Racialised identities of multilingual teachers: stories, experiences and agentic action of Indonesian teachers in Australian schools

ABSTRACT

In a context of increasing deficit discourses about multiculturalism and multilingualism, this study examined the racialised identities of multilingual Indonesian teachers in secondary schools in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. Informed by the Douglas Fir Group Framework (2016), the study unpacked teachers’ socio-cultural, and linguistic trajectories in schools to understand the ways in which they navigate, negotiate, and resist their racialised identities at micro, meso, and macro levels of activity. Through semi-structured interviews with six Indonesian teachers teaching Bahasa Indonesia in NSW schools, the study focused on three broad dimensions, namely: (i) teachers’ perceived racialised identities in connection with their students and colleagues in schools (micro); (ii) the perceived institutional practices that reproduce racialisation and marginalisation (meso); and (iii) the broader societal factors that contribute to ‘self’ and ‘other’ racialisation (macro). Thematic analysis of the interview data reveal that teachers identify systemic ‘thinking’ and ‘doing’ that essentialise their racialised identities, Additionally, the racialisation of Indonesian language teachers in broader societal contexts is influenced by systemic factors, including language policies and institutional structures. Findings suggest that despite the pervasive forces which perpetuate monolithic thinking in schools, teachers engage in agentic action that seeks to resist and overcome their racialised identities.

KEYWORDS:

• Racialisation
• identity
• language teachers
• Indonesian teachers
• agency
• Douglas Fir Group‌

Introduction

In Australia, and most other Anglophone contexts, cultural and linguistic diversity is a ubiquitous characteristic (Veliz and Chen 2024). Such diverse landscape is evident in all spheres of life, including education. To this end, the cultural and linguistic diversity of student population is celebrated as ‘as an asset’ in most of ‘the policy, literature, and broader discourse around Australian schooling’ (Cross, D’warte, and Slaughter 2022, 341–342) However, despite a prevalent celebratory discourse of inclusion in Australia, the actual dominance of English-centric policies and practices came across as not only a monolingual approach to multilingualism (Piller 2016) but also, and most importantly, as a ‘source of divisiveness and exclusion’ (Awad 2011, 40). Similarly, multiculturalism, mainly driven by policies of ‘symbolic recognition’ of diversity (Stokke and Lybæk 2018) has been blamed for failing to create integrated and cohesive societies, and for contributing to the social, political and economic segregation of minority groups (Awad 2011).

In line with the pattern seen in many Anglophone environments, the overwhelming prevalence of hegemonic monolingual ideologies has had a significant impact on language teaching and language teachers in Australia. While raciolinguistic ideologies (Flores and Rosa 2015; Rosa and Flores 2017) and essentialism have been problematised in North American contexts in relation to English language teaching, it remains a significant issue to be addressed in the context of teaching non-European languages globally. Given that much of the relevant research has focused on issues dealing with languages associated with the Global North, there has been a compelling need for the field to pay attention to the experiences of raciailisation related to the languages and teachers associated with the Global South. Unlike teachers of European languages, teachers of non-dominant languages are more readily prone to racialisation and linguistic micro-aggressions (Dovchin 2022; Dovchin and Dryden 2022) due to the distinctive physical, social, cultural and linguistic features of these teachers, which do not conform to normative ideals of the Global North. Their primary languages being non-European, these individuals often find that the languages they teach are undervalued in comparison to European languages like English. This discrepancy in value underscores the importance of studying their experiences of racialisation in research, highlighting the systemic biases and inequalities present in educational and societal contexts. Focusing on their experiences of racialisation, the study draws on an ecological perspective (adapted from the Douglas Fir Group 2016) to explore how Indonesian language teachers navigate experiences of racialisation in Australian schools and respond to it through agentic action.

In particular, this research endeavours to delve into the ways in which multilingual Indonesian teachers, leveraging their diverse linguistic, cultural, and social trajectories, navigate and resist their racialised identities within the school environment. By investigating the nuanced experiences of these teachers, the study aims to shed light on the complex dynamics at play as they negotiate their identities within educational settings. Through qualitative inquiry, the research seeks to uncover the multifaceted strategies employed by multilingual Indonesian teachers to assert agency and challenge perceptions of racialisation, thereby contributing to a deeper understanding of identity negotiation within diverse educational contexts.

The research questions that arise from this context are:

How do multilingual Indonesian teachers perceive, negotiate and resist their racialised identities within the school environment, particularly in relation to students and colleagues?

What institutional practices contribute to the reproduction of racialisation and racism experienced by multilingual Indonesian teachers in secondary schools?

Native or nonnative languages teachers

The increased recognition of multilingualism in the realm of language learning and teaching has contributed to a greater interest in understanding how language learning and teaching emerge from interaction between the individual brain and the social world. The Douglas Fir Group’s (2016) Framework was proposed to synergise a variety of theoretical perspectives in second language acquisition research to problematise the dominance of monolingualism and broaden the field with critical awareness of the role of multilingualism in individual language learners’ language development. The framework demonstrates how different layers of nested systems (macro, meso, and micro) interact with individuals’ cognition and metacognition in mediating the growth and expansion of individual learners’ multilingual resources and repertoire. It also shows that learners’ language development is subject to the constraints associated with their unequal access to opportunities and resources as managed by institutional practices and controlled by the structural hierarchy of languages and power relations. Likewise, language teachers and teaching are also profoundly mediated by contextual conditions and processes at different levels, including racial ideologies and practices.

