Whiteness as currency : Exploring racial ideologies in Pakistan's English language teaching sphere

This is a self-archived version of an original article. This version may differ from the original in pagination and typographic details. Author(s): Title: Year: Version: Copyright: Rights: Rights url: Please cite the original version: CC BY 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Whiteness as currency : Exploring racial ideologies in Pakistan's English language teaching sphere © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Published version Ali, Rukhsana; Salam-Salmaoui, Rauha Ali, R., & Salam-Salmaoui, R. (2024). Whiteness as currency : Exploring racial ideologies in Pakistan's English language teaching sphere. International Journal of Educational Research, 128, Article 102483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102483 2024 Whiteness as currency: Exploring racial ideologies in Pakistan’s English language teaching sphere Rukhsana Ali a,* , Rauha Salam-Salmaoui b,* a The Centre for Applied Language Studies, University of Jyvaskyla, Finland b Department of Language and Communication Studies, University of Jyvaskyla, Finland ARTICLE INFO Keywords: English Language Teaching (ELT) Racial ideologies Linguistic marginalization Decolonizing education Pakistan ABSTRACT Addressing the problem of racial ideologies in Pakistan’s English Language Teaching (ELT) sphere, this study examines the practices within the Society of Pakistani English Language Teachers (SPELT) and the Linguistic Association of Pakistan (LAP). It argues that English’s elevated status, a remnant of colonial legacies, marginalizes local languages, perpetuating racial disparities. Methodologically, the study employs qualitative analysis of interviews with SPELT and LAP members, drawing theoretical framework of Alim (2016) and Flores and Rosa (2015). The findings reveal a deep-rooted preference for English, symbolizing ’whiteness’ and sophistication, thereby sustaining racial hierarchies in ELT. This research highlights the urgency of decolonizing educational practices, advocating for inclusive and diverse language teaching that dissociates language proficiency from racial constructs. The study’s significance lies in its contribution to the broader discourse on education reform, highlighting the necessity of policy changes that embrace linguistic and cultural equity. 1. Introduction Several years ago, I was invited to an ELT conference in Pakistan, where a colleague’s casual inquiry about whether “gorras” (Western white speakers) would be attending revealed the lingering colonial mentality that continues to shape the country’s English Language Teaching (ELT) sector. The term “gorra,” with its colonial overtones, exemplifies the deep-rooted privileging of whiteness in language education, reflecting broader global patterns of “linguistic imperialism” (Phillipson, 1992). This phenomenon is not merely about language proficiency but the ways in which whiteness is intertwined with English, reinforcing racial hierarchies (Flores & Rosa, 2023). Globally, the ELT field is implicated in the perpetuation of raciolinguistic ideologies, positioning English spoken by white, native speakers as the standard, while other varieties of English, especially those spoken by racialized groups, are delegitimized (Flores & Rosa, 2015). Such dynamics expose how ELT systems, both in the Global North and South, remain complicit in maintaining racial inequalities, where proximity to whiteness—whether through accent, appearance, or cultural background—determines linguistic authority and social value (Kubota & Lin, 2006; Ramjattan, 2019). This alignment of whiteness with power in language education speaks to broader critiques of whiteness as a construct that upholds racial inequalities across various domains (DiAngelo, 2021; Sekaja et al., 2022). In the context of Pakistan, these global dynamics manifest in complex, historically entrenched ways. The country’s colonial history continues to exert influence over its language policies, where English retains a socio-economic and racial prestige that marginalizes * Corresponding authors. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (R. Ali), [email protected] (R. Salam-Salmaoui). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect International Journal of Educational Research journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijedures https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102483 Received 31 July 2024; Received in revised form 17 October 2024; Accepted 22 October 2024 International Journal of Educational Research 128 (2024) 102483 0883-0355/© 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). local languages such as Punjabi, Pashto, and Sindhi (Rahman, 2004; Manan et al., 2017). English is often seen as the language of modernity, progress, and elite status, a perception that perpetuates a racialized hierarchy of language use, as highlighted by Kubota and Lin ((2009)) and Flores and Rosa (2017). This hierarchy, far from being a neutral linguistic preference, embeds social control mechanisms that privilege an elite, English-speaking minority while relegating indigenous language speakers to the margins of educational and economic systems (Rahman, 2010; Haider & Fang, 2019). The commodification of English within neoliberal frameworks (Harvey, 2007; Sewell, 2016) further reinforces these inequities, positioning English—and by extension, whiteness—as an asset in the global marketplace. Considering these dynamics, this study aims to investigate how members of the Society of Pakistani English Language Teachers (SPELT) and the Linguistic Association of Pakistan (LAP) articulate racial ideologies within Pakistani ELT landscape. By examining these global and historical influences, this study engages with the persistent colonial legacies in Pakistan’s language education, challenging