Special Issue "Worldly Orientations to Internationalising Education: Non-Western Languages, Theoretic-linguistic Tools and Modes of Critique"

A special issue of Education Sciences (ISSN 2227-7102).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (15 August 2016)

Special Issue Editor

Guest Editor
Prof. Dr. Michael Singh

ROSETE Program, School of Education, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW, Australia
Website | E-Mail
Interests: doctoral research education; METALS; pedagogies of intellectual equality; post-monolingual education; non-Western languages; non-Western theorising; non-Western modes of critiques

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

This Special Issue of Education Sciences will focus on innovative research directed at (a) institutionalising worldly orientations to internationalising education specifically through the activation, mobilisation and deployment of non-Western languages, theoretic-linguistic tools and modes of critique within (b) Anglophone Western universities which privilege and market English-only pedagogies and North Atlantic theories.

Research reporting on theoretic-pedagogical frameworks exploring the institutionalisation of worldly orientations to internationalising education in terms of the following theme are especially welcome:

  1. multilingualism, double knowing and contributing the local/global stocks of knowledge;
  2. deepening multilingual students capabilities for translanguaging versus monolingual English-only pedagogies;
  3. non-Western Higher Degree Researchers’ agency in institutionalising a worldly orientation to (internationalising) education;
  4. institutionalising post-monolingual teaching/learning given the commodification of English-only pedagogies;
  5. establishing credible grounds for non-Western theoretic-linguistic resources in the face of the commodification of North Atlantic theories;
  6. non-Western modes of critique and deficit constructions of non-Western students as uncritical;
  7. institutionalising METALS: maths, engineering, technology, art, languages, science;
  8. lessons from non-Western students’ lives and histories for institutionalising a worldly orientation to (internationalising) education;
  9. lessons from histories of transcultural knowledge exchange for institutionalising a worldly orientation to (internationalising) education;
  10. pedagogies of intellectual equality: verifying the presupposition of intellectual equality;
  11. pedagogies of intercultural divergence: Exploring the unthought through multilingual concepts;
  12. university accreditation of students’ multilingual capabilities;
  13. academic freedom and the struggle against nice white racism;
  14. non-Western Higher Degree Researchers (HDRs) choosing Anglophone Western academic doctoral educators;
  15. innovation, crossing intellectual borders, historical-social-cultural re-formation of disciplinary knowledge;
  16. innovation, crossing intellectual borders, and teaching/learning within/against disciplinary formations;
  17. refining local/global understandings and practices having contingent historical-social-cultural bases;
  18. Indigenous, and non-Western migrant and refugee HDRs’ stance and contributions to worldly orientations to internationalising education;
  19. Ethno-linguistic diversity, creativity and knowledge production

This Special Issue of Education Sciences arises out of a longitudinal research program, known as the “Research Oriented School/industry Engaged Teacher-researcher Education (ROSETE) Program in Multilingual Intercultural Education and Work.” In the ROSETE Program, HDR research education becomes the work of theoretical knowledge co-production oriented towards disciplinary change in the field of field inquiry, “a stimulant and an opportunity for professional learning” (Tran and Nguyen, 2015: 965-966). For Tange and Kastberg (2013: 4) this ‘double knowing’ (Singh and Shrestha, 2008) is an educational means for enhancing non-Western HDRs success as learners, in so far as it establishes

relations between the new information that students encounter at their host university and the insight they have obtained previously in other educational settings. In this manner, one can transform students’ indigenous knowledge from a possible barrier to the transmission of Eurocentric wisdom into alternative insights that can be identified and harvested in the classroom. Such inclusiveness works to the benefit of individual learners, who are no longer requested to marginalise earlier acquired theoretical and methodological knowledge when they arrive at a new university.

The ROSETE Program has been conducted for more than a decade at Western Sydney University where:

some PhD supervisors do such things as encourage students to engage with post-colonial theory, with debates about the geopolitics of globalization and the implications for knowledge production, circulation and consumption, and with the research and theorizing of scholars from their home country and region. And, of course, some research students are particularly agential and seek to resist the intellectual practices we have referred to [as English-only and Western-centric]” (Zhang, Chan and Kenway, 2015: 2).

