Countering English-prioritised monolingual ideologies in content assessment through translanguaging practices in higher education

Abstract

This paper presents the use of translanguaging in the assessment of content subjects in the context of Nepal’s higher education. Since its proposition in the 1990s, translanguaging has been receiving much scholarly attention in multilingual educational contexts. In such contexts, individuals’ language practices show a shift from the understanding of languages as separate autonomous systems to the recognition of integrated and heteroglossic practices. Drawing on the analysis of relevant policy documents and examinees’ answer sheets of formative assessment, and interviews with eight purposively selected teacher educators teaching at the master’s level at a university in Nepal, this paper reports that examinees’ translanguaging practices in responding to assessment questions exhibit their translanguaging instinct resisting unplanned English-prioritised monolingual policies. It also reveals fluidity and simultaneity in examinees’ use of diverse linguistic resources defying demarcated language boundaries as aspired by the institution’s English-prioritised policies. The study further reports layered translanguaging exercised by examinees which educators acknowledged as an attempt to enhance efficacy in content communication. Examinees’ translanguaging practices and educators’ acknowledgment of translanguaged writing indicate collective resistance from the bottom-up countering monoglossic ideologies in assessment systems. This implies consideration of examinees’ and educators’ roles in promoting translanguaging for future language policy changes to facilitate effective assessment.

Keywords:

• Layered-translanguaging
• content assessment
• code alternation
• translanguaging instinct
• translanguaging space

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge the teacher educators for providing us with valuable information on their current practices of classroom instruction and assessment in their respective subject areas.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.