As noted by Von Esch, Suhanthie, and Kubota (2020), racialisation of language teaching ‘has a history that is likely as old as language teaching itself’ (391); however, the explicit critical engagement with the issue only emerged in recent decades (e.g. Kubota and Lin 2006, 2009). The rising scholarship on racialisation of language teaching has largely focused on English language teachers. For instance, there has been a long, ongoing discussion on native speakers and non-native speakers in English language teaching, which can be seen as racial labelling of language teachers. While relevant discussions have examined whether native speakers or nonnative speakers are better teachers (e.g. Aneja 2016; Tajeddin and Adeh 2016) from the perspectives of different stakeholders (e.g. language learners and language teachers), most studies tend not to question whether the monolingual speakers’ English varieties should be the norms for language learners. Efforts to redress this lacuna in the field include the conceptualisation of multi-competence as the ideal goal for language learning, which mandates the disestablishment of monolingual competence as the target norms for English language teaching. Thus, instead of focusing on language learners’ lexical and grammatical development in the target language, those who endorse the notion of multi-competence stress the importance of growing individual language learners’ repertoire of linguistic resources and valuing their multilingual practices (Forbes et al. 2021). In addition, the issue has been addressed by advancing the argument for the recognition of multilingual language teachers as better language teachers, whose language learning experiences, and linguistic repertoire may serve as valuable resources for teaching English to students of multilingual backgrounds.

The noticeable concentration of studies on English language teachers indicates that different languages hold unequal power status. Consequently, this disparity contributes to the existence of racial hierarchies among languages and language speakers. These hierarchies significantly impact the professional identities of racialised language teachers. The English language, in comparison with other languages, has been the centre of language education policies in many educational contexts due to English being a powerful global lingua franca (Cogo and Jenkins 2010; Crystal 2003). The unshakable dominance of native speakers of English as preferred English language teachers (Aneja 2016; Holliday 2006; Piller and Bodis 2022) is surely to do with the ‘problematic’ use of monolingual English norms (Butzkamm 2002; Neary 2022; Piller 2016; Slaughter and Cross 2021) as the enshrined target for English language education in many contexts. Nevertheless, it can be argued that native speakers of English, especially those who speak and have experiences of learning additional languages, have all the desirable resources and skills for helping English language learners to achieve their desired outcomes around the learning of English. Yet, the question of whether native speakers of languages that enjoy considerably ‘lower’ status than the English language will be seen as preferred language teachers remains unresolved. Since most of the existing studies are to do with English language teachers, it is imperative to explore how teachers of languages other than English experience racialisation.

Racialisation of ‘immigrant teachers’ is a widely recognised and accepted systemic issue (Schmidt 2010), yet limited scholarly attention has been devoted to exploring the process of racialisation experienced by these teachers. This is reinforced by Subedi (2008a) who posits that, in the context of the US, for example, research on how racialisation operates in relation to immigrant teachers is a marginalised area of inquiry. As such, there is a persistent need to address issues of marginalisation and racialisation within contexts of immigrant teachers, especially those who teach ‘less powerful’ languages in English language dominant communities. The rationale for this is, by and large, driven by an act of social justice (McDonald and Zeichner 2008) towards these communities of teachers, a strong impetus for decolonising Whiteness and native speakerism (Holliday 2006) in the realm of languages education, and by the constant unequal and inequitable treatment that immigrant teachers are exposed to at the onset of their migration journey up until they are settled in a teaching profession (Nigar, Kostogriz, and Janfada 2022).

In the US, Subedi (2008a) researched how females South Asian teachers navigated, challenged and negotiated ideological and dominant notions of what counted as teacher legitimacy and authority. With a particular focus on two female immigrant teachers, one from Pakistan and the other from India, the study looked at critical ‘sites of struggle’ that these teachers had to navigate to validate the authenticity of their ethnic and racial identities as teachers. By way of example, one teacher found herself constantly reclaiming her identity as a teacher during interactions with mainstream students who did not deem her a ‘real teacher’. These and other similar acts of racialisation as an immigrant teacher led her to find support from a White male teacher who would assist her in dealing with students who would contest her authority. Such experiences highlight the complex dynamics immigrant teachers navigate in asserting their professional identities amidst perceptions of otherness, and practices that perpetuate their racialised identities based on colour, race or ethnicity. Racialisation can also occur on the basis of accent. A study by Veliz and Veliz-Campos (2021) found that while Chinese international students in Australia value the importance of intelligibility, they feel highly racialised and marginalised on the basis of their Chinese accented English which led them to a perceived sense of inferiority. This is ratified by Lee (2021) who stresses how racial inferiorisation is linked to language and accent. Lee reports on the story of a Chinese Canadian teacher, fully proficient in English, who was ‘flattered’ by a White male who indicated that because he didn’t have an accent, he liked engaging in casual talk with him. Such comments embodied in the practices of White, Western-centric communities perpetuate racialisation and marginalisation of immigrant teachers.

Research has also shown that immigrant teachers can transform their educational environments by exercising their agency in the creation of critical spaces for dialogue about diversity. Subedi (2008b) conducted a study into how immigrant teachers – or teachers of ‘diverse identities’ (415) – created pedagogical opportunities and navigated challenges around critical dialogue on diversity in a social studies classroom. Besides highlighting the ways in which teachers can intervene their classroom spaces for heightened awareness of diversity through critical conversations in transformative ways, the study emphasises that teachers from diverse cultural backgrounds, who have experienced some form of ‘otherising’ (García et al. 2021; Harré and Moghaddam 2003), bring more complex and nuanced understandings of difference and diversity into their classrooms. These findings have significant implications for schools seeking to embrace diversity and promote equity and social justice. By valuing the perspectives and experiences of teachers from diverse backgrounds, educational institutions can work towards countering racialisation and fostering more inclusive learning environments.