the racially stratified system that privileges whiteness and calling for a more inclusive and equitable approach to ELT. The study specifically answers the following research question: RQ: How do members of SPELT and LAP articulate racial ideologies in their interviews, and how do these ideologies, in conjunction with historical discourses, structure racial inequalities within Pakistan’s ELT development? The significance of this study lies in its critical examination of the intersection between race and language in Pakistan’s ELT sector, revealing how colonial legacies and Western dominance perpetuate the racialization of English proficiency. By interrogating the association of whiteness with linguistic authority, this research exposes the ongoing marginalization of Pakistan’s diverse linguistic heritage. It contributes to the global discourse on decolonizing education by underscoring the need to dismantle racial and linguistic inequalities. Ultimately, the study advocates for a transformative approach to ELT, challenging entrenched paradigms and pushing for policies that promote inclusivity, equity, and broader representation in language education. 1.1. Context of the study Pakistan’s language policy, situated within a landscape of approximately 74 languages, reflects a deeply problematic legacy of colonialism and entrenched power dynamics. Rather than fostering true multilingualism, the policy has historically reinforced social stratification and ethnic marginalization. Urdu, elevated to the status of national language, is not merely a tool of communication but a marker of national and religious identity (Ayres, 2009; Rahman, 2002), employed strategically in public schools to enforce national unity and suppress ethnic diversity (Rahman, 2005). However, this emphasis on Urdu, particularly during General Zia-ul-Haq’s regime, which coupled its promotion with Arabic for ideological purposes, highlights how language has been wielded as an instrument of political and religious control (Rahman, 2010). Such policies not only ignored the linguistic richness of the country but also perpetuated the colonial pattern of privileging certain languages over others, contributing to ethnic and social divisions. English, the most glaring vestige of colonialism, continues to symbolize power and prestige, disproportionately benefiting the elite and those with access to English-medium education (Manan et al., 2023). The prioritization of English alongside Urdu has historically marginalized indigenous languages, which are often stigmatized as inferior, resulting in the exclusion of vast segments of the population from meaningful participation in academic and professional spheres (Mehboob, 2019). Post-9/11 geopolitical shifts further cemented English’s dominance in Pakistan, as alignment with global initiatives like UNESCO’s Education for All (EFA, 2002; UNESCO, 2000) reinforced the language’s prominence in educational reform (Shier, 2016). Abbas and Bidin (2022) reveal that national and provincial language policies have remained inconsistent, with provinces like Punjab neglecting the promotion of indigenous languages, exacerbating the linguistic marginalization of groups such as Punjabi and Saraiki speakers. Despite some efforts in Sindh and Balochistan to support indigenous languages, the overall policy framework reflects a continuation of colonial attitudes, privileging languages tied to power and elite status. The calls for a paradigm shift in Pakistan’s language planning and policy (LPP), as advocated by Abbas and Bidin (2022), emphasize the need to reconceptualize linguistic diversity as an asset rather than a barrier. Without addressing these deeply embedded inequalities, Pakistan’s language policies will continue to entrench social hierarchies, hindering any meaningful progress toward inclusivity and national cohesion. 1.2. Race and racialization in education: an overview The intricate relationship between race and language in the field of education has garnered significant attention, particularly through the lens of Raciolinguistics. Scholars such as Motha (2014), Stillar (2022), Bacon (2019), and Alim (2016) have demonstrated how Raciolinguistic ideologies in English Language Teaching (ELT) position white English speakers as the norm, marginalizing non-white, regional, and indigenous languages. Alim (2016) emphasizes that this shift from traditional sociolinguistic paradigms requires a more nuanced understanding of how language and identity are racially constructed. This critical discourse is expanded by Almeida’s (2015) exploration of race-based epistemologies, which critiques the continued marginalization of racialized and Indigenous scholars within mainstream Western academia. Almeida (2015) argues that Eurocentric knowledge production systematically reduces critical contributions from marginalized scholars to mere "experiential insights," maintaining racialized hierarchies within academic discourse. This aligns with Hudley’s et al. (2020) call for an interdisciplinary engagement with race and racism within the field of linguistics. Their work highlights the lack of theoretical and analytical frameworks for understanding race in linguistics, emphasizing that this erasure weakens research and excludes scholars of color, whose contributions are often marginalized. Like Almeida’s critique of Western knowledge production, Hudley (2016) argues for a transformation of linguistic scholarship that centers racial justice and inclusivity, calling for more robust frameworks that incorporate interdisciplinary insights from anthropology, sociology, education, and critical race studies. This critical engagement with raciolinguistic ideologies is further contextualized by seminal works on linguistic imperialism (Phillipson, 1992) and critical discourse analysis (Rogers, 2004; Woolard, 1998), which R. Ali and R. Salam-Salmaoui