Superdiverse and multilingual, but still languageless. How unconscious and unintended raciolinguistic attitudes in school-based parent cafés can co-promote exclusion

Medvedev, Alexei; Grotlüschen, Anke Superdiverse and multilingual, but still languageless. How unconscious and unintended raciolinguistic attitudes in school-based parent cafés can co-promote exclusion European journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults 16 (2025) 3, S. 339-353 Quellenangabe/ Reference: Medvedev, Alexei; Grotlüschen, Anke: Superdiverse and multilingual, but still languageless. How unconscious and unintended raciolinguistic attitudes in school-based parent cafés can co-promote exclusion - In: European journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults 16 (2025) 3, S. 339-353 - URN: urn:nbn:de:0111-pedocs-344446 - DOI: 10.25656/01:34444; 10.3384/rela.2000-7426.5895 https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0111-pedocs-344446 https://doi.org/10.25656/01:34444 in Kooperation mit / in cooperation with: http://www.ep.liu.se Nutzungsbedingungen Terms of use Dieses Dokument steht unter folgender Creative Commons-Lizenz: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.de - Sie dürfen das Werk bzw. den Inhalt vervielfältigen, verbreiten und öffentlich zugänglich machen sowie Abwandlungen und Bearbeitungen des Werkes bzw. Inhaltes anfertigen, solange Sie den Namen des Autors/Rechteinhabers in der von ihm festgelegten Weise nennen. This document is published under following Creative Commons-License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en - You may copy, distribute and render this document accessible, make adaptations of this work or its contents accessible to the public as long as you attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor. Mit der Verwendung dieses Dokuments erkennen Sie die Nutzungsbedingungen an. By using this particular document, you accept the above-stated conditions of use. Kontakt / Contact: peDOCS DIPF | Leibniz-Institut für Bildungsforschung und Bildungsinformation Informationszentrum (IZ) Bildung E-Mail: [email protected] Internet: www.pedocs.de European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2025, pp. 339-353 ISSN 2000-7426 © 2025 The authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ http://doi.org/10.3384/rela.2000-7426.5895 www.rela.ep.liu.se Superdiverse and multilingual, but still languageless: How unconscious and unintended raciolinguistic attitudes in schoolbased parent cafés can co-promote exclusion Alexei Medvedev University of Hamburg / KWB e. V., Germany ([email protected]) Anke Grotlüschen University of Hamburg, Germany ([email protected]) Abstract It is widely emphasized that there are existing gaps between parents who understand themselves as residents and parents who are positioned as immigrants or even ‘perpetual foreigners’. This qualitative study illustrates how unconscious and unintended raciolinguistic attitudes position some groups of parents and keep them excluded despite the programmatic idea of school-based parent cafés, legitimized by governmental strategies of better inclusion. The theories of raciolinguicism and monolingual habitus are further explored to understand intertwined mechanisms of creating groups. The analysis was planned and carried out using the Grounded Theory based on interviews. As the main findings, it is argued that German is understood as the language that leaves parents with another first language languageless with no or just limited communication skills. In certain school-related contexts, the monolingual habitus of German can be replaced by another dominant language. The study also showcases the phenomenon of (self)othering that can occur unintendedly in parent cafés. Keywords: school parent cafés, raciolinguicism, monolingual habitus, migrant parents, perpetual foreigners [340] Medvedev & Grotlüschen Introduction Migrants become more diverse, even superdiverse, i.e., the reasons for migration, legal and social status of immigrants, their languages, beliefs, and religions vary substantially. At the same time, societies with immigrant influx also (have) become super-diverse regarding these factors (Vertovec, 2024). National governments of the receiving societies apply strategies and instruments to manage this development. This is especially relevant for education, both for adults and for children. One of these instruments is called the school-based parent café. The intention and program of parent cafés aim at integrating diverse populations (Medvedev, 2020). Parent cafés are a wellestablished part of adult education, educational authorities usually fund them, and they offer informal opening hours (Medvedev, in press). In our case, a public adult education training institution regularly offers courses for parents to become ‘mentors’. These mentors are the parents who start parent cafés in their children's schools and run them. In