Sociolinguistics and Language Education.pdf

Multilingualism and Codeswitching in Education 135
Ethnographic observations
Besides the methods discussed above, researchers interested in investigating
classroom CS have also made use of ethnographic observations
including participant observations and audio and/or video recording of
language use in bilingual classrooms (Hadjioannou, 2009; Lin, 1990;
Martin-Jones, 1995; Zentella, 1981). For instance, Hadjioannou (2009)
reports on an ethnographic study of Standard Greek–Greek Cypriot dialect
CS she conducted in bilingual classrooms in Cyprus, noting that teachers
engaged in CS for classroom management, for elaboration or clarifi cation,
or for joking. Similarly, Martin-Jones (1995) describes two ethnographic
studies of CS, one by Zentella (1981) based on observations of Spanish-
English bilingual classes in New York and the second by Lin (1990) on
English–Cantonese bilingual classrooms in Hong Kong. The results of
these studies reveal that teachers engaged in CS to mitigate the effect of
admonition, to make asides, to make metalinguistic commentaries (Zentella,
1981), or to ensure thorough understanding of the teaching points by reiterating
and elaborating them in L1 (Lin, 1990). It must be said, however,
that the very presence of the investigator–participant observer in the classroom,
together with the recording instruments, makes ethnographic observations
somewhat intrusive. As such, ethnographic observations run into
the same problem of the observer’s paradox that Labov (1978) has raised.
Nevertheless, data from ethnographic observations not only provide
insights into the ways in which teachers and learners get things done bilingually
in the classroom (Martin-Jones, 1995), but also indicate, as observed
earlier, that classroom CS is a mirror image of language practice in the
wider bilingual society. As Joshua Fishman would put it, ‘societal factors
dictate much of what is taught and to whom; as well as how it is taught and
by whom; and fi nally how all of those involved in the teaching-learning
process interact with each other’ (Fishman, 1977: 32).
To summarize, the methods described above, namely, written texts,
interviews, tape recording, language surveys, and ethnographic observations,
have generated a signifi cant body of data for CS analysis. They do,
however, each have their limitations and challenges, as already noted with
respect to the observer’s paradox (Labov, 1978). An eclectic approach, one
that uses a combination of some of these methods for data collection,
might help counter the challenges and allow the investigator to gain more
insights into CS, especially its use in the educational context.
Conclusion and Directions for Further Research
This chapter has highlighted research fi ndings on why bilingual teachers
and students sometime use CS in the classroom. Research shows that
classroom CS, just like CS in the wider multilingual society, is not random.