International Journal of Educational Research 128 (2024) 102483 2 challenge the hegemonic linguistic norms that perpetuate racial hierarchies. As Rosa (2019) and Baker-Bell (2020) have noted, such ideologies stigmatize racialized linguistic identities, sustaining structures of inequality within global language education. The need for a racially inclusive and socially just approach to language teaching is echoed across interdisciplinary fields, reinforcing the argument that dominant, Eurocentric paradigms in linguistics must be deconstructed. This body of work not only challenges linguistic norms but calls for a transformation of the very structures of knowledge that sustain white supremacy in language education, a theme underscored by Almeida’s (2015) call for race-based epistemologies and Charity Hudley et al.’s (2020) appeal for racial justice in linguistics. In Pakistan, these global critiques of race, language, and education converge in a context shaped by colonial legacies and contemporary social stratification. Studies by Gillborn et al. (2016) and Sajjad (2020) reveal how post-9/11 educational policies have deepened racial inequalities, reflecting the global resonance of raciolinguistic ideologies that connect language proficiency with racial hierarchies. In particular, the works of Akram and Mahmood (2007), Baumgardner (1993), and Ghani (2003) illustrate how English, as a colonial language, functions as a tool for social stratification in Pakistan. English is not only a medium of communication but a mechanism for reinforcing racial and class-based hierarchies. Baumgardner’s (1993) exploration of English as a lingua franca underscores how language serves as a marker of social categorization and racialization, while Akram and Mahmood (2007) and Ghani (2003) further highlight how traditional ELT pedagogies perpetuate these inequities. By situating the study of Pakistan’s language education within these broader global frameworks, this literature critically exposes how raciolinguistic ideologies sustain racial inequalities, reinforcing Almeida’s (2015) and Charity Hudley et al.’s (2020) calls for a more just and inclusive approach to language teaching and scholarship. The existing body of research, while extensively addressing raciolinguistic ideologies and the marginalization of non-white linguistic identities, has largely neglected the nuanced intersection of race, language, and colonial legacies in South Asian ELT contexts like Pakistan. This study addresses this gap in the literature by focusing on how non-governmental organizations (NGOs)—SPELT and LAP—function as influential actors within Pakistan’s language policy landscape. These NGOs play a crucial role, both formally and informally, in shaping language education beyond direct government interventions, resonating with Johnson’s (2013) framework of language policy as operating in both de facto and de jure forms. In their collaborations with local communities and international bodies, these organizations contribute to either fostering multilingualism and language preservation or perpetuating linguistic hierarchies (Ali, forthcoming). By examining their perspectives, this study offers a critical lens on how colonial legacies and raciolinguistic ideologies manifest in Pakistan’s ELT sector, advancing the global discourse on language policy and inequality. By exploring how these organizations either perpetuate or resist colonial legacies and the racialization of English proficiency, this study provides localized insights into the global raciolinguistic frameworks that continue to reinforce systemic inequalities in Pakistan’s language education. Moreover, the study positions itself at the forefront of an essential dialogue, challenging the prevailing norms and assumptions within the ELT landscape in contexts like Pakistan. It attempts to examine how racial ideologies, woven into the fabric of ELT through historical and contemporary discourses, shape educators’ perspectives and influence pedagogical strategies. By doing so, the study moves beyond traditional analyses and sheds light on how these racial ideologies, often unnoticed or unacknowledged, create a ripple effect that extends beyond the classroom, influencing broader educational policies and societal attitudes. 1.3. Theoretical framework The theoretical framework for this study weaves the works of Alim (2016) and Flores and Rosa (2015) to analyze the dynamics of race, language, and power within Pakistan’s ELT landscape. Alim’s (2016) exploration of the intersections of race, language, and power, particularly in educational contexts, provides a foundation for examining how linguistic practices are racialized and intertwined with power dynamics. However, Flores and Rosa (2015) expand on Alim’s framework by highlighting its limitations in addressing varied and complex socio-historical contexts, especially in non-Western settings. Their critique calls for contextualizing raciolinguistic dynamics within specific historical and colonial legacies, thereby extending Alim’s (2016) analysis to reflect the intricacies of language and race co-naturalization more accurately in diverse societal contexts (Flores & Rosa, 2015). This study acknowledges that much raciolinguistic research, predominantly conducted in the Global North, tends to overlook the unique linguistic and racial dynamics prevalent in postcolonial societies. Scholars have historically grappled with the role of colonial languages versus indigenous languages in postcolonial societies, often promoting linguistic diversity without adequately addressing the colonial legacy’s impact on racialized communities (Flores & Rosa, 2017; Wynter, 2003). To address this gap, the study adapts the Raciolinguistic frameworks to the Pakistani context, examining the influence of colonial legacies on the co-naturalization of language and race (Alim, 