Multilingual, Not Invisible: Reimagining Education for International Students 

Ayesha Dar

BA (Hons) Education, London Metropolitan University 

Amina sat at the back of her Advanced Literary Theory class, nervously going over her thoughts. The group was deep into a discussion about One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel García Márquez, a book she knew well in its original Spanish. Finally, she built up the courage to jump in, sharing an insight about the word “soledad”, something she felt got totally lost in the English version. But before she could finish, the professor cut her off: “Let’s stick to English so everyone can follow.” The room went quiet. Just like that, her voice and the unique perspective she brought, was pushed aside. 

This story, replicated across universities worldwide, exemplifies one of the most pressing debates in multicultural literature today: the persistence of monolingual norms in academic institutions and the consequent marginalisation of multilingual students and scholars. 

The Monolingual Paradigm in Literary Academia 

Even though today’s literature comes from all over the world, many universities still expect everything to be done in English. This puts other languages and the people who speak them, at a disadvantage. Linguist Robert Phillipson (2009) calls this “linguistic imperialism,” where english is treated as the only language that really matters in education, pushing other languages and cultures to the side. Universities often operate under strict English-only rules, which makes it harder for multilingual students and scholars to fully participate, share their ideas, or feel like they belong.  

For students like Amina, it’s a frustrating situation. Universities say they want diverse voices and perspectives, but at the same time, they expect everyone to speak and write in the same way. As Canagarajah (2013) puts it, multilingual students are stuck in a tough spot: they’re asked to bring diversity, but also expected to fit into one narrow way of doing things. 

Academic Gatekeeping Through Language 

The way many universities force everyone to use only one language (English) in their literature departments creates unfair barriers. This makes it harder for people who speak other languages to succeed in academic settings. 

When universities make students write their dissertation only in English, it creates problems for those whose first language isn’t English. Scholars who speak multiple languages often can’t express certain ideas properly when forced to use only English. This means their work gets watered down through translation, or sometimes important ideas never get written at all. 

As the writer Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o (1986) points out, language isn’t just words, it carries entire cultural viewpoints and values. When scholars can’t use all their languages, we lose important perspectives in academic conversations. 

The problem gets worse with academic journals. The most respected literary journals mostly publish in English only. This creates a cycle where English-language work gets cited more often, making English seem even more important. 

While translation could help solve this problem, less than 3% of books in English-speaking countries are translations from other languages. This means English-only scholars miss out on huge amounts of valuable literary knowledge from around the world. (Post, 2019) 

Amina’s experience illustrates this dynamic. After the seminar, she approached her professor to suggest incorporating the Spanish original alongside the translated text. “That would be impractical,” her professor explained. “Not everyone reads Spanish.” The unspoken assumption, that everyone should read English, remained unexamined. 

Who Belongs in the Literary Canon? 

Who gets to have their stories considered “real literature”, is closely tied to what language they write in. Even though people have been trying for decades to include more diverse voices in literature studies, works that need translation face bigger obstacles to being recognised and respected. This is especially true for writing in languages that aren’t widely spoken globally or lack political and economic power. 

A researcher named Damrosch (2020) looked at what books are taught in World Literature classes at fifty different universities. She found that 68% of assigned readings were originally written in English. Only 9% were translated from French, 7% from Spanish, and 6% from German. 

Languages from less wealthy regions of the world (Global South) made up less than 5% of the required readings. This is unbalanced because these regions have most of the world’s population and produce lots of literature. 

When multilingual students come across these skewed canons, they receive a clear message about whose stories matter. As Hooks (1994) notes, “being taught in a language and learning environment that did not reflect their realities resulted in many students feeling alienated…. and silenced.” 

Three weeks after her seminar experience, Amina discovered García Márquez’s own words on this subject: “I write in Spanish, which is my language. All the subtle meanings I want to convey come from the words I learned from my grandmother… each language has its own heaven, its own sky” (Interview, 1982). She brought this quote to her next class, determined to advocate for linguistic diversity. 

The Social Justice Implications 

Enforcing English-only rules in universities isn’t just about language, it creates unfair systems that affect students in deeper ways and raise serious social justice concerns: 

1. Economic barriers – Students who don’t come from English-speaking backgrounds often have to spend extra money on language classes, tutoring or editing help to meet academic expectations (Hartanto & Yang, 2019). Native English speakers usually don’t face these extra costs. 

