools there thatare targeted toward and attended by students of different social classes offer unequal access tostudying elite languages, such as English, and devalue the language skills of children from poorerimmigrant backgrounds.

In the closely related field of foreign-language education, Kinginger (2004) researches class.She tells the story of Alice, who felt that her lower-class background was subtly held against herwhen she applied to study, and did eventually study, French abroad. Kinginger cites researchasserting that “foreign language instruction may then be reserved for the monolingual elite”(p. 221).

Recent scholarship has explored connections between neoliberalism and appliedlinguistics/ELT (e.g., Block, Gray, & Holborow, 2012; Chun, 2013; Clarke & Morgan,2011). Neoliberalism, with its principles of unregulated markets, privatization, corporatization,and the valorizing of individual responsibility over government’s obligation to the public goodis relevant here because it is complicit in reproducing, reinforcing, and exacerbating social classstatus inequalities through corporate and state influences on education. For example, studentswho have high social class status are more likely than others to understand the educational andwork world systems and to have access to resources for success (Darvin & Norton, this forum).The inequitable forces of neoliberalism are also seen in the increasing amount of corporatecontrol over testing, textbooks, and charter schools and in the attempts to demonize and erode theautonomy of teachers. This is a sad retreat from the increased openness that educators achievedin the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s.

As for the influence of neoliberalism in ELT specifically, Chun (2009) points out thatneoliberalism is reinforced by the global nature of English; the reality is that many English-language classes and materials position students as consumers and serve as advertisements forthe globalized market. The destructive effects of neoliberalism on education and on social mobil-ity echo, in a sense, the effects of coloniality. The neoliberal use and promotion of English as aninternational language builds on the earlier colonial spread of English throughout India, parts ofAfrica, and elsewhere and echoes too the ongoing spread of English as a signifier of social classprivilege and access (López-Gopar & Sughrua, this forum). The prevalent belief that English,and perhaps an education in an English-dominant country, will create a better future maintainsthe class privilege that some English learners already have (Gao; Shin, this forum).

Educational practices such as testing and tracking (Benesch, 1991) and remediation (Benesch,1988) further disadvantage already disadvantaged students by assuming a deficit model andmarginalizing immigrant and ESL students. Benesch (2010) points out other class-related aspectsof this discrimination; for example, military recruiters focus on colleges that serve students oflower socioeconomic status and believe that they can be lured by the economic and educationalbenefits promised by the military.

Although many immigrants hope that education will allow their children to enter the middleclass and have more secure futures, English language learners (ELLs) often do not do well in

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014


school and have far lower rates of access to, and attainment in, postsecondary education, as Kannoand Cromley’s recent (2013) research demonstrates. Their research also shows that many of thereasons for ELLs’ lower success rates are not linguistic but instead have to do with socioeconomiclevel or class.

Textbooks and materials, both in language and in teacher education classes, are often orientedtoward middle-class students. If they discuss social class at all, they generally do not engage withthe power aspects of social class. Jacobson (2003) states that “there is no discussion in ESOLtextbooks of how language use is affected by power relations between speakers, or by salientsocial characteristics” (p. 13).

Most of the small amount written about social class in English language education is concernedwith poverty and the working or lower classes. Less is written about the middle class (or classes),and even less about the upper or most privileged class (or classes) (Gao; Shin, this forum). Butupper class privilege, especially economic privilege, also strongly affects ELT settings and partic-ipants. The anthropologist Nader (1972) makes a case for what she labels “studying up” (p. 284).She states about anthropology that “there is comparatively little field research on the middle classand very little firsthand work on the upper classes,” and asks, “What if . . . anthropologists wereto study the colonizers rather than the colonized, the culture of power rather than the culture of thepowerless, the culture of affluence rather than the culture of poverty?” (p. 289). These questionsare still pertinent today.

Some of my work (e.g., Vandrick, 2009, 2010) has focused on upper class privilege amongstudents in many ESL programs at universities in the United States and its effects on language-learning settings. Social class privilege can and often does lessen the sometimes negative effectsof students being labeled and perceived as ESL students (Darvin & Norton, this forum). Otherstudents or even instructors may look down on ESL students or underestimate their intelligenceand knowledge because they do not speak English well or do not understand the dominant culturewell (Shin, this forum). However, if the students are from a high social class, they may be muchless affected by that condescension, prejudice, or discrimination. They may in fact feel superiorto those others because of their social status (Vandrick, 1995, 2011).

Second-language educators too are affected by their own social class status in relationshipto that of their students (López-Gopar & Sughrua, this forum). For example, some instructorsfrom less affluent backgrounds may resent wealthy students, especially when those students seemoblivious that their social class status and wealth is unearned, and not a result of some specialvirtue or effort on their part (Vandrick, 1995). Tertiary educational institutions themselves haveclass status. Private universities often have more status than public institutions; four-year colleges,more than two-year colleges; research universities, more than others. Furthermore, within insti-tutions, certain majors and programs have more prestige than others; English-language educationis very much on the low end of this continuum.

CONCLUSION

The effects of social class status are not abstract but strongly affect the lived experiences of par-ticipants in second-language education. Social class status can cause great disadvantage or grantgreat privilege. Because it has such concrete consequences, it is important that those involved inlanguage education, whether teaching language, preparing language educators, or carrying out

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014

90 VANDRICK

research on language education, consider addressing social class in their teaching and research.Language educators can have their students reflect on why and how the world is so divided bysocial class, and on the responsibilities of those who have social status and economic privilege.Educators can choose their teaching materials with an awareness of whether or not those materi-als are reinforcing the social and economic status quo. Teacher educators, too, can seek out andteach relevant materials and note and discuss with their students the consequences of social classdifferences. Discussion should involve a critical approach, looking at how social class connectswith power. Finally, researchers can investigate the multiple manifestations and aspects of socialclass in language education; more such research is needed.

REFERENCES

Anyon, J. (1981). Social class and school knowledge. Curriculum Inquiry, 11(1), 3–42. doi:10.2307/1179509Auerbach, E. R., & Burgess, D. (1985). The hidden curriculum of survival ESL. TESOL Quarterly, 19(3), 475–495.

doi:10.2307/3586274Benesch, S. (Ed.). (1988). Ending remediation: Linking ESL and content in higher education. Washington, DC: TESOL.Benesch, S. (1991). ESL on campus: Questioning testing and tracking policies. In S. Benesch (Ed.), ESL in America:

Myths and possibilities (pp. 59–74). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.Benesch, S. (2010). Critical praxis as materials development: Responding to military recruitment on a U.S. campus. In N.

Harwood (Ed.), English language teaching materials: Theory and practice (pp. 109–128). New York, NY: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Block, D. (2012a). Class and SLA: Making connections. Language Teaching Research, 16(2), 188–205.doi:10.1177/1362168811428418

Block, D. (2012b). Economising globalisation and identity in applied linguistics in neoliberal times. In D. Block, J. Gray,& M. Holborow (Eds.), Neoliberalism and applied linguistics (pp. 56–85). New York, NY: Routledge.

Block, D. (2014). Social class in applied linguistics. New York, NY: Routledge.Block, D., Gray, J., & Holborow, M. (Eds.). (2012). Neoliberalism and applied linguistics. New York, NY: Routledge.Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture (R. Nice, Trans.). London, United

Kingdom: Sage.Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (1976). Schooling in capitalist America: Educational reform and the contradictions of economic

life. New York, NY: Basic Books.Chun, C. W. (2009). Contesting neoliberal discourses in EAP: Critical praxis in an IEP classroom. Journal of English for

Academic Purposes, 8(2), 111–120.Chun, C. W. (2013). The “neoliberal citizen”: Resemiotizing globalized identities in EAP materials. In J. Gray (Ed.),

Critical perspectives on language teaching materials (pp. 64–87). Hampshire, United Kingdom: Palgrave.Clark, K. (2010, January 15). Rich students will get more college acceptance letters in 2010. U.S. News and

World Report: Education. Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/education/articles/2010/01/15/rich-students-will-get-more-college-acceptance-letters-in-2010

Clarke, M., & Morgan, B. (2011). Education and social justice in neoliberal times: Historical and pedagogical perspectivesfrom two postcolonial contexts. In M. Hawkins (Ed.), Social justice language teacher education (pp. 63–85). Bristol,United Kingdom: Multilingual Matters.

Collins, J. (2006). “Where’s class in second language learning?”, Working papers in urban language and literacies (Paper41). London, United Kingdom: King’s College.

Ebert, T. L., & Zavarzadeh, M. (2008). Class in culture. Boulder, CO: Paradigm.Gilbert, D. (2002). The American class structure in an age of growing inequality (6th ed.) New York, NY: Wadsworth.hooks, B. (2000). Where we stand: Class matters. New York, NY: Routledge.Jacobson, E. (2003). Critical sociolinguistics in the adult ESOL classroom. Radical Teacher, 68, 13–17.Kanno, Y. (2008). Language and education in Japan: Unequal access to bilingualism. Basingstoke, United Kingdom:

Palgrave Macmillan.Kanno, Y., & Cromley, J. G. (2013). English language learners’ access to and attainment in postsecondary education.

TESOL Quarterly, 47(1), 89–121. doi:10.1002/tesq.49

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014

http://www.usnews.com/education/articles/2010/01/15/rich-students-will-get-more-college-acceptance-letters-in-2010

http://www.usnews.com/education/articles/2010/01/15/rich-students-will-get-more-college-acceptance-letters-in-2010


Kinginger, C. (2004). Alice doesn’t live here anymore: Foreign language learning and identity reconstruction. In A.Pavlenko & A. Blackledge (Eds.), Negotiation of identities in multilingual contexts (pp. 219–242). Clevedon, UnitedKingdom: Multilingual Matters.

