Paradigmatic Tensions in Translanguaging Theory and Practice in Teacher Education: Introduction to the Special Issue

Translanguaging is now well documented as both theory and practice/pedagogy (e.g., Cenoz & Gorter, 2021; Creese & Blackledge, 2010; García, 2009; García et al., 2021; García & Wei, 2014; Lin, 2019; Ossa Parra & Proctor, 2021; Otheguy et al., 2015; Paulsrud et al., 2021; Pontier et al., 2020; Sánchez & García, 2021; Tian et al., 2020). As a theory, it highlights the unique, dynamic, creative, and intelligent ways that multilinguals perform while drawing on their entire linguistic repertoire (García & Wei, 2014). As a transformative practice/pedagogy, translanguaging provides access to otherwise incomprehensible texts and oral messaging (Celic & Seltzer, 2013; Creese & Blackledge, 2010), creates and sustains possibilities for effective interaction with diverse groups of students (García et al., 2017), counters hegemonic policies and expectations of both schools and society (Gort & Pontier, 2013; Sánchez et al., 2018), mirrors the community’s languaging practices (Martin-Beltrán, 2014), and affirms marginalized students’ identities (Canagarajah, 2011; Durán & Palmer, 2014; Sayer, 2013).

Given its liberatory nature, translanguaging has been gaining traction with many critical TESOL and bilingual education scholars who draw on translanguaging in teacher education programs (Deroo & Ponzio, 2019; Robinson et al., 2018; Tian, 2020). However, preservice teachers report that the theories and practices taught in these programs are at odds with ideologies and practices in the academic settings that they observe and participate in (Pontier & Deroo, 2022; Pontier & Tian, in press), an indication that translanguaging has yet to be regularly taken up in PreK-12 classrooms (and beyond). Similarly, in-service teachers have expressed reservations toward or disagreement with instructional approaches that leverage both their own and their emergent bilingual students’ full linguistic repertoires (Martínez et al., 2015; Pontier & Ortega, 2021). We therefore recognize the critical need to focus on the role of translanguaging in teacher education.

We see teacher education as a collaborative process among multiple stakeholders, including teacher educators, pre-service teachers, and in-service teachers. In other words, it is a continuous journey on which pre-service teachers and in-service teachers are co-designers and co-learners along with teacher educators (Tian & King, in press; Tian & Shepard-Carey, 2020), and not a linear set of tasks with a finite end. As such, it serves as a bridge to bring together diverse perspectives and experiences, including unlearning and relearning to develop and engage in translanguaging stance, design, and shifts (García et al., 2017).

In an effort to help us better prepare pre-service teachers and provide professional development for in-service teachers to grapple with paradigmatic shifts in theory and pedagogy regarding working with emergent bilinguals, this special issue explores the study and use of translanguaging from university coursework to pre-service teacher clinical placements to in-service teacher development. These experiences in teacher education are presented through a focus on diversity of geography within the U.S. (New England, South Florida, Colorado, Central California), teacher backgrounds, subject area (i.e., TESOL/bilingual education, science, English language arts, and social studies), and teacher education as both formal education and professional development.

Our special issue examines how teacher educators, pre- and in-service teachers take up translanguaging theory and practice in teacher education. We specifically unpack the dynamic and complex process in which they grapple with the paradigmatic tensions between traditional monolingual-oriented second language acquisition perspectives and contemporary dynamic bilingualism approaches; we discuss the opportunities and challenges as teachers construct and negotiate their translingual-oriented identities and experiment with translanguaging practices in lesson plans and real-life classrooms that have historically mandated monolingual teaching and learning; and we highlight different ways that facilitate teachers’ development of their translanguaging stance, design, and shifts in the face of policies that do not necessarily support a flexible form of bilingualism. This special issue builds on the foundation that JLIE established in 2017 special issue “Breaking Away From The Multilingual Solitudes In Language Education: International Perspectives” guest edited by Jasone Cenoz. To implement a translanguaging pedagogy, it has been argued that teachers must adopt a translanguaging stance (García et al., 2017), which entails an investigation of teacher ideologies, including valuable baby steps (Menken & Sánchez, 2019) along the way. As such, whereas the previous special issue’s contribution highlighted the importance and necessity of translanguaging as a pedagogy, our special issue expands this topic, exploring the process of learning about, adopting, and implementing translanguaging as theory and pedagogy in teacher education.

The special issue

We strategically ordered the studies to show moments in the process of teacher education while recognizing that the process is not always linear: we begin with onsite university coursework (Tian & Zhang-Wu; Deroo, Pontier, & Tian), move to researchers working with pre-service teachers at their clinical placements (Herrera), and finish with researchers co-learning and co-designing with in-service teachers in their own classrooms (Fine). We conclude the issue with commentary from a renowned critical teacher educator, Guadalupe Valdés. Throughout the issue, since we align ourselves with the understanding that we draw on one linguistic repertoire as we engage in various communicative practices, we have purposefully chosen to display participants’ languaging as it occurred; that is, we did not ask authors to provide translations if they did not already do so in their manuscripts.

