Article published In: Language Problems and Language Planning
Vol. 39:2 (2015) ► pp.171–186
Learner agency in language planning
A tripartite perspective
Published online: 22 October 2015
https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.39.2.04bro
https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.39.2.04bro
The role of language teacher agency in language policy and planning (LPP) enactment and implementation at the micro-level has received increasing treatment in the literature. Under-addressed in this context, however, is the role of the learner and the extent to which learner activity can be agentive. Seeking to redress this situation, this paper focusses on learner agency in LPP. After establishing a general ecology of language context, issues related to the problematic concept of ‘agency’ are addressed. This discussion draws upon poststructuralist critiques as well as the insights of sociocultural theory. A poststructuralist perspective provides a broad philosophical base for problematizing learner agency and supplies a critique of the limited structuralist approach characteristic of traditional LPP. A sociocultural lens supplies a more concrete conceptualization of how agentive learner activity operates interactively with teacher agency. The final section of the paper focusses on ethnography as a research methodology; ethnographic research yields qualitative data on learner agency that can be drawn upon in micro planning and policy-making. A relevant case study employing ethnographic methodology is discussed. The conclusion is that learner agency should be given more prominence in LPP research and literature.
Keywords: language planning, poststructuralism, sociocultural theory, ethnography, agency
References (53)
. (2012). Living language: An introduction to linguistic anthropology. West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Baldauf, R.B., Jr. (1993). Unplanned” language policy and planning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 141, 82–89.
. (2006). Rearticulating the case of micro language planning in a language ecology context. Current Issues in Language Planning, 7(2-3), 147–170.
Blommaert, J. (1996). Language planning as a discourse on language and society: The linguistic ideology of a scholarly tradition. Language Problems and Language Planning, 20 (3), 199–222.
Caldwell, R. (2007). Agency and change: Re-evaluating Foucault’s legacy. Organization, 14(6), 769–791.
Canagarajah, A.S. (2006). Ethnographic methods in language policy. In T. Ricento (Ed.), An Introduction to Language Policy (pp. 153–169). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
De Costa, P.I. (2010). Language ideologies and Standard English language policy in Singapore: Responses of a ‘designer immigrant’ student. Language Policy, 9(3), 217–239.
Cross, R. (2009). A sociocultural framework for language policy and planning. Language Problems and Language Planning, 33 (1), 22–42.
Deleuze, G. (1994) Difference and repetition. New York: Columbia University Press. Original work published 1968.
Eggington, W. (2010). Unplanned language planning. In R.B. Kaplan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of applied linguistics (2nd ed.) (pp. 452–262). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fishman, J.A. (1994). Critiques of language planning: A minority language perspective. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 15 (2-3), 91–99.
Foucault, M. (1990). The history of sexuality, vol. 11. New York: Random House. Originally published 1978.
. (1991). Governmentality. In G. Burchell, C. Gordon, & P. Miller (Eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality (pp. 87–104). Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Gubrium, J.F., & Holstein, J.A. (1995). Individual agency, the ordinary, and postmodern life. The Sociological Quarterly, 36(3), 555–570.
Heller, M. (1999). Linguistic minorities and modernity: A sociolinguistic ethnography. London: Longman.
Hornberger, N.H. (2002). Multilingual language policies and the continua of biliteracy: An ecological approach. Language Policy 1 (1), 27–51
Hornberger, N.H., & Johnson, D.C. (2007). Slicing the onion ethnographically: Layers and spaces in multilingual language education policy and practice. TESOL Quarterly, 41(3), 509–532.
Lantolf, J.P. & Thorne, S.L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Levinas, E. (1998). Otherwise than being or beyond essence. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press. Original work published 1974.
Lo Bianco, J. (2004). Language planning as applied linguistics. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds.), The handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 738–762). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Miller, E.R. (2010). Agency in the making: Adult immigrants’ accounts of language learning and work. TESOL Quarterly, 44(3), 465–487.
Norton, B. (1997). Language, identity, and the ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly, 31(3), 409–429.
Norton, B., & Toohey, K. (2011). Identity, language learning, and social change. Language Teaching, 44(4), 412–446.
O Laoire, M., Rigg, C., & Georgiou, V. (2011). Subaltern agency and language education policy: Implementing a language policy for on the ground. Apples - Applied Language Studies, 5(3), 19–32.
. (2006). Postmodernism in language policy. In T. Ricento (Ed.), An introduction to language policy (pp. 60–76). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Phillipson, R. & Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (1996). English only worldwide or language ecology? TESOL Quarterly 30 (3), 429–452.
Poehner, M. & Lantolf, J.P. (2010). Vygotsky’s teaching-assessment dialectic and L2 education: The case for dynamic assessment. Mind Culture and Activity, 17(4), 312–330.
Ramanathan, V. (2005). Rethinking language planning and policy from the ground up: Refashioning institutional realities and human lives. Current Issues in Language Planning, 6(2), 89–101.
Ramanathan, V., & Morgan, B. (2007). TESOL and policy enactments: Perspectives from practice. TESOL Quarterly, 41(3), 447–463.
Richardson, F.C., Rogers, A., & McCarroll, J. (1998). Toward a dialogical self. The American Behavioral Scientist, 41(4), 496–515.
Ricento, T. (2000). Historical and theoretical perspectives in language policy and planning. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 4 (2), 196–213.
Ricento, T.K., & Hornberger, N.H. (1996). Unpeeling the onion: Language planning and policy and the ELT professional. TESOL Quarterly, 30(3), 401–427.
Ros i. Sole, C. (2007). Language learners’ sociocultural positions in the L2: A narrative approach. Language and Intercultural Communication, 7(3), 203–216.
Shohamy, E. (2009). Language policy as experiences. Language Problems and Language Planning, 33(2), 185–189.
Shouhui, Z., & Baldauf, R.B. (2012). Individual agency in language planning: Chinese script reform as a case study. Language Problems and Language Planning, 36(1), 1–24.
Siekmann, S. & Charles, W. (2011). Upingakuneng (When they are ready): Dynamic assessment in a third semester Yugtun class. Assessment in Education: Principles Policy and Practice 18(2) 151–168.
Stern, D. (2000). The return of the subject? Power, reflexivity and agency. Philosophy and Social Criticism, 26(5), 109–122.
Tarnopolsky, O. & Goodman, B. (2012). Language practices and attitudes in EFL and English-medium classes at a university in eastern Ukraine. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics 27 (2), 57–75.
Tollefson, J.W. (2010). Perspectives on language policy and planning. In R.B. Kaplan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of applied linguistics (2nd ed.) (pp. 463–472). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cited by (7)
Cited by seven other publications
Lopera , Sergio & Nelly Sierra
Chen, Lin & Danping Wang
Savski, Kristof
Lu, Juexuan & Qi Shen
Finardi, Kyria Rebeca & Felipe Furtado Guimarães
Goodman, Bridget
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