In conclusion, the journey towards understanding and addressing racialisation in language teaching and the experiences of plurilingual teachers from minoritised communities is an ongoing and complex endeavour. While much of the existing discourse focuses on English language teachers, there is a pressing need to extend this discussion to teachers of other languages who also experience racialisation and marginalisation. Immigrant teachers, particularly those teaching ‘less powerful’ languages in English-dominant communities, face unique challenges in asserting their professional identities and navigating dominant ideologies of teacher legitimacy. Their experiences of racialisation based on ethnicity, race, and accent underscore the need for greater awareness and advocacy for social justice within language education contexts.

Asian languages in Australian schools

Conflicting discourses around the status of languages and legitimacy of nonnative language teachers are associated with a deeply entrenched tradition of English monolingualism in Australia (e.g. Irving-Torsh and Lising 2022; Sinkeviciute 2020; Slaughter and Cross 2021; Xing, Mu, and Henderson 2022). Despite its claim of Australia as a multicultural society, the booklet for Australian Citizenship Test repeatedly emphasises the importance of English for would-be citizens as follows:

Australia’s national language is English. It is part of our national identity. In keeping with Australian values, migrants should learn and use English to help them participate in Australian society. Communicating in English is important for making the most of living and working in Australia. (Department of Home Affairs 2018, 9)

Yet, in the last three decades, the Australian society have also become increasingly cognizant of its location and economic exchanges in the Asia-Pacific, leading people to question whether Australia qualifies as an Asian country (FitzGerald 1997; Kirkpatrick 1995; Wilson 1995). The vision of sustaining a multilingual, multicultural world means that languages other than English (LOTEs) should be promoted in any educational system as ‘linguistic diversity is both critical in sustaining cultural diversity and instrumental in supporting vibrant exchanges of knowledge and understanding generated from different epistemological systems for the common good of human beings’ (Guo, Zhou, and Gao 2021, 1–2). A series of discussions and policy initiatives have been undertaken and launched, leading to the national adoption of ‘the National Asian Languages and Studies in Australian Schools (NALSAS) strategy’ in 1994 (Henderson 2021; Lo Bianco 2005). Over the years, the Australian Commonwealth and state governments have been investing resources into the educational system to develop the nation’s Asian literacy (Hamid and Kirkpatrick 2016). A variety of Asian languages have been taught in Australian schools (e.g. Henderson 2021). Among all the Asian languages that are likely to be marginalised by the power English language, different languages enjoy different power potentials as reflected by the attention to the learning and teaching of these languages. For instance, due to the increased socio-economic exchanges with Australia, Asian languages such as Chinese, Korean and Japanese have received much attention (e.g. Kim 2012; Orton 2016; Turner 2013). Languages associated with less profitable markets such as Indonesia are likely to be neglected. Those who teach these less influential Asian languages may face further marginalisation, whose professional experiences can be approached through the lens of the Doughlas Fir Group Framework.

An overview of the douglas fir group framework

The Douglas Fir Group’ (2016) Framework offers a transdisciplinary approach to Second Language Acquisition (SLA) in a multilingual setting, advocating for practical, innovative, and sustainable solutions tailored to the challenges of language teaching and learning (20). This framework serves as a conceptual tool for language educators to address various issues at individual, sociocultural, and sociopolitical levels (Chong, Isaacs, and McKinley 2023; Gao and Yang 2023; Miller et al. 2018). It also aids researchers in understanding language teachers’ professional experiences amidst changing macro-contextual factors and workplace dynamics. Teaching languages in a multilingual environment requires acknowledging the complexities faced by educators, especially in contexts where monolingualism and multilingualism intersect. For teachers of less dominant languages like Indonesian in English-centric societies, overcoming deficit discourses and asserting professional agency is crucial (Larsen-Freeman 2019; Ortega 2019; Tao and Gao 2021). Despite potential marginalisation and racialisation in Australian schools, these teachers must navigate their roles effectively. This study focuses on Indonesian language teachers in Australian schools, using the Douglas Fir Group Framework to examine their social, cultural, and linguistic trajectories. It aims to understand how they navigate, negotiate, and resist racialised identities within the context of multilingualism and English monolingualism.

Researchers’ positionality

The researchers in this study, originally from Global South contexts, bring a unique perspective and passion to their advocacy for marginalised voices and non-dominant knowledge systems and epistemologies in both the Global North and South. Their positionality is deeply rooted in their own experiences and the socio-political contexts of the Global South, where they have witnessed firsthand the challenges faced by marginalised communities and suppression of local voices, perspectives and languages of indigenous peoples and other non-dominant groups. As language teachers and educators, the researchers’ impetus for increased valorisation of languages other than English, along with the identities of their speakers and community members, is driven by a desire to challenge hegemonic narratives and power structures that often prioritise dominant voices and knowledge systems (Meighan 2022; Veliz, Diaz, and Heinrichs 2024; Veronelli 2015). By the same token, with two researchers teaching and researching in the Global North – Australia, the context of the present study – the motive for recognising, truly embracing and revitalising the voices, perspectives and languages of non-domiant groups lies at the heart of a constant and systematic decline in languages education in Australia (Fielding and Harbon 2022; Liddicoat and Scarino 2010; Veliz and Chen 2024)

By bridging their experiences and expertise from both Global South and Global North contexts, across and within boarders, these researchers contribute to a more nuanced and holistic approach to addressing issues of linguistic and cultural diversity in education in Australia and beyond.

