When I was teaching fifth grade, I had a group of French-speaking students who were quite fluent in English.
When they were chatting with each other on the playground, I encouraged them to use French.
Another teacher in my division told them they had to speak English.
Same school. Same grade level. Same students.
Two completely different expectations about which languages belonged at school.
And it raises a question I’ve thought about quite a bit since.
What is the purpose of recess?
Is it for children to play, socialize, build friendships, and enjoy time with their peers?
Or is it another opportunity to practice English?
These students were already proficient in English. They could communicate comfortably in the school’s language of instruction. They were choosing to speak French because they shared that language with their friends.
So what educational purpose did restricting it serve?
But there’s a bigger issue here, and it goes beyond recess.
What happens when multilingual students receive contradictory messages about their languages from the adults responsible for educating them?
What Do English-Only Rules Actually Communicate?
Schools often establish language expectations for understandable reasons.
They want students to develop proficiency in the language of instruction. They want students to communicate across linguistic backgrounds. Teachers may worry about students being excluded from conversations they cannot understand.
Those are legitimate considerations.
But a language rule should serve a clear purpose, and that purpose should make sense in the context in which the rule is applied.
During a structured English lesson, there may be good reasons to ask students to practice particular language skills in English.
During recess, when two friends are chatting together in a language they share, the educational goal is quite different.
And when adults enforce English-only expectations without distinguishing between those contexts, they may communicate something they never intended.
That a student’s home language is inappropriate at school.
That it belongs at home, but not among friends on the playground.
Or that English is inherently more acceptable, even when there is no instructional reason to use it.
This is particularly important because students learn about the values of their school through far more than formal lessons.
They learn through the way adults respond to their language choices, the rules they encounter, and the behaviors that are encouraged or corrected.
A school’s language culture is shaped by these everyday interactions.
An Inclusive Language Policy Is Not the Same as an Inclusive Experience
Many schools explicitly celebrate multilingualism.
Their mission statements emphasize international-mindedness. Their websites highlight linguistic diversity. Their language policies recognize the value of students’ home languages.
But what does that actually look like during a child’s school day?
Imagine a multilingual student moving between classrooms.
In science, they’re encouraged to use their home language to discuss a complex concept before explaining it in English.
In another classroom, they’re expected to work exclusively in English, even during collaborative activities.
At recess, one teacher encourages them to speak their home language with friends.
Another tells them to stop.
Same student. Same school. Different messages about which languages are welcome.
The problem isn’t necessarily that teachers have different instructional strategies.
It’s that they may be operating from fundamentally different assumptions about multilingualism.
One teacher might see students’ languages as resources for learning, communication, and belonging.
Another might see those same languages as barriers to English development.
And without shared principles, both teachers may believe they are following the school’s educational philosophy.
This creates a gap between the language policy a school has written and the language experiences its students actually have.
I’ve explored the broader dimensions of this challenge in How Can a School Become More Language-Inclusive?.
But the playground example highlights something particularly important: even when teachers work with the same students, their expectations can be dramatically different.
Why Translanguaging Is a Leadership Decision
When schools begin exploring translanguaging, they often approach it as a matter of classroom style.
Teachers learn strategies for encouraging multilingual discussion, connecting vocabulary across languages, accessing prior knowledge, or making meaning through students’ full linguistic repertoires.
These are valuable instructional approaches.
But translanguaging cannot depend entirely on individual teachers.
If one classroom encourages students to draw on their languages for learning while another discourages those same practices, students experience an inconsistent approach to multilingual education.
And if one adult welcomes a child’s home language on the playground while another prohibits it, the inconsistency extends into the wider school environment.
Strictly speaking, a French conversation at recess is not necessarily an example of pedagogical translanguaging. But the beliefs that shape how teachers respond to that conversation are closely connected to the beliefs that inform translanguaging pedagogy.
Do we view students’ languages as valuable resources?
Do we believe those languages belong in the school community?
Do we recognize multilingualism as an asset for learning, identity, and participation?
These are questions that cannot be answered by individual teachers alone.