To prepare mainstream teachers to be linguistically responsive educators, Tian and Zhang-Wu infused a translanguaging perspective into a graduate-level teacher education course at a private research university in the New England area, U.S. Their integration of translanguaging, which was informed by Tian’s (2020) three-dimensional framework, not only provided pre-service content area teachers with opportunities to read and reflect upon relevant texts on the topic of translanguaging in multimodal ways (“Teaching/learning about translanguaging”), but also intentionally created spaces for them to observe and experience translanguaging practices in and after class (“Modeling translanguaging”), and encouraged them to apply bilingual theories and experiment with translanguaging strategies in lesson plan designs (“Practicing translanguaging”). Findings revealed that engaging with translanguaging from multiple entry points helped the teacher candidates grapple with the tension between different theoretical lenses to understand language and bi/multilingualism (e.g., translanguaging vs. code-switching). These pre-service teachers gradually developed an emerging translanguaging stance (García et al., 2017) where they started to adopt a dynamic, holistic view to understand bilingual students’ meaning-making practices, moving away from a bounded code view of language. They also perceived students’ home languages as a valuable resource that needs to be incorporated in classrooms to boost emergent bilinguals’ academic learning and socioemotional well-being. Moreover, these content area teachers recognized the importance of addressing bilingual students’ linguistic needs and employed a variety of translanguaging strategies (e.g., grouping based on home languages and providing translations) in their lesson plans.

Deroo, Pontier, and Tian formed a community of practice, enabling discussion of Pontier’s interactions with his students during a summer course for TESOL educators that was focused on translanguaging. Throughout their meetings, they noticed tensions in the data between SLA and a dynamic understanding of bilingualism, and they became interested in the way that Pontier, as the instructor, maneuvered these tensions and educators’ understanding of translanguaging. As such, they asked what engaging opportunities might have been provided to further support learning about translanguaging as a theory and practice of language among the course instructor and his students. After isolating instances in which engaging opportunities to further support the group of multilingual, multicultural teachers’ meaning making around translanguaging, they built small moments (i.e., reflections on an experience written as a short story about that instance) around the tensions, misunderstandings, and clarity-seeking moments happening in ongoing class discussion. They found four types of engaging opportunities: to expand and continue the co-construction of knowledge about translanguaging, to create space for teachers and students to translanguage, to engage students in clarifying inaccuracies or misunderstandings about translanguaging, and to complicate prior understandings of and socialization into language and how it works. Their findings shed light on the ways that TESOL teacher educators may navigate various interactions while engaging in class discussions that involve paradigmatic tensions (e.g., SLA v. dynamic bilingualism), and their research design provides a reflexive model for other scholars to adapt.

Herrera’s qualitative case study explores how teacher candidates negotiate intentional translanguaging spaces as part of a bilingual teacher residency program where they were placed in dual language bilingual classrooms. In so doing, she analyzes the tensions they confronted as they engaged in theoretical and pedagogical work and grew their critical bilingual literacies. She addresses the following specific questions: How do bilingual teacher candidates develop critical bilingual literacies in a bilingual teacher residency? How can teacher candidates create teaching and learning experiences that center their bilingual students’ identities and language practices? Findings revealed a multiplicity of themes, including invisibility, looking inward, embracing bilingualism, and resistance. As such, she notes the need for intentionality about the kind of teaching force we desire to support, thereby calling for a rethinking of our approach to teacher preparation. Moreover, she suggests embracing a critical bilingual literacies framework (España & Herrera, 2020) in teacher preparation to both prepare future teachers as they examine their language ideologies and the impact they have on our teaching, including an unlearning of racialized language hierarchies discouraging the more dynamic language practices of bilinguals.

Fine questions how teachers’ co-design and interpretation of translanguaging on formative assessments, particularly when teachers and students do not share the same linguistic repertoire. As such, she explores an experienced and highly qualified teacher participating in a teacher-researcher co-design collaborative focused on inviting students to draw on and deploy translanguaging in science formative assessment. Specifically, she asks how an English-dominant science teacher develops interpretive power to attend to bi/multilingual learners’ science ideas on formative assessments that welcome translanguaging. Findings show that through the use of (trans)formative assessment co-design and addressing productive tensions with Fine, the focal teacher was able to confront her own language and assessment ideologies as she moved to (co)design ongoing assessment that provided authentic and accurate information on bilingual students’ learning. As such, the teacher developed both translanguaging interpretive power and confidence around her own knowledge that expanded to include general classroom pedagogies and relationships with her bi/multilingual learners.

Future directions/recommendations for research and practice

We believe a specific focus on these paradigmatic tensions, which include differences in language ideologies, policies, and pedagogies, brings awareness to these conflicts as well as opportunities for teacher educators and teachers alike to continue to evolve in their own stances. We recognize that this is easier said than done, and the studies in this issue shed light on what makes this process of unpacking, understanding, and moving beyond tensions so difficult. They also provide ideas for moving forward, included below.

• Engaging in a collaborative, iterative process to unpack the complexity and utility of both translanguaging itself and teaching about it, especially when it encounters friction with older, more accepted perspectives, practices, and pedagogies;

• Practicing constant (and systematic) critical reflection on our experiences, beliefs, and expectations around languaging, particularly as those practices relate to racialized students;

• Introducing translanguaging in teacher education is not enough; pre-service teachers must experiment and experience translanguaging as they are introduced to it;

• Acknowledging and acting on the fact that language teachers are not enough to support bi/multilingual students; teacher education must also involve content area teachers;

• Enacting culturally sustaining pedagogy, such as use of the TTT (Topics, Text, & Translanguaging) lesson plan (España & Herrera, 2020).

Disclosure statement

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

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Ryan W. Pontier

Ryan W. Pontier is an Assistant Professor of Bilingual Education/TESOL in the Department of Teaching and Learning at Florida International University. Through a translanguaging lens, his research focuses on teachers’ language ideologies, instructional practices in support of bi/multilingual students, and the intersection of the two.

Zhongfeng Tian

Zhongfeng Tian is an Assistant Professor of TESOL/Applied Linguistics in the Department of Bicultural-Bilingual Studies at the University of Texas at San Antonio. Theoretically grounded in translanguaging, his research centers on developing equity-oriented pedagogies with pre- and in-service teachers to advance cultural and linguistic pluralism and justice in K-12 urban classrooms and beyond.