Methodology

This study draws upon interview data collected over a period of seven months, which sought to explore the racialised identities of 6 language teachers from Indonesia teaching Bahasa Indonesia in New South Wales schools. Grounded in the premises of qualitative research methodologies, this study draws specifically upon the tenets of phenomenological inquiry. Phenomenology seeks to understand ‘a phenomenon from the perspective of participants who have experienced it’ (Bonyadi 2023, 1). Phenomenological inquiry stresses on the uniqueness of individuals and that ‘each human is radically singular in their being’ (Zigon and Throop 2021, 9). In this study, a phenomenological lens was vital as it allowed for the exploration of the lived experiences and subjective realities of the participants. By adopting this approach, this study acknowledges the uniqueness and individuality of each participant, recognizing that their racialised identities are shaped by personal histories, trajectories, contexts and perspectives.

Participants

Participants were approached through principals at government, independent and catholic schools in NSW. Assistance and guidance were provided by the NSW School of Languages to identify and locate schools that had Baha Indonesia on their curriculum offering at the time of data collection. Once schools were identified, telephone calls were made, and emails sent to school principals or deputy principals to explain the essence of the study and seek permission to circulate ‘an-invitation-to-participate’ form with their Indonesian teaching staff. After a period of seven weeks, 20 expressions of interest were obtained. However, 10 of those did not meet one of the inclusion criteria, that of being Indonesian born with Bahasa Indonesia as their first language (L1). These 10 teachers were Australian born who had qualified to become teachers of Bahasa Indonesia. Of the 10 remaining teachers that met the inclusion criterion, four withdrew due to personal and family circumstances. In the end, six participants were able and available to commit to interview times on Zoom.

Participants were provided with a copy of an information sheet which outlined a description of the scope of the study, its aims, issues of confidentiality and the voluntary nature of participation in the project. The consent form was also provided to participants, of which a signed copy was requested in return. The project recived ethical clearance from the first author’s university Human Research Ethics Committee. The approval number granted for the project is HE23-116.

Data collection and analysis

Data for this study was collected through in-depth semi-structured interviews, preceded by four biographical questions which sought to obtain information on participants’ age, length of stay in Australia, years of teaching experience in Australian schools, transnational life trajectories, and language(s) used at home. While interviews followed a semi-structured protocol, opportunities were created for impromptu questions that either sought further clarification on participants’ commentaries’ and ‘stories’ or explored other related dimensions to their responses. All interviews were conducted over a period of four months in 2023.

Interview questions (see Appendix) addressed three broad dimensions: the perceived institutional practices that reproduce racialisation and racism, the factors that contribute to ‘self’ and ‘other’ racialisation, and the mechanisms employed to resist and overcome their racialised identities.

The researchers listened to each interview recording several times and transcribed them in their entirety. Repeated readings of the interview transcripts facilitated a comprehensive understanding of the themes emerging from the teacher participants, allowing for the identification of key themes worthy of further exploration. Specifically, the analytical method employed in this study adhered to Nowell et al.'s (2017) six-step process for ensuring trustworthiness during thematic analysis: becoming familiar with the data, generating initial codes, identifying themes, reviewing themes, defining/naming themes, and producing the final report. Table 1 provides an overview of teachers’ profile.

Table 1. Indonesian teachers’ profile.

Name (pseudonym)	Age (range)	Time in Australia^1	Teaching experience in Australia	Language(s) used in household
Dewi	25–30	3 years	2 years	Bahasa and English
Timur	30–35	7 years	5 years	Bahasa (and sometimes English)
Santoso	30–35	8 years	5 years	Balinese, Bahasa and English
Eka	35–40	6 years	4 years	Balinese and Bahasa
Citra	25–30	2 years	2 years	Bahasa
Amisha	30–35	9 years	8 years	Bahasa and English

Findings

Accentedness as racialisation

The analysis of the data, as anticipated to some extent, uncovers that non-native English-speaking teachers teaching in Australia, particularly those responsible for teaching languages considered less powerful, are faced with an array of discriminatory practices and discourses. These prejudicial experiences are based upon from their appearance, linguistic competence, and accent, collectively wielding substantial influence over these teachers’ practices. Furthermore, these adverse experiences contribute to a pervasive sense of disempowerment within these teachers, capable of affecting their perceived, efficacy, legitimacy and agency in the educational domain (Tao and Gao 2021). Such diminishment of agency is believed to be substantially rooted in the pervasive influence of English monolingualism, which prevails as a deeply ingrained sociolinguistic phenomenon (Li Wei 2018).

At a micro level (Douglas Fir Group 2016), a variety of semiotic resources and features characterise the cognitive and emotional capacities of individuals who engage with others in multilingual contexts of interaction. Accent, as a linguistically semiotic marker of teachers’ speech, emerges as a major determinant, significantly influencing the racialised identities of at least half of the study's participants. In this respect, research has elucidated the profound implications of accent, revealing its direct link to individuals’ self-image and broader self-identity constructs (Karam, Kibler, and Yoder 2017). Timur's testimony below offers a poignant illustration of the lived experiences of discrimination in the form of his own students’ giggles stemming from the conflated perceptions of accent and phenotypical attributes.

