Rhizomes in Action: International Multilingual Student Writers’ Literacies

  • Maria PrikhodkoEmail author
Part of the Educational Linguistics book series (EDUL, volume 39)


This book chapter discusses how two international multilingual student writers (re)negotiate) their literacies within US first-year multilingual composition. First, I define multilingual literacies as rhizomatic and, further, consider this group of learners as academically mobile. Second, framed into the conceptions of New Literacy Studies (Barton et al. Situated literacies: Reading and writing in context. Routledge, London: 2000; Street, Language and Education 8(1and2): 9–7: 1994; Current Issues in Comparative Education 5(2):77–91: 2003), and Multiple Literacies Theory (Masny and Cole, Mapping multiple literacies: An introduction to Deleuzian Literacy Studies. Continuum, New York: 2012), this chapter illustrates how, based on semi-structured interviews and literacy autobiographies, their multilingual literacies constantly change and “becoming.” In conclusion, this book chapter calls faculty to approach such students’ learning through their literacy mapping within the ethnographic perspective in collaboration with other pedagogical orientations (anthropological and service learning that welcome unexpected and divergent becomings. In response to this edition call, the chapter delineates how to bridge the gap between MLT as elaboration on New Literacy Studies (NLS) and Second Language Acquisition (SLA), and on the other hand, international academic mobility and international composition studies.


Rhizomatic literacies Literacy mapping International multilingual students First-year multilingual composition Academic mobility Ethnographic approach 


  1. Amorim, A. C., & Charly, R. (2005). Action research and rhizomatic growth. Educational Action Research, 13(4), 581–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anzaldúa, G. (2004). Borderlands/La Frontera. In J. Rivkin & M. Ryan (Eds.), The literary theory: An anthology (pp. 1017–1030). Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  3. Barton, D. (1994). Literacy: An introduction to the ecology of written language. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers Inc.Google Scholar
  4. Barton, D., Hamilton, M., & Ivanič, R. (2000). Situated literacies: Reading and writing in context. In D. Barton (Ed.), Literacies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Beaufort, A. (2007). College writing and beyond: A new network for university writing instruction. Logan: Utah State University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bauman, Z. (2013). Liquid modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  7. Baynham, M. (1995). Literacy practices: Investigating literacy in social contexts. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  8. Belcher, D., & Connor, U. (Eds.). (2002). Reflections on multiliterate lives (Vol. 26). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  9. Blommaert, J., Collins, J., & Slembrouck, S. (2005). Spaces of multilingualism. Language and Communication, 25, 197–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  11. Braine, G. (1994). Non-native educators in English language teaching. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.Google Scholar
  12. Breiteneder, A., Pitzl, M.-L., Stefan, M., & Klimpfinger, T. (2006). VOICE recording - Methodological challenges in the compilation of a corpus of spoken ELF. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 5(2), 161–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of Meanings. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Canagarajah, S. (2013). Translingual practice: Global Englishes and composition relations. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chen, X. (2017). Translingual practices in the first-year international English academic writing. INTESOL Journal, 14(1), 25–50.Google Scholar
  16. Costino, K. A., & Hyon, S. (2007). “A class for students like me”: Reconsidering relationships among identity labels, residency status, and students' preferences for mainstream or multilingual composition. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(2), 63–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cushman, E., & Juzwik, S. M. (2013). Tracing the movement of literacies across, within, and around. Research in the teaching of English, 48(1), 5–12.Google Scholar
  18. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (2004 [1987]). A thousand plateaus. In J. Rivkin & R. Michael (Eds.), Literary theory: An anthology (pp. 378–388). Malden: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  19. Dervin, F. (2009). Transcending the culturalist impasse in stays abroad: Helping mobile students to appreciate diverse diversities. Journal of Study Abroad, 18, 119–141.Google Scholar