Kubota, R. (2003). New approaches to gender, class, and race in second language writing. Journal of Second LanguageWriting, 12(1), 31–47. doi:10.1016/S1060-3743(02)00125-X

Lin, A. M. Y. (1999). Doing-English-lessons in the reproduction or transformation of social worlds? TESOL Quarterly,33(3), 393–412. doi:10.2307/3587671

Luke, A. (2010). Documenting reproduction and inequality: Revisiting Jean Anyon’s “Social class and school knowl-edge.” Curriculum Inquiry, 40(1), 167–182. doi:10.1111/j.1467-873X.2009.00474.x

Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1998). Communist manifesto. London, United Kingdom: Merlin Press. (Original work published1848)

Nader, L. (1972). Up the anthropologist: Perspectives gained from studying up. In D. Hymes (Ed.), Reinventinganthropology (pp. 284–311). New York, NY: Pantheon.

Palmer, D. (2009). Middle-class English speakers in a two-way immersion bilingual classroom: “Everybody should belistening to Jonathan right now.” TESOL Quarterly, 43(2), 177–202.

Persell, C. H. (1997). Social class and educational inequality. In J. A. Banks & C. A. McGee Banks (Eds.), Multiculturaleducation: Issues and perspectives (3rded., pp.87–107). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Ramanathan, V., & Morgan, B. (2009). Global warning? West-based TESOL, class-blindness and the challenge for criticalpedagogies. In F. Sharifian (Ed.), English as an international language: Perspectives and pedagogical issues (pp.153–168). Clevedon, United Kingdom: Multilingual Matters.

Vandrick, S. (1995). Privileged ESL university students. TESOL Quarterly, 29(2), 375–381. doi:0.2307/3587629Vandrick, S. (2009). Interrogating privilege: Reflections of a second language educator. Ann Arbor: University of

Michigan Press.Vandrick, S. (2010). Social class privilege among ESOL writing students. In M. Cox, J. Jordan, C. Ortmeier-Hooper, &

G. G. Schwartz (Eds.), Reinventing identities in second language writing (pp. 257–272). Urbana, IL: National Councilof Teachers of English.

Vandrick, S. (2011). Students of the new global elite. TESOL Quarterly, 45(1), 160–169. doi:10.5054/tq.2011.244020Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society (4th ed., vols. 1-2). Berkeley: University of California Press. (Original work

published 1922)Weis, L. (Ed.). (2008). The way class works: Readings on school, family, and the economy. New York, NY: Routledge.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014


Click for updates


Social-Class Identity and EnglishLearning: Studies of Chinese LearnersFeng Gaoa

a Beijing International Studies UniversityPublished online: 16 May 2014.

To cite this article: Feng Gao (2014) Social-Class Identity and English Learning: Studiesof Chinese Learners, Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 13:2, 92-98, DOI:10.1080/15348458.2014.901820




This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &




http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2014.901820

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014




Social-Class Identity and English Learning: Studiesof Chinese Learners

Feng GaoBeijing International Studies University

This article first looks at the complex conceptualization of Chinese learners’ social-class identitieswith respect to a shifting Chinese class stratification. It then examines the link between socialclass and second-language learning in the Chinese context by reviewing several studies on Chineselearners’ social-class backgrounds and their English language learning experiences, discussing thestrengths and limitations of these studies and suggesting some directions for future research.

Key words: social class, identity, English learning, Chinese

DEFINING CHINESE LEARNERS’ SOCIAL-CLASS IDENTITIES

Under Mao’s leadership, the threefold socialist-era categories of workers, peasants, and cadreswere used to classify the Chinese people (Liang, 1997). Since 1978, however, China has under-gone a rapid economic development and dramatic social reform. Simultaneously, increasingsocioeconomic disparity has become a problem that could potentially destabilize the economicreform, and the existing rigid social-status hierarchy that grew out of a state socialist economy isno longer suited to represent the increasing social and economic fragmentation of Chinese society(Bian, 2002). Under these circumstances, the Chinese government called for a new social-classanalysis, which could help them carefully monitor social inequality so as to maintain social stabil-ity, continue economic growth, and develop a “harmonious society.” To meet this requirement tocarry out the analysis, the term social strata replaced social class, defined by Marxist class anal-ysis as a new expression through which to study China’s changing social structure in the 1990s(Anagnost, 2008). Marx’s class differentiation model was based on the ownership of the meansof production, which divided a society into two opposing groups: the rulers and the ruled (Marx,1976). Marx’s theory of class polarization and Mao’s concept of class warfare once trapped theChinese in an endless dialectic of class struggle, which prevented the development of the Chinesemarket economy. In contrast, the concept of social strata is used to address social inequality with-out assuming social antagonism. In this way, socioeconomic inequality is articulated as culturaldifference in a hierarchy of national belonging rather than class-based conflict (Anagnost, 2008).People from various social strata may have different occupations, incomes, or lifestyles but not,

Correspondence should be sent to Feng Gao, School of English Language, Literature and Culture, BeijingInternational Studies University, No 1 Ding Fu Zhuang Nan Li, Chao Yang District, Beijing 100024, P. R. China. E-mail:[email protected]

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014



SOCIAL CLASS IDENTITY AND ENGLISH LEARNING 93

necessarily, contradictory political stances. Although there is contradiction and conflict amongthe social strata, the class struggles of China’s past are no longer desirable (Wu & Xu, 1997). Thecomplexly differentiated social strata inspire individual Chinese to pursue their self-interests andclimb the social ladder, which fits the market reforms in China (Liang, 1997).

For two decades, Chinese sociologists have adopted a variety of theoretical approaches toanalyze the new social strata. One of the most comprehensive systematic analyses appears in TheReport on Social Stratification Research in Contemporary China issued in 2002 by the ChineseAcademy of Social Sciences (CASS). In this report, Lu (2002) employs a mixture of neo-Marxistconcepts of ownership and control (which posit the concentrated ownership by the ruling classas well as the import of middle-class values), the Weberian concept of authority (which regardsauthority as legitimate power), and Bourdieu’s concept of capital (which distinguishes class cat-egories by the combination of varying degrees of social, economic, and cultural capital) andanalyzes a nationwide sample organized by CASS’s Institute of Sociology. Lu defines Chinesecitizens’ social-strata positions in terms of their occupations and their differential access to power,money, and status. Chinese society can thereby be divided into 10 social strata. Lu then groupsthe 10 social strata into five social classes, based on the quantity and value of the resources eachsocial-stratum occupies (see Figure 1).

Lu’s social-strata model gives a vivid picture of China’s new social structure, which is char-acterized as complex and dynamic. The 10 distinct social strata characterize the complexity ofmarket-driven social differences in contemporary China. Further, each category of social strataencompasses a diverse array of social positions with different degrees of affluence and power.In contrast to the fixed social stratification of the past, Lu addresses the social mobility amongdifferent social strata. In China’s market economic environment, social mobility exists not onlybetween social strata but also within a social stratum.

Adapted from Lu, X. E. (Ed.). (2002). The report on social stratification research incontemporary China (p. 9). Beijing: Social Sciences Documentation.

Considering the complicated and fluid reality of China’s emerging social structure, I draw on abroader conception of social class to study the relationship between Chinese learners’ social-classidentities and their English-learning experiences. Social class can be defined by income, occupa-tion, social status, education level, values, lifestyle, patterns of consumption, taste and aestheticvalues, life chances, and self-perception. Self-perception here refers to individuals’ own beliefsor perceptions of the social class to which they belong. In spite of the hierarchical strata systemproposed by sociologists such as Lu (2002), Chinese learners may not consciously classify them-selves according to the system. Thus, when researching English learners’ social-class identities inChina, it might be appropriate for the researcher to describe the participants’ social-class positionfrom various dimensions and also to encourage the participants to make sense of their social-classidentities from their own social backgrounds.

SOCIAL CLASS AND ENGLISH LEARNING IN THE CHINESE CONTEXT

English proficiency can provide Chinese learners not only with access to more prestigious formsof education but also with desired positions in the workforce or on social-mobility ladders.English is one of the three subjects on the national university entrance examination. Hence, inorder to be admitted to a good university, Chinese students have to make an effort to study English

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014

94 GAO

Five Social Classes Ten Social Strata

upper class

upper middle class

middle class

lower middle class

lower class

rural cadres

managers

private entrepreneurs

professionals

office workers

household business owners and individual industrialists

and commercialists

business and serviceworkers

manufacturing workers

peasants

unemployed and underemployed people

FIGURE 1 Social Structure of Contemporary China. All or part of themembers of one social stratum can be classified into the social classes thatthe corresponding arrow points to.© The Institute of Sociology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.Reproduced by permission of The Institute of Sociology, ChineseAcademy of Social Sciences. Permission to reuse must be obtained fromthe rightsholder.

from primary school to high school. Even at the university level, the certificates of the CollegeEnglish Test or the Test for English Majors have been one of the graduation requirements forundergraduates. After graduation, English competence enhances one’s opportunities for landinga good job and getting promoted in the workplace. However, with the growing social inequalityin China, English education is increasingly becoming a site for the reproduction of social-classdifferences (Butler, 2013; Zou & Zhang, 2011). The new Standards of English Teaching for highschools (Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China, 2005) raised the requirementsfor students’ learning outcomes dramatically, especially for oral communicative competence.In order to help their children gain competitive academic records, parents possessing economiccapital and social capital tend to send their children to high-quality schools and use out-of-schoolEnglish-teaching programs to supplement school learning. Due to the difficulty of being admitted

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014


into good schools, and the cost of the commercial programs, lower class parents, compared tohigher class parents, usually face more challenges when trying to provide their children witha good English-learning environment. Accordingly, social class can be figured as an importantconstruct in Chinese learners’ English-learning processes.