I feel Australians don’t realise they actually discriminate on the basis of accent and race, and even appearance. Once I heard an Aussie say that Australia is one of the most discriminatory countries they’ve even known, and I feel that distance between Aussie White teachers and those of us who are not, mainly, I think, because of our looks, accent and English not being perfect

In the above comment, we observe that Timur expresses a sense of discrimination based on accent, race and appearance, which creates a social and cultural distance between Australian White teachers and non-native teachers. This distance is attributed to perceived differences in looks, accent, and English proficiency, leading to a feeling of discrimination and exclusion from full participation in the teaching community.

While the above observation shows Timur’s feelings about discrimination and racialisation at a societal level, the commentary below alludes more specifically to challenges of navigating linguistic diversity and differences in a classroom setting.

I sense something in class all the time, either kids make fun of my accent outside of class, or they giggle when I speak in class, not in a rude way but the way they do it as teenagers

Timur’s comment clearly points to the need for teachers, students, society at large, to address not only overt forms of discrimination but also the subtle ways in which language-related biases and stereotypes can impact the classroom dynamics and the experiences of non-native language teachers.

Citra seems fully aware of her accented speech and of how accent can affect her teacher identity despite greater recognition of the value of intelligibility (Veliz and Veliz-Campos 2021), particularly in international communicative contexts (Jenkins and Leung 2019). Accent, then, comes across as a sociolinguistic marker that reveals a great deal about Citra, who she is and who she is not in an English-dominated milieu. Citra notes:

I did my Bachelor in Indonesia and my Master’s in Singapore, so I have a weird mix of English accents mainly because of my long stay in Singapore sort of affected my strange English accent, which is what I find most problematic to consolidate my identity as a teacher in Australia

Accent, together with other features, namely gender, clothing items, skin colour, or even compliments insinuating lesser of a gap between (rather idealised) native speakers’ accent and/or language proficiency and the participants’ accent/language proficiency, are used as differentiating artefacts that contribute to English speakers’ racialisation (Taylor-Mendes 2009; Véliz-Campos, Roa, and Veliz 2024). This results in overt processes of otherising (Holliday, Hyde, and Kullman 2010). Eka, for instance, notes that Australians’ frequent compliments, as is the case of ‘your English is better than my Indonesian’ can be ‘really draining, disappointing and frustrating. It makes me more conscious of my [language] imperfections and how I am different from other people’.

The above-mentioned markers, both linguistic and non-linguistic in nature, are, thus, used to establish a distance between the majority – a dominant monolingual English-speaking community in Australia, ‘us’ – and the foreign-accented Indonesian individuals living and working in Australian schools, ‘them’ (Eriksen 2018). Indeed, Amisha notes that ‘it’s not just English, trying to fit in, looks, appearance, but also the fact that some of us wear hijabs’. This most likely explains why she remarks the following:

I shut myself down in large circles of people in school, like in the staff room or staff meetings. I just don’t have the guts to speak up in front of my peers. If I was white, I wouldn’t feel this way.

This quote reflects the internalised impact of racialisation on the individual's sense of belonging and agency within the educational context. The teacher's decision to withdraw from large circles of people, such as staff rooms or meetings, suggests a response to feeling marginalised or excluded due to their racialised identity, thus implying a sense of inferiority (Lee 2021) due to not being ‘White’.

In sum, teachers’ comments encapsulate the micro-level (micro) manifestations of racialisation within the educational ecosystem, viewed through the lenses of the Douglas Fir Group’s (2016) ecological framework. They illustrate how racialisation can deeply impact teachers’ identities, sense of belonging and legitimacy as language teachers for not possessing native-like linguistic, social or cultural features of Anglo teachers. Teachers’ navigation of their racialised identities occurs not only in interaction with themselves and others in their immediate multilingual lifeworlds, but also in larger and broader contexts and communities (meso), which are shaped by dominant underlying ideologies and normative practices (macro).

Racialisation through institutional practices and beyond

At meso and macro levels, racialisation is a complex process that extends far beyond individual interactions, encompassing institutional practices and ideologies that perpetuate and reinforce racial heirarchies. For example, Santoso’s use of the ‘trickle-down-effect’ figure of speech precisely suggests power issues – or racial hierarchies of languages and language speakers governing foreign language provision, a form of (foreign) linguistic imperialism (Phillipson 2013). Santoso remarks:

Schools offer the languages they can staff, but it really depends on principals’ understandings and inclinations to certain languages, and their love of languages … This has a trickle-down effect on staff (Santoso)

From an ecological standpoint as painted by van Lier (2010), the monolingual ‘White leadership’, as alluded to by both Dewi and Timur, is realised in a physical and social context – at least within the boundaries of the educational setting – where symbolic power in the form of Whiteness most likely constrains their teacher agency. Dewi remarks the following, which aligns with Timur’s view:

Throughout my time at three different schools in Australia (Queensland and NSW), I’ve never come across non-White people in leadership positions in schools. Having White, monolingual principals invisibilise the role and prominence of other languages, and students and staff of different backgrounds (Dewi)

I lived in the US for three years and worked as a teacher assistant. There was so much diversity at the leadership level, Black-American principal, Latino head teachers, Asian Deputy Principal, etc. Australia is a long way from embracing real diversity in schools. Principals have to be White Australians! (Timur)

The social status of languages and the idealised speakers of the global powerful languages – as is the case of English most notably and its White (standard) native speakers – contribute to maintaining a privileged White hegemony. Such hegemony is operationalised in organisational structures, including that of educational institutions most specifically – which both mirror and perpetuate sociocultural structures that racialise teachers of less powerful (foreign) languages, and which creates little chance for teachers of under-represented languages to address institutionalised forms of racism and subjugation (Austin 2009). In this respect, Eka reports the following:

‘I’ve noticed this is a wider ‘institutional’ issue in Australia that doesn’t make any, or little, room for ethic and racial representation in politics, education, business, executive positions, and things like that. It’s probably a consequence of the White Australia policy’.