2016; Flores & Rosa, 2015). This involves analyzing how colonialism, which historically positioned English as superior, has impacted Pakistan’s language policies, and contributed to the creation of language hierarchies. Particularly, in Pakistan, the framework explores the transformation of raciolinguistic ideologies in the postcolonial era, examining how colonial distinctions between European and non-European languages, and consequently between whiteness and non-whiteness, continue to influence contemporary linguistic and racial formations. The concept of ecologization of languages is recontextualized to reflect the Pakistani experience, where English is often associated with modernity and progress (Shamim, 2011), while indigenous languages are marginalized or romanticized in the context of national identity and heritage (Flores & Rosa, 2015; Veronelli, 2015 & 2016; Philipson, 1992). Moreover, the framework enables us to examine the perception of racialized language in Pakistan. Building on Flores and Rosa’s (2015) concept of the white listening subject, it explores how racialized speaking subjects are perceived and evaluated within Pakistani society, where colonial legacies and global power dynamics significantly influence these perceptions. A raciolinguistic perspective situates contemporary language ideologies and policies within broader colonial histories, thereby challenging the construction of modernity produced through logics of colonialism (Rosa & Flores, 2017). In short, by adapting the raciolinguistic frameworks of Alim (2016) and Flores and Rosa (2015) to the Pakistani context, this study not only addresses the Global North-centric R. Ali and R. Salam-Salmaoui International Journal of Educational Research 128 (2024) 102483 3 nature of raciolinguistic scholarship but also emphasizes the need for contextualizing these theories within Pakistan’s historical and sociolinguistic realities, offering a more nuanced and relevant analysis of race, language, and power dynamics in the Pakistani ELT landscape. This approach not only enriches the understanding of Raciolinguistics in a postcolonial setting but also contributes to the global discourse on language and race, highlighting diverse manifestations beyond the Global North contexts. 1.4. Researchers’ positionality As researchers from Pakistan situated in Finland, we recognize the complex positionality we hold in examining the ELT sector in Pakistan. Our positionality affords us a critical lens informed by both local and global perspectives. Following Milner’s (2007) framework of researching the self in relation to others, we actively interrogate our own racialized and cultural positionality throughout the research process. This reflexivity allows us to critically engage with the lingering colonial legacies that shape Pakistan’s language policies without imposing Eurocentric assumptions. We strive to acknowledge and disrupt potential biases or unseen dangers that arise when researchers fail to address their embeddedness in systems of knowledge and power. By positioning ourselves within both the South Asian and Western academic contexts, we are uniquely equipped to challenge dominant narratives in ELT discourse, ensuring our analysis remains attentive to local realities and the decolonial aims of this study. 2. Methodology 2.1. Data collection To critically examine the role of non-state actors in shaping language education policy, this study conducted twenty-six (26) semistructured interviews with members of two prominent organizations: the 1 Society of Pakistan English Language Teachers (SPELT) and the 2 Linguistic Association of Pakistan (LAP). These organizations were deliberately selected due to their significant influence in shaping language education policy outside formal state mechanisms, aligning with Johnson’s (2013) framework of informal, covert, and implicit policy processes. SPELT’s advocacy for English as a tool for educational progress and its extensive teacher training initiatives (Gomez,2011) illustrate how non-governmental entities can strategically influence language policy and practice without direct state intervention. In parallel, LAP’s active promotion of multilingualism through research initiatives and partnerships with academic institutions positions it as a key player in contesting monolingual policies, thus challenging hegemonic language practices in Pakistan. The selection of these organizations was crucial for exploring how language ideologies intersect with racial power structures and colonial legacies in Pakistan’s ELT development. Participants were chosen based on a set of stringent criteria (see Fig. 1) that included their academic qualifications—ranging from master’s to doctoral degrees in English, Applied Linguistics, and Education—and their involvement in these organizations’ policy-shaping activities. This ensured a deeper engagement with participants’ nuanced understandings of the historical, ideological, and structural factors shaping language policy. Moreover, to address the issue of representational diversity, interviewees were recruited from multiple cities across Pakistan, ensuring a balance in terms of gender, ethnicity, and regional background. Significantly, while the study primarily highlights a narrative of resistance to colonial legacies, it is not without acknowledgment of contrasting viewpoints. Participants presented varied responses—ranging from strong advocacy for local linguistic autonomy to pragmatic acceptance of English as a necessary medium for global engagement—reflecting the complex interplay of power, identity, and resistance in Pakistan’s ELT sector. Thus, rather than offering a one-sided analysis, the study captures these divergent perspectives to illustrate the ongoing struggle between colonial legacies and local assertions of identity, revealing the contested terrain of language policy and racial