This intricate relationship between social class and English-language learning in the Chinesecontext has not yet been investigated systematically. The few empirical studies conducted so farhave investigated how parents’ socioeconomic backgrounds are related to their children’s Englishachievement (Butler, 2013; Zou & Zhang, 2011) and English-learning motivation (Liu, 2012; Xu,2008). Although all these scholars focused on socioeconomic factors in their studies, there is nomention of social class except by Liu (2012). Xu (2008) used family background to refer to theparticipants’ family economic status. In Butler’s (2013) study, the term socioeconomic status(SES) was employed in reference to the household income and the parents’ education levels.Social class and family background were used by Liu (2012) and Zou and Zhang (2011), respec-tively, to include the parents’ financial status, cultural status, and social status. In the followingsection, I look at how social class influences and is influenced by learners’ English-learningexperiences in the Chinese context by examining 3 studies more closely.

ASPECTS OF RESEARCHING SOCIAL CLASS AND ENGLISH LEARNING

Butler (2013) studied how parents’ SES and their beliefs and behaviors related to English edu-cation influence their children’s English-learning outcomes. She conducted an extensive surveywith 572 students and their parents at 2 primary schools and 2 middle schools in a medium-sized city in the eastern coastal area of China. When defining SES, Butler used a 4-levelordinal measure for parents’ income level and a 6-level ordinal measure for their education level.Additionally, she administered 2 tests to measure the students’ listening, reading, writing, andspeaking skills in English. Her analysis of the combined data suggested that the parents’ SEShad little impact on the students’ achievements in English listening, reading, and writing in pri-mary school; however, the parents’ SES had significant effects in middle school. The students’English-speaking performance was substantially different according to their parents’ socioeco-nomic backgrounds, both during their primary and middle school years. Socioeconomic factorshad an earlier impact on the students’ English-speaking performance than on their English lis-tening, English reading, and English writing performance. This may be because acquiring goodEnglish-speaking skills requires the parents’ capacity to provide more resources and opportu-nities, such as accessing high-quality schools, financing private lessons by trained teachers withhigh oral competency, and offering other English-learning chances and support during childhood.

Liu (2012) examined factors that motivated middle school students from different socialclasses to learn English in China. The participants for this study were 1,542 parents and their stu-dents from 14 middle schools in Shenyang, Nanjing, and Beijing. Surveys and interviews wereemployed in this study. By adding together the values of the variables for parents’ education,occupation, position, and income, Liu grouped the students into 5 classes. He found that com-pared to the students from the lower class, the students from upper-class and upper-middle classfamilies showed higher motivation to study abroad and to further personal development, as wellas stronger intrinsic motivation to learn English. The parents’ beliefs and behaviors about invest-ment in English education varied significantly across different social classes. The investment of

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014

96 GAO

the parents from the upper and upper-middle classes had more positive effects on their children’sEnglish-learning motivation than did the investment of the lower-class parents.

Butler (2013) and Liu (2012) both provide large-scale quantitative data to demonstrate thatsocial class is associated with English-language learning in the Chinese context. However, itis also worth noting that social class does not always positively impact an individual’s English-learning experience. As Zou and Zhang’s (2011) data suggested, within the same economic-statusgroup, there are students who have good and students who have poor English-learning outcomesat the primary school and middle school stage. Xu (2008) also indicated that a family’s economicbackground affected Chinese university students’ English-learning motivation to a certain degree,yet its impact was not invariably large or significant. Therefore, social class can be considereda contributing factor in Chinese learners’ English-learning process but not a determiner of theirEnglish-learning motivations, attitudes, and performance.

In addition to the cases of social class influencing learners’ English-learning experiences,sometimes English-learning experiences can also affect social-class identities. My longitudi-nal ethnographic research investigated how a group of privileged Chinese learners’ social-classidentities were expressed and negotiated through their English language learning journeys inBritain (Gao, 2010). I followed six Chinese students for nine months, from their registration inlong-term programs in three language schools in the UK, to their completion of the programs.The multiple sources of data collected from this case study indicated that on the one hand, theparticipants’ social economic statuses and self-identified social class positions influenced theiropportunities to practice English, and structured their friendship networks. On the other hand, theparticipants’ senses of their middle-class or upper-class identities were reinforced during theirEnglish-language journeys in Britain. When they perceived new behavior and attitudes associ-ated with middle class or upper class in Britain, they tended to adjust themselves socioculturally.For example, influenced by language teachers, peers, the media, and the social environment inBritain, the participants perceived that there was a link between social prestige and fashion. Thus,they chose to wear certain brands to signify their social-class identities.

In summary, these empirical studies demonstrate that investigating the relationship betweensocial class and English learning in the socioeconomically stratified Chinese context can help usunderstand how English as symbolic capital mediates Chinese learners’ investment in Englishlearning; how and why Chinese learners orient themselves to and engage with English-learningprocesses related to their class positions; and how individual Chinese learners’ social-classidentities are negotiated through their English-learning journeys.

DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

Since the current Chinese social-class system is open and evolving, and the contemporary theo-rization of Chinese social class is still emerging, there are no agreed-upon criteria for how classis conceptualized within China. L2 scholars have thus adopted various approaches to understandtheir research participants’ social-class positions. For example, Butler (2013) and Liu (2011) usedsurvey questions to classify the parents’ social class. The questions encompassed the dimen-sions of income, education level, and social status. Taking another approach, in my own study(Gao, 2010) I invited the participants to define their family social-class positions without pro-viding any guidelines in the interview. The participants, creating their own definitions, classified

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014


their families based on the dimensions of income, occupation, lifestyle, patterns of consumption,aesthetic values, life chances, and self-perception. As there is no agreed-upon way of measur-ing social class as a variable in China, it is important for L2 researchers to integrate variousand multiple dimensions in conceptualizing social-class identity. In this way, Chinese learners’complicated and shifting social-class identities can be reflected from different perspectives.

Not only does social-class status influence the learning of English, but the reverse is also true:learning English affects social-class status. Hence, another potentially fruitful line of inquirywould be to explore what aspects of Chinese learners’ English-learning processes help to con-struct their social-class identities. As English is not only an important academic subject in theexam-oriented educational system in China but also a form of cultural capital in the globaliz-ing world, English learning is becoming a means of promoting social mobility (Butler, 2013;Zou & Zhang, 2011). On the other hand, in terms of increasing investment in English education,English learning functions as a means of reproducing class hierarchies. Longitudinal qualitativeand quantitative studies are needed to thoroughly explore how individual Chinese learners’ par-ticular English-learning experiences increase or reduce their life chances and opportunities forsocial mobility.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I thank Stephanie Vandrick and Yasuko Kanno for their thoughtful comments on earlier versionsof this piece.

FUNDING

I appreciate the support from the Special Items Fund of Beijing International Studies Universityand grants awarded by the Innovation Center of Beijing International Studies University.

REFERENCES

Anagnost, A. (2008). From “class” to “social strata”: Grasping the social totality in reform-era China. Third WorldQuarterly, 29(3), 497–519. doi:10.1080/01436590801931488

Bian, Y. J. (2002). Chinese social stratification and social mobility. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 91–116.doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.140823

Butler, Y. G. (2013). Parental factors and early English education as foreign language: A case study in Mainland China.Research papers in education. doi:10.1080/02671522.2013.776625

Gao, F. (2010). Negotiation of Chinese learners’ social class identities in their English language learning journeys inBritain. Journal of Cambridge Studies, 5(2-3), 64–77.

Liang, X. S. (1997). A comprehensive analysis of social stratification in China. Beijing, China: Economic Daily Press.Liu, H. G. (2012). Parental investment and junior high school students’ English learning motivation: A social class

perspective (Unpublished doctoral Thesis). Peking University, Beijing, China.Lu, X. E. (Ed.). (2002). The report on social stratification research in contemporary China. Beijing, China: Social

Sciences Documentation Publishing House.Marx, K. (1976). Preface and introduction to a contribution to the critique of political economy. Peking, China: Foreign

Languages Press. Retrieved from http://www.marx2mao.com/M&E/PI.html (Original work published 1857–58)

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014

http://www.marx2mao.com/M&E/PI.html

http://www.marx2mao.com/M&E/PI.html

98 GAO

Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. (2005). The new standards of English teaching for high schools.Retrieved from http://www.doc88.com/p-598323248017.html

Wu, J. P., & Xu, Y. (1997). Who am I? Social position in contemporary China. Huhhot, China: Inner Mongolia People’sPress.

Xu, J. (2008). The social factors that influence Chinese university students’ English learning motivation. Computer-Assisted Foreign Language Education, 121, 61–64.

Zou, W. C., & Zhang, S. L. (2011). Family background and English learning at compulsory stage in Shanghai. InA. Feng (Ed.), English language education across greater China (pp.189–211). Bristol, United Kingdom:Multilingual Matters.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014

http://www.doc88.com/p-598323248017.html

http://www.doc88.com/p-598323248017.html


Click for updates


Social Class, Habitus, and LanguageLearning: The Case of Korean EarlyStudy-Abroad StudentsHyunjung Shina

a University of SaskatchewanPublished online: 16 May 2014.

To cite this article: Hyunjung Shin (2014) Social Class, Habitus, and Language Learning: The Case ofKorean Early Study-Abroad Students, Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 13:2, 99-103, DOI:10.1080/15348458.2014.901821








http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2014.901821


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014




Social Class, Habitus, and Language Learning: The Caseof Korean Early Study-Abroad Students

Hyunjung ShinUniversity of Saskatchewan

In this article, I draw on Bourdieu’s (1984, 1991) notion of habitus in order to explore the relationshipbetween social class, language learning, and language teaching in the context of the global economy.To illustrate my points, I use Early Study Abroad (ESA), the transnational educational migration thatKorean middle-class families engage in in order to acquire valuable forms of global English capital.Through a discussion of the identities and language practices of Korean ESA students in Toronto,where they invested in a class-based consumption of Korean language and culture to contest theracial and linguistic stigmatization they experienced in the local context, and to index their globalcosmopolitanism, I reveal how the concept of class privilege in actual practice is multilayered andsometimes contradictory; moreover, I posit that acquiring linguistic capital and leveraging it to gainclass privilege are difficult and fraught ventures.