Importantly, as Tran and Nguyen (2015: 965-966) report that “mutual learning occurs at the intersection of knowledge co-construction – the ‘intellectual equality’ zone.” The focus of the ROSETE Program is the innovative enactment and investigation of a worldly orientation to internationalising education through having non-Western Higher Degree Researchers (HDRs) activate, mobilise and deploy non-Western languages, theoretic-linguistic tools and modes of critique in Anglophone Western universities:

the University of Western Sydney project is directed towards the development of ‘Australia–Asia modes of theorising’ … they explore how diverse, non-Western thought can advance ‘anglophone, Euro-American education’ and its internationalization (Zhang, Chan and Kenway, 2015: 9).

Speaking of the ROSETE Program, Takayama (2014: 8) notes that

recent educational scholarship in Australia rejects the conventional view of non-Western regions of the world as ‘simply producers of data for the theory mills of the North’ and instead conceptualizes them as epistemic—as opposed to empirical—others with whom to challenge the ‘epistemic ignorance’ of the West.

Despite rhetoric claiming the internationalisation of Anglophone Western-centric universities, academics “continue to report the same kinds of difficulties and ‘pedagogical uncertainties’ with teaching international students that were reported over a decade ago” (Ryan, 2011: 637). Likewise, non-Western international students continue “to report dissatisfaction with aspects of teaching and learning … and [still] lecturers teaching them continue to complain about the skills that international students lack” (Ryan, 2011: 639). What are the challenges to worldly orientations to internationalising education posed by:         

  1. Anglophone Western-centric universities
  2. Bourdieuan inequalities
  3. etc.

Choy, Li and Singh (2015: 173) recognise “that marginalization of non-Western theories in doctoral study constraints efforts to investigate any global dynamics of knowledge flows.” Thus, the warrant “for new knowledge paradigms and mindsets” for internationalising education (Ryan, 2011: 644).

Prof. Dr. Michael Singh
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All papers will be peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Education Sciences is an international peer-reviewed open access quarterly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Published Papers (9 papers)

View options order results:
result details:
Displaying articles 1-9
Export citation of selected articles as:

Editorial

Jump to: Research, Review

Open AccessEditorial Multilingual Researchers Internationalizing Monolingual English-Only Education through Post-Monolingual Research Methodologies
Educ. Sci. 2017, 7(1), 29; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci7010029
Received: 14 February 2017 / Revised: 16 February 2017 / Accepted: 16 February 2017 / Published: 21 February 2017
PDF Full-text (171 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
The argument advanced in this Special Issue of Education Sciences favors democratizing knowledge production and dissemination across the humanities and social sciences through the mainstreaming of multilingual researchers capabilities for theorizing using their full linguistic repertoire. An important contribution of the papers in
[...] Read more.
The argument advanced in this Special Issue of Education Sciences favors democratizing knowledge production and dissemination across the humanities and social sciences through the mainstreaming of multilingual researchers capabilities for theorizing using their full linguistic repertoire. An important contribution of the papers in this Special Issue is the promise that post-monolingual research methodology holds for collaborative projects among multilingual and monolingual researchers that tap into intercultural divergences across languages. Together these papers give warrant to multilingual researchers, including Higher Degree Researchers develop their capabilities for theorizing using their full linguistic repertoire, an educational innovation that could be of immense benefit to scholars working predominantly monolingual universities. Through their thought provoking papers presented in this Special Issue, these researchers invites those working in the education sciences to seriously consider the potential benefits of multiplying the intellectual resources used for theorizing that is possible through activating, mobilizing and deploying researchers’ multilingual resources in knowledge production and dissemination. Full article