the opening hours, trained mentors typically offer counselling on the educational system and learning opportunities for children in the neighbourhood. The visitors are less experienced parents, new to the school or neighbourhood, or those searching to become mentors themselves. Mentors in the cafés also offer learning opportunities for adults, e.g., on cooking international cuisines. Some use festive days for intercultural activities, and others offer trips to places of interest in the cities (Medvedev, in press). Many countries have similar family learning1 programs and consider them part of the Adult Basic Education system (Desjardins, 2017). However, a well-organized program and good intentions regarding the acknowledgement of a superdiverse society do not always end up in normalizing this urban superdiversity. Scholars point to long-lasting gaps between groups who understand themselves as residents and groups who are positioned as immigrants. This process builds on collective racial knowledge (Terkessidis, 1998). Several factors play a role in this process. Denying a legal status with formal rights (to work and vote) keeps immigrants at the margins of societies as well as out of (adult) education (Heinemann, 2014). On the other hand, education reproduces power relations, e.g., by reproducing racism (Doğmuș et al., 2022) and a monolingual habitus (Gogolin, 1994). This often happens without full intention (El-Mafaalani, 2021). Racialisation and linguicism (Heinemann & Dirim, 2016) intersect substantially in the educational sector because, since the establishment of nation-states, one dominant language has been considered constitutional for a state (Gogolin, 1994). The establishment of this language takes place via the educational system (Gogolin, 1994) and is reproduced in integration courses for adults (Heinemann & Sarabi, 2020). Overall, linguistic practices as well as racialization play a fundamental role in keeping immigrants in a status of perpetual foreigners (Wu, 2023), even though government activities (like the establishment of school-based parent cafés) try to invest in better integration. Therefore, this article focuses on how raciolinguistic attitudes can be expressed, also with no intention. The basis for the analysis is interviews with parents, teachers, and social pedagogues who run school-based parent cafes, conducted in 2023 in Hamburg. The paper starts with a theoretical lens regarding linguistic diversity within the larger framework of Bourdieu’s theory of habitus. Building on this, a short literature review reveals that parent cafés reproduce power relations in many ways. The research question narrows the focus to school-based parent cafés. For the main study, a qualitative empirical approach with an open-ended methodological approach was chosen, based on Grounded Theory (Glaser and Strauss 2010), including coding procedures (Strauss and Corbin 1996). 18 qualitative interviews form the basis for an Superdiverse and multilingual, but still languageless [341] inductive grounded theory-based analysis. Some GTM-generated codes that did not match the initial research question, but seemed relevant, have not yet been published. The authors discussed these codes and searched for theory. Especially the raciolingiustic theory helped understand the ambiguity, sharpen the research question, and identify new semantic connections in the prior collected material. Findings are presented in three main categories: German as a metaphor of human language, Alternative linguae francae, and Racolinguistic deprofiling. The discussion suggests that migrants are kept perpetual foreign because monolingualism dominates the discourse. Theoretical approaches: From monolingual habitus to linguicism and raciolinguicism Pioneering theories on language and education, especially Gogolin (1994) have built on Pierre Bourdieu’s approach to explaining how Language contributes to the reproduction of power (Bourdieu, 1991). Bourdieu shows how languages, as well as types of speech, distinguish between social classes, and how the formality of writing stabilizes these power relations. In the mid-nineties, in a very early phase of educational research on migration in Germany, Gogolin (1994) connected the concept of habitus to language diversity and immigration. Gogolin’s research with schoolteachers shows that teachers do not know about the nation-building process and understand German as the only relevant language within and above education. This process of forgetting the historical development and the process of playing out power relations without reflected intentions to do so are core characteristics of what Bourdieu calls habitus (Wittpoth, 2004). Gogolin thus summarizes her findings in the term of a monolingual habitus of teachers and in schools. Today, as the term habitus has become common in educational research, the concept of a monolingual habitus is easy to understand and