View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Language Histories, Community Translanguaging, and Collective Repertoires: Multilingual Language Learning Interactions in a Second-Grade Writing Workshop

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Language Histories, Community Translanguaging, and Collective Repertoires: Multilingual Language Learning Interactions in a Second-Grade Writing Workshop
Language: English
Authors: Lindsey W. Rowe (ORCID 0000-0001-8874-7560)
Source: Reading Research Quarterly. 2025 60(4).
Availability: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 16
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Early Childhood Education
Elementary Education
Grade 2
Primary Education
Descriptors: Grade 2, Elementary School Students, Code Switching (Language), Multilingualism, Writing Workshops, English (Second Language), Language of Instruction, Interaction, Elementary School Teachers
DOI: 10.1002/rrq.70050
ISSN: 0034-0553
1936-2722
Abstract: Using a community translanguaging lens, this paper focuses on the collective translanguaging practices of second-grade students who come from multilingual language backgrounds but were attending a school where English was the mandated language of instruction. The research question addressed is: How did students construct and employ a community language repertoire during writing interactions in a multilingual, English-medium classroom? Data were drawn from a year-long, qualitative study employing ethnographic and practitioner research methods to examine teacher and students' daily writing practices in one second-grade classroom. Data were analyzed using descriptive and thematic coding of students' language learning interactions. Findings illustrate how the community repertoire was drawn on and constructed as students: (1) talked about their own and others' language histories, (2) interacted with peers and materials to learn language(s), and (3) at times reproduced historical, macro-level discourses. Representative, interactional examples are used to illustrate and describe each theme in detail. Implications for theory and pedagogy are discussed, arguing that a focus on community translanguaging offers a more nuanced view of classroom language learning.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: EJ1487291
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwH-_HJCvSpvwR0MBoF9zLnRAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDPQYvkphlCVGeOa4aAIBEICBm34tEyt7jSn3AbLNAuoIX6RN5Q7b1EwYaz0PM_1DeFVlwAP_O_H28dZ3qriEWi-yFuMbV5Z1uId0afMqYfy-8SUhC5SLQxAQkLbtCLXF5AHnJrr01Oxy8yrMx0ihcYKkiobKFYh6PRpm0OEVHE5TIF6tbYPy430zrWTCta7srvqHUYqnYb3r_Eqd7sALgzLti-VMVub7mnbIdlaI
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0188874256;[nrnu]01oct.25;2025Oct28.05:49;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0188874256-1">Language Histories, Community Translanguaging, and Collective Repertoires: Multilingual Language Learning Interactions in a Second‐Grade Writing Workshop </title> <p>Using a community translanguaging lens, this paper focuses on the collective translanguaging practices of second‐grade students who come from multilingual language backgrounds but were attending a school where English was the mandated language of instruction. The research question addressed is: How did students construct and employ a community language repertoire during writing interactions in a multilingual, English‐medium classroom? Data were drawn from a year‐long, qualitative study employing ethnographic and practitioner research methods to examine teacher and students' daily writing practices in one second‐grade classroom. Data were analyzed using descriptive and thematic coding of students' language learning interactions. Findings illustrate how the community repertoire was drawn on and constructed as students: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref1">1</reflink>) talked about their own and others' language histories, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref2">2</reflink>) interacted with peers and materials to learn language(s), and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref3">3</reflink>) at times reproduced historical, macro‐level discourses. Representative, interactional examples are used to illustrate and describe each theme in detail. Implications for theory and pedagogy are discussed, arguing that a focus on community translanguaging offers a more nuanced view of classroom language learning.</p> <p>Keywords: multilingual; translanguaging; translingual; writing</p> <p>Findings illustrate how the community repertoire was drawn on and constructed in a second‐grade, multilingual, English‐medium classroom during writing workshop.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/NRNU/01oct25/rrq70050-toc-0001.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="rrq70050-toc-0001.jpg" title="." /> </p> <p></p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Rowe (referring to Tina's writing about her mother) Does your mom speak English or Spanish?</item> <p></p> <item> Tina She speaks English, sadly, because I want to be English and Spanish.</item> <p></p> <item> Rowe Yeah, well you have lots of friends here that probably could teach you some Spanish words.</item> <p></p> <item> Maria I can help her! I only know a little bit though.</item> <p></p> <item> Tina I need someone who knows all the Spanish, so I can become my own Spanish person.</item> </ulist> <p>This interaction occurred during writing workshop in a second‐grade, English‐medium classroom in the U.S. serving students from multilingual backgrounds. Tina (all participant names are pseudonyms) was a student who spoke English at home, while Maria reported that she spoke some Spanish with her family at home. As evidenced in this interaction, the classroom language repertoire in this space was complex, constantly negotiated, and influenced both by students' histories with language resources as well as macro‐level discourses and ideologies about language(s). Drawing on a <emph>community translanguaging</emph> lens, which Kim et al. ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref4">22</reflink>]) define as "collaborative meaning‐making among children, their family and community members, and their collective semiotic resources" (<reflink idref="bib293" id="ref5">293</reflink>), this paper focuses on the collective translanguaging practices of second‐grade students who came from multilingual language backgrounds but were attending a school where English was the mandated language of instruction. I describe such spaces as <emph>multilingual, English‐medium classrooms</emph>. This paper explores language learning interactions in this classroom where students talked about and used "named" language resources (e.g., Spanish, Tagalog) that were new to them. At times this meant students engaged with language resources with which they had very limited previous personal experiences, such as Tina's talk about learning Spanish. At other times, this meant students talked about and used language resources that were emerging, such as Maria's discussion about Spanish.</p> <p>Most multilingual learners in the U.S., like those in this study, attend English‐medium schools where policy dictates that instruction and assessment take place only in English (Shin [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref6">44</reflink>]). As classrooms in the U.S. become increasingly linguistically diverse (National Center for Education Statistics [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref7">34</reflink>]), research is needed exploring how teachers and students can disrupt English‐only norms and welcome translingual language and literacy practices (Mendoza et al. [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref8">32</reflink>]; Zapata and Laman [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref9">51</reflink>]). An important role of translanguaging research has been to challenge monoglossic views of language, normalizing the flexible use of multiple named languages by individual speakers (García and Kleifgen [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref10">16</reflink>]). This research shows that multilingual students learn better and have more positive school experiences when they can use all their language resources, as opposed to restricting language use to only the dominant language (Carbonara and Scibetta [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref11">5</reflink>]; García and Kleifgen [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref12">17</reflink>]; Le Pichon and Kambel [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref13">25</reflink>]). However, recent research calls on scholars to shift the analytic focus beyond individual language users to also consider how people interactionally and collaboratively use language(s) to make meaning (Donley [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref14">11</reflink>]; García and Kleifgen [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref15">17</reflink>]; Kim et al. [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref16">22</reflink>]; Pennycook [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref17">38</reflink>]). This shift is needed to better understand how language use operates amongst people in a community, including the language choices of students and teachers in classroom communities. Taking up this call for interactionally focused language research, this paper explores the question:</p> <p>How did students construct and employ a community language repertoire during writing interactions in a multilingual, English‐medium classroom?</p> <p>Analyses specifically focus on language learning interactions in which students interacted with new or less‐familiar language resources as a way of making empirically visible movement of language resources within a classroom community. Results contribute to re‐theorizing translanguaging as a collaborative practice constructed as individual histories of language use meet present communicative needs in historically and ideologically bounded spaces. Furthermore, results foreground the essential role of students' language practices in creating a translanguaging classroom space. The present study is significant because it demonstrates what is possible when historically English‐only school spaces are opened to multilingual practices.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-3">Theoretical Framing: Translanguaging and Community Translanguaging</hd> <p>This paper is broadly framed by a translanguaging lens, which draws attention to how bi/multilingual language users deploy all their linguistic resources, and how those resources are socially and politically defined as named languages, such as English or Spanish (García and Kleyn [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref18">18</reflink>]). While there is some debate in the field around the unitary nature of a multilingual person's linguistic repertoire and the theorization of language boundaries as social and political, (e.g., Bhatt and Bolonyai [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref19">3</reflink>]), translanguaging is a useful lens for this analysis because it conceptualizes the relationship between the everyday language practices of speakers, or their linguistic resources, and the ways those language resources are situated and defined in social settings, or assigned named language boundaries. This theoretical link between language resources and named languages is essential for understanding how the deployment of certain language resources are valued or devalued in certain spaces, and how those values are related to discourses and ideologies about language users. In particular, hierarchical ideologies around race influence what language use is deemed "appropriate" in a space, with white, middle‐class English language use positioned as the standard in many U.S. classrooms (Flores and Rosa [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref20">13</reflink>]). Recently, translanguaging scholars have called for research that specifically focuses on language use in interaction to capture and understand "the complex performances and human activities enacted by multilinguals within social space, rather than solely what happens within the minds of individuals" (García and Kleifgen [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref21">17</reflink>], 558). Mendoza et al. ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref22">32</reflink>]) specifically call for ethnographic and practitioner research partnerships that explore this issue, as these methods together allow for documentation of micro‐interactions and then connection of these to meso‐ and macro‐level interactions. Taking up this call, the present paper uses these methods to explore how translanguaging practices were interactionally constructed in a classroom where speakers did not all share the same named language resources, and where mandates for monoglossic instruction were locally challenged by the teacher's support for translingual composing in the writing workshop.</p> <p>Extending traditional notions of translanguaging theory, in this paper I specifically draw on community translanguaging, which theorizes meaning‐making as a collaborative act amongst people in a community space and their collective semiotic resources (Kim et al. [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref23">22</reflink>]). In contrast to more traditional notions of translanguaging, which locate the linguistic repertoire within an individual, this perspective highlights how translanguaging can be a group practice (i.e., <emph>community</emph> or <emph>collective translanguaging</emph>) in which people draw on a <emph>community language repertoire</emph> (Orellana [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref24">35</reflink>]) that comprises the group's collective knowledge of multiple named languages as well as material resources, to make meaning. For example, Kim and Song ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref25">23</reflink>]) describe how, in the context of a family literacy project, participants collectively contributed to a community repertoire that included the language resources of individual children, immediate and extended family members, and community members. Similarly, working in a community literacy center, Abraham ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref26">1</reflink>]) describes how children drew on a community repertoire by including linguistic elements from school, home, the community, and translingual features. This work complements research in European contexts where, although not always referred to using the term community translanguaging, scholars have explored language practices in multilingual school community spaces (e.g., Carbonara and Scibetta [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref27">5</reflink>]; Le Pichon and Kambel [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref28">25</reflink>]; Little and Kirwan [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref29">28</reflink>]). Findings from these studies emphasize that children learning in schools where translanguaging pedagogies are enacted value multilingualism (Le Pichon and Kambel [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref30">25</reflink>]), are aware of class and community linguistic repertoires (Carbonara and Scibetta [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref31">5</reflink>]), and are able to draw on these collective resources for literacy tasks such as composing texts (Little and Kirwan [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref32">28</reflink>]).