18017742 – Jeremy Odang-Rohan

Diversity, Social Justice, and Learning – Assessment 1: Language and Culture

A child’s life is linked to place, where they went to school and where they’re growing up will

always be part of their lives, though it shouldn’t shape their life chances or predetermine who

they wish to be, and their future achievements. Too often do we see a child’s chances in life

become limited by social exclusion and inequality in schooling, often linked to the place

they’re associated with. Language and culture has become a social justice issue that has

influenced this acceptance of ‘shaping’ children’s lives in the educational setting based on

their link to place, often impacting a student’s experiences and outcomes.

Examining language and culture as a social justice in schools reveals issues of social

exclusion and inequality for students with a language background other than English

(LBOTE). Social exclusion refers to exclusion from a social system and its privileges, mainly

affecting those from a minority social group and this could lead to an inequality of resources,

assistance, freedom of choice and expression, provided to students therefore limiting their

educational experience. Further examination shows these issues are due to educational

policies, forces in power and the influence of equity and access and monolingualism that

require further explanation.

Bourdieu’s theory of habitus, capital and field assist in explaining and addressing this social

justice issue in education. His concern is “directed at the manifestation of inequality within

educational discourses, policies and pedagogies” (Ferfolja, Diaz, & Ullman, 2015, p.28)

which are apparent towards LBOTE students. Using his theory, social exclusion and

inequality are explored further in relation to policies, discourses and pedagogies featured in

schools. To address the issues of language and culture in schools for an entire community,
Greater Western Sydney will be used through a place-based approach to further explain

issues Australian schools and students are facing in an educational setting. According to the

2016 Australian Census, 42% of people spoke a language other than English at home in the

Greater Western Sydney region, making it one of the largest diverse and ethnic regions in

NSW (Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils, 2016). Due to this demographic,

GWS is a reliable region to discuss the issues of language and culture in schools for Australia

as a whole.

To provide background on the significance of linguistic and cultural diversity, Diaz states

“Australia’s cultural and linguistic diversity is of national significance and this forms the

basis of what is currently Australia’s social policy of multiculturalism” (Diaz, 2015, p. 122).

Despite being a multicultural country, our division in language and culture is produced by

viewing English as linguistic currency. Diaz further believes “this global contemporary

context, everyday economic, social, cultural and linguistic practices do not escape the

influences of globalisation,” (Diaz, 2015, p. 122) rather influencing why social exclusion and

inequality are featured in education as globalisation has seen the value of bi/multilingualism

increased creating a greater expectation for all students to develop effective communication

skills for future success. This is discouraging for LBOTE students who may have minimal

background in English or Western culture, creating additional pressure and inequality in

classrooms. Sydney Morning Heralds article ‘A nation lost in translation’ (2011), discusses

failures in encouraging students to learn a second language in schools, arguing Australian

may be multicultural, though English remains the dominant language spoken and taught in

schools, with focus intensifying. Bourdieu’s theory of capital, specifically social capital, ties

in with the expectation to develop higher literacy skills in English.

Social capital is seen as profitable social connections which may result in the transfer into

economic capital (money and property rights) (Huppatz, 2015, p. 173). To develop profitable
social connections, proficient language skills are required to create connections, otherwise a

language barrier could prevent this from occurring. Taking Australia’s geographical location,

our connections with the Asian region are examples of how social capital can result in

economic gains. Developing strong and successful connections with our neighbouring

countries are beneficial, however, this appears to be a hinderance for LBOTE who are

pressured to gain higher English proficiency skills, in addition are required to learn another

language to fit the need for social capital, resulting in more pressure to learn two additional

languages in comparison to fellow peers who have English speaking backgrounds learning

one. Furthermore, according to the NSW Department of Education’s Curriculum Policy

Standards, the combined NESA and department minimum requirements for all government

schools in NSW when providing curriculum for years 7-10 includes 100 hours in a

continuous one-year period for Language (NSW Department of Education, 2016). Despite

Bourdieu’s theory of social capital, the requirement to learn an additional language is still

present amongst NSW government schools, displaying how curriculum and policy can create

inequality for LBOTE students by learning additional languages.