apply. But re-reading Gogolin’s monograph calls to mind that migration was seen as a minority issue in the educational discussion, marginalized as something only necessary during a temporary migration crisis (Gogolin 1994), which would not need any attention after the so-called crisis in the 1990s anymore. It is an unfinished process towards understanding Germany as an immigration country, to see migration and linguistic diversity as an ongoing process, and to build substantial capacities for educational and interdisciplinary migration research. Nevertheless, some seemingly long-discussed issues are being (re-)discovered by groups pleading for a conservative or even right-wing societal turn. Linguistic concepts, often also built on Bourdieu’s theory, inspire this research in many ways (Piller, 2016). A more recent discourse now interferes with the discussion of linguistic diversity. The early discourse on racial knowledge (Terkessidis, 1998), personal and structural violence, and racism (Hall, 2008) was modified and broadened, e.g., as unintentional racism (El-Mafaalani, 2021). Post-colonial theories intertwine with linguistic and educational theories in many ways (Akbaba & Heinemann, 2023; Dusi & Addi-Raccah, 2025). These theories inserted the term othering (Said, 1978) into the educational discourse. For this article, othering is understood as a process of constructing an autochthonous group as normal and that of discriminating populations that do not match the criteria of normality as others. The concept is also applied to populations within countries (Jansson, 2017) as well as to between-country othering processes on a global scale (Grotlüschen & Buddeberg, 2020). Moreover, the othering process also occurs as self-othering (Medvedev, in press). [342] Medvedev & Grotlüschen Within this discussion, early notions of linguicism (Heinemann & Dirim, 2016) as language-based racism were reconsidered (Akbaba, 2024). Linguicism discriminates against languages by understanding some as more prestigious and others as less so. The authors of this paper also understand the non-acceptance of grammatically or phonetically imperfect use of language in everyday communication as discrimination. Furthermore, research shows that teachers do not accept (playful) multilingual mixtures of dialect and informal registers within a school that they understand monolingually. Thus, language receives full validation when it is used without accent and dialect, and any mistakes in grammar and spelling (Akbaba, 2024). This relates to international discourses on raciolinguicism, that resonate with educational research and point to the racism that lies within linguicism: Flores and Rosa (2015, 2023) as well as Rosa and Flores (2017, 2020) build on research regarding education, employment, legal representation, asylum, citizenship, and migration and conclude based on their review: ‘Linguistic classifications and procedures can exclude racialized populations from access to opportunities and resources’ (Rosa & Flores, 2017, p. 630) The raciolinguistic perspective (Rosa & Flores, 2020) is considered in this paper as a precise instrument to figure out how racisms play out and how this reproduces a status as languageless foreigners, even when government programs come with the best intentions. Rosa and Flores’ approach points to ambiguities in structures and practices: ‘While on one level this framing of the issue celebrates multiculturalism and multilingualism, on another level it is premised on modifying the behaviors of racialized populations in ways that obscure how white supremacy structures these populations’ experiences and societal positionalities’ (Flores & Rosa, 2015, p. 149f). As our research builds on infrastructure that according to its programming has been established to foster a better representation of all parents in schools through parent cafés, this approach allows a deeper understanding and questioning ‘how structures of privilege and power are reproduced or disrupted through such programming’ (Rosa & Flores, 2017, p. 640). One of the mechanisms that keeps people in a minority position is understood as ascribing a form of languagelessness (Rosa, 2019) that discriminates against every other language than the monolingually dominant one as irrelevant and as non-language. For this article, we use the approach of a monolingual habitus as the broadest and most influential concept. We also use the categories of (self)othering and raciolinguicism as a frame for a deeper analysis of the language-related categories derived from the main study (Medvedev, in press) that dealt with the question how does the practice of the school parent cafés address the anticipated superdiversity of the target groups and the perceived diversity of the participants, and what decisions does this entail. The additional in-depth study can be presented in and through the following three main categories: German