Focusing on Dutch-medium schools in Belgium, this book examines how the dominant presence of French in Brussels challenges Dutch immersion efforts, such as imposed Dutch-only policies aimed at protecting it as a minority language. The tensions between monolingual policies and multilingual realities create ambivalence and dilemmas for teachers, leading to inconsistent responses. Teachers simultaneously enforce, critique, and justify monolingual policies while striving to balance egalitarian pedagogy with an appreciation for multilingualism. Through linguistic-ethnographic fieldwork in five Dutch-medium schools in Brussels, author Jürgen Jaspers explores teachers’ positions and practices in navigating the challenges of teaching linguistically diverse groups of pupils.
Specifically, the author addresses the polarized perceptions of teachers on language policies and ideologies in multilingual education, which he categorized into two opposing roles: (i) teachers as agents of change/heroes who resist restrictive monolingual language policies and embrace linguistic diversity, or (ii) teachers as state agents/villains who impose monolingual rules and emphasize linguistic standardization. However, the author recognizes that many teachers do not fit neatly into one category with their behavior being ambivalent. These inconsistencies are typically overlooked or dismissed as temporary rather than fundamental ideological conflicts. The author points out that teachers hold conflicting beliefs, simultaneously valuing monolingual policies for language learning while also recognizing the benefits of multilingualism for students’ future opportunities, reflecting current educational challenges within broader sociopolitical and historical struggles over language use in Belgium.
Additionally, the author illustrates how teachers in Brussels’ Dutch-medium schools enforce monolingual policies while grappling with tensions between strict language enforcement and modern egalitarian pedagogies. Though they impose Dutch through rules and punishments, they also exhibit doubts and adaptability, often tolerating multilingual interactions when strict enforcement threatens classroom collaboration. Rather than blindly enforcing monolingualism, teachers navigate complex ideological dilemmas, balancing implicit authority with disciplinary measures. Particularly, by examining ‘monolingual habitus’, the author argues that teachers hold contradictory views on language. While they justify monolingual policies, they also critique them, drawing on multilingualism as a marker of modernity and realism. This challenges the assumption that teachers rigidly uphold monolingualism, suggesting a need to reassess the applicability of the monolingual habitus in other contexts. Additionally, the author explores how teachers enforce monolingual policies while also making space for multilingual practices. This inconsistency not only challenges the assumption that strict language policies eliminate students’ home languages, but also demonstrates that teachers deliberately use or tolerate multilingualism in their classrooms.
This book emphasizes the need to recognize and understand teachers’ rational yet inconsistent responses to classroom challenges, urging researchers to adapt accordingly. The author calls for language-in-education research that fosters dialogue between scholars, teachers, and policymakers, avoiding the imposition of scholarly views and stressing the need for balanced engagement in policy debates. Advocating a heteroglossic approach, the author emphasizes diverse perspectives, reflexivity in research, and the significance of social change and knowledge-driven inquiry. The book highlights the contradictions inherent in education and scholarship, urging a more comprehensive understanding of teachers’ decisions and the complexities of language policy in multilingual classrooms.