Monolingualism in schools contributes greatly towards language and culture is in schools and

regions today. Arguments on monolingualism state it needs to be unlearnt, as a monolingual

view of learning and education in general is mediated through the lens of one language and

culture; that this mindset is due to a focus on language for trade, seeing policy driven by

economic imperatives and languages subsumed with English language and literacy (Scarino,

2014, p. 301; Cruickshank, 2014, p. 42). Viewing education through a monolinguist mindset

limits the students to shape their own home language and cultural identity by imposing fixed

pedagogies in education. We see monolingualism create marginalisation on LBOTE students

they’re unable to communicate effectively to standards set by policy makers. Tange &

Kastberg (2011) discuss this problem and believe that “international students are often
perceived as ‘empty vessels’” (p. 3) due to their deficiencies in English, resulting in an often-

forced marginalisation of their knowledge systems, and to assimilate to an ethno-centric form

of Euro-American learning. Bilingual student’s former knowledge is often disregarded,

“children’s and youth’s experiences of growing up with more than one language and

negotiating more than one identity are often silenced” (Diaz, 2015, p. 123). Bourdieu’s theory

of cultural capital reflects on this marginalisation, stating cultural capital “constitutes various

forms of linguistic capital, including various language resources that make up the different

human dispositions that influence the way we act, think and carry out our daily lives”

(Ferfolja, et al., 2015, p.28). LBOTE students fail to develop cultural capital in schools

adequately as they’re expected to act, think, and carry out their daily lives in a certain way

according to Western cultural expectations, limiting their choices and chances in life due to

an acceptance of their link to place.

Taking the Cook Island Maori Language School, located south-west Sydney, they focus on

cultural activities in class and teach Rarotongan (Cook Island Maori), operating on Saturday

mornings, though when conducting interviews, there was a concern that their language and

culture had been suppressed or lost (Cruickshank, 2014, p. 45,56). These concerns stem from

the monolingual mindsets students face in day schools, creating conflictions within a

student’s social field. Bourdieu has concerns with production power in fields, believing

“those who construct the field have the greatest power within that field” (D’warte, 2015, p.

2014). It appears those who created educational policies and pedagogies have the power to

shape a child’s life, though contradicting the aims set in Multicultural Education Policy. For

example, “1.3 – Schools ensure inclusive teaching practices which recognise and respect the

cultural, linguistic, and religious backgrounds of all students and promote an open and

tolerant attitude towards cultural diversity, different perspectives on world views,” (NSW

DoE, 2016) is contradicted as monolingualism fails to ensure inclusive teaching pedagogies

in language diversity, and marginalisation fails to promote an openness to different

perspectives on world views.

Another great disadvantage LBOTE students face are achieving high results in their

NAPLAN examinations as English literacy skills have not fully developed in comparison to

fellow peers. There is a misrecognition for LBOTE students in national testing, often

categorising them as whether the students and parents speak an additional language other

than English at home (Lingard, Creagh,& Vass, 2012). National testing fails to take into

consideration the possibility that LBOTE students may be at different levels of proficiency in

English literacy, or how some students in the category are from “middle-class, highly

educated, entrepreneurial migrants” (p.322) who are bi/multilingual, and others are possibly

from refugee backgrounds with no former educational experience. Due to the poor data on

LBOTE students, the overall performance of the school can be affected, resulting in a trickle-

down effect on “funding allocation, teacher professional development and classroom

pedagogy that could work against the ongoing provision of essential ESL/EAL programmes”

(Lingard, et al. 2012, p. 324). In addition, “increasing pressure is being place on students and

teachers to demonstrate evidence of English language and literacy proficiency in very short

time frames,” (D’warte, 2015, p. 200) pressuring LBOTE students to perform well, with the

possibility of being blamed for school results, resulting in social exclusion.

To further expand on educational inequality in the Greater Western Sydney region,

educational access needs examination. From NAPLAN, we see that examinations and results

play a crucial role in the distribution of resources through unreliable data, impacting student

outcomes. By categorising LBOTE students, a “lack of redistributive funding to ensure

inclusion and equality of educational opportunity, especially for recently arrived refugee and

asylum seekers” (Lingard, et al. 2012, p. 324) occurs creating inequality between students

and schools who require the resources in needed communities. To illustrate unreliability, data
from the My Schools website on GWS schools displays a general view of them falling on the

bottom quarter, despite the percentage difference of LBOTE students they have. Schools like

Chester Hill High School, who received news coverage for their “Refugee Welcome

Program,” helping refugees transition into Australian life with its Intensive English Centre

(IEC) fall into the bottom quarter according to the 2017 NAPLAN results, with 61% in the

quarter (Connellan, 2017; MySchool, 2018). Despite rooting themselves into the community

to form connections, which displays social inclusion, an accurate source of information

providing proper allocation of resources is unavailable, and using NAPLAN to assist in

allocation still creates the unequal distribution of resources as it fails to consider the

capabilities of each student, their language proficiency levels, knowledge systems or

difference in students with English speaking backgrounds who may have low English literacy

capabilities themselves. The NSW Department of Education’s Multicultural Plan 2016-2018

also state a specific aim for multicultural education is to “support the specific needs of our

LBOTE students,” (NSW DoE, 2016, p. 2) though fails to achieve this through its focus on

national standardized testing as accurate.