as a metaphor for human language, Languages of ‘major minorities’ as alternative linguae francae, and Raciolinguistic deprofiling. Literature review: Parent cafés between empowerment and marginalization Parenting is seen as part of lifelong and lifewide learning (Aarsand, 2014). Many adult education centers offer parent or family education (Mallows, 2008). In adult education, ‘cafés’ are a metaphor for learning opportunities that do not require formal enrolment (regarding the characteristics of a café: Medvedev, 2013). Adult learning and education Superdiverse and multilingual, but still languageless [343] thus can take place in learning cafés, parent cafés or school-based parent cafés. The themes vary:  Learning cafés may offer language learning opportunities for test-takers or offer a variety of themes within adult basic education (Grotlüschen, 2025)  Parent cafés can focus more on parenting, e.g., regarding the changing roles of parents (Faircloth, 2023) or the shift of responsibility between state and the individual (Oelkers, 2012) but also address school-related themes (Hackstein et al., 2023)  School-based parent cafés aim at school-parent co-operation and offer recreational and social activities (Medvedev, 2020) Learning café settings that can also address parents are normally located in and run by non-school institutions. In this way, school-based parent cafés are a very specific example of an adult-learning format placed in a school context. Some empirical studies that build on school-based parent cafés are presented in this literature review. Parent cafés provide opportunities to talk and ask for advice, but also offer cooking, sports, or sewing events (Hackstein et al., 2023). The cafés serve as centres for information, e.g., on institutions for children and youth in the area. The parents who organize the cafes have a multiplier and communicator function in their communities and back into the schools (Hackstein et al., 2023; see also Medvedev, 2020). However, cafes report that few parents regularly participate (Hackstein et al., 2023). It can be assumed that they form an in-group of multipliers who try to keep the café open for the neighbourhood. Parents and parent cafés are also seen as a facilitating structure for inclusive education (Schuppener et al., 2023). As part of a compilation on power relations regarding the cooperation of parents and schools, Dean (2021) claims that schools label some parents as difficult to reach, but that these parents feel empowered and reinforced in school-based parent cafés. On the other hand, Dean shows how formal parent boards are dominated by privileged parents so that both parent groups find themselves in a competitive relationship with each other. The negotiations between these groups reveal unequal power relations with deprivileged parent groups experiencing racism and classism (Dean 2021, similar findings: Medvedev, 2020). This is not a singular experience, as racism in German schools has been discussed for quite a while (Doğmuș et al., 2022). Overall, this literature suggests that school-based parent cafés are organized to empower and integrate (linguistically) diverse families. The qualitative studies we find also show convincingly, that racism, classism, and overall power relations have already been indicated within school and parent co-operation. Theories of power reproduction, monolingual habitus, linguicism, and raciolinguistics argue that existing power relations are (subtly) stabilized even though government programs are installed to overcome them. This leads to the research question of how possible unconscious and unintended raciolinguistic attitudes in school-based parent cafés co-promote exclusion. Methods and data Alexei Medvedev has been working as a practitioner for over 10 years and, therefore, is well-established within this infrastructure. At the same time, Author 1 belongs to a university research group led by Anke Grotlüschen. This double positioning requires a high reflection of the researcher's role regarding possible biases and prior knowledge [344] Medvedev & Grotlüschen constraints derived from being a practitioner in the field for a long time. Before the data collection started, ethical clearance was obtained from the school authority. The faculty’s doctoral committee approved the research design. Besides, the coding process and the analysis steps were discussed and validated by a research colloquium of a postgraduate school of the same faculty. Data were collected via a large infrastructure of school-based parent cafés (hereafter: SPC) in Hamburg. At that point, 50 schools took part in the Schulmentoren project, 40 of which were active in parent education. 