Key words: social class, habitus, ESL, international students, identity, South Korea

In this article, I consider social class to explore the underlying question of my research: Whatis the role of language and education in the construction of social inequality and are languageand education potential resources for social change? More specifically, I examine the relation-ship between social class, language learning, and teaching in the context of the global economy.I find Bourdieu’s (1984, 1991) approach to social class, which highlights the role of the sym-bolic system (as well as material conditions) and boundaries between classes in the analysis ofclass relations, effective in putting social class at the center of my reflection. Particularly, I drawon his notion of habitus to examine ways in which social class intersects with other social cat-egories such as race, ethnicity, and citizenship in the context of language learning in sometimesunexpected ways.

According to Bourdieu (1991), linguistic habitus, a subset of one’s class habitus, is constitutedthrough trajectories of experiences of reinforcements or sanctions for one’s linguistic productsacross different linguistic markets. Habitus thus offers speakers a certain sense of the social valueof linguistic utterances (of their own and of others) and hence of one’s place in the linguisticmarkets concerned, giving speakers a “feel for the game” (p. 76). Subsequently, one’s linguistic(and social) investment is often mediated through his/her habitus in relation to anticipated profit(or sanction).

Correspondence should be sent to Hyunjung Shin, Department of Curriculum Studies, University of Saskatchewan,3120 College of Education, 28 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK S7N 0X1, Canada. E-mail: [email protected]

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014


100 SHIN

I illustrate my points through a discussion of Early Study Abroad (ESA, or pre–college-agestudy abroad), the transnational educational migration Korean middle-class families participatein in order to acquire valuable forms of global English capital. One representative form of ESAinvolves gireogi gajok (wild goose family), which refers to a split-household transnational familythat is composed of a middle-class mother with children in elementary or middle school at thetime of departure. The children living with their mother study in an English-speaking countrywhile the father remains in Korea so that he can financially support the family. Some ESA studentsstay in the host country for higher education while others return to Korea. I highlight how ESAstudents in Toronto high schools mobilized their class power to invest in capital that has highvalue in the (transnational) Korean market, such as Korean fashion and texting. Furthermore,I reveal how the students constructed themselves as elite transnationals in response to the waysthey were marginalized as ESL learners in the local context and the consequences of such identitypractice.

As suggested by the term English Divide, which refers to social polarization resulting fromdifferential access to English instruction, which recently appeared in policy descriptions andin media reports in Korea, English has long been a key source of symbolic capital in Koreanclass distinction (Shin, 2007). Furthermore, with the increasing commodification of language andthe marketization of education in the new economy as well as the rapid neoliberalization of theKorean economy since the Asian financial market crisis in late 1990s, ESA, a means to obtain the“global” capital of “authentic” English, has become a prominent middle-class obsession amongKoreans (Park & Lo, 2012).

Why do middle-class citizens in a democratic nation with a respectable public school systemembark upon such a journey abroad? While study abroad at the postgraduate level has long beencrucial to build elite credentials in Korea, the pace and extent to which ESA has spread into differ-ent tiers in the middle class—despite the increased class disparity and the collapse of segments ofthe middle class during and after the financial crisis—deserves attention. For example, the num-ber of ESA students who left Korea on student visas increased nearly fivefold, between the yearsof 2000 and 2005, from 4,397 to 20,400 (Korea Ministry of Education and Human ResourcesDevelopment, 2006, p. 13), and it reached 27,349 in 2008 (Korea Ministry of Education andHuman Resources Development, 2011, p. 111). In 2007, Koreans represented about 60% of theinternational student population at a large school district in Toronto (Shin, 2010). ESA representsa Korean middle-class’s strategy to reproduce social position by creating new capital of dis-tinction (Bourdieu, 1984) in response to the increasingly intense competition in the Korean jobmarket and education, which has been growing since the 1990s (Park & Lo, 2012; Shin, 2013).

My ethnographic case study of 4 Korean ESA high school students in Toronto revealed, how-ever, that ESA creates both possibilities and constraints for the Korean middle class, who arein search of the best strategy for social mobility under the new political economic conditions inKorea (for details, see Shin, 2012). On the one hand, ESA offers some middle-class individualsalternative paths to acquire high-status Western educational and linguistic capital, without goingthrough the arduous Korean education system within which they would have to compete with theKorean elites. On the other hand, upon their migration to Western countries, ESA students andtheir families enter another social hierarchy in which they are marginalized as ethnoracial minori-ties. For example, Yu-ri, who was a 12th-grader in a Toronto high school at the time of the study,had studied in New Zealand before she moved to Toronto. At the school she attended in NewZealand, Yu-ri was hurt by racial slurs such as “yellow monkey” and by her White classmates

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014

SOCIAL CLASS, HABITUS, AND LANGUAGE LEARNING 101

who mocked her “accented” Asian English (see e.g., Lippi-Green, 1997); thus, she did not speakup in class. Even in Toronto, making friends with White Canadian students was difficult for her.She did not feel that the Korean immigrant students were welcoming either, therefore, she mostlysocialized with other ESA students.

In reactions to the linguistic and racial stigmatization and downward social mobility experi-enced in their transnational activities, these ESA students employed class-based consumption ofKorean language and culture as strategies of distinction, in order to claim status as global cos-mopolitans in the local Toronto context. That is, they constructed themselves as new transnationalsubjects, yuhaksaeng (visa students), who are wealthy, modern, and cosmopolitan, distinguish-ing themselves from both long-term immigrants in local Korean diasporic communities andCanadians by deploying (as stylistic resources) revalued varieties of Korean language and culturein the globalized new economy. For example, ESA students and their families often located them-selves in middle-class high rises in North York, an upscale residential area in northern Toronto(rather than in downtown Koreatown, which is associated with older and poorer immigrants).These ESA students also followed the most up-to-date fashion trends in Korea and associatedwith other ESA students at Korean restaurants and karaoke bars while enjoying K-pop and textingusing Korean slang. As such, the identity construction of these ESA students is partly based onstylistic practices; that is, practices of language and lifestyle associated with one’s class habitusincluding taste in dress, appearance, and residence, as symbols of social distinction (Auer, 2007).This identity construction practice, however, has resulted in contradictions that have constrainedtheir English capital acquisition—the very resource they claimed to pursue through migration.

To explain how such contradictions occurred, I highlight how one’s linguistic (and social)investment is often mediated through habitus. The linguistic habitus of Korean ESA students wasformed through their trajectories through multiple linguistic markets. On the one hand, the lin-guistic and racial stigmatization ESA students experienced in their Western schools formed theirsense of anticipated sanctions (e.g., ridicule, laughter, disrespect, lack of recognition) for their lin-guistic production and thus resulted in their minimal speaking of English. On the other hand, theirongoing interactions with (transnational) Koreans in various transnational social spaces formeda sense of anticipated rewards for their knowledge of English in the Korean (and transnationalKorean) markets. For example, one of the participants worked as a translator for his part-timejob when he went to visit Korea one summer; the employer thought his English must be betterthan that of Korean university students, due to his studying in Canada. ESA students constructedthemselves as “better” speakers of English than Koreans remaining in Korea, in relation to thesymbolic power of the North American academic credentials they would hold. Subsequently,ESA students chose to focus on investing in acquisition of the English credentials required foruniversity admission. For this purpose, the information that circulated in peer social networks ofKorean students was crucial to ESA students, who wished to obtain good marks on the schoolexams for ESA students, for example. These Korean students’ strategies of linguistic investmentin the acquisition of academic credentials while socializing with Korean peers should be under-stood in relation to the social conditions that made it worthwhile for them to make this formof linguistic investment rather than as mere individual choice. Their very investment in cre-dentials sometimes undermined, however, their access to legitimate English in their Canadianschools, thereby further marginalizing ESA students in the dominant Canadian market. Forexample, Yu-ri attended a Korean tutoring agency to improve her scores on the school exam,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014

102 SHIN

which did not really help her acquisition of (oral) academic English proficiency in the schoolcontext.

The dynamic nature of the habitus formation of the ESA students that occurred through theirjourney across multiple global markets helps us to recognize the agency of transnational migrantsin traversing boundaries of linguistic markets as they seek class mobility that responds to thedemands of the market. At the same time, the story of ESA students also reveals how suchtransnational strategies are ultimately rooted in relations of social class and power, with the rise oftransnationalism as a sign of class and cosmopolitanism (Park & Lo, 2012). Thus, understandinghow identity, class, and language learning intersect in the lives of the ESA students and how theirlinguistic investments are mediated through the habitus formed through processes of social exclu-sion from “White” Canada, helps us to move towards a nuanced view of the relationship betweensocial class, power, and language learning and teaching. The interplay of class privilege heldby these ESA students and the way the students are racially marginalized by White Canadiansillustrate how the concept of social class in actual practice is multilayered and sometimes con-tradictory; furthermore, acquiring linguistic capital and leveraging it to gain class privilege is aventure that is difficult and fraught.

