Introduction

Migration and human mobility are phenomena that have accompanied human

history since its very beginning with people moving from place to place in search of

better conditions. However, in the current globalized era, advanced technologies and

information networks offer people the chance to be increasingly mobile, which has led to

the formation of a diverse world. In the European Union, there are people of

approximately 200 different nationalities that reside within its borders, while in 2016

there were an estimated 2.0 million citizens of non-member countries that immigrated to

EU countries (Eurostat, 2017). Those numbers suggest a radical shift in diversity

transforming it in super-diversity (Pauwels, 2014). Super-diversity is a phenomenon in

which there is dramatic increase in the categories of migrants and refugees from many

different aspects: culture, ideologies, economic backgrounds, motives, ethnicity, origins,

itineraries of migration and of course language (Blommaert & Rampton, 2011; Vertovec,

2007). What has also increased mobility in the context of globalization is the

povertisation of people, constant conflicts and authority oppression, causing them to flee

their homelands in search of better life opportunities (Czaika & De Haas, 2014).

Mobility and super-diversity has an important impact on migrant and refugee language

learners regarding knowledge, their everyday experiences and identities and forms each

person’s linguistic needs in a unique way (Sudhershan & Bruen, 2015).

Heterogeneity in the classrooms of the host country

Migrant students in the language classroom differ from their classmates regarding

their reasons for migration, their aspirations, ideologies, economic backgrounds,

ethnicity, religion, origins, itineraries of migration, dreams, linguistic and cultural

profiles and of course their needs (Canagarajah, 2005). All of these differences do not

just linger in society but rather affect its members and their relationship in it (de Coste &

Simon). They also affect the language classrooms attended by refugees and migrants.

Migrant language classrooms are globalized ​s​ocial spaces on their own right, intensely

diverse, even more so than the societies that host them. For instance, regarding refugee

learners language learning may be impeded by the traumatic experiences they carry with

them and by abrupt dislocation ​de Costa (this issue), Wachob and Williams (this issue),

Finn (this issue), and Ollerhead (this issue),​. There are some students who have migrated

for economic and employment reasons, while others in the same classroom had to flee

due to sexual orientation ​in Nelson's article (this issue). ​There are people who have

migrated for employment and economic reasons who have priorly pertained a high level

of literacy and others who have migrated for the same reasons but might not have

acquired the most basic literacy skills ​(Krumm το κεισ σταντι). ​All of those different

affiliations, originating from different communities of practice and experiences, affect a

person’s identity and therefore the language classroom (Wells, 2007).​​To make the

endless possibilities of differences among learners transparent, I will present the case of 5

women who participated in one of Peirce’s (1995) studies: “Mai from Vietnam, Eva and

Katarina from Poland, Martina from Czechoslovakia, and Felicia from Peru” (1995,
p.13), all of whom were English language learners in Canada, so, five women who came

from four different counties. Now, regarding their social identities and motives, Eva

migrated for financial advancement and wanted to learn english for better employment

opportunities, but was facing confidence problems because clients made remarks about

her accent. Mai migrated for a better life, job security, financial independence, had

difficulty speaking with her boss. Katarina, fled from a communist and atheistic system

to invest in her professional identity and had trouble talking to anglophone professionals.

Martina,went to Canada for her children, wanted to learn English to defend her family’s

rights and failure to do so upset her. Felicia fled terrorism but felt uncomfortable

speaking English in front of other Peruvian fluent speakers of English. Given that the

heterogeneity of language learners is so profound, is placing students in the same

classroom arbitrarily, teaching them by using the same methods and content and

assessing them with the same tests and criteria an effective way of language teaching and

policy making?

Limited second language proficiency among migrants counts as a major problem

for integration and for access to services offered in migration countries (see, for example,

Cheswick & Miller 2002). Adult migrants as second language learners are a group that at

the same time as they must acquire language and communicative ability 21 must also

build a new life in a new society (see also Mathews & Aydinli 2008
 In her book Critical Pedagogies and Language Learning (2004) she goes further

and advocates the implementation of language education that can provide social justice,

and sociocultural, political, and economic changes. We constantly deal with culture as a

phenomenon connected to identity and influenced by features like nationality, gender,

age, class, ethnicity, and social background. In this complex society characterized by

diasporic existences, it is utterly significant to focus on the person who experiences

culture (Frykman & Gilje 2003,

Speaking the language of the receiving country is an important factor that defines

integration, since it is usually considered a prerequisite for one to become a member of

society (Krumm & Plutzar, 2008).

Blommaert, J., & Rampton, B. (2011). Language and super-diversity. ​Diversities, 13​(2),

1–22.

Canagarajah, A. S. (2005). Reclaiming the local in language policy and practice.

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Chiswick, B.R. & Miller, P.W. (2002) Do Enclaves Matter in Immigrant Adjustment?

IZA Discussion Paper 449, IZA, Bonn.

Mathews-Aydinli, J. (2008) ‘Overlooked and Understudied? A Survey of Current Trends

in Research on Adult English Language Learners’, Adult Education Quarterly, vol. 58,

pp. 198-213.
Norton, B. & Toohey, K. (eds) (2004) Critical Pedagogies and Language Learning.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Pauwels, A. (2014). The teaching of languages at university in the context of

super-diversity. ​International Journal of Multilingualism, 11​(3), 307–319.

Wells, G. (2007).​Who we become depends on the company we keep and on what we do

and say together. ​International Journal of Educational Research, 46(1-2), 100-103.