  20. Ferris, D. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short and long-term effects of written error correction. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Perspectives on response. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Ferris, D., & Hedgcock, J. (2014). Teaching L2 composition: Purpose, process, and practice (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fraiberg, S. A. (2002). Composition 2.0: Toward a multilingual and multimodal framework. CCC, 62(1), 100–126.Google Scholar
  24. Friedrich, P. (2006). Assessing the needs of linguistically diverse first-year students: Bringing together and telling apart international ESL, resident ESL and monolingual basic writers. Writing Program Administration, 30(1/2), 15–35.Google Scholar
  25. Gee, J. (1991). Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourse.3e. Philadelphia: Falmer.Google Scholar
  26. Gee, J. (1992). The social mind: Language, ideology, and social practice. New York: Bergin and Garvey.Google Scholar
  27. Gee, J. (2007). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Heath, S. B. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Horner, B., & Trimbur, J. (2002). English only and U.S. college composition. College Composition and Communication, 53, 594–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Horner, B., Lu, M. Z., & Matsuda, P. K. (Ed.). (2010). Cross-language relations in composition: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Hurlbert, C. (2013). National healing: Race, state, and teaching of composition. Boulder: UP of Colorado.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ivanič, R., Edwards, R., Satchwell, C., & Smith, J. (2007). Possibilities for pedagogy in further education: harnessing the abundance of literacy. British Educational Research Journal, 33(5), 703–721. Scholar
  33. Johnson, C. (2006). Best practices in syllabus writing: Contents of a learner-centered syllabus. The Journal of Chiropractic Education, 20(2), 139–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Joris, P. (2003). A nomad poetics. Middletown: Wesleyan University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Kent, D. (1999). Speaking in tongues: Chinglish, Japlish, and Konglish. In The Second Pan Asian conference. Seoul: The Second Pan Asian Conference.Google Scholar
  36. Kerr, J. (2006). Composing narratives in the borderlands. International Journal of Learning, 13(3), 57–63.Google Scholar
  37. Kramsch, C. (2009). The multilingual subject. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Kress, G., & Street, B. (2006). Multi-modality and literacy practices (Foreword). In K. Pahl & J. Rowsell (Eds.), Travel notes from the new literacy studies: Instances of practice (pp. vii – x). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  39. Laman, T. T., & Van Sluys, K. (2008). Being and becoming: Multilingual writers' practices. Language Arts, 85(4), 265–274.Google Scholar
  40. Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2008). Introduction: Digital literacies - Concepts, policies and practices. In C. Lankshear & M. Knobel (Eds.), Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and practices. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar
  41. Lawrick, E. (2013). Students in the first-year ESL writing program: Revisiting the notion of “traditional” ESL. WPA, 36(2), 27–59.Google Scholar
  42. Leki, I. (2007). Undergraduates in a second language: Challenges and complexities of academic literacy development. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  43. Leonard, R. (2013). Traveling literacies: Multilingual writing on the move. Research in the teaching of English, 48(1), 13–39.Google Scholar
  44. Lian, P.-A. (2011). Reflections on language-learning in the 21st century: The rhizome at work. RJAS, 1(1), 5–16.Google Scholar
  45. Lillis, T., & Curry, M. J. (2006). Professional academic writing by multilingual scholars: Interactions with literacy brokers in the production of English-medium texts. Written Communication, 23(1), 3–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Limbu, M. (2011). Processing first-year college writing via Facebook pedagogy in linguistically and culturally diverse first-year composition classes. Journal of International Students, 1(2), 59–63.Google Scholar
  47. Liu, Y. (2008). Taiwanese students' negotiations with academic writing: Becoming “playwrights and film directors”. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 86–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Liu, Y., & You, X. (2008). Negotiating into academic discourse: Taiwanese and US college students in research writing. International Journal of English Studies, 8(2), 152–172.Google Scholar
  49. Lorimer, R. (2012). Traveling literacies: Writing among languages and locations. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison.Google Scholar
  50. Losey, K., Roberge, M., & Wald, M. (2013). Introduction the theme section: US-educated multilingual students and college writing. CATESOL Journal, 24(1), 29–33.Google Scholar
