Engaging disadvantaged students in a Chinese as a Foreign Language classroom: Bernstein's pedagogic discourse as a bridge

The paper addresses the problem of disengagement and high dropout among non-Chinese-background learners of Chinese in Australia (reported as up to 95% before Year 10), often linked to teacher-centred pedagogy practiced by many native Chinese-speaking teachers trained in China. Despite moves toward more contextually responsive CFL pedagogies, there is a lack of micro-level empirical studies examining the language of classroom interactions (pedagogic discourse) and how it shapes engagement. The author, a teacher-researcher in a low-SES Sydney primary school, investigates pedagogic discourse using Bernstein’s theory and the Fair Go Project’s engagement framework to understand what pedagogic discourses look like in a CFL classroom and which types promote engagement. Research questions: • What do pedagogic discourses look like in the CFL classroom? • What type(s) of pedagogic discourses promote the engagement of CFL learners? A representative lesson (well-received by students and reflecting typical practice with shifting pedagogic discourse) was selected from a larger dataset to unpack how discourse operated across phases of a lesson. The study aims to offer principles to help CFL teachers align classroom practices with Australian educational priorities and provide engaging learning experiences, while noting that teaching cannot be standardized and the lesson is not presented as a universally replicable model.

CFL education in Australia is framed by national policy goals (e.g., Asia literacy, multilingual citizenship) and social inclusion agendas, yet remains fragile with very high dropout among non-Chinese-background learners. Prior studies attribute disengagement to teacher-directed, textbook-based, decontextualized instruction that clashes with constructivist, collaborative approaches favored in Australian schooling. There is a need for general principles that illuminate the nature of knowledge and teacher–student relations within CFL classroom communication. Theoretical frameworks: • Bernstein’s pedagogic discourse: The concepts of classification (boundaries between knowledge domains) and framing (control over selection, sequencing, pacing, evaluation, and social order) regulate instructional discourse (ID) and regulative discourse (RD), with RD dominating ID. Varying strengths of classification and framing construct specific learner identities and orientations to meaning. Shifts at the micro level (“interactional practices”) can scaffold disadvantaged learners into legitimate text production and valued ways of working, supporting inclusion and equity. • Fair Go Project (FGP) engagement framework: For low-SES students, classroom messages can be engaging or disengaging (“discourses of power”). Engagement is seen as a balance of cognitive, affective, and operative dimensions (“thinking hard, feeling good, working well”). Shifting disengaging messages toward engaging ones empowers students and apprentices them into subject knowledge. The framework informs analysis of students’ focus group accounts.

Design and context: A practitioner inquiry conducted by a Chinese native speaker teacher-researcher in a government primary school in Greater Western Sydney (GWS), NSW, Australia (March 2017–July 2019). The school serves a highly diverse, low-SES community; 67% of students are from non-English speaking backgrounds, with Tagalog, Hindi, Urdu, Filipino, and Arabic among the largest home languages. Participants and data: Year 5 class (9–10-year-olds). Data comprised 25 audio-recorded lessons (producing 25 transcripts) collected across Terms 1–3 in 2018, and four student focus group interviews (each with 4–5 participants, ~20 minutes). Ethics approvals and informed consent (verbal and signed) were obtained. Analysis: Lesson and focus group recordings were transcribed. Lessons were segmented into four phases based on shifts in ideational, interpersonal, and textual meanings: Review → Introduction → Input → Constructivist activities. Using Bernstein’s framework, transcripts were deductively coded for strengths of classification (C+ strong / C– weak) and framing (F+ strong / F– weak). Focus groups were coded using the FGP engagement dimensions (cognitive, affective, operative). Codes across datasets were clustered to derive themes. A particular lesson—frequently referenced positively by students and representative of the broader pattern of shifting pedagogic discourse—was selected for detailed analysis.