</p> <p>Community translanguaging relates to and builds from other similar notions of language interactivity (Linell [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref33">27</reflink>]) in the field such as translingual practice, which "conceives of language resources as always mobile and in contact, generating new grammars and meanings" (Canagarajah [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref34">4</reflink>], 4), and spatial repertoires, which "pushes language outside of the head, not merely as a social resources but also as a spatial artefactual one" (Pennycook [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref35">38</reflink>], 277). However, for the present study, I draw on the notion of community language repertoire because it foregrounds the ways teachers, children, and family members contribute language resources to meaning making in a situated space. I see community translanguaging as a type of translingual practice that foregrounds collective/shared use of spatial repertoires in interaction. Importantly, this lens foregrounds how community repertoires are both historically anchored and presently formed. The boundaries of the "community" space are porous, or distributed (Kim et al. [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref36">22</reflink>]; Pennycook [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref37">38</reflink>]). That is, they are the product of individual experiences brought together and acted on in‐the‐moment. So, on the one hand, each person's history of being, of using language, of learning, doing, and making meaning is present. On the other hand, new collective social action is forming and reforming, with the potential for transformation or reproduction. Thus, examining community language repertoires requires attending both to the histories of language users and language spaces, as well as the emergent, interactional social action formed in any moment of communication. Thus far, discussions of community repertoires have remained largely descriptive (e.g., describing language resources that appear in texts) and situated in out‐of‐school contexts (Abraham [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref38">1</reflink>]; Kim et al. [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref39">22</reflink>]). In this paper, I explore <emph>how</emph> second‐grade students constructed and drew upon a community repertoire to meaningfully compose translingual texts by examining their language learning interactions. By bringing this theoretical lens to the study of classroom interactions, there is the potential to better understand and (re)imagine how translanguaging spaces can be constructed in English‐medium classrooms through collective sharing of language resources.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-4">Translanguaging Pedagogies and Spaces in Multilingual, English‐Medium Classrooms</hd> <p>Stemming from translanguaging as a theory of language, research has explored various aspects of translanguaging in practice in teaching/learning environments. Importantly, while early translanguaging work often focused on bilingual school contexts where speakers largely share two named language resources (e.g., Creese and Blackledge [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref40">8</reflink>]; Palmer et al. [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref41">37</reflink>]), increasingly scholars are also investigating the nuances of translanguaging practices in what I call multilingual, English‐medium classrooms, such as the classroom of focus for this study. These are schools that serve students from multilingual backgrounds, but where English is the mandated language of instruction by school, district, and/or state policy. These contexts differ from bilingual school settings because there is not institutional support or expectation that instruction will take place in two designated languages that all students are learning/share. Instead, students and teachers often have different experiences with language resources, and monoglossic policies and ideologies prioritize English language resources as the "appropriate" language of school (Flores and Rosa [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref42">13</reflink>]). Given these variances, how translanguaging is enacted in multilingual, English‐medium classrooms looks different than in bilingual schools. This is a critical issue, given most multilingual learners in the U.S. attend multilingual, English‐medium schools (Shin [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref43">44</reflink>]). Particularly relevant for the present study is research in multilingual, English‐medium classrooms focused on (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref44">1</reflink>) translanguaging pedagogies and (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref45">2</reflink>) translanguaging spaces.</p> <p>Translanguaging pedagogy centers on instructional practices that support students' flexible use of all their language resources to make meaning in the classroom. García et al. ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref46">15</reflink>]) name three aspects of translanguaging pedagogy: stance, design, and shifts. Their work emphasizes how teacher orientations and practices are both essential for enacting translanguaging pedagogies. Specifically, translanguaging stances carry a social justice orientation (García et al. [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref47">15</reflink>]) as they explicitly center and value the multiple language resources of bi/multilingual learners, in contrast to mainstream, white English‐only perspectives and practices. These stances have been shown to be an essential underlying factor influencing the successful implementation of translingual pedagogies in English‐medium, multilingual spaces (Hansen‐Thomas et al. [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref48">20</reflink>]). Research exploring translanguaging pedagogy in these classrooms has identified <emph>teacher</emph> practices that support student translanguaging, such as: incorporating multilingual literature as mentor texts (Zapata [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref49">49</reflink>]), modeling translanguaging (Rowe [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref50">40</reflink>]), inviting students to speak and write in languages other than English (Machado and Hartman [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref51">30</reflink>]) and to share their transnational (Machado and Hartman [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref52">31</reflink>]) and transcultural experiences (Flynn [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref53">14</reflink>]), discussing cross‐language connections such as cognates or transliteration (Daniel et al. [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref54">9</reflink>]), and using digital tools to support these cross‐language connections (Rowe [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref55">41</reflink>]). These findings emphasize teacher actions, showing that teachers can and do enact translanguaging pedagogies through their intentional instructional design and actions in English‐medium spaces serving multilingual students.</p> <p>When teachers enact translanguaging pedagogies, they create opportunities for translanguaging spaces to emerge. Translanguaging spaces are social contexts created for and by translanguaging, where multilingual speakers employ the full range of their linguistic performances (Wei [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref56">47</reflink>]). In such spaces, translanguaging corrientes/flows, or "dynamic and continuous shifting and moving of language features," are part of everyday classroom interactions and "change the static landscape of the classroom that is traditionally described and defined from a monolingual perspective" (Lin [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref57">26</reflink>], 8). Importantly, research on translanguaging spaces illustrates how both teachers <emph>and</emph> students contribute to the translanguaging practices of a context (Abraham et al. [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref58">2</reflink>]). While teachers play an essential role in launching translingual practices, especially in English‐medium schools, to create a translanguaging space, students have to take up these invitations (Rowe [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref59">40</reflink>]). Furthermore, through their languaging practices, members of a translanguaging space "generate new identities, values, and practices" (Wei [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref60">47</reflink>], 1223). That is, in these spaces, students and teachers learn from one another and co‐construct new practices and ideologies around language use.</p> <p>While we know that both teachers and students contribute to a translanguaging space, at question in this paper is how teachers and students, specifically located in a multilingual, English‐medium classroom, co‐construct a community translanguaging space, and how in this space language resources are contributed, distributed, and taken up across time. This is important for understanding how English‐medium classrooms, where most multilingual students attend school, might be transformed into community translanguaging spaces that more equitably support the language and literacy practices of multilingual learners.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-5">Methodology</hd> <p>Data were drawn from a larger, year‐long, qualitative study in which I used ethnographic (Heath and Street [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref61">21</reflink>]) and practitioner research (Cochran‐Smith and Lytle [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref62">7</reflink>]) methods to explore the writing practices of second‐grade students in a multilingual, English‐medium classroom. Pairing these methods allowed for close analysis of teaching practices that were different from the English‐only norm in U.S. classrooms (Mendoza et al. [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref63">32</reflink>]). Practitioner inquiry, as a methodology, views the dual positions of teacher/researcher as an affordance for generating knowledge (Cochran‐Smith and Lytle [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref64">7</reflink>]). Thus, by using this approach to take on a teacher/researcher role, I was able to work with the classroom teacher, Mrs. Díaz, and her students to implement translanguaging pedagogies in an English‐medium school. Ethnographic methods (Heath and Street [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref65">21</reflink>]) then allowed prolonged engagement across the school year, during which I was able to collect deeply contextualized data that recorded student and teacher interactions when engaged in these translanguaging composing activities. To illustrate the co‐construction of a community language repertoire, this paper reports specifically on students' language learning interactions with new language resources in this classroom.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-6">Context and Participants</hd> <p>The study took place in Mrs. Díaz's second‐grade classroom, located in a mid‐sized urban city in the Midwestern U.S. The school was a Catholic one and received Title I funds to support their large population of students from low‐income backgrounds. Students reported the following language practices: fourteen spoke Spanish or some Spanish at home, seven spoke primarily English at home, one spoke some Korean at home, one spoke French at home, and one spoke some Tagalog at home (see Table 1 for more detailed information on student backgrounds).</p> <p>1 TABLE Student background information.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th align="left">Student</th><th align="center">Gender</th><th align="center">ELL status</th><th align="center">Home language</th><th align="center">Family Country</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">Mary</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">Exited</td><td align="center">Some Tagalog</td><td align="center">Philippines</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Adriana</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">ELL</td><td align="center">Spanish</td><td align="center">El Salvador</td></tr><tr><td align="left">César</td><td align="center">M</td><td align="center">ELL</td><td align="center">Spanish</td><td align="center">Mexico</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Jesús</td><td align="center">M</td><td align="center">ELL</td><td align="center">Spanish</td><td align="center">Mexico</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Alfonso</td><td align="center">M</td><td align="center">Exited</td><td align="center">Some Spanish</td><td align="center">Mexico</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Alex</td><td align="center">M</td><td align="center">Exited</td><td align="center">Some Spanish</td><td align="center">Puerto Rico, Dominican Republic, Peru</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Natalia</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">ELL</td><td align="center">Spanish</td><td align="center">Mexico</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Gloria</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">ELL</td><td align="center">Spanish</td><td align="center">El Salvador</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Steven</td><td align="center">M</td><td align="center">No</td><td align="center">English</td><td align="center">USA</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Mitch</td><td align="center">M</td><td align="center">No</td><td align="center">English</td><td align="center">USA</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Tina</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">No</td><td align="center">English</td><td align="center">USA</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Travis</td><td align="center">M</td><td align="center">No</td><td align="center">English</td><td align="center">USA</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Ethan</td><td align="center">M</td><td align="center">Exited</td><td align="center">Some Korean</td><td