dynamics. This multi-layered approach ensures that the study’s findings are not skewed toward a single ideological stance but instead provide a comprehensive view of how non-state actors navigate power relations and racial ideologies within Pakistan’s language education framework. By situating these responses within broader historical and sociopolitical contexts, the study underscores the critical role of non-state entities like SPELT and LAP in either reinforcing or resisting dominant power structures, thereby offering a nuanced understanding of their strategic positioning in the field of language policy. Significantly, this study, carried out at a Finnish higher education institution, followed the ethical principles outlined by the Finnish National Board on Research Integrity ( 3 TENK guidelines, 2019). These guidelines, which emphasize the importance of respecting participants’ rights, privacy, and fairness, were crucial in upholding ethical integrity and the credibility of the research. Formal written permissions were obtained from participating NGOs SPELT and LAP in Pakistan to prevent any potential biases or conflicts of interest, and participants provided written consent to ensure their autonomy, anonymity, and dignity were protected. 2.2. Analytical procedure In this study, we employed Lawless and Chen’s (2018) Critical Thematic Analysis (CTA) to carefully analyze the interview data. This choice of methodology was deliberate, given the inherent limitations of conventional thematic analysis frameworks, such as those proposed by Braun and Clarke (2006), which offer flexibility but often lack critical specificity in linking discourse to broader societal 1 SPELT: https://spelt.org.pk/. 2 LAP: https://www.lap.org.pk/. 3 TENK Guidelines: https://tenk.fi/en/advice-and-materials/guidelines-ethical-review-human-sciences. R. Ali and R. Salam-Salmaoui International Journal of Educational Research 128 (2024) 102483 4 power structures. CTA, on the other hand, transcends traditional thematic analysis by embedding criticality into the analytical process itself. Further, CTA rigorously examines how these patterns are interwoven with broader socio-political, historical, and ideological power structures. It demands that researchers not only categorize themes but critically analyze how discourses reproduce inequalities and hegemonic ideologies, providing a more incisive understanding of data in relation to systemic power relations. Crucially, to avoid cherry-picking and ensure objectivity, we employed a systematic and rigorous coding process. Initial open coding identified key patterns such as recurrence, repetition, and forcefulness, which were followed by a process of closed coding where these patterns were critically linked to dominant ideologies and power structures. Each phase of the coding process was designed to reflect the broader socio-political contexts of Pakistan’s ELT sector. The percentage of participants’ responses aligned with each theme was also quantified (see Fig. 2) to demonstrate the prominence of each theme, ensuring that the themes derived were not solely reflective of researcher bias. This iterative, reflexive process exposed how everyday language, and practices are embedded in broader systems of inequality and domination. Thus, by adopting CTA by Lawless and Chen (2018), we ensured a deeper, more incisive analysis uniquely suited for examining how interview discourses are embedded in and shaped by unequal power relations and entrenched colonial legacies in language education. Each stage of the coding was also subjected to review by an independent researcher to challenge the initial codes and reduce bias, ensuring that the final themes emerged organically from the data rather than being pre-determined. For instance, the theme of "Colonial Legacy and Western Ideologies" emerged not only as a recurring discourse among participants but also as a reflection of Eurocentric epistemologies that have dominated Pakistan’s educational policy since the colonial era. In addition, selective coding followed where we refined our thematic categories, ensuring each theme captured the depth and complexity of the participants’ narratives. For instance, the theme of “Resistance to Western Influence and Assertion of Local Identity” was carefully substantiated through recurrent discourse of linguistic authority tied to racial hierarchies, expressed by participants across multiple interviews. This ensures that the critical engagement with the data is robust and tied systematically to broader ideological frameworks. Thus, the CTA framework allowed for a critical, reflective, and thorough engagement with the data, minimizing the risk of cherry-picking and enabling a grounded, systematic examination of race, power, and language in Pakistan’s ELT sector. The three major themes— Fig. 1. Participants’ information. R. Ali and R. Salam-Salmaoui International Journal of Educational Research 128 (2024) 102483 5 1. Colonial Legacies and Western Ideologies 2. Dependency on Western Organizations and Racial Hierarchies 3. Resistance to Western Influence and Assertion of Local Identity— are thus the outcome of a careful and systematically applied methodology that ensures the findings remain firmly rooted in the data while critically engaging with the broader historical and ideological forces shaping ELT in Pakistan. Notably, these themes are far from mutually exclusive; rather, they intersect and overlap in complex ways. The following figure shows the frequency of each theme: The chart above, represents the distribution of racial discourse across three central themes within the data, reflecting a nuanced engagement with colonial legacies, dependency on Western organizations, and resistance to Western influence. Colonial Legacy and Western Ideologies constitutes the largest portion at 45 %, highlighting the entrenched impact of