LANGUAGE, POSITIONING, AND MASCULINITIES: A CRITICAL SOCIOLINGUISTIC ETHNOGRAPHY OF IMMIGRANT  ADOLESCENT BOYSÕ IDENTITY PERFORMANCES AND  LEARNING EXPERIENCES IN A U.S. HIGH SCHOOL  By   Kongji Qin               A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements  for the degree of Curriculum, Instruction, and Teacher EducationÑDoctor of Philosophy 2016         ABSTRACT LANGUAGE, POSITIONING, AND MASCULINITIES:  A CRITICAL SOCIOLINGUISTIC ETHNOGRAPHY OF IMMIGRANT  ADOLESCENT BOYSÕ IDENTITY PERFORMANCES AND  LEARNING EXPERIENCES IN A U.S. HIGH SCHOOL By Kongji Qin This yearlong critical sociolinguistic ethnography (Heller, 2006, 2011) examines the relationship of language, positioning, and masculinities of three immigrant adolescent boys in one high school in a U.S Midwestern state. I take a discourse analysis approach, informed by both interactional sociolinguistics traditions (Goffman, 1981; Gumperz, 1982) and  feminist poststructuralist discourse analysis (Baxter, 2003;  Wetherell, 1998), to study how Tiger, Omar, and Chris performed their identities inside and outside their classrooms, how they were positioned as learners, and what these positioning acts meant for their learning.  This study takes a poststructuralist perspective on the study of language, positioning, gender, and masculinities. Drawing upon ButlerÕs (1990) performativity theory and ConnellÕs (1995, 2005) concept of hegemonic masculinity, I view gender and masculinity as socially and discursively performed within or against the normative discourses of heterosexuality and hyper masculinity, and as embedded in the hierarchical power relations. Data collected consist of field notes, audiotaped and videotaped classroom interactions, interview, documents, and artifacts. With an analysis of the multiple identities that Omar, Tiger and Chris subscribed to and were assigned to, as well as the multiple forms of subordination they were subjected to, I argue that these young menÕs experiences in the school need to be viewed through a framework of intersectionality, which allows us to see the compounding effects of multiple oppressions and the hierarchical order of masculinity that was constructed by the systems of power.  Through analyzing TigerÕs stylized speech in a language activity over time, I illustrate that his masculinity performances were intertwined with the process of language teaching and learning. Due to the fact that Tiger and his teacher were speaking within different discourses in the same language activity, his stylized use of English led to him being labeled as a ÒNot SeriousÓ student and a ÒproblemÓ student in the end. Through analyzing a classroom discussion on reading, I argue that these students, their teacher, and other adults in the classroom articulated different notions of reading and performed their reader identities. I illustrate that the challenges in the reading were attributable to the differences in their views of reading, and these young menÕs performances of reader identities was connected to their negotiation of masculinity.    In addition to studying these immigrant young menÕs masculinity performances, I examined teachersÕ pedagogy and their ways of managing gender and masculinity in their classrooms. Through analyzing three teachersÕ identity performances in teaching, I demonstrate that each of the teachers performed a different version of masculine identity in their teaching. However, their ways of managing masculinity were all operating within the same heterosexual normalcy and masculinity discourses, which reinforced, rather than challenged, the normative discourses.  These immigrant young menÕs masculinity performances were intertwined with their language and literacy engagement. For them school was as much a social space as an academic institution. Their struggle and agency in their learning and identity negotiation highlighted the need for educators to attend to their marginalized social positions and their identity work and for researchers to examine the complexity in their negotiation of sense of self and their learning inside and outside classrooms.                        Copyright by KONGJI QIN  2016             !v            This thesis is dedicated to Grandpa.  Thank you for introducing me to the wonderland of language and learning.            !vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  This dissertation is about identity negotiation of transnational youths. Like them, I have also struggled to navigate the social and academic life in the United States during my doctoral program. Many people and organizations have supported me to do this work and to learn during this journey of becoming a researcher. Without their influence, trust, and support I may not have thought it possible to do this research project in the first place, had the means to make it happen, or known how to get it done.  I am deeply grateful to my advisor and dissertation director, Dr. Lynn W. Paine, for apprenticing me into the field of academia, and for nurturing and inspiring me to be a thoughtful researcher, scholar, and educator. Thank you for your support, guidance, trust, and care. I always remember our conversation at that parking lot near Erickson one afternoon at the difficult period of time in my doctoral study. ÒThese months are a dark tunnel, and the light is just at the end of it.Ó You said to me. Thank you for bringing the light to my life and for guiding me to do this important work. I also thank my committee, Dr. Guofang Li, Dr. Mary M. Juzwik, Dr. Peter I. De Costa, and Dr. Paula M. Winke, for their support and guidance. This work has much intellectual influence from each of them. For that, I am grateful. The students and the teachers who participated in this research, and the families who permitted their children to participate deserve special acknowledgement. This work could not be possibly done without your generous support and time. Thank you for opening up your life to me, and for allowing me to tell your stories.  !vii Faculty of the Department of Teacher Education at MSU gave me entry to this work, and have each supported my development as a scholar along the way. Thank you especially to Dr. Michael Sedlak, Dr. Margo Glew, Dr. Susan Florio-Ruane, and Dr. Jeff Bale for their mentorship and investment in my development as a scholar and teacher. I also thank the Graduate School at Michigan State University for funding that enabled me to develop as a researcher.  Dr. Elizabeth Dutro from University of Colorado at Boulder deserves special thanks for her reading the draft of one of my dissertation chapters and for her thoughtful and generative feedback which has pushed me to refine this work. I thank my friend Jacquelyn Kerr for providing substantive feedback and for helping me to improve this work along the way. My colleagues Don Mcclure, Iwan Syahril, and Eunjung Jin at MSU deserve special thanks for their thoughtful suggestions that pushed me to improve this work. I thoroughly enjoyed the weekly discussions at our dissertation writing group.  My family deserves the deepest and most heartfelt thanks of all. I am grateful for my parentsÕ understanding and their support to my academic pursuit. I thank my sister and my brother for their trust, love, and support, and my nephews for bringing joys into my life during this journey.               !viii TABLE OF CONTENTS  LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ xii LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... xiii KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS  ..................................................................................................... xiv CHAPTER 1 ....................................................................................................................................1 ÒDO YOU TWO HAVE SERIOUS ANSWERS?Ó: LANGUAGE, POSITIONING, AND MASCULINITIES OF IMMIGRANT ADOLESCENTS  ..............................................................1 Introduction ...............................................................................................................................1 Feminist Poststructuralist Approach to the Study of Language, Identities, and  Masculinity Performances .........................................................................................................3 Conceptualizing Identity ..........................................................................................4 Conceptualizing Gender and Masculinity Performance ..........................................7 Conceptualizing Language and Discourse .............................................................10 Positioning and the Study of Identities ..................................................................16 Situating the Study in the Current Literature ..........................................................................17 The ÒBoy TurnÓ in Research on Gender and Education ........................................18 Research on Immigrant LearnersÕ Identity ............................................................19 The ÒIdentity ApproachÓ to Research on Second Language Acquisition ..............23 Outline of the Dissertation Chapters .......................................................................................25 CHAPTER 2 ..................................................................................................................................28 A CRITICAL SOCIOLINGUISTIC ETHNOGRAPHY: PARTICIPANTS, SITES, AND METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................28 Academic High School ............................................................................................................29 The ESL Classes and Mrs. BrownÕs Students .........................................................................31 Omar ......................................................................................................................35 Tiger .......................................................................................................................36 Chris .......................................................................................................................37 Researcher Positionality ..........................................................................................................38 Ethnographic Work .................................................................................................................41 Participant Observation ..........................................................................................41 Documents and Artifacts ........................................................................................44 Interviews ...............................................................................................................44 Analytical Approaches, Transcription, and Data Interpretation .............................................45 Interactional Sociolinguistics and Poststructuralist Approach to Discourse Analysis..................................................................................................................45 Transcription as Theorization and Analytical Work ..............................................47 Discourses around Immigration, Race, Gender, Sexuality, and Religion in the U.S. .............51 Academic High as an Institution .............................................................................................57 Accountability Pressures and Discourses of Academic Achievement ..................57 !ix ESL Classrooms, Marginalization, and ÒSecond-Class CitizensÓ .........................59 ÒMrs. BrownÕs KidsÓ: Neglect of ESL StudentsÕ Needs .......................................62 School as a Gendered Institution .............................................................................................64 Null Curriculum: Academic HighÕs Gender and Sexuality Education ..................64 School Rituals: Performing and Policing Gender and Sexuality ...........................68 Sports and Masculinities ........................................................................................70 School as a Racialized Space ..................................................................................................70 Summary .................................................................................................................................73 CHAPTER 3 ..................................................................................................................................74 MAPPING THE MARGINS: INTERSECTIONALITY, MASCULINITIES, AND COMPOUNDING OPPRESSIONS AGAINST IMMIGRANT BOYS .......................................74 Omar ........................................................................................................................................76 Omar: Choice of Pseudonym and Ethnic Pride .....................................................76 Abdallah: OmarÕs Religious Identity .....................................................................79 Religious Identity: Omar and Muslim Students in Academic High ......................81 Arabic ÒNew ManÓ: Style, Friends, and Family ....................................................82 ÒWhat Are You Talking About, Bro?  IÕm an Arabic Boy.Ó: Racial Stereotypes, Boundary Drawing, and Academic Identity ..........................................................84 Tiger ........................................................................................................................................85 Pseudonym, ÒFake Name,Ó and Ethnic Identities ..................................................87 ÒIÕm a Monster, a Lion, and a TankÓ: Self-positioning, Physical Prowess, and Masculinities ..........................................................................................................88 Language, Gay, and Discourse of Sexuality ..........................................................90 Chris ........................................................................................................................................94 Chris and TC2: Pseudonym and Ethnic Identity ....................................................94 ÒIÕm a Reader, a Son, and a BrotherÓ: Academic Identity and Masculine  Identities .................................................................................................................98 ÒI Need Help with the Warm-upÓ: ChrisÕs Academic Identity ..............................99 Interconnectedness of Multiple Identities: Har!m, Religion Identity,  and Masculine Identity ..........................................................................................................102 Intersectionality, Marginalization, and Hierarchy of Masculinities  .....................................108 ÒBecause Omar Is White, And She Is White. IÕm Not White.Ó Racism and Marginalization ....................................................................................................109 ÒAnd, Like His Asian Accent.Ó Gossipy Boys and Racial Slur ...........................111 N-word and ÒBecoming BlackÓ  ..........................................................................113 ÒI Just Look Like Other American BoysÓ and ÒTerroristÓ ..................................114 Linguistic Competence, Linguistic Capital, and Linguicism ...............................116 ESL Stigma ...........................................................................................117 Linguistic Capital and Power Differentials ...........................................119 Summary: Intersectionality and Hierarchy of Masculinities  ................................................122 CHAPTER 4 ................................................................................................................................124 ÒDOING FUNNYÓ: STYLIZING L2, PERFORMING MASCULINITY, AND  LANGUAGE LEARNING  .........................................................................................................124 Introduction  ..........................................................................................................................124 !x Stylization and Participant Example .....................................................................................125 Stylization, Masculinity Performances, and Power Relations .............................125 Participant Example, Social Identification, and Identity Performances ..............126 Tiger: Marginalization and Agency  .....................................................................................127 Masculinity Performances, L2 Stylization, and Power Dynamics  .......................................129 Sentence Starters, ÒAdequate,Ó and ÒNot SeriousÓ Learner Identity ...................130 Stylization, ÒDoing Funny,Ó and Humor .............................................................137 ÒDoing FunnyÓ vs. Socialization: Competing Goals of the Language Activity ..139 Participant Example, Performativity of Masculinities, and Production of  ÒNot SeriousÓ Learner Identity ............................................................................145 Heterosexual Normalcy and Masculinity Discourses ..........................................148 Gender Dynamics, Patriarchy Control, and Institutional Authority ....................152 Tiger as a ÒProblem StudentÓ: Solidification of Learner Identity and School as an Oppressive Institution  .....................................................................................154 CHAPTER 5 ................................................................................................................................159 ÒDUDE! DID YOU JUST SAY THE R-WORD?Ó: PERFORMING MASCULINITIES  AND CONSTRUCTING READER IDENTITIES .....................................................................159 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................159 Current Debates on ÒBoy CrisisÓ in the Field of Reading  ...................................................161 ÒDude! Did You Just Say the R-word?Ó Performing Masculinity and Reader Identity .......163 Performing Reader Identities and Contested Notions of Reading and Readers  ...................167 Framing the Problem and Controlling the Conversation .....................................177 Building ÒReading MusclesÓ and Different Notions of Reading .........................181 Performing Identities and Constructing Reader Identities ....................................................186 ÒMy Own CountryÓ: OmarÕs Ethnic Identity and Reading Investment  ..............186 Tiger: A Misidentified Non-Reader .....................................................................191 Chris: ÒI Like Every Percy Jackson Book.Ó  ........................................................194 Gender Displays: Performing Masculinity and Reader Identities .......................198 Dichotomizing Reader Identities  ..........................................................................................199 Reading Instruction for Immigrant Learners: Challenges, Possibilities and Complexities ..202 Fragmented Texts and Frustrated Readers ...........................................................203 A Collaborative Reading Project: Possibilities and Complexities .......................204 Summary ...............................................................................................................................206 CHAPTER 6 ................................................................................................................................209 PEDAGOGY, CONTROL, AND MASCULINITIES ................................................................209 ÒI Take Control of a Situation Pretty Easily.Ó: Participant Example, Teacher Control,  and Constructing ÒProblem BoysÓ ........................................................................................213 Participant Example and Performing Teacher Identity ........................................218 ÒEveryone, Repeat the Word.Ó: Pedagogy and Control of Attention and Body ..220 ÒTiger, For Now, Come Up Here.Ó Confronting and Controlling Male Body ....221 ÒI Think I Learned Banter That I Do with The Boys.Ó: Math Curriculum and  Pedagogy of Masculinity .......................................................................................................224 ÒIf IÕm in Charge of Making the Problems, They Are Usually Sports-based.Ó: Sports, Curriculum, and Pedagogy of Masculinity ..............................................226 !xi Bantering: Ms. MorrisÕs Speech Style and Pedagogy .........................................231 ÒWhen You Get Out of the Jail, You Want to Multiply.Ó: Mathematics  Concepts and Sexual Banter ................................................................................242 Pedagogy of Masculinity and Perpetuating Masculinity Regime ........................244 ÒItÕs Really a Parallel.Ó: Coaching Football, Teaching Geometry, and Masculinity ............245 ÒJust Everything I Do in Class I Feel Like I Do the Same Stuff in Football.Ó ....247 Class Routine, Efficiency, and Reducing of Learning .........................................248 Ò601, 2, 3, 4Ó: Numbers, Football, and Control  ..................................................251 ÒYeah, Yeah, Oh Yeah, Yeah, Yeah, Yeah!Ó Male Control and Sexual  Allusion in Teaching ............................................................................................253 Summary ...............................................................................................................................254 CHAPTER 7 ................................................................................................................................258 LANGUAGE, MASCULINITY, AND SCHOOLING OF IMMIGRANT ADOLESCENTS: THEORETICAL, METHODOLOGICAL, AND PEDAGOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS .......258 Summaries  ............................................................................................................................261 Intersectionality of Masculinities .........................................................................261 Intertwined Nature of Identity Performances and Language Instruction .............262 L2 Reading Practices and Masculine Identities ...................................................263 Pedagogy, Control, and Masculinities .................................................................264 Language, Masculine Identities, and the Identity Approach to SLA ....................................265 Masculinities and Identity Approach to SLA ......................................................266 Conceptualization of Identity in SLA Research ..................................................267 Intersectionality of Identities vs. Multiple Identities ...........................................268 Intertwined Nature of Identity Performance, Language Use, and Social Identification ........................................................................................................269 Discourse Analysis and Researching Identities ....................................................................270 Masculinities and Multilingual Education: Concluding Thoughts .......................................272 APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................281  APPENDIX A: Transcription Notations  .............................................................................282  APPENDIX B: Research Participant Information and Consent Form .................................283  APPENDIX C: Letter to the Principal for Permission  ........................................................286 APPENDIX D: Interview Protocols with Student Participants  ...........................................287 APPENDIX E: Interview Protocols with Teacher Participants  ..........................................291 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................................292         !xii LIST OF TABLES  Table 1: Conceptualization of the Construct of Discourse(s) ........................................................15 Table 2: Information of Students in Mrs. BrownÕs Classroom ......................................................37 Table 3: Ethnographic Fieldwork Ð the Observation Schedule  ....................................................42 Table 4: Academic High SchoolsÕ ESL Classroom Assignments .................................................60 Table 5: StudentsÕ WIDA Examination Scores in the 2014-2015 School Year ..........................120 Table 6: Modified IRE Sequence in the Classroom Interaction ..................................................134 Table 7: Interaction between Tiger and Mrs. Smith ....................................................................135 Table 8: Examples of Sentence Starters Illustrating the Implicit Socialization Goal ..................141 Table 9: Participant Examples of ÒGood LearnerÓ ......................................................................146 Table 10: TigerÕs Masculinity Performances and Ideological Discourses at Work ....................150 Table 11: Ms. MorrisÕs Algebra Classroom Interactions .............................................................232 Table 12: Ms. MorrisÕs Bantering Style of Speech ......................................................................236 Table 13: Ms. Morris and Performing Teacher Identity ..............................................................238 Table 14: Ms. MorrisÕs Gestures and Pedagogy ..........................................................................239 Table 15: Musicality and Performances of Identity .....................................................................240 Table 16: Performing Teacher Identity and Gestures ..................................................................241 Table 17: Transcription Notations ...............................................................................................282         !xiii LIST OF FIGURES  Figure 1: A Comparison of Referrals and Enrollment at Academic High in 2014-2015 ..............72 Figure 2: OmarÕs Country Project, Omar the National Hero, and Ethnic Pride ............................78 Figure 3: OmarÕs Country Project Slide Ð ÒClothingÓ ...................................................................83 Figure 4: Academic Vocabulary Instruction Slides Ð ÒAdequateÓ  .............................................132 Figure 5: Academic Vocabulary Instruction Example Ð ÒCrucialÓ .............................................142 Figure 6: Multiple Goals of Sentence Starter Language Practices in the ESL Classroom ..........143 Figure 7: TigerÕs Behavior Contact .............................................................................................157 Figure 8: OmarÕs Reading Log for March Reading Month Competition ....................................188 Figure 9: OmarÕs Facebook Post on February 21, 2016 ..............................................................190 Figure 10: TigerÕs Reading Log for March Reading Month Competition  ..................................193 Figure 11: ESL Academic Vocabulary Instructional Slides Ð ÒAssertÓ ......................................215                  !xiv KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS  ESL English as a Second Language ELL English Language Learners AHGEA Academic High Gender Equality Association SOC School of Choice WIDA World-Class Instructional Design and Assessment                                 !1 CHAPTER 1  ÒDO YOU TWO HAVE SERIOUS ANSWERS?Ó: LANGUAGE,  POSITIONING, AND MASCULINITIES OF IMMIGRANT ADOLESCENTS Introduction Episode: ÒadequateÓ [ESL09102014]  Mrs. Smith:     Class. Class. In order to study adequately for the exam, I plan to É whose partner has a good answer? Anina, did you have a good answer for that one? Anina:                   No. É Tiger and Samir:   (Laughing at their jokes) Mrs. Smith: (Towards the corner where Tiger and Samir are sitting) The snickering has gone crazy back over there. Tiger and Samir:   (Still laughing) Mrs. Smith: All right. LetÕs go to the next one. Tiger:       My partner. Mrs. Smith: Your partner? Okay Samir. In order to É Go ahead!  É Mrs. Smith: Good. Those are good answers. Your partner has a good one? (Samir raising his hand and pointing to Tiger) Tiger? Tiger. Tiger:   (With a laughing voice) In order to study adequately for the test, for the exam, I plan to skip to take my girlfriend to relaxing for exam.  Mrs. Smith: All right. Uh. The apartment isnÕt very large but was adequate for É Actually IÕve heard yours I thought that was a good one, Chris.  É Mrs. Smith:  Okay. Good. Anybody else wants to volunteer your partners. (Tiger raising his hand; Mrs. Smith Turning to Tiger and Samir) Do you two have serious answers?   TigerÕs answer to Mrs. Smith, the substitute teacher in his English as a Second Language (ESL) classroom that day, was Ònot serious.Ó It was considered Ònot seriousÓ probably because his sentence referenced non-school behaviors Ð cutting classes and alluding to sex, and therefore, was contextually inappropriate. These references, along with the act of laughing at private jokes with his desk mates, seemed to indicate that Tiger was using gendered speech and action to assert his ÒladdishÓ masculinity in the language classroom (Willis, 1977). His use of language !2 and his masculinity performance led to the teacher categorizing him and Samir as Ònot seriousÓ and the loss of the opportunities for them to practice and speak during the rest of the class. Tiger, a 15-year-old boy, was a 9th grader and an ESL student at Academic High, a suburban high school in a Midwest state in the United States. In the fall of 2014 I started my ethnographic work in TigerÕs ESL classroom. My goal was to understand how Tiger and a group of immigrant young men in his ESL classroom were doing school every day. Tiger and two of his follow classmates, Omar and Chris, were my focal participants. I spent a lot of time in Academic High observing them in different classrooms and across social spaces in order to understand their learning, their stories, their lives, their desires and frustrations in the process of learning to become students in a new context. I wanted to make sense of how they made sense of who they were as students, language learners, immigrants, young men, sons, and brothers. I wanted to document their stories and study how these multilingual, immigrant young men used language and other non-linguistic tools to ÒdoÓ their identity work, particularly how they developed and negotiated the sense of self as immigrant adolescent male students. I wanted to understand, for example, why Tiger and Samir were laughing in the classroom episode above, and why Tiger chose to say that Ònot seriousÓ answer in that context even though he might have already known that such an answer would have consequences for him. I also wanted to understand how teachers like Mrs. Smith decided to, or not to, evaluate students in the way Mrs. Smith did. Would other teachers in the school also look at TigerÕs answer in the way Mrs. Smith did? How about the other students in the classroom? Did they also feel TigerÕs answer was Ònot seriousÓ? Was Tiger also Ònot seriousÓ in other classrooms and other spaces in the school? How did the other immigrant adolescent male students do their identity work in the school? How did they go about letting people know about their identities through words and actions? And, !3 importantly, what was the impact of their identity negotiation as boys on their learning opportunities in the classrooms? In a nutshell, I seek to understand the relationship of language, positioning, gender, and masculinities of these three immigrant adolescents through this ethnographic work. In this yearlong critical sociolinguistic ethnographic study (Heller, 2006, 2011), I aim at examining how Tiger, Omar, and Chris performed their identities as immigrant young men within and through language and other means inside and outside their classrooms, and what these positioning acts meant for their learning experiences. More specifically, I take a discourse analysis approach, informed by both interactional sociolinguistics traditions (Goffman, 1981, 1983; Gumperz, 1982b; Gumperz & Cook-Gumperz, 2008; Hymes, 1974) and a feminist poststructuralist approach to discourse analysis (Baxter, 2003; Threadgold, 2003; Wetherell, 1998), to study the interrelations of language, positioning, gender, and masculinities, focusing on examining the role of language and discourses in their masculine identity negotiation, as well as the impacts of gendered social relations on their schooling experiences.  In this chapter I first introduce the theoretical frameworks that I am using to study language, identity, positioning, and masculinity in schools. I then situate this critical sociolinguistic ethnographic study in related literature and explain how it contributes to the current knowledge base of the education of multilingual young men. I conclude this chapter with a brief overview of the remaining chapters in this dissertation. Feminist Poststructuralist Approach to  the Study of Language, Identities, and Masculinity Performances My approach to studying the relationship between language and masculine identities is grounded in poststructuralist perspectives on the study of language, identities, and power !4 relations (Baxter, 2003; Bourdieu, 1991; Butler, 1990; Cameron, 1997, 2006; Foucault, 1980; Hall, 1997; Weedon, 1987). In this section I define the concepts that I work with in this project Ð identity, gender, masculinity, language and discourse, and positioning, and defend my conceptualization of these terms.  Conceptualizing Identity  Identity has become a key construct in various disciplines in social science, such as psychology, sociology, anthropology, linguistic anthropology, sociolinguistics, cultural studies, and education. Despite, and due to, its ubiquity as an analytic lens and a theoretical construct in these fields, it evokes a wide range of meanings and conceptualizations because different researchers often situate their studies within different disciplinary and methodological traditions, theoretical perspectives, and lineages of thoughts (Bendle, 2002; Bucholtz & Hall, 2005; Gee, 2000; Harklau, 2007; Juzwik, 2006; Lee & Anderson, 2009; Moje & Luke, 2009; Sfard, 2006). In this section I clarify my conceptualization of identity for this study by first differentiating three major existing theoretical perspectives on the study of mind, learning, identity and the society, and then situating my conceptualization in relation to these theoretical traditions. The concept of identity, since Erik Erikson first popularized it in the 1950s and 1960s with his work on identity crisis and on youth identity development (Erikson, 1968), has undergone various theorizations as a result of the shifting perspectives among social science researchers on the relations between the self and the society. I trace and analyze three dominant theoretical perspectives in the existing literature on identity: the essentialist views, the sociocultural perspectives, and the poststructuralist perspectives.   The essentialist views on identity refer to the Eriksonian conception of identity, developed in EriksonÕs work (1968) and in the work of psychosocial researchers who have !5 followed his conception. This perspective to identity is rooted in psychoanalysis and psychology, and is associated with mentalist constructions of the nature and the development of the self.  The mentalist construction perspectives assume that identity is a mental process, a psychological construct, and an inner property that emerges from the mental process. Identity is defined as Òa sense, felt by individuals within themselves, and as an experience of continuity, oriented toward a self-chosen and positively anticipated futureÓ (Penuel & Wertsch, 1995, p. 83). The Eriksonian conception of identity emphasizes the coherence and continuity of self and stresses that maintaining a stable identity is fundamental to mental health. Following the Eriksonian conception of identity, psychosocial researchers regard the development of a stable, coherent, and positive sense of identity as the major task of adolescence (Phinney, 1990).    While the essentialist views are developed in and are more pertinent to the field of psychology, sociocultural perspectives, developed in the fields of social sciences such as anthropology, sociology, sociolinguistics and linguistic anthropology, have offered identity researchers alternative conceptions of identity and have also shifted researchersÕ perspectives to understanding the relations between the Self and the social. I use the term sociocultural perspectives as the overarching term to characterize a wide range of theoretical perspectives which view identity as a social construct rather than a psychological one.  Identity-as-a-social-construct means that sociocultural perspectives generally view identity as a process embodied, constructed, and negotiated in social interaction and practices, and not just as a given or product mentally constructed within the Self (Moje & Luke, 2009). Contrasting to the essentialist views of identity as a stable and consistent Self, the sociocultural perspectives conceptualize identity as a fluid, socially constituted achievement that is multiply constructed and negotiated over time and across space at both micro-social and macro-social levels.   !6 The sociocultural perspectives to the study of identity, as an overarching theoretical paradigm, are generally associated with three different but related theoretical traditions or lineages of thoughts. The first sociocultural genealogy is the Meadian tradition Ð the anthropological approaches to the study of identity that grew out of George Herbert MeadÕs earlier work (Mead, 1917, 1934). MeadÕs contribution to identity theory mainly lies in his concept of symbolic interactionism, which maintains that people form a sense of themselves or identities in relation to the linguistically recognized social positions and other roles crucial to the conduct of social activities and relationships. The second sociocultural tradition is the Vygotskian traditionÑthe cultural psychology tradition following Vygotsky and the social practice theories developed from this Vygostkian genealogy of sociocultural tradition by Dorothy Holland and colleagues (Holland, Lachicotte, Skinner, & Cain, 1998; Holland & Lachicotte, 2007; Holland & Leander, 2004).  The concept of identity articulated in these strands of sociocultural theoretical tradition is that Òmeaning is achieved through symbolic, socially constituted resources, and that sociocultural views of selves are reflexively situated in social and cultural contextsÓ (Lee & Anderson, 2009, p. 186), and identities are constructed and negotiated in the symbolic and socially constituted world. The third sociocultural tradition is the Hymesian tradition to the study of identityÑthe American sociolinguistic tradition following Dell Hymes (1962; 1974). The Hymesian tradition emerged in the field of linguistic anthropology and sociolinguistics, and focuses on Òhow individual appropriate language, both as individual performers and as competent members of a cultural groupÓ (Juzwik, 2006, p. 14).  The analytic emphasis of the Hymesian tradition is on language use and practices and interactions among individuals, communities, and social practices, and how identity is indexed in the use of language and in social interactions.    !7 Poststructuralist perspectives to the study of mind and the society differ from sociocultural perspectives in their conceptualization of language and identity.  Poststructuralist theories of language view Òlanguage not as a set of idealized form independent of their speakers or their speaking, but rather as situated utterances in which speakers, in dialogue with others, struggle to create meaningsÓ (Norton & Toohey, 2011, p. 416). Poststructuralists like Foucault (1980) and Bourdieu (1977, 1991) highlighted the ideological dimension and the politics of language, and the issues of language and power. And, in contrast to the Western humanist philosophy of emphasizing the fixed, essential, and coherent core of the individual, poststructuralists like Foucault (1980) and Weedon (1987) argue that individualsÕ subjectivity is always discursively constructed and is embedded in socially and historically constructed relations. Another dimension of poststructuralist perspectives to the study of identity and the society is that instead of viewing identity as fixed categories like gender, ethnicity and race, scholars like Stuart Hall (1996) and Homi Bhabba (1994) argued that the process of how identity categories are created and essentialized is more important than what identity categories are, and identity is the process of becoming.  Poststructuralists in general view identities as shifting and context dependent, and as negotiated through other positioning acts and self-positioning acts (Davies & Harr”, 1990). My conceptualization of identity in this study is trans-disciplinary because I draw on theoretical perspectives in the sociocultural traditions, mainly social practice theory and sociolinguistic perspectives, and the poststructuralist views of identity construction to understand how social identifications are achieved for adolescent immigrant students and how they negotiate their identity as a student in a U.S. high school.  Conceptualizing Gender and Masculinity Performance   I draw upon poststructuralist perspectives to study gender and masculinities. Different !8 from the essentialist perspectives that view gender as sex differences or gender roles, poststructuralist perspectives view gender as performed and constructed through language, and gender identities as relational and existing in the hierarchy of gender dynamics. Guided by ButlerÕs (1990) concepts of gender performance and performativity, I conducted this study with an assumption that the ways that these immigrant young men presented themselves through language and action in the ESL classroom were connected to their identity negotiation of what it meant for them to be an immigrant young man. Butler (1990) argues that Òfeminine and masculine are not what we are, nor traits we have, but effects we produce by way of particular things we do.Ó (p. 33). Cameron (1996) further argues that gendered speech Òmight be thought of as the congealed result of repeated acts by social actors who are striving to constitute themselves as ÔproperÕ men and womenÓ (p. 50). In this study I focus on understanding how they performed their masculine identities through their second language (L2) Ð English. Butler (1993) differentiates the two concepts Ð performance and performativity Ð in explaining the performative nature of gender identities. Her concept of performativity of gender highlights the poststructuralist and feminist perspectivesÕ view that gender and masculinity are constructed by social norms Ð the invisible discourses and cultural notions about what it means to be ÒproperÓ men and women. She explains that individuals perform their notions of gender and sexualities, and yet their agency in constructing gender identities often is contained by the meta discourses and cultural norms about gender and sexualities.  Poststructuralist perspectives also highlight the argument that gender identity researchers need to problematize the binaries in the linguistic constructions of gender and gender identities, as well as the arbitrary association of masculinities with the male body (Blackburn, 2005; Butler, 1990; Pascoe, 2012a). For example, Pascoe (2012) argues against the notion that the male body !9 is the sole carrier of masculinities, pointing out that Òdislodging masculinity from a biological location is a productive way to highlight the social constructedness of masculinity and may even expose a latent sexism within the sociological literature in its assumption that masculinity, as a powerful social identity, is only the domain of menÓ (p. 12). Although I focus on understanding a male studentÕs masculinity performance in this study, I take the theoretical stance that masculinity does not just reside in a male body.  Similarly, I view masculinities as socially constructed, performed in and through language, and existing in multiple forms (Butler, 1990, 2006a, Cameron, 1997, 2006). Drawing on the theoretical concept hegemonic masculinity, developed by Connell (1995, 1996, 2005), I conceptualize masculinities as relational identities that are constructed in language and discourse and located within complex, unequal power relations. Hegemonic masculinity refers to the dominant forms of masculinity operating within a culture or a context at any one time, and it coexists with other competing forms of masculinity or subordinated masculinities. The multiple and hierarchical features of masculinities are the results of interaction of masculinities with other identity markers such as race, national origins, language, sexuality, and religion, which have been illustrated in previous ethnographic studies of masculinity in school (Ferguson, 2000; Mac an Ghaill, 1994; Willis, 1977), and exist in different competing forms and in relational terms. Butler (1999) points out that identity categories are constructions, and these constructions often Òfind their most powerful articulation through one anotherÓ (p. xvii). The interaction of identity constructions produces inequitable relations of power, which was evident in the relational nature of masculinities I observed in the ESL classroom.   !10 Conceptualizing Language and Discourse  In this study I foreground the role of language and discourse in the process of adolescent immigrant studentsÕ identity construction and negotiation, and highlight the discursive nature of identity formation. Following Bloome and colleagues (Bloome et al., 2008), I frame my foregrounding the role of language and discourse in adolescent immigrant studentsÕ identity construction and my use of discourse analysis as grounded in the linguistic turn in the social sciences, which highlights the role of language in the construction of knowledge and in the construction of social relationships among individuals, groups, and social institutions. My conceptualization of discourse in this study attends to discourse at multiple levels, with the analytic emphasis on the local practices and events and their relationships to broader cultural and social processes.  In this section I clarify and situate my conceptualization of discourse and discourse analysis within the existing scholarly traditions.  The term discourse, like the construct of identity, is often subject to dispute and different interpretations (Bloome, 2005; Bloome et al., 2008; Bucholtz, 2003; Juzwik, 2006).  Its definitions vary both across and within scholarly traditions, ranging from the formal linguistics definition to the non-linguistics ones in the fields that go beyond language-centered approaches.  In the field of linguistics and applied linguistics, discourse usually refers to the linguistic units larger than a sentence, and discourse is largely viewed as a term that focuses on the linguistic structures, forms, and semantic meanings of the linguistic items.  In contrast, the non-linguistics definitions of discourse usually focus on the use and the functions of the linguistic units rather than on the linguistic forms, and discourse as a concept in these fields is often defined as language in context and language in use (Bucholtz, 2003). Discourse is usually used as a countable noun as the term discourses are often used in these inquiries. However, the definition !11 of discourse also varies among researchers in the non-linguistic fields, as researchers often approach the construct with different theoretical traditions or different lineages of thoughts within the same theoretical paradigm.  Two conceptual articles on theories of discourseÑBucholtz (2003) and Juzwik (2006), have informed my conceptualization of discourse in this study.  In her article on discourse and research on gender, Bucholtz (2003) theorizes four disciplinary traditions of discourse analysis and approaches to understanding the concept of discourse: discourse as culture, discourse as society, discourse as text, and discourse as history.  By discourse as culture, Bucholtz refers to the anthropologically oriented approach to discourse analysis that focuses on understanding culture specificity and variability through examining the language use by particular individuals or groups of people. This conception of discourse as culture is grounded in the American sociolinguistic traditions of the ethnography of communication established by Hymes (1962; 1974) and the interactional sociolinguistics that was developed from GumperzÕs work on cultural and linguistic contact (Gumperz, 1977, 1982a, 1982b). By discourse as society, Bucholtz refers to the notion of discourse used in sociological and socio-psychological paradigm, which argues discourse shapes and structures the society, and social norms emerge and are constructed through everyday social interaction and through the use of language and discourse. Bucholtz points out that this perspective on the relationship between discourse and social norms derived from the work of sociologist Harold Garfinkel (1967). By discourse as text, Bucholtz refers to the tradition of critical discourse analysis, which makes written language central to its inquiry rather than the spoken forms of language in the traditions of discourse as cultural or discourse as society.  Although critical discourse analysis represent many different ÒcriticalÓ approaches to engaging with texts (e.g. Fairclough, 1989, 1995, 2003; Foucault, 1980; Gee, 2011), and should !12 not be viewed as a monolithic approach, the analytic emphasis of this tradition is on the power relations and ideologies in written discourse, and on the linguistic and discourse tools in the texts that make certain ways of thinking, valuing, and organizing social relationships as the ÒnormalÓ and Òcommon sense.Ó  The goal of the critical discourse analysts is to make visible the invisible and unquestioned power relations and ideologies in the written discourse in order to change the society.  According to Bucholtz, the concept of discourse as history emphasizes the analysis of the historical context of discourse or the ÒhistoryÓ of discourse.  FoucaultÕs (1980) use of discourse is one of the examples which focus on how historically formed systems of knowledge and use of language have acquired power.  Juzwik (2006) differentiates four different but often interconnected traditions in the use of the terms discourse and discursive practices in educational research.  Each tradition has its own working definition of discourse.  The first type of discourse is the definition following the systematic functional linguistics which views discourse as language above the level of the sentence (Halliday & Hasan, 1976).  The second type of the discourse is classroom discourse, as the term is used in NystrandÕs work (1997, 2006).  The third type of discourse is GeeÕs (1996) use of the term.  GeeÕs (1996) work has distinguished two types of discourseÑdiscourse vs. Discourse (big D).  He defines Discourse (big D) as various ways of being in the world, as ways of Òbehaving, interacting, valuing, thinking, believing, speaking, and often reading and writing (p. viii).   According to Gee, the practice of participating in a particular Discourse requires one to acquire the Òways of doing things,Ó to become a certain type of person, and to assume a particular identity.  The fourth type of discourse refers to the definition of discourse used in the critical tradition that focuses on analyzing the power relations in the use of language and !13 discourses, such as in Foucault (1980) and Fairclough (1995).  In this sense, this conception of discourse is similar to BucholtzÕs (2003) conception of discourse as text. I connect and juxtapose the theorizations of discourse from the two conceptual articles to clarify how I define and conceptualize discourse in my study.  In this study I mainly focus on three types of discourse to examine the discursive nature of adolescent immigrant studentsÕ identity construction and negotiation. Articulating my conceptualization of discourse is important as it informs how I will operationalize the construct of identity, go about collecting data, and conduct data analysis.  The first type of discourse that I focus on is the discourse at the micro level of the classroomÑthe Òeveryday, moment-by-moment unfolding of classroom discourseÓ (Juzwik, 2006, p. 15).  Discourse in this sense is spoken discourse, and refers to classroom interactions, which include interactions around the curriculum and social interactions among individuals in the classroom. This conception of discourse as classroom interactions is grounded in the American interactional sociolinguistic traditions (Goffman, 1981; Gumperz, 1982a), and aligns with BucholtzÕs (2003) notion of Òdiscourse as culture.Ó Informed by this conception of discourse, I conceptualize the construct of identity as identity-in-interaction. This conceptualization of identity-in-interaction means that the level of analysis is on the classroom interactions, and that the analytic emphasis in my study of identity negotiation is on the local speech events and on the local processes of identity negotiation. From the perspective of data analysis, classroom discourse includes both the linguistic interactions and the linguistic and paralinguistic features associated with the interactions, such as intonation, stress, pitch register, rhythm, loudness, gestures, etc. (Gumperz, 1977). Focusing on classroom interactions allows me to examine how these adolescent immigrant boys perform their identities, and position !14 themselves through their use of language and their actions, as well as how they are positioned as learners in classroom interactions.   The second type of discourse in this study is the discourses at the meso level of the school Ð the discursive practices within the school. Here the term discourse is often used in plural form. Discourses refers to notions and ideas of ways of being in the school. For example, in a school there are always ideas being circulated about what means to be a student, a boy, a girl, an ESL student, a student from certain racial and religious background, etc. These ideas and notions of being are discourses that shape and inform studentsÕ thinking of learning, gender, sexuality, masculinity, femininity, race, religion, etc. Discourses of this type then exist in the form of the schoolÕs formal policies, and in the form of the discourses that teachers, staff, administrators, and students construct in different classrooms and social spaces. In this sense I focus on how the school practices, personnel, and resources figure cultural worlds (Holland et al., 1998) and construct identities for these adolescent immigrant students, and how these students make identity bids in these symbolic, figured worlds.  The third type of discourse in this study that I focus on is the discourses at the macro level of the society. How immigrant students like Tiger position himself are positioned in the moment-to-moment classroom interactions is connected to discourses and ideologies circulated in the school and those at the societal level. In this sense, the conceptualization of the meso level discourses and the macro level discourses in this study attends to the critical sense of the term discourses, following the Foucauldian tradition (Foucault, 1972). Discourses are Òa form of social and ideological practice, systematic ways of making sense of the social world, or powerful sets of knowledge, assumptions, and expectations that govern mainstream social and cultural practicesÓ (Baxter, 2003, p. 7). Discourses in the Foucauldian tradition are connected to the !15 notions of power, which refers to the pervasiveness and normalcy that constitutes and regulates all discursive and social relations. Individuals are simultaneously embedded in multiple discourses. For example, as an immigrant learner, Tiger is subjected to discourses of what it means to be a good student in the school, what it means to be an ESL student, and what it means to be a young man. These discourses are not necessarily congruent, and they often compete against each other. Similarly, the notions of what it means to be a good student or a young man in the U.S. schools might be different from those from his own culture or those in his own family. These differences pose significant social and ideological meanings for his negotiation of identities.  Table 1: Conceptualization of the Construct of Discourse(s)   Therefore, discourse in this study exists at multiple levels, and includes both the conceptions of discourse in the field of linguistics (American sociolinguistics) and those defined in the non-linguistics fields (social practice theory and poststructuralist perspectives). Including discourses at multiple levels in the study does not mean that I view each type of discourse as separated from each other. Rather, the analytic emphasis in my study will be on the connections and interactions between the discourses at the micro, the meso, and the macro levels. I seek to !16 examine how the process of identity construction and negotiation at the micro-level discourse reflects the violence of social identification at the meso and macro levels, and how the identification models circulated in the macro and meso level discourse take effect, and get translated or challenged in the local events of classroom interactions.  Positioning and the Study of Identities  I draw upon positioning theory (Davies & Harr”, 1990; Tan & Moghaddam, 1995; Wetherell, 1998) as a lens to analyze how these boysÕ identity negotiation occurs in micro-level classroom interactions, and how the ways that they are positioned and position themselves are connected to larger normative discourses circulated in the school and the society. Positioning theory also illuminates my conceptualization of the relationship between language, discourses and identities.   Positioning theory was developed to understand the social dynamics in the process of interpersonal interaction and the production of personhood in the conversation. Dissatisfied with the concept of ÒroleÓ in social psychology, which states that the roles that individuals have determine the basis of action, positioning theorists argue that in the process of a conversation, individuals also take up subject positions that are available in response to how they are being positioned. Davies and Harr” (1990) take up the poststructuralist perspectives to discourses, arguing that,  A particular strength of the poststructuralist research paradigm, to which we referred above, is that it recognises both the constitutive force of discourse, and in particular of discursive practices and at the same time recognises that people are capable of exercising choice in relation to those practices. We shall argue that the constitutive force of each discursive practice lies in its provision of subject positions. A subject position incorporates both a conceptual repertoire and a location for persons within the structure of rights for those that use that repertoire. Once having taken up a particular position as oneÕs own, a person inevitably sees the world from the vantage point of that position and in terms of the particular images, metaphors, story lines and concepts which are made relevant within the particular discursive practice in which they are positioned. (p. 46) !17  What Davies and Harr” explains here is that what we choose to say and to do in interpersonal interaction is informed by the large normative discourses that shape the Òconceptual repertoireÓ of that subject position we take up. In addition, they also argue that individuals have the agency to choose which subject positions to take on in relation to the positions they are afforded. One speaker might choose to speak from a different subject position than the one that her conversant is assigning to her. For example, in the classroom interaction at the beginning of this chapter, Tiger was a student, and Mrs. Smith and the rest of the students in the classroom were expecting him to speak from the subject position of a Ògood studentÓ; however, he chose to speak from a position of a boy to assert his masculine identity. Mrs. SmithÕs evaluation of him as not serious was also based on her position as a teacher and Tiger as a student. This misalignment between the positioning acts of the two speakers created two different Òstory lines,Ó or what Goffman calls ÒframesÓ (Goffman, 1974). At the same time, both TigerÕs and Mrs. SmithÕs discursive positioning acts were material in that the speech acts of their utterance constructed the subject positions or identity of not serious students and the discourses of masculinity. Therefore, positioning can be understood as the process by which speakers discursively construct personal stories, affording positions for speakers to take up in relation to each other so that participantsÕ actions are made intelligible and relatively determinate as social acts. In moving from the use of ÔroleÕ to ÔpositionÕ as central organizing concepts of social analysis, the focus of attention shifts from the more ritualistic and formal, to the more dynamic and negotiable, aspects of interpersonal encounters. Situating the Study in the Current Literature   Building upon the theoretical frameworks and my conceptualization of identity and discourse I explicate above, in this section I present a critical overview of two lines of !18 scholarship on language, gender, masculinity, and immigration: research on boys and immigrant adolescents and research on identities in the field of second language acquisition, with the goal of situating and providing backgrounds for this study. Though studies are referenced and discussed, I do not aim to systematically review all the studies but rather to illuminate and discuss how this study adds to the current research.  The ÒBoy TurnÓ in Research on Gender and Education Research on gender and schooling started to experience a resurgence of interest in boysÕ lives and experiences in the mid-1990s, and this shift or renewed interested is referred as the Òboy turnÓ in gender and education research (Alloway & Gilbert, 1997; Archer, 2003; Connell, 1995, 1996; Way, 2013; Way & Chu, 2004; Weaver-Hightower, 2003). This turn to boys has several roots and was spurred by pop psychology, feminism, gender equity, and the crisis of masculinity (Weaver-Hightower, 2003). However, in this renewed research boys from diverse backgrounds were neglected. As Way and Chu (2004) argue in their introduction to their edited book of the research of boys from diverse background.  To the extent that white middle-class boys are not viewed as white or middle class but simply Òboys,Ó boy who are not white or middle class are regarded as Òother,Ó and their experiences tend to be marginalized or neglected together. Although the recent discourse on boys claims to consider culture, for instance by evaluating cultural norms and ideals of masculinity, it nevertheless decontextualizes boysÕ experiences by failing to include the experiences of boys from diverse ethnic, racial, and socio-economic backgrounds and by ignoring ways in which cultural identities (e.g., race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and nationality) and social contexts (e.g. family, peers, and school) shape and are shaped by boys themselves (p. 2).  Although studies on masculinities of immigrant adolescent are few, qualitative studies in the field of sociology have also demonstrated that immigrant young menÕs masculine identities significantly influenced their learning and schooling experiences (e.g. Archer, 2003; Lee, 2004; Qin, 2009; Sua⁄rez-Orozco & Qin-Hilliard, 2004). For example, ArcherÕs (2003) work on !19 Muslim boys in Britain explored the complex interplay between race, ethnicity, religion, and masculinity within these boysÕ lives, arguing that the Muslim boysÕ identities cannot be fully understood without considering their masculine identities. QinÕs (2009) study of Chinese adolescent immigrant boys in the U.S. demonstrated that these boys struggled with conflicting gender expectations from home and from school, and they tended to downplay their engagement in academic work in order to construct for themselves a ÒcoolerÓ masculine image. LeeÕs (2004) study of Hmong adolescent immigrant boys in a high school in Wisconsin indicated that some Hmong boysÕ attitudes toward learning were influenced by their perceptions of gender relations in traditional Hmong culture, in which men are viewed as superior to women. In her study the Hmong boys refused to seek help from their female teachers because they saw that act as a threat to their masculinity. While these studies have focused their analysis on immigrant adolescent boysÕ masculinities, they did not look at how immigrant boys performed their masculinities through language in moment-to-moment classroom interactions; neither was language learning the focus of these studies.   Research on Immigrant LearnersÕ Identity  This lack attention to how identity was negotiated was also evident in the research on immigrant learnersÕ identities that took a macro-sociological approach. One of the major themes in the literature on immigrant studentsÕ identity construction is understanding the relationship between their acculturation patterns, identities, and the consequences on their learning or their academic achievement. The existing studies have identified three major acculturation patterns among immigrant students: assimilation, opposition, and straddling (Lee & Anderson, 2009). Results from the studies seem to suggest that the paths of acculturation are associated with the development of school identity, their academic engagement, or their connectedness to school. !20 These macrosociological studies focus on examining identity attachment, in which identity is defined as oneÕs level of attachment to social categories (i.e. race, ethnicity, religion, gender).  In these studies, identity is operationalized as the extent that one identifies to a social group and what it means to belong to a social group.  These studies are largely quantitative, measuring Òhow muchÓ or Òto what extentÓ individuals feel attached to their social groups (Carter, 2005; Phinney, 1990; Quintana, 2007). Identity, then, is not about development per se, but about the extent to which one feels connected to members of his social group.  In this section I review these macrosociological analysis studies of acculturation patterns to further illustrate how my study on identity negotiation differs from these identity attachment studies.    While schools are often envisioned to offer peoples of all backgrounds a route to social mobility and to achieve their American dreams, they are also considered as the sites for social and cultural reproduction.  Schools, as one element of social structure, value the dominant language and cultural norms, which reinforce what it means to be a Ògood student,Ó and advantage those coming from the dominant culture and disadvantage those from minority backgrounds.  Immigrant students face pressure to become the new members of the society.  The majority of studies on acculturation patterns of immigrant students show that immigrant students who choose to conform to the dominant culture are more likely to develop a school identity and to gain social resources to achieve academic success (Bartlett, 2008; Davidson, 1996; Mart™nez-Rold⁄n & Malav”, 2004).  However, studies also show that immigrant students who are assimilated to the dominant culture and ideology and who develop assimilated identities seem to suffer from psychological stress because they lose a strong sense of ethnic identity and intragroup affiliation with peers from the same linguistic and ethnic background.  For example, !21 Ogbu and Simons (1998) pointed out that minority students who are fully assimilated to the dominant culture are sometimes viewed as traitors and Òacting whiteÓ by their peers.  In contrast, studies found that oppositional identities are associated with behaviors of academic disengagement and academic failure.  Immigrant students who develop oppositional identities usually show strong in-group racial and ethnic identity.  Fordham and Ogbu (1986) are the first researchers who put forward this stance, and they argued that involuntary immigrant students develop oppositional identities as they realize the injustice and limited career opportunities for them after completing school.  Valenzuela (1999) made a similar argument in her ethnographic study on Mexican American students.  She found that the uncaring pedagogy and curriculum in the school, coupled with the Mexican American studentsÕ recognition of the structural barriers and the unequal treatment they receive at school, contribute to the development of non-school identities, or street-kid identity, as in Flores-Gonz⁄lezÕs (2002) study of Puerto Rican students in Chicago.  These oppositional identities lead to studentsÕ disengagement with academic activities.  However, a number of studies also show that oppositional identities do not necessarily lead to academic disengagement, and that developing assimilated identities is not the only path to academic success.  For example, Davidson (1996) found that students who oppose accommodating to mainstream expectations find other ways to achieve academic success.  Studies also show that students who are not assimilated to the dominant culture seem to benefit from the social network and support from co-ethnic peers and the resources from their communities (Fordham & Ogbu, 1986; Gandara, 1996).  Studies also show that straddling identities or bicultural identities are associated with positive schooling experience and academic achievement (Andrews, 2009; Carter, 2005; Davidson, 1996).  Unsatisfied with the either-or categories of assimilating identities or !22 oppositional identities, researchers found that some immigrant students can straddle between the dominant culture in the school and the society and the ethnic culture they are from.  They call these students cultural straddlers (Carter, 2005), transculturals (Davidson, 1996), or biculturals. Studies show that immigrant students who develop bicultural identities can maintain their own in-group racial and ethnic identity while also actively participating school activities.  They recognize the structural barriers but also realize that they need to overcome the barriers through their success in school.  For example, Davidson (1996) found that transculturals or cultural straddlers in her study are able to achieve academic success because they utilize resources from both the dominant cultural world and their own ethnic communities.  They capitalize on their linguistic ability to signify their in-group membership so that they can access the support from peers who may share the same ethnic history.  Thus, the ways that cultural straddlers negotiate their identities enable them to successfully navigate social and cultural norms at school while at the same time to be socially successful with their co-ethnic peers.  One issue in these studies is that they focus on the macrosociological analysis of immigrant studentsÕ identity attachment, and their analytic emphasis is more on how immigrant students identify themselves with the racial and ethnic identity categories that are made available to them.  These studies usually do not focus on immigrant studentsÕ identity negotiation or identity interaction, that is, how identities for immigrant students are constructed and negotiated in the everyday and local social interactions.  Thus, there is limited understanding of how identification acts occur at or through local events, and how immigrant students take on or resist these identification acts.  To gain a rich understanding of how social and institutional processes shape immigrant studentsÕ identity, researchers need to focus on how identity categories become available and accepted or rejected by immigrant students at the local level.  By focusing on !23 classroom interactions in my study, I emphasize the negotiated nature of identity formation through micro-discourse analysis.   Another issue in these studies is that by focusing on identity attachment and how immigrant students identify themselves with certain identity categories, these studies tend to treat acculturation patterns and identity categories as static and unproblematic, and thus fail to recognize that each acculturation pattern might mean different things for different individuals. These studies also tend to treat identity as constant and stable across various contexts, and thus have not examined the situated nature of identityÑthat is, how identity emerges from social interactions and how a person might enact different identities in different social contexts. This study examines immigrant studentsÕ identity negotiation across different contexts, from their sheltered ELA and ESL classes, to their subject matter mainstream classes, and to other social spaces in the schools, with the goal of understanding how they make sense of themselves in different contexts and enact their identities.  The ÒIdentity ApproachÓ to Research on Second Language Acquisition  During the past two decades the fields of second language acquisition (SLA) have begun paying increasing attention to the role of identity in language learning. A significant body of work has examined how identity relations, such as race, class, gender, and sexuality, shape immigrant learnersÕ learning experiences (Darvin & Norton, 2014; Nelson, 1999; Norton, 1997, 2013; Norton & Toohey, 2011; Pavlenko, 2002; Shuck, 2006; De Costa, 2010; De Costa & Norton, 2016). Gender identity, as one of the primary ways that individuals are socialized into the society, has also drawn growing scholarly interest in this research. However, most studies on gender and second language learning focused on female language learners, and male language learners, particularly immigrant adolescents, and their masculine identities remain under-!24 explored in the identity research of second language education (Pavlenko, 2001; Pavlenko & Piller, 2008; Teutsch-Dwyer, 2001).  Although research on masculine identity in second language learning is limited, existing studies have pointed to the important role of masculinities in shaping male learnersÕ language learning experiences, willingness in language learning, and their language learning outcome. For example, Teutsch-DwyerÕs (2001) longitudinal case study of an adult male Polish immigrantÕs language acquisition in informal contexts in California indicated that the gender roles that he took up had significant impact on his access to opportunities for speaking and learning English. Kissau and Wierzalis (2008) found in their survey study in Canada that adolescent male students tended to view studying French as feminine, and were more likely to avoid expressing their desire and interest in learning French. Findings from studies that focused on male language learners but did not have an explicit analytic emphasis on gender identity also implied the connections between masculinity and language learning. For instance, McKay and WongÕs (1996) study on four Chinese immigrant studentsÕ learning experiences illustrated that the immigrant boy who took on dominant norms of masculinity in the new learning context was better able to gain access to the social circle and thus more opportunities to learn English. Hruska (2004) found that due to gender ideologies held by students in the classroom Latino boys in the study were excluded from the social circle of the native English speaking boys. Although not all of these studies focused on immigrant adolescent boys, the findings from these studies indicated that gender identities and masculine identities figure into the process of language learning in important ways.   !25 Outline of the Dissertation Chapters In this chapter I have introduced the research topic and the theoretical frameworks that I use for this study, and have explained how this study contributes to the current research on boys in gender and education and identity research in SLA. By foregrounding language and discourses in studying masculinity performance of immigrant adolescents, I aim at studying the constitutive relationship between language and identity negotiation. By situating these immigrant adolescentsÕ identity performance in multiple levels of discourses, it allows us to see how normative discourses shape their performances of identities, and how their performances of identity in the local interactions reinforce or contest the larger discourses.  In Chapter 2, I introduce the three multilingual young men Ð Omar, Tiger, and Chris, their teacher Mrs. Brown, their classrooms, their school, and my own positionality as a researcher in this ethnographic work. I explain the analytical frameworks and procedures that I use Ð interactional sociolinguistics and poststructuralist discourse analysis. In addition, I explain how Academic High, as both a learning and social space, was gendered and racialized, which provides the background for understanding these young menÕs identity performance.  In Chapter 3, I analyze the multiple identities that Omar, Tiger and Chris subscribed and were assigned to, as well as the multiple subordinations they were subjected to due to their minoritized social positions at school. I argue that these young menÕs experiences in the school need to be viewed through a framework of intersectionality, which allows us to see the compounding effects of multiple oppressions and the hierarchical order of masculinity that was constructed by the systems of power.  In Chapter 4, I look at the boysÕ performance of masculinities inside the ESL classroom. Through analyzing TigerÕs stylized use of language in a language activity over time, I illustrate !26 that his identity negotiation Ð masculinity performance Ð was intertwined with the process of language teaching and learning in the classroom. However, due to the fact that Tiger and his teacher were speaking within different discourses in the same language activity, TigerÕs stylized use of English led to him being labeled as a Not Serious student and a problem student in the end.   In Chapter 5, I examine the (dis)connection between these young menÕs masculinities and reader identities. Through analyzing a classroom discussion, I study how these students, their teacher, and other adults in the classroom articulated their different notions of reading and performed their reader identities. I illustrate that (1) the challenges in the reading were attributable to the differences between the teacherÕs view of reading and that of the students, and (2) these young menÕs performance of reader identities was connected to their negotiation of masculinity.    In Chapter 6, I study teachersÕ pedagogy and their way of managing gender and masculinity in their classroom to understand how the teachers, together with their student, constructed the notions of what it meant to be a male and female in their classrooms. Through analyzing three teachersÕ identity performance in teaching, I illustrate that each of the teachers performed a different version of masculine identity in their teaching, and through their pedagogy they constructed a social space out of their classrooms with their different ways of managing and shaping masculinity. However, their ways of managing masculinity were all operating within the same heterosexual normalcy and masculinity discourses, which reinforced, rather than challenged, the normative discourses.  In Chapter 7, I summarize what I learned from this ethnographic work, and discuss the theoretical and pedagogical implications from this work. I particularly look at how a lens of gender and discourse can add to the research on the education of immigrant adolescents. In !27 addition, I also reflect the challenges of disrupting heterosexual normalcy discourses in school and discuss directions for future work in both research and practice.                        !28 CHAPTER 2 A CRITICAL SOCIOLINGUISTIC ETHNOGRAPHY:  PARTICIPANTS, SITES, AND METHODOLOGY Ethnography, whatever it is, has never been mere description. It is also theoretical in its mode of description. Indeed, ethnography is a theory of description. The whole of a culture cannot be assumed, and there has never been a total consensus on how whole is whole enough, especially when dealing with questions of boundaries. Nor has there been agreement on what makes ethnographic reporting Òfactual,Ó a problem in mainstream scientific work as well. (Nader, 2011, p. 211-212)  When I began my fieldwork in Academic High in the fall of 2014, I was not totally new to the school Ð I had been volunteering in the school for over two years. In 2012 I got to know Mrs. Brown the ESL teacher at Academic High through work. When she later expressed the need for more volunteers in her ESL classes to help her students with homework, I volunteered, and she happily agreed. In the September of 2012 I started working in her classroom in Academic High on a weekly basis, assisting her students during individual work or small group activities, and helping them with homework during Excel hours (study hall) or at her after-school tutoring program in the middle school. As my time working in the classroom grew, I became increasingly intrigued by how some of the boys were engaged or disengaged with language learning in the classroom. After spending two years volunteering in the ESL classroom, I decided to conduct a study to take a closer look at how adolescent boys negotiated their sense of ÒselfÓ in the ESL classroom and in the school, and how their identity negotiation was connected with their investment in language and literacy activities (Norton, 2000).    In this chapter I explain how I sought to understand Òthe wholeÓ of the ÒculturesÓ of Academic High which Omar, Tiger, and Chris were part of, and were learning to live within. I start this chapter with a brief introduction of Academic High and its student population, and then !29 move on to introduce the three focal participants, their ESL teacher, and their ESL classes. After addressing my researcher positionality and discussing how my perspectives and identities added to the complexity of this ethnographic work, I explain and defend my analytic frameworks Ðinteractional sociolinguistics and feminist poststructuralist discourse analysis, as well as my approaches to transcription. I then move on to introduce the discourses at the macro and meso level. After a broad introduction of the societal discourses around immigration, race, gender, sexuality, and religion, I conclude the chapter with a more detailed look at Academic High as an institution from three angles: as an academic space, as a gendered institution, and as a racialized institution. Understanding Academic High as a space simultaneously embedded in these social and historical relations provides the social contexts for data interpretation in the later chapters.  Academic High School  Academic High is a comprehensive, 9-12 grade, co-educational high school in Rivertown, a suburban town in a Midwestern state in the United States. In the 2014-2015 school year during which I conducted my fieldwork, Academic High had over 1,000 students enrolled1. About 60 percent of the school student population was white, 20 percent black, 10 percent Hispanic, 5 percent Asian, 1 percent American Indian, and the rest of the students self-identified as mixed with two or more races. About 30 percent of the students were on free lunch program, and roughly a third of the student population were School of Choice (SOC)2 students from neighboring districts.  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"!To protect the confidentiality of the school and the participants, I chose to provide rough descriptive statistics about the school, and used pseudonyms for the participants, the school, and school-specific programs.     !#!Schools of Choice is a state education policy, which provides students with additional enrollment opportunities, ranging from allowing students to determine which school within the !30 The large percentage of SOC students in Academic High reflected both a demographic trend in the communities that Academic High was serving and the schoolÕs reputation in academic achievement and sport programs among families in the local communities. According to the data from the U.S. Bureau of the Census 2014, RivertownÕs school-aged population was relatively low, and the shrinking student body created a need for its school district to attract and take in nonresident students to fill its classrooms. In addition, Academic HighÕs success in getting more students from its neighboring districts rested on its reputation in academic achievement. According to the promotion information from the schoolÕs website, it was ranked as one of the top schools in the state. Academic HighÕs recognized reputation in academic achievement, coupled with the school districtÕs increased efforts to seek more revenue to fund its schools, attracted a large number of students from neighboring districts with fewer resources. The majority of the SOC students were African American and Hispanic students. While enjoying the funds brought by the school-choice students, Academic High was also encountering a challenge brought by the SOC student population. ÒChanges in student population led to new scrutiny concerning the performance of traditionally underrepresented minority and economically disadvantaged studentsÓ (from Academic High School document). As I illustrate later in this chapter, its reputation of academic achievement and student success, coupled with the pressure for responding to the needs of the increasing diversity of student population, pushed the school to further heighten its priorities in academics while leaving unaddressed more sensitive and complex issues such as race, gender, sexuality, and religious diversity.    !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!resident district they will enroll, to allowing non-resident students to enroll in a district other than their own. Participation in choice programs is optional for districts. The degree and extent of participation are also determined at the local level of school districts.!!31 The ESL Classes and Mrs. BrownÕs Students  In the 2014-2015 school year Academic High had 44 students who were officially identified as English language learners (ELLs)3, which made up about 4-5 percent of the student population. The actual number of students who were learning English as an additional language might be greater than this number because some students who fell under the category of being eligible for language support might have chosen to not be identified as ELL students.  The percentage of the ELL student population in Academic High was similar to the percentage of ELLs in the total school age student population in the state. According to a report by the National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition (2015), ELL student population made up of about 5 percent of the stateÕs school population. In this particular state, the ELL student population tended to concentrate in some metropolitan areas. Since the 1990s, overall the state, like the U.S., has experienced ÒdeconcentrationÓ and Òwidespread dispersalÓ of its immigrant population (Fix & Passel, 2003; Liaw & Frey, 2007). At the national level, although states like California, New York and Texas continue to attract large percentage of foreign born population, the percentage of immigrant population that these states took in has been declining, and more and more immigrants have settled down in the states which tended to have less immigrant population (National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition, 2015). The deconcentration trend was also present at the state level. For instance, in the state in which this research project took place, the immigrant population was widely dispersed across the state. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!3 I use the phrase ÒEnglish language learners (ELLs)Ó here because it was the term used by the school in its official documents for referring to students whose first language is not English. I use the abbreviated term ÒESLÓ for the same reason. These terms are not neutral; rather they are labels of subject positions that are historically, politically and ideologically constructed (see Garc™a, Kleifgen, & Falchi, 2008). When I am not reporting the terms as they were used by the school, other institutions, or people who I talked to, I use phrases such as multilingual learners, emergent bilingual students, immigrant learners, or minoritized youth to highlight the studentsÕ cultural and linguistic assets and the fact that they were put into the category of minority.  !32 While the four school districts with the greatest ELL population made up about 85 percent of the total ELL population, the rest of school districts all had ELL populations (State Department of Education, 2013).  The geographical dispersal of immigrant population has important implications for schools and the education of this group of student population. First, this dispersed distribution of immigrant students poses challenges for many schools in areas with comparatively little recent history settling newcomers since they have not been prepared for educating immigrant learners and working with immigrant families. Second, compared to schools that have a greater percentage of immigrant learners, schools with ÒinsignificantÓ number of immigrant learners tend to pay less attention to the academic and social needs of these students. Such geographic dispersal also leads to the invisibility of immigrant learners in individual schools. By using Academic High School as a case, we are able to see the challenges of ELL students in what is the increasingly common pattern of the widespread dispersal of immigrant learners. Understanding how schools like Academic High work with their ELL students and how immigrant young men navigate academic study and social life in a space in which they are being minoritized is critical for increasing our understanding of the education of immigrant learners in the U.S.  Mrs. Brown, a middle-aged white female teacher, was the only English as a second language (ESL) teacher at Academic High, teaching two ESL classes Ð the second hour and the third hour. In the afternoons she commuted to a middle school in the same district to teach two ESL classes there. Not all of the 44 ELL students in Academic High were taking ESL classes Ð only 13 of them were in Mrs. BrownÕs classroom. The rest of the ELL students either had opted out of the ESL program, or had been released from the program because they had acquired !33 strong English skills, even though they might have not tested proficient on the English language assessment mandated by the state. Mrs. BrownÕs second hour ESL class was a sheltered English language arts (ELA) class, equivalent to English I/II. Her third hour ESL class was an English language development (ELD) class with homework support time. During the first half of the 3rd hour class, she mainly focused on teaching academic vocabulary; and during the second half of the 3rd hour, students usually worked on their homework, with supports from Mrs. BrownÕs para-pro and adults like me who were volunteering in her classroom.  The 2014 fall semester when I formally started my fieldwork, Mrs. Brown had 11 students in her second hour sheltered ELA class. Later in November one male student from Columbia joined the class, and one girl from China started in early February, which made a total of 13 ESL students Ð five boys and eight girls Ð in her second hour sheltered ELA class. Tiger, Omar and Chris were three students who started from the beginning. These three boys were all in Mrs. BrownÕs ESL classes at the middle school the year before, and they were freshman in Academic High when I started my fieldwork. This multilingual classroom had students who spoke Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese, and Thai as their first languages. Most students had studied English as a second language in the United States for one or two years, or they had studied English as a foreign language in their home countries or other countries before they came to Academic High School.  Not all of the students in her second hour class were taking her third hour ELD class, because the third hour class focused on developing studentsÕ basic academic vocabulary, and was considered a course for ESL students with lower levels of English language proficiency. Four of the girls in the 2nd hour ELA whose English language proficiency was quite high did not take !34 Mrs. BrownÕs third hour. And one boy who was not taking Mrs. BrownÕs 2nd hour ELA class came to her third hour only for homework support. Therefore, her third hour was smaller than the 2nd hour Ð 10 students, with six boys and four girls.  The gender dynamics of these two classes, when juxtaposed with studentsÕ English language proficiency, contrasted in interesting ways Ð the more advanced second hour ELA class had more girls who had higher level of English proficiency, and the third hour more basic ELD class had more boys and their English proficiency levels were lower than that of the girls. Therefore, as I will analyze in greater detail in Chapter 3, membership in these two different ESL classes also implicitly implied the proficiency levels of the students. Language proficiency was not simply a marker of their language ability. Rather it also became a linguistic capital and power differential, which contributed to the gender dynamics and hierarchical power relations in each of the classes.      Mrs. Brown had been teaching in the school district for a long time. Starting as an English and Spanish teacher, she switched to teaching ESL students when she returned to teaching after maternal leave. She since then Òfell in love with teaching ESL classes.Ó Mrs. Brown had a curriculum laid out for two years for both her second hour ELA course and third hour ELD course. This two-year-long curriculum design, she said, allowed students to take ESL classes with her for two years without repeating the same curriculum. Mrs. Brown explained that the goals for her ESL instruction were to help students understand, speak, read, and write English as quickly and as fluently as possible so they could, within a reasonable period of time, fully participate in their regular classroom programs, and achieve their grade level requirements. She explained that her 2nd hour ELD class correlated with the English I and English II curriculum. In the second hour class, she concentrated on the development of English reading, writing, speaking !35 and listening skills. Specific skills taught included text comprehension and literature appreciation, grammar and usage, sentence, paragraph, and essay composition, vocabulary development, oral fluency, and focused listening. In her third hour ELD class she focused on developing studentsÕ academic vocabulary. Each day she and the class spent the first 20-25 minutes learning one high-frequency academic vocabulary, and during the rest of the class time students worked on their homework or assignments from other classes, with the help either from Mrs. Brown or other adults in the classroom Ð her para-pro, student teachers, or me. Some students often chose to work alone, or work with a peer.  Omar  Omar usually did not ask for help from adults. As I will illustrate in the next chapters, his low interest in asking for help was connected to his identity negotiation as a learner and a young man. Omar was a 15-year-old boy, who was born and had grown up in the United Arab Emirates (U.A.E)4. The first time I met him in Mrs. BrownÕs classroom, I wondered why he was taking the ESL classes because his spoken English seemed to me quite fluent. Later, I learned that Omar had dual citizenship, Emirati and American. His mother, a Caucasian woman, was a U.S. citizen; his father was Emirati. Omar had three older brothers and three older sisters. He and his mother moved to the United States after his parentsÕ divorce in 2012. One year later, two of his brothers also came to the United States and joined them. His three sisters, his eldest brother, and his father were still living in U.A.E. Omar said that, although his father had darker skin, he and his brothers and sisters all had lighter skin. One of his sisters had blonde hair and the other two curly black hair. Omar said that he Òlooks just like other Americans.Ó Omar was about 5 feet 10 inches tall, !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!$!To keep my commitment to confidentiality, I chose to use a pseudonym for the name of OmarÕs country of origin. For Tiger and Chris, I just referred to the geographic region of their home country.    !36 and was very attentive to the style and color of the clothes that he wore. Hoodies, jeans, and sports shoes were his regular school attires. In class he sometimes wore glasses. I noticed that he had two pairs of glasses, one pair with blue frame and the other with red frame. When I asked why he bought two pairs of glasses, he smiled and explained that he wanted two pairs so that he could match the color of the glasses with his clothes. At home, Omar spoke both English and Arabic, and he told me he spoke about the same amount of each language at home. Tiger Tiger was a 16-year-old-boy from an eastern Asian country, who came to the United States in 2012 to reunite with his mother who he had not been living together with for over 10 years. His parents separated when he was three years old, and his mother moved to the United States after the divorce. Tiger and his sister Mary stayed in his home country, living with their father and grandparents until they came to the U.S. TigerÕs sister Mary came to the United States three years earlier than him, and was studying biochemistry in a top-tier public university in the same state. Mrs. Brown taught TigerÕs sister too, and said that Mary was a straight A student. She was very proud that Mary was able to Òbreak the ESL tabooÓ when she was selected as the Homecoming Queen during her senior year. None of her ESL students had ever received such social prominence in the school, she explained. Compared to his sister, Tiger was considered by people around him as Òless successfulÓ in his academic study. He was getting Cs and Ds in his classes, and often forgot to complete his homework. When I started my fieldwork, Mrs. Brown told me that she had not yet found Òany inroads to motivate Tiger to learn.Ó TigerÕs mother was a kindergarten teacher in a school district nearby, and his stepfather, also a man who immigrated from his home country to the U.S., was a staff working in a public university. Tiger was on the schoolÕs varsity field and track team, and he was an athlete in shot put. Tiger was physically !37 stronger and bigger than other boys in the ESL classroom. Tiger was not into fashionable clothes, often wearing a whitish grey sport jacket and black sports trousers.   Chris  Chris was a 14-year-old boy from a southeastern African country. He came to the United States one year ago with his family when his mother started her visiting scholarship in a university nearby. Chris was living with his mother, his stepfather, and a four-year-old half-brother in an apartment in a neighborhood where the majority of the residents were international visiting scholars and their families. Both his parents were instructors of fishery in a college when they were in their home country. His mother had her undergraduate degree in their home country, and masterÕs degree in Norway. While his mother was still working on her academic research at the university, his father was working in a car factory that makes Òexpensive car partsÓ in a town  Table 2: Information of Students in Mrs. BrownÕs Classroom  nearby, according to Chris. Chris had taken one year of ESL classes with Mrs. Brown in the middle school. Both Omar and Tiger had taken two years of ESL classes with her in the middle !38 school. Chris described himself as Òsportive, helpful, and playful,Ó and sometimes ÒlazyÓ because he spent all winter break watching TV and did not do any studying. Mrs. Brown described Chris as a good student who often completed his homework. Chris was about 5 feet and 8 feet tall, and had short curly hair. He always wore hoodies, jeans, and sports shoes.  Researcher Positionality  January 2015. Late in the night. In the Library. I am writing my research statement for a job application, in tears. I cannot help myself. ÒI feel like I need to let my future colleagues know I have a personal investment in this research project. It is such an important part of who I am that I think I should let them know.Ó I write to ask for my advisorÕs advice.  Part of what conjured my emotion that night was writing the summary of this ethnographic work. It made me realize even more clearly the powerlessness of these minoritized young men in their journey of learning to grow up and do schools in a context with so many borders to cross and navigate: language, culture, ideology, gender, religion, sexuality, etc. I wrote in my research statement,  É I illustrate that, entangled in the hierarchy of masculinities in the school, their boysÕ (dis)engagement with language and literacy was shaped by their masculine subject positions, and how they related their sense of being boys to the learning of language and words. Their access to language learning was jeopardized by the inequitable relations of power they found themselves in.   My emotional reaction from the reflective writing was accompanied with my sense of pain when realizing how powerful these webs of the discourses in which they were living are and the impact of these invisible forces on these boysÕ lives and learning.  The emotional aspect of this ethnographic work was also connected to my own identities and positionality as a researcher. Like Omar, Tiger, and Chris, I am also a language learner, using and learning to use English as an additional language. Language is a huge part of my life !39 and my identity. I get frustrated when I cannot express my meanings and feelings in English like I can do freely in my mother tongue Chinese. The sense of the loss of my ability to utter and controlling linguistic sophistication constantly haunts me, making me feel I am smaller and less. And, like them, the sense of Otherness has been impacting my life and my sense of self.  Our shared Otherness offered me the ÒinsiderÓ perspective to their experiences. My insider position enriched this study because, as a minoritized man and a language learner, I experienced some of the same challenges they were facing. Our shared minoritized positions gave me insider knowledge and researcher instincts for deciding when to ask and what to ask in order to get a deeper understanding of their identity negotiation. However, my ÒinsiderÓ position also complicated the research because it would become problematic for me to impose my own assumptions into my interpretation of what I heard and saw in the field work and the data, which constantly reminded me that I should not force my interpretation onto the experiences of the participants. My commitment to this research to make visible the challenges in their learning in the school also came from my researcher positionality. My commitment to this scholarly journey to understand their experiences and stories was strengthened by my personal investment. As a minoritized individual, my own marginalized experiences allowed me to see that some of the challenges that we are having in the education of immigrant learners are not the problems of these learners, rather they arise from the inequalities structured by the society. I chose to understand their learning experiences and lives in order to make visible the impact of the systems of inequalities and the invisible normative discourses that shaped their lives. I thus chose to tell the struggles of these young men, as well as their agency. The critical lens that I took in this research was informed by my perspectives on power, inequalities, and education, and !40 empowered by the critical theoretical and analytical tools I drew upon. For example, in my analysis of their multiple identities, I examined how the compounding forms of subordination marginalized these young men. In my analysis of TigerÕs performance of masculine identity in the ESL classroom and the process of him being identified as a ÒNot SeriousÓ learner, I examined how the normative discourses at both the school and the societal level shaped the social space for him and his identities.    My own identities, however, also complicated this ethnographic work. One complication was my identity as a homosexual man. When I started this project, I was insecure about doing research with male students because I was not sure how much I needed to disclose to them about my sexual orientation. This issue was particularly relevant in situations where they might ask questions that I felt uncomfortable to answer. I did not know whether and how I should response to homophobic comments in a way in order to maintain the researcher and participant relationship. As I address in the conclusion chapter, these issues did come up in my field work, and they evoked discomfort, but these situations also pushed me to engage the issues more thoughtfully, and consider seeking opportunities to address them as an extended part of this research work. Another challenge in my research was to navigate the triad relationship between the student participants, the teacher participants, and myself as a researcher. This relationship was particularly complicated when I was in Mrs. BrownÕs ESL classroom because, as I explain in the next section, my role in Mrs. BrownÕs classroom was more a participant than an observer. I learned during the research that the student participantsÕ perception of my relationship with the teachers might impact what they would like to share with me in interviews and how open they could be. For example, during one of my interviews with Omar, when I asked him about his favorite subjects at school, he also bought up the subjects which he did not like. When I asked !41 him to say it a little bit more, he said, ÒI know you like this teacher, but IÕm going to share it with you anyways.Ó At that moment I was not sure how to respond. I just told him that all he shared with me was confidential and I would not share with anybody else.     Ethnographic Work Participant Observation  I started my observation from Mrs. BrownÕs ESL classroom in the fall of 2014. A month later I started to contact other teachers for their permission to observe Omar, Tiger, and Chris in their classrooms. I contacted seven teachers, and in the end was able to get consent from five of them. As I explain in the next section, getting access to the classrooms was also a telling process which indicated the pressure of accountability in the school.  As indicated in the table below, I observed Omar, Tiger and Chris as a group in their ESL classroom, and then followed them individually into different classrooms. I observed the three boys three to four times each week in their ESL classrooms, and twice in the other classroom they were in. I observed Omar in his first hour U.S. history classroom, fourth hour biology classroom, and sixth hour Algebra classroom. For Tiger, I observed him in his first hour U.S. History classroom, fourth hour biology, and sixth hour Geometry classroom. For Chris, I observed him in fifth hour Algebra classroom.  I was a participant observer in Mrs. BrownÕs ESL classroom and most of the time I was more a participant than an observer. I circulated in the classroom to assist students with their individual work or group work, and tutored students on their homework during the Excel hours and their homework support time. Sometimes when Mrs. Brown had to leave the classroom for a couple of minutes or if she had to use a substitute teacher, she asked me to step in to teach. I kept notes of classroom observations and informal interactions. Since I was involved in the classroom !42 activities, most of the notes were brief and I expanded upon them each day after I left the school. In the other classrooms, I was mostly an observer, sitting at the back of the classroom.  Table 3: Ethnographic Fieldwork Ð the Observation Schedule  In addition to field notes I also audiotaped and videotaped classroom interactions. Taping the classroom interactions is important for this research because this study was designed with using interactional sociolinguistic approach to analyze how these multilingual boys used language to index and perform their masculine identities in classroom interactions. Taping the classroom interactions allowed me to capture the linguistic and non-linguistic features of the utterances that were critical for understanding the indexicality and performativity of !43 masculinities. I audiotaped all the classes I observed, and videotaped most of the ESL classes and the Algebra classes that I observed.  In addition to observing the students inside the classrooms, I also observed them at the cafeteria, the gym, and other social spaces and events. I sometimes ate lunch with them at their table in the cafeteria. Most of the ESL students were having the late lunch schedule5, and they always ate lunch together. But they separated themselves to two tables in the cafeteria, one boy group and one girl group. I also went to the mosque that Omar was going for several times, and went to two sport meets to see Tiger competing shot put.  Besides observing the students in different classrooms and spaces, I also regularly attended other school meetings and events which they were not part of. I went regularly to the school districtsÕ board of education meetings, Academic High SchoolÕs parent council meetings, and the weekly meetings of Gender Equality Association. I also went to the schoolÕs winter formal, a winter dance and the homecoming parade. My goal for attending these events was to understand the school and the community as a social space. As some of the questions that I sought to understand focused on the school as a social space, my participation in these events allowed me to see and experience how different actors articulated their views about Academic High and how they framed and pushed on agenda for the school. Participation in these events was also important because the school was not immune from the larger debates circulated in the society around issues such as racial relations, marriage equality, immigration, religion, terrorism, and election. These debates and discourses around them also got taken up by students and adults in the school in formal or informal contexts, shaping the ÒculturesÓ and the discourses in the school.   !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!%!Academic High used two lunch periods, Òearly lunchÓ and Òlate lunchÓ to handle large numbers of students using the same cafeteria.  !44 The data collected outside the classrooms and the school served as complementary data for understanding how the students performed their identities across different social spaces, and the connection and disconnection between their subject positions between home and schools. In addition to the interviews I also collected studentsÕ classroom work to analyze their discursive performance of identities. Documents and Artifacts  I also collected documents and artifacts from the classrooms and the school. I collected studentsÕ work and assignments, as well as teachersÕ syllabi, handouts, and instructional slides. I also collected the schoolÕs newspapers for the purpose of understanding how the student body were responding to some of the social issues and discourses. In addition, I also collected the schoolÕs discipline data to understand, as I illustrate in the next section, how the patterns of disciplinary incidents in the school might indicate that the issue of discipline was racialized and gendered in the school. Interviews  I interviewed the three students, their teachers, and their mothers (see interview protocols in appendix). In addition to informal interviews with the students during class breaks or other occasions, I conducted one semi-structured interview with each of the three students in the late spring of 2015. The purpose of the interviews was to clarify some of the questions that I had during the observations at school. I also conducted semi-structured interviews with four of the teachers: Mrs. Brown, Ms. Morris, Ms. Ford, and Mr. Harrison. In Chapter 6 when I analyze the teachersÕ performance of their identities in teaching, I also use the interview data to support my interpretation of their identities and their ways of managing gender and masculinity in their own classrooms. I conducted an individual interview with each of the mothers of the three students. !45 The interviews with the mothers were designed to gain a better understanding of studentsÕ family background and how their family member viewed them as young men.  Analytical Approaches, Transcription, and Data Interpretation Because they are interpretive, sociolinguistic approaches to narrative admittedly do not claim to establish certainty. To be credible, however, studies of learning using the identity-as-story construct Ð through a narrativized definition and operationalization Ð should follow careful interpretive procedures and clarify those procedures such that these conclusions reached are at least traceable (to and from data) by those attempting to replicate their work or to do related work. (Juzwik, 2006, p. 17)  Juzwik (2006) reminds narrative-minded discourse analysts that, in order to establish credibility of their interpretation of data, they need to clarify their theoretical definitions and analytical procedures, and defend the analytical procedures and choices. In this section, building off my conceptualization of discourses, identities, and masculinities, I explain the analytical approaches I am using to interpret the data and the data reduction process, and defend my transcription decisions of classroom interaction data. Interactional Sociolinguistics and Poststructuralist Approach to Discourse Analysis I combine interactional sociolinguistics (Goffman, 1981; Gumperz, 1982a; Hymes, 1974) and poststructuralist discourse analysis (Baxter, 2003; Threadgold, 2003) in this study in order to understand both how identity performance and negotiation happens in the moment-to-moment classroom interactions, and how the interpersonal social interactions and classroom talk reflect or complicate the power of the ideologies and macro-level discourses. I use these two discourse analysis approaches as complementary approaches because linguistic forms, situated discourses, and ideology need to be analyzed together (Bucholtz, 2011; Bucholtz & Hall, 2008; Gumperz, 1982; Rampton, 2013). However, as Rampton (2013) pointed out, Òin Critical Discourse Analysis, there is form and ideology, but often not enough on situated interactional processingÓ (p. 377). This critique echoes the concerns from critical discourse analysts who find it important !46 to situate their analysis of power systems in micro-analysis of Òtalk-in-interactionÓ (Baxter, 2008; Wetherell, 1998). At the same time, sociolinguistics oriented discourse analysts also point out that detailed analysis of discursive interactions can lead to deeper understanding of the larger discourses at work. Bucholtz and Hall (2008) argue that Òinteraction is the valuable starting point for the analysis of sociolinguistic practice, but it cannot be the end point. Interaction gives the empirical grounding we need to move from the moment to moment unfolding of social activities to the larger social, cultural, political world that we seek to explicate as scholars of culture and societyÓ (p. 158). In this study I use the tools of interactional sociolinguistics to study how individuals use language to perform their identities in talk-in-interaction. My focus on identity negotiation in talk-in-interaction requires analytic work on both the content and the structure of the linguistic interactions, as well as the linguistic and paralinguistic features associated with the interactions, such as intonation, stress, pitch register, rhythm, loudness, gestures, etc. (Gumperz, 1977). Therefore, I focus on analyzing both what has been said and how it has been said. Attending to both the ÒwhatÓ and ÒhowÓ allows discourse analysts to gain a deeper insight of how individuals use language to ÒdoÓ things. As my conceptualization of discourses in the previous section indicates, I also connect identity negotiation at the interactional discourse to the normative, ideological discourses at the school and societal level. Poststructuralist discourse analysis (Baxter, 2003; Threadgold, 2003; Wetherell, 1998) offers the analytic tools for me to examine how these young menÕs masculinity performances are shaped by larger normative discourses around gender, masculinity, and power, and how speakers constantly shifts between positions of powerlessness or powerfulness within !47 different discourses. Therefore, I situate the close-up analysis of classroom interactions within the Òoften unspoken social and cultural knowledge that participants bring to interactionÓ (Bucholtz, 2011, p. 9), in order to make visible of how identity work at local classroom interactions is connected as well as contributes to ideologies and discourses at the macro level.   Moreover, I combine my analysis of classroom interactions and the critical discourse analysis with ethnographic methodologies which allow me to make sense of locally specific elements of interaction as well as to get at the sociocultural context in which interaction unfolds and to which it contributes. My ethnographic work in the school, particularly attending to the school-related events and activities, allowed me to support my interpretation of conversation-based analysis with my understanding of the whole of the school culture. This combination of ethnographic work and discourse analysis also allows me to situate the texts in the larger social and cultural world from which it emerges from.  Transcription as Theorization and Analytical Work    Transcription, as an important part of narrative-minded studies, has received much attention. Discourse analysts argue that transcription is both theoretical and analytical work, and researchers should be aware of its significance, and clarify and defend their transcription decisions (Juzwik, 2006; Mishler, 1991; Ochs, 1979; Psathas & Anderson, 1990).  The significance of transcription lies, first, in the complexity involved in the process of decontextualization, or identifying and selecting a narrative from a stream of oral discourse data, and entextualization, or rendering the oral data into written form (Silverstein & Urban, 1996). Discourse analysists argue that both the process of decontextualization and entextualization are theoretical work. Ochs (1979) points out that Òtranscription is a selective process reflecting theoretical goals and definitionsÓ (p.44). She emphasizes that how discourse analysts select to !48 transcribe oral data should be informed by their Òparticular interestsÓ or the Òhypotheses to be examinedÓ (p. 44) in their research. Therefore, selectivity in transcribing the features of oral discourse is guided by the researchersÕ theoretical goals, and should be encouraged. A transcript with too much information might be difficult for the readers to follow and for the researchers to do the analytical work.   Second, transcription is not just a technical process of transforming oral discourse into written form; it is also part of the analytical work. Ochs (1979) states that, in the process of selecting what narrative data to be transcribed and what features of the narrative to be documented, transcripts become the researcherÕs data, and Òwhat is on a transcript will influence and constrain what generalizations emergeÓ (p. 44). Mishler (1991) further argues that transcription is not only data for analysis, but also part of the data analysis and interpretation. Citing his own experience, he stresses that the process of transcribing, when combined with close and repeated listening, can lead to the discovery of features and patterns of the discourse which might not be evident otherwise.   Across the chapters I choose to transcribe and represent classroom discourse data in multiple ways to serve the purpose of data interpretation in each chapter. The methodic transcribing and representing the details of speech was informed by my theoretical perspectives and analytical goals.   In Chapter 4 I follow the tradition of conversation analysis, and choose to, first, divide the classroom interactions into speaker turns, and, second, transcribe the paralinguistic features (tone, loudness, elongation, etc.) of the speech, or the contextualization cues (Gumperz, 1982a). The tradition of conversation analysis is to document naturally occurring talk-in-interaction, and study the structures of the talk which produce and reproduce patterns of social action (Jaworski !49 & Coupland, 2006). Gumperz (1982) argues that the contextualization cues are also indicative of the speakersÕ meaning and discursive intention. My goals in Chapter 4 are to understand how Tiger used language to perform his identities, and how his identity as a ÒNot SeriousÓ student was solidified over time. In other words, I want to understand how the classroom interactions constructed this learner identity for Tiger. Therefore, I not only need to study the content of the classroom interactions, but also the structures of the classroom talk, that is, how the teacher and the students used language to negotiate meaning during classroom instruction. Transcribing and representing the classroom talk into turns allows me to analyze the structure of the classroom interaction (e.g. turn taking) and the relationship between the speakers (e.g. the teacher and the students). In addition, capturing and transcribing the paralinguistic features allows me to analyze the features of TigerÕs stylized speech.   In Chapter 5 when I move to analyze the classroom discussion on reading, I choose to organize the classroom interactions into stanzas (Gee, 1985, 2014) in order to (1) trace the thematic development of the discussion and (2) contrast the different notions of reading that are articulated by the students, the teacher, and other adults in the classroom. Different from the method, used in the tradition of conversation analysis, of transcribing and dividing talk-in-interaction by speaker turns in Chapter 4, I divide the transcription into lines and stanzas as basic units, as Gee (1985) did in his re-representation of the story narrated by a student, which was originally published in Michaels (1981). I first divide the classroom talk into idea units, which are usually one clause long. I then integrate several idea units into a larger block of information, which is called Òstanza.Ó Similar to the stanzas in a poem, each stanza of narrative data in this form is about one particular topic, character, theme, or perspective. Since my goals in this chapter are to understand what kind of reader identities were constructed for each of the young !50 men, and what kind of notions of reading each class member articulated in the classroom discussion, representing the classroom discussion into stanzas allows me to trace the topics and the perspectives articulated during the discussion. In other words, the analytical emphasis in Chapter 5 differs from that of Chapter 4. In Chapter 4, I want to analyze the structure of the classroom interaction and the relationship between the speakers. In contrast, in Chapter 5 I want to analyze the content of the classroom talk. Therefore, turn taking is not as relevant to the analysis in this chapter as it is in Chapter 4.   In Chapter 6 when I move to analyze the teachersÕ performance of identities through their use of language in teaching, I organize the three teachersÕ discourse data in different ways. When transcribing the classroom interactions between Mrs. Brown and her students, I choose to divide the classroom talk by speaker turns, similar to the method of transcription in Chapter 4, because the analytical focus is on the relationship between the speakers and the sequence of turn taking of the classroom interaction. I choose to transcribe the contextualization cues (Gumperz, 1982a) in Ms. MorrisÕs language to show how the linguistic and non-linguistic features of her use of language allows us to understand her bantering speech style. In addition, when analyzing the musicality of her use of language, I divide her speech into lines by tone units and pauses (Juzwik, 2006), because the linguistic pauses form idea units with the paralinguistic and non-linguistic features of her speech (her hand gestures, body movement, the pitches and volume of her voice, etc.). When representing Mr. FordÕs use of language, I chose to break down his language into small discursive chunks by pauses to show the sound effect of his use of sexually loaded language and his performance of masculinity.   The transcription choices and practices, therefore, are informed by the traditions in the sociolinguistic studies which focus on the relationship between language, speakers, and the !51 social contexts, and the situatedness of meaning making and negotiation (Hymes, 1974). My choices of using a combination of transcription and representation methods are guided by the analytic goals in each chapter. The discourse analytic tools are not incompatible; rather they are different lens to illuminate the process of language in making things and social realities (Gee, 2014). Although I use different discourse analytic tools, I resort to one set of transcription notion to keep the mechanics of transcription consistent across the chapters. The transcription notion is presented at the beginning of this dissertation.   Transcription then is an interpretive practice guided by the researchersÕ theoretical assumptions and analytical goals as well as their perspectives to language and the social realities (Juzwik, 2006; Mishler, 1991). Juzwik (2006) point outs that making transparent the transcription decisions does not mean that sociolinguistic approaches to narrative aims to establish certainty. Instead, the goal is to arrive at credibility in interpretation. Transcription is not a neutral process, but a construction and a re-presentation of the social reality (Mishler, 1991).    Discourses around Immigration, Race, Gender, Sexuality, and Religion in the U.S. On August 12, 2015, I returned to the United States after spending the summer break in China. Arriving at the Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport, I followed the passengers on my flight, most of them young Chinese college students, to the immigration control. The line waiting to pass the immigration control that day was long. With just a few immigration officers at the control, the line moved slowly and people started to become anxious as they lost time to catch their next flight. I was extremely tired after a long flight and anxious, too, about not being able to catch the next flight. But I was too tired to seek any alternatives. After waiting in the line for more than two hours, it was finally my turn. I handed my passport and documents to the !52 immigration officer, a mid-aged Latina woman. She asked a couple of questions, then started to work on checking my documents and processing my entry. While she was checking my documents, she asked a question, without raising her head from the desk, ÒSo the Chinese students at your university just stay together and donÕt study English, right?Ó  I was stunned, not sure why she said that, if she meant it to be a question, and whether I should say anything in response. Was she referring to my fellow Chinese students whom she just checked? Did she ask me the question because she recognized that I was an older graduate student who had stayed here longer, and thought that I might know how young Chinese undergraduate students in my university socialized, and thus might confirm her judgment? I just kept silent, trying to avoid any conversation to slow down the checking process or upset the immigration official, even though I was deeply upset by her bizarre question and her apparent insensitivity and bias against immigrants and foreign visitors. She handed me my passport and documents, and I thanked her, dismayed by missing the connecting flight and frustrated by her question. Was she aware that she was making a blanket generalization about Chinese students? Did she realize that these students might not be responsible for their social isolation? My experience with this immigration officer certainly was not representative of all my encounters at immigration control. However, her attitude toward the Chinese international students reflected one sentiment in the U.S. that views immigrants as a problem to the U.S. society because they are not ÒwillingÓ to be ÒassimilatedÓ to the mainstream society. In this case, language was the index of assimilation used by the immigration officer.  Immigration issues became increasingly heightened and divisive in the public and political discourses during the time I was conducting my research work at Academic High, as were issues of race, gender, sexuality, and religion. In this section I offer a brief and broad !53 overview of the discourses around these issues at the societal level, both historically constructed and contemporarily shaped, in order to present the social and ideological spaces in which these immigrant young men found themselves. As explained in the previous chapter, these macro-level discourses are not data for analysis. Rather, they are used as contextual information to situate the analysis of the meso and micro level discourses.  On April 21 2013, the next day after the second suspect of the Boston Marathon bombing was taken into custody, the New York Times (2013) published an editorial, ÒImmigration and Fear,Ó calling for Òthoughtful deliberationÓ from the congressmen in their debates and decisions on immigration reform. The two brothers who committed the horrific bombing attacks migrated to the U.S. when they were young. Their immigrant backgrounds led to concerns about immigration and national security. Citing the danger of the fear of connecting the bombing to the overhaul of immigration policy, the editorial board argued that, Òthe immigration debate will test the resilience of the reform coalition in Congress. Changes so ambitious require calm, thoughtful deliberation, and a fair amount of courage. They cannot be allowed to come undone with irrelevant appeals to paranoia and fear.Ó  Immigration continued to draw heated debates in 2014 with a large surge in the influx of unaccompanied minors from Central America into the United States across its southwest border. According to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (2014), from October 2013 to September 2014 about 68,000 unaccompanied children, the majority of them from Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador, and Mexico, arrived at the U.S. border and were apprehended. The public and political debates around the ObamaÕs administrationÕs response to the immigration crisis and immigration reform were divided between the humanitarian concerns and the anti-immigration sentiment (Blow, 2014; Newland, 2014). While humanitarian concerns called for the government to protect !54 and provide resources for these unaccompanied children, the rise of nativism exploited anti-immigration sentiment, arguing that immigration caused the problems of lost jobs and crime, and posed challenges to national security. The ideological debates over immigration and border control were further politicalized and exploited in 2015 amid the ObamaÕs administrationÕs push for immigration reform and the presidential election primaries.  Immigration debates are intertwined with discourses around race, ethnicity, and religion in the United States. For example, scholars (Alsultany, 2012; Cisneros, 2015; Ismaili, 2010) argue that, after the tragic event of 9/11, while there were sympathetic representations of Arabs and Muslims in both the political and media discourses, hate crimes, workplace discrimination, bias incidents, and airline discrimination against Arabs and Muslim Americans were on the rise. They argue that the War on Terror led to, and was accompanied by, the War on Immigrants, which particularly targeted Arab and Muslim men and resulted in their hyper marginalization in the United States. This marginalization worsened in 2014 and 2015 with the increased terrorist attacks, both in the United States and around the world, by ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) or radicalized individuals who claimed to be part of ISIL. The Islamophobia discourses are also gendered as Arab and Muslim men are portrayed as terrorists.  During this time period, other minority groups also continued to fight for justice and equality, and against racial injustice and discrimination. The Black Lives Matter Movement, starting in 2013 in the African American community and with support from allies, drew increased attention to issues of police violence toward black people, and broader issues of racial profiling, police brutality, and racial inequality in the United States. Black Lives Matter movement continues to fight against police violence and racial inequality, and became a voice !55 but also a target in the presidential primaries during which race and identity politics became increasingly heightened and divisive. Another racial stereotype is the Asian Model Minority discourse, which originated from two U.S. magazine articles published in 1966 depicting Japanese and Chinese Americans as the Òmodel minorityÓ who achieved success by Òtheir own almost totally unaided effortÓ (Peterson, 1966, p. 180). Over time the Model Minority discourse has been extended to other Asian immigrant groups, but the narrative of the myth has remained largely the same: Asian Americans and immigrants, by virtue of their self-improvement and hard work, have achieved their American dreams and have been ÒassimilatedÓ into mainstream America (Li & Wang, 2008). Critics of the Model Minority discourse argue that it has overgeneralized Asian AmericansÕ experiences and it is a racial stereotype constructed to pit one minority group against other minority groups. The media also tried to create counter discourses against the stereotypes of Asian Americans. Fresh Off the Boat, a TV show produced by American Broadcasting Company and aired in February 2015, was the first American television comedy starring an Asian American family. It has received critical acclaim from the audience and a high approval rating. Critical favoring of the show cited the potential to increase the visibility of Asian Americans in the media, and the prospect of disrupting stereotypes and clich”s against Asian Americans. However, critiques of the show from both viewers and television critics focused on ABCÕs adaptation of the original book with the same title, and how the show played into Asian American stereotype and misrepresented Asian AmericansÕ experiences. For example, the author of the book Eddie Huang was particularly critical of the showÕs portrait of Asian men. In his book he was eager to push back the stereotype of Asian men as passive and nerdy, but in the !56 show the fatherÕs ÒAsian nerdinessÓ reflects the continued emasculation of Asian men that has long dominated the mediaÕs representation (Nussbaum, 2015).     Issues related to gender identity and sexuality also became more contentious in the United States during the past several years. On 26 June 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Windsor that DOMA, a federal regulation, was unconstitutional because it allows the federal government to deny federal recognition of same-sex marriage licenses that are recognized or performed in a state that allows same-sex marriage. Two years later on the same day, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that state level bans on same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional as well, legalizing same-sex marriage throughout the U.S. These social changes and movements did not occur without challenges. For example, as the thesis is being finished, the conflicts between marriage equality and religious freedom continue to appear on the headlines of news and media.   Academic High and its local communities did not live in the vacuum. The debates over immigration, race, gender, sexuality, and religion surging nationally also resonated in local conversation and action. Student groups and local groups organized events and rallies to support or protest against violence, discrimination, and injustice. The schoolÕs Black Student Union held a unity march rally to protest police violence and racial profiling. After the terrorist attack of Charlie Hebdo shooting in Paris in 2015, the Muslim Student Association held a rally in the school to voice their stance against terrorism. In winter 2015, amid the increase rhetoric against immigrants and refugees in both United States and Europe, the local communities held a rally in the main street to show their support for welcoming immigrants and refugees. However, as I illustrate in the next section on the null curriculum (Flinders, Noddings, & Thornton, 1986) of gender and sexuality in Academic High, these topics did not enter into the classrooms at !57 Academic High. The absence of engagement, from the school and the teachers, with these issues at school, coupled with the social isolation of immigrant learners in the school, added to the complexity of these young menÕs identity negotiation and their learning.   Academic High as an Institution In this section I analyze Academic High School as an institution, focusing on explaining the ÒculturesÓ of the school in relation to three themes: school as an academic space, as a gendered space, and as a racialized space. I draw on school documents, observations, and interview data to explain the discourses circulated in the school around these issues. I first focus on explaining its priorities and rhetoric in striving for academic excellence under the larger policy contexts of accountability. However, the needs of ESL students like Omar, Tiger, and Chris were neglected. I then explain in what ways Academic High was a gendered space, looking at issues of gender, sexuality, and masculinity in the school. Lastly, I explain in what ways issues of race were dealt with as well as missed out at Academic High, during a year in which issues of racial relations, immigration debates, and religion were heightened in the United States. The goal of describing and analyzing these contextual factors is to provide a basis for understanding what Academic High, as a learning and social space, was like for multilingual learners like Omar, Tiger, Chris and others.  Accountability Pressures and Discourses of Academic Achievement   Academic High was proud of its Òacademic success,Ó and was also focusing on addressing the Òachievement gapsÓ between various studentsÕ population groups. This emphasis on academic achievement was reinforced under the larger narratives of accountability measures both on student achievement and teacher evaluation. I first experienced how accountability measures were impacting the teaching and learning in Academic High when I approached some !58 of the teachers to observe Omar, Tiger, and Chris in their subject area classrooms. In late October of 2014, I sent emails to seven teachers. My communication with one social studies teacher, Mrs. Jackson, indicated that the pressure of accountability measures had trickled down to the school in the area of teacher evaluation. After sending emails without getting any responses from Mrs. Jackson, I visited her classroom during lunch hour to introduce myself, and asked her if she would be willing to let me observe the students in her classroom. She told me that she had to confirm with the school administrators to see how my observation would work out so that it did not impact her instruction. In the end I was not able to get into Mrs. JacksonÕs social studies classroom despite the fact that I confirmed that her participation would be kept confidential and I would not evaluate her teaching. Mrs. Brown later commented that she would not be surprised if some teachers would not be willing to let me sit in their classroom because the school was using observation and studentsÕ scores to evaluate teachersÕ performance. She said that each department was in the process of figuring out how to use studentsÕ achievement scores for teacher evaluation, a statement confirmed by Ms. Morris an Algebra teacher and Mr. Harrison a biology teacher.  Academic HighÕs launching of several new initiatives to address academic achievement gap was another indicator of the impact of the accountability measures on the school. The schoolÕs annual education report indicated that, by the stateÕs school accountability measures, there was a significant student achievement gap between its top 30% of highest achieving students and the bottom 30% of lowest achieving students, and the state mandated that the school needed to develop their ÒSchool Improvement Plan.Ó Responding to the stateÕs mandate on addressing the achievement gap, the school identified three initiatives for improvement. However, in its discourses for improving the academic achievement, the needs of English !59 language learners were neglected. The first initiative was to address the achievement of African-American and Hispanic student populations. The second initiative was to introduce the AVID program to the school. AVID, was the abbreviation for ÒAdvancement Via Individual Determination,Ó which focused on Òdeveloping studentsÕ skills and behaviors for academic success,Ó Òdeveloping a sense of hope for personal achievement gained through hard work and determination,Ó Òproviding intensive support with tutorials and strong student/teacher relationships,Ó and Òcreating a positive peer group for students.Ó The AVID program recruited a cohort of 20 9th grade students who Òhad the potentials for college.Ó These cohort of students took certain courses together with teachers who went through AVID professional development sessions. The last initiative was adding pre-AP courses to its existing curriculum. The pre-AP courses were created to give students who had the potential for AP courses an opportunity to engage rigorous materials so that they could be prepared for the AP courses.  None of the initiatives, however, addressed the needs of ESL students in Academic High. In fact, these initiatives made it even harder for ESL students to achieve academic success in the school. For example, the pre-AP courses were practically a form of tracking in disguise. None of the ESL students were able to get enrolled in the pre-AP courses, which meant that their chance for getting enrolled in AP courses would be even more limited.    