I hope that the Korean case represented in this paper helps us to turn our attention to the centralrole of social class in language learning and teaching, which is still underresearched in appliedlinguistics. Theorizing the role of social class and power in language learning and teaching withthe specificity of the examples from the lives of Korean ESA students gives us insight into thecomplex relation between social class and language learning, given that these students comefrom privileged backgrounds—that is, Korean ESA students are themselves engaged in the activereproduction of social inequality because they employ certain cultural and linguistic practices inorder to stress the class privileges that allowed them to engage in ESA in the first place. At thesame time, however, they are subject to certain amounts of racial and linguistic discriminationin their adoptive country and their investment thus resulted in self-marginalizing practices andunanticipated consequences.

The story of the ESA students also allows us to reflect on how to intervene in the (re)productionof the inequalities, as well as to understand where we might begin to take action to advocate forsocial change. For example, strategies of linguistic investment of the ESA students indicated thesalient role of habitus, as learned through their trajectories through multiple linguistic markets,in shaping students’ language practices and hence their language learning.

How can language teachers make sense of the individuals’ struggles for social mobility whileat the same time moving towards a more critical engagement with social class, and designingtransformative pedagogies given the dominant class-based inequalities across the globe? Can we,as teachers, theorize habitus as a pedagogical concept so that we can help students to rebuild theirhabitus so they will not invest in marginalizing practices? How might we do so?

REFERENCES

Auer, P. (Ed.). (2007). Style and social identities: Alternative approaches to linguistic heterogeneity. Berlin, Germany:Mouton de Gruyter.

Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014

SOCIAL CLASS, HABITUS, AND LANGUAGE LEARNING 103

Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power(J. B. Thompson Ed.; G.Raymond & M.Adamson Trans.). Cambridge,United Kingdom: Polity Press.

Korea Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development (Ed.). (2006). Success and failure case studies of earlystudy abroad and suggestions for parent education [jogi yuhak seong gong gwa shil pae sarye josa mit hakbumogyedo rul wihan hongbo bangan yeongu]. Seoul, Korea: Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development.

Korea Educational Development Institute. (2011). The analysis of education statistics, Annual report. Retrieved fromhttps://www.kedi.re.kr/khome/main/research/selectPubForm.do?plNum0=7990

Lippi-Green, R. (1997). English with an accent: Language, ideology, and discrimination in the United States. London,United Kingdom: Routledge.

Park, J., & Lo, A. (2012). Transnational South Korea as a site for a sociolinguistics of globalization: Markets, timescales,neoliberalism. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 16(2), 147–164. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9841.2011.00524.x

Shin, H. (2007). English language teaching in Korea: Toward globalization or glocalization? In J. Cummins & C. Davison(Eds.), International handbook of English language teaching (Vol. 1, pp. 75–86). Norwel, MA: Springer.

Shin, H. (2010). “Gireogi Gajok”: Transnationalism and language learning (Doctoral thesis, University of Toronto,Toronto, Canada). Retrieved from https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/handle/1807/19133

Shin, H. (2012). From FOB to COOL: Transnational migrant students in Toronto and the styling of global linguisticcapital. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 16(2), 184–200. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9841.2011.00523.x

Shin, H. (2013). Ambivalent calculations in Toronto: Negotiating the meaning of success among early study abroad highschool students. Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, 22(4), 527–546.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014

https://www.kedi.re.kr/khome/main/research/selectPubForm.do?plNum0=7990


Click for updates


Social Class in English LanguageEducation in Oaxaca, MexicoMario E. López-Gopara & William Sughruaa

a Universidad Autónoma Benito Juárez de OaxacaPublished online: 16 May 2014.

To cite this article: Mario E. López-Gopar & William Sughrua (2014) Social Class in English LanguageEducation in Oaxaca, Mexico, Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 13:2, 104-110, DOI:10.1080/15348458.2014.901822








http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2014.901822


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014




Social Class in English Language Education in Oaxaca,Mexico

Mario E. López-Gopar and William SughruaUniversidad Autónoma Benito Juárez de Oaxaca

This article explores social class in English-language education in Oaxaca, Mexico. To this end, first,we discuss social class in Mexico as related to coloniality; second, for illustration, the paper presentsthe authors’ own social-class analysis as language educators in Oaxaca; third, we discuss how socialclass impacts English education access, Mexican teachers of English, and the curriculum; and finally,we offer conclusions related to the prevalence of coloniality in Oaxaca and the consequential need toengage critically with social class and its connection to English teaching.

Key words: Oaxaca, Mexico, social class, coloniality, colonial difference, ELT

This article discusses how social class impacts English-language education in Oaxaca, the mostculturally and linguistically diverse state in Mexico and the second poorest. This article has fourrelated sections. First, heeding Block’s (2012) call to analyze social class in applied linguisticsby “tak[ing] not only economics seriously . . . but also history” (p. 63), we (Mario and William)first provide a historical overview of social class in Mexico and its connection to coloniality. Theterm coloniality refers to the manner in which colonial power controls or dominates a communityby imposing on that community certain Western or Eurocentric models of subjectivity, author-ity, economy, and knowledge (Mignolo, 2009). Coloniality, in this sense, currently remains themost prevalent and widespread form of subjugation in the world, even though the actual politicalsystem of “colonialism” has long since been replaced, for the most part, with independent nationstates (Quijano, 2007). This sense of confinement within coloniality is illustrated in the secondsection of our paper. Here, taking Oaxaca as a locus of enunciation, the place where colonialityis experienced firsthand and in turn impacts concrete lives and ideological positioning (Mignolo,2009), we present our own social-class self-analysis as language educators. The purpose here is toillustrate social class as bound up in coloniality and in what is termed colonial difference. Then,through this same lens, we move to a discussion of how social class in Mexico impacts Englisheducation access, Mexican teachers of English, and the curriculum. This discussion, in the fourthand final section, leads us to call for further critical engagement on the issue of social class andEnglish-language education. We begin with the historical perspective.

Correspondence should be sent to Mario E. López-Gopar, Priv. Puerto La Paz 137-B, Col. Eliseo Jiménez Ruiz,Oaxaca, Oaxaca, México, 68120. E-mail: [email protected]

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014


SOCIAL CLASS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION IN MEXICO 105

MODERNITY/COLONIALITY AND COLONIAL DIFFERENCE

Mexico, along with the rest of Latin America, suffered colonization in the 15th century. Mignolo(2000b) considers the emergence of the Atlantic commercial circuit in the 16th century as “fun-damental in the history of capitalism and modernity/coloniality” (p. 56, our translation), whichbrought exploitation and despair to the Americas. Quijano and Wallerstein (1992) argue that“there could not have been a capitalist world-economy without the Americas” (p. 549). Galeano(1971), in his seminal book The Open Veins of Latin America, vividly portrays the exploitationsuffered both by Amerindians and African slaves during several centuries and argues that thepoverty of the inhabitants was caused by the richness of their land, which was used to build theso-called modern Europe. The late Hugo Chavez, former president of Venezuela, presented acopy of this book to U.S. President Barack Obama as a must-read for understanding U.S. andEuropean economic and political interference in Latin America.

Dussel (2002), Mignolo (2000b), and Quijano (2007) state that coloniality is the other side of“modernity,” the tale that emerged from the expansion of European capitalism in the Americasand other parts of the world. Without coloniality there is no modernity: “The rhetoric of modernity(salvation, novelty, progress, development) appeared with the logic of coloniality” (Mignolo,2009, p. 43; our translation); that is, if there had to be salvation, it was because “someone”needed to be “saved”; if there had to be novelty, progress, and development, it was because“someone” was “backward” and “primitive.” This someone was the Amerindians, the Africans,and the Asians who were “different” from the European colonizers and capitalists. Hence, thetale of modernity involves colonial difference.

Colonial difference has its origins in 16th-century discussions about whether or not theMayans, Aztecs, Quechuas, Aimaras, and the other peoples of the Americas grouped as “Indians”should be considered people of equal value to the Spaniards. At this time, under the influence ofFrancisco de Vitoria, who is considered to have been the father of international rights duringthe 16th century, it was decided to consider Indians as fellow human beings (Mignolo, 2009).However, Vitoria also concluded that the Indians were not as mature or cognitively developedas the Spaniards and thus required the Spaniards’ guidance (Mignolo, 2009). This conclusionmarked the emergence of colonial difference. According to Mignolo (2009), colonial differenceplaces human beings at different levels of worth according to an ontological and epistemologicalrationale. This rationale holds a supposed “reality” that some human beings will always be infe-rior to others and that this inferiority results from a deficiency in “knowledge,” especially in termsof reason and aesthetics. Within the modernity/coloniality narrative, White European males wereplaced at the top of the social-class structure and indigenous people and African slaves, at the bot-tom. Mignolo (2000a) thus concludes that the colonial difference is an abstract space in which, onone hand, colonial power is wielded and, on the other hand, that same power is contested throughthe assertion of the subaltern knowledge that has been marginalized and discriminated against bycoloniality. In other words, colonial difference is the “space” in which those who are considereddifferent from and inferior to “modern” individuals are able to exert their agency in order to resistand challenge the hegemonic discourses of modernity/coloniality that regard them as inferior.For such individuals, therefore, the colonial difference becomes a locus of enunciation, the placewhere they voice their resistance (Mignolo, 2009).

In Mexico, the colonial difference accentuates social-class structure. At the onset ofcolonialism in Mexico, ethnicity, race, and economics determined the social strata (e.g.,Spanish/Creoles/Mexicans; White/Brown/Black; rich/poor). Nowadays, as a result of mestizaje(mixture among races), social class in Mexico can be defined as the interplay between economics,language, racial features, schooling, and ways of being, acting and consuming. In other words,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014

106 LÓPEZ-GOPAR AND SUGHRUA

social status seems determined by whether or not one is rich or poor (economics); whether onespeaks Spanish, another “modern” language such as English, or an indigenous language (lan-guage); whether one is White, Brown, or Black (race); whether one has been formally educated(education); whether one has attended or is attending a private or public school or an urban orrural school (schooling); and whether or not one behaves, acts, and consumes “modernly” (waysof being). These social categories seem to be consciously or unconsciously used by Mexican peo-ple to negotiate their social-class identity and to contest the colonial difference. For instance, ifsomeone is Brown or Black, she may want to display her level of schooling and ways of beingmodern in order to contest her race, which places her in a lower social class. This negotiation iscoconstructive, situated, and intersubjective in the sense of being performed and accepted by thesocial audience at a particular place and time in history (Blommaert, 2005).