colonial education policies and the dominance of English as a marker of quality in Pakistan’s ELT sector. Dependency on Western Organizations and Racial Hierarchies, comprising 30 % of the data, highlights the pervasive reliance on foreign institutions like the British Council and USIS, reinforcing racial hierarchies and sustaining external control over local education. Meanwhile, Resistance to Western Influence and Assertion of Local Identity, though representing a smaller portion at 25 %, reveals a critical shift toward reclaiming local languages and cultural autonomy in educational practices. The proportional distribution reflects a contested space where colonial legacies still hold significant sway, but where localized efforts to challenge these dynamics are gradually emerging. More importantly, the excerpts selected for detailed analysis were not mere random choices; they were exemplary, reflecting the broader trends in the dataset and effectively demonstrating the identified themes. Each excerpt offers an exploration of how members of SPELT and LAP articulate racial ideologies within the context of English language teaching (ELT) in Pakistan, shedding light on the ways these ideologies, intertwined with historical and colonial discourses, continue to structure racial inequalities. By critically engaging with the ideological forces that position English as a language of power, the interviews uncover how ELT practices perpetuate colonial hierarchies, shaping social and political identities in ways that reinforce systemic inequities. 1. Colonial legacies and western ideologies Under this theme, the participants reflected on how English, as a remnant of British colonialism, has become synonymous with quality education, reinforcing racial and linguistic hierarchies that marginalize indigenous languages. The alignment of English with progress and modernity perpetuates Western dominance, positioning it as a gateway to academic and social mobility while simultaneously devaluing local languages. In conjunction with historical colonial discourses, these ideologies sustain systemic racial inequalities within Pakistan’s ELT sector, where English is upheld as the language of power and privilege, further entrenching sociolinguistic divides. For instance, in the following excerpt 1, the participant focused on psychological internalization of inferiority due to colonial legacies, highlighting the emotional and mental impact of this racial dynamic. The psychological dimension highlights the enduring influence of colonialism, where race and professional legitimacy remain intertwined, reinforcing racial hierarchies within Pakistani ELT. Excerpt 1: “We have some problems, psychological, inferiority complex as a nation, we are really not confident enough, our confidence level is never good and we feel, that if there is a pure White man can do that, or any authentic person again from a very White man and someone who speaks English with a specific accent it is with us then we do things with their support, so people from my region are little brown even if they do quality work but are never regarded and recognized. I also remember, one of the experts for our conferences was XYZ. He was known as the authority over linguistics. His mother was British, and he was quite a white man. His English was excellent, and our language skills were not like him. We asked him to come because of his credibility being Fig. 2. Frequency of themes in data. R. Ali and R. Salam-Salmaoui International Journal of Educational Research 128 (2024) 102483 6 English. I mean we were not authentic enough, as we were known as locals and are as such not regarded as an authority or internationally acclaimed people."(LAP/F/7) 4 The excerpt critically reflects the internalization of racialized hierarchies within Pakistan’s ELT sector, closely aligning with the conaturalization of race and language as discussed by Flores and Rosa (2015) and Alim (2016). The speaker’s reference to a “psychological inferiority complex as a nation” underscores a raciolinguistic self-perception that privileges whiteness, particularly when linked to English proficiency. This internalized hierarchy is not merely personal but systemic, rooted in colonial legacies that continue to shape language education in postcolonial Pakistan. As Alim (2016) and Flores and Rosa (2015) emphasize, the colonial distinctions between European and non-European languages persist, reinforcing whiteness and English as markers of linguistic authenticity and expertise. This reflects a broader global pattern, as noted by Motha (2014) and Bacon (2019), where white English speakers are positioned as linguistic ideals, marginalizing non-white professionals. The speaker’s depiction of the “pure White man” as inherently credible and the emphasis on “authentic English” being tied to specific accents illustrate the dynamics of the white listening subject, a concept central to Flores and Rosa’s (2015) critique. In Pakistan’s ELT framework, local professionals are positioned as linguistically inferior, regardless of their expertise, due to the racialized expectations that equate whiteness with linguistic competence. This raciolinguistic inequality is reinforced by the statement that “people from my region are little brown” and therefore “never regarded or recognized,” reflecting how colonial epistemologies continue to shape professional recognition and authority in Pakistan. Studies by Stillar (2022) and Baker-Bell (2020) further corroborate the stigmatization of racialized linguistic identities, which perpetuate whiteness as the linguistic norm. Moreover, the reference to an expert whose “mother was British” and who was “quite a white man” highlights how racialized authority is constructed through whiteness. This aligns with Alim’s (2016) argument that linguistic competence is racialized and linked to colonial power structures, where the expert’s whiteness elevates his status in the Pakistani context. Local professionals, regardless of their qualifications, are denied legitimacy because they are not seen as racially or linguistically “authentic.” This reflects Motha (2016) and Phillipson’s (1992) discussions of linguistic imperialism, where whiteness and native English-speaking abilities are upheld as global standards, thereby marginalizing non-Western expertise. The speaker’s language, which describes local professionals as “not authentic enough” because they are “known as locals,” reveals the deeply ingrained coloniality that devalues indigenous knowledge in favor of Western epistemologies, as Wynter (2003) argues. This perpetuates the historical discourse of colonialism, positioning European knowledge and linguistic standards as superior and sustaining structural inequalities in Pakistan’s ELT sector. As Flores and Rosa (2015), Alim (2016), and Almeida (2015) assert, such raciolinguistic ideologies reinforce Western and white dominance in global education, where non-Western scholars are often seen as illegitimate. The excerpt further exposes how English proficiency is racialized in Pakistan, with Western accents being considered markers of “authenticity” and “credibility.” This supports Flores and Rosa’s (2015) critique of linguistic authority, where non-native speakers, particularly from colonized regions, are measured against racialized standards. The linguistic hierarchy this creates ensures that local Pakistani professionals are perpetually seen as lacking, aligning with Bacon’s (2019) argument that whiteness remains the unmarked norm in global ELT. Thus, the excerpt reveals how colonial ideologies persist, maintaining racial and linguistic hierarchies that privilege whiteness and marginalize non-Western voices in Pakistan’s language education system. A similar perspective was conveyed by another participant, as seen in excerpt 2, which highlights the psychological imprints of racial ideologies that prioritize Western expertise within Pakistan’s ELT sector. This perspective reveals how deeply ingrained beliefs about Western superiority shape the field, where global educational exchanges perpetuate the colonial hierarchies of knowledge and authority. The participant’s view underscores how internalized raciolinguistic ideologies reinforce the dominance of Western pedagogical models, sustaining a global racial order that marginalizes local expertise and reproduces systemic inequalities within the ELT landscape. Excerpt 2: “You attend sessions on teaching, especially of people who are basically English, from USA, UK, or Australia, but they are teaching and training in underdeveloped countries like Indonesia, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Pakistan. They share experiences on how to overcome ELT issues especially in countries like us. These kinds of sessions are really enlightening especially when somebody who has authentic English background talks about them. They are extremely helpful, and you can understand and relate with them better. This year XYZ was there, an international white speaker, we ensured that she comes to Pakistan. She gave excellent talks on sessions. She spoke on a couple of sessions. Last year we also had another person here from the UK.” (SPELT/F/15) The excerpt demonstrates the deep-rooted psychological impact of raciolinguistic hierarchies on the speaker’s perception of Western expertise in Pakistan’s ELT sector. The speaker’s language in the excerpt also reveals a clear division between countries, creating a psychological hierarchy that further reinforces colonial and raciolinguistic ideologies. By grouping the UK, USA, and Australia together as representatives of "authentic" English and contrasting them with "underdeveloped countries" like Pakistan, Indonesia, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka, the speaker reproduces a colonial binary of superiority and inferiority. The speaker’s use of the term "underdeveloped countries" reinforces the notion of the Global South as perpetually lacking, a space that requires guidance from the West to "overcome ELT issues." This framing perpetuates what Flores and Rosa (2015) describe as a racialized global order, where Western countries are seen as possessing inherent linguistic and educational authority, while countries like Pakistan are seen as 4 LAP=Affilation with Association, F=Female, 7=interview No. R. Ali and R. Salam-Salmaoui International Journal of Educational Research 128 (2024) 102483 7 deficient and incapable of resolving their own educational challenges without external, Western help. The repeated reference to the "authentic English background" of trainers from Western countries reflects this deeply embedded hierarchy, linking whiteness and Western English not only to linguistic competence but also to intellectual and pedagogical superiority. Furthermore, by describing the sessions led by these Western professionals as "enlightening" and "extremely helpful," the speaker constructs a psychological hierarchy in which local knowledge and expertise are automatically devalued. This internalized colonial mentality, where local professionals are considered less capable or knowledgeable, aligns with Alim’s (2016) concept of the co-naturalization of race and language, which continues to shape how linguistic authority is perceived in postcolonial contexts. The speaker’s positioning of Western trainers as inherently better able to "understand and relate" to local ELT issues perpetuates the colonial logic that the Global South must rely on Western expertise to resolve its own challenges, thereby maintaining the racialized power dynamics embedded in linguistic imperialism (Phillipson, 1992). Moreover, the speaker’s excitement about ensuring the participation of an "international white speaker" underscores the racialized