Research

Jump to: Editorial, Review

Open AccessArticle Re-Imagining Asian Religious Identity: Towards a Critical Pedagogy of Religion and Race in Australian Schools
Educ. Sci. 2017, 7(2), 49; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci7020049
Received: 26 October 2016 / Revised: 20 March 2017 / Accepted: 7 April 2017 / Published: 25 April 2017
Cited by 1 | PDF Full-text (220 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
This paper is drawn from a research project that investigates the relationship between teachers’ understanding of the religious identity of Asian background students, and recent Australian curriculum initiatives focused on religion and religious identification. Based on responses from an Australia-wide survey, and follow-up
[...] Read more.
This paper is drawn from a research project that investigates the relationship between teachers’ understanding of the religious identity of Asian background students, and recent Australian curriculum initiatives focused on religion and religious identification. Based on responses from an Australia-wide survey, and follow-up interviews from teachers and principals in several Australian states, the project examined the ways that Australian teachers understand, respond to and talk about the religious identities of their students, and the implications of these demands for teacher practice and education. This paper is concerned with the findings from the interview phase that for a significant number of teachers, notions of religion were often elided with culture and race, and often subsumed by broader notions of a nominal ‘white’ Australian culture. Research conversations appeared framed by an often Christian perspective and sense of self, as opposed to a putative and Asian religious and cultural other. We argue that a better understanding of the ways that teachers participate in discourses of representations about Asian religious identities negotiated by Australian diasporic communities has direct implications for the refinement of policy and for teacher professional learning. In the light of our findings, we further argue that there is a need for curriculum, teachers and researchers to move beyond an understanding of culture and identity that is based on monolingual, monocultural and Anglocentric perspectives that frame the foreign as the ‘exotic’ other, and define it through references to limited, tokenistic artefacts of culture, which are reinforced by iconic use of language to talk about culture, religion and identity. Full article
Open AccessArticle Post-Monolingual Research Methodology: Multilingual Researchers Democratizing Theorizing and Doctoral Education
Educ. Sci. 2017, 7(1), 28; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci7010028
Received: 29 September 2016 / Accepted: 25 January 2017 / Published: 20 February 2017
Cited by 1 | PDF Full-text (593 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
This paper reports on the ground-breaking research in the study of languages in doctoral education. It argues for democratizing the production and dissemination of original contributions to knowledge through activating and mobilizing multilingual Higher Degree Researchers’ (HDRs) capabilities for theorizing through them using
[...] Read more.
This paper reports on the ground-breaking research in the study of languages in doctoral education. It argues for democratizing the production and dissemination of original contributions to knowledge through activating and mobilizing multilingual Higher Degree Researchers’ (HDRs) capabilities for theorizing through them using their full linguistic repertoire. This paper contributes to this study’s development of post-monolingual research methodology which provides a theoretic-pedagogical framework for multilingual HDRs (a) to use their full linguistic repertoire in their research; (b) to develop their capabilities for theorizing and (c) to construct potentially valuable theoretical tools using metaphors, images, concepts and modes of critique. This paper is based on a longitudinal program of collaborative research whereby monolingual Anglophone and multilingual HDRs jointly developed their capabilities for theorizing through producing Anglo-Chinese analytical tools, and the associated pedagogies for using their languages in doctoral research. This longitudinal research program has been undertaken in the field of doctoral education to further a defining feature of democracy, namely linguistic diversity. This research has been conducted with the aims of promoting the multilingualism of Australian universities and activating linguistic communities of scholars to use their full linguistic repertoire in their research. The main finding arising from this program of research has been the development of post-monolingual research methodology which (a) uses the divergences within and between languages to undertake theorizing and (b) in co-existence with the tensions posed by monolingualism, especially the insistence on using extant theories available in only one language. Doctoral pedagogies of intellectual/racial equality provide multilingual HDRs with insights into the debates about the geopolitics governing the use of languages in the production and dissemination of theoretical knowledge and the capabilities for theorizing. Often, from an English-only monolingual mindset, difference and divergence are seen as a recipe for deficits and dissonance. However, this paper challenges such mistaken beliefs by showing that multilingual HDRs can deepen and extend their capabilities for theorizing by using their own linguistic repertoires. Post-monolingual research methodology is to be of enormous benefit to multilingual researchers and scholars engaged in intellectual labor in predominantly English-only monolingual universities. Full article
Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle Sàng khôn as A Theorizing Tool in Mobility Education
Educ. Sci. 2017, 7(1), 26; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci7010026
Received: 3 November 2016 / Revised: 25 January 2017 / Accepted: 25 January 2017 / Published: 8 February 2017
PDF Full-text (267 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
The current virtual and physical mobility of humans, ideas, knowledge and epistemologies has major implications for education, especially in settings where English is seen as the default medium of instruction. While diversity is inherent in mobility, English-only pedagogy is a denial of the
[...] Read more.
The current virtual and physical mobility of humans, ideas, knowledge and epistemologies has major implications for education, especially in settings where English is seen as the default medium of instruction. While diversity is inherent in mobility, English-only pedagogy is a denial of the richness and potential of diverse resources learners bring with them through their mobility. This paper reports a philosophical stance and pedagogical practices employed by a lecturer in English language education at an Australian university. It argues that students’ full linguistic resources and epistemologies, known as sàng khôn, contribute to their agency and can be used as tools to theorise new knowledge in the context of their mobility education. Full article
Open AccessArticle A Dui Hua (对话) Standpoint to Multilingual Educational Theorizing
Educ. Sci. 2017, 7(1), 24; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci7010024
Received: 26 September 2016 / Revised: 17 January 2017 / Accepted: 31 January 2017 / Published: 7 February 2017
PDF Full-text (796 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
