Language, Culture and Identity in Two Chinese Community Schools

More than One Way of Being Chinese?

Sara Ganassin

• Publisher: Multilingual Matters
• Year: 2020
• Print ISBN: 9781788927222
• eBook ISBN: 9781788927246
• Topic: Languages & Linguistics
• Subtopic: Sociolinguistics
• Index: Languages & Linguistics

This book investigates the social, political and educational role of community language education in migratory contexts. It draws on an ethnographic study that investigates the significance of Mandarin-Chinese community schooling in Britain as an intercultural space for those involved. To understand the interrelation of 'language', 'culture' and 'identity', the book adopts a 'bricolage' approach that brings together a range of theoretical perspectives. This book challenges homogenous and stereotypical constructions of Chinese language, culture and identity– such as the image of Chinese pupils as conformist and deferent learners – that are often repeated both in the media and in academic discussion.

1 Introduction

Migrant and ethnic minority communities in different parts of the world have dedicated resources to setting up schools that, alongside mainstream ones, provide children with learning opportunities particularly designed to maintain diverse and often underrepresented heritages and languages. In the UK, as in other parts of the world, community schools are sites, not only where migrant and minority languages and cultures are taught to new generations, but where discourses of language and culture are used to preserve and foster a sense of identity.

Previous studies have demonstrated how community language schools represent linguistically and culturally varied educational spaces, offering an alternative to the monolingual and monocultural orientation of the mainstream education system (Creese, 2009; Li & Wu, 2008), and how they also help pupils to resist ethnic categories and social stereotypes associated with static identity markers (Creese & Blackledge, 2012). They have also argued that these schools represent an important social context for developing the identities of the children attending them (e.g. Archer et al., 2010; He, 2006; Li & Wu, 2009). In proposing areas for further research, Li and Wu (2009: 196) suggested that ‘the impact this specific context has on the children’s identity development is an issue worth further investigation.’

Overall, community schooling is increasingly acknowledged as a resource for a whole society, in an increasingly globalised world (Wang, 2017). At the same time, although community schools have attracted public debate in the UK in relation to the government’s involvement in educational management, few studies have attempted to critique and examine these schools’ populations, policies and practices (Li & Wu, 2009; Li & Zhu, 2014). The value of these schools to the local community where they are situated is also largely unexplored. It is that lacuna that this study seeks to address.

Aims of the Book

Located in the field of intercultural studies, with a particular focus on interculturality and language education, this book investigates the social, political and educational role of community language education in migratory contexts. At the same time, the book is located more specifically within the growing international interest in Chinese language education, ‘Chinese culture’, and Chinese people and communities including migrants.

This book draws on an empirical study that investigated the significance of Mandarin-Chinese community schooling in England. The book has a strong ethnographic focus where personal experiences and participation of both researched and researcher shape the narrative. Pupils’ and adults’ perspectives are illustrated both in the context of the teaching and learning taking place in the classrooms and in the broader social context of the schools, as they interact with others in the schools and with me, the researcher.

Overall, this book adopts a ‘bricolage’ approach – discussed in Chapter 8 – that brings together a range of theoretical perspectives including theories and literature in the areas of intercultural education, communication and socio- and applied linguistics to contribute to theoretical discussions in the areas of language, culture and identity and to the significance of these in relation to the phenomenon of intercultural language education. It also seeks to challenge homogeneous and stereotypical constructions of Chinese language, culture and identity – such as the image of Chinese pupils as conformist and deferent learners – that have often been supported by academic and media attention. The topics that the book explores are relevant to current debates – particularly in the UK and in the USA – on migration, and migrant and minority education and inclusion.

Two main arguments are developed in the book. First, by providing an account of pupils’, parents’, and educators’ lived experiences of community schooling, it demonstrates how community schools are linguistically and culturally varied spaces where those involved construct concepts of language, culture and identity that are both informed by their life trajectories and ideologically charged. Such complexity needs to be dealt with in research in order to understand the importance of the schools, not only for the communities that are involved in them, but also for the wider host society.