align="center">Korea</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Neville</td><td align="center">M</td><td align="center">ELL</td><td align="center">French</td><td align="center">Cameroon</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Patience</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">No</td><td align="center">English</td><td align="center">USA</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Rachel</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">No</td><td align="center">Some spanish</td><td align="center">Costa Rica</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Susana</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">No</td><td align="center">Some spanish</td><td align="center">Puerto Rico</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Mia</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">No</td><td align="center">Some spanish</td><td align="center">Costa Rica</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Ana</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">ELL</td><td align="center">Spanish</td><td align="center">Mexico</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Camden</td><td align="center">M</td><td align="center">No</td><td align="center">English</td><td align="center">USA</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Jose</td><td align="center">M</td><td align="center">ELL</td><td align="center">Spanish</td><td align="center">El Salvador</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Maria</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">Exited</td><td align="center">Some Spanish</td><td align="center">Mexico</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Ivan</td><td align="center">M</td><td align="center">Exited</td><td align="center">Spanish</td><td align="center">Mexico</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Jada</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">No</td><td align="center">English</td><td align="center">USA</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 <emph>Note:</emph> All student names are pseudonyms. English Language Learner status, as reported by the ELL teacher. This shows whether the student was currently or previously classified by the school as needing additional English language services due to language background. This terminology reflects the language used by the school. Home languages and family countries as reported by students.</p> <p>Students designated as "English Leaners" by the school district at times received both push in and pull out instruction from a specialized teacher. However, they spent the majority of their day in Mrs. Díaz's homeroom classroom. Mrs. Díaz identified as Latina and spoke Spanish and English. She was in her third year of teaching, all of which had been as a second‐grade teacher at this school. Mrs. Díaz expressed an interest in supporting her multilingual students' use of all their language resources to a mutual colleague, who connected us prior to the start of a new school year based on our shared interest in this topic. She partnered with me, a university researcher, to consider this as part of her writing instruction.</p> <p>During the year of this study, Mrs. Díaz had flexibility with her writing curriculum and chose to loosely follow a writing workshop format (Laman [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref66">24</reflink>]). Thus, while Mrs. Díaz's writing instruction was not reflective of larger school writing practices, it does illustrate how a teacher can creatively design and adapt writing instruction to include translanguaging when given the flexibility to do so. Students wrote daily in writing workshop, which typically lasted 1 h and involved a teacher‐led minilesson, student writing time, and student‐author sharing time. While instruction and assessment in Mrs. Díaz's classroom and school typically took place in English (following school and district policy), Mrs. Díaz intentionally worked to create a classroom culture that valued multilingualism. Starting early in the year, she routinely talked with students about their multiple language practices and invited them to use languages beyond English as part of daily classroom routines and activities (see Rowe [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref67">40</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref68">42</reflink>]). This included asking students about their language backgrounds, sharing about her own bilingual experiences, and creating multilingual routines such as daily greetings in all the languages spoken by children. As part of her writing instruction, Mrs. Díaz demonstrated creating bilingual texts and invited students to include translingual text in their own stories. This included modeling and encouraging inclusion of translingual text in a variety of ways, ranging from entirely bilingual texts to texts with translingual labels, speech bubbles, glossaries, or words. She included bilingual mentor texts in her instruction and discussed strategies around including multiple languages in print, including using digital translation tools to support the use of multiple languages. Students increasingly took up these invitations to compose translingually across the year (see Rowe [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref69">40</reflink>]).</p> <p>Mrs. Díaz also valued student talk and interactions. Thus, students had daily time to work on their writing; during this time, they were permitted to talk and interact with one another. These interactions often revolved around students' texts, but at times also veered into other topics of conversation. This paper focuses on students' interactions with one another and adults during this writing time, focusing on conversations where students interacted with language resources that were new to them. Mrs. Díaz's writing time was a rich site for exploring community translanguaging practices, as it was a time where students and teachers interacted with one another in large and small groups, using multiple named language resources for academic and social purposes.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-7">Researcher Positionality</hd> <p>I am a white woman who grew up speaking English and then learned Spanish as an additional language in school and through experiences living and teaching outside of the U.S. I formerly taught second grade in an English‐medium school that served multilingual students, similar to Mrs. Díaz's classroom. Drawing on practitioner inquiry methodology (Cochran‐Smith and Lytle [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref70">7</reflink>]), I held dual roles of teacher and researcher in this classroom. Thus, throughout this paper when I refer to "teachers" in Mrs. Díaz's classroom, I am referring to both Mrs. Díaz and myself. My researcher role involved observing and collecting data on writing practices in this classroom through fieldnotes and audio/video recordings (data collection procedures are described in detail in the following section). I typically observed Mrs. Díaz's whole‐group instruction in this setting in my researcher role and then, when students wrote, took on a dual role as a researcher collecting data as well as a teacher supporting their composing. As a researcher informed by an ethnographic approach (Heath and Street [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref71">21</reflink>]) to data collection, I spent extended time within this classroom community across one school year to capture the everyday practices of people in this space.</p> <p>My teacher‐like role involved (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref72">1</reflink>) instructional planning with Mrs. Díaz and (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref73">2</reflink>) providing instructional support as students composed. I met monthly with Mrs. Díaz to discuss instructional plans. We both brought a translanguaging stance (García et al. [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref74">15</reflink>]) to planning and implementing writing instruction. Our planning conversations often centered on instructional practices (e.g., reading bilingual texts, using digital translation tools) that might support this work, as well as reflections on how students were (or were not) taking up these invitations. My role in planning meetings was typically to help Mrs. Díaz consider modifications to her writing workshop minilesson plans that could invite and foster translingual composing. For example, I often suggested bilingual mentor texts that aligned with the genre of instruction or suggested ways that students might compose for multilingual audiences.</p> <p>I also took on a teacher‐role during my visits to the classroom as students wrote by circulating the room and conferring with individual students about their writing. Through my conversations with students, I inquired and learned about their home and school language practices. Like Mrs. Díaz, I also often issued invitations to compose translingually and offered support to students who decided to do so. I spoke with students about how I am a Spanish learner, used this language at times with students to support their composing, and also talked about my interest in learning additional languages from students.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-8">Data Collection</hd> <p>Drawing on tools of ethnographic observation to collect data (Heath and Street [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref75">21</reflink>]), I visited Mrs. Díaz's writing workshop two or three times a week from August to March, resulting in 51 observations. Observations typically lasted about an hour and focused on the daily writing period. During each visit, I recorded fieldnotes (<emph>n</emph> = 51) focused on my observations and reflections in the field regarding ongoing implementation and uptake of translingual composing practices (Emerson et al. [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref76">12</reflink>]). I also recorded audio‐video of each observed writing period. This involved capturing audio‐video recordings of whole‐group teacher‐led writing instruction (<emph>n</emph> = 49). Additionally, when students worked on their own writing pieces, I used Swivl recording technology to capture up to five separate audio files of interactions at shared student tables, which synced to a video recording capturing interactions in the entire classroom space. These Swivl audio‐video recordings (<emph>n</emph> = 178) thus captured both teacher‐student and student–student interactions as people in the classroom circulated amongst tables while students composed. I also collected images (<emph>n</emph> = 583) of students' in‐progress and completed texts. Finally, I met monthly with Mrs. Díaz to debrief and plan, and I audio recorded these meetings (<emph>n</emph> = 7). As this paper primarily focuses on interactional data, fieldnotes and audio‐video data were the primary data sources analyzed, with other data sources supporting my ethnographic understanding of the context.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-9">Data Analysis</hd> <p>Data analysis occurred in two phases to address the question: How did students construct and employ a community language repertoire during writing interactions in a multilingual, English‐medium classroom? Drawing on a community translanguaging approach (Kim et al. [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref77">22</reflink>]), I analytically viewed Mrs. Díaz's classroom as a community and considered the language interactions taking place in this space as contributing to the community repertoire, while also recognizing the porous boundaries of this community repertoire.</p> <p>The first phase of analysis involved carefully reviewing all fieldnotes and audio‐video recordings to identify and descriptively code (Miles et al. [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref78">33</reflink>]) all events in which students (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref79">1</reflink>) talked about language learning (<emph>n</emph> = 35), or (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref80">2</reflink>) participated in a language learning event (<emph>n</emph> = 130). For this analysis, I defined <emph>language learning events</emph> as those including students' interactions with languages they had limited/no historical experiences with (<emph>n</emph> = 86), as well as interactions in which they drew on the community repertoire to learn more about a language with which they had some historical experience (<emph>n</emph> = 44). While any moment of interaction can theoretically be considered as building (from) a community language repertoire, I selected talk about language learning and language learning events as the focus of analysis because they make empirically visible the crossing (and mixing) of named language boundaries (see Table 2 for an overview of descriptive codes).</p> <p>2 TABLE Descriptive coding.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th align="left">Type of event</th><th align="center">Operational definition</th><th align="center">Example</th><th align="center">Count</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">Talk about language learning event</td><td align="center">Student talks about learning a language (but does not engage with new language resources)</td><td align="center">Tina (who speaks English at home) states "I want to be English and Spanish"</td><td align="center">35</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Language learning event</td><td align="center">Student learns about a language they have limited/no historical experiences with</td><td align="center">Jada (who speaks English at home) asks "what does hermano mean" and learns the meaning of the Spanish word</td><td align="center">86</td></tr><tr><td align="center">Student learns more about a language with which they do have historical experience</td><td align="center">Mary (who speaks some Tagalog at home) uses Google Translate to find, learn, and add to her text a Tagalog translation for the English word "trunk"</td><td align="center">44</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>In a second phase of analysis, I drew on a constructivist approach to grounded theory (Charmaz [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref81">6</reflink>]) as I re‐examined detailed logs and videos of all events identified in the first phase of analysis (<emph>n</emph> = 165). This involved repeatedly reading through these data, with the theoretical perspective of community translanguaging in mind, to identify and code patterns in how students constructed and drew upon a community repertoire. From this, the following over‐arching themes were identified, as well as sub‐patterns for each theme (shown in parentheses): (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref82">1</reflink>) individual histories (valuing family language practices, interest in peer language practices), (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref83">2</reflink>) interactional use of community repertoire (learning with/from others, learning with/from materials), and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref84">3</reflink>) macro‐level historical discourses (English as implicit, language separation, and value judgements). I then identified representative, interactional examples from the data to illustrate and describe each theme and sub‐pattern in detail.