hierarchy in ELT, where whiteness is explicitly linked to expertise and legitimacy. This dynamic mirrors what Flores and Rosa (2015) describe as the racialization of language competence, where linguistic proficiency is evaluated against the racialized standards of Western English. The speaker’s reliance on Western trainers as the only credible source of ELT solutions illustrates how local professionals are consistently positioned as inferior, regardless of their actual expertise. This further reinforces the colonial legacy in Pakistan’s ELT sector, where the co-naturalization of race and language sustains structural inequalities (Motha, 2014). The speaker’s framing of Western experts as better suited to address local issues is also indicative of the internalized colonial mentality, which devalues indigenous knowledge and reinforces a unidirectional flow of knowledge from the West to postcolonial contexts. This not only perpetuates the exclusion of local voices but also reflects a broader global racial order that sustains the dominance of whiteness in ELT, as discussed by Hudley et al. (2020). Therefore, the excerpt exemplifies how raciolinguistic ideologies continue to reproduce racial inequalities in Pakistan’s ELT sector, maintaining whiteness as the unmarked standard for linguistic and professional competence. 2. Dependency on western organizations and racial hierarchies This theme highlights how Pakistan’s reliance on Western institutions, such as the British Council and US State Department, entrenches racial hierarchies and limits local autonomy in ELT development. By perpetuating a neocolonial dynamic, Western control over funding and educational projects undermines local agency, reinforcing Western dominance and marginalizing indigenous voices. This dependency not only sustains systemic power imbalances but also reinforces racialized perceptions of competence, positioning Western expertise as superior and essential, thereby constraining Pakistan’s capacity for independent educational reform. This is exemplified in the following excerpt 3. Excerpt 3: “These days, the British Council has almost all its projects in Punjab, so they have shifted their major work there due to government support. First, we paid a lot of attention to UGC, and we wanted to be patrons of UGC support for such trainings. But then we realized that we had to be an independent body, not subservient to the British Council or the State Department.” (SPELT/F/1) The speaker’s use of the term "subservient" in this excerpt reveals the entrenched raciolinguistic hierarchies and neocolonial power dynamics that shape Pakistan’s ELT landscape. This word encapsulates the perceived dependency on Western institutions like the British Council and U.S. State Department, reinforcing the notion that Western expertise is seen as both linguistically and racially superior. Flores and Rosa (2015) critically address how non-Western professionals are positioned as inherently deficient, regardless of their abilities. The speaker’s earlier desire to be "patrons" of Western-backed projects reflects an internalized inferiority, where local legitimacy is contingent upon Western validation. Further, the speaker’s realization that independence must be achieved highlights the raciolinguistic dynamics at play. The admission that their institution must break free from Western subordination demonstrates an acute awareness of the racialized power relations that have long dictated Pakistan’s educational development. However, this recognition of neocolonial dependency is not just institutional but deeply raciolinguistic, illustrating how local professionals are evaluated against white, Western standards. This dynamic perpetuates the belief that local expertise lacks authenticity unless endorsed by Western institutions, as Alim (2016) highlights in his work on the co-naturalization of race and language in postcolonial contexts. The phrase "government support" signals a critique of racialized spatial politics within Pakistan, where regions like Punjab, aligned with Western priorities, receive more attention and resources. This aligns with Rahman’s (2004) critique of how Punjabi dominance has historically marginalized regional identities and languages, reinforcing a colonial hierarchy that privileges Western linguistic authority. The British Council’s focus on Punjab further deepens regional inequalities, illustrating the spatial dimensions of neocolonial influence. The participant’s resistance to this subservience reflects the colonial legacy of relying on Western aid and educational frameworks. The speaker’s critique aligns with Abdullah and Akhtar’s (2019) analysis of how organizations like UK Aid and DFID perpetuate neocolonial dependency under the guise of financial aid. While these contributions may appear beneficial, they reinforce racialized hierarchies that limit local autonomy and position Western expertise as essential for progress. Thus, this excerpt illustrates how the language used by the speaker captures the raciolinguistic ideologies that continue to privilege Western authority and marginalize local expertise. The speaker’s critique of subservience illustrates a growing awareness of the need to resist these racialized power structures, yet the framing of this as an ongoing process reflects the enduring colonial legacy that continues to shape Pakistan’s educational landscape. Another participant echoed this perspective in excerpt 4, highlighting how reliance on Western institutions like the British Council and U.S. State Department perpetuates a system in which control and recognition remain with foreign organizations. This dependency reinforces raciolinguistic hierarchies, marginalizing local voices and maintaining Western dominance in Pakistan’s ELT sector. R. Ali and R. Salam-Salmaoui International Journal of Educational Research 128 (2024) 102483 8