2. Mental strain – Multilingual students often have to constantly switch between languages in their heads, which uses up mental energy. This can make it harder to focus on learning compared to monolingual students who don’t have to do this (Hartanto & Yang, 2019). 

3. Loss of meaning – When research has to be translated into English to be taken seriously, some important cultural ideas can get watered down. This weakens the diversity of global knowledge. (Spivak, 2000) 

4. Identity pressure – As Anzaldúa (1987) said, language is closely tied to identity. Forcing students to hide or leave behind their native languages can feel like erasing part of who they are. 

The academic world is starting to recognise that language-related issues are also social justice issues. New ideas like “linguistic justice” (Skutnabb-Kangas & Phillipson, 2016) and “trans languaging pedagogy” (García & Li Wei, 2014) are now challenging the old belief that only one language, usually English, should be used in education. 

Progressive universities are starting to challenge English-only approaches. Some emerging practices include: 

• Classes that use both original language texts and translations 

• Adding translation activities to literature courses 

• Grading systems that accept mixing languages in assignments 

• Online tools that support using multiple languages in academic work 

• Community projects that protect heritage languages while encouraging creative writing 

After weeks of feeling silenced, Amina finally found validation when a visiting scholar conducting a workshop on trans lingual reading practices. Students were encouraged to bring passages in their heritage languages, creating deeper literary analysis that went beyond the limits of just one language. For the first time that semester, Amina’s full linguistic identity was recognised as an academic asset rather than a liability. 

The push for English-only rules in university literature classes is a serious issue when it comes to fairness and inclusion. When schools limit academic discussion and writing to English, they don’t just make things harder for multilingual students, they also reduce the depth and richness of what everyone can learn. Literature is shaped by culture, and meaning often gets lost when it’s stripped of its original language and context. As Kramsch (2009) explains, the meaning of a story isn’t just in the words themselves but in the culture those words come from. By excluding other languages, institutions are not only silencing diverse voices but also narrowing students’ understanding of global literature. Challenging these monolingual norms isn’t just about fairness for international students, it’s about expanding what we value as knowledge, culture, and human experience in the classroom. 

Amina’s journey from silence to advocacy represents the potential for change. In her final paper that semester, she boldly incorporated untranslated Spanish passages alongside her English analysis, providing contextual explanations that enriched her classmates’ understanding rather than excluding them. Her professor, initially hesitant, acknowledged the depth her multilingual approach brought to the discussion. Small victories like these point towards a more linguistically fair academic future, one where the full spectrum of human languages enriches, rather than divides our literary conversations. 

Amina stood anxiously at the threshold of Professor Chen’s office. For weeks, she had avoided seeking help with her literary analysis paper despite falling behind. “It’s not that I don’t understand the concepts,” she explained hesitantly after finally mustering the courage to attend office hours. “It’s finding the right words in English to express what I can articulate perfectly in Arabic.” The professor nodded with recognition, he had heard similar concerns from countless international students over his twenty-year career. What Amina didn’t know was that her experience had a name in academic literature: language-related academic stress, a phenomenon documented yet persistently overlooked in institutional policies. 

Research consistently shows that language is one of the biggest challenges international students face in higher education. Andrade (2006) notes that “language issues pervade all aspects of academic life for international students,” affecting far more than just speaking in class. In her review of studies over 15 years, she found that language proficiency was the strongest predictor of academic success, even more important than students’ past academic achievements. This suggests that strong ideas and motivation aren’t always enough if students don’t have the language skills to meet academic expectations. 

For students like Amina, this leads to a frustrating gap between what they know and how they’re perceived. Zhang and Mi (2010) explain that many international students “possess sophisticated ideas but lack the linguistic resources to express them with the precision demanded in academic settings.” As a result, their true abilities may go unnoticed or undervalued. Over time, this can cause what Preece (2010) calls “academic identity conflict,” where students start to doubt their own academic strengths, even though they may have been successful in their home countries. 

When Amina’s professor suggested she join the university writing centre for additional support, she reluctantly agreed. Yet as documented by Kim (2022), many writing centres operate from monolingual assumptions that position international students’ language differences as deficiencies rather than resources. During her first session, the tutor focused exclusively on correcting Amina’s grammar rather than engaging with her ideas, an approach Kim’s research shows can “reinforce linguistic insecurity rather than build academic confidence” (2022). 