64% of these schools (n=32) have or have had a parent café, 10% of other schools (n=5) state that they are planning one. This means that 74% of all schools (n=37) have dealt with the topic of parent cafés. All the schools participating in the Schulmentoren project were reached out to, 18 of them gave a positive response. So, the full sample consists of 18 interviews with 47 participants (45 female, 2 male). The teams responsible for the parent cafés - school staff members (teachers or social pedagogues) and volunteer parent mentors - were interviewed using problem-centred interviews (PCI). 17 interviews took place in person between September and November 2023 in Hamburg in schools and in one case in an out-of-school venue. The language of the interviews was German. The linguistic and functional composition of the interviewees was as follows: 21 interviewees spoke German as their first language, 26 as a second language. 25 parents in their function as parent mentors and 22 school staff members (teachers and social pedagogues) were interviewed. For the moment of the study, all the interviewees were involved in the management of their school’s parent café. All interviews have been recorded, auto-transcribed, manually revised, anonymized, and approved by all the participants. The analysis was planned and carried out using the Grounded Theory (Strauss & Corbin, 1996). The qualitative interview protocol was developed in an open mode to allow for inductive analyses. The main part of the study was submitted for publication (Medvedev, in press). Within the full coding and publication process, it became obvious that there are many more relevant aspects of racism, stereotypes, and linguistic exclusion left out of the coverage of the main study. These aspects were fully coded, but because they did not belong to the initial research question, they were put aside for a new in-depth analysis that is presented in this article. This analysis builds on the theories of racism and linguicism (see above). The initial codes ‘Othering’, ‘Self-othering’, ‘Programmatic’, ‘Challenging participants’, ‘Linguistic practices’, ‘Supposed knowledge about nonparticipants’, and ‘Perceived heterogeneity’ were elaborated anew. New semantic connections were identified. Findings: How the status of being forever foreign is produced The most important findings of this study can be summarised in three thematic blocks: German as a metaphor for human language, Languages of ‘major minorities’ as alternative linguae francae, and Raciolinguistic deprofiling. German as a metaphor for human language Several recurring patterns in the interviews reveal presumably unconscious and unintended monolingual habitual attitudes. The concept of ‘a language’ is consistently equated with the idea of speaking ‘the German language’. By saying someone is not speaking ‘the language’ the interviewees probably do not mean the parents would not Superdiverse and multilingual, but still languageless [345] have any command of any language. However, by perpetuating it, the German language is repeatedly considered the only relevant language (which mirrors a monolingual habitus). The interviewees (interviews#1, 8, 9, 14) seem to forget about the multilingualism of the parents, sometimes their command of different script systems like Arabic and Cyrillic, their efforts to manage their children’s language skills. German becomes a metaphor of ‘the language’. If parents do not speak (enough) German, any other language competence is made invisible. This happens because in the interviews on a symbolic and metaphorical level, German, as one of the languages spoken today is made into the human language per se: In the statements, the assessment of the parents' (supposed) German competence(s) becomes a judgment on the (in)ability or partial ability of human speech par excellence. This can be observed in many interview passages (see below). A post-colonial interpretation of this finding refers to what Rosa and Flores (2017) call ‘longstanding racialized ideologies of languagelessness’ (p. 624). Three levels of this subjective-symbolic languagelessness can be distinguished. The most radical level implies that parents who do not speak or understand German, alias ‘the language’, would be rather languageless than multilingual, because other languages than German are made invisible, as this quote of a parent volunteer expresses: ‘It doesn't matter that the language is not there. Nevertheless, they [parents who don’t speak German] can do something for the school and for the pupils. And I think that's something very important’ (interview#9, items2 13, 17, 26, 61-64, see also interview#1, item 16 interview#8, item 37; interview#14, item, 35). Although the second level of languagelessness acknowledges that the parents speak some German, i.e. ‘the language’, it emphasizes language deficits that take the form of ‘some’, ‘many’, ‘several’, ‘relatively high’ ‘linguistic barriers’ (interview#1, item 16; interview#6, item 59; interview#12, item 23), ‘comprehension barriers’ (interview#14, item 54) ‘perhaps language difficulties’ (interview#17, item 13), ‘language problems’ (interview#17, item 