ECONOMICS AND SOCIAL CLASS IN MEXICO

Even though different factors influence social strata in Mexico, economics is paramount. Amongthe countries belonging to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development(OECD), Mexico is the country with the widest gap between rich and poor people (GonzálezAmador, 2013). Sixty million people, 50% of the country’s population, live in poverty, and51.5 million experience food shortage (Enciso, 2013a). Despite these statistics, Mexico is hometo Carlos Slim, the richest man in the world. In addition, 43% of the country’s wealth is controlledby 0.02% percent of the population. Only 20% of the population is considered neither nonpoornor nonvulnerable (Olivares Alonso, 2013), and 80% struggle financially on a daily basis.

In Oaxaca, 16 different indigenous groups suffer financially, more so than the rest of the pop-ulation. Indeed, many indigenous families survive on minimum wage, US$4.50 for 8 hours ofwork (Enciso & Camacho, 2013), and 76% of indigenous children and young adults in Oaxacalive in poverty and suffer ill nutrition (Enciso, 2013b). In sum, 50% of the people in Mexico andin Oaxaca are poor or of very low socioeconomic status (SES), 30% are of low-SES, 19.8% aremiddle class, and 0.02% are in the category extremely high-upper class. Each of these categories,though, has a wide range. For instance, blue- and white-collar workers, as well as well-paidpoliticians, fall in the middle-class category. However, social class in Mexico involves more thaneconomics, as we now illustrate by placing ourselves in this analysis.

DETERMINING OUR OWN SOCIAL STATUS IN OAXACA, MEXICO

We (Mario and William) write this article from our situatedness in the colonial difference that weexperience in Oaxaca. As explained above, the colonial difference reflects social class structure.For this reason, we consider it pertinent to include our own brief self-analysis of social status, soas to illustrate the concepts set forth in the sections above.

To begin, we believe that we could be considered middle class, as we are neither poor nor vul-nerable. Yet in some respects we fall into the very lowest category of the middle class since weteach at the lowest paying public university in the country. In addition, we both live in working-class neighborhoods. However, our PhD degrees from foreign institutions, academic travels,purchasing power based on financial credit, and especially English proficiency seem to place

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014


us into the very highest category of middle class, at least in the eyes of the general Oaxacan pub-lic. This perception seems to be enhanced by ethnicity and race: William was born in the UnitedStates and is White; and although Mario is Oaxacan and Brown, his background as descendedfrom African slaves makes him much taller than most Oaxacans, giving him a “non-Oaxacan”look that for practical purposes excludes him from the low-SES category, which usually com-prises Brown, short people. Nevertheless, our style of dress and “behavior” in Oaxaca (e.g., eatingbreakfast at market stands) puts us at the low end of the middle-class category. Further, we bothstruggle with colonial difference in Mexican academia, as our research generates knowledge in acountry where “foreign” or “imported” knowledge seems preferred.

In short, our social class seems delineated but also blurred and contradictory. It perhapsdepends on the perceiver: the agents (e.g., Mario and William); outsiders (e.g., Mario’s andWilliam’s neighbors or coworkers); or the intersubjectivity of both (e.g., Mario’s and William’sacceptance of the perspectives of their neighbors or coworkers, and vice versa). However, wherethe perception of social class seems more decisive is regarding English proficiency. It is mainlyour English proficiency that gives us both a high-end middle-class distinction, especially now thatMexico’s “coloniality” contrasts with the United States’ “modernity.” This force of the Englishlanguage seems quite apparent in Mexico and Oaxaca in particular, as we now go on to discuss.

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND SOCIAL CLASS STATUS IN OAXACA,MEXICO

In Mexico, access to English education depends on social class as related to economics. Englishinstruction in public schools starts in middle school, except for a few public elementary schoolsnow piloting the National English Program for Basic Education, which intends to place Englishas a subject in the curricula of elementary schools in several years time. In Oaxaca, this Englishinstruction in the middle school automatically excludes 40% of the state population (1.2 mil-lion people) since this 40% does not finish elementary school education (INEGI, 2010). Further,English instruction in public secondary and middle schools produces poor results due to the lim-ited hours of instruction, inadequately prepared teachers, and incongruous curricula. Hence, mostlow-SES Mexican students have very low levels of English proficiency, except those who decideto pursue a BA in English teaching in public universities and study this language extensively atthis level.

Because of the absence of English instruction in public elementary schools, private elementaryschools offering English as a subject and bilingual elementary schools (English and Spanish)began to flourish in Mexico during the late 1990s. This coincided with Mexico signing the NorthAmerican Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with the United States and Canada, at which timeEnglish and commercial relations with the United States began to be “sold” by the governmentas a way to climb the social-class ladder. This perception of English as conveying social-classprestige has contributed to a rapid increase in the number of private elementary schools andbilingual schools throughout Mexico and in Oaxaca.

In Oaxaca, the tuition at private schools is very expensive. For instance, a low-SES Oaxacanfamily would have to invest its entire monthly income to pay one month’s tuition for only 1 ofthe children in a private school where she or he could learn English. Equally expensive arethe private English-language institutes. Only 5% of the Oaxacan population can afford private

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014


schooling. Hence, many of the students attending these private institutions could be consid-ered middle or upper-middle class, not only because of income but also (as explained above)because of their place of residence, consumption patterns, dressing habits, sociolect, and emerg-ing English proficiency. Nevertheless, most of these students are brown-skinned, and their heightand facial features accord with their indigenous heritage, which places them in a lower classcategory. It seems then that they rely on their middle-class characteristics (above) in order tochallenge the colonial difference prevailing in Mexico and thus negotiate their social-class iden-tity. For example, López Gopar (2013) documented how his student Alfredo, a 3rd-grader whowas brown-skinned and from professional working parents, used his Spanish-posh accent andhis emergent English proficiency to display how he was “better” than other low-SES children inthe neighborhood where his private school was located. Indeed, this posturing as exemplified byAlfredo seems so common in Oaxacan private schools that English teachers such as Lopez Gopar(2013) wonder whether by providing the children of the Oaxacan elite with an English educa-tion they are unintentionally contributing to the widening of the gap between social classes inOaxaca.

ENGLISH STUDENT TEACHERS’ SOCIAL-CLASS STATUS AND PRAXIS

Most of the graduates from our university’s BA program in English teaching end up workingas teachers in private institutions. Most could be considered low-SES and are first-generationuniversity graduates from indigenous backgrounds or mestizo families. To us, the authors, theyare humble in their dress and ways of being. However, on our university campus, our studentsare considered fresas (posh) due to their emergent English proficiency, which gives them contactwith tourists and hence international lifestyles. This English proficiency, further, gives our stu-dents opportunities to travel to the United States for study scholarships, jobs at summer camps,and other incentives. International travel is primarily typical of upper-middle-class families inMexico.

Nevertheless, as the main workforce of private institutions, our graduates are exploited. Theyreceive very low salaries (e.g., US$3–$4 hourly or US$300–$600 monthly for a full-time position)with no employee benefits. As teachers in private schools, our graduates have to contest thecolonial difference, as carried by their ethnic, racial, and low-SES status. To do this, they need toassert their near-native-like accent or their high TOEFL scores in order to prove their legitimacyas English teachers (Sayer, 2012). Sadly, our English graduates must toil as teachers with lowpay in order to help the high-middle and upper-class people maintain their comfortable socialstatus through the acquisition of English; and by receiving low pay for this work, our graduatesthemselves remain at their low-SES level with a modest aspiration to reach, at most, a lower-middle–social-class level as teachers.

Not only do Mexican English teachers struggle with colonial difference, legitimacy, andexploitation in private English institutions, but they also have to deal with middle- and upper-class lifestyles and values present in English textbooks as well as the curriculum. Most textbooksand curricula used in English institutions come from Mexico City or foreign countries. Rarely dothese materials depict the realities of poor or low-SES people. For instance, based on a typicaltextbook lesson concerning the modal can, Mexican English teachers have their students surveythe class by asking each other whether or not they can play the piano, ski, speak French, or drive a

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014


car. Such particular musical, sport, and life competencies, however, are not usually possessed bymost Mexican students, or even by most Mexican English teachers. Equally unrealistic were thetextbooks and curricula used in an English program (Inglés Enciclomedia) piloted in the publicelementary schools (López-Gopar, Núñez Méndez, Montes Medina & Cantera Martínez, 2009).

This inappropriateness of English-related textbooks and curricula speaks to the need forEnglish instruction to be conducted critically (Pennycook, 2001) in Mexico. In general terms,the critical English teacher would relate her or his teaching practice “to broader social, cultural,and political domains” so as to address issues of “access, power, disparity, desire, difference, andresistance” (p. 10). Without such a critical approach, English teaching would maintain the socialclass stratification and the colonial difference already existing in Mexico.

CONCLUSION

Pursuant to the colonial difference, Mexican English teachers are part and parcel of the intru-sion of the English language with its connection to globalization and neoliberalism as well asto its perpetuation of the gap between social classes. Hence, English-language teaching and itsrelation to social class must be problematized in research, language policies, educational initia-tives, teacher preparation, and curriculum development. If we neglect such problematizations, wewill be doomed to become the proletariat tool of the new economic world situation, which bene-fits very few people while negatively affecting most. English-language teaching must be used tochallenge the colonial difference and to explore more egalitarian social systems.