Structural, contextual forms of racialisation can take various forms, with varying socio-emotional and career development consequences – ranging from subtle seemingly naïve well-meaning compliments of minority (foreign) language teachers’ ‘impressive’ (native-speaker like) language competence levels to truncating racialised (foreign) language teachers. This is what Citra reports in this regard:

‘In my school, there are two Indonesia teachers, an Australian teacher and me. I’ve been in the school longer than the other teacher, and I have not been given a chance to the Indonesian language leader but the other one has. What do we call this? For me, it’s discrimination’.

Citra’s comment illustrates the systemic perpetuation of racialisation within the institutional context of the school. Her observation of the composition of the teaching staff, including two Indonesian teachers, an Australian teacher, and themselves, highlights the diversity within the school. However, the teacher's assertion that she has not been given the opportunity to serve as the Indonesian language leader despite her longer tenure compared to the other Indonesian teacher suggests a form of discrimination based on their racialised identity (Rosa and Flores 2017; 2021).

This disparity in opportunities within the school hierarchy reflects how systemic biases and power dynamics can influence decision-making processes and perpetuate inequalities based on race. The teacher's questioning of the situation stresses her awareness of the discriminatory treatment she has experienced, indicating a desire to challenge and address the systemic barriers that hinder their professional advancement (Schmidt 2010). Overall, the above quotes emphasise the intersectionality of racialisation at both the individual and institutional levels, highlighting the need for systemic changes to promote equity and inclusivity within educational institutions and beyond.

The landscape outlined above clearly does not favour the prospect of successfully sustaining an increasingly multicultural society, where teachers of non-dominant languages can contribute to students – and society at large – greater understanding of cultural diversity through ‘vibrant exchanges of knowledge and understanding generated from different epistemological systems for the common good of human beings’ (Guo, Zhou, and Gao 2021, 2). This, to a large extent, responds to (White monolingual) language policies that indubitably have not addressed the issue adequately. Citra remarks that ‘It's disheartening to see how broader systemic issues categorise our multilingual Indonesian identities, overlooking the depth of our cultural and linguistic diversity’. Notwithstanding the various forms of racialisation that the participants are habitually exposed to, teachers seem intent on challenging discriminatory practices by promoting the participants’ multilingual Indonesian identities, as pointed out by Citra. Similarly, Dewi reports the following:

It’s the little things that sometimes have the bigger impact. It’s the way you’re treated or looked at in shops, not enough job opportunities, or people look at your name. It's essential to challenge these issues that foster discrimination of our Indonesian identities and advocate for more inclusive perspectives.

This quote highlights how racialisation permeates beyond the confines of the educational institution and is reinforced by broader societal practices entrenched in dominant ideologies. The mention of being treated differently or subjected to judgment in everyday settings such as shops reveals the pervasive nature of racial biases and stereotypes. Furthermore, the reference to limited job opportunities suggests systemic barriers that disproportionately affect individuals with racialised identities.

Practices of resistance against racialisation

As hinted earlier, the participants exert various forms of resistance against racialisation. As argued by Savski and Comprendio (2022), migrant teachers are often faced with both the challenge of developing a professional self in an alien community and of ‘societal belonging’ (3). Amisha, for instance, employs a strategy consisting in sharing part of her cultural background, perhaps in an attempt to challenge possible stereotypes regarding her racial identity and foster intercultural understanding. Amisha remarks:

I love cooking and I use this passion to serve my colleagues. I cook for them, bring traditional food to the staff room, give them Indonesian sweets, and things like that. Everybody loves food so it’s a way for me to blend in.

Seeking intercultural exchange is also exercised by Citra, though in a rather different manner. Citra actively seeks participation in community engagement most likely challenging established boundaries and asserts herself as a valued member of the school context confronting possible racialised expectations. Citra reports as follows:

One of the things I try to do is put my hand up for anything. This gives me opportunities to be a part of the school community, get acceptance and be loved by my peers. Serving your community is a way of getting know by your service and not by your race, English or accent.

Citra shows intentional efforts to proactively engage with her school community, illustrating a strategic approach to overcome potential racialisation. Citra expresses a commitment to inclusivity by actively participating in various activities, showcasing a sense of agency in shaping her identity within the school context.

Timur's proactive approach to improving her English skills reflects an agentic action aimed at assimilating into the Australian culture. Her conscious effort to mimic the Aussie accent suggests a form of agency in adapting to linguistic norms, possibly as a means of reducing racialisation through language proficiency.