32) and would therefore possibly impair communication in the SPC: If we know that someone is coming who is not so proficient in the language, that we can have someone come in to translate and all sorts of things, because that's just...many people don't know that the parents come to school and are integrated. (interview#15, item 21) If parents ‘with language barriers’ dare to speak German, i.e. ‘the language’, at school, there was a risk that their language skills would be ‘judged’ (interview#12, item 43) by other parents or that they even might be ‘laughed at’ (interview#6, item 59). The third level of linguistic de-recognition qualifies strongly developed German competence(s) of parents with a first language other than German rather as an exceptional situation, which only conceals the deficient view: ‘We offered German courses. I remember, for example, that in those eight years, the mothers, who have a migrant background but still speak German very well, taught German to each other. What a great thing!’ (interview#5, item 50). As a significant contrast, a quote from another interview can be cited here, which also attests that language deficits of parents with German as their first language are the exception rather than the rule: ‘[...] I even have German parents that I care of who are illiterate, who can't read the marks at all but would never say so. And then of course they are afraid’ (interview#1, item 44). Even if the programmatic of the individual SPCs sounds positive at first glance, for example by announcing a notion to create ‘a broad linguistic base’ (interview #1, item 35) or ‘to develop something in the field of language’ (interview #14, item 50), such a [346] Medvedev & Grotlüschen positive agenda can also contain exclusionary traces that shape a biased view of the target groups and later the participants: ‘We don't just provide linguistic support, even if you can also speak the language but need support from a mum or dad, then we are also responsible for that’ (interview #8, item 20, see also interview#1, item 16; interview#17, item 13). The thesis of the monolingual habitus of the German school is confirmed several times in the interviews, in that a dichotomous structure of German vs. other languages is repeatedly evident, which is well expressed in this quote, for example: Well, we speak German in the group. But we have a few options, and it has also happened that parents who have found each other have then spoken something in their language. It was also the case that (...) that didn't bother them. It was kind of like, well, if one of them didn't understand something, the other mum would tell them. So, it was quite pleasant so far. (interview#12, item 40, see also interview#1, item 35; interview#6, item 60; interview#8, item 11; interview#18, item 26) This pattern is typical and repeated often. It shows that the interviewees stick to German. They see multilingual practices as an auxiliary construct of the parents and accept it. However, the interviewees aim to communicate monolingually. Another interview provides concrete compensatory approaches that, on the one hand, contribute directly to language support for parents, but at the same time emphasize the language deficits of German learners who still speak ‘broken German’ and anchor the status of German in its educational language variant even more firmly as a normative (language) education goal: ‘Yes, in the German language, there is plenty of proverbs and all these images and metaphors. And if you can just drop something like that, as someone who is a German learner, it's perceived very differently’ (interview#6, item 22). The preservation of the monolingual habitus is not only justified by the intention to promote language, as shown above with the example of proverbs but is also problematized as a resource issue: ‘[...] multilingual design. It is simply enormously time-consuming, especially when we have to make every single invitation’ (interview#6, item 61). Nevertheless, it would be presumptuous to claim that the monolingual habitus concerning German remains constant or solely dominant in the SPC. Languages of ‘major minorities’ as alternative linguae francae The image of the dichotomous positioning of German as the hegemonic language in the school system vs. other languages described above requires two additions in the context of the study conducted. Firstly, this positioning does not reveal neither language hierarchies nor language competition relating to the languages as a whole in the interviews3. For example, English or other languages of the global North don’t dominate and are not valued differently from the languages of origin of the largest parent communities. The interviews tend to show that because of gentrification and the increasing superdiversity in the neighbourhoods, new individual parents or parent groups with additional languages are being added that were not