About me
Title:
Chinese Community Activism for Equitable Educational Policy for Immigrant Children
Abstract:
Purpose: Existing language policy research puts little emphasis on parental agency, particularly immigrant parents. This study explores how immigrant parents advocated for more equitable policies and practices for English Learners (ELs) in Alberta, Canada.
Theoretical Framework: Informed by critical language policy theory, this study examined how and to what extent language policy responds to social pressures while also serving as “an officially mandated set of rules for language use and form within a nation-state” intended to shape citizens (Spolsky, 2012, p. 3). The study takes policy as discursive practice and examines how policy is experienced and constructed locally by parents (Dagenais, 2013). It focuses on eight components of ELs policy: visibility, designation of responsibility, eligibility, duration, placement, programming, assessment and reporting, and funding (Kouritzin, 2013).
Method and Data Source: Data were collected through policy documentation,
interviews with 35 immigrant parents, and two focus groups involving parents and policymakers. Ten of the parents came from China. This paper reported the experiences of these parents.
Findings and discussion: Parents raised concerns that there were systemic inequities of education policies that disadvantage ELs, including ELs funding reduction, the lack of accountability, inadequate ELs programming, and Eurocentric curricula. These inequities resulted in high dropout rates of ELs. As a result, many parents reported intervening on behalf of their children by adopting the following important strategies to advocate for better ELs programs and curriculum.
One strategy that many parents often undertook was to attend workshops offered by immigrant serving organizations. The way many of these workshops combined “personal development and knowledge building” proved effective for immigrant parents to learn about ELs programs and simultaneously engage in advocacy (Warren et al., 2009, p. 2233).
Another strategy that parents thought was equally effective in advocating for better ELs policies was the collaboration that they forged with various community organizations interested in ELs issues. Thus, parents in collaboration with community organizations arranged protests in front of the local school board after the board reduced the EL program, and made presentations to the Ministers. Participants perceived such collaboration was successful in raising awareness of the Ministers and school officials to the needs and demands of ELs and parents.
Apart from the macro advocacy strategies, there were also several examples of individualized, agentic steps that parents exercised. One such commonplace act consisted of ‘critique’ as many parents shared how they would often take individual initiatives to express their dissatisfaction with the ELs placements, the funding system, and the reporting and assessment system to the teachers and the school authorities.
Conclusion and Implications: The study analyzes how parental advocacy groups informed educational change for new Canadians in public schools. The study thus brings new voices of immigrant parents into the educational policy process and challenges the deficit perspective that educators often hold against immigrant parents. Results of this research will provide directions for ELs policies, programs and services, as well as new insights into the effectiveness of advocacy and capacity building of immigrant parents, thus of knowledge mobilization processes (Levin, 2013).