Language isn’t the only challenge international students face, many also deal with feeling socially and culturally isolated. In a study by Li and Kaye (2018), two-thirds of the 223 international students they surveyed said they felt isolated during their first year. Most pointed to language barriers as the main reason. The researchers pointed out that even though universities often talk about being “international” in their mission statements, the everyday campus experience still tends to feel very mono cultural (Li & Kaye, 2018). 

For Amina, this isolation became apparent during group projects. When teams formed in her literary theory course, native English speakers grouped together, leaving international students to form their own groups. As she confided to her journal: “It feels like there are two parallel universities, one for native speakers and one for the rest of us.” This observation aligns with Marginson’s (2014) concept of “parallel social worlds” that develop on internationally diverse yet culturally segregated campuses. 

The cultural disconnect isn’t just social, it also shows up in the way teaching and learning work. Gu and Schweisfurth (2015) followed a group of Chinese students studying at British universities and found big differences in educational expectations. In China, learning often focuses on memorising information and following the teacher’s lead. But in the UK, students are expected to think critically and work independently, often without much clear guidance. The study pointed out that universities usually expect international students to adjust to the way things are done, instead of making space for different ways of learning (Gu & Schweisfurth, 2015). 

When Amina’s professor told her that her analysis “lacked original perspective,” it showed a clear cultural disconnect. In her previous education, she was taught to engage deeply and respectfully with well-known interpretations, not to challenge them. However, in the UK classroom, that approach was seen as unoriginal or passive, rather than as a difference in academic style and values. 

Even with all the challenges, research shows that international students can go through powerful identity changes, especially when they get the right kind of support. Montgomery (2010), found that many international graduate students who adjusted well to academic life developed what she calls “transcultural academic identities.” In other words, they created a blended academic self that draws on both their original culture and the new one. 

This kind of transformation happened for Amina when she took a comparative literature seminar with Professor Okafor, who had studied trans lingual teaching methods. Unlike her earlier classes, this one welcomed and celebrated students’ different language backgrounds. During a discussion on Mohsin Hamid’s ‘Exit West’, Professor Okafor encouraged multilingual students to share how stories about migration are told in their own cultures. This created what Tran (2011) describes as “zones of cultural validation”, spaces where international voices weren’t just accepted, but seen as valuable and enriching to the conversation. 

In this supportive environment, Amina’s relationship to her multilingualism began to shift. “For the first time,” she wrote in her final reflection, “my knowledge of Arabic literature wasn’t something to hide but something that enriched our class discussions.” This experience exemplifies what Song and Pyon (2019) document as “linguistic capital recognition,” where multilingualism is reframed from obstacle to asset. 

For every professor like Okafor who used thoughtful, research-based teaching methods, Amina also came across others who didn’t seem aware of the challenges international students face. This kind of inconsistency is what Bodycott and Walker (2013) call a “patchwork implementation” of internationalisation, where some teachers try new approaches, but the wider system stays the same. 

As Amina got closer to graduation, she looked back on her experiences through a final auto ethnographic project, where she told her own story, the ups and the downs. Her project is a great example of what Shen and Peng (2019) encourage in research: treating international students not just as people we study, but as people who create valuable knowledge based on their lived experiences, insights that could help improve how universities work.Top of FormBottom of Form 

Research into international students’ experiences paints a mixed picture, highlighting real challenges like language barriers, cultural isolation and rigid institutional norms, but also revealing the power of supportive environments that embrace multilingualism. For Amina, success didn’t come from fitting into English-only expectations, but from learning spaces that valued her linguistic and cultural background. As she moved on to doctoral studies, she carried a commitment to amplifying the voices of international students in academic research. 

The bigger issue, however, is the gap between what research tells us and how universities actually operate. As Tran and Nguyen (2015) point out, institutions often prioritise market goals over meaningful educational change. Until policies begin to reflect the rich insights already available, students like Amina will continue to succeed not because of the system, but in spite of it. 

“I never thought my research would take this direction,” Amina confided to her academic mentor over coffee. Three years into her PhD program, she had shifted her focus from Victorian literature to multilingual pedagogy in higher education. The catalyst? Her own journey as an Arabic-Spanish-English multilingual navigating British academia. “When I found out about Finland’s approach to language education, it made me question everything about how we handle multilingualism here in the UK,” she explained, spreading research papers across the table. Her mentor nodded thoughtfully. “The question is whether such approaches could work within our system.” 