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-10">Findings</hd> <p>Analyses of language learning events revealed three main themes that illustrate how the community language repertoire was used and built by students in a multilingual, English‐medium classroom. These were: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref85">1</reflink>) individual histories, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref86">2</reflink>) interactional use of community repertoire, and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref87">3</reflink>) macro‐level historical discourses. Next, I describe each of these themes and sub‐patterns for each.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-11">Personal Histories With Language(s)</hd> <p>The first overarching pattern was the influence of personal histories on the construction and use of the community language repertoire in this classroom. These findings illustrate, using interactional data, how students talked about their own and each other's language histories. In particular, children talked about their language histories in two primary ways: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref88">1</reflink>) connecting to and valuing family language practices and (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref89">2</reflink>) showing interest in and learning about the language practices of their peers.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-12">Connecting to Family Language Practices</hd> <p>First, students who had some history with a language other than English often talked about those language practices as connected to <emph>family</emph> community repertoires, or the language practices of family members. Numerous students reported that their family members spoke various named languages, and that they themselves were wanting or trying to learn that language from or for their family. For instance, Alfonso was a student who, early in the year, took up Mrs. Díaz's invitations to compose using Spanish. When he talked about his language practices and his decisions to compose using Spanish, Alfonso often referenced his family. For instance, in February he made a bilingual text about tigers, and I asked him who he was writing for. He responded, in part:</p> <p>I'm the only person in my family who doesn't know like that much Spanish at all, so um my padrino [godfather] is from Mexico and he, and they like when I learn more words so I write this book for my padrino</p> <p>Alfonso's response here positioned his Spanish language resources as connected to his family language practices. Learning Spanish was personal. He described his use of Spanish language resources as a means of connecting with family. His knowledge and use of Spanish in the classroom, then, was inextricably tied to his personal history with his family language practices, and to his family history and identity. Alfonso's mother and her family were from Mexico and spoke Spanish, while his father did not have a family history of speaking Spanish. As Alfonso took up invitations to compose using Spanish, he also began signing work with his full name, which included his mother's Spanish surname. His mom commented on this to Mrs. Díaz and noted that Alfonso had begun coming home from school and asking to learn more Spanish. Alfonso's talk about learning and using Spanish, then, exemplified how students used language resources in response to and as a way of connecting with family language practices. That is, Alfonso's choices as to how to draw on the community repertoire were specifically informed by his personal experiences with those languages, and, in particular, his desire to connect with and use family language practices (Little and Kirwan [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref90">29</reflink>]).</p> <p>Mary was another student who talked about her language practices as connected to family community repertoires. For instance, in the next example, I was conferring with her about her writing, asking her about Tagalog words that she might include. When she said she was unsure how to translate a certain word, I suggested that she might ask her mom for support. She then responded:</p> <p>Let me tell you something, so I'm gonna ask my mom, she's gonna write, I already know how to go all the way to one, two, three in Tagalog, but then I'm gonna ask my mom to write the word on there, and then my teacher's gonna read it, and then she's gonna <emph>learn</emph> them, and then she can, she'll teach us <emph>all</emph> them.</p> <p>Here, Mary made sure to get my attention to tell me her idea for a new text she was planning to create by drawing on her family community language repertoire. She planned to have her mother help her write Tagalog words, including the numbers one, two, and three, which Mary reported that she had already added to her oral language repertoire through her mother's teaching. She then planned to share this text with Mrs. Díaz so that her teacher could read it, learn the Tagalog words, then teach them to the class. Mrs. Díaz had been teaching the class how to count in Spanish and French as they did their daily morning stretching, and so Mary likely was thinking that Mrs. Díaz could add Tagalog counting to this routine. Like Alfonso, Mary's talk about language learning here exemplified how students' language use was influenced by their personal histories with previous language experiences, and a stated desire to connect to and learn from family language practices.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-13">Interest in and Learning About Peer Language Practices</hd> <p>Second, students who had limited/no historical experiences with a certain language beyond English often talked about wanting to learn the language from or for their peers. This pattern was especially true about Spanish language resources, which were the most shared language beyond English in this classroom. That is, students in Mrs. Díaz's class who had limited or no experiences with Spanish often talked about wanting to learn this language that was spoken by many of their peers. In these interactions, students' talk about language practices showed an awareness of their own and others' language histories, and how those influenced their use of and contributions to the community language repertoire. For instance, in the example that opened this paper, Tina was writing about her mother, so I asked her about her mother's language practices:</p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">Rowe</td><td align="center">does your mom speak English or Spanish?</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Tina</td><td align="center">she speaks English, sadly, because I want to be English and Spanish</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Rowe</td><td align="center">yeah, well you have lots of friends here that probably could teach you some Spanish words</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Adriana</td><td align="center">I can help her, I only know a little bit though</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Tina</td><td align="center">I need someone who knows all the Spanish so I can become my own Spanish person</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>While some of Tina's comments here reflect macro‐level discourses and ideologies about languages and language users (more on this later), her response also displayed recognition of her own, her family, and her peers' language histories, and displayed an interest in tapping into the community repertoire to learn and use Spanish. She stated that she wanted to be "English and Spanish" and her "own Spanish person." While she did not explicitly connect this to peer language practices in this moment, given my ethnographic understanding of Tina's interactions in this classroom, I inferred that her interest in Spanish language practices and being a "Spanish person" was influenced by her repeated interactions with multiple peers who spoke and used Spanish daily in her classroom. That is, in the context of this classroom community, Tina's stated interest in being "English and Spanish" can be seen as reflecting an understanding of the English and Spanish language practices of her peers, and an interest in matching those. I mentioned that Tina might tap into the peer community repertoire to learn Spanish, and Adriana volunteered to help, while recognizing that she was also an emerging speaker. Tina then commented that she was seeking a peer who knew "all the Spanish" and later went on to describe a different peer, who was a newcomer student, who she felt had more extensive experiences with Spanish and thus might be a better teacher. Throughout this interaction, then, Tina talked about language learning as a practice that was dependent on the personal language histories of herself and her peers. She recognized her own limited experiences with Spanish language resources ("English, sadly"), displayed an interest in aligning with and joining the peer group of Spanish users ("I want to be English and Spanish"), and thought through peers' histories with Spanish when considering who might best support her learning ("I need someone who knows all the Spanish").</p> <p>Across time, students not only displayed interest in one another's language practices, but they also continued to learn about one another's language histories and consider these in their conversations about language use and learning. For instance, in February the following conversation occurred between three students as two of them (Tina and Mia) gave another (Maria) feedback on her Spanish‐English bilingual text:</p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">Maria</td><td align="center">(showing her notebook with bilingual pages) it's the same like as this page but this one is in Spanish</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Tina</td><td align="center">xxx actually first read the Spanish!</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Maria</td><td align="center">and then I read you the English so you can understand?</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Tina</td><td align="center">yeah</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Maria</td><td align="center">(reads her text aloud, Mia and Tina lean over to listen)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Tina</td><td align="center">I have a comment. I love how you like you put Spanish and then you put English and then you put Spanish again xxx</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Mia</td><td align="center">um I like xxx but then you added some Spanish, like you put English and then xxx but the other idea was after xxx so like if Ethan reads your book at least they'll know English and xxx if he still speaks Korean you'd want to write it in four languages</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Tina</td><td align="center">or like Neville he speaks French</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Mia</td><td align="center">and if you write it in French and in Korean, so that everybody can understand it</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Although this interaction took place months after the previous example shared about Tina, here she continued to display an interest in her peers' Spanish language resources, asking Maria to share her Spanish text first ("first read the Spanish!"). Maria's response of "and then I read you the English so you can understand" displayed a recognition of Tina's language resources. It evidenced learning and understanding of the language resources available to Tina. In their comments following Maria's reading of the text, Mia and Tina continued to display knowledge of their peers' language histories. They praised Maria's use of Spanish and English ("I love how you like you put Spanish and then you put English..."), and then suggested that she might add Korean to align with the language resources of their peer Ethan, or French to align with Neville's repertoire. This discussion evidenced a detailed understanding of the language resources held by all peers in the classroom, and a consideration and interest in those resources as a means of communication.</p> <p>Together, these examples from the first pattern illustrate how students and teachers talked about their own and each other's language histories when discussing language use and learning. This finding offers empirical examples of the influence of personal histories on a community language repertoire (Kim et al. [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref91">22</reflink>]). Across interactions, children's talk displayed an acute awareness and recognition of their own and others' language experiences, how those contributed to their current language practices, and how they might draw on their family and peers' experiences to expand their own language abilities. This created an openness to and valuing of diverse experiences, showing how communities can benefit from bringing together people who have diverse language resources and histories. Specifically, in multilingual, English‐medium classroom communities where teachers have intentionally welcomed the use of and discussion about students' multiple named language backgrounds, students then have space to consider their own and others' language histories and how those might intersect and grow.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-14">Interactional Use and Construction of a Community Repertoire</hd> <p>Building on the first theme which evidenced students' recognition of language practices as built on personal histories, the second theme shows how students interactionally drew upon, constructed, and expanded the community repertoire through moments of language learning with and from others and materials. This included: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref92">1</reflink>) whole‐class language learning interactions, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref93">2</reflink>) peer‐to‐peer teaching/learning interactions, (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref94">3</reflink>) learning from mentor texts, and (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref95">4</reflink>) learning from Google Translate. Across these interactions, students talked about their own and others' language practices, as well as their writing goals, to consider what language resources to include in their texts to make them understood and meaningful. They then flexibly drew on the community repertoire to learn languages and make meaning—by asking peers, teachers, family members, or digital tools for translations or spelling support.