New forms of intellectual inequality have become evident with the internationalisation of higher degree researchers (HDRs) education, in particular theoretical dominance and dependency. However, the linguistically and theoretically based inequalities associated with local/global currents of standardized monolingual English HDRs education are gradually opening
[...] Read more.
New forms of intellectual inequality have become evident with the internationalisation of higher degree researchers (HDRs) education, in particular theoretical dominance and dependency. However, the linguistically and theoretically based inequalities associated with local/global currents of standardized monolingual English HDRs education are gradually opening up to scholarly debates. In the field of education, bilingual HDRs have the potential disposition, and some have the capabilities for multilingual theorizing. Some make use of their knowledge of more than one language to extend the possibilities for theorizing educational phenomena or otherwise naming and making sense of problems. This multilingual theorizing may provide another path to transform the problems with uniformized, Anglophone HDRs education. With this concern, this paper reconsiders the universalisation of Euro-American theories through their embodiment in monolingual English in HDR education. A Dui Hua (对话) standpoint to other languages and theoretical knowledge is outlined and debated to highlight the divergences of languages and thoughts. Thus this paper probes into the possibilities of multilingual educational theorizing, whereby bilingual HDRs generate original conceptual tools that benefit the wider educational research community. Full article
Open AccessArticle Divergence of Languages as Resources for Theorizing
Educ. Sci. 2017, 7(1), 23; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci7010023
Received: 29 September 2016 / Revised: 24 January 2017 / Accepted: 24 January 2017 / Published: 4 February 2017
PDF Full-text (574 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
This paper investigates the potential of conceptual divergences within and between languages for providing intellectual resources for theorizing. Specifically, it explores the role of multilingual researchers in using the possibilities of the plurality of intellectual cultures and languages they have access to for
[...] Read more.
This paper investigates the potential of conceptual divergences within and between languages for providing intellectual resources for theorizing. Specifically, it explores the role of multilingual researchers in using the possibilities of the plurality of intellectual cultures and languages they have access to for theorizing International Service Learning (ISL). In doing so, this investigation of conceptual divergence within/between languages shows how it is possible for multilingual researchers to extend their capabilities for theorizing; to bring forward possibilities for theorizing ISL in languages other than English; and to potentially bring new perspectives to a field of enquiry which lays claim to being “international”. The process of developing the capability for theorizing begins by exploring the divergence in languages of key concepts. In this instance, the analysis focuses on the English concept of “service learning” which is rendered in Tiếng Việt (i.e., Vietnamese language) as học tập phục vụ cộng đồng. The analysis of the conceptual divergence represented by these Tiếng Việt concepts opens up insights into ways of developing the capabilities that multilingual researchers have for theorizing. In effect, this paper contributes to the knowledge about the options multilingual researchers have for using their full linguistic repertoire for the purpose of theorizing. The study has significant implications for multilingual education, multilingual research and theorizing ISL in universities which privilege English-only monolingualism. Full article
Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle Debating the Capabilities of “Chinese Students” for Thinking Critically in Anglophone Universities
Educ. Sci. 2017, 7(1), 22; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci7010022
Received: 26 September 2016 / Revised: 18 January 2017 / Accepted: 24 January 2017 / Published: 4 February 2017
PDF Full-text (431 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
There are media and research reports of international students from the People’s Republic of China as being deficient in the capabilities for thinking critically. This paper argues for a shift in the frame for researching their critical thinking, moving the focus from the
[...] Read more.
There are media and research reports of international students from the People’s Republic of China as being deficient in the capabilities for thinking critically. This paper argues for a shift in the frame for researching their critical thinking, moving the focus from the ethno-national label of “Chinese students” to “multilingual students” and their full linguistic repertoire. This opens up possibilities for exploring definitions of modes of critical thinking in Zhongwen (the official language of China) and English, and the importance of critical thinking in higher education in Australia, China and elsewhere. Attention then turns to constructions of “Chinese students” as uncritical, with explanations for their learning deficit including poor English language proficiency, lack of relevant knowledge, inappropriate assessment and deficiencies in China’s educational system. This paper concludes by suggesting research into post-monolingual education may find a theoretic-pedagogical framework that sees multilingual students use their full linguistic repertoire to develop modes of critical thinking while dealing with the tensions posed by English-only monolingual education. Full article
Open AccessArticle Trans-Cultural, Trans-Language Practices: Potentialities for Rethinking Doctoral Education Pedagogies
Educ. Sci. 2017, 7(1), 19; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci7010019
Received: 25 October 2016 / Revised: 13 December 2016 / Accepted: 10 January 2017 / Published: 21 January 2017
PDF Full-text (217 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Over the last decade, there has been a rapid increase in doctoral enrolments of Asian international students in Australian universities. While policies have been developed to meet the needs of these students, there seems to be some confusion around the terms internationalisation, globalisation,
[...] Read more.
Over the last decade, there has been a rapid increase in doctoral enrolments of Asian international students in Australian universities. While policies have been developed to meet the needs of these students, there seems to be some confusion around the terms internationalisation, globalisation, bi-cultural, inter-cultural, multi-cultural, and trans-cultural within these policies. In this paper, we define these terms and advocate for a policy position which orients to a futurist definition of culture. We then review the work of Michael Singh and his research team at Western Sydney University who have responded to this rapid increase in Asian international student doctoral enrolments in Australian universities by developing pedagogic principles around notions of trans-language and trans-cultural practices. In the final section of the paper, we then draw on our own experiences of doctoral supervision in Australian universities to reflect on our positioning within the pedagogic principles around trans-language and trans-cultural practices. Full article