• Structure of pedagogic discourse across a representative lesson: The lesson comprised four phases—Review, Introduction, Input, Constructivist activities—each marked by distinct combinations of classification (C) and framing (F). – Review: C+ F+. Teacher explicitly selected content (greetings), tightly controlled sequencing, pacing, criteria, and behavior (e.g., take out worksheets), establishing hierarchical relations and strong evaluation. – Introduction: C+ with F weakening at times. Teacher introduced numbers 0–10 and used a video clip; students requested replay, gaining some control over pacing and how to engage (watch vs. shadow pronunciation), indicating increased autonomy. – Input: C+ F+. Teacher-led modeling and explicit evaluation (tone accuracy for líng), with ritualized call-and-response and clear criteria; asymmetrical, highly structured interactions. – Constructivist activities: C– F–. Integration of arithmetic (addition/subtraction) with Chinese numbers weakened classification; dialogic practices and peer nomination/correction weakened framing. Students exercised pedagogic rights (enhancement, inclusion, participation), took independent control of behavior and knowledge, and engaged in inclusive, participatory talk. • Engagement outcomes (FGP lens): Students displayed high operative engagement (active involvement, desire to participate), affective engagement (expressing fun, eagerness to be chosen), and cognitive engagement (transferring mathematics knowledge to Chinese; attending to tones and pronunciation). Illustrative student comments: – “That one, everyone wanna choose, cuz everyone wanted to get that sticker and choose the person to have a turn.” – “It is fun (reading after the teacher) and makes it easier to remember.” • Generative pattern: A deliberate sequencing of stronger C/F (to establish content and criteria) and weaker F (to allow pacing/autonomy) followed by weaker C/F (to connect knowledge domains and open dialogic space) supported engagement and learning for low-SES students. • Evidence base and context: Findings are drawn from 25 lesson recordings and 4 focus groups in a low-SES, highly diverse school (67% NESB). While most phases maintained strong classification due to the distinctiveness of Chinese for learners, weakening classification during constructivist tasks created meaningful cross-curricular connections and engagement.

The findings address the research questions by showing how pedagogic discourse manifests in a CFL classroom and identifying which configurations promote engagement. A strategic, phase-based shifting of classification and framing—from strong C/F to moments of weaker F (autonomy/pacing) and weaker C/F (cross-curricular integration, dialogic participation)—supported students’ access to content, criteria, and valued interactional norms, while also enhancing their affective connection to learning. This dynamic adjustment countered disengaging “discourses of power” historically experienced by low-SES students, refreshing their feelings about schooling and encouraging risk-taking beyond rote tasks. Maintaining strong classification during core input safeguarded explicit knowledge transmission (e.g., tones, pronunciation), whereas weakening classification in constructivist tasks blurred disciplinary boundaries to create epistemic links that made learning meaningful and applicable. Students’ active, peer-mediated participation and desire to be chosen reflected heightened agency and inclusion, subverting stereotypes of primary-level CFL as limited to low-level tasks. Overall, shifting pedagogic discourse emerged as a viable bridge to social inclusion, apprenticing learners into CFL knowledge and classroom culture while fostering engagement.

The study contributes a micro-analytic account of classroom pedagogic discourse in a low-SES CFL context and proposes a structured, phase-based approach that purposefully shifts classification and framing to cultivate high operative, affective, and cognitive engagement. It extends the Fair Go Project’s engagement framework into CFL, offering practitioners precise language and principles to plan and chart lessons aligned with Australian educational aims and social inclusion. Pedagogical and teacher education implications include supporting teachers of Chinese—especially those trained in Mainland China or with Chinese backgrounds—to recognize the value of language use and implement flexible, context-responsive practices. The engaging approach of shifting pedagogic discourse can inform teaching of other Asian languages (e.g., Indonesian, Korean, Japanese) and contribute to Asia literacy and retention in school language programs. Future directions include developing professional learning to scaffold teachers’ use of classification/framing shifts across contexts and exploring broader applications to enhance equity and inclusion.

The detailed analysis centers on one representative lesson selected from a larger practitioner inquiry; while typical of the observed pattern, it is not presented as an exemplary or universally replicable model. The author emphasizes that teaching is a human activity that cannot be standardized. Findings are situated in a single low-SES primary school context and specific year level (Year 5) with non-Chinese-background learners, which may limit generalizability beyond similar settings.