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-15">Language Learning With/From Whole‐Class Instruction</hd> <p>At times, language learning was a collective practice that took place in the whole‐group setting in this class. Mrs. Díaz intentionally made space for language learning in her classroom. As mentioned, as part of their daily stretching routine, she learned with/taught students how to count to 10 in Spanish, French, and Korean. Students also learned collectively how to say hello and goodbye in all the languages of the classroom, as well as additional languages through a GoNoodle video. During these whole‐group language learning events, Mrs. Díaz made space for questions and conversation around languages and language learning, for instance discussing differences in meaning of the word "chao" in Spanish and Italian. Mrs. Díaz also made space for language learning within her whole‐class literacy instruction. For instance, when writing personal narrative stories, Mrs. Díaz modeled in her minilesson creating a translingual text, writing, "Mi hermano Tom got married." A student with limited/no Spanish experiences, Jada, stopped her to ask:</p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">Jada</td><td align="center">what does hermano mean?</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Mrs. Díaz</td><td align="center">hermano, what do you think it means based on what I wrote, what would make sense?</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Jada</td><td align="center">me and my brother</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Mrs. Díaz</td><td align="center">not me and my brother, (re‐reads sentence) do you think me and my brother got married?... you're very close. Who had a wedding? Who is mi hermano, who do you think Tom is?</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Jada</td><td align="center">your brother</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Mrs. Díaz</td><td align="center">my brother, so what do you think the words "mi hermano" mean?</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Jada</td><td align="center">my brother</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Mrs. Díaz</td><td align="center">some people already knew that and some are learning, now you know that! Do you have an hermano?... Raise your hand if you have an hermano as well</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>This interaction served as a public, whole‐class language learning opportunity. Mrs. Díaz drew on her language repertoire to include Spanish text in her writing, and Jada asked about the meaning of the Spanish word. Mrs. Díaz then guided Jada through using contextual information to determine the meaning of "mi hermano." She reinforced this as a language learning space ("some are learning, now you know that!"), and gave all students a chance to practice using and responding to this new or reinforced linguistic resource in their repertoire by having them respond to a use of this word ("raise your hand if you have an hermano as well"). In doing so, Mrs. Díaz publicly valued translanguaging and language learning as part of the official writing curriculum (García et al. [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref96">15</reflink>]). Her public use of translanguaging pedagogy "transform[ed] heritage languages into a learning target for all of the students" (Carbonara and Scibetta [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref97">5</reflink>], 1064).</p> <p>Mrs. Díaz also used her whole‐class instructional platform to elevate students as language teachers and experts (Rowe and Johnson [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref98">43</reflink>]; Woodley and Brown [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref99">48</reflink>]). For instance, early in the year, Mary created a translingual English/Tagalog text that included a transliterated spelling of the word "twobeg [sic]" [water], which Mary told me she had learned from her mother. Mrs. Díaz then invited Mary to share this text with the whole class and used this as a language learning opportunity:</p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">Mary</td><td align="center">(showing page) I want to share something that I wrote, (pointing to Tagalog word) it is a word that means water</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Mrs. Díaz</td><td align="center">it means water in Tagalog, can you say what the word is?</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Mary</td><td align="center">tubig</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Mrs. Díaz</td><td align="center">say it real loud, (repeats) tubig, (to class) can you guys say that?</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Students</td><td align="center">tubig!</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Mrs. Díaz</td><td align="center">so if you're referring to water, and maybe you ask me, "Mrs. Díaz can I have some water?" you might want to say it, "Mrs. Díaz can I have some tubig?"... Thank you for sharing that with us, Mary, I love learning new words in different languages</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>This interaction shows how, after drawing on her family to add this word to her repertoire, Mary then shared it with her teacher, then publicly with all peers in her class. Mrs. Díaz modeled for the class using this word as part of the everyday, translanguaging flow of the classroom and invited students to practice using the word as well. This example, then, illustrates a direct progression in how language resources are shared and distributed across the community repertoire. In this case, a language resource was shared from Mary's mother, to Mary, to her teacher, to her classmates. Through Mary's interest in expanding her own language practices, and her teacher's willingness to publicly share multilingual practices, the language resources of the classroom were also expanded.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-16">Language Learning With/From Peers</hd> <p>Students also expanded and shared their linguistic repertoires through one‐on‐one or small group interactions with their peers. As previously mentioned, many students displayed an interest in learning or growing their Spanish language resources. This interest and students' awareness of their peers' language resources led to language learning in peer‐to‐peer interactions as students worked on their writing. For instance, after seeing snow outside one day in November, Steven, who spoke English at home, turned to César, who was a newcomer and spoke primarily Spanish, and asked how to say "snow" in Spanish. César told him, and Steven repeated the Spanish word aloud. Students also picked up on one another's desire to learn Spanish language resources and offered language learning opportunities to one another, such as in the following example:</p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">César</td><td align="center">(to Steven, pointing at book) that's an eagle!</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Maria</td><td align="center">you wanna know how to say bald eagle in Spanish? Hey! You wanna know how to say bald eagle in Spanish?</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Steven</td><td align="center">bald eagle? Balala?</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Maria</td><td align="center">no! águila calva</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Steven</td><td align="center">(repeats) águila calva</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>In this example, Steven was talking with César about a nonfiction text they were using to learn about birds. Maria noted their conversation and used it as a chance to teach Steven the Spanish word for eagle. Steven's repetition of the Spanish term evidenced taking up the language learning opportunity, drawing from his peer's knowledge to add a Spanish linguistic resource to his repertoire. Across the year, these language learning events were a common occurrence, with peers asking one another how to say a word in languages beyond English, then repeating the word aloud or adding it to their text. In doing so, they publicly displayed their interest in and the value of drawing on the collective language resources of the classroom to add new language resources to their repertoire. Students' varied language resources then could also lend them credibility as experts and teachers of others.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-17">Language Learning With/From Mentor Texts</hd> <p>Students also used translingual mentor texts to learn new translingual practices (Zapata et al. [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref100">52</reflink>]). Often Mrs. Díaz first shared these texts with the entire class. For instance, when she read the book <emph>Dear Primo: A Letter to My Cousin</emph> (Tonatiuh [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref101">45</reflink>]), this became a language learning event:</p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">Mrs. Díaz</td><td align="center">I want you to see how they use labels to add their Spanish in, so for example (pointing to page) the words are all really, most of them are in English, there are a few vocabulary words that they add in there that are Spanish, but they even label it afterwards, for example, they draw a picture of a burro, what do you think burro is? it's labeled here (pointing to picture)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Students</td><td align="center">donkey!</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>By introducing this text into the classroom language practices, Mrs. Díaz also introduced the author's translingual composing into the community language repertoire of the space. This allowed for discussion around the author's Spanish language and translingual composing practices. For students who were new speakers of Spanish, this was a language learning event, using the text to learn the word burro in Spanish. For students who were more experienced speakers of Spanish, this was an opportunity to see a model of translingual text—that is, they saw and discussed strategies they might use for deploying their bilingual language resources when writing. Students then at times drew on these mentor texts as they individually composed. For instance, at one point I observed a student, Natalia, get a bilingual text Mrs. Díaz had previously read aloud, bring it to her seat, and closely inspect the Spanish spellings to use them in her own translingual composing. These interactions illustrate how the community language repertoire of the classroom also included the bi/multilingual materials, particularly texts, within the space. These mentor texts, intentionally included by Mrs. Díaz, served as resources that students used to expand their language repertoires and imagine and exemplify new translingual language practices. By virtue of being published texts that people pay for, bilingual mentor texts also lent power to the value of translingual composing.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-18">Language Learning With/From Google Translate</hd> <p>Students also drew on Google Translate as a material resource to expand and support their bi/multilingual language resources. After Mrs. Díaz introduced this tool to the class in the spring, students often turned to Google Translate to seek translations or spelling support (see Rowe [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref102">41</reflink>]). For example, in the following interaction, Mary used Google Translate to support her Tagalog translations and to create a language learning interaction for her peers:</p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">Mary</td><td align="center">guys! what do you want to learn how to say in Tagalog</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Mia</td><td align="center">uh trunk</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Mary</td><td align="center">trunk? ooh Tagalog words, what's this, hmm (presses button for English audio)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Google Translate</td><td align="center">"trunk"</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Mary</td><td align="center">wait, whoops</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Mia</td><td align="center">is that how you spell Tagalog?</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Mary</td><td align="center">(presses button for Tagalog audio)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Google Translate</td><td align="center">"puno ng kahoy" (Google produced Tagalog word for trunk)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Mary</td><td align="center">okay guys! Hear this! Look, ready, hear this guys</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Google Translate</td><td align="center">"puno ng kahoy"</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Ana, Mia</td><td align="center">(repeat, laughing) puno ng kahoy</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Here, Google Translate participated in the language learning event by supporting Mary's Tagalog learning. Mary then used this knowledge to gain her peers' attention and invite their learning of a new Tagalog term as well. Through access to Google Translate, then, the bounds of the community language repertoire were expanded.</p> <p>Taken together, these examples from the second pattern illustrate how students interacted with new language resources by drawing on the community language repertoire of the classroom. This repertoire included the language resources of the various people in the space, as well as the materials and tools such as texts and Google Translate. Students strategically tapped into these resources to learn new language resources and make meaning. These interactions illustrate how language resources are not static, but rather continuously being shared, learned, and passed on. One student's language learning moment was often the result of another's previous language learning event. Adding to the community repertoire had expansive ripple effects. These language learning opportunities were important because they expanded what counted as school language and literacy practices and positioned previously marginalized language practices as powerful and centrally important.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-19">Macro‐Level Historical Discourses and Ideologies About Language(s)</hd> <p>Third, and related to the previous two themes, students' talk and interactions with language learning illustrated how macro‐level discourses and ideologies about language(s) and language users also influenced the use and construction of the community language repertoire. At various times, students' talk reproduced discourses and ideologies that (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref103">1</reflink>) positioned English as implicit in school spaces, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref104">2</reflink>) viewed languages as separate, bound entities, and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref105">3</reflink>) assigned value judgments to language(s) and language users. This finding highlights the distributed agency (Pennycook [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref106">38</reflink>]) of community repertoires and their spatially/historically bound nature.