Home vs School Language Conflict: An Auto-ethnographic Inquiry

Authors

  • Tikaram Poudel

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51474/elepraxis.v2i2.667

Keywords:

Home language, school language, language conflict, social justice, structural and ideological injustice

Abstract

Children from minority communities speaking a different home language from the language of instruction at school face multiple forms of social injustice. I explore the experience of a learner who faced learning hardships when the home language was different from the language of instruction at school. Methodologically, I follow the principles of the autoethnographic approach, reflecting on the nuances of my experience navigating the conflict between home and school language disparities. I connect my anecdotal reflections to show the larger social and political mechanisms, such as policies, laws, and power imbalances that sustain and perpetuate these inequalities. Based on my auto-ethnographic anecdotes, I explore the experience of a learner from the theoretical construct of ideological and structural injustice (Fricker, 2007; Fraser, 2010). For this paper, I understand ideological injustice as an unfair treatment of a socially marginalized group by a dominant group based on ideological and social affiliations (Fraser, 2010). It discriminates and further marginalizes members of the socially marginalized group, creating artificial differences in ideas, personal value systems, and social identities, ignoring the intellectual abilities, actions, and characters of marginalized groups. On the other hand, structural injustice arises from deeply rooted social, political, and educational systems (Fricker, 2007). Individuals experience discrimination because of the broader patterns of social inequalities that emerge from social structures, policies and practices (Fraser, 2010), which restrict access to resources and opportunities. This paper contributes to the discourse on language education in the context of South Asia by connecting my reflections to the larger social context for just and inclusive policies. It aims to create awareness to eliminate the challenges of bias and prejudice by dismantling existing underlying social structures and advocating for an equitable and just social system.

References

Awasthi, L. D., Turin, M., & Yadava, Y. P. (2023). Challenges in the acknowledgement and implementation of linguistic human rights in Nepal. In T. Skutnabb-Kangas & R. Phillipson (Eds.), The handbook of linguistic human rights (pp. 551–560). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Bernhofer, J., & Tonin, M. (2022). The effect of language instruction on academic performance. Labour Economics, 78, 102218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2022.102218
Canestrino, R., Magliocca, P., & Li, Y. (2022). The impact of language diversity on knowledge sharing within international university research teams: Evidence from TED project. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 879154. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.879154
Government of Nepal. (2015) The Constitution of Nepal 2015. Government of Nepal.
Fraser, N. (2010). Scales of justice: Reimagining political space in a globalised world. Columbia University Press.
Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford University Press.
Government of India. (1949, September 21). Merger agreement between the Governor-General of India and His Highness the Maharaja of Manipur.
Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks. International Publishers.
Hamuddin, B., Ramadhani, M. R., & Ningrum, F. S. (2025). The impact of home language and literacy environment on children's learning outcomes. Script Journal: Journal of Linguistic and English Teaching, 10(1), 138–163. https://doi.org/10.24903/sj.v10i1.2001
Macaulay, T. B. (1835, February 2). Minutes on education in India. In H. Woodrow (Ed.), Minutes on education in India written in the years 1835, 1836, and 1837 (pp. 1–7). Baptist Mission Press.
Macaulay, T. B. (1972). Minute on Indian education. In J. Clive & T. Penny (Eds.), Thomas Babington Macaulay: Selected writings. University of Chicago Press.
Nepal National Education Planning Commission. (1956). Education in Nepal: Report of the Nepal National Education Planning Commission. Bureau of Publications, College of Education.
Phillipson, R. (2016). Linguistic imperialism continued. Routledge.
Poudel, T. (2022). Resisting the hegemony of English in the Indian subcontinent. Journal of Education and Research, 12(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.51474/jer.v12i1.590
Recento, T. (2006). An introduction to language policy: Theory and method. John Wiley & Sons.
Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2009). Linguistic genocide in education or worldwide diversity and human rights? Routledge.
Skutnabb-Kangas, T., & Dunbar, R. (2010). Indigenous children's education as linguistic genocide and a crime against humanity? A global view. Gáldu Čála: Journal of Indigenous Peoples' Rights 1(10), 2010.
Thiong’o, N. w. (1986). Decolonising the mind: The politics of language in African literature. James Currey.
Wells, G. (1980). Language in the transition from home to school: Final report to the Nuffield Foundation. University of Bristol.

Published

2025-11-30 — Updated on 2025-11-30

How to Cite

Poudel, T. (2025). Home vs School Language Conflict: An Auto-ethnographic Inquiry . ELE Praxis, 2(2), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.51474/elepraxis.v2i2.667

Issue

Section

Editorial