| Theories of language learning resistance (Canagarajah, 1993, 1999; Pennycook, 1998; Phillipson, 1992) originally developed in post-colonial contexts of cultural domination in relation to formalized instruction in English as a Second or Other Language. This dissertation is the first to extend these theories of resistance to contexts of non-dominant foreign language (FL) classroom learning. Framed by critical social and pedagogical theories, it reports the findings of a semester-long critical ethnographic microanalysis involving classroom observation and video recording, individual interviews, document analysis, and group member check interviews of one section of students (n=21) enrolled in first-semester Italian as a FL at a large Midwestern university. Findings reveal several types of resistance: (a) the use of codeswitching from Italian to English to resist their instructor's interpretation of the target-language-only policy because conforming to these classroom expectations threatened their identities as competent, articulate students; (b) students' playing dumb to protect their identities and to create a sense of solidarity among classmates; (c) resistance to instructor-initiated discourses or implied "truths" that the culture of Italy was superior to that of other countries, and (d) rejection of an implied goal that all the students were planning to study abroad in Italy when, in fact, students had multiple goals.; The ethnographic study was supplemented with quantitative data from a two-trial course-wide (N=177) attitude survey based on Gardner's (1985) AMTB scale. Results provided statistically significant evidence of negative change over time in attitudes toward certain elements of FL learning, lending support to the study's principal qualitative findings.; Discussion includes theoretical and practical implications for communicative language teaching particularly in terms of how students may negotiate the target-language-only policy, as well as the potentially conflicting goals for FL learning held by various stakeholders (i.e., teachers, students, programs, and institutions). To build on findings regarding the enactments of resistance uncovered in this study, additional research on the politics of language learning in non-dominant FL contexts is warranted. Such research should inform the development of empowering critical pedagogies for FL teaching. |