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-20">English as Implicit</hd> <p>In this classroom, there was a language ideology that established English as the dominant and implicit language of communication. This was a historically entrenched ideology formed through the pre‐existing language practices of the larger school context. English was the default language of school instruction and assessment—teachers typically used English to teach, and students typically used English to engage in classroom learning activities. English was the default language of the classroom, even between speakers who shared Spanish language resources. This is evident through all examples shared in this paper, where the primary language used by students is English, despite students and teachers having multilingual expertise. This is not a surprise, nor is it necessarily problematic. Students often chose to use English because it was the shared language resource of the space and they were thinking through how to communicate with others. For instance, I had the conversation below with Alfonso when I observed him writing in English after previously using Spanish to compose.</p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">Rowe</td><td align="center">are they [the characters] speaking in English or Spanish?</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Alfonso</td><td align="center">because sometimes not everybody's gonna know Spanish and so I'm gonna write it in English.</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Likewise, another Spanish‐speaking student told me something similar about her decision to compose in English. I noticed she was writing about family members and I asked about their language practices:</p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">Rowe</td><td align="center">when you talk to your mom and dad do you normally talk in English or Spanish?</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Gloria</td><td align="center">Español</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Rowe</td><td align="center">Spanish?</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Gloria</td><td align="center">but I'm doing it [writing] like this because, like, I know everyone speaks this language</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>It is simplistic, then, to say that students used English only because it was the default language of the classroom, or because they were adhering to monoglossic ideologies. Use of English language resources can, at times, be considered a strategic deployment of the multilingual language resources of the community repertoire as speakers consider the language resources of their audience and how best to convey their message.</p> <p>At the same time, students' decisions to use English also reflected the larger ideologies and practices of the school and cultural language practices, specifically raciolinguistic ideologies that valued white, "standardized" English practices (Flores and Rosa [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref107">13</reflink>]). For instance, at one point Steven, who spoke English at home, overheard two peers, César and Ivan, speaking Spanish, and asked them in a frustrated tone why they were speaking in Spanish. Ivan responded: "because I can, okay, it's my language, I talk Spanish, why can't I talk in Spanish then!" It should be noted that Steven, Ivan, and César were good friends who chose to sit near each other and interact while writing on almost a daily basis, including after this interaction. At an interpersonal level, when César and Ivan spoke in Spanish, Steven might have felt left out of conversations and/or frustrated by a lack of mutual understanding (Carbonara and Scibetta [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref108">5</reflink>]). At the same time, his questioning of Ivan's Spanish use reproduced monoglossic, macro‐discourses that elevated English above other named languages. As a white student questioning two Latino peers' use of Spanish in the classroom, his language can also be seen as unconsciously reproducing entrenched, implicit raciolinguistic ideologies that institutionally position use of languages other than English as problematic and those speakers as lacking appropriateness in U.S. schools (Flores and Rosa [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref109">13</reflink>]; Rosa and Flores [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref110">39</reflink>]).</p> <p>Interactions like this one were not frequently observed in this classroom, where Mrs. Díaz intentionally modeled valuing the use of multiple languages, and where the majority of students were multilingual language users, but they did occur. Interesting here from a community translanguaging perspective is considering how both the immediate interactional context and need to make meaning were interacting with larger discourses and ideologies. For instance, at times, students like Steven co‐opted macro‐discourses in an attempt to achieve an immediate interactional goal of communicating with friends, while at other times, students used discourses of multilingualism to decide to use English.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-21">Language Separation</hd> <p>Students' language learning events also at times, and inevitably, reproduced ideologies of language separation. Because English was the default language of the classroom, introduction of different language practices required naming them. As such, conversations about named languages were frequent in this space. For instance, in the conversation example that opens this paper, I asked Tina, "Does your mom speak English or Spanish?" This question, while aimed at opening the composing space to include additional languages, also presented these languages as binary, separate entities. This binary, and the implicit status of English as the norm, then at times led to the tokenization of languages beyond English. That is, languages other than English were at times positioned as a novel addition to an English text.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-22">Value Judgments for Language(s) and Speakers</hd> <p>As students talked about and engaged with new language resources, they also at times displayed value judgments towards language practices and speakers of certain languages. For instance, Tina and Maria's comments in the opening example voiced an ideology about a hierarchy of language users. Maria talked about herself as "only knowing a little bit" of Spanish, and Tina commented that she needed to learn Spanish from "someone who knows all the Spanish." This ideology about degrees of language expertise is interesting in the context of the community repertoire. On the one hand, students were recognizing and acknowledging their historical experiences with a language. On the other, they also were assigning value judgments to these experiences, with certain language users with certain experiences having a higher value than others. As mentioned, students who spoke languages other than Spanish and English often displayed an interest in learning Spanish. This suggested construction of ideologies where some languages were viewed as more valuable than others. In other words, students' language learning interactions constructed value judgments or a hierarchical view towards different named languages, and towards speakers of those languages. Taken together, examples from the third pattern illustrate ongoing tension between the immediate construction of a translanguaging space that valued a multilingual community repertoire, and the continual encroachment and reproduction of long‐standing monolingual ideologies.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-23">Discussion and Implications</hd> <p>Responding to recent calls stating a need for research that focuses on translanguaging theory and language use in interaction (Donley [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref111">11</reflink>]; García and Kleifgen [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref112">17</reflink>]; Mendoza et al. [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref113">32</reflink>]), findings from this study illustrate how multilingual students built and drew on a community language repertoire (Kim et al. [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref114">22</reflink>]) in one English‐medium classroom. Current literature theorizes community translanguaging, but there are few empirical examples of this theory illustrating how people construct community language repertoires, especially in classroom contexts. Why is this needed? Community translanguaging is a valuable lens for analysis because it illuminates the collective nature of translanguaging practices, as well as the porous boundaries of the community settings in which people translanguage. This theory, then, enables us to think of language resources as shared, distributed, and actively assembled across time and space as people come together to make meaning. Bringing this lens to understanding multilingual, English‐medium classroom interactions then has transformative potential because it foregrounds the collective nature of languaging amidst people who bring varied language experiences to a space. As Kim et al. ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref115">22</reflink>]) write, "The community translanguaging framework can counterwork the separatist and hierarchical language paradigm and offers new ways to create classroom space... in which all the possible spatial/ecological repertoires are drawn upon to maximize creativity in teaching and learning" (<reflink idref="bib313" id="ref116">313</reflink>). Thus, the present study is significant in that it contributes a needed empirical example of the community language repertoire being collectively constructed on a moment‐by‐moment basis in an English‐medium classroom, centering the experiences of students as active participants in this co‐construction. In other words, it shows <emph>how</emph> this can happen—what actions teachers and especially students took that "offered new ways to create classroom space" through the construction and use of a community language repertoire. In doing so, findings add to current understandings of community translanguaging as a theory for understanding classroom interactions. Next, I describe how the three main findings from this project relate to and extend community translanguaging theory and then discuss implications of this work for classroom pedagogy.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-24">Implications for Understanding Community Translanguaging in Classrooms</hd> <p>This study's first major finding was that students' personal histories contributed to the language repertoire of the classroom, and that these histories manifested through valuing family language practices and displaying an interest in peer language practices. In their theorization of community translanguaging, Kim et al. ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref117">22</reflink>]) describe how people carry "linguistic/non‐linguistic means and cultural assets from the many communities that they (have) inhabit(ed)" (<reflink idref="bib294" id="ref118">294</reflink>). Findings from this study illustrate how children brought varied experiences with language practices to the present classroom interactions. This included nuanced experiences with familiar/family languages, illustrating that a community translanguaging perspective requires attention to the vast range of experiences even amongst speakers who identify as speakers of the same named language. Importantly, however, findings additionally demonstrate that a key part of the construction of the community repertoire was not only that children brought varied linguistic means, but that they also were building awareness and recognition of those experiences, and how the experiences of others differed. They displayed an interest in the language histories of others and how they might learn from or align with those practices. In essence, this finding shows how language use in a community space involves recognition and appreciation of who one is as a language user, who others are as language users, how language resources might or might not overlap, and how language resources could be leveraged to learn language or make meaning. These data also illustrate the porous boundaries of a "community" repertoire, and how language resources are continually moving across time and space as language users inhabit different contexts (Pennycook [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref119">38</reflink>]). In essence, the community is always multiple and interactionally assembled, as individuals come together through movement across webs of overlapping community spaces. It is impossible to draw a firm boundary around the community, and in fact, analyzing classroom interactions through a community translanguaging lens challenges the idea that these hard boundaries exist. In other words, in the same way that translanguaging research has contributed an understanding that language boundaries are not inherent or fixed (Otheguy et al. [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref120">36</reflink>]), I argue that a community translanguaging lens contributes a view that community boundaries are likewise porous and permeable.</p> <p>The second main finding was that students interactionally used the community language repertoire as they learned with and from others and materials. Existing research on community translanguaging has examined translingual products, describing the inclusion of multiple elements and how those align with aspects of the community repertoire, such as school or family language practices (Abraham [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref121">1</reflink>]). This study goes a step further to illustrate how the community repertoire was assembled and interactionally drawn on through language learning events. It empirically demonstrates the transfer of language resources through these language learning events. While students entered the classroom with historical language experiences, these were not static. Through each new interaction, they built new experiences with language and, in doing so, expanded their histories and language resources (Kim and Song [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref122">23</reflink>]). In particular, findings show children did this by learning with and from one another as well as from materials like bilingual texts and Google Translate. Some of these language learning experiences were led by the teacher and so were public and shared amongst all students, while others occurred in one‐on‐one interactions between peers. These language learning interactions were largely intentional, with students seeking out and desiring to learn new language resources from the community repertoire (Turner and Lin [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref123">46</reflink>]). This finding, then, reconceptualizes the process of multilingual language learning as collective and connected to others (families, texts, etc.), rather than isolated in an individual learner's head. It shows how the community language repertoire is an assemblage (Deluze and Guattari [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref124">10</reflink>]) that is continually becoming, or constructed through moment‐by‐moment interaction as language users' linguistic and semiotic resources come into contact (Pennycook [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref125">38</reflink>]).</p> <p>The third finding was that macro‐level historical discourses were continually at play in the community language repertoire. Pennycook ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref126">38</reflink>]) writes that a distributed view of language not only shifts focus away from the individual, but in doing so poses "an understanding of language as embodied, embedded and distributed across people, places and time" (<reflink idref="bib276" id="ref127">276</reflink>). Findings from this paper show that, as students brought their histories and experiences with languages to present interactions, they also brought histories with language ideologies. These included dominant perspectives that position English as implicit, tokenize non‐English languages, and reinforce separation of languages (García and Torres‐Guevara [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref128">19</reflink>]). These ideologies are deeply entrenched in English‐medium schools, and can circulate in peer and adult interactions as well as the materials and tools, like Google Translate, that also contribute to the community language repertoire (Rowe [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref129">41</reflink>]). These findings demonstrate a new understanding of how ideological aspects of distributed agency work within the community repertoire, illustrating how practices in place are an assemblage of personal desires and communicative goals, as well as the continual creep of entrenched, dominant ideologies. This suggests that translanguaging spaces in English‐medium classrooms are inherently sites of tension, with an ongoing push/pull between transformative and embedded ideologies about which language practices are valued and accepted. Community translanguaging draws attention to how the community language repertoire in a multilingual classroom space can be leveraged to challenge English‐only monolingual ideologies, but that this is difficult, ongoing work.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-25">Implications for Teaching and Learning in Classrooms</hd> <p>Pedagogically, this study illustrates that children can and do engage in collective translanguaging practices in English‐medium classroom contexts that have been designed to value and promote multilingualism, and that these practices have the potential to challenge and transform English‐only interactional patterns. These findings are important, as they show possibilities for how English‐medium classrooms serving multilingual students, which currently are the norm, might be transformed. While it is unsurprising that multilingual children are capable of using multilingual language resources (i.e., translanguaging), the present study expands the field's understanding of community translanguaging by showing how children's deployment of multilingual language resources was collectively built, fostered, and distributed across speakers in an English‐medium classroom through language learning interactions. By adopting a community translanguaging lens, findings contribute a new understanding to teaching multilingual learners that, while personal experiences with and histories of language use are important, they do not constrain future meaning making. That is, children in this classroom flexibly and practically considered their own and others' language experiences, then reached out to their community language resources to make meaning. At times, this involved reproducing dominant discourses that were historically entrenched in the classroom. However, as children participated in this environment designed to intentionally support multilingualism, they also used community language resources to create a transformative translanguaging space (Wei [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref130">47</reflink>]) where their own and others' language experiences were broadened and new norms and ways of making meaning were created. Therefore, this work contributes an understanding that neither teachers nor students are constrained by personal language histories or repertoires. This can be freeing for educators, who can instead consider how to build classroom spaces that foster community repertoires that are rich with the multiple language practices of families, peers, and digital/material tools. Importantly, this work highlights that educators, when given the flexibility to do so, can build an environment that challenges English‐only, monolingual ideologies and promotes collective translanguaging even when they do not share all the languages of their students (Little and Kirwan [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref131">28</reflink>]).</p> <p>This study can then be seen as an existence proof, illustrating conditions of possibility (Zapata et al. [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref132">50</reflink>]) that fostered collective construction and use of a multilingual, community language repertoire despite being situated in an English‐medium school. In other words, these findings provide evidence that such multilingual practices are possible in English‐medium classrooms when teachers have flexibility to design and adapt writing instruction that supports translanguaging. The pedagogical practices that supported this work, described below, could be implemented in similar multilingual, English‐medium classroom writing spaces to support community translanguaging practices. To begin, the teacher normalized and frequently invited conversations about language use and language learning. This opened space for students to reflect on their own language practices, learn about those of peers and teachers, and consider new language practices they might like to adopt (Rowe [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref133">40</reflink>]). As part of this, the teacher positioned herself as a language learner and publicly demonstrated drawing on the community repertoire to use additional named language resources. She also designed her writing period so that students had time to interact and talk with one another, to compose on topics of their choosing, and to use digital translation technology if desired (Woodley and Brown [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref134">48</reflink>]). This made space for peer‐to‐peer conversations where language resources could be discussed and shared. Mrs. Díaz also publicly demonstrated use of multiple language resources from the community repertoire. This gave students tangible models as to how the collective community repertoire might be drawn upon, including referencing bilingual texts, asking peers or family members, or using digital translation tools.</p> <p>Taken together, these findings suggest the following questions for educators to consider when doing this work: What language resources do we have available here, including named languages and other language varieties? What teaching practices would support students' learning and knowing about these multiple language resources? How do texts and tools contribute to the shared language repertoire? What teaching practices could de‐center English and instead create communicative purposes for the use of all language resources?</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-26">Conclusion and Future Directions</hd> <p>This article has illustrated how shifting from the notion of an individual language repertoire to instead foreground community language repertoires offers a more nuanced picture of classroom language learning interactions. Findings from this research offer direction for future work exploring community translanguaging in interaction. Questions for future researchers to consider when examining interactions from this perspective include: What histories and experiences are at play in this space—personally, institutionally, and presently formed? What new ones are being created? What materials and resources are available here? What ideologies and positions are manifest and constructed, collaboratively, about languages and people? How is meaning made across and through language(s), materials, people, and histories? How is this transgressive and how is it reproductive of larger power dynamics?</p> <p>Shifting the analytic focus from the individual to the collective allows for a broader look at why and how people, as social beings, make language choices (Linell [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref135">27</reflink>]). Viewing language learning as a collective practice allows for focus on expansion rather than absence of language resources. In doing so, this perspective rejects deficit lenses that focus on what bi/multilingual children supposedly do not know (i.e., their "lack" of English knowledge). Instead, each person is viewed as part of a language community, with ties to the full wealth of collective language knowledge. The focus is on how their interactions build on one another to take a form and make meaning. The challenge for educators then becomes how to foster expansive interactions. Future research should explore connections between classroom language communities and the broader school community, including considering how collective translanguaging practices can be institutionally supported.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-27">Ethics Statement</hd> <p>This research meets ethical guidelines and was approved by the Institutional Review Board at The Ohio State University.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-28">Conflicts of Interest</hd> <p>The author declares no conflicts of interest.</p> <hd id="AN0188874256-29">Data Availability Statement</hd> <p>Research data are not shared.</p> <ref id="AN0188874256-30"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Funding: The author received no specific funding for this work.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0188874256-31"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibtext> Abraham, S. 2022. " Autores Fuertes: Practices of a Community Translingual Repertoire." Reading Teacher 76, no. 5 : 558 – 569. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.2159.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref2" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Abraham, S., K. Kedley, M. Fall, S. Krishnamurthy, and D. Tulino. 2021. " Creating a Translanguaging Space in a Bilingual Community‐Based Writing Program." International Multilingual Research Journal 15, no. 3 : 211 – 234. https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2021.1883791.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref3" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Bhatt, R. M., and A. Bolonyai. 2022. " Code‐Switching and Its Terminological Other—Translanguaging." In Multilingual Perspectives on Translanguaging, edited by J. MacSwan, 154 – 180. Multilingual Matters.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref34" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Canagarajah, S. 2017. Translingual Practices and Neoliberal Policies: Attitudes and Strategies of African Skilled Migrants in Anglophone Workplaces. Springer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref11" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Carbonara, V., and A. Scibetta. 2022. " Integrating Translanguaging Pedagogy Into Italian Primary Schools: Implications for Language Practices and Children's Empowerment." International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 25, no. 3 : 1049 – 1069. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1742648.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref81" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Charmaz, K. 2006. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. SAGE.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref62" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Cochran‐Smith, M., and S. L. Lytle. 2009. Inquiry as Stance: Practitioner Research for the Next Generation. Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref40" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Creese, A., and A. Blackledge. 2010. " Translanguaging in the Bilingual Classroom: A Pedagogy for Learning and Teaching? " Modern Language Journal 94 : 103 – 115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540‐4781.2009.00986.x.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref54" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Daniel, S. M., R. T. Jiménez, L. Pray, and M. Pacheco. 2017. " Scaffolding to Make Translanguaging a Classroom Norm." TESOL Journal 10, no. 1 : 1 – 14. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.361.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Deluze, G., and F. Guattari. 1987. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, edited by B. Massumi and Trans. University of Minnesota Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Donley, K. 2022. " Plugging in Translanguaging: Thinking Across Theory for Methodological Innovation in English Learner and Multilingual Education." International Multilingual Research Journal 17, no. 1 : 51 – 67. https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2022.2103116.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Emerson, R. M., R. I. Fretz, and L. L. Shaw. 2011. Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes. 2nd ed. University of Chicago Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Flores, N., and J. Rosa. 2015. " Undoing Appropriateness: Raciolinguistic Ideologies and Language Diversity in Education." Harvard Educational Review 85, no. 2 : 149 – 171. https://doi.org/10.17763/0017‐8055.85.2.149.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Flynn, E. E. 2020. " 'Rapunzel, Rapunzel, Lanza tu pelo': Storytelling in a transcultural, translanguaging dialogic exchange." Reading Research Quarterly 56, no. 4 : 643 – 658. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.367.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> García, O., S. I. Johnson, and K. Seltzer. 2017. The Translanguaging Classroom: Leveraging Student Bilingualism for Learning. Caslon.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> García, O., and J. A. Kleifgen. 