Second, by exploring the diversity of the school population, this book challenges the view of community schools as ‘ethnic enclaves’ (e.g. Francis et al., 2009) where migrant communities seek to isolate themselves. In contrast, the book demonstrates that these schools are sites for intercultural awareness and development and, as such, are examples of good practice in community inclusion as well as valuable learning spaces for the wider community.

The Context of the Study

The phenomenon of community language education, the locus of this study, has emerged in the UK over the last 70 years as a result of collective efforts made by different migrant communities (e.g. Polish, Italian, Finnish, Greek, Somali, Iranian, Turkish and Chinese) (Li, 2006). Community schools are voluntary and self-funded organisations which usually run weekend classes or classes outside normal school hours (Li & Wu, 2008). They aim to fulfil a diverse range of purposes. Some schools have a strong orientation towards particular faiths or religions (e.g. Muslim and Jewish community schools), while others focus on supplementing the mainstream education curriculum by providing further opportunities for the exploration of culture and language-related topics (Arthur, 2003; Francis et al., 2008).

In 2016, the National Resource Centre for Supplementary Education (NRCSE) – a national strategic and support organisation for communityled supplementary schools – estimated that there were 3,000 to 5,000 such schools in England. According to the NRCSE, these schools offer educational support on language, core curriculum taught in children’s mainstream schools, faith, culture and other out-of-school activities to children also attending mainstream schools. Because of their independence from the mainstream education system, it is difficult to provide an exact estimate of the number of these schools. The NRCSE suggests that with the drop in funding available from local authorities and changes in education policy, the number of community-led supplementary schools offering language would seem to have decreased. At the same time, there has been an increase in private tuition centres offering maths and/ or English, and an increase in community-led organisations offering faith tuition.

In his review of the literature on community schooling in the UK, Li Wei (2006) divides the schools into three broad categories: (1) Afro-Caribbean schools; (2) faith schools and, in particular, Muslim schools; and (3) language schools. The first category of schools emerged in the late 1960s in the London metropolitan area. They were set up and run primarily by women from Afro-Caribbean backgrounds to improve the academic progress of their children. The schools represented a response both to poor mainstream educational provision and to the racial and linguistic discrimination experienced by Afro-Caribbean children in mainstream schools (Reay & Mirza, 2000). Faith schools are dedicated to the transmission of particular faiths or religions with additional linguistic focus (e.g. on Arabic or Hebrew) (Hewer, 2001; Miller, 2001). In the UK, the most prevalent faith schools are Muslim and Jewish community schools (Li, 2006). Finally, the category of language schools, the focus of this book, embraces all the schools set up by migrant communities to maintain and transmit their languages and cultural heritages to the younger generations (Archer et al., 2010). Currently, language community schools in the UK outnumber faith and Afro-Caribbean schools.

It should be noted how the categorisation offered by Li Wei (2006) is based on the different socio-political contexts of the schools and on their aims and objectives. In fact, Issa and Williams (2009) argue how the different categories of community schools have significant overlap. Although Afro-Caribbean, faith and language schools differ in terms of their aims and objectives, they share one common feature in that they represent a response to the failure of the mainstream education system to meet the needs of ethnic minority children and their communities (Li, 2006).

An understanding of community schools as educational spaces aimed at providing for the needs of migrant and ethnic minority children (in the case of this study, the Chinese community) contributes to and informs the rationale for this book. Although it can be argued that migrant Chinese communities do not solely exist within their community schools, these schools represent unique settings where Chinese language, culture, and identity are actively and openly fostered. Different schools have different policies, textbooks and pedagogical approaches, but a common goal in their mission statements is to teach Chinese language (primarily Cantonese and Mandarin) and transmit Chinese culture to school-aged Chinese children (Wang, 2017). The missions of the schools define them not just as educational environments but, more importantly, as self-defined cultural agents, places where Chinese language is transmitted to the younger generations and culture is preserved and can be experienced (Li & Wu, 2009). With their explicit focus on maintenance and transmission of ‘traditional’ cultures and languages, Chinese community language schools therefore represent ideal sites to investigate Chinese culture, language and identity (Francis et al., 2010; Mau et al., 2009). Chapter 2 explores in further depth the context and features of Chinese community schooling in relation to the wider phenomenon of Chinese migration.