REFERENCES

Block, D. (2012). Economising globalisation and identity in applied linguistics in neoliberal times. In D. Block, J. Gray,& M. Holborow (Eds.), Neoliberalism and applied linguistics (pp. 56–85). London, UK: Routledge,

Blommaert, J. (2005). Discourse: Key topics in sociolinguistics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Dussel, E. (2002). World-system and “trans”-modernity. Nepantla: Views from South, 3(2), 221–244.Enciso, A. (2013a). En seguridad alimentaria, 51.5 millones de mexicanos: Coneval [In food security, 51.5 millions of

Mexicans: Coneval]. La Jornada. Retrieved from http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2013/08/01/sociedad/035n1socEnciso, A. (2013b). En México, 56% de los niños menores de cinco años viven en la pobreza [In Mexico, 56% of

children under five years of age live in poverty]. La Jornada. Retrieved from http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2013/04/04/sociedad/040nlsoc

Enciso, A., & Camacho, F. (2013). Enfrentan indígenas más carencias que el resto de mexicanos pobres [Indigenouspeoples face more shortages than the rest of poor Mexicans]. La Jornada. Retrieved from http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2013/08/09/sociedad/033n1soc

Galeano, E. (1971). Las venas abiertas de América Latina [The open veins of Latin America]. Mexico D. F., Mexico:Siglo XXI Editores.

González Amador, E. (2013). En México la brecha entre ricos y pobres es la más amplia de la OCDE[In Mexico the gap between rich and poor is the widest within the OCDE]. La Jornada. Retrieved fromhttp://www.jornada.unam.mx/2013/05/15/economia/029n2eco

INEGI. (2010). México en Cifras: Oaxaca [Mexico in numbers: Oaxaca]. Retrieved from http://www.inegi.org.mx/sistemas/mexicocifras/default.aspx?e=20

López-Gopar, M. (2013). My biography: From an “English teacher” to an educator attempting to be critical. In M.Lengeling (Ed.), Entering into the EFL teaching profession: Stories of teacher socialization in Mexico (pp. 73–94).Guanajuato, Mexico: Universidad de Guanajuato.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014

http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2013/08/01/sociedad/035n1soc

http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2013/04/04/sociedad/040nlsoc

http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2013/04/04/sociedad/040nlsoc



http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2013/05/15/economia/029n2eco

http://www.inegi.org.mx/sistemas/mexicocifras/default.aspx?e=20

http://www.inegi.org.mx/sistemas/mexicocifras/default.aspx?e=20


López-Gopar, M. E., Núñez Méndez, O., Montes Medina, L., & Cantera Martínez, M. (2009). Inglés enciclomedia:A ground-breaking program for young Mexican children? Teaching English to younger learners [Special Issue].Mextesol Journal, 33(1), 67–86.

Mignolo, W. (2000a). Local histories/global designs: Coloniality, subaltern knowledges, and border thinking. Princeton,NJ: Princeton University Press.

Mignolo, W. (2000b). La colonialidad a lo largo y a lo ancho: El hemisferio occidental en el horizonte colonial de la mod-ernidad [Coloniality in length and width: The western hemisphere at the colonial horizon of modernity]. In E. Lander(Ed.), La colonialidad del saber: Eurocentrismo y ciencias sociales: Perspectivas latinoamericanas [Coloniality ofknowledge: Eurocentricism and social sciences: Latin American perspectives] (pp. 55–85). Buenos Aires, Argentina:Clasco.

Mignolo, W. (2009). La colonialidad: La cara oculta de la modernidad [Coloniality: The hidden face of modernity]. InS. Breitwiser (Ed.), Catalog of Museum Exhibit: Modernologies, Museo de Arte Moderno de Barcelona (pp. 39–49).Barcelona, Spain: MACBA.

Olivares Alonso, E. (2013). Sólo 19.3 % de la población en el grupo de personas no pobres ni vulnerables [Only19.3% of the population in the group of people neither poor nor vulnerable]. La Jornada. Retrieved fromhttp://www.jornada.unam.mx/2013/03/15/sociedad/045n2soc

Pennycook, A. (2001). Critical applied linguistics: A critical introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Quijano, A. (2007). Coloniality and modernity/rationality. Cultural Studies, 21(2–3), 168–178.Quijano, A., & Wallerstein, I. (1992). Americanity as a concept, or the Americas in the modern world-system.

International Social Sciences Journal, 134, 549–557.Sayer, P. (2012). Ambiguities and tensions in English language teaching: Portraits of EFL teachers as legitimate speakers.

New York: Routledge.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014



Click for updates


Forum CommentaryYasuko Kannoa

a Temple UniversityPublished online: 16 May 2014.

To cite this article: Yasuko Kanno (2014) Forum Commentary, Journal of Language, Identity &Education, 13:2, 118-123, DOI: 10.1080/15348458.2014.901825




This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions




http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2014.901825




Forum Commentary

Yasuko KannoTemple University

Social class has been underresearched in the field of applied linguistics. The central goal of this forumwas to stimulate more conversation about social class as it impacts language learning and teaching.In this article, I comment on 3 salient themes that have emerged in the 5 articles: (1) agency andstructure in language learning and teaching, (2) transnationalism and social class, and (3) framingsocial class in applied linguistic research.

Vandrick and I first proposed this forum out of our concern that applied linguistics research hasnot so far confronted issues of social class head-on as other related fields such as education andsociology have done. As Vandrick notes in her introduction to the forum, in the field of appliedlinguistics “scholarship on social class is fairly meager”. This is a serious concern given thatincome inequality has dramatically increased in recent years, and that the learning of English inmany parts of the world has become implicated in the reproduction of social classes. We wantedto provide a forum in which we begin to address directly how social class influences and isinfluenced by language learning and teaching.

AGENCY AND STRUCTURE IN LANGUAGE LEARNING AND TEACHING

One of the things that the articles in this forum do very well is portray language learners asactive agents who make decisions to invest in their language learning. In my opinion, appliedlinguistics research (mine included) often focuses too narrowly on the challenges and adverseconditions of second-language learning (especially in the context of immigrants’ learning thedominant language in their adoptive countries) and in the process, has unwittingly perpetuatedthe image of language learners as “incomplete,” “powerless,” and “disadvantaged.” In contrast,in this forum language learners are described as their own agents, marshaling whatever resourcesthey have to learn the target language and vie for class status and privilege. As a second-languagelearner myself who has slowly made English her own through 3 decades of learning and use, Ifind such portraits refreshing.

Correspondence should be sent to Yasuko Kanno, Department of Teaching and Learning, College of Education,Temple University, Ritter Hall 462, 1301 Cecil B. Moore Ave., Philadelphia, PA 19122. E-mail: [email protected]

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014


FORUM COMMENTARY 119

In this context, it is fascinating that even in countries in which English has traditionally beenthought of as a “foreign” language, English has become a critical means of gaining and maintain-ing a class distinction (Gao; López-Gopar & Sughrua; Shin, this forum). Thus, in both China andMexico, upper-class parents are keen to mobilize their economic and cultural capital to facilitatetheir children’s acquisition of English so that the children in turn will maintain their class privi-lege. In the meantime, Korea’s enthusiasm for English has reached such a feverish pitch that manyfamilies are willing to endure a prolonged separation from one another in order to send their chil-dren to English-speaking countries with their mothers. Their hope is that high English proficiencycoupled with educational credentials from an English-speaking country will ensure the children’smarketability in the brutally competitive Korean economy. One could read such reports and dis-miss them as yet another extreme form of English linguistic imperialism (Phillipson, 2000), andno doubt there is some truth in the notion. Nonetheless, these portraits also highlight languagelearners’ agentive decisions to invest in language learning in order to survive and thrive in arapidly changing global economy.

At the same time, in their efforts to elevate their status through language learning, languagelearners can simultaneously become subjects and objects of social reproduction. Shin’s paperdoes a brilliant job of highlighting this duality in Early Study Abroad (ESA) students’ experi-ences. First of all, it is important to remember that not all Korean families have the means tosend children and their mothers abroad to facilitate the children’s English learning; it is only aprivileged segment of Korean society that has the economic means to do so. Second, by gain-ing valuable linguistic and cultural capital through ESA, these families can further their classprivilege once they return to Korea. At the same time, the ESA students, thus privileged inone way, are subject to other kinds of discrimination: the host country citizens’ racism andridicule of their nonnative English. In other words, while they are contributing to one kindof social reproduction, ESA students are also victimized in another kind of social reproduc-tion. Similarly, although their high English proficiency places López-Gopar and Sughrua at theupper end of the middle class on the social class scale in Oaxaca, they wonder if they andother English teachers like them are perpetuating social inequality by teaching English mainlyto children from affluent families. Meanwhile, the student-teachers whom López-Gopar andSughrua have taught in their teacher education program and who have gone on to become Englishteachers are largely confined to lower SES status because of the meager salaries they earn teach-ing English to children of privilege in private schools. Thus, while acting through their ownagency, language learners and teachers are also inevitably influenced by the forces of the socialstructure.