Review

Jump to: Editorial, Research

Open AccessReview Conceptualising Multilingual Capabilities in Anglophone Higher Degree Research Education: Challenges and Possibilities for Reconfiguring Language Practices and Policies
Educ. Sci. 2016, 6(4), 39; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci6040039
Received: 27 September 2016 / Revised: 11 November 2016 / Accepted: 16 November 2016 / Published: 24 November 2016
PDF Full-text (221 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
In a context of the internationalisation of Higher Education (HE) driven by the high mobility of international Higher Degree Research candidates (HDRs), it is important to consider the value of HDRs’ multilingual capabilities for their learning and making of original contributions to knowledge.
[...] Read more.
In a context of the internationalisation of Higher Education (HE) driven by the high mobility of international Higher Degree Research candidates (HDRs), it is important to consider the value of HDRs’ multilingual capabilities for their learning and making of original contributions to knowledge. This article reports on a literature study regarding conceptualisations of multilingualism and multilingual capabilities, together with multilingualism in university research education practices and policies. Key themes to emerge from the literature include divergent understandings of languages, multilingualism, and multilingual capabilities. For example, a ‘static’ language construct provides a structuralist lens through which multilingual HDRs are viewed as an accumulation of monolinguals, whereas a ‘dynamic’ language construct informs a socially and culturally constructed linguistic space where the multilingual resources of HDRs are valued. These divergences are manifested in the language-as-problem orientation and language-as-resource orientation in anglophone universities’ HDR education policies. Informed by empirical evidence of leveraging multilingual capabilities in original contributions to knowledge, this article argues that it is urgent for pertinent stakeholders in HDR education to reconfigure language practices and policies in the HDR educational context. In doing so, the voices of HDRs would be able to leverage multilingual capabilities in their research instead of being treated as deficient English learners. Full article
Back to Top