We see the effects of this language and culture social justice issue effecting the educational

environment all Australian students face, including schools in Greater Western Sydney.

Bourdieu’s theory of habitus, capital and field allow a deeper analysis into why this issue is

occurring, how its unfolding and what the outcomes are for students. Monolingualism and

standardised testing, paired with social and economic capital gains are created by people in

power through policies and pedagogies that students are exposed to in their daily school lives.

Effects such as marginalisation and poor resources allocation due to inaccurate standardised

testing results create social exclusion and inequality for students, especially LBOTE who are

at more risk of experiencing these through a suppression of the language and culture, pressure

to learn high proficient English literacy skills, and inability to share their funds of knowledge,
contradicting policies aimed to achieve the opposite. A student’s place of living or schooling

is often accepted as a determining factor for life chances, though this predetermined

restriction placed on them requires revision and reversal. What is required is a reflection on

student habitus, to consider “identity, agency and power” as constructs in literacy learning, to

acquire an appropriation of ideas and to hear the students’ needs and voices, especially

LBOTE students with minimal exposure to English literacy and Western culture, and let them

lead an understanding of how identities are shaped, and to shape “social and cultural contexts

of school literacy learning,” (D’warte, 2015, p. 208) allowing the students to shape their own

life chances, to be construct the field and have power within it.
Referencing:

Connellan, M. (2017). Schools ‘crucial’ program helps refugee students transition into their
new lives in Australia. Retrieved from https://www.sbs.com.au/news/sbs-world-
news/article/2017/09/13/schools-crucial-program-helps-refugee-students-transition-their-
new-lives
Cruickshank, K., (2014). Exploring the -lingual Between Bi and Mono: Young people and
Their Languages in an Australian Context. In Conteh, J., & Merier, G. (Eds.), The
Multilingual Turn in Languages Education (pp. 41-63). Channel View Publications.
Diaz, C.J., (2015). Chapter 7 Silences in growing up bi/multilingual in multicultural
globalised societies: Educators’, families’, and children’s views of negotiating languages,
identity and difference in childhood. Understanding Sociological Theory For Educational
Practices (pp. 121-138). Melbourne, VIC: Cambridge University Press.
D’warte, J. (2015). Chapter 12 Reflections on language and literacy: Recognising what young
people know and can do. Understanding Sociological Theory For Educational Practices (pp.
199-215). Melbourne, VIC: Cambridge University Press.
Ferfolja, T., Diaz, C.J., Ullman, J., (2015). Chapter 1 The unseen half: Theories for
educational practices. Understanding Sociological Theory For Educational Practices (pp. 28-
38). Melbourne, VIC: Cambridge University Press.
Huppatz, K. (2015). Chapter 10 Social class and the classroom: A reflection on the role of
schooling and mothering in the production and reproduction of disadvantage and privilege.
Understanding Sociological Theory For Educational Practices (pp. 169-184). Melbourne,
VIC: Cambridge University Press.
Lingard, B., Creagh, S., & Vass, G. (2012). Education policy as numbers: data categories and
two Australian cases of misrecognition. Journal of Education Policy, 27(3), 315-333.
doi:10.1080/02680939.2011.605476
MySchool. (2018). Chester Hill High School. Retrieved from
https://myschool.edu.au/school/41577
NSW Department of Education. (2016). Multicultural Education Policy. Retrieved from
https://education.nsw.gov.au/policy-library/policies/multicultural-education-policy
NSW Department of Education. (2016). Multicultural Plan 2016-2018. Retrieved from
https://education.nsw.gov.au/media/schools-operation/Multicultural-Plan-2016-18.pdf
NSW Department of Education. (2016). Policy Standards for Curriculum Planning and
Programming, Assessing and Reporting to Parents K-12. Retrieved from
https://education.nsw.gov.au/policy-library/associated-documents/policystandards161006.pdf
Scarino, A. (2014). Situating the challenges in current languages education policy in
Australia – unlearning monolingualism. International Journal of Multilingualism. 11(3). 289-
306. doi: 10.1080/14790718.2014.921176.
Tange, H., Kastberg, P. (2011). Coming to terms with ‘double knowing’: an inclusive
approach to international education. International Journal of Inclusive Education. 1-14. doi:
10.1080/13603116.2011.580460.
The Sydney Morning Herald. (2011). A nation lost in translation. Retrieved from
https://www.smh.com.au/education/a-nation-lost-in-translation-20110206-1aifl.html
Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils. (2016). Greater Western Sydney Region
Language spoken at home. Retrieved from
https://profile.id.com.au/wsroc/language?WebID=200