previously represented in the SPC, even though these languages may belong to the global players: I don't know why other immigrants have joined. (...) Apparently, several other countries have been added, such as Portugal. Spanish, which we didn't have, is now available and the parents also come to the parents' café. (...) Today we had four Spanish-speaking Superdiverse and multilingual, but still languageless [353] Heinemann, A. M. B. (2014). Teilnahme an Weiterbildung in der Migrationsgesellschaft [Participation in Continuing Education in the Migration Society]. (Vol. 33). transcript Verlag. https://doi.org/10.14361/transcript.9783839427187 Heinemann, A. M. B., & Dirim, I. (2016). „Die sprechen bestimmt (schlecht) über mich“ [“They're definitely talking (badly) about me”]. In E. Arslan & K. Bozay (Eds.), Symbolische Ordnung und Bildungsungleichheit in der Migrationsgesellschaft (pp. 199-214). Springer Fachmedien. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-13703-8_11 Heinemann, A. M. B., & Sarabi, S. A. (2020). Paternalistic benevolence – Enabling violence. European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, 11(3), 309-320. https://doi.org/10.3384/rela.2000-7426.ojs1712 Jansson, D. R. (2017). The Work of Southering: “Southern Justice” and the Moral Landscape of Uneven Racism. Southeastern Geographer, 57(2), 131-150. https://doi.org/10.1353/sgo.2017.0014 Macha, H. (2017). Die neue Körperlichkeit in der Elternund Familienbildung [The New Physicality in Parent and Family Education]. Forum Erwachsenenbildung, 1, 45-48. Mallows, D. (2008). Effective and inclusive practices in family literacy, language and numeracy: Family literacy, language and numeracy: a practitioner handbook. CfBT Education Trust. Medvedev, A. (2013). Germany’s School-Based Parent Cafés: A New Hype or a Sustainable Way to Update Home-School Policies? International Journal about Parents in Education, 7(2), 59-68. https://doi.org/10.54195/ijpe.18215 Medvedev, A. (2020). Heterogene Eltern. Die Kooperation von Eltern und Schule neu denken und umsetzen [Diverse Parents. Rethinking and Implementing Cooperation Between Parents and Schools]. Beltz Juventa. Medvedev, A. (in press). Between Superdiversity and Doing Diversity: School-Based Parent Cafés as Places of Parent Education. International Review of Education (REVI). Oelkers, N. (2012). The Redistribution of Responsibility Between State and Parents: Family in the Context of Post-Welfare-State Transformation. In M. Richter & S. Andresen (Eds.), Children’s Well-Being: Indicators and Research. The Politicization of Parenthood, 5, 101-110. Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2972-8_8 Piller, I. (2016). Linguistic Diversity and Social Justice: An Introduction to Applied Sociolinguistics. Oxford University Press. Rosa, J., & Flores M. (2017). Unsettling race and language: Toward a raciolinguistic perspective. Language in Society, 46(5), 621-647. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404517000562 Rosa, J., & Flores M. (2020). Reimagining Race and Language: From Raciolinguistic Ideologies to a Raciolinguistic Perspective. In H. Samy Alim (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Language and Race (pp. 90-107). Oxford University Press. Rosa, J. (2019). “They’re Bilingual… That Means They Don’t Know the Language”: The Ideology of Languagelessness in Practice, Policy, and Theory. In J. Rosa (Ed.), Looking like a Language, Sounding like a Race: Raciolinguistic Ideologies and the Learning of Latinidad (pp. 124-143). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190634728.003.0005 Said, E. W. (1978). Orientalism. Pantheon. Schuppener, S., Leonhardt, N., & Kruschel, R. (2023). Inklusive Schule im Sozialraum. Entwicklungsprozesse durch Kooperation und Interprofessionalität in herausfordernder Lage. [Inclusive Schooling in the Social Space. Development Processes Through Cooperation and Interprofessionality in Challenging Situations]. Springer VS. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1996). Grounded Theory. Grundlagen qualitativer Sozialforschung. Beltz. Terkessidis, M. (1998). Psychologie des Rassismus [Psychology of Racism]. Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Vertovec, S. (2024). Superdiversität. Migration und soziale Komplexität [Superdiversity. Migration and Social Complexity]. Suhrkamp. von Kotze, A., & Walters, S. (2023). Taking risks: Exploring ecofeminist, climate-just popular education. European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, 14(1), 17-33. https://doi.org/10.3384/rela.2000-7426.4324 Wittpoth, J. (2004). Gerahmte Subjektivität [Framed Subjectivity]. In P. Faulstich & J. Ludwig (Eds.), Expansives Lernen (pp. 256-262). Schneider. Wu, A. (2023). Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype: Third Class Americans. In Asian American Educators and Microaggressions (pp. 41-60). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-234590_3