A Contentious Definition

In the literature, community schools are also termed ‘supplementary schools’ (e.g. Reay & Mirza, 2000), or ‘complementary schools’ (e.g. Creese, 2009; Hancock, 2014; Li & Wu, 2009, 2010; Li, 2014; Li & Zhu, 2014; Martin et al., 2004), or ‘heritage language schools’ (Li & Wu, 2008). Such terminological choices not only imply a focus on different educational emphases within the schools, but also describe the nature of their relationship with the mainstream education system.

Arguments stressing the ‘supplementarity’ of the schools emphasise that they were set up to supplement teaching provided within mainstream schooling in response to criticisms that mainstream education failed to support, and even excluded, heritage language acquisition (Reay & Mirza, 2000). The term supplementary is also often used in national government and local authority documentation in different parts of the world (Maylor et al., 2010), where the schools are seen as additional to the mainstream state education system and, perhaps, as such, subordinate to them.

Studies which describe the schools as ‘complementary’ move away from the concept that the main function of the schools is supplementing educational gaps in the mainstream system (e.g. Creese et al., 2006; Hancock, 2014; Strand, 2007). They identify their main focus not only as providing additional learning opportunities for ethnic minority pupils, especially in terms of language acquisition (Martin et al., 2006), but also as having a concern for the educational and social importance of these schools in the lives of those who are involved in them (Creese et al., 2007; Martin et al., 2004; Mau et al., 2009). Overall, although notions of complementarity and supplementarity share similarities, such as the identification of a gap in the mainstream system, complementarity ‘evoke[s] a non-hierarchical relationship to mainstream schooling’ (Mau et al., 2009: 17).

A third term found in the literature is ‘heritage language schools’. For example, Li and Wu (2008) draw on this term to present their work on language ideologies and practices in Chinese heritage language schools in England. The concept of ‘heritage language schools’ has also been adopted by some studies located in the United States. For example, Chan Lü links the concept of (Chinese) heritage language schools to the use of the term ‘heritage language’ as used in context in the USA, where it refers to ‘languages of immigrants, refugee and indigenous groups’ (2014: 82).

The idea of heritage language – discussed in further detail in Chapter 2 – evokes family relevance as well as the emotional value of the language to the learners (Fishman, 2001). It refers more broadly to languages other than English spoken by linguistic minorities (e.g. Hornberger & Wang, 2008). Therefore, the term ‘heritage language schools’ implies that pupils are heritage language learners, and that they have a degree of proficiency in and an emotional relationship with the language of the schools through the presence of that language in their home and family life. Arguably, the idea of heritage language schools for heritage language speakers (or learners) also reinforces the idea that pupils and adults in the schools have the status of being a linguistic minority. However, the concept of heritage language schools does not reflect the complexity and diversity of the language backgrounds of pupils nor their relationship with, in the case in point, Chinese language(s).

We shall see in Chapter 2 that the Chinese community in the UK is extremely diverse, and migrants from different parts of the Chinese world also called ‘Greater China’ (Mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and, Singapore) or from areas where Chinese communities are strong (e.g. Malaysia and Vietnam), do not necessarily have Mandarin as their heritage language (Benton & Gomez, 2008). As other varieties of Chinese are spoken (e.g. Hakka and Hokkien), the assumption of Mandarin as the universal Chinese heritage language does not take into consideration linguistic diversity. For these reasons, the adoption of the term ‘Chinese heritage language schools’ to define my two research sites is contentious and the construction of Chinese heritage language(s) is investigated as part of the research aims rather than being taken for granted.