  51. Lunsford, A. (2017). The St. Martin's Handbook (8th ed.). New York: Bedford/ St.Martin’s.Google Scholar
  52. Makoni, S., & Mashiri, P. (2007). Critical historiography: Does language planning in Africa need a construct of language as part of its theoretical apparatus. In S. Makoni & A. Pennycook (Eds.), Disinventing and deconstructing languages (pp. 62–89). Tonawanda: Multilingual Matter Ltd.Google Scholar
  53. Marshall, S., Hayashi, H., & Yeung, P. (2012). Negotiating the multi in multilingualism and multiliteracies: Undergraduate students in Vancouver, Canada. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 68(1), 28–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Masny, D. (2010). Multiple Literacies Theory: How it functions, what it produces. PERSPECTIVA, 28(3), 337–352. Scholar
  55. Masny, D. (2011). Multiple Literacies Theory: Exploring futures. Policy Futures in Education, 9(4), 494–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Masny, D., & Cole, R. (2012). Mapping multiple literacies: An introduction to Deleuzian Literacy Studies. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  57. Matsuda, P. K. (2013). It's the wild West out there: A new linguistic frontier in U.S. college composition. In S. Canagarajah (Ed.), Literacy as translingual practice: Between communities and classrooms (pp. 128–138). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  58. Matsuda, P. K., Cox, M., Jordan, J., & Ortmeier-Hooper, C. (2006). Second-language writing in the composition classroom: A critical sourcebook. Boston: Bedford/ St.Martin's.Google Scholar
  59. Miller-Cochran, S. (2012). Beyond “ESL writing”: Teaching cross-cultural composition at a community college. TETYC, 20–31.Google Scholar
  60. Ortmeier-Hooper, C., & Ruecker, T. (2017). Linguistically diverse immigrant and resident writers: Transitions from high school to college. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  61. Osmond, A. (2015). Academic writing and grammar for students (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  62. Prikhodko, M. (2017). International students’ (re)negotiation of their multilingual literacies in a first-year multilingual composition class. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. Indiana University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  63. Roberge, M., Siegal, M., & Harklau, L. (2009). Generation 1.5 in college composition: Teaching academic writing to U.S.-educated learners of ESL. Mahwah: Erlbraum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rolston, H. III (1996). The Bible and ecology. Interpretation.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Scribner, S., & Michael, C. (1981). The psychology of literacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Shin, D., & Cimasko, T. (2008). Multimodal composition in a college ESL class: New tools, traditional norms. Computers and Communication, 25, 376–395.Google Scholar
  67. Singh, P., & Doherty, C. (2008). Mobile students in liquid modernity: Negotiating the politics of transnational identities. In N. Dolby & F. Rizvi (Eds.), Youth moves. Identities and education in global perspective (pp. 115–130). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  68. Sorokin, P. (2011). Social and cultural mobility. In R. Arum, I. R. Beattie, & K. Ford (Eds.), The Structure of Schooling: Readings in the Sociology of Education. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  69. Stables, A. (2004). Responsibility beyond rationality: The case for rhizomatic consequentialism. International Journal of Children’s Spirituality, 9(2), 219–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Street, B. (1984). Literacy in theory and practice. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
  71. Street, B. (1998). New literacies in theory and practice: What are the implications for language in education? Linguistics and Education, 10(1), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Street, B. (1994). What is meant by local literacies? Language and Education, 8(1and2), 9–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Street, B. (2003). What's “new” in New Literacy Studies? Critical approaches to literacy in theory and practice. Current Issues in Comparative Education, 5(2), 77–91.Google Scholar
  74. Street, B. (2006). New literacies for new times. In J. Hoffman & D. Schallert (Eds.), 55th Yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 21–42). Oak Creek: NRC Inc.Google Scholar
  75. The New London Group. (1996). A Pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Webb, A. (2009). Rhizomatic literacies: Restructuring pedagogy and practice within the freshmen composition classroom. M.A. Retried from
  77. Yin, R. K. (2009). Qualitative research from start to finish. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Writing, Rhetoric, and DiscourseDePaul UniversityChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations