VOICES FROM PALESTINE: AN INVESTIGATION OF THE SOCIOLINGUISTIC TRAJECTORIES OF PALESTINIAN POSTGRADUATE STUDENTS IN ENGLISH HE ĐIỂM CAO

Luận văn, báo cáo, luận án, đồ án, tiểu luận, đề tài khoa học, đề tài nghiên cứu, đề tài báo cáo - Khoa học xã hội - Khoa học xã hội University of Roehampton DOCTORAL THESIS Voices from Palestine An Investigation of the Sociolinguistic Trajectories of Palestinian Postgraduate Students in English HE Elhour, Rawand Award date: 2022 Awarding institution: University of Roehampton General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors andor other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ? Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 28. Apr. 2024 0 Voices from Palestine: An Investigation of the Sociolinguistic Trajectories of Palestinian Postgraduate Students in English HE By Rawand Elhour A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of PhD Department of Media, Culture and Language University of Roehampton 2022 i Ethics Approval The research for this project was submitted for ethics consideration under the reference MCL 18 043 in the Department of Media, Culture and Language and was approved under the procedures of the University of Roehampton’s Ethics Committee on 11th September 2018. ii Disseminating the Project: Publications Arising from this Thesis Conference Participation: Refereed Publications Elhour, R. (2019). Language learning on the boundary: the difference between ‘knowing about’ English and actually ‘living in’ English. In Danjo, C., Meddegama, I., O’Brien, D., Prudhoe, J., Walz, L. and Wicaksono, R. (Eds.), Taking Risks in Applied Linguistics: Online Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the British Association for Applied Linguistics, York St John University, 6-8 September 2018 (pp. 21-23). Retrieved from BAAL2018 https:custom.cvent.com01664CE00C344F7BA62E39C4CFE91FA8files86adbc6e0e884e9 fbf6d9e7d03ec8832.pdf Elhour, R. (2019). Globalised yet inexhaustive: the role of English language education in preparing Palestinian academics for sojourning in the UK PowerPoint Presentation. School of Education Doctoral Research Conference ‘Developing Doctoral Voice: disseminating your research within the Education Community’, 17 May, University of Roehampton. Elhour, R. (2018). Going mobile yet holding still: Palestinian sojourners, turbulence, and stillness PowerPoint Presentation. ''''Taking Inequality Seriously: Economy and Society in the Age of Inequalities'''' Workshop, 8 November, University of Sheffield. Elhour, R. (2018). Giving voice to the unheard: an investigation of the sociolinguistic trajectories of Palestinian postgraduate students in UK Higher Education PowerPoint Presentation. Annual Research Student Conference 2018: Originality and Innovation in Research: Implications, Practice and Theory, 15 October, University of Roehampton. Elhour, R (2018). Language learning on the boundary: the difference between ‘knowing about’ English and actually ‘living in’ English PowerPoint Presentation. BAAL 2018 Conference: Taking Risks in Applied Linguistics, 6 September, York St. John University. Elhour, R. (2018). Voices from Palestine: the difference between ''''Knowing'''' English and ''''Living in'''' English PowerPoint Presentation. 5th International Postgraduate Conference on Modern Foreign Languages, Linguistics Literature 2018, 1 June, University of Central Lancashire. Elhour, R. (2018). From immobility to mobility: the Sociolinguistic experiences of Gazan sojourners in the UK PowerPoint Presentation. Language, Translation, and Migration Conference 2018, 24 May, University of Warwick. iii Invited Talks  Society for Research into Higher Education (SRHE) (14 June 2021) ‘Studying while under occupation, apartheid, and pandemic: lessons for the digital university’.  University of Roehampton, MCL Department, Language Issues in Multilingual Settings Undergraduate Module (21 November 2018) ‘Language and Politics: Languages issues in nations-without-states (insights from Palestine). List of Grants Awarded to Fund this PhD Project  2017-2020 HESPAL Studentship to fund my PhD in Educational Studies at the University of Roehampton, London.  2018- 2019 Santander and Ravenscroft £1250 research grant to fund my doctoral fieldwork.  September 2020 Bseiso Foundation £1950 grant.  October 2020 Hoping foundation £1000 grant.  November 2020 Palestine Britain Business Council emergency £780 grant.  April 2021 British Council partial scholarship (£6000). iv Abstract Located at the intersection of the fields of study abroad (SA), sociolinguistics, EFL, and mobility, this doctoral project provides a sociolinguistic investigation of the mobility trajectories of study abroad among nine Palestinian postgraduate students in English HE. The purpose of this research is to understand the consequences of mobility on sojourners’ perceptions of their Englishes, identity (trans)formation with specific reference to social class construction, and social practices and networks in the new context. This study springs from the need to qualitatively document the under-researched experiences of Palestinian sojourners in the UK and privilege their voices. Hence, this research adds more diversity to the SA literature which has been criticised for over-representing certain departure zones such as the USA and Europe. Moreover, the research addresses many calls for widening the scope of investigating sojourners’ lives abroad. It attends to Coleman’s (2013) call for embracing a holistic perspective towards sojourners’ experiences, viewing them as ‘whole people with whole lives’. Also, the study responds to calls which stress the importance of sojourners’ histories and contextual antecedents (Surtees, 2016) by touching on participants’ language history, motivations, statuses, and immobilities back home to provide a thorough understanding of their journeys to and in the UK. To this end, data were longitudinally collected over a period of nine months through two initial focus groups and three waves of individual interviews, resulting in a total of 27 interviews. Thematic Analysis (TA) was devised to interpret the nine cases under study. TA generated commonalities as well as singularitiesdifferences in the sample. Findings revealed that participants’ perceptions of their Englishes were affected by crossing borders and changing contexts. While sojourners perceived their linguistic repertoires as competent by virtue of their successful language histories back home, their views on their Englishes were subject to v ongoing negotiation and reconceptualisation upon mobility. Participants started to view their Englishes as ‘less distinguished’ and ‘not enough’ in the UK. Sojourners’ perceived linguistic limitation (relatively) disturbed their perceptions of themselves as EFLESL speakers, thus leading to forming new reflexive linguistic identities. Other reflexive identities, such as ‘foreigner identity’ were triggered as a result of participants’ mobility and its encounters. Class-mediated constructions were complex and fluctuating, but they generally featured more moments of moving down (i.e., declassing) than elevating up. Participants’ socialisation practises centred around their co-national circles which provided the necessary support, security, and familiarity, although other outer social spheres were mentioned by some participants towards the middle of the sojourn. Sojourners’ accounts also featured supportive and obstructive factors underpinning their decisions to establish social connections, such as sharing cultural habits and intense academic work, respectively. Both sets of factors contributed to a sort of ‘ghettoisation’ which was perceived in this study as a necessary strategy for coping and handling complexity, strangeness, and difference in the UK. vi Table of Contents Ethics Approval .................................................................................................................... i Disseminating the Project: Publications Arising from this Thesis .................................... ii Conference Participation: Refereed Publications....................................................................... ii Invited Talks ............................................................................................................................... iii List of Grants Awarded to Fund this PhD Project ............................................................ iii Abstract .............................................................................................................................. iv Table of Contents................................................................................................................ vi List of Tables ....................................................................................................................... x List of Figures ...................................................................................................................... x Acknowledgments .............................................................................................................. xi Chapter One ........................................................................................................................ 1 Setting the Stage: Background and Rationale of the Study ............................................... 1 1.1 My Sociolinguistic and Mobility Trajectory: A Bio-note on My Language and Travel History ......................................................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Situating the Research in its Academic Background: Identifying Gaps, Problems, and Needs in SA? ................................................................................................................................ 9 1.3 Research Aim and Objectives .............................................................................................. 11 1.4 Introducing the Research Questions ................................................................................... 11 1.5 Outline of the Study ............................................................................................................. 12 Chapter Two ...................................................................................................................... 16 The Study Contexts: Palestine and the UK ...................................................................... 16 2.1 The Palestinian Contexts ..................................................................................................... 17 2.1.1 Geography, History, and Political Conditions................................................................................. 17 2.1.2 Sociolinguistic Depictions from the Palestinian Contexts ............................................................... 22 2.1.3 Trends in Palestinian Students’ Academic Sojourning .................................................................... 26 2.2 International Students in UK HE and Immigration Policies ............................................. 30 Chapter Three ................................................................................................................... 39 Literature Review.............................................................................................................. 39 3.1 English Language in an Era of Globalisation ..................................................................... 39 3.1.1 English Language as a (Post)Colonial Legacy: A Historical Glimpse ............................................. 39 3.1.2 English Language Learning and Discourses in an Era of Globalisation........................................... 41 3.2 Sociolinguistics of (Im)Mobility .......................................................................................... 56 3.2.1 Divided We Move: Mobility as a Marker of Stratification .............................................................. 56 3.2.2 Language in Motion: What Happens When Individuals and their Resources Go Mobile, Cross Borders, and Relocate? .......................................................................................................................... 58 Structure and Agency in Mobility Contexts ............................................................................................ 63 vii 3.3 Experiences of Study Abroad: Motives, Intercultural Encounters, and Identity Work .... 68 3.3.1 Motives for Crossing Borders and Studying Abroad ...................................................................... 70 3.3.2 Cross-cultural Interaction and Social Circles in Study Abroad Settings .......................................... 74 3.3.3 Identity Performance in Study Abroad Contexts ............................................................................ 79 3.4 Conclusion and Summary ................................................................................................... 83 Chapter Four ..................................................................................................................... 85 Methodological Framework .............................................................................................. 85 4.1 Worldviews and Philosophical Assumptions ....................................................................... 86 4.1.1 Subjectivist Epistemology ............................................................................................................. 86 4.1.2 Constructivist Ontology ................................................................................................................ 87 4.2 Mobility: Mobilising Research? .......................................................................................... 88 4.3 Research Design ................................................................................................................... 97 4.3.1 Qualitative Approach: Rationale and Challenges ........................................................................... 97 4.3.1.1 A Note on the Trustworthiness and Credibility of this Study ................................................................. 99 4.3.2 Situating the Study in a Research Paradigm ................................................................................. 100 4.3.2.1 Why a ‘Case Study’? ......................................................................................................................... 100 Merits of Case Study .................................................................................................................. 102 4.3.3 The Longitudinal Dimension ....................................................................................................... 103 4.4 ‘Have been there’, ‘have done that’, ‘that happened to me’: Notes on Researching from Inside ....................................................................................................................................... 105 4.4.1 Researcher-Participant Relationship Highlighted ......................................................................... 109 4.5 Research Practicalities ...................................................................................................... 111 4.5.1 Preparing the Ground: Participant Recruitment ............................................................................ 111 4.5.1.1 Introducing Research Participants...................................................................................................... 116 4.5.2 Data Generation Methods............................................................................................................ 117 4.5.2.1 Focus Groups to ‘Start the Ball Rolling’ and ‘Round-Up’ .................................................................. 118 4.5.2.2 Individual Interviews for More ‘Personal’ Data.................................................................................. 119 4.5.2.3 Representation: Notes on the (Multi)Language(s) and Voice(s) of Interviews ..................................... 121 4.5.3 Thematic Data Analysis .............................................................................................................. 125 4.6 Ethical Considerations ...................................................................................................... 127 4.7 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 130 Chapter Five .................................................................................................................... 131 English Language ‘on the Move’: Expectations and Encounters .................................. 131 5.1 Language History: Pre-departure Trajectories ................................................................ 132 5.1.1 Compulsory English Learning ..................................................................................................... 132 5.1.2 Private Investment in English ...................................................................................................... 134 5.1.3 From Investment to Opportunities: What English Had to Offer .................................................... 135 5.2 Why the UK? ..................................................................................................................... 139 5.2.1 UK HE System as an Incentive to Study Abroad .......................................................................... 140 5.2.2 Other Reasons ............................................................................................................................ 145 5.2.2.1 The Tourist Student: Leisure and Consumption .................................................................................. 146 5.2.2.2 Crossing Borders as Interim Release.................................................................................................. 149 5.2.3 Concluding Remarks................................................................................................................... 153 5.3 Moving Across Geopolitical Borders: From ‘Knowing’ English to ‘Living in’ English ... 155 5.3.1 (Re)conceptualising English Language on the Move: A Panoramic View ..................................... 160 5.3.2 Relocating: ‘My English is Not Enough Here’ ............................................................................. 163 5.3.3 English ‘(Un)moored’: ‘The Diversity is Crazy’ ......................................................................... 170 viii 5.3.4 Un-imagining ‘Imagined Communities’: Meeting Different Members .......................................... 174 5.3.5 Sociolinguistics of Palestinian Students’ Mobility Trajectories: Towards a More Context-sensitive Approach ............................................................................................................................................ 178 5.4 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 182 Chapter Six ...................................................................................................................... 184 Identity Work in a Study Abroad Context ..................................................................... 184 6.1 Identity Performance in a Context of Mobility: Setting the Stage ................................... 185 6.2 L2-mediated Identity: Linguistic Dimensions................................................................... 186 6.2.1 Changing Relationships and Perceptions: New Linguistic Identities ............................................. 187 Contextual Layer: Different Interactants ....................................................................................................... 188 Intersectional Layers to Linguistic Identity Work .......................................................................................... 193 6.2.2 Foreigner Identity ....................................................................................................................... 200 Mobility as a Trigger of ‘Foreignness’ .......................................................................................................... 201 Non-nativeness as a Facet of Foreignness: Linguistic Perceptions as Triggers of a Non-native Identity .......... 203 English-mediated Interactions as Triggers of Foreignness .............................................................................. 205 6.3 Personal Growth: More Self-awareness and Different World Views ............................... 211 6.4 Social Class ........................................................................................................................ 219 6.4.1 Pre-sojourn Subjective Class Positionings of Participants ............................................................ 219 ‘Scholar for a Year, Chevener for Life’: Notes on Constructing Class Through the Scholarship Sojourn ........ 220 6.4.2 ‘Déclassement’, ‘Reclassement’: Class Construction in a Study Abroad Context .......................... 223 Aspiring ‘Up’ But Moving ‘Down’: Trajectories of Declassing in UK HE ..................................................... 224 ‘Classement’ Through Consumption ............................................................................................................. 227 6.5 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 230 Chapter Seven ................................................................................................................. 231 Sojourners’ Social Practices and Networks in the UK ................................................... 231 7.1 ‘Whole People with Whole Lives’: Aspects of Sojourners’ Social Life in the UK ............ 231 7.2 Factors Underpinning Sojourners’ Socialisation Practices .............................................. 235 7.2.1 Sharing Cultural Backgrounds and Habits ................................................................................... 235 7.2.2 Micro-geographies and Mobilities of Sojourners’ Social Encounters ............................................ 238 7.2.3 Sojourners’ Personal Goals, Interests, and Criteria ....................................................................... 241 7.2.4 The Study and the Scholarship .................................................................................................... 242 7.3 Barriers to Social Interaction: Brought Along or Brought About? .................................. 244 7.3.1 Academic Barriers: Sojourners’ Perceptions of their Studies and Campus Dynamics .................... 245 7.3.2 Participants’ Stereotyping of the British Society .......................................................................... 249 7.3.3 Religious Attitudes...................................................................................................................... 253 7.3.4 Temporality of the Sojourn .......................................................................................................... 256 7.4 Is it Necessary for ''''Birds of a Feather'''' to ''''Flock Together''''? Remarks on ‘Student Ghettoisation’ .......................................................................................................................... 257 7.5 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 261 Chapter Eight .................................................................................................................. 263 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 263 8.1 Introduction: Thesis Summary ......................................................................................... 263 8.2 Research Questions Revisited: Key Findings.................................................................... 263 8.2.1 Moving Beyond the RQs: Sociolinguistics of Study Abroad Mobility .......................................... 275 ix 8.2.2 Going Mobile Yet Holding Still: What Does it Mean to Be a Palestinian Crossing Borders for Sojourning?......................................................................................................................................... 277 8.3 Contributions of the Study ................................................................................................ 280 8.4 Limitations ......................................................................................................................... 282 8.5 Implications ....................................................................................................................... 283 8.6 Potential Avenues for Future Research ............................................................................. 285 8.7 Closing Word ..................................................................................................................... 286 References ........................................................................................................................ 287 Appendices ...................................................................................................................... 309 Appendix 1. Interview Guides................................................................................................. 309 First Round of Individual Interviews .................................................................................................... 309 Second Round of Individual Interview Questions ................................................................................. 311 Third Round of Individual Interview Questions.................................................................................... 315 Appendix 2. Consent Form ..................................................................................................... 319 Appendix 3. Participant Information Sheet ........................................................................... 321 x List of Tables Table 4.1 Research participants’ background data Table 5.1 Snapshots of participants’ changing perceptions of their English throughout their sojourn Table 6.1 Differences in how both gender groups perceive themselves linguistically List of Figures Figure 2.1 Map of the besieged Gaza Strip and its crossings Figure 2.2 Map of the West Bank and the Israeli checkpoints Figure 2.3 Israeli multi-tiered hierarchy of Palestinians Figure 7.1 Participants’ patterns of socialisation xi Acknowledgments Through this space, I extend my thanks to all those who accompanied me through this journey. I owe appreciation to my supervisory team, Dr. Eva Eppler and Dr. Marie-Pierre Moreau for their invaluable support, guidance, and advice. Thank you both for being there whenever I needed you. Your professional and intellectual guidance and commitment to this project motivated me to walk through and finish this route while setting my standards high. I have learned a lot from you, and you are the example I would like to be in the future. May the Lord bless and reward you, ''''Jazakom Allah Kheir''''. I owe my thanks to the British Council and the HESPAL scheme and the funders who believed in me and sponsored my project. I also thank the other funders who contributed to facilitating the research process and paving the way to its completion. Thank you all. I thought that stars go astray and lose their way to the ''''Camp'''', but your support and generosity helped me ''''witch my wagon to the stars''''. I also thank my academic institution, the University of Roehampton, for offering me the opportunity of studying and being a member of its community. I am honoured for having been a student learning and researching in such a supportive and inclusive environment and beautiful campuses. At Roehampton, I got to meet beautiful and amazing souls who I am also indebted to their existence in my life. My colleagues and friends, Sahar Al-Shobaki, Dr. Samson Tsegay, and Fernanda Puentes- Rodriguez (Fernie), thank you for the support, stimulating discussions, and laughs. May our friendship prosper and last forever. Special thanks go to my family: Ahmed, thanks my dear for the love, exciting conversations, food, laughs, and giving me the time to write this thesis. My dear parents, Amal and Abed, who I have not seen since September 2017, words cannot describe how I miss and love you. You have been my source of strength, determination, and hope. My siblings, I am grateful for your love, humour and kindness. Grandma (Sarah), I hope you are proud of me now. Thanks for your unconditional love and sorry for being away from home for such a long time. Last but not least, I am indebted to my two dears, Sarah Ferner and Samar Salamah. Thank you for instilling feelings of hope, safety, and happiness in me during my hard times in the UK. I am forever humbled by your outpouring love, help, and hospitality. May your good deeds come back to you. 1 Chapter One Setting the Stage: Background and Rationale of the Study Opening Scene The Sea Traders .. became the first to provide a link between the culture of the ancient Near East and that of the uncharted world of the West…They went not for conquest as the Babylonians and Assyrians did, but for trade. Profit rather than plunder was their policy (Pritchard, 1974, p.7). It is an established fact in ancient Mediterranean history and Phoenician chronologies that the Phoenicians, a distinct Canaanite group that settled in the Levant region (Sanford, 2008), were (among) the first world globalists (eg. see Scott, 2018, 2019). Since the dawn of history, ‘the purple people’ criss-crossed the Mediterranean Sea westward in a far-flung quest for silver and other riches. Flowing out of their Levantine coasts and guided by the North Star, the first seafarers initiated a cultural interaction with the Occident that spanned two millennia (Scott, 2018). As their ships sailed across the waters of the Mediterranean turning it into ‘a Phoenician pool’, they carried and transfused goods, individuals, ideas, and innovations to ancient Europe. This PhD is a project about unmooring ships and navigating westward into unfamiliar shores. This venture is undertaken by current Levantine descendants of Canaanites who also pursue profit, as they traverse the expanses of seaspace between the shores of the Levant and the West. Their voyaging tells a story of moving from the imagined and crossing the borders of the real, of the difference and complexity that remain salient in their narratives, and the effects thereof on their perceptions of their languages, selves, and others strangers. Through this academic space, nine Palestinian sojourners in English HE have been invited and encouraged to communicate their voices as they reflect on and engage with their trajectories 2 of mobility, crossing borders and maintaining uncrossable ones, sojourning, and the turbulence that persists in these trajectories. This introductory chapter is set to provide a general overview of the study. I start by presenting a personal note on my sociolinguistic and mobility journey, including the routes that led to this research investigation. Then, I locate the study in its academic context, highlighting gaps, problems, and needs. This leads to specifying the research objectives and questions. The chapter concludes by outlining the chapters and their organisation in the thesis. 1.1 My Sociolinguistic and Mobility Trajectory: A Bio-note on My Language and Travel History We need all our words to tell the whole story. And in the end, we can only stand upon our stories. We do ourselves and our disciplines no service by only telling half-tales, by only reporting finished analyses in temperate voice, by suppressing wonder or perplexity or dread (Charmaz and Mitchell, 1996, p.300). To define ‘who I am’ is to define how I see myself, what I do, what I aspire to, and how I interpret the world around me. I have been shaped by my ‘roots’ and ‘routes’ (following Gilroy, 1993), i.e., the different life paths I went through, be they social, academic, linguistic, professional, economic, orand political. Amongst many things, I am a Palestinian academic sojourner in UK higher education. This depiction features my nationality, academic, linguistic, and mobile status, as well as geographical and institutional location. I share these specific ‘roots and routes’ with my research participants who are also Palestinian sojourners in English HE. I was born in Nuseirat Camp, The Gaza Strip, Palestine where I lived all my childhood, teenage years, and early twenties until I got the chance to pursue my education in the UK. 3 My father’s family is originally from the suburbs of Ramla City in Central Occupied Palestine. My grandfather became a refugee after he was forced to leave his village in the Palestinian Catastrophe, Nakba, of 1948 and settled in Gaza. My family speak rural Palestinian Arabic, and I was raised to speak that same variety. I still remember how I would feel in my early childhood when one of my classmates would ask me to pass her the pencil, for example, saying, “hati elAlam” - the urban variety which is perceived to be ‘classier’ back home, not “hati elGalam” as my family members and I would usually pronounce it. I learnt that people speak differently and that some dialects tend to be viewed as ‘more prestigious, elegant, or favourable’. I started learning English at the age of 11. I was both anxious and excited about that new language that I used to hear on TV when my parents watched films or series. I found out I was doing well at it, as a main school subject, with the proof of full marks, until one of my teachers embarrassed me when she asked for a conversation exercise to be done. I could not speak fluently. Then, I was alarmed that my English was not actually as good as what the exams’ marks indicated. When language learning became more serious and demanding in secondary school, a distinction was made between two accents: American and British. I decided to go for American English. I guess it wasis a trend among teenagers back home to pursue American varieties because they were associated with modernity, prestige, songs, Hollywood films, and were seen as accessible and easy. I enjoyed being a good user of English. As I enrolled in the department of English language at the Islamic University of Gaza, I used to hear comments like: ‘you’re almost native-like’, which made me confident. Later, I decided to switch to the ‘British accent’ as I planned to pursue my higher academic studies in the UK. I looked for integration by 4 sounding ‘British’ before I lived in my ''''imagined'''' place. While this signals an awareness that language can be a site of both integration and exclusion in contexts of difference, I still took my language, among other identity aspects, for granted and did not realise the hurdles that would be triggered by my difference before I left Palestine to study in the UK in November 2015. During the first weeks of my MA course, classmates commented on how British I sounded to them. Some of them expressed their astonishment upon knowing it was my first time ever visiting an English-speaking country. That was indeed encouraging to someone who was away from home for the first time. However, I was challenged by the vernacular English’ used in the street. A worker in a dry cleaner''''s shop commented on my English joking, ‘speaking to you is like speaking to a dictionary’. My choice of words and structures sounded odd to his ear, as he said. He was not a linguist to make that judgment, but ‘dictionary English’ was the way he used to refer to the strangeness of my language in an informal context. These words echoed in my head, and I cannot deny they disturbed me a little. Such judgments shape the way we perceive ourselves and our competencies. I agree with Baker (2011, p.133) who argues that learning a language is about ‘who we are, what we want to become, and what we are allowed, by first language speakers, to become’. My academic journey was successful having gained a master’s degree with distinction, and I returned home in September 2016 to work as a university lecturer. I taught English poetry to third-year undergraduates. For them, my English sounded British, with some of them complaining about my pronunciation, and that I ‘swallow’ some sounds. I decided to articulate that r and not use the glottal stop, which was not a feature of Standard British English. And then I was perplexed. Do I even have to sound British? Why cannot I mix or 5 speak English that is not necessarily categorised under certain labels? These labels seemed to be at play everywhere, including in my country. Can I not just be perceived as a Palestinian girl who can speak English well? Who decides, though, what it means to be a good speaker of English? These negotiations became part of a continued ‘discursive practice’ (Foucault, 1982) as I tried to understand and evaluate my status and position being both an English learneruser and teacher. In 2017, I returned to the UK for another academic degree (doctorate) with a clearer vision this time, aware of the complexities surrounding my position and the shift it would undergo by virtue of crossing borders and relocating. My previous sojourn experience equipped me with realistic knowledge to expect the kind of discourses I will encounter this time, unlike the new arrivals who will have to grapple with them for the first time ever maybe. During my PhD time, I dealt and worked with international sojourners in many contexts. For example, I taught basic English skills in Summer 2019 to a group of Italian teenage students. I also taught the ‘Language Change’ module to both ‘home’ and ‘international’ students at Roehampton University along with occasional guest-lecturing to other groups. These professional encounters I gained during my PhD journey made me aware of my shifting status and positionality; inside the teaching classroom, I am the expert language teacher, and once I leave the teaching setting, I am the international, non-native L2 speaker and learner. These experiences coupled with the rich empirical and theoretical insights arising from this research investigation have made me passionate about researching sojourning trajectories among my fellow Palestinian postgraduate students. My journey paths intersected with theirs. Sometimes, mine provided guidance, relevance and 6 reassurance, while many other times, their trajectories gave me meaning and insights into various encounters and critical moments in my own sojourn trajectory. In this research project, I am indeed both a process and an outcome. I knew I had an academic ambition towards acquiring a doctoral degree since I learned that a PhD was the highest academic degree one could obtain in Palestine. However, how I came to research this topic was not only attributed to this aspiration or to sharing many life trajectories with the research participants. In fact, the focus and topic of this research stemmed from a painful and tumultuous mobility experience back in late 2015 as I was planning to venture outside my local Palestinian world to discover a new land and capacities. This critical experience sparked an interest in knowing more about the flows of Palestinian sojourners in specific and whether they all experience the same hardships I went through on my way to the UK. As I expected, some of this research participants’ hard experiences of travel echo mine in several ways. In 2015, after I was awarded a scholarship to pursue my postgraduate studies at Goldsmiths, University of London, UK, I knew I had a long way to go through applying for the UK student visa, Israeli and Jordanian permitsvisas to pass through their security controlled and monitored spaces to my destination country. The severe restriction in mobility imposed on those travelling in and out of Gaza was the context of my first-ever border crossing experience. I was able to secure my UK visa two months after submitting my application. There was a delay because I was inexperienced in visa applications and lacked guidance to complete the complex document, so I had to amend the application form. The visa was issued in September when the academic year usually starts in most UK universities. Two more visas needed to be secured so that I could join my course at 7 Goldsmiths. I applied for both, and the long wait started. The course started, and my university contacted me for a clarification of my physical absence. I tried to explain the difficult political situation in my local place, the siege on Gaza, and severe immobility to the officer who seemed perplexed by what I told her. I was the first international student she dealt with from that corner of the world, so it was sort of ‘expected’ that she did not know how to handle this unique situation. Neither did I. ‘We are an academic institution. We do not have the political power to impose on Israel to issue you a travel permit’, she wrote in one of the email correspondences between us. I had to deal with this alone. I had to act and draw on my own individual agency in the face of all the power asymmetry surrounding my situation and context; otherwise, I would lose the scholarship. I started my education online. I did the essential readings and even completed an assignment from my ‘stilled’ position in Gaza. At that time, my Jordanian visa was rejected on the basis I had no Israeli travel permit. Gloominess and depression started to creep into my mind. I remembered, though, that I was working for the UNRWA 1 as a school teacher. The UNRWA is a powerful international institution that could probably aid me with this, which was voluntary on their side. After a couple of visits to the main headquarter in Gaza and explaining my situation to the head of the Education Programme, he agreed to let his office secretary apply for an Israeli travel permit on my behalf so that I could travel through the Erez Crossing border to Amman and then the UK. I retained a sense of hope and positivity. September and October passed, though, and I heard no word from any of the authorities that were supposed to let me travel. It is now November, and I was expecting an email notifying me of scholarship suspensionwithdrawal at any moment. The notification came. I was alarmed that my student visa was to be curtailed (due to failure in attending my course of studies) if I did not make it to the UK by the end of the 1 UNRWA stands for The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East. 8 first week of November. The anger, fear, powerlessness, lack of support,, and discrimination I felt were indescribable. On 5th November, I received a phone call informing me that my travel permit was issued and that I had to go to the Erez Crossing early the next day to travel. It was a short notice, but a long-awaited one. Hastily, I bid farewell to my family and friends and started a long journey that lasted for more than 12 hours and was inflicted with too many security checks and inspections, exhaustion, worry, tears, and uncertainty. The programme convenor commented as she welcomed me into the last sessions of the Autumn term, ‘You are the last student to join us here’. Reflecting on the chronicles of the CanaanitesPhoenicians, in the opening scene of this chapter, it is sad (and sometimes ironically striking) to realise how different and paradoxical our mobility trajectories are considering our ages. While it appears that there is no way to strike a comparison between our times in terms of advancement and the levels of civilisation we have achieved, our ancestors’ trajectories of mobility and freedom prevail in this comparison; with theirs moving forward to penetrate new spaces and ours going backward to more restrictions in movement and space. Those people led lives that centred on the freedom of mobility and expansion, while a contemporary population of their offspring are being held still in their tight corners of the world, with their horizon blocked and space restrained andor closed. Having said that, the memory and trauma of my turbulent journey remained with me throughout the entire sojourn and affected my perception of travel and mobility as sites of struggle and stratification differentially accessed by individuals. Whenever I read about the ‘flows’ of individuals, my mind would digress to re-conceptualise these ‘flows’ as ruptured, intermittent, and never smooth. I, then, developed a desire to ‘objectify’ and document these difficult experiences through systematic academic research. I wanted to privilege Palestinian sojourners’ views and 9 amplify and deliver their muted voices to the world that seemed to either ignore or lack knowledge about them. Therefore, I combined elements of my academic and professional interest and speciality (English Language Teaching Sociolinguistics) with my personal thorny trajectory of movement to ignite and articulate this research inquiry. 1.2 Situating the Research in its Academic Background: Identifying Gaps, Problems, and Needs in SA? Experiences of study abroad students are established and documented in abundance in Study Abroad (SA) research. However, this research has been criticised for being selective in its population and reductionist in theoretical perspectives. Coleman (2013) and Kinginger (2009) argue that the SA field has been preoccupied with focusing on certain departure contexts, i.e., Europe and North America. Students from other countries are less represented in SA research because their sojourns are likely to take other migratory routes, as Kinginger (2015) explains, unlike students from the USA, Canada, or Australia whose sojourn trajectories are often more predictable with pre-defined periods. Thus, the sojourns of students coming from less researched backgrounds are usually positioned and theorised in light of broader migration studies andor second language acquisition and social integration (ibid). The theoretical approaches and focus of the SA research have also been subject to criticism. Coleman (2013) calls for a departure from studying and assessing the language acquisition of L2 learners during their sojourn to see them as full rounded human beings. He introduced the concept of ‘whole people with whole lives’ as a new approach to researching SA student experiences and documenting them in full. More calls for (and responses to) a holistic treatment of sojourners’ trajectories abroad followed. For instance, Beaven and Borghetti (2016) argue that a new trend that focuses on students’ intercultural relations and 10 development is emerging in SA research. This interest in the intercultural aspect can be seen as being embedded in the general paradigm shift in Applied Linguistics that was called for by David Block (2003), i.e. ‘The Social Turn’. Other scholars focused on the effects of the sojourn on students’ self-formation and identity work. In this regard, Marginson (2014) calls for a shift from ‘adjustment processes’ to a focus on exploring the self-formation journeys of students. This study deviates from both the traditional population and theoretical approaches dominating SA research. To this end, it addresses the trajectories of an under-researched population of sojourners in English HE and adopts a holistic approach which views them as full human beings, with complex and multi-layered identities, leading full lives that stretch beyond the walls of campus. Here, the study is premised on the understanding that these full, diverse, complex, and fluid livestrajectories should not be reduced to certain limited and limiting discourses or approaches. Meanwhile, the study is bound by a moral commitment to document and provide space to the unheard stories of Palestinian students in English HE. Doing so, it attempts to achieve some (academic) justice to these sojourners by highlighting their narratives and accentuating their subjectivities and agency. Within this rubric of understanding, the study is set to investigate several areas in the sociolinguistic trajectories of Palestinian sojourners in English HE. To specify, the study seeks to understand the consequences of mobility on sojourners’ perceptions of their linguistic resources, identity work, and social practices in the new context. In order to attend to the rich details and narratives arising from these issues, the study embraces a transdisciplinary approach as it invites several theoretical constructs from different but interrelated fields including Study Abroad, Mobility, Sociolinguistics, ELT, and CulturalHuman Geography. At the methodological level, data have been generated through a qualitative, longitudinal 11 investigation, which has been conducted through two initial focus groups and three waves of individual, in-depth interviews with nine Palestinian postgraduate students studying at different UK universities, over a period of nine months in the academic year 201819 1.3 Research Aim and Objectives The main aim of this research is to investigate, trace, and document the sociolinguistic experiences of Palestinian sojourners who crossed borders to pursue their postgraduate degrees in English HE. The specific objectives are as follows:  Providing a space to a highly under-represented population in SA research and empowering them to reflect on and interact with their residence abroad experiences.  Documenting the immobility experiences of those coming from non-traditional contexts and showcasing moments of disturbance, agency, singularity, and universality.  Giving insights into what happens to individuals’ language resources, competencies, and identities when they go mobile, and how they gain new meanings and statuses.  Exploring the difference between ‘knowing’ English and ‘living in’ or performing English, the difference between the imagined Britain and the real one, as well as the expected of and the experienced in the sojourn. 1.4 Introducing the Research Questions With reference to this study, the overarching guiding research question is: What effects does mobility (moving from the local to the global) have on Palestinian sojourners’ sociolinguistic trajectories in the UK? More specifically, the question above is addressed through unpacking it into three sub- questions: 12 1. What is the effect of mobility on Palestinian postgraduate students’ conceptualisation and perception of English language? 2. What is the effect of mobility on Palestinian postgraduate students’ identity (trans)formation, with specific reference to social class? 3. What is the effect of the sojourn encounters on sojourners’ social practices and friendship-making in the UK? 1.5 Outline of the Study This thesis is organised into eight chapters. This introductory chapter has set the stage for the study; it has presented its academicempirical background, rationale, focus, purpose, and questions. I have highlighted the study focus as an attempt to understand the lived sociolinguistic experiences and consequences of Palestinian sojourners’ SA mobilities in the UK on their perceptions of their linguistic repertoires, selves, and host society. Chapter Two extends setting the stage by shining some light on the contexts involved in this study. It provides some information on the political situation in participants’ local contexts (of departure), i.e., Gaza Strip and the West Bank. The chapter also includes some sociolinguistic aspects from the Palestinian context, and then it reviews some trends in Palestinian academic sojourning. This is where the discussion is led to addressing participants’ situation, as international students, in their new institutional and political contexts (UK English HE and immigration policies). Chapter Three engages with the relevant literature which theoretically informs, provides language to and guides the study. Thereby, and against a wider background of a mobility picture, it tackles these issues: English language learning and discourses in an era of globalisation, approaches to and trends in Sociolinguistics of mobility globalisation, and 13 finally Study-abroad and its cross-cultural encounters within contexts of mobility, difference, and diversity and their effects on sojourners’ identity work. Chapter Four moves to address the research practice and methodological framework of the study. As such, it provides a chronologically ordered documentation of the methodological decisions, justifications, and procedures followed to collect and manageanalyse data. The chapter also includes my epistemological and ontological stances and practical challenges. Moreover, I reflect on my positionality as an ‘insider’ researcher. The chapter touches on methodological practice from the prism of mobility and how this is considered and applied in the practice and design of this research. Chapters Five, Six, and Seven present the empirical findings and theoretical analysis discussion of the data yielded through a longitudinal investigation. Each chapter deals with a specific research question (above). Chapter Five investigates the linguistic aspect of the sojourn. It endorses a mobile and chronological trajectory approach to track participants’ experiences and views of their Englishes, starting from their language histories, and moving to the role of English in their pre-sojourn arrangements. Following that, the chapter engages with the data coming from participants’ sojourn settings, featuring the consequences of crossing borders, relocating, and contextual encounters on their perceptions of their linguistic repertoires, and the changes and continuities in these perceptions. Chapter Six focuses on sojourners’ identity performance in their study-abroad contexts. The chapter tracks participants'''' identity (trans)formation throughout the sojourn period at multiple (intersecting) levels, among which are language, gender, and social class. Data show how sojourners are able to negotiate and discursively reflect on their identity (re)construction 14 abroad in their most frequent contexts of interaction. Participants’ depictions and evaluations of their identities vary depending on their different encounters and intersectional experiences; they are sometimes negative when identity-making is a site of struggle and...

Situating the Research in its Academic Background: Identifying Gaps, Problems, and

Experiences of study abroad students are established and documented in abundance in Study Abroad (SA) research However, this research has been criticised for being selective in its population and reductionist in theoretical perspectives Coleman (2013) and Kinginger (2009) argue that the SA field has been preoccupied with focusing on certain departure contexts, i.e., Europe and North America Students from other countries are less represented in SA research because their sojourns are likely to take other migratory routes, as Kinginger (2015) explains, unlike students from the USA, Canada, or Australia whose sojourn trajectories are often more predictable with pre-defined periods Thus, the sojourns of students coming from less researched backgrounds are usually positioned and theorised in light of broader migration studies and/or second language acquisition and social integration (ibid)

The theoretical approaches and focus of the SA research have also been subject to criticism Coleman (2013) calls for a departure from studying and assessing the language acquisition of L2 learners during their sojourn to see them as full rounded human beings He introduced the concept of ‘whole people with whole lives’ as a new approach to researching SA student experiences and documenting them in full More calls for (and responses to) a holistic treatment of sojourners’ trajectories abroad followed For instance, Beaven and Borghetti (2016) argue that a new trend that focuses on students’ intercultural relations and development is emerging in SA research This interest in the intercultural aspect can be seen as being embedded in the general paradigm shift in Applied Linguistics that was called for by David Block (2003), i.e ‘The Social Turn’ Other scholars focused on the effects of the sojourn on students’ self-formation and identity work In this regard, Marginson (2014) calls for a shift from ‘adjustment processes’ to a focus on exploring the self-formation journeys of students

This study deviates from both the traditional population and theoretical approaches dominating SA research To this end, it addresses the trajectories of an under-researched population of sojourners in English HE and adopts a holistic approach which views them as full human beings, with complex and multi-layered identities, leading full lives that stretch beyond the walls of campus Here, the study is premised on the understanding that these full, diverse, complex, and fluid lives/trajectories should not be reduced to certain limited and limiting discourses or approaches Meanwhile, the study is bound by a moral commitment to document and provide space to the unheard stories of Palestinian students in English HE Doing so, it attempts to achieve some (academic) justice to these sojourners by highlighting their narratives and accentuating their subjectivities and agency Within this rubric of understanding, the study is set to investigate several areas in the sociolinguistic trajectories of Palestinian sojourners in English HE To specify, the study seeks to understand the consequences of mobility on sojourners’ perceptions of their linguistic resources, identity work, and social practices in the new context In order to attend to the rich details and narratives arising from these issues, the study embraces a transdisciplinary approach as it invites several theoretical constructs from different but interrelated fields including Study Abroad, Mobility, Sociolinguistics, ELT, and Cultural/Human Geography At the methodological level, data have been generated through a qualitative, longitudinal investigation, which has been conducted through two initial focus groups and three waves of individual, in-depth interviews with nine Palestinian postgraduate students studying at different UK universities, over a period of nine months in the academic year 2018/19

Research Aim and Objectives

The main aim of this research is to investigate, trace, and document the sociolinguistic experiences of Palestinian sojourners who crossed borders to pursue their postgraduate degrees in English HE The specific objectives are as follows:

 Providing a space to a highly under-represented population in SA research and empowering them to reflect on and interact with their residence abroad experiences

 Documenting the im/mobility experiences of those coming from non-traditional contexts and showcasing moments of disturbance, agency, singularity, and universality

 Giving insights into what happens to individuals’ language resources, competencies, and identities when they go mobile, and how they gain new meanings and statuses

 Exploring the difference between ‘knowing’ English and ‘living in’ or performing English, the difference between the imagined Britain and the real one, as well as the expected of and the experienced in the sojourn.

Introducing the Research Questions

With reference to this study, the overarching guiding research question is:

What effect/s does mobility (moving from the local to the global) have on Palestinian sojourners’ sociolinguistic trajectories in the UK?

More specifically, the question above is addressed through unpacking it into three sub- questions:

1 What is the effect of mobility on Palestinian postgraduate students’ conceptualisation and perception of English language?

2 What is the effect of mobility on Palestinian postgraduate students’ identity (trans)formation, with specific reference to social class?

3 What is the effect of the sojourn encounters on sojourners’ social practices and friendship-making in the UK?

Outline of the Study

This thesis is organised into eight chapters This introductory chapter has set the stage for the study; it has presented its academic/empirical background, rationale, focus, purpose, and questions I have highlighted the study focus as an attempt to understand the lived sociolinguistic experiences and consequences of Palestinian sojourners’ SA mobilities in the

UK on their perceptions of their linguistic repertoires, selves, and host society Chapter Two extends setting the stage by shining some light on the contexts involved in this study It provides some information on the political situation in participants’ local contexts (of departure), i.e., Gaza Strip and the West Bank The chapter also includes some sociolinguistic aspects from the Palestinian context, and then it reviews some trends in Palestinian academic sojourning This is where the discussion is led to addressing participants’ situation, as international students, in their new institutional and political contexts (UK/ English HE and immigration policies)

Chapter Three engages with the relevant literature which theoretically informs, provides language to and guides the study Thereby, and against a wider background of a mobility picture, it tackles these issues: English language learning and discourses in an era of globalisation, approaches to and trends in Sociolinguistics of mobility/ globalisation, and finally Study-abroad and its cross-cultural encounters within contexts of mobility, difference, and diversity and their effects on sojourners’ identity work

Chapter Four moves to address the research practice and methodological framework of the study As such, it provides a chronologically ordered documentation of the methodological decisions, justifications, and procedures followed to collect and manage/analyse data The chapter also includes my epistemological and ontological stances and practical challenges Moreover, I reflect on my positionality as an ‘insider’ researcher The chapter touches on methodological practice from the prism of mobility and how this is considered and applied in the practice and design of this research

Chapters Five, Six, and Seven present the empirical findings and theoretical analysis/ discussion of the data yielded through a longitudinal investigation Each chapter deals with a specific research question (above) Chapter Five investigates the linguistic aspect of the sojourn It endorses a mobile and chronological trajectory approach to track participants’ experiences and views of their Englishes, starting from their language histories, and moving to the role of English in their pre-sojourn arrangements Following that, the chapter engages with the data coming from participants’ sojourn settings, featuring the consequences of crossing borders, relocating, and contextual encounters on their perceptions of their linguistic repertoires, and the changes and continuities in these perceptions

Chapter Six focuses on sojourners’ identity performance in their study-abroad contexts The chapter tracks participants' identity (trans)formation throughout the sojourn period at multiple (intersecting) levels, among which are language, gender, and social class Data show how sojourners are able to negotiate and discursively reflect on their identity (re)construction abroad in their most frequent contexts of interaction Participants’ depictions and evaluations of their identities vary depending on their different encounters and intersectional experiences; they are sometimes negative when identity-making is a site of struggle and contestation; while they are positive and aspirational when participants’ identities are perceived as enhanced Furthermore, this chapter attempts to narrow down a gap in research by tackling the class-mediated experiences of sojourners in the UK Their trajectories of classing and declassing are approached (mainly in contexts of HE) in light of participants’ capitals, competencies, and resources and their (changing) status within mobility contexts as well as consumption practices

Chapter Seven turns its attention to the social aspects of sojourners’ lives in the UK Again, within a mobile trajectory understanding, the chapter traces participants’ patterns of socialisation and networking as it looks at their social circles of interaction in the UK Doing so, the chapter features both supportive and obstructive factors underpinning sojourners’ social interaction and grouping in the UK One marked feature/phenomenon can be noticed through these underpinnings: 'student ghettoisation' (clinging to and clustering around co- national groups) Thus, an engaging discussion on Palestinian students’ ghettoisation in the

UK is presented This discussion deviates from dominant debates on student ghettoisation as it provides a more complex and diverse perspective to it

Chapter Eight rounds up the story of this project To this end, it revisits the research questions to highlight key findings and goes beyond them to zoom out and present a more comprehensive view of Palestinian sojourners’ sociolinguistic trajectories in their mobility contexts This is achieved by bringing together the various, different but interrelated, threads in the rich sociolinguistic tapestry of those sojourners to highlight how fluid, diverse, unique, and dynamic their mobilities are Meanwhile, and to extend the scope of the study to a more holistic and rounded depiction and understanding of sojourners’ SA trajectories, the chapter touches on Palestinian students’ disturbances in their journeys Here, experiences of the pre- sojourn enforced restricted mobility are brought to the scene to accentuate the peculiarity and difference surrounding Palestinian sojourners’ experiences of border-crossing Following this, the chapter discusses the contributions, limitations, implications, and possibilities for future research

Chapter Two The Study Contexts: Palestine and the UK

This chapter provides a starting point for strengthening the understanding of Palestinian sojourners’ sociolinguistic experiences in the UK by shedding some light on the contexts involved This chapter is divided into two parts as it addresses two main contexts: the departure zone (Palestinian contexts) and the destination context of English HE In the first part, I start by providing vignettes on the geographical, historical, and political conditions in the Palestinian context The political contextualisation offers some background only to Gaza and the West Bank (where the research participants come from) and mainly focuses on restrictions in movement in these contexts (among many other injustices enveloping Palestinian lives) As such, the chapter excludes Palestinians from other contexts such as: 48-Palestinians and Druz (i.e those who have remained within Israel's 1948 borders after the Nakba events), Palestinians of diaspora, and Jerusalemites Following this, I move to depict some sociolinguistic realities in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT), where I touch on the languages spoken and English language teaching (ELT) situation in Palestinian schools and universities This part ends with discussing Palestinian historical and recent trends in study abroad/ academic sojourning The second part contextualises the study from the destination end, i.e., the UK, as it looks at the positioning of international students in the UK

HE sector 2 , specifically England, and immigration policies.

The Palestinian Contexts

Geography, History, and Political Conditions

Historical Palestine, or Palestinian Occupied Territories, is the name of the 27,000 km land that is geographically located at the very western edge of Asia, stretching between the Mediterranean Sea and Jordan River Throughout history, the region was a conflict zone to many conquering powers including Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, Fatimids, Seljuk Turks, Crusaders, Egyptians, and Mamelukes The region fell under Ottoman rule between 1517 and 1917 Following the Ottomans’ defeat in WW1, the British took control of Palestine (British Mandate), which facilitated establishing a Jewish ‘homeland’ in Palestine in 1948 This year (of Nakba) is a marked one in the collective memory of Palestinians as it is associated with displacement and losing land, thus opening a new chapter in the history of struggle between ‘Jews’/’Israel’ and Palestinians By the end of the 1948 events, the Jews took control over more than two-thirds of the former British Mandate, while Jordan administered the West Bank, and Egypt controlled the Gaza Strip These lands, along with other lands belonging to neighbouring Arab countries, were also taken by Israeli forces

2 In 1998/9, the responsibility of HE was transferred/devolved to the legislative powers in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland This has enabled the three devolved countries to reshape their educational policies according to their national priorities (Bruce, 2012) Since devolution, issues of convergence and divergence in HE policies across the four countries/systems have been discussed Raffe (2013) argues that the interdependence between the four systems, exacerbated by the pressures of internationalisation and the wider market, constrain divergence With England dominating as ‘the elephant in the room of the devolved HE systems’ (ibid, p.16), the UK HE ‘remains a single market for students, staff and resources’ (Bruce, 2012, p.1) Hence, I use the term 'English HE’ throughout the thesis to refer to participants’ academic institutions which are all located in England The broad

UK HE is used to refer generally to commonalities in all UK HE sectors or experiences/issues faced by international students in general

3 I use ‘contexts’ in its plural form to denote and stress the diversity of Palestinian contexts by the end of the six-day war in 1967 This war resulted in continued conflicts in the region which has lasted for decades In 1993, a peace initiative/process was proposed and signed to stop the ongoing violence, known as ‘the Oslo Accord’, where an interim Palestinian authority was to be created in Gaza and the West Bank Ultimately, the Oslo Accord failed to achieve its target of bringing peace to the region, and the conflict continued

In 2005, the Israeli Army evacuated their troops, and around 7000 Jewish settlers withdrew from Gaza, which became the only territory free of Israeli physical existence in Palestine Hamas (an Islamist military faction) won the legislative elections in 2006 This sparked a civil fight over ruling Gaza between the Palestinian Authority (PA, Fattah) and Hamas in

2007 that led to the defeat of PA in Gaza Hamas’ control over Gaza was not welcomed by the international community which viewed/s it as a ‘terrorist organisation’ and refused to acknowledge it as a legitimate representative of the people who elected it The international community, under the pressure of Israel and the US, quickly moved to impose strengthened sanctions on the Hamas-led government in Gaza which placed a blockade on the Gaza Strip, severely restricting exports and imports and banning (almost) all forms of mobility and travel by Gazans The restrictions included basic necessities such as gas, fuel, medical supplies, construction materials, toilet paper, spices, and clothes which were blocked from moving into the besieged Strip This ‘collective punishment’, according to the UN (Middle East Eye staff, 2020) coupled with multiple Israeli military operations/attacks (in 2008, 2012, 2014, 2021) worsened the humanitarian situation in the besieged Gaza Strip The devastating impacts of the blockade are manifested clearly through the numbers and figures 4 coming from that area:

 Both the Rafah and Erez Crossings (to Egypt and Israel respectively) were shut for

4 I rely on the BBC article published on 20 May 2021 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-

240 days and opened for 125 only in 2020

 80% of Gaza residents rely on international aid

 Gaza has the highest unemployment rates in the world, with youth unemployment reaching 70% in 2020

 Damaged electrical infrastructure resulted in power cuts for up to 16 hours per day

 Water is highly contaminated Meanwhile, 70% of the population received running water for six to eight hours every four days in 2017

 More than 100 million litres of untreated and partially treated sewage are dumped into the Mediterranean every day, while treatment facilities are banned from entering Gaza

 64% of 275 UNRWA schools run a double-shift system, one school in the morning and another in the afternoon At wartime, these schools become triple-shift schools as some of them turn into shelters for people fleeing shelling

 An average class size was 41 pupils in 2019

These shocking statistics have persisted, and continue to persist, for over a decade in Gaza This compelled the UN to release an alarming report in 2012 in which they predicted that if the prevailing economic, environmental, and political circumstances continued, the besieged coastal enclave would become ‘unlivable by 2020’ (UN News, 2015) For the two million Gazans crammed in the world’s ‘largest open-air prison’, Gaza has been uninhabitable for years

Figure 2.1 Map of the besieged Gaza Strip and its crossings

The situation in the West Bank relatively echoes that in Gaza Restricting residents’ movement is not caused by a siege, though Rather, it is a result of checkpoints, whether permanent or flying, and constant closures (especially during Jewish holidays) The checkpoints control many forms of movement inside the West Bank, between the WB and Israel, and between the WB and Gaza According to the Israeli Ministry of Justice, these checkpoints are put to ensure safe passages to the Israeli settlers who fear the threat of Palestinian attacks On the other hand, these checkpoints divide the WB into separate cantons and complicate Palestinians’ lives, making it difficult for them to travel to work, reach medical services, transport goods, or/and reach their academic institutions According to B’Tselem, an Israeli organisation promoting human rights in the Occupied Territories, these checkpoints usually require permits to be crossed ‘When travel permits are required by Israel, they are given through a lengthy, non-transparent, and arbitrary bureaucratic process’ (B’Tselem, 2017) This has contributed to perpetuating a state of uncertainty where Palestinians find it difficult to perform simple tasks or plan their lives Recently, these checkpoints have functioned as sites of life suspension, quite literally, where dozens of Palestinians have been killed Israeli checkpoints have become ‘death traps’ for Palestinians where ‘mere suspicion of Palestinian wrongdoing could lead to immediate killing’, according to the ‘Euro-Med Monitor, 2020)

Figure 2.1 Map of the West Bank and the Israeli checkpoints

In a nutshell, under Israeli control, Palestinians are stratified into different tiers with different levels of rights, depending on which geographic unit they are born in Palestinians born in the heartland and Jerusalem receive the Blue ID which grants them the highest tier of rights a Palestinian can get (for example crossing to the WB and Israeli cities without a military permit), but still lower than Jewish Israelis because of their ethnicity Palestinians born in the West Bank and Gaza are issued with green IDs, an even lower tier with few rights This ID subjects them to harsh restrictions in every aspect of their daily lives, as has been demonstrated above, hence the use of ‘Palestinian contexts’ in its plural form in this section

The hierarchy below shows the Israeli multi-tiered system stratifying Palestinians (and their rights) according to their geographical origin This study is solely concerned with those Palestinians positioned at the bottom of the Israeli hierarchy of rights (or lack thereof)

Figure 2.3 Israeli multi-tiered hierarchy of Palestinians

Sociolinguistic Depictions from the Palestinian Contexts

Arabic is the dominant language in Gaza and the West Bank Hebrew is more frequently used by Palestinians in the West Bank than in Gaza due to the spread of illegal Israeli settlements and contact between the Israelis and Palestinians there Hebrew is a second language for certain Palestinians who work/ed in Israeli towns as manual labourers or those who are/were political prisoners (Horesh, 2021) The multi-glossic nature of Arabic prevails in Palestinian contexts (like other Arab contexts), namely Classical Arabic, Modern Standard Arabic, and Dialectal Arabic (Palestinian Arabic variety) Hary (1992, p.28) views multiglossia in Arabic as

[a] system [which] includes a continuum with two extreme ends: the acrolect, or Standard Arabic, and the basilect, or ColloqUial Arabic In the middle, the mesolect, one finds countless varieties, or lects, used by native speakers on different occasions and under various circumstances

Classical Arabic is an old/historic variety of Arabic, sometimes referred to as Quranic Arabic Being the language of the Holy Quran, it unifies millions of Muslims and serves as a lingua- franca for the Muslim nations Members of these communities are not unified by tribal affiliations, but by the holy script This variety is only used/spoken when reciting Quran or classical Arabic poetry ‘Jahili’, but its religious associations have rendered it emotion-laden for Muslims all over the world (Marranci, 2007)

Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) is a descendant, simplified variety of Classical Arabic It also has no native speakers, but it is the modern lingua franca taught in schools across all the Arab world and used in formal speech such as news, written texts and reports, orations, presentations, etc The expansion of free education in the Arab world has led to the spread of Standard Arabic as the main medium of literacy and eloquence (Ennaji, 1999)

Palestinian Arabic Variety is the local vernacular form of MSA ‘Ammyia’ spoken by Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank, Jerusalem, inside the Green Line of 1948/Israel, and the diaspora This variety is a result of historical processes of Arabisation and nativisation of Classical/Standard Arabic ‘Fusha’ in Palestine As such, this variety has layers and traces of the indigenous tongues which were spoken in the region before the advent of Arabic, mainly Aramaic, Canaanite, Classical Hebrew, Latin and Greek (Bassal, 2012; Hopkins, 1995) Recently, Palestinian Arabic has a range of regional sub-varieties such as urban ‘madani’, rural ‘fallahi’, and Bedouin ‘badawi’ The way each Palestinian area or group speaks is a crucial identity marker distinguishing between cities, towns, villages, refugee camps as well as social classes Even in places which might be seemingly perceived as linguistically homogenous, the sociolinguistic scene is more complex and diverse For example, a distinction can be easily made between the Gaza dialect, which Horesh (2021, p.668) describes as ‘an interesting mixture of urban Palestinian, Bedouin and Egyptian elements’, and the dialects of other non-Gazan Palestinians, i.e., refugees Horesh (2021) argues that if an accurate dialectal geography is to be created, the intricacies of dialectal variation, language choice, and language contact in the contexts of Palestinian Arabic varieties will produce ‘a very messy’ atlas/ linguistic map considering the historical, political, social, and economic contexts at play It is worth mentioning that these varieties have grown in importance in the age of social media as younger generations have tended to use their colloquial varieties in writing, thus giving it more legitimacy

English is the most dominant foreign language in the Occupied Territories The British Mandate period paved the way for the establishment of English as a language of power in Palestine Even when another language was brought into the dynamic sociolinguistic scene (Hebrew) as of 1948, English has endured both as a colonial legacy and a window onto the wider world (Bianchi and Abdel Razeq, 2017) Currently, English is the most widely known and used foreign language in Gaza and the West Bank Amara (2003, p.221) maintains that

‘knowledge of English is a powerful status symbol and class marker’ in the Palestinian society This is not surprising because colonial powers did not only introduce and establish their foreign languages within the communities/nations they controlled They also spread and promoted certain ideologies which portrayed these languages in shiny colours, eg as languages of power, elitism, education, civilisation and prestige English language ideologies remain at the heart of societal and institutional perceptions Therefore, it can be argued that the esteemed status of English in Palestinian society is embedded in hegemonic discourses and ideologies that advantage and favour those who master English This attracts more individuals who aspire to attain this privilege/advantage Once they attest to the power and opportunities offered by English, they become part of the ideological loop which reproduces and perpetuates the favourable status/perceptions of English and its speakers

At the institutional level, acknowledging the importance of English is reflected in the Palestinian ELT curriculum English for Palestine, the result of a collaboration between the Palestinian Ministry of Education and HE and McMillan Education, is the title given to a series of textbooks taught in the government/public, UNRWA, and private schools in Gaza and the West Bank (Bianchi and Abdel Razeq, 2017) English is taught starting from the first grade (age of six) as a core subject Despite this valuing of the important role of language education in the future of students, ELT in Palestine continues to attract criticism given the challenges both within the educational system and the outside context which hinders the learning/teaching process (ibid) Among these persisting challenges, which profoundly affect the quality of ELT are: large class sizes, lack of technology use, teaching in ‘a cultural vacuum’ (Shehadeh and Dwaik, 2013), lack of educational materials and resources, limited proficiency in English among EFL teachers (as observed by Abdel Razeq, 2017), dearth of group work and cooperative learning methods (Al Mazloum and Qeshta, 2007), teaching to pass the tests, overemphasis on grammar (Fennel, 2007), lack of extracurricular material and activities, lack of teachers’ motivation due to low wages (Yamchi, 2006), reliance on

‘Standard British English’, and living under the Israeli occupation where frequent closures, strikes, demonstrations, and incursions challenge any educational system Given these conditions, Bianchi and Abdel Razeq (2017) state that a large number of high school graduates enter higher education with mediocre English proficiency, except for those minority students who graduate from private schools where English is the medium of instruction At the university level, all students are required to study and learn English either as a medium of instruction and reading or as a requirement course regardless of students’ majors

I concur with Bianchi and Abdel Razeq (2017) when they wonder how Palestinian students are even able to gain an education in light of the logistical limitations, demographic realities, and the contextual factors of conflict which all conspire to constantly impede the learning process However, many of those students continue to draw on the resources they can reach and their individual ‘investment’ (Norton, 1995) in the language as they aspire to be proficient speakers of the English language One way of investing in English, and indeed a result of diligent investment, is studying abroad in an English-speaking country The following section traces trends in academic sojourning among Palestinian students.

Trends in Palestinian Students’ Academic Sojourning

Travelling to pursue higher education abroad is not a new phenomenon among Palestinian learners (Arar and Haj Yehia, 2020) The mobility of Palestinian students to other countries has its origins in Arab and Islamic cultural history (Haj Yehia and Arar, 2014) Towards the end of the Ottoman rule, Palestinian students from wealthy backgrounds oriented to Istanbul, Beirut, Cairo, and even Paris to attain academic degrees (Arar and Haj Yehia, 2020) Under the British Mandate, opportunities to study abroad were limited, with 91 students studying at the American University in Beirut and Al-Azhar and Dar Al-Olum in Cairo (ibid) According to Tibawi (1956), in 1948, the number of sojourners reached 1,133, distributed between Beirut, Cairo, the USA, and the UK The emergence of the USA and UK as destinations for sojourning is indicative of the influence of globalisation forces back then, as the global north/west started to attract students from the south/east, including Palestinians

Recent statistics indicate that the number of Palestinian students studying abroad has significantly increased, making OPT among the top five Arab source countries of student mobility In 2019, before the coronavirus pandemic and the year of this research data collection, the number of Palestinian students reached 24,518, distributed as: 17,500 in Arab countries, 5,023 in Europe, 1,400 in Asia, and 595 in the USA (Badran et al., 2020) It is important to highlight that Palestinian students usually orient to Arab countries for undergraduate studies, while there tends to be a preference for Europe (particularly the UK) and the US to pursue postgraduate studies Undergraduate studies take four to six years to complete in most Arab academic institutions, therefore Arab destinations, which are close in geography and culture, are preferred to Palestinian families 5 when they decide to send their 18-year-olds for lengthy periods of study abroad On the contrary, postgraduate studies are of relatively short durations; between one to two years in the UK and USA, respectively These are usually fully funded for Palestinian students who have become full-fledged and mature adults (at least from the standpoint of their families) by the time they decide to venture outside their comfort zones to other new continents

Arar and Haj Yehia (2020) argue that while a considerable percentage of Arab sojourners (54%, according to the UNDP 2014 report) do not return to their countries after finishing their studies abroad due to political conditions and instability, Palestinian minority students of Israel (Palestinians/Arabs of 1948) tend to have ‘circular’ mobilities This means that those students return to ‘Israel’ with degrees that usually enable them to participate in the labour market Despite the fact that the majority of the participants in this project (eight out of nine)

5 The decision of academic mobility among Palestinian students/sojourners is strongly influenced by their social ties, especially parents and other family members This research supports such an argument and resonates with Brooks and Waters’ (2010) findings that UK students’ sojourn experiences are socially embedded and grounded within networks of family and friends returned home after successfully completing their studies, I cannot argue that their sojourns were/are circular for many reasons First, their trajectories are not representative of other Palestinian sojourners’ even those coming from the same contexts (Gaza and the West Bank) From my own observations, many students, especially those coming from Gaza, take other routes after the sojourn, e.g., migration, asylum-seeking, work, and seeking another academic degree abroad In fact, fear of ‘brain-drain’ is a real issue in Palestinian academic and political circles and media In a recent publication, Abou-Al-Ross and AlWaheidi (2021) investigate the phenomenon of ‘brain-drain’ in Gaza and identify the negative impacts of some of the cause factors such as living conditions on the ‘human resource assets’ of the health sector in Gaza Hamas, the de facto authority in Gaza, sees the departure of talented youths and academics ‘as part of a systematic Israeli policy to empty the territory of skilled citizens through siege and regular wars’ (Othman, 2015) This flight is not surprising considering the ‘unliveable’ circumstances in Gaza, which put these students in a dilemma where they must choose between trying to find ways of staying legal and handling living abroad alone or returning home to miserable living conditions but under the shelter of a family The decision is often difficult to take and is contingent on many conditions, such as: family support, gender, availability of work, personal attitudes and perceptions, and having a strong case for applying for asylum For the participants in this research, these routes were blocked particularly for those from the West Bank who had to return to work in jobs that they would not be able to secure in the UK, as many of them expressed in chapter five The situation was less stable and more turbulent for Gaza sojourners who were obliged to return under the pressure of visa and financial restrictions and family commitment not necessarily because they chose or wanted to return

Second, my participants’ mobilities cannot be described as circular because their UK sojourn was a starting point in a continuum of a mobile trajectory, at least at the stage of planning In the final phase of interviews (in Summer 2019), all sojourners indicated that they had plans to travel again So far, three of them have returned to the UK: two on a student visa for another academic degree and one on a work visa, while another one has been to the US on a work/ training programme These mobilities fall outside the scope of this study, but they provide evidence for the noncircular, rather extended and continued nature of Palestinian sojourners’ mobilities

A new wave of Palestinian academic mobility could be observed during the last (five) years, to the UK HE This wave can be seen as a consequence of an interplay between multiple push and pull factors The main push factor is the challenging political situation in the Occupied Territories Availability of scholarships funding postgraduate degrees and being dedicated specifically to Palestinian students from Gaza, the West Bank, and sometimes East Jerusalem is the main attracting factor in UK HE To name some of these scholarship schemes, they are: Chevening UK Government Scholarship, The Said Foundation Scholarship Programme, Durham Palestine Educational Trust, Gaza Oxford Brookes University Scholarship, St Andrews Education for Palestinian Students (STEPS), Sheffield University’s Gaza-Palestine Postgraduate Taught Scholarship, and Higher Education Scholarships for Palestinians (HESPAL) Each funding scheme has a set of criteria prioritised in the selection of candidates/awardees, the most important of which are academic merit and leadership skills These criteria render both the application and selection processes very competitive and difficult considering that some schemes only fund one or two students per year Recently, some of these funders have aimed to increase the quota (of funds) provided to Palestinian students For example, the HESPAL, a British Council managed scheme, is currently committed to supporting 25 PhD scholars and four master's students at different UK universities, according to the British Council in Occupied Palestinian Territories website Still, this process is uncertain and fluctuating every year having been subject to availability of funds All research participants were awardees of these schemes, particularly HESPAL and Chevening, selected for the academic year 2018-2019 These scholarships, in their attempt to increase the representation of minority, ‘non-traditional’ students on UK campuses, should be always seen as being embedded in processes of globalisation, internationalisation, and promotion of the UK HE market (as discussed in section 2.2) The following section further contextualises this study through addressing these issues, i.e., international students in UK/ English HE and immigration policies.

International Students in UK HE and Immigration Policies

The UK attracts thousands of international students annually There are many reasons contributing to the large market share (of international student recruitment) of UK HE The most cited reasons revolve around ‘academic branding’ (Osman, 2008) and promoting UK campuses as modern, diverse, and advanced in research and technology, receiving high- quality education from well-reputed universities, achieving prestigious academic and global qualifications, availability of funding opportunities, and the relatively short duration of undergraduate and postgraduate courses compared to other global academic ‘markets’ The global university rankings contribute to and feed into the branding of UK HE, ‘production of geographies of education’, and the persistence of ‘certain academic hegemonies’ (Waters,

2017, p.290) Besides discourses that focus on branding and the embedded role of ‘world- class’ education in cultural and economic capital, some scholars provide (post)colonial analyses to account for academic mobilities (e.g., Madge et al., 2009; 2014; Waters 2017; 2018) The works of these scholars demonstrate the links between colonial histories, structures and institutions and contemporary international student mobilities The legacy of colonialism plays a role in determining the mobility of students coming from post-colonial sites, i.e., where in the globe to pursue education (Waters, 2018) For example, Sin (2009) emphasises Malaysian international students’ preference for a British academic experience English as a global language is another issue here and ‘an enduring theme’ (Waters, 2017, p.291) English fuels students’ desires to move for education as they aspire to benefit from its advantage and imagine practicing it in an English-speaking environment (ibid)

The late 1970s witnessed the introduction of policies of marketisation in academia following cuts in government support of UK universities, which made UK HE subject to rapid transformation (Furedi, 2010) The marketisation of universities has attracted a polarisation in opinions between ‘pro-marketers’ and ‘anti-marketers’ (Barnett, 2010) The first camp acknowledges the benefits of the market such as: income generation, securing efficiency, freedom, choice, and quality management (Barnett, 2010; Foskett, 2010) On the other hand, the opponents of the marketisation project take cultural, intellectual, and pedagogical perspectives/ramifications as they argue against the ‘commodification of academic education’ (Furedi, 2010) ‘Rituals of commodification’ or 'policy devices' (Ball, 2008), such as quality control, auditing, ranking performance, league tables, and student surveys (ibid, p.2), have led to an increase in state intervention and management of university life- a very politicised activity (ibid) Here, Ball's (2008) work on education policy debates is important in grasping the political discourses underpinning and shaping education in the UK under the umbrella of education reform One of the most prevailing debates concerning education policy is 'the subordination of education to economic imperatives' (ibid, p.9) and global competitiveness Education is a main player in 'national productivity' within the global 'knowledge economy' (p.31) Within the 'knowledge economy', knowledge is commodified, and its social principles and values are pushed to the margin This has led to many ramifications such as 'the production of new learners' (p.9), policy convergence across nations and sectors, and privatisation of public education 'Policies which might have seemed like economic barbarism 20 years ago, now seem right and proper' (Ball, 2008, p.38) Governments put academic institutions under market pressure for the ultimate purpose of revenue generation from international students (De Vita and Case, 2003) Universities, in their attempt to survive the competitive market, compete to promote their services to fee-paying students in order for the UK HE to secure a large share of the global educational market

The project of marketising HE has generated various manifestations that are premised on commercial discourses Examples include: the shift in the roles of universities into enterprises serving the industry, selling certificates, and graduating employable individuals (Jarvis, 2001), business, ‘disembodied’ discourses towards international students and their experiences treating them as customers, change in the student-teacher relationships (from pedagogical to commercial), and a controversy over what is ethical and commercial in UK HE First, the neo-liberal perceptions of international students as agentive, fee-paying customers, which prevail in UK HE, risk ignoring their unique, diverse, and situated experiences for the sake of treating them as equal or imposing ‘one-size-fits-all educational prescriptions’ (Sidhu and Dall'Alba, 2012, p.415) Furthermore, the promotion of student-customer discourses has recast the relationship between academics and students along commercial models of service- provider and customer (Furedi, 2010) In the market logic, the customer has a loud voice and knows what they want to purchase, and universities should listen to their customer-students (ibid) Here, Maringe (2010, p.148) raises important questions, such as ‘what is right for example about a student who fails to submit an assignment in good time for no apparent reason?; and how far do we apply this [customer] metaphor in the HE context if at all?’ This has resulted in the emergence of what Furedi (2010) terms as ‘defensive education’, where academics are reduced to providing a service, thus not comfortably articulating their professional judgment when offering feedback and refraining from stating views that could annoy their students when writing reference letters Courses that do not rate highly in student surveys are amended and made customer-friendly (ibid) In the same vein, attracting potential customer-students involves promoting campus in shiny colours that portray promising, yet sometimes unrealistic pictures of sojourning in the UK For example, the celebration of diversity on UK campuses can be misleading to sojourners who have aspired to learn in multicultural environments but find themselves surrounded by groups of nationals and co- nationals in the UK While this can result in misleading expectations and disappointment, it also raises questions on the ethical considerations of UK HEIs when it comes to accurately

‘marketising’ their ‘services’ to prospective students

UK HE is one of the most marketised and vertically stratified systems in the world (Brooks et al., 2021; Brooks and Abrahams, 2021) where students are seen as ‘entitled’, ‘passive learners’, ‘instrumental’ and ‘career-oriented’ (Fin et al., 2021) Nevertheless, research demonstrates that dominant policy narratives do not necessarily shape staff and international students' perspectives and constructions of themselves (as service-providers and customers respectively) and that there has been some resistance to such identities, policies and discourses of marketisation in HE (Tomlinson, 2017; Brooks et al., 2021) In a recent publication, Brooks (2021) reiterates the finding that many students in UK HE do not feel that they were ‘purchasing’ a degree or studying for instrumental gains solely Rather, those students had broader and more complex and contested views as they focused on their private needs and negotiated the importance of HE in terms of personal growth and promoting the public good (Brooks et al., 2021, Brooks and Abrahams, 2021) Finally, many scholars have argued against the dominant business-based discourses in UK HE and proposed to enhance the learning experience of students For instance, Maringe (2010) argues for a proper marketing concept of HE that should be based on the co-creation of knowledge, understanding, and curriculum rather than delivering students values/ services and putting them at the receiving end of education and academia (as promoted by the commercial perspectives) To this end, an authentic, welcoming, caring, and culturally inclusive education/pedagogy needs to be implemented in every aspect of the learning process In the same vein, Madge et al (2009) take a postcolonial stance and call for ‘an engaged pedagogy and responsibility’ This critical pedagogy stresses the connection between students and their institutions where power imbalances and exploitation in the learning process should be understood and acknowledged (Waters, 2018) Wong and Chiu (2021a) call universities and staff for explicitly communicating expectations of university students to avoid discrepancies of expectations They developed the concept of 'the ideal university student' which offers students less familiar with HE a better understanding of what is valued and expected at university (ibid) When transparency is promoted and applied on campus, the uncertainty students from non-traditional backgrounds may experience is reduced, and those students are empowered and not disadvantaged by their unfamiliarity of the system This also has effects on reducing inequalities resulting from implicitness and assumptions on campus (ibid)

Expansion in the numbers of international students is one of the direct and most apparent results of the marketisation of UK HE These are some recent statistics around international students in UK HE, according to the House of Commons research briefing paper, by Hubble and Bolton (2021) These are summarised as:

 The number of overseas students studying in the UK HE reached 538,600 in 2019/20, making 22% of the total student population They were distributed as: 143,000 from the EU and 395,600 from outside the EU In its updated International Education Strategy 2021, the government aims at raising this figure to 600,000 international higher education students annually

 2019/20 witnessed a boom in the number of new overseas entrants to UK universities, which peaked at 307,800

 Recently, the UK has been the second most popular global destination for international students after the USA, although the global educational market has been

‘slipping’ to other competitors such as Australia, New Zealand and Canada

 It is estimated that international students contributed around £25.8 billion in gross output to the UK economy in 2014/15 This figure is aimed to increase to £35 billion a year by 2030

 Overseas students are much more likely than ‘home students’ to study full-time and/or follow postgraduate courses In 2019/20, 53% of non-EU students were on postgraduate courses compared to 30% from the EU and 19% of ‘home students’ Also, 91% of those from the EU and 94% of non-EU entrants compared to 76% of home students were studying full-time

Despite the plans to recruit more international students, those students who come to the UK to study for more than 12 months are counted as ‘migrants’ included in the net migration 6 target (Hubble and Bolton, 2021) As a result, there were several changes to the student visa scheme during the last decade, and more are expected to be implemented For example, in

2011 Prime Minister David Cameron pledged to cut the total net migration number to below 100,000 (BBC, 2011) Also, in 2012 post-study work visas, which allowed students on Tier4

6 Net migration is ‘the difference between those who come to the UK for periods of at least 12 months and those who leave’ The British government has aimed to cut net migration for several years (Hubble and Bolton, 2021, p.8) visas to stay and work in the UK for up to two years after their studies, was abolished, which resulted in a 20% reduction in enrolments at UK HEs (Hubble and Bolton, 2021) As a PM, Theresa May insisted on counting international students in the net migration target She stated,

Whether or not international students are included in the net migration target is not a message about our country and how we welcome people We welcome students coming to this country— we are very clear about that—but in the statistics we abide by the international definition used by countries around the world We want to ensure that the brightest and the best are indeed able to come to the United Kingdom and get the value of a UK education (HC Deb 29 March 2017 c289), as cited in (Hubble and Bolton, 2021, p.9)

Many bodies, academic, political, and social, campaigned to negotiate and change the situation of international students in the UK, i.e., to have them removed from the net migration figures and loosen student visa restrictions For example, Lord Hannay of Chiswick proposed an amendment to the Higher Education and Research Bill 2016, where international students were supposed to be removed from the net migration target This amendment passed in the House of Lords by a large majority, but it was later removed when the House of Commons considered the amendments to the Bill (Times Higher Education, 2017)

Recently, two main factors have played a role in effecting changes in government policies concerning international students: Brexit and the coronavirus pandemic After Brexit, many international students started to perceive the UK as a less welcoming foreign destination for studying and living which has impacted the numbers recruited in UK HE (Hubble and Bolton, 2021) Meanwhile, the coronavirus pandemic has had an impact on the number of students coming to the UK (ibid) In response to these circumstances, the government allowed for more flexibility in extending the post-study leave period and introduced new post-study work routes for international students In September 2019, the government announced the introduction of a new two-year post-study work visa (graduate route), where all international students, at undergraduate and master’s level, graduating in the Summer of 2021 will be able to stay, look for, and apply for jobs for two years after their studies (GOV.UK, 2019) In the same vein, international students completing PhDs were to be permitted to stay in the UK for three years after graduation to live and work as of Summer 2021 (GOV.UK, 2020)

In spite of the British government’s mitigation measures to make the UK attractive and welcoming to international students, anti-immigration policies, economic dominance in education and insensitive consumerist discourses towards students, visa requirements and restrictions, and differential fees between national and international students still challenge many students who aspire to join UK HE Fee increases in IELTS tests 7 , course tuition, and student visa application and Immigration Health Surcharge (IHS) 8 along with restrictions in work hours during the sojourn, while not having an optimal learning experience due to distance/online learning in coronavirus times are contemporary issues that raise questions on the accessibility, worth, flexibility, generosity and hospitality of UK HE

In addition to the issues discussed above, education in the UK has attracted other criticisms from scholars who addressed some of its major dilemmas and contradictions James Banks (2020; 2015), who is a leading authority in multicultural education, argues that the democratic ideals promoted in the US and UK, including their education programmes, are contradicted by the political and socioeconomic contexts where education takes place Teaching and promoting democratic values, e.g., British Values, while the daily lives of other minorities are full of inequality, racism, and injustice renders those values irrelevant and only

7 IELTS test fee increased to 1000 Israeli Shekels (more than 300 USD) in the OPT (British Council in OPT website)

English Language in an Era of Globalisation

English Language as a (Post)Colonial Legacy: A Historical Glimpse

And who in time knows whither we may vent

The treasure of our tongue, to what strange shores

This gain of our best glory shall be sent,

T’enrich unknowing nations with our stores?

What worlds in th’yet unformed Occident

May come refin’d with th’accents that are ours

(Samuel Daniel (1599) Musophilus, as cited in Leith, 2007, p.117)

Were Daniel living in our times, he would be certainly proud of how accurate a seer he is and of the highly prestigious position of his dream language in our contemporary world English writers in the 16 th century were able to prophesy a time when English might extend its rule and dominance to ‘strange shores’ Daniel’s dream of an English expansion to new worlds is obvious in his poetry which is injected with known economic metaphors (which are trendy in approaching linguistic phenomena) These metaphors are adapted to complement the imperial scenario he established or fantasised- language as a coin/ treasure is to be sent ‘to enrich’ strange nations and ‘refine’ their accents Superiority of English is highlighted and naturalised as if it was by nature destined to rule and reform the other ‘unknowing’ people

That dreamy poem has obviously turned out to be a prophecy come true through a history of imperial colonialism and imposition of English both within and beyond the British Isles Tracing English as it moved in history, it appears that it has acquired a changing nature depending on political, social, economic, cultural, and even religious factors (Swann, 2007) Language contact is key to the discussion of English evolution The language has always been in contact with other languages The experience of colonisation played a major role in the contact of languages and cultures and diffusion of English until it became the language of the Empire on which the sun never sets and whose speakers never sleep! Leith (2007) suggests that colonisation began before the 16 th century within the British Isles In the 12 th century, English was established as the main language of the Celtic communities in Scotland, Ireland, and Wales The motives were political, involving the subjugation of people, and religious, reinforcing Christianity At the end of the 16 th century, England started sailing to other shores outside the British Isles Colonies were established and lasted for more than three centuries mainly for three motives: economic, political, and social Additionally, Leith (2007) identifies three types of English patterns in the colonies: displacement, subjection, and replacement The first type refers to the settlement by the colonial native English speakers who displaced the indigenous people (e.g., North America, Australia and New Zealand) and had no interest in the native languages Therefore, nearly no linguistic contact occurred Subjection entails that settlers, though a minority, maintained power over pre-colonial people and land and allowed them access to learn English as a second language, for example in India and Nigeria Whereas the first two types of English were purely British, the last one represents a different situation in West Africa In the replacement process, precolonial people in the Caribbean Islands were replaced by African slaves in the 18 th century This led to the emergence of Creole English, a variety made of hybrid elements of African, European, and English languages, which was adopted as a native language there

I have chosen to start with this dark side of history because it is not over yet Ghosts of the colonial past still haunt the world, but they take different shapes/names The role of English has not changed much being ‘the consort of empire’ and its sincere ‘mate’ (Phillipson, 1992, p.31) Religion, political agenda, economy, along with language were promoted whether when missionaries were preaching Christianity in the Middle Ages or when the US tries to impose its political and economic hegemony in the contemporary world In an era of immense globalisation, the role and importance of English has become more intense and deeper than ever.

English Language Learning and Discourses in an Era of Globalisation

It is contended that globalisation has enormous repercussions on everyday practices Globalisation is a driving force that affects modern societies at many levels Through movement of people, objects, and practises across the world, which is best captured by the concept of ‘global fluids’ (Mooney, 2007, p.107), globalisation has changed the game and destabilised the norms Such mobility is complex and chaotic ‘leading to heterogeneous results’ (ibid) which include, for example, an increasingly diverse population and different representations of imagined communities of host nations (Block and Cameron, 2002) Such heterogeneity/ super-diversity has thus opened the door for infinite possibilities and encounters Consequently, it has grown difficult to prepare language learners for the endless possibilities and situations outside the classroom Kramsch (2014) argues that despite the availability of the internet with its authentic materials and social networks which have increased learners’ access to native speakers, there has never been such tension between what is presented in classrooms and measured in exams and what is needed in the real world outside the school setting The gap is widening which means it can be argued that teaching and testing fail to cope with and attend to the complexities and messiness of the real sociolinguistic contexts Teachers more than ever are confused when it comes to deciding on what they are supposed to teach or what contexts and situations they should present and reflect (Badwan, 2017; Kramsch, 2014)

In many contexts, there are a lot of ‘myths’ (see Pennycook, 2007 on the English myth) surrounding English, and these have real and dangerous effects on language teaching They are so penetrating that they hugely shape and dominate in applied linguistics and everyday discourses Monolithic views of English both perpetuate and are mutually perpetuated by these myths Within the monolithic paradigm, English, or the English, is pinned down to/ exists as a unitary, correct, standard, valuable entity that is to be acquired and learned as a fixed subject derived from a native-speaker ideal and not to be constructed differently (Hall,

2012, 2013); otherwise, it will be judged wrong and non-standard Agents of institutional power are key players in advancing these understandings Pennycook (2007) maintains that language is a product of human activity and that social actors, the powerful, are very agentive when constructing and perpetuating particular versions of language such as the standard varieties This construct has not only led to the superiority of one language/ dialect over others, but also to the emergence of ‘metalanguage’, i.e., discourses about language As for Standard English, there is a culture of standardisation that maintains its beliefs about SE Ideologically, people are made to (uncritically) believe, by institutions of power, that SE is the language of ‘institutionalised power’ (Hall, 2014) So, these sets of beliefs, Pennycook (2007) argues, are nothing but a project and not a real thing This is called the ‘myth position’ which focuses on representations and discourse through which the world is constructed, i.e., on the production of metalanguages and on the normalisation of SE This position refutes claims that language operates in a vacuum away from politics With this in mind, we know that English is not neutral/detached from socio-economic and political relations nor necessarily beneficial to all those using it These claims, i.e., monolithic language ideologies, are supported by education leading to ‘a doctrine of correctness’ (Hall, 2014) where there is a single set of correct norms to be taught and learned Native speakers are the guardians and models who are idealised as the perfect source of knowledge about language and culture as well as being the best teachers This also entails the superiority of American and British Englishes Other learners should conform to the idealised forms, and proficiency is judged based on the degree of conformity to the norms (Hall, 2014; Block and Cameron, 2002) Promoting this conceptualisation justifies the contentious existence of global textbooks, high- stake tests (IELTS, TOEFL, TOEIC, etc.) as well as international organisations for ELT (British Council and Amideast) This powerful machinery works collaboratively to build an Empire of ELT industry However, it is based on a determinist/ reductionist approach that does not attend to the dynamic and ever-changing sociolinguistic realities beyond language teaching settings nor does it regard the complex encounters and contexts of millions of users of English who are not British or American

Monolithic thinking is not only wrong but can also be misleading Besides assuming that SE is the only correct version of English that should be perfectly learned, learners in many contexts still hold the belief that this is what they will use in out-of-classroom communication, i.e., classroom equates and reflects the real world outside With the help of what Gray (2002) calls ‘the global coursebooks’, these beliefs are promoted and perpetuated These coursebooks, which target English language learners outside their local borders, have many features First, they are ‘subtly deterritorialized’ (ibid, p.157), i.e not context-specific Second, they are inclusive, meaning that they take a non-sexist approach when presenting men and women Also, publishers take into account market sensitivity and eliminate the risk of offending potential customers by avoiding certain hotly debated topics These topics can be informally synthesised in the acronym PARSNIP (Politics, Alcohol, Religion, Sex, Narcotics, Isms, and Pork) (Gray, 2002; 2012) Avoiding these topics, being neutral and adopting a one-size-fits-all approach has resulted in a limited range of ‘bland’ topics which are seen to be safe and apolitical such as travel, leisure, work, aspirations Kramsch (2014, p.302) describes ELT textbooks as ‘tourist brochures The result is a lack of student engagement and negotiation of meaning

The use of global coursebooks is also misleading/delusional because when language learners deal with English inside the classroom, they necessarily interact with their own ‘imagined communities’ as they desire to ‘reach out to wider worlds’ (Norton, 2000; Norton and Mckinny, 2011; Pavlenko and Norton, 2007) Imagining being a member of different communities beyond learners' tangible social contexts mediates the learning process by either facilitating/motivating it or challenging/resisting it Either way, it indeed has strong impacts on learners’ trajectories, identities, and investment in English, which is more than any other language implicated in the process of imagination due to its global status and widespread

(Norton and Mckinny, 2011; Pavlenko and Norton, 2007) However, real encounters are substantially more different, infinite, heteroglossic, and unpredictable than what is essentially portrayed in the textbooks taught to millions of learners globally The limitedness of topics along with their aspirational and apolitical content as well as their linguistic focus on SE and its own culture misleadingly shape learners' visions that English guarantees intercultural understanding Ironically, though, emphasis on the inner circle does not lead to that Rather, it results in a narrow conception of the world and diversity and promotes essentialist views Learning English ends up emphasising cultural essentialism, stereotypes and classification rather than promoting a sense of pluralism or critical multiculturalism (Block and Cameron, 2002) These coursebooks and the whole ELT profession which uses them continue in their promotional mission, wittingly or unwittingly, to also promote that English promises social and economic success This should be done through an identification with an idealised native English-speaking community- but which community? They rarely inform learners that English can be particularly tied to certain class positions, and that it can be divisive for those who must learn it particularly where there are those who do not have access to high-quality English education (Pennycook, 2007) These shiny promises are delusive as one of Gray’s respondents (2012, p.108) critically puts it: ‘It is a dishonest portrayal of life in the UK It creates false dreams and aspirations in the minds of language learners As such, the story being told in the classroom is not exhaustive enough to reflect the realities outside the walls of school because of its focus on a one-sided narrative I would like to advance the view that the content of these textbooks does not determine the variety of language used or learned It is the other way around in the case of English The standard variety of English is not reflected in these textbooks; it is rather the reason for their existence, raison d’être They are basically there to promote it, therefore, the textbook is the discourse not a discourse on English The way English is put into discourse, i.e., global coursebooks, feeds the ‘Myth(s)’ knitted around that language (back to Pennycook, 2007)

This monolithic discourse has severe repercussions on learners’ construction of viewpoints of, investment in, and delving into the real world of English(es) They are vulnerable with regards to the powerful single story they have constantly been narrated to and brainwashed into believing When they are exposed to other Englishes and realities they may start to challenge and question their primary assumptions about the language they learned (so monolithically) for years

Not only does a monochrome vision of English fill learners’ imagination with many misconceptions of the world beyond their reach, it also disadvantages them upon mobility It is important to bear in mind that interaction is not only about transmitting facts or opinions, but also about having power, voice, and making learners speak ‘as themselves’ (Ushioda, 2011) Those who have the power to voice themselves, allegedly native speakers, will continue to keep it, while other non-natives will try to seek it They have been taught or made to believe that it is through English that this power is automatically guaranteed What actually happens when they ‘go mobile’ whether in study abroad contexts or as immigrants, is quite different (Badwan, 2017) Their previous education puts them in critical, sometimes awkward, conditions rather than preparing them for the real encounters It has made them imagine they are successful users/learners of English Once moving from the imagined to the real, these illusory beliefs turn into mirage crushing upon the very first real encounter which leads to them having several challenges when communicating and maybe losing their voice Literature from study abroad research (e.g., Pellegrino Aveni, 2005) and migrant education (Simpson, 2010; 2015) has revealed many examples on the inadequacy of ELT in preparing

EL learners for using English in their ‘messy’ life beyond the confines of classroom and cyberspace Their informants’ experiences with the language after mobility featured moments of silence, losing voice, and not feeling comfortable dealing with different informal registers and forms of language This has eventually changed their conceptualisations of language and made them reflect on their previous education which they sometimes depicted as having

‘deceived’ them, as one of Badwan’s (2017, p.204) interviewees expressed Thus, it can be argued that the previous education of language, which is premised on over-simplistic representations of language and culture, has real effects on and is part and parcel of the learners’ imagined and real worlds On the one hand, they shape and feed learners’ fantasies placing them in a shiny bubble (following Badwan’s, 2017 figurative description) On the other hand, when the bubble touches the hard, unexpected, and heterogeneous realities, it bursts, and they are left silent, intimidated, and feeling ‘betrayed’

Not only do ELT global coursebooks promote and perpetuate the ‘monolithic myth’, but

‘high-stake’ tests (Gray, 2012) play a key role in this mission Testing, which is an activity that ‘dictates what is taught and learnt’ (Hall, 2014 p.379), is the arena where myth and reality of English are the most evident yet the least acknowledged Proficiency tests are not only pedagogical functioning as ‘gatekeepers’ of SE They are also powerful as they acquire social, economic, and political meanings This entails that they have serious educational and social impacts on their takers (Gray, 2012) On their webpages, TOEFL and IELTS promote themselves on the basis of their global reach and the possibilities they offer to their attendees as ‘passports to study abroad’ and employment (ibid) When language learners are required to achieve a certain score to be offered a place at university and to be granted a visa to enter a foreign country, they would believe that attaining the required band/level simply means open doors Again, this feeds into discussions on how English is put into myth Through these powerful, gatekeeping exams, English is mythologised as the language that builds bridges to the world and guarantees mobility and success However, these tests, with their traditional approach to proficiency as a skill that is achieved by conformity to standardised norms against which errors can be identified and judged, do not always measure real English They only judge the kind of learning that has happened through instruction where English is reproduced and replicated objectively, i.e., declarative Knowledge (Hall, 2014) Here, accuracy is central to the tests whether at the classroom level or in the case of the big, standardised ones, such as IELTS and TOEFL Hall (2014) and Pennycook (2007) refer to the knowledge tested as one type of ‘Englishing’ English conceived as a verb with -ing should be different from English as a noun, i.e., the galactic, hybrid, diverse, plurilithic, ever- changing sociolinguistic system- a realisation that is still not fully captured by the testing regimes (willingly?) and English language learners (unwillingly)

In the same vein, these tests which have a fixed, objective set of norms along with their purpose to measure proficiency and accuracy are very contested in academia (e.g., Jenkins, 2006; Gray, 2012), posing several question marks Who has the right to decide on the design of these tests and what score should be obtained to secure a place at university or get a visa? Who decides on the ‘correct’ answer and the criteria against which answers are evaluated? Who takes responsibility for all the repercussions of these tests’ results on their takers’ lives and future plans? The obvious issue is that the criteria and standards of these tests are set according to monolingual native speakers’ even though they are designed to evaluate learners from other diverse multilingual societies, which are becoming increasingly hybrid and changing in an age of globalisation This is where the major criticism of standard tests stems from, i.e., the heterogeneous nature of English due to its global spread and its sociolinguistic consequences (Gray, 2012) Jenkins (2006) calls it bizarre that while candidates are examined for qualifications of international currency, they get penalised for using international forms of the language She goes on to argue that there is nothing international about only studying two main varieties of the world Englishes The study of British or American English does not necessarily lead to international understanding, which these tests introduce themselves as a medium of achieving

Another criticism of SE and its tests has its underpinnings in pedagogy Proficiency tests, as their name suggests, focus on proficiency However, their approach to proficiency is contested Traditional views of proficiency presuppose monolithic vision There is one target variety that is idealised, correct, and valued Native speakers of that standard variety should be the role models to imitate Foreignness is not tolerated Mistakes are not allowed, and non- conformity is deficient (Hall, 2012) More dynamic views on proficiency challenge this understanding by arguing that proficiency comes with non-conformity which signals that learners can possess the language and bend it to suit their own will and interests (ibid) ‘They [learners] should carry their own cultural experience into English and stamp it with their own identities’ (Holliday, 2014, p.1) These insights are central to the counterargument embodied in plurilithic views of English, which will be discussed below So, with their focus on objective reproduction of English as an external body target, tests become ‘counterproductive’ (Hall, 2014, p.382) As learners are expected to reproduce declarative facts about the language, they become less able to develop natural procedures for effective communication and use which is the very essence and objective of learning English/ any language Also, testing is ‘inappropriate’ (ibid) Learning is not only about replicating facts about the external target language In fact, actual learning is normally the result of natural interaction where learners develop their own situated, discursive, personalised, and procedural experiences with the language (ibid) These trajectories are inevitably not identical to the taught declarative system, and this is what makes testing inappropriate and unrepresentative

It seems evident, then, that more change needs to occur in language tests and their ideologies which is not easily achievable due to their entrenchment and penetrating influence on shaping peoples’ collective views of what standard, correct English is Their existence and effects are further legitimised by agents/agencies of power and dominant groups whose interests dictate keeping power by maintaining the status quo So, when individuals conform to these measures, they become products of this project and, ironically, part of the social process of perpetuating the standards, i.e., agents of promoting monolithic English especially when they successfully prove themselves against the norms and allude to others that this is the only way to success

The alternative approach to English views it in terms of accepting the reality of its ‘plurilithic’ (as coined by Hall, 2012; 2013; 2014) nature Those working with World Englishes have been the most active and effective in refuting and countering monolithic views, developing and bringing new understandings to the phenomenon, for a decade or so now This view takes English not as a single reified entity (mono= one, lithos= stone), rather as ‘a dynamic set of overlapping phonological, grammatical, and lexical resources, stored in millions of individual minds, which interact in multiple communities and cultural practises.’ (Hall, 2014) As such, pluricentrism provides a framework to understand and legitimise the non-standard, often marginalised, non-native varieties It does not privilege a single group of people or set of forms (Hall, 2012; 2014) It also highlights flexibility of choice and accentuates learners’ agency Commenting on this, Hall (2014, p.6) maintains: ‘[English is] a portable resource which individual learners construct internally on the basis of social experience’ (English as a

Sociolinguistics of (Im)Mobility

Divided We Move: Mobility as a Marker of Stratification

Before elaborating on the effects of mobility on individuals’ resources, capitals, identities, and social interaction, it is important to touch on the inequalities associated with movement The world is a stratified place Ironically, in an era of globalisation, when people and communities are supposed to get closer, the world continues to go widely polarised Bauman (1998) was one of those who viewed globalisation in terms of its unequal effects on people and societies and the social divisions it has brought about The degree of people’s mobility and freedom of choosing where to be reflects this inequality and stratification While he (ibid) maintains that immobility is ‘not a realistic option in a world of permanent change’, there are people whose only real and lived option is immobility (Gaza for example) This complexity, evidenced and supported by participants’ experiences, has led to me developing a new understanding of (im)mobility I view it as a continuum whose ends are total freedom of movement and very restricted immobility This continuum-based perspective captures the complex, relational, plural, and contextual nature of mobility experiences in the sense that it does not necessarily classify people as either mobile or immobile especially in the age of telecommunication and cyber networking where mobility can be virtual However, the continuum also attends to reality by invoking the binaries (mobility and immobility) it departed from and should not seek to ignore This is relevant and important to highlight especially in cases of enforced constraints on physical or even virtual mobility

Bauman (1998) makes a distinction between the ‘high-up’ and ‘low-down’, the 'globally mobile’ and the ‘locally tied’, the ‘first world’ and the 'second world’ in terms of concepts of time and space No matter how we choose to refer to each of them, these opposites continue to exist at the end of the continuum as bitter consequences and integral parts of globalisation and a reflection of the stratification and inequality in the globe Bauman (1998) argues that the 'high-ups' leave the 'low-downs' lagging behind This is because the first group have a globally mobile space that is not constraining, whereas the second group’s space is shrinking, so most of the time they have to passively tackle the change that might visit their homes where they are being tied When space closes up, the flow of time becomes void While people in the first world are living in the present, are busy and always short of time as there is a lot to do, those marooned in the low-down world suffer the redundancy and uselessness of time Nothing much happens, and ‘they can only kill time, as they are slowly killed by it’ (ibid, p.88) While inhabitants of the first world live in time, space does not seem to matter because it can be instantaneously crossed and spanned Those in the opposite world, though, live in space: tied, resilient, uncontrolled, and heavy So, they have no control over the space in which they are suffocating and dying slowly The difference between the two poles becomes a difference between life and death, quite literally Paradoxically, in an era of postmodernity where hybridisation and rejection of essentialism are proclaimed and celebrated, the globalising-localising poles are so distortedly reflected in the postmodern narrative It is still, Bauman (1998) continues, far from conveying the complexities and contradictions that are ripping our world Only the audible and influential global experiences are heard of and accounted for while other trajectories remain unarticulated as they come from the bottom (the imbalance in SA research testifies to this argument)

Thus far, I have accounted for the divides that shape many experiences in the world This discussion might be criticised as being too rigid and dichotomous especially by views which see globalisation as being more complex and entangled and accentuate the role of the local and agency Globalisation from below or grounded globalisation (Fairclough, 2006), for instance, is concerned with strategies of groups and individuals in specific places ‘defending themselves against negative effects of processes of globalisation or taking advantage of new possibilities offered by these processes’ (ibid, p.121) As such, the local can be productive of its own version of globalisation However, the zeal for accounting for the positive experiences of agency and action (which is totally valid and promising) should not take us far away from seeing and highlighting the structural inequalities that quite often restrain and control individuals’ practices Furthermore, these theories which prefer to depend on agency are not specific as to what counts as an agency action One might argue against ‘effective’ forms of agency mainly because they will always be dependent on events and actions which are not produced nor controlled by the local (more discussion on structure and agency to follow) These understandings are the key points for me highlighting the divides/borders as they continue to persist at the top and bottom of the scale It is against this background I can move to represent and understand experiences of those ‘on the move’ which are characterised by enforcing borders, crossing them, and working on and within them.

Language in Motion: What Happens When Individuals and their Resources Go Mobile, Cross Borders, and Relocate?

Movement across geopolitical borders is a defining characteristic of globalisation that has resulted in multiplicity and heterogeneity of consequences, whether at the level of interaction or theory When people move across space and time/history, they carry with them their identities, affiliations, positions, linguistic repertoires, different skills and competences, sociocultural awareness/expectations among many others These assets, as they travel to new realities, confront spaces that are never empty but rather filled with others’ norms and expectations (Blommaert, 2010) This entails that mobile people along with their loads will have to grapple with dynamics of change and new encounters that will render their assets revalued and reconstructed Effects of mobility on individuals’ interaction and perceptions in new societies have received attention by different sociolinguists who tried to theorise a Sociolinguistics of globalisation (Blommaert, 2010) and Translingual practises (Canagarajah,

2013) While the former views mobility, interaction, and language resources in terms of structural inequalities and power relations as he introduces notions of scales and orders of indexicality, the latter gives prominence to the role of agency looking at interaction as a site of meaning negotiating and resisting the norm

Blommaert’s (2010) book can be described as a critical theory to sociolinguistics The book raises questions of how to analyse sociolinguistic interactions within contexts of globalisation

It is, therefore, not a book on world languages or global Englishes Blommaert is rather critical of such theories which treat languages as reified entities assuming immobility and fixedness of language and people This is underpinned by an interesting view of globalisation which does not draw on the ‘global village’ metaphor, but rather conceptualises it as ‘a complex web of villages… connected by material and symbolic ties in often unpredictable ways’ (ibid, p.1) Within this framework, globalisation forces sociolinguistics to ‘unthink’ its traditional classifications and ‘rethink’ issues of sociolinguistics and language as ‘mobile resources’ Evidently, the idea of mobility drives any analysis of sociolinguistics in this book When people move, their linguistic and sociolinguistic resources move with them as well Here, language, which was once fixed in space and time, shifts into dynamic or ‘translocal’ patterns of language use This leads to ‘unexpected sociolinguistic effects’ (ibid, p.5) These effects are related to the inequalities and mobilities globalisation engenders and the role language resources and repertoires play within shifting Whether people manage or fail to make sense and get their voice heard across global contexts is eventually a matter of

‘inequality that is exacerbated by processes of globalisation’ (p.3) Informed by notions of mobility and languages as mobile resources and their effect and role upon shifting, Blommaert critiques many areas of linguistic orthodoxy One of these is ‘sociolinguistics of distribution’ where language resources are distributed and stuck horizontally in fixed spaces and chronological time He instead proposes another paradigm called ‘sociolinguistics of mobility’ which focuses on language in motion not space Here, he takes up the idea of

‘scales’ where language in use/speech is organised on different scale levels Space is not spatial but vertical, multi-layered, complex and reproduced because it is an ‘outcome of political and social processes’ (Collins et al., 2009, p.5) Sociolinguistics of mobility is about speech not language; the actual linguistic resources in actual sociocultural, political, and historical spaces These spaces are described by Blommaert as ‘messy’ (p.27) and ‘complex markets for linguistic and communicative resources’ (p.3) and by Bourdieu (1991) as

‘markets of power and capital’ (p.28) In these global markets, there are winners and losers, and people start devaluing and revaluing their linguistic repertoires The boundaries in this global marketplace of language and interaction are blurry, changeable, and flexible As there are more mobile individuals, mobile languages and resources across these mobile boundaries, language markets become even messier, more complex, and more unpredictable

The concept of scales is crucial to Blommaert in capturing how linguistic resources change their value and function in mobility contexts Scales are levels or dimensions according to which language use is organised Space is full of vertical layers of scales, norms, and codes and is ‘stratified, controlled, and monitored’ (p.6) People move across spaces and scales, from the local to the global and others in between Upon movement and to achieve meaningful interaction, individuals try to maintain the norm of the higher scale (macro- global/ trans-local) and act according to what is expected of them In this sense, Blommaert’s notion of scales focuses on the unequal relations of globalisation offering a horizontal and vertical framing of scales as a hierarchy where the local and global have different degrees of power Before Blommaert's theorisation of scales, critical geographers rejected hierarchical views of scale arguing that globalisation and mobility are multi-scalar and not primarily spatial (Collins et al., 2009) Following Wallerstein (1998), time and space are brought together in globalisation, i.e.TimeSpace compression He calls for giving more attention to the temporal (time) scaling as we engage in analysing spatial scale Here, time scale, like the spatial scale, is political, social, and ideological Thus, we need to think of both time and space as ‘mutually constituted’ (Collins et al 2009, p.6) It is noteworthy to mention that scaling, as a strategy discursively produced as a result of ideological and social effects, can be used as a resource of agency and power There are moments or movements (Smith’s 1993

‘scale-jumping’ as a source of power) where jumping on/shifting scales empowers local, disempowered groups However, movement across scales continues to be a power-tied movement that requires access to elite resources that equip people with tools to jump to higher scale levels This means that scaling entails power and inequality where resources are distributed in inequitable ways, i.e., they can be accessible to some people and unavailable to others Still, unprivileged people will continue to find ways of manoeuvre and project their own meanings and mobilities

Turning to Canagarajah (2013), he commences with a call for a paradigm shift from monolingual orientations to language and communication to indicate two main new understandings First, communication transcends mono languages; second, it transcends words to include other diverse semiotic and ecological resources He adopts the term

‘translingual practice’ to capture these new orientations to interaction These understandings assume many other indications and perspectives For example, interaction does not necessarily include one labelled language at a time Languages are in contact and complement each other in communication This leads us to conclude that in such contexts of linguistic diversity, meaning is not generated through a normative system, but through negotiation in situation Canagarajah takes it further to add that communication is not only about language Language is actually one semiotic resource among many such as, images, body movement, codes, and ecology These all work and mesh together for meaning Even though he focuses on those labelled non-natives in traditional accounts and on contexts of diverse people, he asserts that these practises are shared by everyone including native speakers According to him, we are all ‘translinguals’ because we keep ‘shuttling across’ languages, and codes and do not commit to one language/dialect even in homogenous contexts Rather, semiotic resources are at play, meshed with languages to generate new norms He shares Blommaert’s (2010, p.49) view that languages should be treated as ‘mobile resources’ that index meaning in situated contexts He gives the example of English as a language that evolved from meshing and codifying ‘the mobile resources of the three tribes who migrated to the British Isles’ (ibid, p.24)

Canagarajah criticises analyses of global Englishes which perceive context as static, homogeneous, and centred, where ‘each English variety is given a corresponding national or community locus’ (p.153) To theorise translocal spaces, he adopts a more complex view to geographical/political context He appreciates Blommaert’s (2010) borrowing of the ‘scale’ metaphor from geography studies as a useful term that captures the ‘spatiotemporal mobility of English’ (p.153) and ‘unpack[s] the many layers of context’ (p.154) However, he is critical of Blommaert’s treatment of scale as being too rigid where power and language norms’ negotiation appears to be limited in contexts of mobility Such static approach to scale, Canagarajah continues, implies that when individuals travel across translocal spaces, their roles are predetermined and assigned to them, i.e., they have to adjust to the norms, while the more powerful have prestigious language resources that enable them to jump on the scalar hierarchy Canagarajah summarises the limitations in Blommaert’s metaphor in two points: 1 it is ‘too normative’ (p.157) where norms are not open to discussion, resistance, nor reshaping;

2 it is ‘too impersonal’ (p.158) because the scales are predefined and shape people’s status and mobility, thus not leaving room for their agency and ability to invoke and reconstruct the scales for their own purposes Following scholars in the fields of geography and politics, e.g., Swyngedouw (1997) and Uitermark (2002), Canagarajah calls for adopting a more dynamic view of scale This approach entails treating scale as a process not as a predefined outcome or entity This process is ongoing, heterogeneous and negotiated, where power relations are open to contestation In the end, he calls for considering activities of ‘re-scaling’ He argues that rescaling is not necessarily top-down institutional influence on individuals’ perceptions and behaviours, i.e., not one-sided Rather, it can occur bottom-up when codes are re-negotiated and appropriated to achieve translinguals’ objectives He is optimistic that changes in policy are a possibility in the daily context of rescaling As such, Canagarajah centralises individuals’ capacity of being active agents of change ‘Translinguals’ challenge stability, violate and change the norms, construct meaningful communication, reach agreement and convey messages by getting involved in negotiation and processes of ‘re-scaling’

Structure and Agency in Mobility Contexts

Is it, then, the power of norms and structural inequality or the power of individuals’ agency to negotiate and contest meaning that best describes trajectories of mobility in an era of globalisation? In fact, while these two models present thought-provoking accounts on sociolinguistics of globalisation, they are singular and thus risk overgeneralization The high levels of super-diversity and unpredictability that characterise our world make it hard to theorise a one-size-fits-all approach The same individual can encounter countless possibilities in interaction which is even more complicated and unpredictable in new contexts This entails destabilising the two models above It is noteworthy to remember that the two approaches stem from different sets of data Blommaert’s data (2010) come from an asylum seeker’s encounters with immigration policies and institutions, while Canagarajah (2013) mainly draws on testimonies from educational and professional settings Canagarajah criticises Blommaert’s focus on structural scales as being too rigid and inflexible to capture exercises of agency, which is totally valid in some contexts, e.g., his professional and educated participants did enjoy the agency to do re-scaling and alter indexical orders to their own advantage But, is Canagarajah’s approach helpful when interpreting processes of gatekeeping in high-stakes contexts? Can an asylum seeker enjoy the agency to resist institutional discourse where power asymmetries are so observable and dominant? It is unlikely Put simply, the difference between the two sets of data justifies the difference in approaches More data are coming from different settings and populations, and these deserve more nuanced accounts to their particularities Contextual sensitivity is of paramount importance here

Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under circumstances of their own choosing, but under circumstances already existing, given and transmitted from the past The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living And just as they seem to be occupied with revolutionizing themselves and their surroundings, creating something that did not previously exist, precisely in such epochs of revolutionary crisis they anxiously conjure up the spirits of the past to their service, borrowing from them names, battle slogans, and costumes in order to present this new scene in world history in time-honoured disguise and borrowed language (Karl Marx, 1852/1972, p.437)

This is one of the most famous quotations of the Marxist view on the role of individuals on transforming societies While Marx argues that history produces and repeats itself as it transmits its ‘nightmarish’ orders to the present, he acknowledges individuals’ capacity for action This can be done even when chains of historical structures exist as they can be

Experiences of Study Abroad: Motives, Intercultural Encounters, and Identity Work

Motives for Crossing Borders and Studying Abroad

In order to achieve a sophisticated understanding of sojourners’ experiences, research should consider their agency and personal choices, which are based on motives, attitudes, desires, and the meanings they assign to their performance We do not only want to examine performance in terms of difference (and highlight it!) between them and the locals (or natives), rather the intentions and choices behind such distinctive appliance of language should be a matter of concern Kinginger (2013, p.354) convincingly argues that if researchers do not question the rationale and intentions underlying some language forms and choices in SA contexts, we cannot discover whether these choices and forms are ‘dis- preferred’ or ‘unknown’

Sticking to the holistic approach this study adopts, investigating the reasons for studying abroad will be a transdisciplinary issue It will approach the issue from overlapping areas including migration, sociology, and psychology Motives for moving abroad are generally various Chircov et al (2007) maintain that scholars from different areas of inquiry approach this phenomenon in line with the main focus of their disciplines Some sociologists, for instance, talk about political, social, economic, and structural ‘push-pull’ factors to move abroad (Richmond, 1993) The push-and-pull model of international migration (ibid) has been a tool employed by various scholars to conceptualise migration motivational factors including that of international students (Chircov et al., 2007) Within this model, ‘proactive migrants’ (Richmond, 1993), i.e., those who choose to travel willingly/voluntarily such as professionals and workers on contracts, are ‘pulled’ by promises of a better future, economic stability, or social mobility Unlike ‘proactive’ travellers, ‘reactive migrants’ (ibid), i.e., those who involuntarily migrate as a result of a threat, fear of persecution, or being unable to return and whose movement is severely restricted, are ‘pushed’ away by genuine threats Richmond (1993, p.11) mentions ‘stateless persons and those fleeing generalised violence’ as an example of reactive behaviour Richmond refuses the proactive-reactive dichotomy and perceives the constructs as two ends of a continuum, where most migrants fall between them Regarding international students in particular, common push factors are lack of opportunities at home countries, lower educational quality, unavailability of subjects, employers’ preference of oversea qualifications, political and economic challenges (Wilkins et al., 2012) Common pull factors, on the other hand, include quality of education, reputation of institution and its ranking, easy admission, safety, employment prospects, and opportunity to improve English skills and experience a different culture (ibid) However, it might be interesting to probe which of these factors is more influential in the decision-making of studying abroad Wilkins and Huisman (2011a, p.308) found that push factors are significantly less influential than pull factors as socioeconomic conditions have improved in most countries, which has implications for academic institutions to focus on developing their attractiveness and pull more students, if they want to keep competing in the global ‘crowded market’ (as indicated in Chapter Two) Yet, they acknowledge the un-generalisability of this finding For Palestinian students, for example, this is hardly the case since push factors are significant for the motivation to study overseas Pull factors become apparent especially when these students consider the country/institution of destination Some students do not even have the luxury of thinking about the host country when they have few options (financial assistance in limited countries, for example) and primarily think of fleeing their tight places (Gaza is an example)

I agree with Richmond (1993) that there is no hard and fast line between proactive and reactive migration, even when we talk about the same context because deciding to travel is not merely about external pull and push factors, but also about the humans themselves In fact, it is a complex and multi-layered process where the macro structural forces integrate with the micro personal, psychological motives to bring about such an important decision

On an individual level, the role of capital, socio-economic background, and habitus is substantially important in the decision making of study abroad (John and Asker, 2001; Salisbury et al., 2009) According to student-choice theory (John and Asker, 2001), students’ decisions are situated and shaped/framed by their habitus, i.e., the beliefs and perceptions individuals acquire through their environment and social class (Bourdieu, 1986) Sociologists talk about different forms of capital that affect students’ decisions including cultural (individual’s cultural knowledge, language skills, and educational achievements), social (individual’s access to information, resources, and support), financial (any economic resource measured by money), and human capital (capacities such as skills and knowledge) Salisbury’s et al (2009) research on the intent to study abroad reveals ‘a complex interplay’ between socio-economic background and social and cultural capital accumulated before in the student-choice construct They observe that low or average social and cultural capital is likely to prevent students from valuing the benefits (thus affecting their investment) of SA even when there is financial assistance Therefore, they call for more consideration of the contexts from where students come and within which their capitals are accumulated when probing choices students make about educational experiences

Delving deeper in motivational psychology, Chircov et al (2007) decided to apply notions of Self-Determination Theory (SDT) to study international students’ motives to cross borders and study abroad SDT is a theory of personality, human motivation, and optimal functioning developed by Ryan and Deci (2000) According to SDT, two aspects of motivation need to be addressed: 1 the level of self-determination of people, and 2 the content of goals they strive to achieve (ibid) As for the level of self-determination, it is measured by the degree to which an individual's behaviour is seen to be autonomous versus controlled Chircov et al (2007) identify two types of autonomous motivation: intrinsic and internalised When people are engaged in an activity because it is interesting and enjoyable, they are intrinsically motivated

An example of this is when students travel to a foreign university because they find this journey exciting in itself People are also said to have autonomous motivation when they have an ‘identified regulation’ (ibid, p.203), i.e., an activity in which people get engaged to achieve certain goals that are external to the activity, but they have been internalised and personalised When people move abroad to study and then attain personally relevant life goals, they are demonstrating an internalised form of autonomous motivation Sometimes, though, people fail to internalise the regulation of their behaviour Two types of regulation emerge as a result: external and introjected External regulation occurs when people do an activity to avoid punishment or get external rewards, e.g., when students travel because their parents insist on it or promise rewards for doing it Parental influence here is coercive, if not internalised, it will remain external However, when students partially internalise the activity, for example they choose to travel to gain social approval and meet what is expected of them, then their behaviour is introjected (ibid)

People differ in their motivation not only in terms of their degree of self-determination but also with regard to the content of goals and intentions they pursue to attain Chircov et al (2007) conceptualise these goals as being context specific Their main finding, which was already predicted and hypothesised, was that those who have higher degrees of self- determined motivation to travel and study abroad are more likely to work harder, culturally adapt, and be successful academically and socially Finally, they remark that the level of self- determination and content of goals are two independent sources of motivation as they independently account for the variance in outcomes They assert that it is the level of autonomy which strongly predicts peoples’ behaviours, not the content of their motivation To conclude, the content of motivation remains a largely personal and contextual matter What is crucial, though, is the degree to which sojourners’ intents, aspirations, and motivations are informed, and how they can serve as an effective drive for a successful journey abroad.

Cross-cultural Interaction and Social Circles in Study Abroad Settings

Ask any applied linguist confidentially, in the corner of a bar, about their own time abroad as a student, and the emphasis will never be on enhanced TL lexis and mean length of utterance, but rather on romance, on discovery of self and others, on people and places (Coleman, 2013, p.29)

Leading efficient interaction between groups of culturally diverse backgrounds has become a crucial skill to grow in contexts of difference and diversity This skill/ competence/ awareness goes beyond linguistic proficiency whose advanced levels do not guarantee successful cross- cultural interaction, as indicated by research conducted on intercultural communication in L2 contexts (eg Fernandez, 2016; Kinginger, 2015; 2013; Jackson, 2013) The reasons can be rooted in students’ local contexts (eg non-culturally sensitive, monolithic pedagogies to language teaching) as well as their SA contexts Fernandez (2016) problematises study abroad settings and the automatic cultural and linguistic ‘authenticity’ ascribed to them, i.e., that SA provides unique access to authentic cultural language use and cites studies which show that many sojourners do not have access to ‘legitimacy’ as group members of the L2 community (Lave and Wenger, 1991) For example, Kinginger (2015; 2013), Brown (2013), and Siegal (1996) illustrate that international students acquire a limited range of positions (being foreigners and outsiders), which limits their situational language resources Moreover, some students may opt for limiting their ‘interactive repertoires’ (Kinginger, 2009) even when they form social bonds with the locals of their host society This can be a result of students’ heavy reliance on classroom language/ing which they carry to their interaction settings outside the classroom, thus they engage in ‘recreating the classroom in other, diverse cultural settings’ (Miller and Ginsburg,1995, p.312) As for the expert language speakers (locals), their reception and positioning of international students as foreign and non-native may cause them to use a neutral language as an act of politeness and a way of understanding and respecting difference by sparing those students the hassle of grappling with complex language forms Iino (2006) documents what she refers to as ‘cultural dependency’: some American students were constructed by their host Japanese families as helpless and in need of assistance to manage their sojourn life in Japan These host families tended to avoid correcting grammatical errors and inappropriate language use As Kinginger (2013, p.348) argues, the foreigner status of students was interpreted as ‘exempting all parties from observance of local norms for politeness’ Reactions to this differ: some students will insist on learning and using the norms and informal forms, while others will enjoy the exemption and freedom from constraints resulting from their foreignness (ibid)

Regardless of the different scenarios of language-mediated interactions, intercultural communication in the particular contexts of unprecedented mobility and diversity is challenging to those individuals who are required to grapple with the strangeness around them while putting their linguistic resources in competent and effective use to project themselves and their ideas and preserve their self-image To maximise ‘authenticity’ of language use (referred to above), sojourners need to go beyond written, academic registers and forms of language and engage with their host society’s conversation habits and language use The above discussion highlighted how this can be blocked by sojourners’ own capacities and practices as well as their assigned statuses Failure to achieve intercultural communication can have severe implications on students’ self-perceptions When communication in L2 poses a threat to its users’ self-image, feelings of anxiety, intimidation, and reduced self-esteem emerge This can result in withdrawal from social interaction and/or resorting to silence (Pellegrino Aveni, 2005)

To safeguard their self-image and refrain from awkward and embarrassing situations, individuals tend to employ ‘defensive and protective practices’ (Goffman, 1959) which attempt to manage and minimise any discrediting anticipated An embodiment of those

‘protective practises’ can be seen in sojourners’ social circles and identifications When sojourners identify with and cluster around their co-national groups, they seek a sense of familiarity, security, and protection away from outer social spheres whose members might disturb their social face and confidence It is important to highlight that ghettoisation can have many justifications and interpretations: it can be a matter of power in the sense of being tied to the ground as in the case of Palestinians who cannot escape their ghettos (Skovsmose, 2012), while ‘student (cultural) ghettoisation’ (Fay and Spinthourakis-Katsillis, 2000) can be an anticipatory ‘protective practice’, a reactive ‘corrective practice’, a discursive strategy/mechanism to coping with life (Pitts, 2009) and coming to grips with complexity and unfamiliarity, an essential tool for bridging and reaching out to other diverse social circles (Bochner et al 1977), or a constellation of all these practices as is the case with this research participants who (almost) went through all these meanings and phases Ghettoisation is further discussed in Chapter Seven

As for sojourners’ social circles and socialisation practises, Coleman’s (2013) model to account for their friendship and social interaction patterns is often cited Coleman (2013) proposes a dynamic ‘concentric circles model of socialisation while abroad’ This model is based on Bochner et al’s (1977) functional model of social relations In the centre lies the inner circle which refers to co-nationals, the middle circle refers to other outsiders, while the outer circle refers to the locals in the host society He (2015) maintains that students usually begin socialising with their co-national groups, and when they dedicate more time and motivation, they can add other outsiders to their networks If circumstances allow, (including sojourn period, personal motivation, initiatives, and aspirations) the locals can be added to the expandable social circles The circles are additive, not mutually exclusive, and represent progression rather than intensity Thus, Coleman’s model can account for possible longitudinal changes and adopts a dynamic perspective to friendship-making (ibd, 2013) Unlike Bochner’s et al views, Coleman (2015) considers interaction with the host nationals as ‘a key to successful adjustment’ (p.42), while interacting with co-nationals ‘reduces contact with locals’ (p.43) He (2013) considers it an institutional responsibility to take deliberate actions to ‘mix and mingle’ to minimise student ghettoisation However, he concludes that ‘we cannot ethically tell our outgoing students who they should eat, drink and sleep with, but we may certainly ask them when they get back (2015, p.47) In this research, while I utilise Coleman’s model to describe sojourners’ social circles, I acknowledge the critiques associated with the ‘socialisation’ this model attempts to theorise Participants were not role players following scripts to socialise They actively reflected on their positions in their new context and made decisions on who to socialise with depending on their needs and circumstances (as argued in Chapter Seven) This rendered their social practices less predictable, which contradicts with functionalist views on socialisation where individuals are

‘oversocialised’ and supposed to conform to society’s expectations on how and who to socialise with

The possibility and efficiency of intercultural communication depends immensely on how interactants position themselves and each other This section started with showing how the positioning of sojourners as being foreign and non-native affected their language practices and possibilities for development This invokes issues of power differences and inequality Besides language, the wider political spectrum is also replete with power asymmetries where international students are perceived and positioned as outsiders and ‘migrants’ whose numbers should be monitored and controlled (as discussed in 2.2) Such policies reproduce and nurture xenophobic, discriminatory discourses and practices Smith and Khawaja (2011), for example, maintain that international students from the Middle East, Africa, India, and Latin America are more likely to experience discrimination compared to their European counterparts This illustrates that international students’ places of origin seem to trigger different perceptions among the locals in the host societies

Positioned as foreigners and migrants, such sojourners become vulnerable in the face of these non-hospitable discourses, which profoundly affects and shapes their socialisation practises while abroad In interaction, individuals seek comfort, understanding, respect, and security, and thus they (un)consciously try to avoid threatening encounters which challenge their self- perception As a reaction to this, it is not surprising that individuals may cling to their familiar networks which provide security and refuge in contexts of mobility and difference, as the model of sojourners’ social interaction/networks above indicates While studies on acculturation and adaptation in migratory contexts stress the importance of intercultural mingling and contact in coping and integration in new contexts, sojourners who grapple with the difficulties of their sojourn on a daily basis can evaluate the affordances and hurdles of their contexts and decide whether to opt for or out of intercultural communication.

Identity Performance in Study Abroad Contexts

Identity has attracted different approaches since it started to gain prominence across different disciplines One of the earliest approaches to identity was the humanist, essentialist ones As the name suggests, essentialist conceptions view individuals’ identities as essential, fixed, unified, and independent of embodied experience (Pascale, 2011) These singular notions of identity as being self-determined and distant from social constructions started to be contested as part of the postmodern era in the late 20th century Poststructuralist approaches, as opposed to essentialist ones, started to gain momentum through the work and ideas of intellectuals such as Foucault, who was an authority in changing understandings of identity towards ‘a discursive production of the subject’ (Foucault, 1972) In sociolinguistics, these ideas have been built upon by viewing identity as processual, negotiated, plural, contingent, co-constructed in interaction (De Fina, 2011; Blackledge & Pavlenko, 2001; Norton Peirce, 1995) and intersectional (Crenshaw, 1989) Block (2007, p.864) summarises post-structuralist thinking as: moving beyond the search, associated with structuralism, for unchanging, universal laws of human behaviour and social phenomena to more nuanced, multileveled, and, ultimately, complicated framings of the world around us

Some theorists have not perceived essentialist and poststructuralist approaches as binary Rather, they have attempted to establish a middle ground For example, Davies and Harre (1990) argue that ‘human beings are characterised both by continuous personal identity and by discontinuous personal diversity’ Baynham (2015) shares similar views and develops them as he draws on cross-cultural, migratory contexts as rich sites for identity work He argues that

“identity brought along”, those relatively stable identity positions, often thought of as essentialised, are in fact sedimented and built up over time through many repeated encounters in which identity is “brought about” performatively’ (p.84)

In this argument, Baynham (2015) does not see identities 'brought about’ and ‘brought along’ as dichotomous The repetition of the interactional ‘brought about’ identities leads to the accumulation of the relatively static ‘brought along’ identities

In Study Abroad research, identity has established itself as a crucial concept in the literature (eg Kinginger, 2013, 2015; Benson et al., 2012; Block, 2007) In contexts of immersion, the negotiation of identity usually occurs within unequal power relations and is usually interpreted in terms of traditional identity categories, such as gender, nationality, language, and social class (Kinginger, 2013) One of the main arguments surrounding identity work in intercultural contexts is that exposure to the unfamiliar destabilises and shakes taken-for- granted views of the self and the world Kinginger (2013) argues that while SA encounters may generate feelings of ambivalence, discomfort, and anxiety, they also have the potential to bring about many skills and capabilities such as intercultural awareness, multilingualism, empathy, and global engagement Chapter seven tackles identity work in contexts of mobility and diversity and highlights both the struggles experienced and the capabilities gained out of the sojourn

This study draws on Benson et al’s (2013, p.19) multifaceted conception of identity which views L2 identities as of six facets: 1 Embodied identity: the self as a mobile point of perception located in a particular body; 2 Reflexive identity: the self’s view of the self, incorporating self- concept and attributes and capacities; 3 Projected identity: the self as it is semiotically represented to others in interaction; 4 Recognised (perceived) identity: the self as it is preconceived and recognised by others in the course of interaction; 5 Imagined identity: the self’s view of its future possibilities; and 6 Identity categories and sources: the self as it is represented (by self or others) using established social categories and semiotic resources (e.g linguistic identity, gendered identity, academic identity etc.)

This study responds to calls for attention to an under-researched identity category, i.e., social class David Block (2015) argues that there has been what he terms as ‘social class erasure’ in Applied Linguistics because it has received little or no attention in publications addressing identity Furthermore, he maintains that social class is different from, although interrelated with, other identity categories such as gender, ethnicity, race, nationality, religion, and sexuality He draws on Nancy Fraser’s (1995) Redistribution-Recognition Dilemma (RRD) to make the distinction: social class falls within the realm of ‘redistribution’ (which is

‘socioeconomic injustice [ ] rooted in the political-economic structure of society’ (p.70), such as exploitation and economic marginalisation), while the other categories of identity relate to ‘recognition’ and respect for differences (cultural injustice [ ] rooted in social patterns of representation, interpretation, and communication’ (p.71), such as cultural domination, non-recognition, and disrespect Fraser notes that the focus on ‘recognition’ has de-centred ‘redistribution’ in research which contributed to the rise of neoliberalism as a dominant discourse from the 1970s onwards While social class is about the (re)distribution of material resources, it is also about a wide range of daily experiences (Block, 2015) Block lists a table of a constellation of dimensions/ daily experiences to embrace the notion of social class, which is not merely an economic construct These multiple dimensions of class include property, wealth, occupation, place of residence, education, social networking, consumption patterns, symbolic behaviour, spatial relations, mobility, and life chances (p.3)

In L2 settings, including SA, there is a correlation between social class and access to and success in English language learning especially in countries with a postcolonial relationship with English (Block, 2015; Butler, 2013) Some research studied the interrelationship between the social class dimension and language learning in multilingual settings For example, Gao’s (2010) research sheds light on the class-mediated experiences of wealthy Chinese students in the UK He posits that those upper-class students maintained/ reinforced their sense of middle/upper class positions during their English language journeys abroad and adjusted themselves culturally as they perceived and developed new habits and behaviours associated with upper class in the UK Gao’s work illustrates that individuals can maintain their home class positions after crossing borders Simpson and Cook (2010), on the other hand, investigated the ‘downward mobility’ trajectory (declassing) of Tobi, a migrant Nigerian student who had aspired to progress up in education but had an experience of moving down due to tensions between Tobi’s use of English and the variety he is expected to orient towards as well as the literacy assessment he had to go through Experiences of declassing (following Bourdieu’s (1978) déclassement) are expected for many migrants and sojourners whose movement to different contexts makes them lose/drop their sense of social class (Sharma, 2021) as their capitals start to attract different values and identities become challenged These examples show that class is important in maintaining privilege or causing disadvantage in contexts of transition and difference

Against the context of increased mobility, some scholars problematise the concept of class and its relevance and transferability across national borders Simple static paradigms that assign low class status to mobile ethnic minorities and their languages can no longer be assumed nor straightforwardly predicted (Sharma, 2021; Blommaert and Rampton, 2012) Sharma (2021) challenges notions of British social class and argues that foreign codes can create ‘subtle recalibration’, ‘whereby emergent global prestige may start to outrank Britishness, localness, even nativeness’ (p.697) Here, this indicates a shift from national vertical social systems towards ‘lateral, cross-national competition among ‘apex varieties’ (ibid, p.697) Still, Sharma (ibid) does not perceive such changes as a subversion of the British class hierarchy, but ‘a reorganizing and revaluing of a global network of class hierarchies’ (ibid) All in all, this discussion on the different approaches and theorisation of social class in L2, mobile, migratory contexts highlights the complexity of class construction in such contexts and its multiple scenarios/possibilities and varied trajectories.

Conclusion and Summary

This chapter has engaged with several theoretical strands invited from different but related disciplines in an attempt to theoretically foreground and understand the sociolinguistic trajectories of sojourners in UK HE The first thread has shown the role of English language learning, teaching, and assessment in perpetuating certain hegemonic ideologies and perceptions of English Such perceptions usually draw a simplistic and unrealistic picture that does not capture the amorphous and dynamic sociolinguistic world of English, which contributes to a chasm between learning English and living in and using English This divide is often felt and experienced by those who cross borders and change contexts where their linguistic capabilities are put to test and challenged, thus leading to many (re)conceptualisations of their linguistic resources and identities The second strand has dealt with mobility as a sociolinguistic phenomenon It mainly featured the works of Blommaert (2010) and Canagarajah (2013) who proposed two major approaches to language practices in contexts of mobility/globalisation While Blommaert’s vision highlights the role of structural inequality and power relations in conditioning and limiting individuals’ performances, Canagarajah’s approach accentuates the role of human agency and rescaling/up-scaling in interaction The discussion has argued for the need to problematise both approaches to account for the complexity, unpredictability, and context-sensitivity of human interaction in unfamiliar contexts of mobility The last section has looked into experiences of study abroad starting from motivations to intercultural communication/socialisation practises and identity work in these settings The next chapter moves from the theoretical to the practical aspect of the research, i.e., tracing and documenting its methodological framework

This research is an investigation of the social and linguistic trajectories of Palestinian postgraduate students in UK Higher Education The main aim of this study is to develop a deep and nuanced understanding of the effect of mobility on those sojourners’ relationship and conceptualisation of English language, their identity (trans)formation, and their social encounters Insights/understandings from participants are mainly related – but not restricted to:

 Their reflections on their ‘English on the move’ and the different linguistic encounters which shape their views of and relationship with the language

 Their (re)conceptualisations of themselves as mobile individuals in a new context and how they (re)class/ (re)position themselves in relation to others

 Their sociocultural encounters/interaction/networking patterns in the new UK context Following Creswell’s (2014, 2018, p.5) framework for research which illustrates that a research approach involves philosophical assumptions and distinct methods, I start with identifying the underpinning philosophical ideas or ‘worldviews’ (ibid) that have influenced the practice of this research, i.e., the meta-theoretical Then, I move to discuss the methodological choices and challenges with specific reference to the ‘mobilities’ paradigm, i.e., the theoretical level Next, I discuss the research design by tracking and justifying the use of a qualitative, longitudinal case study strategy Following that, I try to position myself as a researcher by tackling my role and relationship with the research participants The rest of the chapter provides a detailed account on the research practice, e.g., participant recruitment, introducing them, fieldwork arrangements and methods, and ethical issues The chapter also explains how the data have been analysed and reported As such, it functions as a systematic record which documents the methodological choices and procedures of the study and traces the chronological development of the research design.

Worldviews and Philosophical Assumptions

Subjectivist Epistemology

This study adopts a subjectivist epistemological stance where I have collected data about how participants make sense of their own experiences in various interactions in the UK This epistemological position rejects absolutist, positivist views on reality as being objective and independent of context and interaction (Cunliffe, 2011; Moksha, 2013) While positivists stress that reality should be based on scientific evidence, subjectivists reject notions of single realities and maintain that reality can be perceived through individuals’ subjective interpretation (Moksha, 2013) As a social researcher, I believe that meaning is interpreted and constructed by individuals in social interaction, thus it is not objective As I investigate the sociolinguistic experiences of Palestinian sojourners in the study abroad context of the

UK, I aim for and draw on participants’ subjective interpretation and meaning construction of the world around them, which is usually associated with such types of qualitative inquiry.

Constructivist Ontology

As repeatedly indicated, this study investigates the linguistic and social experiences of Palestinian sojourners in a mobility context of study abroad To this end, an interpretive constructionist ontological approach is adopted which acknowledges the presence and representation of multiple realities These realities are socially constructed through interaction between the researcher and participants to capture and represent experiences Within this rubric of understanding, knowledge or truth is multiple and interpreted in different ways It is also relative to time, place, contexts, individuals and their circumstances (Cunliffe, 2011) Here, this study investigates participants’ experiences of time and place and how they have evolved in different contexts and discourses This suggests that reality is bounded by society, history, politics, and norms/values Historical and social settings are brought to the context of participants’ experiences (Creswell, 2003) Hence, research underpinned by constructivism should accentuate the role of context to understand (bounded) realities and how individuals construct their world(views) (Charmaz, 2008) Given that constructed knowledge offers contextualised, situated meanings, it becomes less generalisable and less predictable

The central issue of this research which revolves around investigating the influence of mobility (as a context of sojourners’ experiences) on their construction of their English, identities, and social networks provides a good example of the role of context and social interaction in the (re)construction of realities Sojourners needed to interact with culturally diverse members of their host society to create meanings, represent realities, and navigate and adapt in the new context of mobility, unfamiliarity, difference and diversity In this context, a constructivist ontology helps ‘to understand the complex nature of people in their social- cultural context and to describe the meaning they associate with their experiences and actions' (Bear-Lehman, 2002, p.85) In short, constructivism listens to different narratives as potential representatives of truth regarding a certain social phenomenon Here, every research participant constructs/represents his/her own version of reality according to how s/he makes sense of the sojourn experience The meaning participants attribute to their sojourn experiences is discursive, not stable, and constantly (re)shaped as they go through new and different experiences/situations Thus, the analysis of sojourners' narratives will illustrate their subjective, diverse, (and shifting) constructions of their encounters and conditions abroad and the impact these have on their individual (sociolinguistic) trajectories in the UK.

Mobility: Mobilising Research?

The true unity of apprehension is secured only by… a dissolution of dogmatic rigidity into the living and moving process (Georg Simmel, 1907, p.110)

Having identified the philosophical (meta-theoretical) underpinnings of this study, this section tackles methodology in relation to a key theoretical notion underpinning this research, i.e., mobility This strategy is consistent with Stelma’s et al (2013) notion of ‘research as intentional activity’ Intentionality does not only operate at the theoretical level Where possible, I articulate overt intentional choices/practices as I talk about how the study has been operationalised This entails acknowledging that this chapter exhibits a fluctuation in voice and style, which metaphorically goes in rhythmic harmony with the dominant theme of the study: mobility/movement This is another area of intentionality in this chapter: the language

I use I will overtly opt for words, terms, and metaphors that invoke a sense of movement and change to remain focused on the topic and to highlight my commitment to what being a researcher of mobility experiences in a mobility context means and entails- even at a lexical level

As noted earlier, this research is about mobility Had participants remained home, this whole project would not have seen light So, it was the movement of Palestinian sojourners to the

UK (myself included) that initiated the thought of a research proposal, and it is the mobility context that was enveloping and guiding the development of this academic inquiry/ journey

As stated before, this study is of a transdisciplinary nature which may flag up some concerns regarding integrating many disciplines/areas consistently Among them, mobility stands out as the strongest thread that has a great potential to pull all other research elements together in order to chronicle the story of this research Mobility is tackled from a methodological perspective in this discussion

In the early twentieth century, Philosopher Georg Simmel, quoted above, cautioned against

‘dogmatic rigidity’ in science calling for ‘dissolving’ it into ‘the living and moving process’

In other words, to mobilise research A century later, ‘mobilities perspective’ penetrated and crossed the boundaries of many disciplines The contemporary picture of global flowing had provided both a backdrop and rich content for a wide range of research from different disciplines, e.g., Globalisation (Bauman, 1998); Human Geography (Cresswell, 2006, 2010,

2012, 2014); Sociology (Urry, 2000, 2007; Sheller, 2014, 2016, 2017); Language and its education/teaching (Blommaert, 2010, 2014, 2016; Canagarajah, 2013, 2018) to mention but a few There has been an obvious shift in social research with a move from ‘spaces of places’ to ‘spaces of flows’ (Castells, 1996), which was later depicted as ‘a global turn’, ‘mobile turn’, or ‘spatial turn’ (D’Andrea et al., 2011; Sheller, 2017) Prior to that, within the classical sedentary social theory, mobility was almost neglected in discussions of social struggle or political ideology (ibid) The current mobilities scholarship carries heavy empirical weight as it destabilises the norms and ‘recodes’ social phenomena, thus reflecting ‘the deregulatory, commoditizing and ubiquitous trends’ (D’Andrea et al., 2011, p.150) Contrary to the fast empirical advancements in mobilities theory, though, efforts to establish more fluid methods seem to lag behind Few methodological innovations have started to find their way across the research community whereas the predominant stance is the adoption of conventional and traditional methods/approaches which are usually critiqued as producing stagnant and uncritical accounts of mobility

Thus far, Simmel’s call to mobilise research has been attended to in theory, but research is also about practice and conventions These practices also need to be criticised differently within a mobilities paradigm Many mobility scholars and theorists have been lately incorporating innovative/fluid methodology in their works For instance, D’Andrea et al., (2011) argue that methodology should not be reduced to a choice and application of methods Rather, research is better understood when situated in the context of the specific theoretical and epistemological commitments of the researcher This study takes this on board as it shifts traditional focus on investigating international students’ mobility experience in terms of language acquisition and social integration to a more nuanced and individualistic examination of those students’ lives after crossing borders This shift accentuates the role of mobility both conceptually and methodologically It also poses critical questions to it, being an object of study (researching Palestinian sojourners’ mobile experiences in the UK) and a methodological concern For example, some of the concerns deal with how the mobility scholarship involves a rethinking of research practices in the face of the challenges brought about by mobility (i.e., rethinking methodology from a mobility angle) and to what degree (mobility) research addresses implicit assumptions not commonly documented in research

Cresswell (2012) calls for ‘distinct exemplars of research’ to capture and represent complex forms of mobility To start with, the researcher’s own movement across disciplines, spaces, and institutional settings are important conditions and expressions of research (D’Andrea et al., 2011) Mobility in research and for research takes various forms in nature, frequency, distance, or degree For example, a researcher moves across theoretical disciplines for a deeper understanding of mobility, moves towards subjects/participants located in different places to collect data, or moves to access and analyse datasets stored in physical or virtual spaces from afar These mobilities are not mere ‘externalities’ to research, but they often shape research procedures and researcher’s relationship with participants and materials According to D’Andrea et al (2011), the research journey is traditionally viewed in terms of limitations, expectations, and opportunities where the researcher is a privileged metropolitan traveller enjoying the capital of mobility whereas the participants are disadvantaged with restricted mobility This perspective runs the risk of predetermining the actual field of research or even directing and influencing its results With reference to my research, this view is problematic While it is true that I enjoyed being a free traveller to do research (backed by a powerful academic institution in a world-leading developed country), there had to be some arrangements to claim that privilege For example, I had to go through a long process of applying for a studentship to fund my PhD journey After I won it, I had to apply and compete for another internal fund from the University of Roehampton to support my fieldwork because my main funding does not cover research logistics (travel, incentives, etc.) My participants, although coming from a challenging and unprivileged context and being busy with their academic studies, are not necessarily suffering restricted mobility Data revealed they enjoyed being in the UK and travelled across the country as tourists Therefore, by no means does this research pre-supposedly negotiate participants’ experiences in terms of struggle or lack of privilege, unless data indicate the opposite This relational, multi-layered, and context-sensitive nature of mobility in research practicalities has made it a challenging task to bridge the gap between the advanced discourses of mobility and the application of mobile methods

Nevertheless, as articulated earlier, this has not stopped scholars from suggesting some new innovative ways to conduct research ‘on the move’ Büscher and Urry (2009) maintain that research methods need to be ‘on the move’ in two senses: 1 when researchers track the movement of their research subjects, including the physical travel 2 researchers turn to be

‘social organisations of moves’ as a result of moving with or because of their subjects There are several ways of getting involved in patterns of movement while conducting research At the immediate level, this research involves interaction with participants in ‘interactive sites’ Both participants and I travelled to conduct research All of them came to London, where I am based, when they participated in the first focus group and subsequent interviews I, in turn, visited their cities and universities when I conducted the individual interviews Not only did these little mobilities contribute to the fulfilment of this research, they were also a part of participants’ (and my) big travel experience What is more, they even caused and shaped it (partially) A participant, for example, reflecting on his first visit to London to participate in the first focus group, thanked me ‘for providing him with a reason to come down to London from the North’ As I accompanied him to do some sightseeing around the city, he was actively engaged in taking pictures and drawing comparisons between his city ‘which sleeps at 5 pm’ and ‘the very vibrant and lively London’ Discussions like these that arise from conducting mobile research give deeper understandings of recollected experiences, situations, and places They, furthermore, shape and define the atmosphere of research as well as the relationship between the researcher and participants and the future of their interaction What is more interesting and significant than defining the atmosphere of research, movement across spaces formulates places and situations This can happen when, for examples, ‘there is a demand to assemble fragmented and mobile geographies’ (Büscher and Urry, 2009, p.107)

In other words, participants in this research negotiated their situated trajectories where the need to integrate and describe micro/geographies and events arose routinely They moved back and forth across geographical and historical spaces (spatio-temporally) and ‘assembled’ them as they reflected on their sociolinguistic experiences abroad

The general approach to mobility research can fit under the umbrella of ‘follow the thing/the people’ strategy (Cresswell, 2012; Sheller and Urry, 2016; Lash and Lury, 2006; Büscher and Urry, 2009) Following mobile people can take on many forms starting from travelling with them and visiting them, to following their news/updates for a lengthy period of time Objects, capitals, skills, and assets also move as humans move Effects of mobility on humans and objects are diverse For instance, some of these assets (e.g., linguistic repertoires) increase in value as they travel while others lose it (e.g., deskilling) in the new contexts Following processes of change in value needs appropriate methods to track, document, and discern them Lash and Lury (2006) suggest involving a ‘cultural biography’ strategy when researching objects Adopting ‘a cultural biography’ perspective means that a researcher is not solely interested in the production of change nor when it happened, but mainly in the process and contexts of it In fact, change should not be pre-assumed or foregrounded even when we talk about one of the most life-altering trajectories (travel) Change might not happen for many reasons including: personal attributes, contextual factors, it might be too minor to observe, or it might just need more time to happen Documenting and understanding travel experiences as processes does not limit them to be perceived in terms of change solely Rather, this strategy has the potential to account for continuities and endurances

By way of illustration, in this research, I took into account participants’ historical backgrounds in relation to their English language learning to understand their language situation after moving to the UK I analysed where their knowledge of English had come from, who/what had shaped their constructions of it, what the important stages of their lives with English were, the struggles, the achievements, how their English shifted in different contexts and why, and what happened to their relationship with English when they realised it had changed its value (if it had) These issues do not only mark or focus on change, they also explain its contexts and document its gradual process (Kopytof, 1986)

After all, following and tracing these processes requires a longitudinal research practice Barak Kalir (2013), in his longitudinal five-year study of the mobility experience of a Chinese immigrant and worker in Israel, calls for looking at mobility from the eyes of those experiencing it Being an 'innovative mobile method', he suggests that social analysts need to

‘document a full course of the journey, which begins long before and ends much after the speed cameras’ locations (ibid, p.315), i.e., to research mobility longitudinally and holistically (more on the longitudinal aspect of my research in Section 4.3.3)

Research Design

Qualitative Approach: Rationale and Challenges

This study adopted a longitudinal qualitative approach to make sense of how Palestinian sojourners perceive their sociolinguistic trajectories in the UK This approach was used to answer questions about experiences and perspectives (of participants) As such, it had the merit of enabling the researcher to have access to in-depth, complex, and biographical data While some scholars argue that qualitative data are ‘not amenable to counting or measuring’ (Hammarberg et al., 2016), others believe that conducting qualitative research does not mean rejecting the use of quantifications out of hand When precise descriptions are needed, the ideological commitment to qualitative methodology should not be too strict For example, the numbers of participants (many, most of, all but one, etc.) were used when describing and analysing their experiences Thematic analysis also produced some quantitative results, e.g., see chart 7.1 in Chapter Seven

Qualitative research is often criticised for its small samples and thus lack of generalisability This research, however, does not intend to generalise its findings to a larger population Its main concern is the specific and biographical trajectories of this group of international students, their unique routes, contextual encounters, and personal conceptualisations Still, those insights can offer a great deal of understanding, appreciation, transformation (even), and relatability (maybe) to many others As such, the value of this research is not expected to stem from its generalisability, but the empowerment and advocacy it has the potential to offer Through this research, sojourners’ agency is supported, and their privilege is expanded and prioritised by providing them with an academic space to communicate their under- documented trajectories The value of this research could also extend to the British Council, the funder of this research project and some other participants’ studies through the HESPAL scheme The British Council aims to ‘upgrade academic staff in Palestinian universities’ through higher studies Through such research, the institution can track its sojourners’ realistic experiences, agency, disturbances and views throughout the academic year and can adjust its plans and targets based on the findings It can also transfer/report knowledge (e.g., in presentations and workshops addressed) to prospective future sojourners who can have informed decisions as they plan to embark on their journeys abroad Implications for practice arising from this research are further discussed in Chapter Eight

Contrary to some quantitative views that perceive qualitative research as being lightweight (Al-busaidi, 2008; Hammarberg et al., 2016), conducting a qualitative inquiry is not an easy option Complex philosophical and theoretical frameworks are needed as a start, as explained in 4.1 Analysis of ‘messy’ and huge amounts of data is conducted without the use of systematic and straightforward statistical rules Moreover, integrity and robustness of analysis/findings need to be defended by different means: trustworthiness, credibility, applicability, and consistency (Leininger, 1994)

4.3.1.1 A Note on the Trustworthiness and Credibility of this Study

Reporting on the validity or truth value of qualitative research requires strategies that depart from positivist approaches to knowledge/truth Qualitative research is credible and trustworthy ‘when its results, presented with adequate descriptions of context, are recognizable to people who share the experience and those who care for or treat them’ (Hammarberg et al., 2016, p.500) They (ibid) and Creswell (2013) identify many practices to prove the internal validity of qualitative inquiry, of which the following techniques have been implemented in this research:

 A robust procedural description and details of data generation, management, and justifications for methodological choices are explicit and traceable

 Reflexivity, i.e., clarifying position, bias, and influence of the researcher on the research In this chapter, I comment on my positionality and relationship with participants in this research

 Triangulation or answering research questions in several ways Although this study makes use of two methods to collect data (focus groups and individual interviews), it is not necessarily the case that these specific two methods achieve this end, i.e., checking the degree of reliability/credibility of responses The longitudinal aspect of this study has a greater potential to build trust, return to earlier questions, observe patterns, and check interpretation

 Substantial description of the analysis process with direct quotations from the data is to be presented in the data analysis chapter Congruence between excerpts of data and interpretation raises the credibility of research and allows others particularly those who share the same experience(s) to reflect on, recognise, and transfer information to their context (re-contextualisation).

Situating the Study in a Research Paradigm

Following Creswell’s (2013, p.69) advice that researchers need to identify a specific approach to qualitative inquiry ‘to present it as a sophisticated study’, I had to go through a process of identifying a specific qualitative research tradition Yet, the increasing complexity of social research has contributed to complicating the task of defining qualitative research traditions and strands Also, scholars and researchers tend to develop different understandings and practices of qualitative methods Consequently, upon reading and reflecting on different qualitative traditions (namely ethnography, narrative research, and case study), I ended up choosing the case study as a label for my research tradition

This study used the case study tradition for many reasons The first reason is related to other possible alternative paradigms, while the second set of reasons has to do with the characteristics/merits of the case study per se It can be argued that many other paradigms such as ethnographic and narrative inquiry could possibly be used for my study because it featured some of their elements However, this research did not meet all the orthodoxies of these paradigms

Although this study made use of some ethnographic tools, such as prolonged engagement with participants and in-depth interviews, I did not consider ethnography as a label for the tradition of this research This is mainly because this inquiry did not meet the main defining features of ethnographic research, i.e., detailed field notes and participant observation through immersion in participants’ daily lives

The ‘narrative’ label is also problematic As a term, ‘narrative’ has been understood and used in diverse ways There is no consensus on the definition of narrative and what counts as a narrative (for example, see Labov’s and Waletzky’s (1967) canonical approach to narrative/ language in use, Schegloff’s (1997) interactional view) De Fina and Georgakopoulou (2008) propose an alternative, middle-ground framework that they call ‘the social interactional approach’ where narrative is viewed as a social practice This view links narrative to its social practices thus capturing regularity in discourse (i.e., frequent responses) while at the same time allowing for observing momentary and emergent stories in communication One of the implications of this approach is to be open to varied types of narrative and avoid pre- definitions of what a narrative is or should be They (ibid) call for paying attention to ‘non- canonical narratives’, e.g., small stories (Bamberg, 2004; Bamberg and Georgakopoulou, 2008) So, researchers can take different stances; those following conventional structures of narrative are reluctant to represent or include ‘small stories’ in their treatment of narrative research data, while those adopting a practice-oriented view are more confident labelling

I acknowledge the richness of data a narrative approach can harness and offer even when we talk about ‘small stories’ which might be overlooked for being poor in narrativity Conversely, these stories co-construct the big ones and build up a chronological narrative that traces the biological accounts of participants Eventually, different kinds of narrative can emerge in participants’ responses regardless of the study’s research tradition On many occasions, I still referred to participants’ testimonies and responses as types of narrative using, for example, narrative-related words such as, ‘stories’ and ‘tell’

Despite their limited applicability, the above approaches would not fully meet my research objects for the specified reasons Hence, in this study, I applied case study approach The merits of case study are discussed below in details

Moving to the other set of reasons which are pertinent to the case study option, the main reason for this research being located within a case-study tradition is that it met the features of case study research According to Creswell (2013) and Yin (2014), a ‘good’ case study is an identifiable one with boundaries which seeks to investigate a contemporary phenomenon in depth within its real-world context It relies on data from different sources and benefits from prior theoretical propositions in guiding data collection and analysis (ibid) My research had nine identified cases, i.e., Palestinian sojourners’ trajectories in the UK, which were studied holistically and in depth within contexts of mobility and globalisation Data were generated through interviews and focus groups, and as will be explained later, they were analysed in light of existing theories

Another favourable reason is the flexibility a case study tradition holds One facet of this flexibility has to do with the number of cases that should/could be examined in a multiple- case study Practitioners have not agreed on that issue, but Creswell (2007; 2013) warns against exceeding four cases because this is likely to affect the level of depth when dealing with and interpreting each case Yin (2014), though, argues that multiple cases provide more compelling evidence Such contradiction leaves some room for flexibility and manoeuvre I recruited nine participants because I was interested in grasping and representing the diversity and richness of their experiences As I sought to achieve a diverse sample, this tactical choice influenced other research practicalities such as the data analysis (as will be elaborated later)

Explaining the strengths of case studies, Dornyie (2007, p.155) maintains that it is an excellent tool for obtaining ‘a thick description of a complex social issue embedded within a cultural context’ He recommends case study ‘for exploring uncharted territories’ Dornyie might not intend to literally refer to geographical territories here, but with reference to my research, the population coming from the Occupied Palestinian territories is definitely uncharted The detailed information gathered about the cases requires spending an extended proportion of time to deeply examine them in their natural contexts This feature, which provides a further justification for embracing a case study tradition, makes it very effective in terms of understanding longitudinal processes, such as tracking the flow of life and discerning change of perceptions (Neale, 2012; 2013).

The Longitudinal Dimension

Qualitative research conducted through time enables researchers to explore complex flows of time, or ‘timescapes’ (following Neale, 2012) Examples of timescapes can include change, critical moments in unpredictable life trajectories, the intersection of time and space to shape and locate experiences, reflections on the past and future (ibid, p.5), and I add continuities and individuals’ agency Within qualitative longitudinal research, time is seen as a method that needs to be re-theorised as a social construct (Adam, 1990) to understand its flow and the life experiences associated with it in fluid and dynamic ways (Neale, 2015) This marks a departure from static snapshots to dynamic movies of different types (Berthoud, 2000) In fact, the nature of this study favours the application of longitudinal research Study abroad theorists, e.g., Coleman (2013) calls for more longitudinal examination of international students’ experiences if more holistic and deep insights are sought And as mentioned previously, scholars coming from a mobility perspective call for researching mobility experiences longitudinally and holistically

It is worth mentioning that longitudinal research can be designed in different ways: prospectively, retrospectively, or by mixing the two ways (Neale, 2014; 2015) Prospective longitudinal studies track individuals over time as their lives unfold Findings from one wave of data inform the next Retrospective studies focus on studying the history of participants and change in their lives up to the present Work of memory is a fundamental source of data here In the case of Palestinian sojourners, pre-departure histories/ contexts/ experiences were investigated to understand their effect on the mobility experience in the UK It can be said that this research had elements of both prospective and retrospective strands as it sought to develop a nuanced, contextual, and holistic understanding of Palestinian students’ sociolinguistic trajectories in the UK

‘Adding time into the mix’ (to quote Neale, 2013) comes with significant challenges in terms of research practicalities During data generation, maintaining participants in research is an issue that needs strategic planning and sustaining relationships Bearing in mind the sensitive context of the participants of this study, I had to plan ahead to recruit more than ten participants and follow up with their travel arrangements before they departed from Gaza and the West Bank I started off by losing one participant who could not travel from Gaza (as mentioned earlier) I had built good rapport with all the remaining participants who did not withdraw Another issue has to do with the large amounts of data which can be messy, eclectic, time-consuming, and challenging to deal with especially when transcribing and analysing them Finally, ethical considerations are particularly crucial to elaborate on because of the prolonged engagement between the researcher and participants Issues of confidentiality, ongoing consent, and researcher-participant relationships need to be carefully negotiated and amended over time

It is according to these rubrics of understanding that the study was crafted longitudinally, using the methods of focus groups and in-depth interviews to both track the lives of Palestinian sojourners as they would unfold and (re)collect their pre-departure experiences and their reflections on them over a period of nine months

4.4 ‘Have been there’, ‘have done that’, ‘that happened to me’: Notes on Researching from Inside

It is important to be aware of and acknowledge the subjective nature of this research which had its influence on the data collection, analysis, as well as relationship with participants Much has been written about reflexivity, i.e., turning back to look into one’s self, in qualitative research (e.g., Pillow, 2003; Berger, 2013; Ross, 2017) These scholars and others discuss the importance of being reflective on many integrated layers such as: our own status/identities as ‘insider’ researchers, our own biases and ideologies, and researcher- participant relationship

Having shared the travel and study-abroad experience with participants positioned me in the role of the ‘insider’ But, what does reflexivity mean for researchers who are researching from inside? To approach this question, though, it is important to answer other related and basic questions: Who is an insider researcher? Or how ‘insider’ is an insider researcher? Qualitative scholars and practitioners have called attention to reject the oversimplification of the insider-outsider dichotomy For example, they distinguish between ‘total insiders’ (who share multiple identities and profound experiences with subjects) and ‘partial insiders’ (who have some detachment from the community of study) (Ross, 2017) Others talk about researchers as ‘passionate participants’ (Lincoln and Guba, 2000), or ‘native anthropologists’ (Johnstone, 2000) These more nuanced positionings indicate that a researcher’s positionality is not static and is subject to shifting according to the role of power relations and research context (Merriam et al., 2001) However, the underpinning connotations of some of these terms/adjectives (e.g., native, insider) are problematic as they invoke an assumption that all

‘natives/insiders’ are the same Such a simplistic assumption flattens differences between apparently similar individuals who can be different in terms of many factors: education, social class, travel experiences, life trajectories, etc To this end, while I acknowledge the multiple identities and commonalities I share with my research participants (being a fellow Palestinian and international student in English HE), I need to highlight that our life paths have made us different at many levels Also, I learned many new things which I was utterly unaware of from participants about the Palestinian society For example, participants from the West Bank told me about the economic situation and how expensive life is there, which, to my great surprise, could reach London standards

Who we want to research, who we want to hear from or maybe empower through our research and who we want to identify with and represent ourselves through continues to be influenced by our ideological stances Such backgrounds affect the way we research, the questions we ask, the language we use, and the lenses through which we process and filter data to make sense of them (Berger, 2013) Our ideological stances, in turn, come from and are shaped by our lived experiences and reflections on the world My personal mobility experience to pursue a master’s degree in educational studies in 2015-2016 in the UK

(mentioned in Chapter One) was transformative in every sense of the word and ignited the idea of this research Moreover, this further experience of being a researcher of mobility enhanced my understanding of my own academic sojourning in the UK I had richer and deeper understandings of the labels attached to me and other participants: being Palestinian, female, Arab, Muslim, non-native English speaker, and international student I had/have to grapple with what these labels entail many times and in many contexts Dealing with/understanding these issues was not always pleasant as it entailed a painful awareness of how stratified and hierarchical our world is, and that we live in more than one world

Nonetheless, it is these same stratifying labels that facilitated the research process, - it allowed me better access to participants and contributed to maintaining good relationships with them First, my social capital, i.e., sharing Palestinian, and Islamic culture with participants created a sense of trust and cooperation I was a co-national who came from the same generic social/cultural context and geographical occupied territories As a result, most of the time, participants felt they were sharing stories that are ‘common sense’, relevant, or understandable without having to explain contextual sensitivities to me or to suspect and feel

‘insecure’ that a ‘foreigner’ researcher is ‘spying on’ them abroad (as a Palestinian scholar abroad, (over)thinking personal security issues is common and can be justifiable 9 )

My presence as an ‘insider’ researcher and academic who collected data from co-nationals could be thought of as an advantage or ‘a resource’ Drawing on my personal experience as a previous postgraduate student in London and a current doctoral researcher, I remember how difficult and challenging it was to travel and live alone for the first time in my life outside my

9 Assassinating Palestinian scholars abroad is not uncommon The last murdered Palestinian scholar was Fadi Al-Batsh who was gunned down in Malaysia in April 2018 (BBC NEWS, 2018 ) familiar context My participants experienced similar feelings of estrangement, homesickness, and the need of guidance and to be surrounded with familiar faces that share their native language and culture Having lived in the UK for three years, I could be that ‘resource’ of familiarity and guidance who understood their struggles and related to them

These labels, i.e., being a Palestinian doctoral researcher, a previous master’s student in the

UK, and older than my participants (except for one) contributed to building trust, credibility, cooperation, and commitment which was needed in this longitudinal research I foregrounded and tactically mentioned the value of such commonalities as a potential ‘re/source’ of support and guidance in the ‘participant information sheet’ that I sent to participants when I recruited them

Moreover, being a female researcher allowed me to recruit other four Palestinian female students relatively easily I can assume that those women were willing and comfortable to share detailed stories because of our shared gender status which gave them an added sense of trust and familiarity Regarding males, I foregrounded my academic and age status (being a doctoral researcher and older than them) to build that sense of trust

Furthermore, being multilingual, i.e., speaking and/or understanding different Palestinian varieties and standard Arabic as well as British, American, and ‘non-accented’ English made participants and I comfortable shifting between these languages/dialects during interviews However, this was not unproblematic because I sometimes asked participants to clarify some very culture-specific terms/sayings/ idioms and linguistic choices Also, there were some methodological concerns to deal with as a result of this multilingualism/translingualism (as will be illustrated later)

It is noteworthy to say that, despite all the merits of having a ‘shared’ social capital, being an

Researcher-Participant Relationship Highlighted

As seen above, using my social capital rendered researching Palestinian sojourners’ experiences in the UK easier, and enabled participants and I to establish rapport The relationship out of this research can be discussed in terms of two particular aspects: mutual cooperation and the prolonged engagement

Mutual cooperation or reciprocity is important and practised in this research Inviting participants to take part in research entails asking them to give up their time, and when it is longitudinal research, this entails substantial, lengthy commitment Besides time and commitment, participants were asked about aspects of their lives, knowledge, experiences, and even their private worlds In return, researchers are ethically required to ponder what they could offer, but what constitutes as a ‘good exchange’ varies Is the mere representation of peoples’ lives and ‘giving them a voice’ through communicating it to the public enough? But, again, issues of representation and voice in research are problematic and contested, e.g., giving voice to participants suggests a rather passive construction of them/lack of agency (as will be discussed later) Bearing this in mind and having foregrounded it for participants, I decided to take it further and solidify this two-way exchange so that participants could have a real feeling that they could benefit from participating in this research With the aid of

Ravenscroft funding that I applied for earlier this year to support my fieldwork, I was able to promise participants to reimburse their train/bus tickets whenever they travelled for interviews and to provide them with small incentives such as, inviting them for a drink or meal This is a distinctive area of reciprocity in this research Most of participants had been severely restricted in mobility in Palestine before they journeyed to the UK Since this research is about mobility (and having (or not) having access to it), I felt an ethical obligation that I should not enjoy the status of the ‘global researcher’ who is backed by powerful academic institutions and funded to span the country and collect data alone I saw that my participants should equally enjoy mobility and benefit from its advantages 10 Enhancing participants’ ‘mobility capital’ (following Kaufmann et al, 2004) was a practical aim that I set from the beginning of round one of data collection Before every wave of interviews, I asked participants living outside London to choose whether they would like to come to London or remain in their cities as I travelled to meet them there In most occasions, they opted for going mobile

Also, as I mentioned before, I tactically drew on my social capital to inform participants that I could be a source of guidance and support for them Many times, I share/d some parts of my

UK experience(s) in some individual interviews Some participants asked me about challenging situations and how I would cope, and I did not hesitate to advise One participant asked me about the PhD process and its stages, and I gave a detailed response Another example of reciprocity was when two participants asked me to send them some resources for their articles, and one of them asked me to comment on her academic papers twice I did not feel providing such services was an obligation or a burden for the sake of conducting this

10 There are different perspectives to mobility as to whether it is a capital/resource (Kaufmann et al., 2004) or a practice/burden (Moret, 2018) research I argue that research should not be a mechanical ‘tit-for-tat’ relationship Conversely,

I felt a moral and national sense of responsibility for helping my participants The same kind of feeling they felt when they agreed to take part in this research, as one of them told me There were no serious risks arising from helping or advising participants

The longitudinal nature of this research contributed to establishing a friendly and trustworthy relationship All participants were committed to this research Some of them reflected that they took more notice of their daily encounters so that they could re-tell them in the upcoming interviews This commitment to my research has entailed that our relationship sometimes goes beyond research For example, I accompanied some of them to do some sightseeing in London We also exchange text messages asking about each other’s well-being and progress and sending good wishes on birthdays and festive seasons When the situation deteriorates in Gaza or the West Bank, it is very common that we check on and stand in solidarity with each other at those hard times.

Research Practicalities

Preparing the Ground: Participant Recruitment

‘Purposive sampling’ was the strategy used during participant recruitment stage It is a common practice in qualitative inquiry that researchers strategically select participants who can fit the research criteria, and thus best answer their research questions However, this sampling choice is not unproblematic because this general label of sampling does not precisely describe or capture the nuances of the recruitment process, which is elaborated in detail in this section Also, using the sampling logic in case study implies that the cases come from larger universe of like-cases (Yin, 2014), which is not consistent with my study’s approach This study embraced the understanding that Palestinian sojourners’ trajectories abroad are unique, complex, and dynamic, and their cases are perceived to be diverse I was interested in grasping the diversity of those students’ experiences, and thus I sought to achieve a diverse sample Even though I sought helpful and insightful data from cooperative participants, I viewed every individual case as being interesting and worthy of investigation

That said, the most essential criterion for participant selection was that all participants needed to be Palestinian academics studying at a HE academic institution in the UK during the time of this research fieldwork To make it more specific, other conditions had to emerge, and they were:

 Participants should be Palestinian students coming from Gaza or the West Bank (other Palestinians who used to be based in diaspora 11 fall outside the scope of this study)

 They should be in the UK for the first time of their lives during the academic year 2018/2019, favourably available in London or close-by areas during that time

 They should be enrolled on a one-year master's or MSc degree ã

 A balanced representation of gender was sought

These criteria were chosen consciously and carefully The first criterion excludes Palestinians who used to reside outside the Palestinian Occupied Territories (Gaza and the West Bank) before travelling to the UK Contexts of enforced immobility/ restricted mobility (Gaza and the West Bank respectively) are fundamental to this research Including other Palestinians who used to benefit from living outside these contexts, particularly in terms of travel/mobility and multicultural encountering, would have distracted its focus

11 The Palestinian diaspora is a term used to refer to Palestinian people living outside the Occupied Palestinian Territories It is estimated that more than 7.5 million Palestinians currently live in the global diaspora, according to Ma’an News Agency, 2015

The second criterion stresses the condition that participants should be in the UK for the first time This condition ensures that the objective of investigating their lived experiences and contrasting them with what was imagined and expected will be met If they had travelled and got immersed in multicultural/ multilingual environments before, then these experiences would not have been something really new to explore and reflect on Although the study’s prolonged nature favoured recruiting participants living in London, that was deemed difficult because it was not easy finding ten Palestinian sojourners studying in one city Therefore, after recruiting five participants in London, I had to recruit the other half of the sample from other cities/universities This, of course, had its consequences on applying extra measures to mitigate the distance factor and maintain participants’ commitment to this research For example, I applied for an internal funding from Roehampton University, Ravenscroft scholarship, to provide them with incentives such as travel tickets (as mentioned earlier) I also had to plan ahead and start contacting them before the London group to ensure that they would be ready for the coming rounds of interviews

Third, students should be on a Master’s/MSc degree (not a PhD or short-term courses) for two reasons; 1 it was much easier to find and recruit Palestinian students on a master's degree To my best knowledge, the majority of Palestinian students who travel from Gaza and the West Bank to study in the UK are on master's programmes because the majority of funding schemes specified for Palestinian students are for MA programmes, 2 for this research, data needed to be gathered within a certain timespan A one-year course like a taught full-time MA provided prolonged engagement, which was a requirement of this research While keeping the study longitudinal, the data collection for this research needed a time limit, as the whole project needed to be completed within three to four years Lastly, although gender was not a specific focus of this study, including both males and females would provide a more equitable representation and insightful discussion of Palestinian students’ trajectories abroad (e.g., Chapter Seven highlights gender differences in participants’ identity work)

Recruiting participants started in July 2018, two-three months before their actual enrolment on their courses in the UK universities I had to plan for and start this task a bit early for two reasons: 1 because of the challenging situation of travel back home; and 2 I had had to wait until results of winning scholarship applicants were announced so that I could start contacting those scholars before their travel (by July all names were released)

To approach potential participants, I used three methods of recruitment:

 Funding schemes: as indicated above, all participants were granted scholarships to pursue their master's degrees I could identify five funding agencies: Goldsmiths International Scholarship for Palestinians, Durham Trust, HESPAL, Chevening, and Said Foundation Those specifically sponsor and fully fund Palestinian students (from Gaza and The West Bank) every academic year I contacted three funders who approved to grant me access to the names of awardees Afterwards, I contacted five scholarship winners from Gaza Strip who gave their initial consent to participate in the research

 Already-recruited participants (i.e., snowball or chain sampling): I managed to get the contact details of two participants from the scholars whom I had recruited before I contacted them via email, and they gave their initial agreement to participate

 HESPAL induction day/meeting: Being ‘an old hespal-er’ myself, I was invited by the HESPAL scholarship coordinator to deliver a speech to the new HESPAL recipients at the British Council in London on the 29th September 2018 I talked about my academic journey in the UK and utilised the event to talk about my doctoral project and recruit participants (I asked for permission before) After my talk, three scholars approached me and volunteered to participate in the study

It is worth to mention that recruiting participants from the West Bank was more difficult than recruiting their Gaza counterparts because of the separation of the two geographies and lack of communication (Chapter Two) As a researcher coming from Gaza, I lacked access to their (scholarship) details/names The five participants from the West Bank were recruited after the Gaza group using the last two techniques explained above

I managed to recruit ten participants, but one of them could not travel from Gaza to pursue his academic degree because he was denied exit Therefore, I ended up having nine participants (five males and four females) who took part in the initial focus groups and the subsequent rounds of individual interviews Phone calls was the method of communication via which we discussed and decided on convenient interview dates Email correspondence was another method to receive ticket receipts from outside-London participants whom I reimbursed after booking and sending their tickets to my university email (when they chose to do the research travel)

Eventually, finding and recruiting the balanced sample (in terms of number and gender) which I aimed to have was deemed feasible mainly because of the abundance of the scholarships given specifically for Palestinian students For example, the HESPAL scheme alone sponsored more than 40 Palestinian scholars from Gaza and the West Bank to pursue their master's and/or PhD studies in the UK in 2018-2019, according to the British Council in the Occupied Palestinian Territories website Regarding gender, those scholarship schemes tend to follow a gender equal policy when selecting awardees From my personal observation, females constitute more than 60% of scholarship winners in Palestine (there is no official statistics) Socially, Palestinian families have been more open regarding sending their daughters to study abroad which reflects many changes in the societal fabric in Palestine (explaining these changes falls outside the scope of this chapter) As a result, contrary to the stereotypical views that recruiting and studying Arab women is not easy and could be restricted, finding and recruiting Palestinian women was not too much of a challenge to me The major concern was the travel issue which particularly affects/ed students from Gaza However, knowing that some funding agencies, such as the British Council, may interfere and arrange students’ travel, e.g., they apply for a pass permit through Israeli Erez border with Gaza and a Jordanian visa, and accelerate the UK student visa process, gave me a sense of relief/reassurance that the participants who I had already recruited would be able to travel While some students can still be denied travel even with the aid of prestigious international organisations, the majority of them eventually manage to travel and enrol on their courses in time This entailed, of course, constant and persistent support and follow-up (from my side) with the long and complex processes of applications which lasted for months The waiting time was nerve-wrecking and draining for both participants and I

Table 4.1 below provides information on participants’ pseudonyms, their age at the beginning of the study, Palestinian city, course of study, and their gender

3 Dua’a 26 Gaza English and Female

4 Huda 23 Beit Jala Neuroscience female

6 Fareed 28 Beit Sahur Management Male

8 Medo 23 Tulkarm Food Science Male

Table 4.1 Research participants’ background data

Data Generation Methods

To make sense of how Palestinian sojourners perceive their sociolinguistic trajectories in the

UK, the source of data was individual, in-depth, semi-structured interviews as well as focus group discussions Data were collected longitudinally over a period of nine months (the academic year) The other method was focus groups: two focus groups at the beginning of the data collection process (in October and December) and one focus groups at the end of participants’ study The initial focus groups were to be followed by three waves of nine individual semi-structured interviews (a total of 27) The first round of interviews was done by January 2019 The second phase which was approximately three-four months later was conducted by Mid May, and the last wave was completed in August 2019 Afterwards, a final focus group discussion followed Both interviews and focus groups approximately lasted for 60-90 minutes for a deep and thorough discussion of participants’ experiences The focus groups and interviews were conducted in London (Roehampton campus) for London group and when participants living outside London travelled for the interviews When I travelled to meet participants in their cities, though, our interviews were conducted on their university campuses

4.5.2.1 Focus Groups to ‘Start the Ball Rolling’ and ‘Round-Up’

The initial plan was to invite all the recruited participants to one initial focus group in London so that they get to know each other and create a comfortable atmosphere of familiarity and sharing However, I had to reconsider this plan and rearrange it because it was difficult for all participants to agree on a convenient time The amended plan, then, was to divide participants into two groups, the London group (consisting of five participants) and the outside-of- London group (consisting of four) Accordingly, the two initial focus groups were conducted in London in October 2018 and Newcastle in December 2018

The initial focus groups were intended to ‘break the ice’ and smooth the path of this research fieldwork Participants got to familiarise themselves with the topics to be discussed, shared opinions and insights, and stimulated each other to reflect on their views Opinions, attitudes, meanings, and perceptions are socially constructed, and social groups provide a microenvironment for them to be articulated, shared, and even (re)/co-constructed (Breen, 2006) Moreover, some views are only triggered through the dynamics of group interaction and would not be articulated in individual interviews (ibid) Therefore, focus groups were utilised to encourage participants to talk about their crossing borders experience, English language history, as well as their attitudes towards social life in the UK Furthermore, the initial group discussions helped me identify some broad themes/questions to investigate in the following three waves of individual interviews Regarding the final focus group, it was conducted for two main reasons: 1 to seek clarification and confirmation of my own interpretation of previously collected and analysed data; and 2 to give participants the opportunity to assess their overall journey in the UK, reflect on their relationship with English (how it was and how it is at the end of their programmes), comment on the transformations or endurances that happened or persisted in their own selves and positionality, think about what could/would be done differently if they were to start over, and state their final remarks on the research itself

4.5.2.2 Individual Interviews for More ‘Personal’ Data

The use of semi-structured individual interviews is to generate more in-depth and ‘personal’ data It is through the space of interviewing that every individual case will share, reflect on, and interact with their trajectories in the UK One of the issues with focus groups is that there might be some dominant people affecting the views and interaction of others Moreover, focus groups are often inappropriate to discuss more ‘personal’ issues Individual interviews are therefore necessary to gain deeper and probably more personalised testimonies from (less vocal) participants

Following the initial focus groups, three rounds of in-depth individual interviews were to be conducted To facilitate coding themes, identifying patterns, comparing responses, and summarising findings, all participants were asked the same main questions However, interviews varied in terms of depth, length, interaction, and context While some participants were willing to provide detailed responses with examples, which resulted in probing more subsequent questions and lengthening the interview time, others tended to be briefer Bearing in mind that language (more on the language(s) of interviews in the following section) could be an obstacle to articulating elaborate responses, I reminded participants on the onset of every interview to use the language they prefer whether English or Arabic However, I understood that the pride of being a scholarship recipient who scored high in the IELTS and went through the process of applying to study in the UK using English language might be another hindrance preventing my participants to use Arabic in an English context In some cases, this meant preferring to give short answers in English rather than elaborate ones in Arabic This was obvious in the case of Medo who seemed shy and uncomfortable using English in the initial focus group and subsequent two individual interviews Although I asked him to use Arabic if it was better for him and did converse with him in Arabic, he insisted on proceeding on using English By looking at the duration of interviews per participant, the shortest interview came from Medo’s (25 minutes) This is not to suggest, though, that language is the main/only cause for not being as interactive/elaborate as other participants The second shortest interview (35 minutes), for example, came from Dua’a who opted for Arabic in all her interviews

The interview questions and process

Before delving into the interview process, it is worth shedding some light on the interview questions and protocol As I tried to identify many themes related to the research questions, I utilised the guiding literature Once themes were identified, topics and questions became clearer The topics and themes continued to develop through an iterative process of going back and forth to the literature and participants’ responses to build on them and propose questions for subsequent interviews As said above, although all the interviews were structured around the same guides, each interview varied depending on participants’ responses These interviews allowed for opening discussions on relevant topics and did not strictly follow tightly designed questions The interview questions helped me prepare an interview protocol/ guide for every wave of interviews which contained basic information on the study and the themes/questions to be covered to inform and encourage participants to dwell on their experiences (Appendix 1)

As for the interview process, it broadly followed three stages The first introductory stage was concerned with laying the ground for the interview I reminded participants with the topic and purpose of this research investigation, some ethical considerations, arranged the recording equipment, and introduced the first theme and question The second stage was where participants responded to the questions, and I listened carefully The third stage was about seeking clarification I asked immanent questions that would arise from participants’ discussion to fill emerging gaps

4.5.2.3 Representation: Notes on the (Multi)Language(s) and Voice(s) of Interviews

The default language of this research is academic English mainly because the academic research culture in the UK favours it as a language of scholarly research Regardless of the different attitudes to this (a linguistic domination or a unifying language of science), I gave participants the freedom to choose any language/variety they wish when responding to my questions It was a priority to allow participants to articulate their feelings and negotiate their experiences without having to worry about translating their stories into a language to which they are not native All participants preferred to use English except for Dua’a who opted for Arabic to respond to the interview questions However, an English or Arabic interview did not mean pure conversations in these languages Translanguaging was frequent as we

‘shuttled’ (following Canagarajah, 2006) across different languages, varieties, and registers, i.e., colloquial Palestinian Arabic varieties, standard Arabic, British, American, near-native English, formal/academic, and slang English While these translingual practices allowed participants to deploy some (linguistic) agency, they posed methodological challenges during the transcription process, translation, and analysis stages

Through giving participants the opportunity to choose the language(s) they wished to converse with in the interviews, they were able to elaborate their stories While most of them were comfortable using English varieties as a main medium of communication in the interviews, their other linguistic repertoires leaked into one another and were deployed in multiple ways before, in, and after the interviews The participants' translingual practices reflected who they were as EFL speakers and translinguals and what they tried to convey The interview was a space for demonstrating an ability to speak and negotiate experiences in English for (some) interviewees, while our shared native Arabic variety was a haven for explaining complex and private views/stories, digressing from the interview topics, and informally commenting on the interview process and the research project in general

This research has an inherent ‘emancipatory’ goal, i.e., to ‘give voice’ to this population of participants whose stories are usually unheard in the sociolinguistic inquiry Actually, the provisional title of this research started with ‘Giving voice to the unheard’, but I changed it to

‘Voices from Palestine’ after being uncomfortable with this unproblematised use of the term and reflecting on the claim of ‘giving voice’ Was voice mine to give? Assuming so, was I really giving participants voice? Didn’t participants have voice anyway? What is the effect of their voice(s)? These were some of the questions I raised as I reflected on voice Post- structuralist thinking views ‘giving voice’ as vain, and patronising Also, ‘voices heard’ are partial, reframed, and ideological (Osgood, 2010) Gray (2007) reminds us that since voice is contextual, the ways it is articulated and perceived are ‘intricate and infinite’ That is to say the effect of voice (e.g., whether significant or not, worthy of representation or not) is bound by who says it, how and where it is said (ibid) Moreover, how a voice is heard, taken up and analysed is equally important to consider Eventually, whose voice and whose language to be represented in research is a persistent issue of power and authority in academia

Contemporary, emancipatory scholarship calls for representing the multilingual repertoires of participants (Creese and Blackledge, 2015) and making space for other, less dominant discourses to emerge (to shake the taken-for-granted, in other words) Nonetheless, the messiness brought about by the endeavour of undertaking such types of practices is challenging and needs to be exposed At the meta-theoretical level, when it comes to representing participants’ multi/translingualism and voices or ‘speaking for/about others’ (following Alcoff, 2009), the act of representation is mediated and conditioned by the researcher’s context, which has the privileged epistemological salience (ibid) This mediated and relative nature of representation/voice raises questions on: who has the legitimacy to speak for others? And what are the criteria of such legitimacy? The answer according to Alcoff (2009) lies in analysing who is representing others, their impetus to speak, affordances of their context, and the actual effects of words on the material context Adopting Spivak’s (1988) view, she further argues that to answer the problem of speaking for others,

We should strive to create wherever possible the conditions for dialogue and the practice of speaking with and to rather than speaking for others If the dangers of speaking for others result from the possibility of misrepresentation, expanding one's own authority and privilege, and a generally imperialist speaking ritual, then speaking with and to can lessen these dangers (ibid, p.23)

Another challenge, at the methodological level, is that researchers are under the pressure of having to meet the expectations of their academic institutions, supervisors, review panellists, and participants Being in charge of the research, the researcher’s voice and language are more likely to be dominant This is apparently problematic and contradictory with the ethical commitment of representing participants’ voices and languages

Thematic Data Analysis

Although the typical data analysis design of case studies, describing each case and its issues (within-case analysis) followed by a cross-case analysis (Yin, 2014, p.101), provides detailed and rich descriptions of cases, it does not fit a research studying nine cases I was committed to representing the trajectories of all my nine participants; however, writing nine chapters followed by a cross-case analysis chapter was unworkable due to word count restrictions This study might thus have run the risk of rendering data analysis shallow and uncritical Therefore, my study deviated from this strategy and subjected the data to a thematic analysis According to Braun and Clarke (2006, p.79), thematic analysis is ‘a method for identifying, analysing and reporting patterns (themes) within data’

Thematic analysis (TA) was deemed to be the most suitable choice for this study because of its flexibility which was consistent with this study’s holistic and complex approach TA works with a variety of data including those about people’s experiences and perceptions (Clarke and Braun, 2013) It entails identifying both codes and themes from data Codes are important to develop a complex and rich account beyond obvious meanings in data (ibid) Themes develop from codes, and these (themes) can be data-driven or theory-driven For this research, themes were informed by the research questions as well as theoretical literature, thus leaving room for possibly generating new contextual terms while at the same time acknowledging previous research and theory because knowledge does not work in an ‘epistemological vacuum’ Furthermore, analysis was interpretive, going beyond the semantic surface level of content of data to look for the underlying conceptions and ideologies of meanings and attitudes, i.e., latent analysis (following Braun and Clarke, 2006)

With reference to this research, thematic analysis was consistent with its complex and holistic approach as well as its transdisciplinary nature On the one hand, drawing on three main research areas and constructs from other fields enriched thematic analysis and revealed aspects of the sociolinguistic experiences of Palestinian postgraduate students in UK Higher Education hitherto missed On the other hand, thematic analysis enhanced the critical, holistic and complex approach the study embraced by combining the different strands of this research in a tight manner as I looked for themes to create links between disciplines and theoretical tools As such, it helped me to identify the themes/strands that stood out with the most explanatory power These strengths qualified thematic analysis as an adequate tool to make sense of my data

My analysis was broadly informed by Braun and Clarke’s (2006) step-by-step guide of conducting thematic analysis First, I familiarised myself with the data through transcribing and (re)reading them Second, I generated initial codes across the dataset both manually and using Nvivo qualitative data analysis software (inductive coding) Here, coding was both theory and data driven (i.e., deductive and inductive), taking into consideration both the theoretical underpinnings of the study and the research questions and responses I applied the deductive approach when I used the research and interview questions as a priori themes to guide the coding process This helped me keep focused on answering my research questions while interpreting the data within existing knowledge Meanwhile, I kept an open mind to the richness of data and their potential of generating interesting, context-sensitive codes in order to avoid the rigidity associated with deductive coding Third, I searched for themes gathering all data relevant to each potential theme The fourth and fifth steps were a constant and iterative process of reviewing and naming themes, checking if the themes work in relation to the dataset and refining clear definitions of themes which later developed into main findings

The guiding literature was used to theoretically interpret the data The last sixth stage was producing the report While I was writing my analysis chapters, I selected extract examples to address the research questions and back themes and findings I also looked across and within the data to look for similarities and differences in the research sample/cases The discussion of themes and findings extended beyond the research questions and analysis of relevant data to produce a more thorough and holistic account of sojourners’ experiences (Chapter Eight) This is consistent with the study’s holistic approach towards participants’ trajectories in the

UK Finally, it is important to mention that the data analysis was a recursive, iterative cycle of moving back and forth across the different stages, sometimes stumbling and stucking, and editing and refining findings.

Ethical Considerations

My research involved the recruitment of human beings and the use of their voices/knowledge Therefore, I needed to follow the ethical principles and procedures of the University of Roehampton A detailed ethics application was submitted to the University of Roehampton’s Ethics Committee The study was ethically approved on 11th September 2018

Participants’ interests were a priority, and they were able to make informed decisions regarding their voluntary participation through an informed consent and detailed information sheet (see Appendix 2 and 3) Both consent and information sheet included information on the nature and purpose of the study, what participants’ contribution means, any potential risks, and their right to withdraw at any phase of the data collection without having to justify this decision

As far as issues of confidentiality and anonymity are concerned, participants’ responses were kept confidential to protect their rights of privacy To guarantee that I achieve this, participants’ real names were replaced by pseudonyms However, this was not a straightforward task with reference to my research All participants were scholarship winners to study a Master’s/MSc degree in the UK Some funding agencies publish winning students’ names along with their academic institutions on their websites, which renders identifying those students/participants possible Therefore, I decided to use pseudonyms while concealing the names of participants’ funding agencies as well as their academic institutions While this could deprive the study of enriching contextual information, I had to commit to my ethical obligation of not breaching participants’ privacy Sometimes, I classified participants as London group and out-of-London, which was a compensatory measure to get a general sense of the geographical, social, linguistic, and demographic natures of participants’ places

Considering the longitudinal nature of this study, my participants and I were engaged in a prolonged relationship This flagged up issues of rapport and researcher’s influence on participants These issues have been extensively debated in literature and are ultimately contextual and relative Being aware of such issues is the first step to address and deal with them The presence of a researcher (and his/her influence) are a matter of fact, therefore, reflecting on my role and the extent to which I practice authority or influence on participants was a crucial, recursive, and constant process Thus, I kept asking my informants the question of whether I was pressuring them with my questions and if I affected their responses On the other hand, my presence as an ‘insider’ researcher who was collecting data from co-nationals could be thought of as an advantage or ‘a resource’

Regarding data storage, all data, raw and processed, were stored on the university M-drive which can be easily accessed through any computer on campus As I used Nvivo software package to process data, data folders were password protected and stored on the M-drive Another back-up copy of data was saved in a password protected folder on my laptop and my google drive account (which I could access on and off campus) This copy of data was also password protected and encrypted

Since my research involved the use of biographic, personal data, these needed to be securely protected I assessed the degree of sensitivity of personal data by referring to and checking with the participants themselves Then, I concealed highly private information, such as records, religious beliefs, personal conditions, and other orientations that participants might have shared with me but would not like to include in the dissemination of the study

It is noteworthy to mention that I adopted Neale and Hanna’s (2012) strategy of ‘refresh and remind’ This strategy is informed by their (ibid) understanding of consent and ethics ‘as an ongoing process’ and not a priori On the onset of each round of interviews, I reminded participants of the focus of this study, the significance of their remarks to its progress, their right to withdraw, their right to choose the language they prefer, and what yet to be done Commenting on this practice, one participant wondered, ‘do you have to repeat this every time?’ I also sought permission to audio-record students’ voices at the beginning of every interview/focus group Moreover, I kept checking my interpretation and sought confirmation of previously collected data from participants for a truthful (re)presentation and reporting of them and their testimonies This approach to research ethics as a recursive and constant process will be further justified when I seek permission from participants to use the data generated from them beyond the dissertation Interviewees will be reminded, where possible, that personal information as well as any details that could lead to revealing their identities, such as the names of their scholarship funding agencies and universities, will still be kept confidential, and their names will remain pseudonymous in all forms of publication.

Conclusion

This chapter has chronicled the story of this research methodology It tracked the research design providing as much details as possible regarding the rationales behind its philosophy as well as the stages and techniques of data generation and analysis This documentation is a systematic way to tidy and document a messy, recursive, and complex process by rigorously tracking, justifying, and explaining decisions and practicalities of fieldwork while locating these practices within the broader literature on qualitative research and Study Abroad and mobility paradigm This chapter is both the means and the end: the means to producing a transparent and traceable report to increase the trustworthiness and credibility of this research, and it is an end per se for the richness, value, and amount of reflection it contains within its craft

Chapter Five English Language ‘on the Move’: Expectations and Encounters

Every day, I am in awe of international students Doing a [postgraduate degree] in your native language and home country is hard Doing it in a non-native language, in a different country and different culture is so much harder You are not stupid You are legends! (Kearns, 2019)

This is the first of three analysis chapters which thematically presents the first part of the findings of this research The chapter engages with the datasets generated from both the longitudinal interviews and focus groups in an attempt to identify and highlight the similarities and/or differences between the nine Palestinian student participants to underline the key features of their sociolinguistic trajectories in the UK Meanwhile, the chapter draws on and engages with several theoretical concepts from different disciplines to provide interpretive insights into and support for the data analysis The chapter is ordered chronologically against a backdrop of a wider ‘mobility trajectory’ metaphor to provide a smooth read This chapter seeks to provide an answer to the first question of this research, i.e., what is the effect of mobility on Palestinian postgraduate students’ conceptualisation and perception of English language? Hence, the focus on the linguistic aspect of the participants’ trajectories As such, I start by overviewing participants’ pre-departure experiences of English language learning and use I, then, move to examine the reasons for choosing the UK as a destination for further studies Afterwards, I discuss participants’ lived experiences of transition with English language after crossing geopolitical borders Finally, the chapter concludes with some remarks and insights into the ‘sociolinguistics’ of Palestinian students’ mobility trajectories in the UK.

Language History: Pre-departure Trajectories

Compulsory English Learning

Six of the participants received their primary, preparatory, and secondary education (including English language subject) in UNRWA and government schools (public sector) Three, on the other hand, attended private schools In general, participants’ experiences of learning English in the UNRWA and government schools were similar All of them started learning English as a compulsory subject from Grade one (age six) to Tawjihi (grade 12, age

18) The way English was delivered/taught was described similarly by all participants who attended the public sector schools as being boring, not engaging, and test oriented English learning involved memorising lists of vocabulary, knowing and applying grammatical rules, reading texts and answering comprehension questions, and taking frequent exams every month Essay writing, listening, and speaking skills were largely ‘ignored’, not focused on, and barely tested However, those who studied at private schools reported a different, more dynamic and richer experience of English language learning All three participants attributed their good command of English to their ‘really good teachers’ who offered them ‘a solid foundation’ (Fareed, 1 st focus group, 2019) since childhood Suhaib (1 st focus group) stated that the good teaching styles of his English teachers and the high competence level at his private school made him realise that his English skills needed improvement to reach a good, competent level So, he was encouraged to invest in the language He described his motivation to learn English at school as ‘a very conscious decision deeply rooted in a strong experience of humiliation (loud laugh followed)’

This divide in early experiences of English language learning is a part of an age-old debate around the performance of private vs public schools There is a widely held opinion in the Palestinian society that private schools ‘do the job’ (Huda, 1 st focus group) better than public schools This belief also has evidence and support in academic work Figlio and Stone (2012) maintain that private schools generally outperform public schools for several reasons, such as: the different peer group, high socio-economic status of students, the more disciplined learning environment, and extracurricular activities Overall, all participants’ early experiences of English language could be viewed in terms of two aspects: First, English was taught and learned as a school subject which made them perceive it as an academic challenge/test to score high for the sake of accumulating a high final GPA in their school certificate Doing well in the English exams boosted participants’ sense of achievement and interest in this subject This leads to the second aspect, i.e., private motivation and investment in the language.

Private Investment in English

All participants developed an early interest in English language during the first years of their formal language education Although English served as a school subject, participants had the feeling their learning was lacking/insufficient in some way and devised extracurricular strategies to learn English This interest and agency both demonstrate an early awareness of the importance of English, which obviously did not happen in a vacuum (i.e., language ideologies came into play) In response to the perceived limitations of their school education, all participants narrated instances of private investment in English language Investment in English is a term coined by Norton (1995) which better accounts for language desirability and captures the complex relationship between learners’ identities, language, and power relations When learners invest in a language, ‘they do so with the understanding that they will acquire a wider range of symbolic and material resources, which will in turn increase the value of their cultural capital’ (Norton and Gao, 2008, p.110) Eventually, an investment in the language is an investment in one’s self or identity

Participant's investment in English took different shapes, but it was mainly selective investment focusing on the skills that were ‘ignored’ and not taught by their formal education, i.e., listening and speaking All participants mentioned music, movies, TV series and cartoon as a way to listen to and speak English For instance, Huda and Fareed focused on acquiring a popular accent (e.g., American) through watching movies and repeating English songs’ lyrics Rita said she was a ‘book worm’ who used to enrich her vocabulary through extensive reading Laila and Duaa joined an extracurricular programme called the ‘Access’ (run by Amideast) which contributed significantly to their English proficiency All these instances show a genuine interest in and relentless efforts to master and perfect their English Those types of investment continued after joining college even when majoring in non-English courses It is worth mentioning that Huda, Sharaf, Fareed, and Medo gained a degree in a STEM subject (with English being the medium of instruction), while the other five participants majored in English language Throughout these areas of speciality, participants felt comfortable and at ease using English compared to their peers They were accumulating and enhancing their ‘linguistic capital’, which is part of their broader ‘cultural capital’ (Bourdieu, 1986) Individuals’ cultural capitals distinguish and separate between social classes (ibid) As such, participants’ accumulated linguistic capital (e.g proficiency and fluency in English) represented value/privilege and was thus perceived as a marker of social status and distinction (Bourdieu, 1984) in relation to others in the society Gaining/growing a linguistic capital boosted participants’ sense of privilege and competitiveness which enhanced their linguistic confidence Therefore, it can be claimed that ‘self-confidence’ characterised participants’ relationship with English language especially at the academic level According to Yang et al (2006, p.490) self confidence in using a language is having ‘a high level of perceived competence in the second language, combined with low levels of anxiety using that language’.

From Investment to Opportunities: What English Had to Offer

Besides feelings of confidence, pride, and distinction, the opportunities offered, and the horizons widened by English were a key player in shaping participants’ relationship with and attitudes towards English All participants made use of English language in Palestine and were conscious of its role in their lives This was a commonly shared testimony that participants related to when they talked about the opportunities and experiences which English rendered possible for them before travelling to the UK When asked about the opportunities offered by English, the most frequent response was ‘that I am here talking to you now’, i.e., the sojourn experience in the UK They all achieved high scores of IELTS (all scored between 7 and 8.5, except for Medo who scored 6.5) Consequently, participants were able to successfully apply and be admitted to several universities in the UK for their postgraduate degrees All of them also competed for and won prestigious scholarships to fully sponsor their studies and eventually managed to apply and get a UK Tier4 student visa For all international students, these three applications, i.e., university admission application, scholarship application, and the visa application, have to be completed in English and have, in their turn, a language requirement that should be met by applicants, i.e., IELTS in this case Clearly, being able to survive and pass such a globally powerful gate-keeping test was attained because of participants’ high level of English skills (as determined and certified by institutional requirements) The following testimonies by Dua’a and Fareed respectively capture the role of English in embarking on their academic journeys in the UK:

Had I chosen a different area of speciality in my BA other than English, I wouldn’t have imagined that I’d get to know about all these opportunities Had I not enrolled in the 'Access programme', I wouldn’t have been surrounded by inspiring people (teachers) who had gone abroad and did their postgraduate studies in the UK or USA

So, the opportunity of learning English enabled me to be successful, convince the selection panel, and get the scholarship [1 st interview]

The most recent opportunity English gave me was the scholarship My level of English language allowed me to pass the IELTS comfortably without even preparing for it I got 7.5 which led the way to the scholarship [1 st interview]

All participants were employed after graduating from their local universities Except for Fareed, Huda, and Medo, the rest of participants mentioned having a previous work experience that was directly linked to their good command of English language before starting their postgraduate degrees in the UK in Sep 2018 These professional experiences were situated in a context of very high unemployment rates especially among youth in Gaza and the West Bank According to Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS, 2019), unemployment rates in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) among youth (19-29) rose to the world’s highest level in 2018 at 44%; 27% in the West Bank and 69% in Gaza Strip The youth graduates were the most impacted group suffering from unemployment with a rate of 58%; 40% in the West Bank and 78% in Gaza In light of these exceptional statistics, the role English plays in the employability and social mobility of participants is perceived to be immensely significant Therefore, when participants discussed how life-changing English was to them, those participants were relating to and drawing on personal, lived experiences rather than repeating clichés The following quotation from Laila highlights how she constructed English as a key resource and enabler on a competitive job market.:

English gave me a job In Gaza, having good language skills especially in English is considered a privilege So, it is like a key to any institution especially if it’s like for teaching the language So, the first thing that it gave me was a job, and it was a life- changing experience through which not only my life was changed, but also the lives of my students It was the means to communicate and change the lives of the people I was interacting with on a daily basis [1st interview]

Other participants, namely Huda, Sharaf, and Akram, highlighted the value of cross-cultural communication which English made easier

It helped me better communicate with people and learn, so not only education-wise but also learning from people culturally [Huda, 1st interview]

Before my undergraduate degree, I was a tour guide in Bethlehem English served as a medium of communication a common language we shared You know, in every group there were different nationalities: Germans, English, Portuguese, Italians We all communicated with English [Sharaf, 1st interview]

The above accounts suggest that participants’ relationships with English were strong before travel These relationships were shaped by the significant role English played in important milestones of their lives whether at the ‘personal, emotional, psychological, cognitive, academic, professional, cultural, or/and global levels’, as Suhaib [1st interview] summarised However, such connections with/ conceptualisations of English were not separate from their surroundings but are rather embedded within a complex web of social and political power relations As such, the dynamic process of forming a relationship with and conceptualising English is characterised by the interaction between attitudes of individuals, societies, institutions, and governments Altogether, they form and perpetuate language ideologies which influence how people conceptualise the importance of language in their lives

The references participants made when discussing English language, i.e., previous formal education, extracurricular activities led by NGO institutions, lived experiences, and the jobs and academic success, are clear instances and iterations of English language being a powerful gatekeeper and a door-opener Thus, the way English is perceived to function as an empowering tool and facilitator for jobs, social and economic mobility, travel, study abroad, communication, and wider horizons is unsurprising/predictable and backs ideologies pertinent to the power and hegemony of English I say unsurprising because participants’ perceptions and views of English language are underpinned by ideologies which ‘often operate as tacit, common-sense notions about language and learning [ ] and are deeply embedded in our cultural ways of being’ (Razfar and Rumenapp, 2012, p.365) In essence, language ideologies prevailing in participants’ contexts contributed to developing participants’ perception of English In turn, these perceptions resonate with, feed into, and reproduce English ideologies This is not to presume those individuals were completely passive recipients in the face of the power of English (as explained later) Instead, it is what they witnessed and experienced -whether implicitly or explicitly- that made them have such views Participants were not just told or brainwashed into believing the importance and benefits of English for their success, but rather they experienced and attested to the power of English in many domains of their lives The classroom, for example, which was the first environment in which participants were exposed to English is usually reflective of the ideological policies of dominant educational institutions The media, Hollywood industry, TV news, job markets, and prestigious international universities altogether promote and perpetuate the prestigious and powerful status English enjoys in the world Participants were stuck in a loop of English language being a prerequisites/ requirement that they needed to meet in order to score high at school and university, compete in the local poor job market, win a scholarship, get admitted to a UK university, or complete a student visa application In light of these underpinning realities, it would be logical to consider participants’ conceptualisations of English as part of

‘practical consciousness’ rather than ‘discursive consciousness’ Razfar and Rumenapp (2012) remind us that practical consciousness occurs when dominant language ideologies are taken for granted and are uncontested Whereas, any rethinking of language ideology that de- naturalises and critically analyses dominant beliefs about language is part of ‘discursive consciousness’ It is eventually a loop of ideology in which language learners and users absorb the ideological hegemonic discourses which favour and privilege those who speak and perfect a certain language By attracting more individuals who aspire to the perceived advantages and capitals provided by the prestigious language, they become part of the ideological machinery which ultimately ‘wins the day’ (Blommaert, 1999, p.10).

Why the UK?

UK HE System as an Incentive to Study Abroad

R: Why did you choose to study in the UK in the first place?

Huda: because it has very good education, and there are scholarships And because it is a one-year programme Initially, I did not want to do a master’s because I thought it’s a waste of time I still think it’s kinda a waste of time because fine, I got this degree, then what? It’s only gonna add me like 300 Jordanian Dinars to my salary But, anyway, I am enjoying this experience I am not paying, so nothing to lose (financially) So, the one-year programme is the main reason why, and I do not regret it I’d still do it again [3rd interview]

Huda’s testimony summarises other participants’ main reasons to study in the UK, i.e., the well reputed education, availability of scholarships, and programmes' duration These three features were salient in all the participants’ profiles To start with, the good reputation of the

UK universities was a main reason attracting Palestinian sojourners to apply for postgraduate courses 'there'/here Although participants’ universities are concealed in this research for confidentiality purposes, it is worth mentioning that all participants applied and got admitted to UK’s top universities according to academic rankings In fact, some of the participants had the option of studying in either the USA or the UK, the two world-leading countries in higher education This suggests an awareness of 1 participants’ self-confidence of being competent candidates both linguistically and academically (by virtue of their successful profiles of language learning and academic distinction) since world-leading universities accept and grant scholarships for Palestinian scholars based on their academic merit; 2 the high status and prestigiousness, or ‘university branding’ (following Osman, 2008) of the target universities The academic ‘brand’ of a university is associated with many factors, such as: its historical legacy, research profile, academic ranking, and diversity on campus (as argued in Chapter Two) While these factors shape the image of and promote/’marketise’ the university worldwide so that it attracts international students (including Palestinians), the attracted international student becomes part of the branding campaign which celebrates diversity on campus; a cheerful, smiling face on the universities’ websites

The other related alluring feature was the scholarship, to which participants assigned many meanings; a materialistic reward of their investment in English or opportunity, a means of investing in English language learning in a different context (thus becoming both an outcome and impetus), and a reason or motive to study in the UK Essentially, it was the availability of scholarships which directed the participants to their UK universities In other words, the scholarship (and its process and conditions) preceded/ took priority over both the country (be it the USA or UK) and the university, given that the universities they were going to apply to in both countries would meet the standards of delivering world-class education and degrees Akram [3rd] made this clear when he said,

Good education… good reputation and the scholarship In my mind, I had two options: the… (I delete the UK scholarship as part of my ethical commitment) and the Fulbright in The States, but the process here is much faster than the Fulbright which takes one year! Basically, it is the scholarship nothing for England in specific, just to be honest here

Other participants also talked about the decision-making of choosing between the USA and

UK as destinations of postgraduate studies Again, the scholarship was a factor that tipped the scale in favour of the UK universities Suhaib, for example, said, ‘I wanted to study in the US, but the US did not give me a scholarship, so I was like, OK, let’s go to the UK [3rd]’ While Akram favoured the UK scholarship because of the faster process, Dua’a touched on the relative abundance of postgraduate scholarships in the UK compared to the USA and its social consequences She said,

I had two choices: the UK and USA, but the scholarships available in the UK are plenty I only know of one in the US (the Fulbright) The people [her role models] who did their degrees abroad went to the UK, so I knew there is a Palestinian community in the UK Although I did not know them, the mere fact that there are co- nationals and Arabs in this country was encouraging [3rd]

Participants’ testimonies above resonate with academic research from other contexts For example, Wilkins et al (2012) and Mazzarol and Soutar (2002) stress the importance of finance for students They argue that finance can emerge as even more important than the institution and country of destination (ibid)

Besides the scholarships, the master's programmes duration in the UK was another factor to favour the UK All participants were enrolled on a one-year Master’s/MSc programmes This particular aspect of the UK HE was more inviting to them than the USA whose master's programmes’ duration is two years Sharaf and Rita agreed with Huda (above) that it was mainly the one-year duration which encouraged them to pursue higher studies in the UK Sharaf, listing his reasons for studying in the UK, said,

Mainly because it is only one year, so (it’s) because of the time saved Second, it is the second-best country to study in after the USA so, it’s their high education level Also, because of the language the English language

R: So why did not you consider USA?

Sh: The process and degree are longer in USA [3rd]

It can be argued that this attraction to a relatively short degree is not only for the sake of saving time The participants above were keen to pursue a financially sponsored and ‘fast’ degree while not sacrificing the prestigious label or university brand element This does not necessarily mean those sojourners were not interested in investing effort in another degree (as illustrated later) Rather, this tendency to the UK shorter programmes could reflect their uncertainty about committing to more lengthy courses in a new and different context, especially when they have never travelled abroad before Therefore, as they were unsure about the outcome(s) of their academic sojourn, participants might have felt more comfortable with and opted for a calculated adventure, i.e., by choosing to spend less time abroad

H: A Master’s does not do anything in life! Everyone has a master's these days It has become a very ordinary thing no longer a sign of distinction

Another reason can be related to uncertainty of the economic benefits of this academic sojourn in the UK Participants, such as Huda above who raised the ‘then what?’ question after her degree, were not sure how their UK degree will enhance their careers in the frustrating job market in Palestine or at a global level The increasing number of Palestinian students/scholars who gain master's degrees whether from local, regional, or international universities could have serious impacts on participants/students’ evaluation of their master's degrees, thus probably seeing them as less valuable Globally, securing a job in an unfamiliar market is even more competitive and requires more than high command of English and academic merit (e.g., powerful networks, global work experiences, and sponsorship) These challenging conditions become worse when other more serious factors surface, such as: institutional racism, xenophobia, social class, lack of transparency, and ‘English frenzy’ (following Piller and Cho, 2013) With these realisations in mind, participants deemed spending more than one year studying a master's degree as not worthy of ‘the pain’ or risking their careers in Palestine and ‘a waste of time’

Interestingly, the perspective of the one-year duration as an attracting motive became contested and reconsidered by many participants after immersing in the UK educational system Reflecting on how time passes or ‘flies’ quickly in the UK, Dua’a, Laila, Huda, and Akram shared a common observation that the short duration they were happy with before is no longer a bonus for the UK/ English HE, but rather a deficit in the system Furthermore, all other participants touched on the lack of time indirectly when they were asked about the strategies they devised to further improve their English in the UK, as they responded, ‘there is no time for English’ This is a clear area of shift, after and as a result of mobility, where motives turned into impediments, as illustrated in 7.3.1 The quotations below capture the dramatic flip in attitudes towards the one-year master's courses in the UK:

It is a lot of pressure Who on earth does a dissertation in three months?! So stressful!

I always tell my mum I want to do another master's because in this one I have experimented and known the system; in the second I will directly apply my skills One year to teach you research methodology and how to be a critical thinker? Not enough! [Dua’a, 3rd]

With the amount of work we have and the time limits, I came to realise a Master’s degree needs two years I did not know this To get good grades and enjoy the experience, you need more time [Huda, 3rd]

Other Reasons

In addition to academic reasons, other various reasons for travelling and studying in the UK featured in participants’ responses It is important to mention that these reasons or motives of the academic sojourn were talked about both directly and indirectly As such, for some participants who did not articulate them quite clearly, I was able to collect them from their testimonies across all the interviews as the journey unfolded These reasons were incorporated within the main, big reasons discussed above All the reasons, regardless of their classification, served the ultimate purpose of questing for self-fulfilment and gaining capital through this journey With this understanding, these reasons are not considered subsidiary as they were believed to constitute other layers of self-fulfilment In fact, these reasons were more subjective and personal as they related to participants’ decision of travel and crossing borders per se and not necessarily the academic side of the experience In fact, the wording of the question I asked, i.e ‘Why did you choose the UK for travel and study?’ could have directed participants to articulate and focus on reasons related to aspects of UK HE as prime motives After all, this mobility experience was undertaken for study-abroad/academic purposes, and thus these reasons remained at the heart of the academic sojourn Nonetheless, the other personal reasons, I can argue, were as genuine and even more preferred and enjoyed by participants They actually could not conceal themselves as they emerged across participants’ profiles Generally, these motives can be classified under two concepts: 1

‘leisure and consumption’, and 2 interim release

5.2.2.1 The Tourist Student: Leisure and Consumption

Following Kubota’s (2011) notion of ‘leisure and consumption’ in informal settings of language learning, I utilise the concept to understand participants’ ‘pursuit of pleasure and enjoyment’ (ibid, p.475) in the UK In engaging in leisure activities, individuals consume the activity, the services, and the skills for entertainment/pleasure or accumulating knowledge and experience (Stebbins, 1997) My participants indicated that they started imagining the different types of leisure activities they would practice when they were applying for the postgraduate studies These activities were part of their ‘imagined mobility’ (following Baas, 2010) which almost started to materialise when they ‘received the scholarship offer letter email’ as [Laila, 1st] stated She also said that, out of excitement, she searched at google maps for the main streets she was going to stroll in; cafes, parks, museums etc she was going to visit and enjoy Fareed [1st] shared with her the excitement and showed me a prepared bucket list of travel destinations he had to 'tick off' In fact, all participants showed early evidence of willingness to ‘consume’ their academic sojourn, English language, their UK visa, and other services and facilities provided for students as resources to access new lifestyles and leisurely experiences such as travelling and doing sightseeing, going to the cinema, and trying different cultural cuisines While participants spoke with doubt and uncertainty about achieving economic gains out of their sojourn, they seemed more confident and certain that their travel experience would be resourceful in other ways, as Huda [3rd] digressed above when she said, ‘but, anyway, I am enjoying this experience.’

All participants’ accounts after moving to the UK showed strong inclinations towards consuming leisurely activities, although the time factor and study obligations limited those activities for some participants such as Medo who travelled the least Fareed [2nd] captured this struggle between academic responsibilities and leisure when he said he was ‘sandwiched between submissions and preparing travel papers and applying for a Schengen visa’ As seen, leisure is mainly manifested in travelling across the UK and even in other countries All participants embarked on trips within the UK visiting different cities, castles, beaches, museums, and places in the countryside In so doing, they practised different activities that are typical of any tourist behaviour such as: taking photos, attending cultural festivals, buying souvenirs, booking hotels, going to popular cafes, and trying cultural cuisines This established Palestinian students as ‘domestic tourists’ (following Payne, 2009) in their host country Moreover, except for Rita and Medo, the rest of participants crossed the UK borders and travelled to other countries not only in Europe but also in Africa (Suhaib) and Latin America (Dua’a)

The leisurely side of respondents’ academic sojourn which was both envisaged and later achieved through tourism was a pivotal reference point across all their profiles Travelling whether inside or outside the UK provided participants with unique, unprecedented pleasure and freedom of movement, made them explore new cultures, and even collect experiences of being expert travellers Fareed, who has the richest profile of travelling during his sojourn (35 destinations in the UK and nine European countries), can be considered as a ‘buff’ (Kubota, 2011) as he strived to ‘systematically accumulate’ (ibid, 476) skills and knowledge pertinent to travelling and exploring places When I asked him to justify this eagerness to travel, he made it clear that it is a regressive reaction to the restricted mobility he suffered from in Palestine (see quotation below) Equally, the impulse to freely travel and see places and cultures was the same for all participants because of their severely restricted local context in Palestine No wonder that having imagined mobility aspirations was a strong motive for them before travelling to the UK Whereas, embarking on subsequent ‘micro-mobilities’ (Holton and Finn, 2018) after reaching their study destination was a form of compensation for their immobility (lack of travel/ restricted movement) in Palestine For the majority of participants, this travel experience was the first outside their cities in Gaza and the West Bank Leaving their home country to study abroad was their solely guaranteed strategy to exit and see the world, i.e., ‘migrating to learn and learning to migrate’ (following Lefebvre, 1991)

F: The lack of mobility back home is driving me to seize every chance to travel R: How do you describe your feelings towards this experience of travel?

F: Freedom Happiness Anything positive you can think of [Fareed, 2nd]

In light of the above, students’ mobility trajectories should be viewed as processual rather than ‘a one-off migration event’ (Findlay et al., 2012) In the case of Palestinian students, their academic sojourn in the UK is part of, a means of, or rather the onset of a wider set of ‘a mobility culture’ (ibid), or at least plans for mobility throughout their lifespan Participants’ rich profiles of travel during their sojourn demonstrate this Also, some of them embarked on other journeys following their UK sojourn, while others planned their mobilities for the next years Additionally, participants’ im/mobilities rendered the dichotomy of the permanent and the temporary problematic The participants’ accounts showed elements of developing a sense of belonging or ‘a second home’ [Huda] in their temporary dwellings For example, Laila said that after a while of settling in her city, she stopped capturing pictures or ‘documenting the moment’ as she used to do during her first months in the UK She justified this by her being a 'Londoner', not a tourist in ‘the city’ Here, Laila emphasised her ‘living’ not ‘visiting’ status in relation to other people in her city This aligns with Prazeres (2018) findings which conclude that some international students tend to use their relative immobility/stay during their sojourn to signal distinction from the mobilities of travellers and tourists As such, they

‘legitimise’ their belonging and insider-ness to the place along with the status and capitals associated with it Eventually, these students end up ‘collecting homes’, which is about

‘feeling at home’, and narrating their home stories to friends and family during the sojourn and upon return (ibid, pp 931-32) At the end of the day, Palestinian students in the UK aspired for some permanence in their temporary moorings (following Phipps, 2013) (by

‘collecting a second home’), and some temporariness in their stagnant lives (interim release from siege and immobility) and in their relatively permanent ‘homes’/moorings in the UK (by being tourists)

5.2.2.2 Crossing Borders as Interim Release

As discussed above, the leisure, fun layer of the academic sojourn of participants had its underpinnings in the devastating local conditions of severe restriction in mobility and lack of cross-cultural communication at home in Palestine Besides this challenging political context, other social constraints came into play Therefore, this travel experience for studying abroad offered participants an opportunity to temporarily retreat and leave their challenging context at home I describe this leave as a release because it captures (at least) half of the participants’ pre-departure situation as being used to living in the ‘world’s largest open-air prison’ (i.e., the Gaza Strip) These scholars were able to release themselves by virtue of their academic distinction and aspirations This release, though, is interim for four reasons: 1 the majority of participants signed legally binding contracts with their sponsors to return to Palestine upon finishing their studies; 2 participants wanted to return because of the challenges discussed earlier and for professional and personal commitments in Palestine; 3 those who wanted to remain in the UK could not secure a legal way to stay in the country, except for Rita (I am concealing her situation for confidentiality purposes); and 4 eight participants left the UK by the end of their studies, seven of them to Palestine and one to pursue another degree in the USA As such, participants’ trajectories of border-crossing were indeed interim

While the political restrictions crept in all participants’ profiles and imaginations, escaping the social constrains predominantly featured in women participants’ accounts Their sojourn was perceived by them as an opportunity to live independently and explore new lifestyles and identity facets Laila stated that she wanted to try living abroad alone for the first time in her life She was clearly keen to start a new adventure leading an independent and individual lifestyle away from her family and society She could not help comparing between the two social contexts of Palestine and the UK, particularly stressing the disparity in the degree of freedom and agency women exercise in the two contexts Moreover, Laila touched on some aspects of social norms in Palestine which limited her freedom and independence such as: controlling the time she spent out of the house by her family, having to ask for permission before going out or meeting people, the way people judge women who do not dress in a certain manner or ‘decently’, as well as the general status of women which was not satisfying for her

L: Here, I can do anything I feel like doing I dress up the way I want, without having to worry if my jacket is a bit short or if my neighbour will gossip about the way I look

I spend as much time as I feel I need in the library or in a cafe without having to monitor my time because I need to return before it is too late or too dark I meet people and go to events I am definitely free here

R: So what does this tell you about yourself as a woman in the UK?

L: I feel like women are more valuable here I know that there is disparity between genders everywhere, but still women have social status, freedom, liberty everything

In my twitter account, I follow some people from Gaza They keep discussing silly topics related to women [for example] ‘Oh, what do you think of women who smoke?’ I compare between the two contexts when you compare women status here and see they can do whatever they want, I just feel sorry for people back home This is one of the things I am going to miss the most being a woman here compared to there [Laila, 3rd]

Similarly, Dua’a discussed how her journey in the UK liberated her from the social constrains and stereotypes practiced against women at home, which negatively affected her self-image at some point She also talked about how empowering this experience is to her, thus allowing her to explore and experiment with the range of identity facets that were rendered possible and more transparent in the UK For example, during the early months, Dua’a grappled with the strangeness of her sojourn which made her feel ‘vulnerable’ as a woman Later towards the middle of the journey, her testimony revealed a change in perspectives towards herself as a female living alone and in full charge of her own life Like Laila, the simple activities Dua’a was engaging in such as: walking, shopping, meeting people outside, having a cuppa in a cafe, or going to the gym were not constructed as mere activities of consuming leisure, but rather a deployment of agency and independence Eventually, she assigned her sojourn meanings of confidence, independence, and agency

I am more confident here when it comes to physical appearance In Gaza, they see you as a moving object which should fit their standards of beauty I am a bit fat and used to receive comments and advice on the need to lose weight You feel like you are less than others because of these stereotypes It is not the case here They do not appear to care, and they wear whatever they want without the need to cover their bodies even when they are not beautiful [not fit] according to our standards I love myself more here [Dua’a, 3rd]

I like the fact that I depend on myself for doing all the things that I did not use to do back home I cook for myself, I do the shopping and the laundry, I go walking, I go to trips I do everything I am more convinced now that I actually do not need anyone in my life to depend on I can go on solely [Dua’s, 3rd]

It appears that the cliché ‘strong independent woman’ materialised in the cases of the women in my research Huda also shared the same experiences and sentiments of satisfaction and empowerment as a result of being in the UK She talked about how her previous work conditions were dominated by men which caused her to quit and try a different, liberating route, i.e., study abroad Moreover, she was keen to maintain the empowerment and independence she gained through her academic sojourn and even utilise them when she returns home

H: I am happy I am a female now Before, I used to hate that I am a female

R: Before traveling to the UK?

Concluding Remarks

Individuals’ relationships with and perceptions of English language has many layers One of them is how language learning and investment relates to opportunities and general self- fulfilment As discussed above, participants identified many reasons for their academic sojourn in the UK These reasons stemmed from and fed into their continuous enhancement of their selves or human capitals (from a neo-liberal perspective) Gaining a prestigious UK degree from world-renowned academic institutions, having a scholarship award in their CVs, and returning home with enhanced English skills were the main pull factors (Wilkins et al., 2012), while leaving the challenging and limiting local context served as a push factor (ibid)

These factors were hoped to provide participants access to richer experiences, knowledge, skills, and capitals to draw on in their life Meanwhile, motives for participants’ mobility experience incorporated elements related to their subjectivities (Kramsch, 2009), such as consuming leisure through tourism, emancipating themselves from political and social constraints (or what is called ‘individual salvation’), exercising personal agency, and exploring different facets of identity Notably, participants’ motives or ‘desires’ here resonate with Kramsch’s (2009) description of the manifestations of desire in language learning These particularly include the desire to escape from one’s social constraints, obtain freedom and economic value, and explore one’s identity in new contexts

It is important to state that the two sets of reasons have areas of reciprocity and can be extended to complement each other After all, the quest for and success in self-fulfilment and enhancing one’s human capital is measured against accumulating experiences, skills, and values especially in a context of dominant neo-liberal discourses (Fairclough, 2006) where everything is commodified Participants conceptualised their big sojourn as a way to invest in their human capital However, the manifestation of this investment took different, rather entangled shapes across their profiles The more utilitarian factors such as gaining a UK degree from a ‘branded’ university, the uniqueness of the sojourn, and the English language skills can lead to other more subjective qualities/ qualifications such as: agency, richer identity facets, recognisability etc Mutually, leisure and consumption and interim release can be extended to see their embedded utilitarian advantage and economic value For example, the agency and empowerment which characterise this set of motives denote better communication skills, resourcefulness, and wider horizons These skills, in essence, are important personal qualifications for employability and thus have economic value All in all, participants embraced these sets of motives as a package to embark on their academic sojourn and negotiated and (re)worked them throughout their journey This leads to the conclusion that these motives should be seen as falling on a continuum with no particular fine lines which participants moved across.

Moving Across Geopolitical Borders: From ‘Knowing’ English to ‘Living in’ English

Relocating: ‘My English is Not Enough Here’

Changing places was the first reality the participants had to interact with as a direct result of their mobility This interaction inevitably had its linguistic consequences, i.e., changing their perceptions of their English language As seen in participants’ pre-departure linguistic trajectories, they perceived and talked about their English skills in positive terms and confidence Their local context allowed them to feel distinguished there, where English is a precious foreign language/asset That distinction and confidence was further solidified by achieving high scores of the powerful, international test, the IELTS and wining scholarships to study in world-leading universities With the exception of a few cross-cultural encounters with foreign tourists and visitors especially in the case of some participants from the West Bank, it can be said that the IELTS was the first serious ‘test’ and encounter with English language at an international level The participants passed the test successfully and were ready to embark on a new journey of other continuous tests

The new UK context was an absolute area of difference at many levels First, the place itself was no longer the participants’ local arena This meant grappling with the unfamiliarity of the new place became the new norm/challenge Second, the place was ‘super-diverse’, thus having more competitors, such as: the native speakers of English who constantly claim ownership of the place and the language, as well as other multilingual speakers whose experiences might have been richer and proficiency levels higher than these novice (in terms of travel and mobility) Palestinian scholars This entailed shaking the distinction element/privilege which was at the heart of their linguistic confidence and pride Third, living in the new place meant living in the new language system, i.e., ‘living in English’ As such, this required that English transformed into a language of life whose uses went beyond academia and work This new status demanded not only higher linguistic competence but also cultural and social awareness as a basic means of communicating one’s self to go about their daily life routine At the end of the day, what once used to be a privilege and a marker of distinction turned into an essential means of survival and an average, ordinary resource Thus, participants’ English skills started to attract a lower value by virtue of moving from ‘low scale English’ to ‘higher scales’ (following Blommaert, 2010), as they constructed their linguistic skills through a deficit lens:

I feel my English was more appreciated back home because appreciation comes from scarcity So, I was one of a few with that level of English, and people used to praise my English Here, It is an English-speaking country, and I am not the only English speaker It is not rare or distinguishable [Sharaf, 1st interview]

I thought my English was good, but by the time I arrived here, I thought ‘wait, which level is my English actually?’ I was doubting myself because again I was introduced to a new accent, new terms I never heard before So, yeah, I felt my English was more appreciated like 100%! [Fareed, 1st interview]

There was a consensus among participants that their English was more appreciated and praised in Palestine This is due to their awareness of the current status and value of their English as being no longer ‘scarce’ or ‘distinguishable’ Therefore, the English they brought with them was seen as needing improvement to suit the new surroundings The participants agreed that the type of improvement they needed was particularly pertinent to the social English outside classroom As such, they maintained that they needed to expand their vocabulary and expressions to be used in the street Sharaf made it clear that his English was

‘not enough’ for effective social communication at the start of his sojourn Fareed, too, complained that he sometimes was at loss for words as he had to think about the language when he spoke to native speakers In the same vein, Suhaib expressed his ‘weakness’ in English language when he described his struggle with social communication He stressed that point throughout his entire sojourn/ interviews He said,

In casual speech, I feel that my English is terrible, and we discussed this in our first meeting Because I acquired English in purely academic contexts, that really affected my ability to use it as a social means of relating to others, and I recognise this is an area of improvement to me [Suhaib, 1st]

Improving ‘casual speech’ was a frequent issue raised by all the participants By the end of the academic year, the participants felt (varied degrees of) change and improvement in their English mainly because of getting used to the UK context However, the change was not significant for the majority of them who had expected more out of their sojourn in this regard (speaking 'social English') Dua’a realised that ‘it does not happen in nine, ten months’ When

I asked participants about the strategies they developed to improve their social English, they did not mention any particular strategy other than learning through their studies The main reason for not accomplishing that goal was their full schedules and busy time (and occupied minds) on their campuses, in addition to their limited social circles in the UK

Do not expect me to focus on my English with all the workload I have here I mean look, the sun sets before 4 pm these days The atmosphere is frustrating I can barely find time to do the essential readings and structure my essays [Laila, 1st]

Laila was trying to adjust to the shorter days and 'faster pace' of her new context as she was required to fulfil her academic duties and meet the expectations of her family and sponsors

On top of that, she, like the rest of participants, had limited social contacts Indeed, these circumstances added layers to the complexity and difficulty the participants had to grapple with In light of this situation, finding the time and resources to improve English skills was deemed a luxury

In the classroom, the participants discussed their academic English in more positive terms In fact, the majority of the participants considered that their English skills played a part (sometimes significantly) in contributing to their academic success Fareed maintained, ‘it contributed a lot to my academic writing I came prepared’ Suhaib also praised his academic English saying, ‘the transferable skills of critical analysis and creative writing enabled me to critique and reflect on the topics I came with zero knowledge in’ For Sharaf and Huda, things were quite different Sharaf stressed that his English was 'not good enough' for academic writing as he had very basic skills of writing academic essays Furthermore, he considered English to be a hindrance towards achieving higher marks

I feel I can express my strong scientific background better in Arabic When I think of expressing them in English, they would come out with lower quality [Sharaf, 2nd]

Having strong scholarly abilities did not mean those participants did not face incidents of challenge as a result of using English language in the new classroom context, where they used to excel in Palestine The challenges ranged between struggling with some heavy accents of professors and worrying from the competition with native speakers and other international classmates, to dealing with issues of style and inconsistency when writing academic essays and more seriously ‘losing voice’ (Pellegrino Aveni, 2005) and resorting to silence Due to unfamiliarity with their surroundings, and to avoid embarrassing, uncomfortable encounters, some participants waived their right to speak and preferred not to communicate Suhaib, despite his distinguished academic profile, struggled with ‘social English’ He described a situation with his classmates where he preferred to take ‘protective practices’ (following Goffman, 1959) by remaining silent and not participating to avoid embarrassment and safeguard his self-image

I feel embarrassed by the fact that I am saying something, and I see a weird reaction from the other person I try to avoid such embarrassing situations I remember a situation when I was in the … class We were required to work in groups to develop a project building proposal I have a three-year experience of writing such proposals and know a lot about that area My group had no experience and were not doing okay

English ‘(Un)moored’: ‘The Diversity is Crazy!’

Meeting a wide range of linguistic repertoires and Englishes was another unexpected, sometimes disturbing reality for the majority of the participants Except for Rita and Sharaf, the other participants maintained that the diversity they were exposed to when they reached the ‘cold shores’ was overwhelming and surprising Table 5.1 above includes comments on the diversity the participants witnessed and reacted to during the first months of their arrival Those surprised participants seemed to have expected everyone in the UK to conform to the 'standard British' variety (RP); the English promoted in their local schools and the one they heard and imitated when they watched movies such as ‘Harry Potter’ However, the reality was that the English around them ‘was barely English English’ [Huda, 1 st focus group], and

‘everyone had their own accents’ [Laila, 1 st focus group] These new encounters made participants view that the English they possessed was not necessarily the best asset that they would always capitalise on comfortably and still win Even on campus, where participants’ linguistic abilities were viewed to be strong, they also had to deal with and meet the standards of the different formal, academic register imposed by British academic norms For example, participants’ written English essays were commented on by their tutors and markers as ‘not too formal’ [Dua’a and Laila], having issues of consistency and style [Akram], ‘limited in vocabulary’ [Medo], or even ‘weird’ as in the case of Huda [2 nd interview]

H: Yes, my academic results do reflect a language-related problem So, there is this lecturer who wrote to me in the feedback on one of my papers ‘your use of English is weird’ It is so rude, right? She knows she has international students!

R: How did you feel about that?

H: I felt really bad I should’ve talked to her I mean, I understand where she is coming from because my English is not the best, but I am not used to writing essays

It was my first actual essay

Not knowing the suitable register, i.e., degree of formality, to be used in the new contexts was not exclusive to the academic settings Rather, it extended and was even more obvious in less formal interactions That was an early observation the participants reported in the first phases of data collection Both Sharaf and Suhaib perceived their English as ‘not social’, ‘not informal’, or not suitable for ‘street conversations’ This perception was highlighted in the

UK by virtue of their (cultural, linguistic) difference This affected the way they conceptualised their English as well as their own self-image As seen before, Suhaib preferred to be silent sometimes ‘because he lacked knowledge in English in these situations’ [2 nd interview] While Huda felt bad at how her tutor described her English and Suhaib resorted to silence, both Sharaf and Medo embraced the feedback as a learning experience Meanwhile, Fareed maintained that he was not worried about judgements on his English because he is ‘at peace with the idea that he is not a native’ [2 nd ]

Sh: The English taught is different Of course, there is a difference I speak weird English, so formal so academic, not street English… People commented that my English is weird

Sh: It is so formal It is like books’ English This is the way I learned the language R: How did you react to such comments?

Sh: It’s okay These comments enlighten me to improve my English in a certain direction… to have the English similar to street language, not the formal one [Sharaf,

It can be argued that those students perceived their English through adopting a deficit discourse, as being not academic enough in the classroom, yet too academic or not informal enough for non-academic encounters This paradox can be particularly observed in Sharaf’s contradicting views (see table 5.1) In the first interview, he maintained that his English was 'not good enough' especially for social communication, while in the second interview he re- conceptualised his English as good for communication but not enough for academic writing This indicates that (re)conceptualising and (re)valuing one’s linguistic repertoires is discursive, dynamic, contextual, and relational, as it constitutes an integral part of an ongoing (un)learning process

When I first asked the participants to describe the Englishes they spoke, they had determinist labels for their Englishes, e.g., American English, neutral, or Palestinian English Towards the end of their journey, the labels became more fluid and less certain ('un-moored' views of language, Phipps, 2013) For example, Suhaib described his English as ‘it does not have a label’ Fareed viewed his English as ‘intelligible and international’ Akram said his English

‘is more British now having traces of his heavy British local accent that made people think [he] has been here for a long time’, while Huda and Laila considered their English as

‘Americanised’ The way these participants viewed their linguistic repertoires in the first phases of their sojourn and the comments they received reflect and entrench one-language-in- a-place ideologies, i.e., moored (Phipps, 2013), essentialist, territorialised views of language Such views lock language into certain territories, thus producing unrealistic, simplistic sociolinguistic sceneries

Mooring language also extends to accents, varieties, and registers For instance, Akram was perceived by the locals as having been ‘here’ for a long time because of his accented English

In a way, the locals legitimised his existence in their place because Akram seemed to have adopted sufficient local language features to pass as local(-ish) He, in turn, wanted to acquire that accent ‘from the natives’ since the very beginning of his sojourn because he was aware of issues of inclusion and exclusion based on language, or variety in his case Huda referred to some comments she received on her American accent as ‘a kind of polite racism’ Although those comments were seemingly positive, she thought it was not nice to hear them because they highlighted and actualised her difference and non-belonging Comments on language proficiency, accented English, or sounding ‘American’ align with the notion of ‘language purism’/a homogeneous view of language, where language is seen to be pure and neatly fitted in its pure context/place In essence, these are ideological and political comments which orbit in the space of nationalism and monolingualism

The diversity participants witnessed in the UK as well as the different labels they ascribed to their Englishes challenge notions of mooring and ‘language essentialism’ (Irvine, 2000) Nonetheless, participants’ expectations of English language and surprise of the linguistic diversity at the beginning of the sojourn manifested essentialist/moored approaches to language Ultimately, though, participants (and their Englishes) reflected the places they had been to (their routes) while, at the same time, they engaged in acts of attaching language/varieties to places and localities (roots) (‘routes and roots’, Gilroy, 1993) In particular, the Englishes participants had reflected their perceived and assigned status in the

UK as being ‘international’ [Fareed above], ‘not native’, and ‘outsiders’

Still, some participants had certain essentialist views of English language that did not change by the end of their sojourn For example, some of them were still annoyed by some of the heavy accents/varieties around as they struggled to understand them, and others aspired to acquire standard British English ‘from the natives themselves’ However, the majority of participants exhibited more flexibility towards the diversity around them ‘There is no good English; there are Englishes, and I accept the infinite varieties out there’ [Suhaib, 2 nd interview] As such, it can be argued that participants problematised and un-moored their perceptions of English language by virtue of being mobile The quotation below depicts an awareness of the dynamics of language on the move and the linguistic diversity and unpredictability they cause, as languages anchor their ships to unexpected wharfs (inspired by Alison Phipps’ (2013) metaphor of un/mooring)

H: People are moving, and their accents and languages move and change Here in…., it is hard to change your accent because of the diversity which allows you to speak your own English You will find other people speaking your language For example, Arabs are everywhere here

D: And you can hear someone speaking a language, and you start wondering what language that could be…

H: True, but it is all good because it is easier to understand non-British accents, plus they will not judge you [Huda and Dua’a, 1 st focus group].

Un-imagining ‘Imagined Communities’: Meeting Different Members

As seen above, the participants encountered different, heterogeneous cultures and Englishes in their new globalised context in the UK Likewise, they encountered their ‘imagined communities’ (following Pavlenko and Norton, 2007) upon arrival to the UK Having essentialist views on language (as seen above) can also suggest that such views extend to its speakers In other words, the participants viewed a certain language or dialect as being attached to a determined and bounded place or region This means that this bounded place is usually imagined to be inhabited by a community of homogeneous speakers This goes in line with the traditional teaching methods and styles the participants received in their formal education, i.e., they learned and rehearsed English with an imagined community of homogeneous, cooperative interactants However, the reality was that the participants met different groups of interlocutors in the UK The most featured people in the data, as labelled and most commonly mentioned by the participants, were 1 the native speakers of English, 2 international classmates and second language users

Research data revealed that meeting and dealing with the heterogeneity of the people ‘out there’ triggered different psychological reactions which affected participants’ social interactions Notably, those psychological responses were associated with the presence of and interaction with English native speakers (ENS) The majority of the participants reported experiencing feelings of linguistic and social anxiety, challenge, and even intimidation when interacting with ENS To start with, both Laila and Dua’a reported feeling uncomfortable and anxious when talking with ENS

Whenever I talk to a native speaker, I have a feeling that they judge me I even make unusual mistakes that I would not normally do if I was talking to someone else Recently, I noticed I do not do as many mistakes as I used to before… To be honest, I avoided English for the first months as I did not feel the courage to use it… there was a barrier preventing me [Laila, 2 nd ]

This testimony shows how interacting with a different group of people affected fluency and the whole interaction as the participant became more sensitive to her language use Conversing with people perceived as of a higher status (socially and linguistically) made Laila feel that her English was being judged (from its owners) Consequently, this affected her self-confidence, and she became more conscious of her grammar and sentences to the extent that she eventually made linguistic mistakes she would not normally do ‘Normally, here refers to the usual encounters where she used to use her English to interact with non- native speakers like herself In those encounters, she was a more confident and fluent speaker, and her English was a marker of distinction and a source of advantage In the UK, though, her lack of fluency and linguistic mistakes were markers of a ‘downward trajectory’ (Simpson and Cooke, 2010) of disadvantage, weakness, and silence

Likewise, Akram and Medo reported feeling challenged when talking to ENS Medo mentioned having encounters where local people from his neighbourhood gave him ‘strange looks’ as he was not able to express himself clearly Their non-verbal reaction to his English highlighted his disadvantaged status as being ‘international, not native, and not from here’ Akram [2nd] maintained that being with a group of only British people was ‘really challenging’ ‘Being exposed to a slang from the north, I think this is the most challenging encounter’

In the same vein, encounters with ENS served as a barrier for language development and practice Fareed maintained that he stopped practising ‘accented English’ and imitating the locals because he was afraid that his language would ‘come out as a mockery’ Although this did not affect his confidence because he ‘is at peace with’ his non-nativeness, his anticipation of others’ reactions towards him imitating their dialect (or metalinguistic awareness) was a psychological barrier which held him back from speaking the local variety Fareed was aware that ‘speaking like the locals’ would enhance his position and social life in his place, but he compromised that as he became more aware of his difference as well as the labels attached to languages, accents and varieties

F: With more practice and communication, I can reach that level where I speak like them However, I do not try to use their words or style

F: I do not want them to think I am mocking them because, to them, it is not a complete accent! There will always be something missing that I might not be aware of R: So you are not working on acquiring the local accent now

F: There is no real effort, although I want to improve that As I said, I am afraid it is gonna come out as a mockery especially with heavy accents I now know I should avoid them because they come with labels [Fareed, 2nd]

Other participants continued to receive comments on their English throughout the entire sojourn The reactions to those comments (whether coming from ENS or second language speakers) varied amongst the participants While the majority were happy with the positive comments coming from ENS perceiving them as uplifting, others were critical of them For example, Suhaib thought that the comments he received on his English manifested some stereotypical views on the people coming from the Gaza Strip (that their English was not imagined to be advanced)

S: I receive comments quite a lot People associate Gaza with the blockade and lack of travel and low levels of English I would be in a conversation, and they will be like,

‘Oh my God! You just arrived last September! And after three, four minutes of speech;

‘Wow, your English is quite good’

R: How do you feel about these comments?

S: Well, at least they are reassuring that I did not mess things up, I mean (laughs) [Suhaib, 2nd]

Sharaf and Fareed were the only participants who noted that they had concerns interacting with their tutors/ supervisors Both worried about making mistakes and wanted to safeguard their good image on campus Sharaf said he felt less confident when he had committed linguistic mistakes in front of his professors especially when he felt that they did not fully understand him Again, such situations increased his language anxiety and affected his perception of his English (as undergoing a ‘downward mobility’)

Generally, interacting with international people/ classmates was perceived as a less stressful experience for the majority of participants Huda explained this when she pointed out to the relatively similar position the participants shared with international classmates In fact, some participants placed themselves in a higher position in terms of linguistic and academic achievement This made international classmates less competitive, and thus easier to deal with Furthermore, they were perceived to be cooperative and responsive interactants who usually commented positively on the participants’ language However, Huda, Sharaf, and Akram were critical of such comments Huda, as seen previously, considered comments on her accent a ‘kind of polite racism’ Whereas, Akram maintained that the most comments he received came from second language speakers who ‘tend to pay attention to the way [he] speaks and pick [him] up on wrong structures more than the natives who ignore these’ [2 nd ]

He stressed that he would not trust second language speakers’ use, and therefore not take their feedback seriously Rather, he preferred to ‘learn the accent from the natives because [he] can trust it is 100% genuine use’ [2 nd ]

So far, it is apparent that different interactants (and their social status) bring about different encounters, psychological responses, and linguistic perceptions However, this does not necessarily entail that the participants’ language value and success was entirely dependent on how others allowed them to be used or predetermined them Personal agency was noticeable across most of the participants’ profiles, which suggests they were not passive recipients or influencees of their sojourn The participants reported different strategies which they devised for making the interaction successful For example, they asked other interlocutors to repeat their sentences, say them slower, or elaborate on their ideas In the case of Sharaf, who had an interest in learning foreign languages, he was able to converse with some international students using their own mother tongues (e.g., German and Spanish) As such, challenges of social interaction in a new context, with different repertoires and interlocutors did not always place participants’ language in a lower scale position as they seemed to be more accepting of the new encounters’ demands and embraced them as good feedback for advancing their linguistic and cultural competences.

Sociolinguistics of Palestinian Students’ Mobility Trajectories: Towards a More Context-sensitive

One of the premises of Sociolinguistics is that human interaction is complex, variable, unpredictable, relative, and conditional While interaction takes place in contexts populated with structures, power asymmetries, norms, and expectations, there is still room for agency, creativity, resourcefulness, and possibility Given these conditions of interaction and interactants, language use becomes contextual, discursive and complex, thus challenging fixed views/approaches which try to theorise it in limited and generalised frames When the context of interaction is language-in-motion, more unpredictability, complexity, and destabilisation (i.e., notion of turbulence) is expected to arise Investigating the study abroad experiences of Palestinian students as a main context of mobility offers insights (from a highly particularised population of international students) into how those scholars engage in the geopolitical, academic, linguistic, and socio-cultural contexts of their new and first experiences abroad In particular, it provides an opportunity to examine the effects of mobility on their perception of and relationship with their linguistic repertoires In the previous section, light was shed on the participants’ situated experiences of transition with English language in the UK with specific reference to place, different Englishes, and interactants These experiences mainly operated within deferential/ stratified hierarchies (or scales following Blommaert, 2010), and thus produced expected, ‘redundant orders and practices’ (Marston et al., 2005) Although research participants were novice mobile individuals (and thus more prone to the effects of mobility and the explicit power asymmetries), their trajectories featured moments of individual agency deployment These moments or ‘singularities’ (ibid) which created ‘unique events’ deserve further attention despite the dominance of hierarchical experiences and relations Here, Palestinian students are viewed as agentive or ‘resourceful’ agents (following Pennycook, 2012) Obviously, the linguistic resources they brought with them allowed them to manoeuvre and practice agency

Instances of personal agency varied across participants’ profiles However, a common and noticeable achievement among Palestinian students was their high academic/scholarly performance The majority of them were among the top achievers in their classes Five of them graduated with an overall distinction, while one was awarded a prize from their prestigious college for the most outstanding academic performance As such, it was obvious to the participants that even in the presence of more competition and stressful encounters, they could still outperform their fellow classmates, be they ENS or not This is an empowering example that should be highlighted as a main area of agency and defying expectations, generalisations, and rigid scales It is also an inspiration for future sojourners which may emancipate them from the stereotypical views on international students (as being always impacted and disadvantaged by their non-nativeness) The grand objective of the sojourn for the majority of the Palestinian sojourners was to pass and even excel in the academic experience, a goal that materialised through their efforts and agency

One area of transition which some participants exhibited was their perception of the different Englishes around them Towards the end of the sojourn, some of them embraced their non- nativeness, and did not aim to acquire the idealised RP as they shifted their focus to ineligibility and performativity Language was realistically perceived and appreciated for its

‘performative’ value rather than the ‘representational’ (Pennycook, 2012) aspect Here, the participants were inspired by the diverse non-native varieties around them which were generally seen as less complicated than the Standard British, and whose speakers were more comfortable to interact with Where does this lead to? This means that the value participants had assigned to the RP ‘a high-scale’ English changed in favour of other non-native varieties (usually perceived as low-scale English) This perception does not only problematise high- scale English as a ‘timeless’, valid and pursued asset, but also it shows an act of ‘rescaling’ (Canagarajah, 2013) The participants here actively engaged in ‘redefining the norms’ (ibid) and exercising criticality by acknowledging and accentuating the value of non-native varieties and their speakers However, it should be stated that such acts of ‘rescaling’ were contingent and relative, thus depending on contextual factors, such as the (linguistic) diversity of the city, and the type of interactants That is to say, in the big cities where participants were exposed to ‘infinite varieties’ of English, they were more inclined to develop such critical views and appreciation of non-native varieties Also, the value ascribed to non-native varieties and their speakers was subject to change and re(valuation) in the presence of native speakers, or more proficient L2 speakers, or in the formal competitive academic contexts

A final example of agency comes from the profile of Sharaf As said before, this participant had an interest in studying foreign languages His encounters with international, L2 speakers during his sojourn offered him a chance to practice his foreign languages (namely German and Spanish) as well as agency When he or the other interactant stumbled with English, he would use his other linguistic resources to ‘lift the interaction to the level of common meanings’ (Blommaert, 2010, p.33) According to Blommaert, this is an act/ a definition of

‘scale-jumping’ which refers to speakers’ agency and ability to ‘constitute, organise, and regulate space’ (Archibald et al., 2018)

This discussion, which foregrounded and accentuated participants’ agency, criticality, and resourcefulness, demonstrates that the mobility experience is not only about movement across fixed, rigid scales, i.e., moving from local, low-scale contexts to global, high-scale ones Likewise, the value attributed to individuals’ linguistic capitals is not exclusively and unchangeably determined by crossing borders Rather, what participants’ trajectories teach us is that in order to present a critical account of what happens to their linguistic repertoires, we need to unpack their interactions to untangle the contextual factors which affect the perception and (re)valuation of English ‘as a mobile resource’ (Blommaert, 2010) These factors (e.g., place, atmosphere, topic, interactant, purpose of communication, linguistic repertoires and degree of proficiency, anxiety, and cooperation) disturb and influence the way individuals perceive their Englishes Bearing them on mind, the participants engaged in ongoing processes of assessment and value-making As such, the participants did not always perceive their Englishes in terms of hierarchy or low scale position; although their experiences constantly invoked hierarchical differences Rather, the participants reflected discursively on their encounters, deployed different forms of agency, and assigned different and fluctuating values to their Englishes depending on context Furthermore, they embraced the mobility experience as a useful resource/space for up-scaling/ scale-jumping, learning, changing, and widening perspectives Ultimately, it was not a one-off event of crossing geopolitical borders and eventually effecting change in participants’ conceptualisation of their language resources In fact, the participants’ contextual particularities affected their (re)evaluation/transition as they ‘shuttled across’ (borrowing Canagarajah’s 2013 words) norms, scales, places, interactants, and varieties, hence the adoption of a dynamic, context- sensitive approach to understand the mobility trajectories of SA students.

Conclusion

This chapter has presented a chronologically ordered account on Palestinian students’ linguistic trajectories in a mobility context of study-abroad In so doing, it communicated their highly under-researched voices as they narrated their pre-departure language histories and their foundational role in shaping and preparing their conceptualisations and expectations of English language Then, the sojourners discussed the different reasons which attracted them to study in the UK Most remarkably, their UK linguistic experiences offered insights into their movement and transition across different stages of life ‘on the move’ The participants moved across a continuum of experiences; from shock, struggle, challenge, persisting difference, turbulence, to expecting patterns, adaptability, agency, and embracing the sojourn as a learning resource and advantage It is hoped that the chapter has responded to the question of ‘what is the effect of mobility on participants’ conceptualisation of their English(es)?’ by not only approaching and celebrating the mobility event per se, but also by unravelling its contextual components with their potential to bring about unpredictable outcomes A brief answer would be: there was an effect of change in perceptions, but it is more complex than that

Chapter Six Identity Work in a Study Abroad Context

This chapter seeks to provide an answer to the second question of this research, i.e., what is the effect of mobility on Palestinian postgraduate students’ identity (trans)formation, with specific reference to social class? Hence, this chapter focuses on identity and self-work in the Study Abroad (SA) context of the UK The chapter can be seen as an extension to Chapter Five While the previous chapter tackled experiences/issues of ‘living in’ English (Said, 2004) while abroad, this chapter looks into ‘being’ and ‘becoming’ in English (Pavlenko, 1998) Here, language is considered as having the capacity to transform ‘the self’ rather than being merely possessed and controlled by the self

I start by focusing on the linguistic dimensions of identity negotiation in the UK, i.e., the effects of language encounters and shifts on sojourners’ identity (trans)formation Then, I widen the scope by examining some of the non-linguistic effects of the big mobility experience on sojourners’ personal development, such as self-awareness and openness to diversity Afterwards, I probe identity from the specific lens of social class, which is an under-researched facet/category of identity in contexts of mobility/SA It is worth mentioning that there is no consensus in the literature on distinguishing between ‘the self’ and ‘identity’ Therefore, in this chapter, I utilise this lack of agreement and inconsistency to generally use the two terms interchangeably bearing in mind the subtle difference between them (according to Hammell, 2006), that is, identity refers to how a person perceives who they are based on how others perceive them (social face), while the self is a person’s sense or

‘feeling’ of who they are.

Identity Performance in a Context of Mobility: Setting the Stage

Identity work is a complex process, and moving across borders and beyond comfort zones adds an extra layer of complexity to identity work Therefore, asking about, discussing and analysing participants’ responses related to their identity (trans)formation was not a smooth, linear, or comfortable task/process, but rather ambivalent and confusing For example, on many occasions, participants’ immediate response to my identity-related questions would be

‘that’s a tricky one’, ‘I am not sure’, ‘I do not know yet’, ‘I have not thought about it before’ This confusion and sometimes contradiction persisted throughout the entire journey from arrival to departure, as featured across participants’ profiles Despite inevitable shared commonalities, it can be argued that participants’ identity performance took varying instantiations and levels depending on 1 what they carried/brought with them to the SA context (their ‘seen-as-valuable’ repertoires and histories); 2 their contextual encounters and intersectional experiences with their hosts as well as the reactions and impressions that arose as a result After all, sojourners became involved in identity work when they negotiated their identities in terms of how they perceived themselves (i.e., reflexive identity) and how they would like to be perceived by others in the new context (i.e., recognised or perceived identity) In fact, for many of them, the quality and success of the sojourn depended on how they were perceived in their frequent contexts of interaction (such as campus and accommodation) How they chose to reflect on and react to others’ portrayal/perception of them also influenced the SA experience Identity-related destabilisation and struggles often arise when there is disparity between what students expect and desire and the reality they encounter, especially when they are perceived in unfavourable ways

Moreover, crossing borders adds elements of unfamiliarity and strangeness, which frame and persist throughout the whole experience Here, identity may become destabilised because exposure to the unfamiliar triggers reflecting on, questioning, problematising, and negotiating long-held, taken-for-granted views or aspects of students’ identities This can become a painful process when old aspects of identity lose their relevance and easiness particularly when transition and unfamiliarity strike hard (unexpectedly and undesirably) The possibility of challenge heightens when thinking of self-negotiation within unequal power relations and new, complicated norms that govern the new place Below, I discuss how the mobility/SA experience served as an impetus for the negotiation of different facets of the self, thus leading to new trans(formations) in identity I start with the effects/implications of the new English language experiences of transition in the UK discussed in Chapter Five on participants’ identity and self-work.

L2-mediated Identity: Linguistic Dimensions

Social Class

Factors Underpinning Sojourners’ Socialisation Practices

Barriers to Social Interaction: Brought Along or Brought About?

Research Questions Revisited: Key Findings