I never stop trying to improve my English skills. I love listening to the specific pronunciation features of the Aussie accent and try to imitate them, not very well but I try

While it is commendable that Timur shows a desire and action to improving her English language skills, this is, in fact, prompted by systematic processes of racialisation and discrimination that have devalued her ‘non-nativeness’ that perpetuates global inequalities (Holliday 2006) as she says ‘my non-native English is to blame for how I feel and how I am seen by others, and that’s not fair’. Similar moves to initiate purposeful action are seen in Santoso’s statement who capitalises on his active role in taking some initiative.

When it comes to making petitions, organize activities, request meetings with the principal, I am generally the one who does it. I don’t want to come across as someone who can’t do things because of my English, or can’t go beyond the boundaries, so this is a way of challenging the established boundaries (Santoso)

Santoso's proactive role in initiating tasks, coordinating events, and pushing against established boundaries showcases a distinct agentic position in opposition to constraints set by societal norms. Engaging in activities that involve petitioning and organizing reflects a conscious effort to challenge the status quo as he navigates the ‘native-speakerism’ ideology (Tao and Gao 2021), potentially resisting racialisation through assertive actions.

I have to say that I don’t really do much any more. I want to be accepted as I am not by what I do, which can be really tiring. I used to be super unnaturally friendly to fit in but now I am who I am (Eka)

In Eka's quote, we see a teacher reacting against practices of racialisation by asserting her agency in defining her own identity and boundaries. Eka expresses a shift away from performing behaviours that conform to societal expectations of her race or ethnicity. By stating, ‘I want to be accepted as I am not by what I do’, Eka rejects the pressure to conform to stereotypes or expectations imposed by others (Kubota and Lin 2009). Instead, they prioritise authenticity and self-acceptance, suggesting a reclaiming of agency over their own identity (Tao and Gao 2021). This response can be interpreted as a form of resistance against racialisation, as Eka asserts her right to be recognised and valued for who she is rather than for how she performs according to racial stereotypes.

Whenever I have the opportunity to speak about my culture in a way that allows me to connect with people, I’m up for it. Connections are really important for me and it’s a way of presenting myself as a good ambassador to my culture (Dewi)

Similarly, we can observe in Dewi's quote a teacher’s clear attempt to exercising agency in response to practices of racialisation, but in a different manner. Dewi expresses a willingness to share aspects of her culture as a means of connecting with others and presenting themselves as a positive representative of their culture. By actively engaging in cultural exchange and emphasising the importance of connections, Dewi counters racialisation by promoting understanding, dialogue, and respect across cultural boundaries. This proactive approach allows Dewi to assert agency in shaping how her culture is perceived and understood by others, challenging stereotypes and fostering mutual appreciation and respect.

Discussion

The discussion addresses the two research questions formulated for this study in light of the theoretical theoretical lens through which the data were analysed. Multilingual Indonesian teachers in Australian schools navigate complex dynamics of racialisation and marginalisation, which manifest across all levels (i.e. micro, meso and macro) within the educational and societal systems, and through the interactions of all levels. At the micro level, the analysis of the data unveils the profound impact of discriminatory practices and discourses on non-native English-speaking teachers teaching in Australia (Nigar, Kostogriz, and Janfada 2022; Piller and Bodis 2022), particularly those responsible for teaching languages considered non-dominant, less influential or less powerful. These findings mirror the argument put forth by Von Esch, Suhanthie, and Kubota (2020) who posit that the teaching of languages along with the experiences of language learners [and teachers] are influenced by historical manifestations of racism rooted in colonial expansion.

The teachers in the study face a myriad of challenges based on their appearance, linguistic competence, and accent, which collectively shape their experiences and practices within the educational landscape. These prejudicial experiences contribute to a pervasive sense of disempowerment among these teachers, a great sense of inferiority (Lee 2021) influencing their perceived agency within the educational domain. Such diminishment of agency is deeply rooted in the pervasive influence of English monolingualism along with other normative ideologies (Flores and Rosa 2015; Subedi 2008a), which prevails as a deeply ingrained sociolinguistic phenomenon. Teachers’ conflated perceptions of their racialised identities, stemming from experiences around their accent, competence, appearance and other phenotypical attributes, aligns with Subedi’s (2008a) concepts of teacher authenticity and legitimacy. Such remarks as ‘I shut myself down in large circles’, ‘I have a weird mix of English accents’ or ‘they giggle when I speak in class’ highlight not only the complex interplay of their perceived social and cultural racialised identities but also the intricate ways in which racism operates in school environemnts. These feelings of racialisation position teachers as ‘others’ (Sinkeviciute 2020), less competent and less capable than ‘Australian’ teachers, leading to feeling that no opportunities are provided for, for instance, leadership roles.

Additionally, accent emerges as a significant determinant, directly influencing the racialised identities of these teachers and profoundly impacting their self-image and broader self-identity constructs. Testimonies from participants vividly illustrate the discriminatory experiences they face, from students’ giggles to subtle yet impactful compliments that underscore their racialised identities. These markers, both linguistic and non-linguistic, are used to establish a distance between the dominant monolingual English-speaking community and foreign-accented individuals, resulting in overt processes of othering. This aligns with ideas posed by Dovchin (2022), Dovchin and Dryden (2022) and Veliz and Véliz-Campos (2021) who highlight the detrimental ways in which non-native English-speaking individuals experience overt and covert forms of racism on the basis of their accented English.

