Multilingualism in the Classroom
A multilingual approach as an opportunity in modern foreign-language education

Foreign-language education holds an opportunity. The languages and linguistic knowledge that students bring with them can act as a bridge to the target language and contribute to more inclusive, meaningful and effective language teaching, provided they are used thoughtfully at the right moments. In this article, I will discuss three perspectives that highlight the added value of a multilingual approach.

By Indira Wakelkamp

Anyone who teaches in secondary education knows this already: many classrooms are multilingual. Students may speak Turkish, Arabic, Polish, Papiamentu or Frisian at home, or they may pick up other languages at school, online or while travelling. However we define multilingualism, one thing is clear: students’ linguistic repertoires typically stretch far beyond Dutch alone.

Despite the growing attention to multilingual approaches, classroom practice is still largely shaped by a predominantly monolingual perspective (Blackledge & Creese, 2010; May, 2014). This is often done with the best intentions and is driven by understandable misconceptions about multilingualism, several of which are described by Van Beuningen & Polišenská (2019). In many foreign-language teaching traditions, the guiding principle is that the target language should be used as much as possible by both teacher and students (Littlewood, 1981). That principle is undeniably valuable: rich, meaningful exposure to and use of the target language form part of the foundation of language acquisition, as Long (1996) notes. Yet in practice we see that the principle is sometimes interpreted too rigidly, based on the belief that students learn best by being immersed in the foreign language (Hall & Cook, 2012; Turnbull & Dailey-O’Cain, 2009). This often leads to an emphasis on maximising target-language use, with Dutch as the only permissible support language.

Against this background, foreign-language education holds an  opportunity. The languages and linguistic knowledge that students bring with them can act as a bridge to the target language and contribute to more inclusive, meaningful and effective language teaching, provided they are used thoughtfully at the right moments. Below, I will discuss three perspectives that highlight the added value of a multilingual approach.

Inclusion and well-being

Language is more than a means of communication. It is part of who we are and closely tied to our identity (García & Wei, 2014; Norton, 2013). This is especially true for students who speak a language other than, or alongside, Dutch at home. A strong sense of belonging, the feeling of being included and acknowledged, is a crucial foundation for motivation and learning (Goodenow, 1993). For multilingual students, that sense of belonging strongly depends on the extent to which their linguistic and cultural identities are taken seriously (Cummins, 2001a; Van der Wildt, Van Avermaet & Van Houtte, 2017). Turner et al. (2023) also showed that students become more engaged and enjoy learning more when their home languages are given a visible and meaningful place in the classroom.

Those who speak multiple languages also possess valuable linguistic knowledge that can facilitate the learning of additional languages (Cenoz, 2003; Herdina & Jessner, 2002). Limiting classroom language use to the target language and Dutch can implicitly signal to students that their other languages, and the identities and linguistic knowledge tied to them, do not matter in the classroom (Cummins, 2001b; García & Kleyn, 2016). By recognising and valuing the full linguistic identities and knowledge of students, we convey a different message: ‘Your language and your knowledge count.’ This strengthens both their motivation and their well-being at school.

Language development and constructivism

For many years, it was assumed that multilingual speakers stored their languages as separate systems in their minds, as though each language occupied its own compartment (Grosjean, 1989). Mixing these systems was often seen as something negative that might hinder development — one of the well-known misconceptions about multilingualism (Van Beuningen & Polišenská, 2019). We now know that multilingualism is not made up of separate systems but of a dynamic network in which languages constantly interact. When we speak or listen in one language, for example, other languages remain unconsciously active (Kroll & Bialystok, 2013). Jim Cummins (2008) described this in his Common Underlying Proficiency model, which proposes that all of a speaker’s languages are supported by a single shared underlying reservoir of knowledge. From this reservoir, knowledge and skills developed in one language can transfer to another. Geva & Ryan (1993), for example, found that phonological awareness in the first language correlates with reading ability in the second, suggesting that certain linguistic skills are shared across languages.

These insights align with a social-constructivist view of learning, which assumes that new knowledge is constructed on the basis of existing knowledge (Vygotsky, 1978). The languages students bring to school therefore form a rich reservoir of prior knowledge that we can build on in the foreign-language classroom. For example, when students prepare for a communicative task in the target language, they can draw on what they already know in their other languages, such as vocabulary, structures or learning strategies, and use this as scaffolding (Grasso, 2012; Nation, 2003). In this way, the knowledge and use of other languages become a stepping stone or scaffold that can help students make the transition to the target language. Purposefully drawing on students’ full linguistic repertoires therefore aligns with insights from language-acquisition research as well as broader learning theory.

Language awareness

When students consciously reflect on similarities and differences between languages, they develop language awareness: the ability to think about language, understand how it works in context, and see how languages relate to one another. Within this broader concept, metalinguistic awareness refers specifically to insight into the form and structure of language, including grammar, word formation and semantic relations. Research shows that this linguistic and metalinguistic awareness is an important predictor of success in foreign-language learning. Students who understand how language works recognise grammatical patterns more quickly, acquire vocabulary more easily, and make a smoother transition to a new language (Brooks & Kempe, 2013; Roehr-Brackin & Tellier, 2019).

Reflecting on language, whether on form, use, or comparison across languages, not only deepens understanding but also promotes transfer between languages and increases motivation for language learning (Cenoz & Gorter, 2011). In terms of Cummins’ Common Underlying Proficiency model, language awareness strengthens the shared knowledge reservoir that connects a speaker’s languages. By consciously thinking about how languages function, students deepen their understanding of that underlying system. It is precisely this process of reflecting on language that is cognitively demanding and requires thoughtful pedagogical choices: moments when it may be beneficial to temporarily depart from the target language (Macaro, 2009; Swain, 2006).

Sebastiaan Dönszelmann (2024) observes in his Handboek Doeltaaldidactiek [Handbook of Target Language Didactics] that at the very moments when students’ linguistic or metalinguistic awareness is activated, the target language is not always the most effective language of instruction. At such moments, the home language, whether Dutch or another language, can provide valuable assistance, for example when students need to understand new grammatical concepts or connect new knowledge to what they already know in their other languages. The target language remains central to the lesson, while other languages are used strategically to construct meaning, deepen understanding, and strengthen language awareness. In such cases, the use of other languages is a pedagogical choice that supports language development and comprehension (Dönszelmann, 2024; Hall & Cook, 2012).

Conclusion

Recognising, valuing and purposefully drawing on students’ full linguistic repertoires can enrich foreign-language teaching. These repertoires include not only the languages students know, but also their linguistic experiences, skills, and learning strategies, all of which can serve as valuable sources of knowledge and support. Through deliberate pedagogical decisions, both in planning and during the lesson, it becomes possible to explore how and when multilingual resources can support learning in and of the target language, in ways that align with what students themselves are willing and able to contribute. By drawing on these resources together with students at appropriate moments, we can create language education that is both more inclusive and more effective, and in which every language may play a meaningful role in learning a new one.