The above examples illustrate the importance of critically examining the dialectic relation-ship between structure and agency when studying social class in language learning and teaching.The structure-agency relationship has been one of the most enduring problems in sociology:Thinkers such as Bourdieu (Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992), Swartz (1997), and Giddens (1979)have extensive discussions on the topic. Fundamentally, the debate concerns how social struc-tures (including race, class, gender, ideologies, laws, marriage, family, governments, schools,and collective histories) condition human conduct, on the one hand, and to what extent individu-als can exercise their will to determine their own fate, on the other hand. The analysis of socialclass in relation to language learning and teaching is in essence the investigation into and critiqueof how a social structure (class) conditions an agentive act (language learning and teaching) andhow the agentive act in turn might reproduce or challenge the social structure.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014

120 KANNO

TRANSNATIONALISM AND SOCIAL CLASS

Another theme that is salient in the forum articles is transnationalism. Transnationalism, char-acterized by “liv[ing] dual lives; speaking two languages, having homes in two languages, andmaking a living through continuous regular contact across national borders” (Portes, Guarnizo, &Landolt, 1999, p. 217) is not limited to any particular class of people. For instance, working-classVietnamese immigrants in Philadelphia may regularly send remittances to family members inVietnam, stay connected with friends and relatives all over the world through social networkingmedia, and budget trips to Vietnam every few years. Nonetheless, living abroad, fluidly goingback and forth, and maintaining active ties in multiple communities across borders is still easierto imagine and practice for middle-class and upper-class populations because such a lifestyle isexpensive. I noted earlier that countries such as Korea, China, and Mexico may still be consideredEnglish-as-a foreign-language countries, but for upper-class segments of these countries, Englishmay very well be more than a foreign language if they foresee the real possibility of living in anEnglish-speaking country. They may spend a significant portion of their lives in English-speakingcountries and/or go back and forth between their country and another country, retaining strongties to both at all times. For people of such classes, English is not simply a mark of distinctionbut also a critical tool kit for leading a transnational life.

Darvin and Norton introduced the concept transnational habitus in their article. Habitus refersto class-based dispositions that inform one’s interpretation of and reaction to a situation. Buthabitus is not rigid and unchanging dispositions once acquired; rather, “habituses are permeableand responsive to what is going on around them. Current circumstances are not just there tobe acted upon, but are internalised and become yet another layer to add to those from earliersocialisations” (Reay, David, & Ball, 2005, p. 26). It is important to remember this permeable andresponsive nature of habitus, since the essential nature of transnational existence is the rapidlychanging sociocultural environments to which transnational individuals must adapt. Thus, themiddle-class status that Korean and Chinese students take for granted back in their own countryneeds to be asserted with fashion, consumption patterns, and accommodations in the context oftheir adopted country (Gao; Shin, this forum). Although it is easy to dismiss their consumptionpatterns as the indulgence of spoiled rich kids from Korea and China, it takes on a deeper meaningwhen placed in the context of their transnational experiences: Sensing that their middle-classprestige is at risk in their adopted country because of racial, ethnic, and linguistic stereotypingand discrimination, they need to signal their class identity through the means that are availableto them. In contrast, Ayrton, an upper-class immigrant in Darvin and Norton’s article, seemssecure enough in his upper-class identity not to feel a strong need to assert his class identity inCanada.

FRAMING SOCIAL CLASS IN APPLIED LINGUISTICS RESEARCH

Another important contribution of this forum is its discussion of various ways of conceptualizingand theorizing social class. Gao’s article illustrates the difficulty of capturing and operationalizingsocial class in a society whose economic system is undergoing a transformation. Researchers suchas Gao who are working in the Chinese context are tasked with not simply taking social class asa factor but fundamentally thinking about how to capture the notion of class. López-Gopar and

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014


Sughrua present another way of framing social class in terms of colonial difference. By describingtheir own experiences and those of their student-teachers, the authors provide a glimpse into amultifaceted system of indexing one’s social class.

The other 3 articles by Vandrick, Shin, and Darvin and Norton, set in North America, mark thestrong influence of Bourdieu’s theory of social reproduction. It is no coincidence that Bourdieu’swork is familiar to many applied linguists because of Norton’s seminal TESOL Quarterly paper(Norton Peirce, 1995) and her subsequent book (Norton, 2000, 2013). What is particularly attrac-tive about Bourdieu’s theory to applied linguists is his conceptualization of social class as largelya matter of cultural and symbolic resources, not just a matter of economic wealth. As Darvinand Norton argue in this forum, “While [social class] has always been recognized as an economicposition, it has also increasingly been regarded as a cultural process, marked by consumption pat-terns, identity formations, and bodily attributes like accent, behavior, and dress”. Since languagefigures prominently in Bourdieu’s conceptualization of social class (1977, 1991), it lends itselfwell as a framework for applied linguistics research.

However, Bourdieu’s theory is by no means the only conceptual framework that is available toexplore social class in relation to language learning and teaching. There are alternative theoriesthat are potentially powerful. For example, Yosso’s (2005) critical race theory and communitycultural wealth provide a useful corollary to Bourdieu’s conceptualization of capital. Yosso’stheory of community cultural wealth takes the idea of capital from Bourdieu and proposes aset of alternative forms of capital that minority students are likely to have access to, such asaspirational capital, linguistic capital, familial capital, social capital, navigational capital, andresistant capital. Together, these forms of capital characterize minority communities and studentsas being in possession of rich cultural knowledge, skills, and contacts, in contrast to the commoncharacterization of these communities and students in deficit terms. By focusing on such alter-native forms of capital, and speaking from the position of these communities as rich in valuablecapital, we can begin to challenge the status quo in school and begin to question why schools haveso far failed to utilize these forms of capital that minority and poor students bring to the table, asopposed to how to inculcate these students in the cultural values and resources of the dominantclass. For example, we can use Bourdieu’s notion of linguistic capital to analyze how working-class English language learners’ lack of English proficiency limits their educational opportunitiesin schools—as I have done in my own analysis (Kanno & Kangas, 2013). However, Yosso’s def-inition of linguistic capital is different from that of Bourdieu and “reflects the idea that Studentsof Color arrive at school with multiple language and communication skills” (Yosso, 2005, p. 78).We can thus use Yosso’s conceptualization of linguistic capital to interrogate the obvious paradoxwhereby those who arrive to school with multiple language and communication skills nonethelessalmost always end up being characterized as lacking in linguistic proficiency.

I also believe that Bowles and Gintis’s (1976) theory of social reproduction is a usefulframework for applied linguists to consider, as Vandrick pointed out in her article. Althoughtheir correspondence principle has been criticized as being too deterministic, my observationof practices in schools that serve different social class populations largely affirms Bowles andGintis’s argument that working-class students are socialized to be obedient, to follow instruc-tions, and to not get too ambitious, whereas upper-class students are socialized to lead, to questionauthority, and to seek new opportunities. Language learning can be analyzed through that lens:In Ayrton’s experiences (Darvin & Norton, this forum), we can see an upper-class youth beingled to have ambitions, to nurture a sense of entitlement, and to be bold, and his learning and use

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014

122 KANNO

of English is part of his elite education. In contrast, John’s experience of English learning is verymuch that of a working-class immigrant, who needs to learn English in order to survive in schooland in society but at the same time who is not given enough access to learn the language to theextent that he is able to leverage it for his own benefit.

CONCLUSION

As the 5 articles in this forum have illustrated, investigating the relationship between social classand language learning involves a number of balancing acts. Ideally, we want to critically exam-ine the (often harsh) conditions of language learning for working-class and poor immigrantswithout stigmatizing the learners themselves while also studying the language learning of moreprivileged learners without trivializing their experiences. We need to detail the local context oflanguage learning while also paying attention to the global forces that may have motivated thelearning in the first place. And we also need to conceptualize social class without reducing itto a matter of economic wealth while, nonetheless, remembering the fundamental importance ofthe economic factor in social class. But despite such challenges, the relationship between socialclass and language learning and teaching is a critical area of investigation for applied linguists.As Vandrick noted at the beginning of this section, many of us in applied linguistics are advocatesfor social justice. However, we cannot critique or advocate for something without first examiningit. Just as race/ethnicity and gender have been productive lenses that have revealed many aspectsof language learning and teaching that would otherwise have been hidden, social class can also bea highly illuminating lens. Through that lens, we can examine how languages are being learnedand taught in a way that reproduces or disrupts the existing social structure.

REFERENCES

Bourdieu, P. (1977). The economics of linguistic exchanges. Social Science Information, 16(6), 645–668.doi:10.1177/053901847701600601

Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power (G. Raymond & M. Adamson, Trans.; J. B. Thompson, Ed.).Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (1976). Schooling in capitalist America: Education reform and the contradictions of economic

life. New York, NY: Basic Books.Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure, and contradiction in social analysis. Berkeley:

University of California Press.Kanno, Y., & Kangas, S. N. (2013, April). English language learners’ limited access to high level courses in high school.

American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting (AERA), San Francisco, CA.Norton, B. (2000). Identity and language learning: Gender, ethnicity and educational change. Harlow, United Kingdom:

Longman/Pearson Education.Norton, B. (2013). Identity and language learning: Extending the conversation (2nd ed.). Bristol, United Kingdom:

Multilingual Matters.Norton Peirce, B. (1995). Social identity, investment, and language learning. TESOL Quarterly, 29(1), 9–31.

doi:10.2307%2F3587803Phillipson, R. (2000). English in the new world order: Variations on a theme of linguistic imperialism and “World”

English. In T. Ricento (Ed.), Ideology, politics and language policies: Focus on English (pp.88–106). Amsterdam,Netherlands: John Benjamins.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014


Portes, A., Guarnizo, L. E., & Landolt, P. (1999). The study of transnationalism: Pitfalls and promise of an emergentresearch field. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22(2), 217–237. doi:10.1080/014198799329468

Reay, D., David, M. E., & Ball, S. (2005). Degrees of choice: Class, race, gender and higher education. Stoke on Trent,United Kingdom: Trenthan Books.

Swartz, D. (1997). Culture and power: The sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital?: A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth. Race

Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69–91. doi:10.1080/1361332052000341006

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

15:

39 1

4 D

ecem

ber

2014

Date post:	13-Dec-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	gabriel-nascimento
View:	213 times
Download:	1 times

Special Issue 2014 - Social Class and Language Learning - Journal of Language, Identity and...

Documents