Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorFenton-Smith, Ben
dc.contributor.authorGurney, Laura
dc.date.accessioned2018-04-26T00:02:18Z
dc.date.available2018-04-26T00:02:18Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.issn1747-7506en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/14664208.2016.1115323en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/99403
dc.description.abstractNearly two decades have passed since Kaplan and Baldauf [1997. Language planning from practice to theory. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters] drew attention to the dearth of language policy and planning (LPP) in higher education. Despite the continuing inflow of English as an additional language students into Anglophone universities, and a boom in English-medium instruction policies in non-Anglophone tertiary institutions [Dearden, J. (2014). English as a medium of instruction: A growing global phenomenon. British Council], LPP research remains relatively underdeveloped in higher education. We suggest that current understandings of academic language policy and planning in higher education would benefit from contextualised analyses of actors and agency [Chua, C. S. K., & Baldauf, R. B. (2011). Micro language planning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 936–951). New York, NY: Routledge; Zhao, S. H., 2011. Actors in language planning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (Vol. II, pp. 905–923). New York, NY: Routledge; Zhao, S. H., & Baldauf, R. B. (2012). Individual agency in language planning: Chinese script reform as a case study. Language Problems & Language Planning, 36(1), 1–24]. In order to address this gap, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 10 academic language program planners at different universities across Australia. We examined how the micro-level processes of program development and implementation were both constrained and enabled by the participation of different actor groups, operating at different levels (micro, meso, macro) and each with their own capacity to influence change. We conclude by arguing that coherent university-wide language policies, formulated by decision-making bodies representative of a variety of stakeholder groups and sensitive to program implementation needs at the micro level, represent a step towards improving the current situation.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.publisherRoutledgeen_US
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom72en_US
dc.relation.ispartofpageto87en_US
dc.relation.ispartofissue1en_US
dc.relation.ispartofjournalCurrent Issues in Language Planningen_US
dc.relation.ispartofvolume17en_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchApplied Linguistics and Educational Linguisticsen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode200401en_US
dc.titleActors and agency in academic language policy and planningen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Peer Reviewed (HERDC)en_US
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articlesen_US
gro.facultyArts, Education & Law Group, School of Languages and Linguisticsen_US
gro.hasfulltextNo Full Text


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record