Scholarlink

Policy decisions regarding the language of instruction (LOI) have profound implications for mathematics education in multilingual contexts. Assuming that policy decisions are informed by research evidence, it would still be challenging to devise policies that fit the realities of a given country, municipality, school, student groups, etc. and that ensure “effective” mathematics teaching and learning in these multi-layered “realities”. Any policy recommendation has to make choices—yet, what should be emphasised in such choices? A choice in such a policy by definition will express or enforce specific power relations, the risk of marginalising specific student groups or languages, or strengthen the position of certain elites, etc. For instance, in the Netherlands, it is policy that final examinations are only offered in Dutch, as students should show their proficiency in the national language. Of course, this disadvantages recently immigrated students who, from their mathematical knowledge, could do the final examinations, but not in terms of their proficiency in Dutch. The choice of language in education policy can either facilitate or hinder mathematics learning, particularly when it involves a shift to a language that is not the first or second language of the teachers and learners. The political nature of these decisions underscores the power dynamics inherent in language policy, where the language of the powerful elite often gains precedence, potentially marginalising linguistic minorities. Research has begun to shift away from a deficit discourse that views languages other than the language of instruction as problematic, recognising instead the potential benefits of multilingualism in the classroom. However, there remains a need for policies that are informed by a nuanced understanding of the socio-political role of language in education and its impact on learning outcomes. The slow growth of research in this area suggests a need for interdisciplinary and multilingual research teams to expand the knowledge base and inform policy decisions.

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Implications for Policy and Practice: The Debate on Language of Instruction

  • 章节

  • 发表日期：

    2026年

查看全文
  • Danyal Farsani,
  • Sashi Sharma,
  • Shweta Sharma

摘要

Policy decisions regarding the language of instruction (LOI) have profound implications for mathematics education in multilingual contexts. Assuming that policy decisions are informed by research evidence, it would still be challenging to devise policies that fit the realities of a given country, municipality, school, student groups, etc. and that ensure “effective” mathematics teaching and learning in these multi-layered “realities”. Any policy recommendation has to make choices—yet, what should be emphasised in such choices? A choice in such a policy by definition will express or enforce specific power relations, the risk of marginalising specific student groups or languages, or strengthen the position of certain elites, etc. For instance, in the Netherlands, it is policy that final examinations are only offered in Dutch, as students should show their proficiency in the national language. Of course, this disadvantages recently immigrated students who, from their mathematical knowledge, could do the final examinations, but not in terms of their proficiency in Dutch. The choice of language in education policy can either facilitate or hinder mathematics learning, particularly when it involves a shift to a language that is not the first or second language of the teachers and learners. The political nature of these decisions underscores the power dynamics inherent in language policy, where the language of the powerful elite often gains precedence, potentially marginalising linguistic minorities. Research has begun to shift away from a deficit discourse that views languages other than the language of instruction as problematic, recognising instead the potential benefits of multilingualism in the classroom. However, there remains a need for policies that are informed by a nuanced understanding of the socio-political role of language in education and its impact on learning outcomes. The slow growth of research in this area suggests a need for interdisciplinary and multilingual research teams to expand the knowledge base and inform policy decisions.