Research shows that supporting language diversity in education benefits all students, not just those who speak more than one language. Hornberger and Link (2012) explain that multilingual education isn’t just about making room for different languages, but actually offers a powerful way to improve learning for everyone. 

Multilingual teaching approaches offer a new way to think about inclusion. Instead of seeing language differences as a problem, these models treat students’ language skills as strengths. García and Sylvan (2011) show how “trans language” practices, where students use all their languages to learn and express ideas, create fairer classroom environments where multilingual students can fully take part without hiding who they are. 

Amina experienced this during a research exchange at the University of Helsinki. She sat in on a literature seminar taught mainly in English, but with built-in support in Finnish and Swedish. Students freely switched between languages to explain complex ideas, using all their language knowledge. Reflecting in her journal, Amina wrote, “I kept thinking how different my first year might have been if my seminars had worked like this. The Finnish students weren’t just being helped, they were valued for being multilingual.” 

Multilingual education not only supports inclusion; it also deepens critical thinking. Skutnabb-Kangas and Heugh (2012) show that engaging with multiple languages helps students develop metalinguistic awareness, a better understanding of how language works, which strengthens overall analytical skills. This ties into Kramsch’s (2014) idea of symbolic competence: the ability to see how language shapes meaning and reality itself. 

Amina witnessed this first hand during her fieldwork at the University of Cape Town, where students explored Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s writing through isiXhosa, Afrikaans and English. Each language revealed different shades of the word “belonging,” showing how meaning shifts across cultural and linguistic contexts. Rather than just analysing texts, students were engaging in cross-cultural interpretation, highlighting how multilingualism doesn’t just enrich understanding, it fundamentally changes the way literature is studied. 

There is an abundance of evidence showing that multilingual teaching can actually boost academic performance. Cummins (2019) found that students who are allowed to use all their languages in learning understand ideas more deeply and remember them better than students limited to just one language. May’s (2017) study across six countries showed that universities with flexible language policies had higher graduation rates among students from different language backgrounds. 

Amina experienced this herself. In her first year, working only in academic English made it hard to express her more complex ideas. But things changed when she partnered with a Finnish researcher who encouraged writing in multiple languages first, then translating into English together. “We’d start drafting in whatever language captured the idea best,” Amina said, “then we’d work together to translate it into English without losing the meaning.” This approach made her work more productive and helped her express her thinking more clearly. 

Several countries have successfully put multilingual education policies into practice, both nationally and at the university level. In Canada, the Official Languages in Education Program supports bilingual education across provinces. At the University of Ottawa, students can submit assignments in either French or English in any subject (Haque & Patrick, 2015). 

In Finland, multilingualism is seen as normal, not unusual. The national curriculum values language diversity, and universities commonly offer courses in Finnish, Swedish and English. Saarinen and Nikula (2013) explain that Finland’s higher education system builds language support into degree programs from the start. 

South Africa also has strong multilingual policies. Its ‘Language Policy for Higher Education’ recognises all eleven of the country’s official languages. Universities like Cape Town and Stellenbosch use multilingual teaching methods, such as offering the same class in different languages or using group translation. According to Madiba (2014), these practices help students from underrepresented language backgrounds succeed. 

Despite these promising examples, implementing multilingual education faces significant barriers globally. 

“When I suggested adding a multilingual element to our first-year writing program,” Amina said, “the department chair called it ‘impractical’ and ‘too hard to assess.’” Her experience reflects a common problem that Liddicoat (2016) points out, universities often resist changing language policies because they’re more focused on keeping things standardised and easy to measure rather than on improving teaching and learning. 

Baker (2018) adds that many universities don’t have systems in place to support big language policy changes, especially when those changes need different departments to work together. Because universities are often organised into separate departments that work independently, it can be hard to create the kind of combined approach that multilingual education needs. 

Even when universities support the idea of multilingual education, actually putting it into practice often falls short, mostly because of limited resources. Teaching in multiple languages takes time, training and money. Staff need proper training and creating multilingual course materials isn’t cheap. As Heugh (2013) points out, the real issue usually isn’t about teaching ability, it’s that schools don’t have the funding to follow through on their language goals. 

During her research placement at a UK university that claimed to promote internationalisation, Amina saw this gap first hand. The university had a 142-page internationalisation strategy, but language support funding had actually been cut over the past five years. “They were happy to take fees from international students,” Amina said, “but didn’t want to invest in the language support those students actually needed.” 

One of the biggest challenges to multilingual education is the widespread belief, that mono lingualism is the norm and multilingualism is unusual. Piller (2016) explains that in these societies, language hierarchies often place English at the top, making it seem like using only one language is “normal” while multilingualism is treated as something extra or optional. These “monolingual mind-sets” often shape how schools and universities operate. 

Amina experienced this first hand at a UK education conference. After presenting her research, a senior professor asked why universities should “accommodate” multilingualism if students chose to study in an English-speaking country. “The idea that English should be the default wasn’t even questioned,” she said. This kind of thinking shows how deeply the belief in English-only education is embedded, even in academic spaces that claim to be international. 

Although many countries are making progress with multilingual education, UK universities often stick to more traditional, English-only approaches. As Preece (2022) points out, support for international students in the UK usually comes in the form of short-term English for Academic Purposes (EAP) courses, rather than embedding multilingual practices into everyday teaching. This creates what Martin (2010) describes as “parallel language worlds,” where language support is separate from actual subject learning. 

Amina saw the downsides of this model during her doctoral research interviews with international postgraduates. “Many students said they finished their EAP courses only to feel what one called ‘linguistic abandonment’ when they returned to their departments,” she explained. Without ongoing, integrated support, these students often struggled to express complex ideas in academic English, even though they had a strong grasp of the subject matter.Top of FormBottom of Form 

As Amina completed her comparative study of multilingual higher education policies, she reflected on both the opportunities and obstacles ahead. “The research clearly shows that multilingual approaches benefit all students, not just multilingual ones,” she explained in her final presentation. “The challenge is shifting institutional cultures that remain stubbornly monolingual despite increasingly diverse student populations.” 

The global picture of multilingual education shows both real progress and ongoing struggles. Countries like Finland, Canada and South Africa prove that supporting multiple languages in schools and universities can improve both the quality and fairness of education. But putting these ideas into practice isn’t easy, it means dealing with things like resistance from institutions, lack of funding and deeply rooted beliefs that favour English-only learning. This is especially true in the UK, where universities often talk about internationalisation but don’t always back it up with real changes in how they teach. 

For Amina, who went from being an international student to becoming an education researcher, the solution lies in what Canagarajah (2011) calls “translingual practice”, teaching methods that see language diversity as a strength, not a problem. As universities become more and more multilingual, the real question isn’t if they should support multilingual education, but how soon they can break down the barriers and start putting proven, inclusive practices into action. 

References  

Andrade, M. S. (2006). International students in English-speaking universities: Adjustment factors. Journal of Research in International Education, 5(2), 131–154. 

Baker, W. (2018). English as a lingua franca and intercultural communication. In J. Jenkins, W. Baker, & M. Dewey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of English as a lingua franca (pp. 25–36). Routledge. 

Bodycott, P., & Walker, A. (2013). Pathways and barriers to internationalization: Case studies from Hong Kong community colleges. Journal of Studies in International Education, 17(3), 287–301. 

Canagarajah, S. (2011). Translanguaging in the classroom: Emerging issues for research and pedagogy. Applied Linguistics Review, 2, 1–28. 

Canagarajah, S. (2013). Translingual Practice: Global Englishes and Cosmopolitan Relations. Routledge. 

Cummins, J. (2019). The emergence of translanguaging pedagogy: A dialogue between theory and practice. Journal of Multilingual Education Research, 9(1), 13–32. 

Damrosch, D. (2020). Comparing the Literatures: Literary Studies in a Global Age. Princeton University Press. 

García, O., & Li Wei. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education. Palgrave Macmillan. 

García, O., & Sylvan, C. E. (2011). Pedagogies and practices in multilingual classrooms: Singularities in pluralities. The Modern Language Journal, 95(3), 385–400. 

Gu, Q., & Schweisfurth, M. (2015). Transnational connections, competences and identities: Experiences of Chinese international students after their return home. British Educational Research Journal, 41(6), 947–970. 

Haque, E., & Patrick, D. (2015). Indigenous languages and the racial hierarchisation of language policy in Canada. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 36(1), 27–41. 

Hartanto, A., & Yang, H. (2019). Does language switching impair executive function? Cognition, 194, 104029. 

Heugh, K. (2013). Multilingual education policy in South Africa constrained by theoretical and historical disconnections. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 33, 215–237. 

hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom. Routledge. 

Hornberger, N. H., & Link, H. (2012). Translanguaging and transnational literacies in multilingual classrooms: A biliteracy lens. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15(3), 261–278. 

Kim, S. (2022). Writing center tutoring for multilingual students: Moving beyond deficit models. Journal of Second Language Writing, 55, 208–221. 

Kramsch, C. (2009). The Multilingual Subject. Oxford University Press. 

Kramsch, C. (2014). Teaching foreign languages in an era of globalization: Introduction. The Modern Language Journal, 98(1), 296–311. 

Li, A., & Kaye, M. (2018). Understanding the social isolation and psychological well-being of international students. Journal of International Students, 8(2), 423–439. 

Liddicoat, A. J. (2016). Language planning in universities: Teaching, research and administration. Current Issues in Language Planning, 17(3–4), 231–241. 

Madiba, M. (2014). Promoting concept literacy through multilingual glossaries: A translanguaging approach. Multilingual Teaching and Learning in Higher Education in South Africa, 68, 385–403. 

Marginson, S. (2014). Student self-formation in international education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 18(1), 6–22. 

Marginson, S. (2021). The international student experience: Rhetoric and reality. Higher Education, 82(1), 7–23. 

Martin, P. (2010). ‘They have lost their identity but not gained a British one’: Non-traditional multilingual students in higher education in the United Kingdom. Language and Education, 24(1), 9–20. 

May, S. (2017). Promoting multilingual approaches in teaching and learning. Springer. 

Montgomery, C. (2010). Understanding the international student experience. Palgrave Macmillan. 

Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o. (1986). Decolonising the Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature. Heinemann Educational. 

Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o. (1986). Decolonising the Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature. London: James Currey. 

Phillipson, R. (2009). Linguistic Imperialism Continued. Routledge. 

Piller, I. (2016). Linguistic Diversity and Social Justice: An Introduction to Applied Sociolinguistics. Oxford University Press. 

Post, C. (2019). The Three Percent Problem: Rants and Responses on Publishing, Translation, and the Future of Reading. Rochester, NY: Open Letter Books. 

Preece, S. (2010). The positioning of learners and educators in discourses associated with academic literacy. In G. Blue (Ed.), Developing academic literacy (pp. 25–38). Peter Lang. 

Preece, S. (2022). Repositioning English language in the multilingual university. Languages in Higher Education, 3(1), 1–17. 

Ryan, J., & Carroll, J. (2005). ‘Canaries in the coalmine’: International students in Western universities. In J. Carroll & J. Ryan (Eds.), Teaching international students: Improving learning for all (pp. 3–10). Routledge. 

Saarinen, T., & Nikula, T. (2013). Implicit policy, invisible language: Policies and practices of international degree programmes in Finnish higher education. In A. Doiz, D. Lasagabaster, & J. M. Sierra (Eds.), English-medium instruction at universities: Global challenges (pp. 131–150). Multilingual Matters. 

Shen, W., & Peng, K. (2019). International students as knowledge producers: An emerging trend in international higher education research. Journal of Studies in International Education, 23(5), 573–592. 

Skutnabb-Kangas, T., & Heugh, K. (Eds.). (2012). Multilingual Education and Sustainable Diversity Work: From Periphery to Center. Routledge. 

Skutnabb-Kangas, T., & Phillipson, R. (2016). Language rights. In N. Flores, O. García, & M. Spotti (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Language and Society (pp. 181–202). Oxford University Press. 

Song, J., & Pyon, S. (2019). Multilingual students’ experiences in university writing classes: A phenomenological study. TESOL Quarterly, 53(1), 55–81. 

Spivak, G. C. (2000). Translation as culture. Parallax, 6(1), 13–24. 

Three Percent Database. (2022). Translation Database. University of Rochester. 

Tran, L. T. (2011). Committed, face-value, hybrid or mutual adaptation? The experiences of international students in Australian higher education. Educational Review, 63(1), 79–94. 

Tran, L. T., & Nguyen, N. T. (2015). Re-imagining teachers’ identity and professionalism under the condition of international education. Teachers and Teaching, 21(8), 958–973. 

Zhang, Y., & Mi, Y. (2010). Another look at the language difficulties of international students. Journal of Studies in International Education, 14(4), 371–388.