2010. Educating Emergent Bilinguals: Policies, Programs, and Practices for English Language Learners. Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> García, O., and J. A. Kleifgen. 2020. " Translanguaging and Literacies." Reading Research Quarterly 55, no. 4 : 553 – 571. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.286.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> García, O., and T. Kleyn. 2016. " Translanguaging Theory in Education." In Translanguaging With Multilngual Students: Learning From Classroom Moments, edited by O. García and T. Kleyn, 9 – 33. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> García, O., and R. Torres‐Guevara. 2010. " Monoglossic Ideologies and Language Policies in the Education of U.S. Latinas/Os." In Handbook of Latinos and Education: Research, Theory and Practice, edited by E. G. Murillo Jr., S. A. Villenas, R. T. Galván, et al., 182 – 193. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hansen‐Thomas, H., M. A. Stewart, P. Flint, and T. Dollar. 2021. " Co‐Learning in the High School English Class Through Translanguaging: Emergent Bilingual Newcomers and Monolingual Teachers." Journal of Language, Identity, and Education 20, no. 3 : 151 – 166. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2020.1726759.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Heath, S. B., and B. V. Street. 2008. Ethnography: Approaches to Language and Literacy Research. Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kim, S., L. M. Dorner, and K. H. Song. 2021. " Conceptualizing Community Translanguaging Through a Family Literacy Project." International Multilingual Research Journal 15, no. 4 : 293 – 316. https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2021.1889112.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kim, S., and K. H. Song. 2019. " Designing a Community Translanguaging Space Within a Family Literacy Project." Reading Teacher 73, no. 3 : 267 – 279. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1820.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Laman, T. T. 2013. From Ideas to Words: Writing Strategies for English Language Learners. Heinemann.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Le Pichon, E., and E. Kambel. 2022. " The Language Friendly School: An Inclusive and Equitable Pedagogy." Childhood Education 98, no. 1 : 42 – 49. https://doi.org/10.1080/00094056.2022.2020538.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lin, A. M. Y. 2019. " Theories of Trans/Languaging and Trans‐Semiotizing: Implications for Content‐Based Education Classrooms." International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 22, no. 1 : 5 – 16. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1515175.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Linell, P. 2014. " Interactivities, Intersubjectivities and Language: On Dialogism and Phenomenology." Language and Dialogue 4, no. 2 : 165 – 193. https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.4.2.01lin.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Little, D., and D. Kirwan. 2018. " Translanguaging as a Key to Educational Success: The Experiences of One Irish Primary School." In The Multilingual Edge of Education, edited by P. Van Avermaet, S. Slembrouck, K. Van Gorp, S. Sierens, and K. Maryns, 313 – 339. Palgrave Macmillan.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Little, D., and D. Kirwan. 2019. Engaging With Linguistic Diversity. Boomsbury Academic.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Machado, E., and P. Hartman. 2019. " Translingual Writing in a Linguistically Diverse Primary Classroom." Journal of Literacy Research 51, no. 4 : 480 – 503. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X19877462.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Machado, E., and P. Hartman. 2020. " 'It Took Us a Long Time to Go Here': Creating Space for Young Children's Transnationalism in an Early Writers' Workshop." Reading Research Quarterly 56, no. 4 : 693 – 714. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.363.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mendoza, A., L. Hamman‐Ortiz, Z. Tian, et al. 2024. " Sustaining Critical Approaches to Translanguaging in Education: A Contextual Framework." TESOL Quarterly 58, no. 2 : 664 – 692. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3240.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Miles, M. B., A. M. Huberman, and J. Saldaña. 2014. Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. 3rd ed. SAGE Publications.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Center for Education Statistics. 2023. English Learners in Public Schools. IES. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cgf.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Orellana, M. F. 2016. Immigrant Children in Transcultural Spaces: Language, Learning, and Love. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Otheguy, R., O. García, and W. Reid. 2015. " Clarifying Translanguaging and Deconstructing Named Languages: A Perspective From Linguistics." Applied Linguistics Review 6, no. 3 : 281 – 307. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev‐2015‐0014.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Palmer, D., R. A. Martínez, S. G. Mateus, and K. Henderson. 2014. " Reframing the Debate on Language Separation: Toward a Vision for Translanguaging Pedagogies in the Dual Language Classroom." Modern Language Journal 98, no. 3 : 757 – 772.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pennycook, A. 2017. " Translanguaging and Semiotic Assemblages." International Journal of Multilingualism 14, no. 3 : 269 – 282.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rosa, J., and N. Flores. 2017. " Unsettling Race and Language: Toward a Raciolinguistic Perspective." Language in Society 46 : 621 – 647. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404517000562.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rowe, L. W. 2022a. " Disrupting Monolingual Ideologies: Constructing Biliterate Composing Practices in a Second‐Grade Classroom." Reading Research Quarterly 57, no. 4 : 1149 – 1166. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.465.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rowe, L. W. 2022b. " Google Translate and Biliterate Composing: Second‐Graders' Use of Digital Translation Tools to Support Bilingual Writing." TESOL Quarterly 56, no. 3 : 883 – 906. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3143.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rowe, L. W. 2024. " Interactions With New‐To‐Teacher Language Resources: Supporting Translingual Composing in a Multilingual Elementary Classroom." Journal of Early Childhood Literacy 24, no. 3 : 692 – 711. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687984241276315.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rowe, L. W., and J. Johnson. 2024. " When Writers Lead the Lesson: Students as Teachers in Elementary Composing Spaces." Reading Teacher 78, no. 1 : 86 – 89. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.2331.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shin, S. 2018. Bilingualism in Schools and Society: Language, Identity, and Policy. 2nd ed. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tonatiuh, D. 2010. Dear Primo: A Letter to My Cousin. Abrams.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Turner, J., and A. M. Y. Lin. 2020. " Translanguaging and Named Languages: Productive Tension and Desire." International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 23, no. 4 : 423 – 433. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1360243.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wei, L. 2011. " Moment Analysis and Translanguaging Space: Discursive Construction of Identities by Multilingual Chinese Youth in Britain." Journal of Pragmatics 43 : 1222 – 1235.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Woodley, H. H., and A. Brown. 2016. " Balancing Windows and Mirrors: Translanguaging in a Linguistically Diverse Classroom." In Translanguaging With Multilingual Students: Learning From Classroom Moments, edited by O. García and T. Kleyn, 83 – 99. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zapata, A. 2020. " Cultivating a Critical Translingual Landscape in the Elementary Language Arts Classroom." Language Arts 97, no. 6 : 384 – 390.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zapata, A., C. R. Kuby, and J. J. Thiel. 2018. " Encounters With Writing: Becoming‐With Posthumanist Ethics." Journal of Literacy Research 50, no. 4 : 478 – 501.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zapata, A., and T. T. Laman. 2023. " Reconditioning a New Linguistic Normal for Children's Classrooms Through Critical Translingual Literacies." Language Arts 100, no. 3 : 245 – 253.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zapata, A., N. Valdez‐Gainer, and C. Haworth. 2015. " Bilingual Picture Book Making in the Elementary Classroom." Language Arts 5 : 343 – 358. https://doi.org/10.58680/la201527192.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Lindsey W. Rowe</p> <p>Reported by Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib293" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref68"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref76"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref78"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref90"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref98"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref99"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref100"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref101"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref110"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib313" firstref="ref116"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib294" firstref="ref118"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref120"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref123"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref124"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib276" firstref="ref127"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref128"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref132"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1487291
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Language Histories, Community Translanguaging, and Collective Repertoires: Multilingual Language Learning Interactions in a Second-Grade Writing Workshop
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Lindsey+W%2E+Rowe%22">Lindsey W. Rowe</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8874-7560">0000-0001-8874-7560</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Reading+Research+Quarterly%22"><i>Reading Research Quarterly</i></searchLink>. 2025 60(4).
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 16
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Early+Childhood+Education%22">Early Childhood Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Elementary+Education%22">Elementary Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Grade+2%22">Grade 2</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Primary+Education%22">Primary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Grade+2%22">Grade 2</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Elementary+School+Students%22">Elementary School Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Code+Switching+%28Language%29%22">Code Switching (Language)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Multilingualism%22">Multilingualism</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Writing+Workshops%22">Writing Workshops</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22English+%28Second+Language%29%22">English (Second Language)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Language+of+Instruction%22">Language of Instruction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interaction%22">Interaction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Elementary+School+Teachers%22">Elementary School Teachers</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1002/rrq.70050
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0034-0553<br />1936-2722
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Using a community translanguaging lens, this paper focuses on the collective translanguaging practices of second-grade students who come from multilingual language backgrounds but were attending a school where English was the mandated language of instruction. The research question addressed is: How did students construct and employ a community language repertoire during writing interactions in a multilingual, English-medium classroom? Data were drawn from a year-long, qualitative study employing ethnographic and practitioner research methods to examine teacher and students' daily writing practices in one second-grade classroom. Data were analyzed using descriptive and thematic coding of students' language learning interactions. Findings illustrate how the community repertoire was drawn on and constructed as students: (1) talked about their own and others' language histories, (2) interacted with peers and materials to learn language(s), and (3) at times reproduced historical, macro-level discourses. Representative, interactional examples are used to illustrate and describe each theme in detail. Implications for theory and pedagogy are discussed, arguing that a focus on community translanguaging offers a more nuanced view of classroom language learning.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1487291
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1487291
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1002/rrq.70050
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 16
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Grade 2
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Elementary School Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Code Switching (Language)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Multilingualism
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Writing Workshops
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: English (Second Language)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Language of Instruction
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interaction
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Elementary School Teachers
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Language Histories, Community Translanguaging, and Collective Repertoires: Multilingual Language Learning Interactions in a Second-Grade Writing Workshop
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Lindsey W. Rowe
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 10
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0034-0553
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1936-2722
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 60
            – Type: issue
              Value: 4
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Reading Research Quarterly
              Type: main
ResultId 1