At meso and macro levels, institutional practices and ideologies perpetuate racial hierarchies and systemic inequalities within educational institutions. Kubota and Lin (2006) pointed to the complexity of racism, cautioning against interpreting it solely as overt bigotry. They emphasised the need for a holistic perspective, highlighting how racism is deeply rooted in institutional and systemic structures of inequality. In line with this remark, one such manifestation in our study is the lack of racial and ethnic representation in leadership roles, which reflects entrenched power dynamics. This lack not only marginalises educators from the Global South but also restricts their avenues for professional growth and advancement (Veliz and Bonar 2023). Structural forms of racialisation that embody unequal access to leadership roles or discriminatory treatment in decision-making processes further compound the lived experiences of marginalisation of Indonesian teachers in Australian classrooms (Austin 2009). Furthermore, the dominance of White, monolingual principals not only invisibilises the role of and prominence of languages and cultures other than English but also perpetuates a privileged White hegemony (Rosa and Flores 2017; Piller and Bodis 2022). This systemic limitation extends beyond individual acts of discrimination, permeating organisational structures and practices. It contributes to a cycle of exclusion and reinforces hierarchies that disproportionately favour individuals from dominant groups. As a result, educators from marginalised backgrounds face barriers to accessing leadership positions, despite their qualifications and expertise. Additionally, the social status and idealisation of English and its native speakers contribute to maintaining this hegemony, thus leading to the racialisation of teachers of less powerful languages. In sum, the interaction between the participants’ individual cognition and the social realm, as proposed by the Douglas Fir Group’s framework, is evident in the social value attributed to different languages and the resulting language policies. The preference for English over less influential languages restricts participants’ agency and undermines their professional identity due to various linguistic and non-linguistic factors.

Despite these challenges, teachers show resilience and a commitment to resisting and challenging attitudes, practices and the overall systemic apparatus that perpetuates racialisation (Rosa and Flores 2017). Teachers’ resistance to ‘acts’ of racialisation manifested in their refusal to perpetuate stereotypes and biases based on racial and ethnic identities but, most importantly, through opportunities for agentic action (Maclellan 2017; Moses et al. 2020; Tao and Gao 2021). This commitment is evident in their proactive efforts to improve their language skills, not just for professional advancement but also as a means of asserting their linguistic identities and challenging language-related biases. Additionally, teachers actively involve themselves in school activities, demonstrating their dedication and commitment to participation in the school community as an avenue to be noticed, seen and valued as a staff member. It was also noted that cooking traditional food and sharing it with colleagues is not merely a culinary gesture but a deliberate act of cultural expression and an invitation for others to appreciate and embrace cultural diversity. In addition, this is an exemplary act of how agency is exercised in challenging contexts of racialisation and marginalisation. By choosing to prepare and share international food with colleagues, who may have (unwittingly) displayed subtle forms of racism or discrimination, teachers take an active role in shaping the cultural dynamics within their environment through agentic action (Tao and Gao 2021).

The findings of this study have significant implications for understanding the challenges faced by non-native English-speaking teachers of Indonesian in Australian schools. It highlights the need for greater awareness and sensitivity towards issues of racialisation and marginalisation within the teaching profession, especially concerning linguistic diversity and non-native English-speaking teachers within and across educational environments.

Concluding remarks

This study aimed to investigate how racialised identities impact multilingual Indonesian teachers’ teaching practices, pedagogical approaches, and interactions within the school community. By exploring their perceptions of racialisation and its influence on their professional roles, the research sought to uncover the strategies and mechanisms these teachers employ to assert their professional identities amidst these perceptions.

SLA research emphasises the role of context in language learning and teaching, both in instructed and naturalistic settings (Chong, Isaacs, and McKinley 2023). According to the Ecological Systems theory (Chong, Isaacs, and McKinley 2023), interactions within educational institutions are influenced by various social groups, thus reflecting power dynamics. Teachers in this study noted the dominance of White leadership positions in Australia, often favouring monolingual raciolinguistic views that marginalise non-dominant languages (Rosa and Díaz 2020).

Future research could explore the intersectionality of racialised experiences with gender, ethnicity, or cultural background in multilingual teaching contexts. Understanding these intersections and their impact on career trajectories and experiences of marginalisation would provide a deeper insight into the challenges faced by non-native English speaking teachers. Additionally, addressing systemic ideological structures perpetuating racialisation is crucial. Research focusing on societal contexts and power dynamics can uncover root causes and advocate for structural changes, promoting equity, social justice, and inclusivity.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 Number of years has been rounded up.

Appendix

Interview questions

• How long have you lived in Australia?

• How many years of experience as a language teacher (in Australian schools) do you have?

• Could you please tell me the languages you use around your household environment?

• Do you ever feel marginalized or racialized as an individual and language teacher?

• On what basis do you feel marginalized or racialized?

• Could you please tell me what physical, social, cultural, ethic or linguistic features/traits make you feel marginalized or racialized in professional contexts?

• Could you please talk about some specific contexts or situations in class or school when you feel marginalized or racialized?

• When you feel this way (marginalized or racialized) in school contexts, what do you do?

• Do you think that your experiences of racialization or marginalization in schools are likely to occur in other Australian schools? Please say why.

• In your opinion, what are some practices in schools that contribute to marginalization and racialization of nonnative language teachers?

• Do you think that your experiences of racialization or marginalization in schools are likely to occur in other contexts (daily life, politics, etc.)? Please give examples.

• Could you please share examples of activities or practices you engage in to help you navigate marginalization and racialization? Please give examples.

• What drives you to engage in these practices or activities?

• What are some of the things (relationships, resources, spaces, etc.) that you greatly value in your current teaching situation?