School leaders are responsible for creating the conditions in which language-inclusive practices can become coherent across the school.
That includes language policies, professional learning, shared expectations, curriculum planning, and the everyday decisions adults make about students’ languages.
It’s also why professional development for multilingual learners needs to involve leadership rather than focusing exclusively on individual classroom strategies.
Consistency Does Not Mean Every Teacher Must Do the Same Thing
There’s an important distinction here.
A language-inclusive school does not need identical practices in every classroom.
An English teacher working on persuasive writing, a science teacher introducing a complex concept, and a PE teacher organizing a team activity have different instructional goals.
Their language expectations will naturally differ.
There may be moments when sustained English practice is appropriate. There may be other moments when students benefit from discussing ideas in another language, comparing linguistic structures, or communicating freely with peers.
The point is to make those decisions intentionally.
Consistency doesn’t mean identical practice. It means shared principles.
Teachers should understand why certain language choices are encouraged in one context and different expectations may be appropriate in another.
And students should be able to recognize a consistent message underneath those differences:
Their languages are valuable. Their multilingualism is an asset. And the school has clear educational reasons for the language expectations it establishes.
How Can School Leaders Identify Inconsistent Language Practices?
One of the most useful things school leaders can do is examine how students actually experience language throughout the school day.
That means looking beyond written policies and lesson plans.
Here are five questions worth investigating:
1. What happens when students speak their home languages outside class?
Consider recess, lunch, hallways, extracurricular activities, and informal conversations.
Are students encouraged to communicate naturally with peers? Are there restrictions? Do different adults enforce different expectations?
And importantly, what educational purpose do those restrictions serve?
2. Do teachers share an understanding of why multilingualism matters?
Teachers may agree that linguistic diversity should be celebrated while holding very different beliefs about whether students should use their languages during learning.
A shared understanding requires examining those beliefs and connecting them to instructional decisions.
3. Do classroom practices reflect the school’s language policy?
If a policy recognizes multilingualism as an asset, how is that principle visible in everyday instruction?
Can students use other languages to process complex ideas, make connections, or demonstrate understanding when appropriate?
Or does their access depend entirely on which teacher they have?
4. What do students themselves say about language expectations?
This may be the most revealing question of all.
Ask multilingual students when they feel comfortable using their languages at school.
Ask whether those expectations change between classrooms or activities.
Ask what happens when they use a language other than English.
Their answers may reveal inconsistencies that are difficult to recognize from an administrative perspective.
5. Are teachers supported in making informed language decisions?
Teachers need more than a policy telling them to value multilingualism.
They need professional learning, opportunities for discussion, examples of effective practice, and a shared understanding of what language inclusion looks like in different contexts.
Without that support, language policies can remain statements of aspiration rather than guides for practice.
From Language Policy to Language Experience
I don’t think the other teacher in my fifth-grade example was trying to make those children feel that French was unwelcome.
I suspect we simply had different understandings of the role of language at school.
And that is precisely why leadership matters.
When expectations are left to individual interpretation, students may experience the same school very differently depending on the adults they encounter.
A school can value multilingualism in its mission statement and still send contradictory messages about multilingualism in its classrooms and playgrounds.
The solution isn’t to prescribe identical instructional strategies or eliminate teacher judgment.
It’s to establish shared principles, examine how they’re enacted, and create opportunities for teachers to develop a coherent approach to multilingual education.
Because ultimately, the measure of a school’s language policy isn’t how beautifully it is written.
It’s what students experience.
And that leaves school leaders with an important question:
If you followed a multilingual student through their entire school day, what would their experiences tell you about your school’s language policy?
Building a more coherent approach to multilingual education?
At Conex-Us Consulting, I work with schools to examine how language policies, classroom practices, and leadership systems interact with students’ learning, engagement, and sense of belonging. Together, we identify practical ways to make multilingual inclusion part of everyday school life.
Next steps: see how school-wide language inclusion support works; or book a free discovery call to talk through your school’s context.
Related reading: Your Students Love Multilingualism. So Why Do They Still Want English-Only Classrooms? | Language Inclusion Is for Every Multilingual Learner