The term ‘community language schools’ is more applicable in this book for a number of reasons. First, the term acknowledges the importance of these schools to the communities that establish and run them, and their potential role in the political and social life of the wider context where they are located (Li, 1993; Martin et al., 2004). Further, the community dimension of the schools as spaces where not only pupils but also adults and teachers interact and negotiate their positions on language, culture, and identity is important in this study, which compares and contrasts participants’ perspectives. Finally, the concept of language community schooling focuses attention on the transmission of a language – in this book, Mandarin-Chinese – to the younger generations. At the same time, it leaves open for discussion how people involved in the schools – and especially pupils – understand and construct the language itself, for example, as a heritage, second, or even additional language.

Interculturality in this Study

Zhu Hua (2014, 2016) defines interculturality in terms of how people exhibit their cultural identities in everyday social interaction in relationship to other people’s cultural identities. According to Borghetti et al. (2015: 31–32): ‘[interculturality] refers to potential dynamics associated with interactions, to their situated nature and to the discursive contingencies developing in/across them’. Interculturality is also a quality generally attributed to intercultural encounters, sites where people infused with different cultures and worldviews can negotiate cultural and social identifications and representations (Kramsch, 1998).

In investigating the experiences of Chinese migrants in the UK and their efforts to maintain their language(s) and culture(s) through community education, this book uses ‘interculturality’ as a lens to interpret a multiplicity of positions concerning language, culture and identity at play in the context of the schools, as pupils and parents engage with one another and with me, the researcher. In this case, interculturality is concerned with interactions when social identities are salient and when different social identities are present. It entails recognition of multiplicity within ‘Chineseness’ in the perspective that ‘the Chinese’, as we shall see in the next Chapter, are not a homogenous group but they are characterised by inner heterogeneity routed in the historical and political complexity of the Chinese world.

Here, the ‘inter’ dimension focuses on the exchanges and encounters that the schools enable among Chinese people – adults and children, long-term residents and recent migrants – who do not necessarily share common languages, family and personal trajectories or their sense of Chinese identity, yet are brought together by a desire to share and transmit what they perceive as a common ‘Chinese heritage’. In the context of this book, the lens of interculturality is used to analyse the ways in which participants construct the role of Chinese language, culture, and identity – through Chinese community education – in their lives and in the lives of their children. It is also used to make sense of the issues that emerge as adults’ and pupils’ constructions often clash as, in defining what ‘Chineseness’ is, they privilege different cultural, political and linguistic positions.

As argued by Jin (2016), interculturality is a fluid process that implies a multiplicity and intersectionality of perspectives about culture and identity and, here it is argued, about language. It is this dimension of exchange and intersectionality that this book seeks to capture by investigating how pupils’ experiences of community schooling, including the intercultural encounters that the schools facilitate among Chinese people from different national, linguistic, and cultural backgrounds as well as the encounters they have with members of the local community, impact on their sense of identity. Pupils, parents, and teaching staff bring together their different experiences of life, migration, cultural and linguistic capitals, and different understandings of concepts of education, language and culture. How individuals negotiate their own identity positions and (cultural) representations in intercultural encounters lies at the centre of this book.

About this Book

This book draws on a study that investigated the significance of Mandarin-Chinese community schooling in two locations in England for those involved. The overarching aim of the study was to understand the role of Chinese community schools as educational spaces where Chinese language, culture, and identity are promoted by the ...

Table of contents

• Frontcover
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Figures
• Acknowledgements
• Preface
• 1 Introduction
• 2 Constructing the Term ‘Chinese’
• 3 Research Design
• 4 Chinese Community Schools: ‘Spaces for People to Come Together and Learn from Each Other’
• 5 One of Many Chinese Heritage Languages: ‘I Can’t Speak Mandarin but when I Speak Cantonese People Think that I am Local’
• 6 Teaching ‘Real’ Chinese Culture: The Fable of the Frog at the Bottom of the Well
• 7 Fluidity and Complexity in Pupils’ Chinese Identities: ‘I am Happy to be Chinese’
• 8 Conclusions
• Appendices
• References