ESL Classrooms, Marginalization, and ÒSecond-Class CitizensÓ  Not only were ESL students neglected in Academic HighÕs initiatives for addressing academic achievement, the classroom arrangement also indicated that ESL students as a group were marginalized. Mrs. Brown did not have a classroom of her own at Academic High. Instead, she had been assigned to share classrooms with other teachers. She had her own classroom in the middle school, and also considered the middle school as her professional home because most of !60 her professional activities were associated with the community in the middle school. Sharing classrooms with other teachers is logistically reasonable, but instructionally problematic, particularly because classroom arrangement is an integral part of teaching and learning, and shapes what and how instruction can be carried out.  Not having a classroom of her own at Academic High was a constant instructional challenge for Mrs. Brown. During three years of my volunteer work and fieldwork in Academic High School, Mrs. Brown had to switch classrooms for five times (see the table below).  Table 4: Academic High SchoolsÕ ESL Classroom Assignments   One issue stood out is that all the classrooms were either at the corner, or the edge of the school building, or at the location with difficult access. The physical locations of these shared classrooms were indicative of the marginalized social position of ESL students in Academic High School. The marginalization of ESL students through the classroom arrangement is not uncommon. Previous literature has showed that language learners are often socially separated from the other student population in school (Harklau, 1994; Vald”s, 2001), and one of the reason is the symbolic representation of these students through allocating classroom spaces which are physically at the peripheral of the school Ð the basement, the corner, and the ÒclosetÓ classrooms.  !61 Second, the classrooms were not set up for a language classroom where teachers could maximize their instruction. The structure of the spaces often did not work well for a language classroom. For example, in the 2014-2015 school year, Mrs. Smith was asked to share the theatre classroom. The theatre classroom was a gigantic space, and it was so huge and its ceiling was so high that Mrs. Smith said her voice just lost in the space. Frustrated with the theater classroom, she asked the administrators for permission to use a computer lab as her regular classroom. She only used the room for two hours in the morning. When the administrator approved, she was really happy and moved her classroom to the computer lab on December 9th, 2014. However, the computer lab was not set up for a language classroom either. There were only four desks in the classroom, and they could only be arranged in two lines. The room did not have enough desks for all the students. Mrs. Brown had to ask some students to sit around the end of the desks.  In addition to the undesirable facilities in these classroom, sharing classroom with other teachers also limited the opportunity for creating comfortable learning space for her students, due to social factors involved. For example, in the 2013-2014 school year, the French classroom that Mrs. Brown shared to use was a regular classroom. However, Mrs. Brown felt that her instruction was constrained because she could not decorate her classroom with her studentsÕ work. She was concerned that other students might know her students was an ESL student if she put up their work on the walls. Her students had told her not to put their writing or their photos on the wall.  Although Mrs. Brown was frustrated about the schoolÕs assignment of classrooms, it was not until the beginning of the 2015-2016 school year that she started to view this problem as an institutional problem. On August 20, 2015, she and I met at a local caf” to catch up on our summer breaks. When I asked her how many students were enrolled in her classes in the coming !62 fall semester, she was very concerned and was upset that the classroom that she was assigned to was not going to work for her large class this year. She showed me a video that she took of the classroom, and said that it was one third smaller than the computer lab classroom that she had last semester. Since she was going to have 21 students in her classroom, she said that there was no way for her to fit all the students in the classroom. When I asked her why she could not use the computer lab classroom, she told me that the principal informed her that the English Department had made a special request of assigning the lab exclusively to the teachers in their department. Frustrated with the situation of not having a classroom that would work for the size of her classes, Mrs. Brown confessed, ÒYou know, IÕm not sure if my students feel in this way. I feel like that they are treating them as second-class citizens.Ó  In the end, that classroom did not work out for Mrs. Brown. She invited the deputy principal to the classroom, and convinced the principal that the room was too small for her class. She was assigned to share the craft arts classroom, located at the northeast corner of the upper level of the school building. The craft arts classroom had workstation desks fixed to the floor, and the desks were facing backwards to the whiteboard. ÒI am not sure how this is going to work out with students having their backs to me while IÕm teaching, but at least I can fit them all in one room now.Ó Mrs. Brown was frustrated.  ÒMrs. BrownÕs KidsÓ: Neglect of ESL StudentsÕ Needs   In Academic High ESL students were ÒMrs. BrownÕs kids.Ó When I introduced myself to staff members at Academic High that I was volunteering in Mrs. BrownÕs classroom, they often asked me whether I was doing a study on Mrs. BrownÕs kids. This phrase first indicates that while most of the teachers think that they were working for all the students in the school, they view the education of the ESL students as Mrs. BrownÕs responsibility.  !63  This mentality was also reflected in my observation of how the district and the school administrators thought of the education of EL students in Academic High. In October 2014, I attended the districtÕs parent council meeting. At the meeting during the question and answer time, I asked the superintendent if the district had any professional development programs in place for helping classroom teachers to understand how to work with ESL students in the content classroom. The superintendent said that Mrs. Brown was in charge of the ESL program, which was how the district addressed the needs of ESL students.   In October 2015, at the Academic High School Parent Council Meeting, after the principal reported the schoolÕs improvement plan with the council, I asked him if there were any professional development programs that the school was using to help subject area teachers in the school to work with ESL students in their classroom. He explained that, although he knew that the SIOP Model (Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol) was one of the effective instructional model that the school could introduce to their teachers, but the school did not have funds for conducting professional development in this area because the school district did not prioritize the needs of ESL students in the high school. According to the principal, the district disproportionally distributed the ELL education funds to the elementary schools.    This neglect of ESL studentsÕ needs was institutionalized in the district, the school, and across the content area classrooms. The systematic inaction to ESL studentsÕ needs marginalized this particular group of students. As I will argue in Chapter 6, for example, the institutional neglect of the ESL studentsÕ need, in the form of unequal classroom assignment, contributed to the social construction of Tiger as a so-call problem student.      !64 School as a Gendered Institution In this section I look at the school itself as a social institution that structures gender order, sexuality, and social identities.  Null Curriculum: Academic HighÕs Gender and Sexuality Education  Academic HighÕs official policies about gender and sexual matters reflected an ambivalence and an avoidance approach towards both gender and sexuality. In this section I look at the schoolÕs health education curriculum to illustrate that how, in the school district and the schoolÕs intention to avoid controversies, sex education was structured and delivered in way that resulted in the null curriculum of gender and sexuality education, perpetuating gender binaries, and the heterosexist and homophobic discourses in the school.    Elloit Eisner (1985) argues that there are three curricula in schools: the explicit, the implicit, and the null. The explicit curriculum refers to the schoolÕs official program of study and what teachers explicitly include in their instruction. The implicit curriculum refers to values and expectations that are not included on the schoolÕs official program of study, but students learn through their school experiences. He defines the null curriculum as: Éthe options students are not afforded, the perspectives they may never know about, much less be able to use, the concepts and skills that are not part of their intellectual repertoire (p. 170.) The concept of null curriculum highlights the importance of examining what is absent from the schoolÕs official curriculum because what is not taught is as critical as what is taught. The absence of certain curriculum reveals the values of a school and its education.     In Academic High sex education was part of the curriculum of the course titled ÒPersonal Health and Wellness,Ó which was required for graduation and was offered in the department of !65 physical education. Students were also recommended to take this course by the end of 10th grade. At the end of the 2014-2015 school year, the sex education curriculum drew attention when a student group in Academic High voiced their concerns about the inadequacy of their schoolÕs sex education during one of the districtÕs board of education meetings.   The student group was Academic High Gender Equality Association (AHGE), a student group in Academic High that aimed to Òbring together students dedicated to shedding light on issues of gender inequality by conducting campaigns and projects within our community.Ó During the 2014-2015 school year, I regularly observed their bimonthly meetings. As one of the most active student groups on campus, the groupÕs meetings had a regular attendance of about 20-30 students. Over the year they organized and initiated several school-wide projects focusing on issues of gender equality, sexual violence, sexuality, queer topics, and other social justice issues. For example, they initiated a Post-It project, and created posted sticky notes about issues of gender inequality around the campus. Some of their notes cited statistics about the inequality of salaries between men and women, with the intention to raise awareness of gender inequality and create conversations among students and staff on campus.   This student group gained spotlight and popularity in the school, particularly due to its broad mission for addressing injustice. It had drawn such a large student base on campus that on February 25th 2016 when the school was taking student group photos, their group literally took up all the space in front of the schoolÕs library. One of the co-chairs of the group, who arrived late for the photo taking, had to lie down in front of the first row so that she could be included in the picture.  In the late April of 2015 AHGEA decided to speak about the inadequacy of sex education in the school. In this particular state, sex education is regulated by the state legislature on what !66 should, and should not, be included. In the meantime, school districts are also given the autonomy to decide what they want to include, under the condition that those topics and contents are allowed by the stateÕs laws. At the district level, school districts are required to form its own sex education advisory committee to oversee the sex education curriculum.  The board of a school district may engage qualified instructors and provide facilities and equipment for instruction in sex education, including family planning, human sexuality, and the emotional, physical, psychological, hygienic, economic, and social aspects of family life. Instruction may also include the subjects of reproductive health and the recognition, prevention, and treatment of sexually transmitted disease. Subject to subsection (X) and section X, the instruction described in this subsection shall stress that abstinence from sex is a responsible and effective method of preventing unplanned or out-of-wedlock pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease and is a positive lifestyle for unmarried young people. THE BOARD OF A SCHOOL DISTRICT SHALL NOT ENGAGE OR ALLOW AN INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY THAT PROVIDES ABORTION OR ABORTION COUNSELING AND REFERRAL SERVICES, OR AN EMPLOYEE OR AFFILIATE OF SUCH AN INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY, TO PROVIDE INSTRUCTION UNDER THIS SECTION. (State law) (Caps in original)  As spelled out in the mandates above, abstinence-based curriculum was mandated by the state legislature, which the Academic High Gender Equality Association group took issue with. Four students from the group voiced their opinions during the public comment session of one school board meeting. Academic High Gender Equality Association group argued that 1) the abstinence-based sex education was shame-based education, rather than fact-based education; and the curriculum provided inaccurate information about the effectiveness of condom use; 2) the abstinence sex education was faith-based, and should not be imposed on all students; 3) the sex education curriculum did not inform students about consent in sex, and actually encouraged sexist behaviors in its curriculum; 4) the sex education curriculum, by just focusing on marital sex and excluding topics related to same sex and intersex, perpetuated gender binaries, and heterosexual normalcy and homophobia discourses; 5) the sex education curriculum was outdated, and 6) the !67 curriculum did not teach adolescents how to be critical and responsible internet users when accessing information related to gender, sex, and sexuality online. The students argued that, since most of teenagers tended to educate themselves about sex and sexuality matters through searching information online, not teaching them critical ways for interpreting the information was problematic for sex education. They also argued that the schoolÕs act of blocking websites on campus was counterproductive since they were not able to get the information which could inform their understanding of topics related to sex and sexuality.    The schoolÕs avoidance approach to sensitive issues such as gender and sexuality in the school was reflected in the principal and the superintendentÕs response to the Student groupÕs critique of the sex education curriculum. Both the administrators said it was a sensitive and controversial topic and they would not like to comment on it, rather to leave it to the school board and the sex education advisory committee. The avoidance of sensitive issues was also reflected in the principalÕs review of the student groupÕs work. The group in general felt that their work was not being affirmed by the school administrator. For example, they were not allowed to display their projects in the school. The principalÕs sanction of one of the post-it note on campus also revealed that the principal wanted to avoid sensitive topics. For example, during their first school-wide project the post-it note project, they were asked to send their post-it note reviewed before they posted them across the campus. The principal approved all the sticky note, but one Ð ÒDude, man it up.Ó Compared to the rest of the sticky notes, this post was written with the intention to create conversations around what it meant to be a boy. It spoke to issues of masculinity, sexuality and homophobia. It seemed at least two interpretations can be made on why the principal sanctioned the group from posting this note. First, this sentence spoke more to the issues of sexuality than gender. The principalÕs sanction might indicate that for him gender !68 equality was a much more comfortable topic to engage with than issues around sexuality. Second, this sentence highlighted a controversial issue about sexuality and masculinity, which the administrators wanted to avoid, or they did not want to create controversies among the students.  By and large, the null curriculum in gender and sexuality education at Academic High resulted in an absence. However, this ignorance and absence is not simply a neutral void; it has important effects on the students in their learning to navigate their adolescence and the increasingly heated debates around these issues in the media and the society.    School Rituals: Performing and Policing Gender and Sexuality While the schoolÕs official sex education curriculum and the administratorsÕ responses to the AHGEAÕs work seemed to indicate an avoidance approach adopted in the school to issues of gender, sexuality and masculinity, school rituals at Academic High reflected and reinforced the gender norms and binaries. At Academic High, the major social events of the school year were the homecoming parade, the winter formal, the prom, and various sports activities and events. These social events were institutionalized as rituals in the school, and became social orders that were shaping and organizing much of the studentsÕ social lives and their understanding of norms of gender and sexuality in the school and in the society. Bernstein, Elvin, and Peters (1966) stated that,   Ritual in humans generally refers to a relatively rigid pattern of facts specific to a situation which construct a framework of meaning over and beyond the specific situational meanings. Here, the symbolic function of ritual is to relate the individual through ritualistic acts to a social order, to heighten respect for that order, to revivify that order within the individual and, in particular, to deepen acceptance of the procedures used to maintain continuity, order, and boundary and which control ambivalence towards the social order (p. 429).    Scholars who study rituals in general (Durkheim, 1996; Goffman, 1961; Turner, 1996) and rituals in schools (Bernstein et al., 1996; Pascoe, 2006) have pointed out sex rituals are used !69 to reinforce gender order and validate the masculinity order. Rituals like these are the key to the formation and continuation of society. In a sense, these rituals were institutionalized in the school by the society and socialize the adolescents into their future roles. Through rituals members of a society reaffirm shared morality and values. School rituals are symbolic, bodily performance that affirms in- and out-groups, the norms and the abnormal, reproducing dominant and understanding of race, gender, and class. School rituals do not just reflect heteronormative gender differences; they actually affirm its value and centrality to social life (Pascoe, 2006). Winter Formal was one of the rituals in the school that drew much attention in the school. Every winter, usually in early December, Academic High hosted a winter dance for students in all grade levels. For this winter dance, girls usually invited boys to be their dates, which was in reverse order from the prom. Although the winter dance was usually in December, students started to prepare for this dance from October. The locker common area was usually the spot where girls courted their male dates for the Winter Formal. Usually during the class break time, students hang out with their friends and classmates at that area. The delta between the locker common, the library, and the central office was where much of the courtship occurred. Students in the school even created a twitter account, asking girls to post the photos of them and their dates so that Òpeople can [could] be informed of who has already been asked.Ó The rituals of the Winter Formal, viewed with a gender lens, seems to indicate that girls were able to exert more agency since they were the ones who initiated the Òdating.Ó The adolescent young men become the prey, the one who were more passive, just like James said that his sense of being a male was validated because the girl asked him. On another level, the rituals of the Winter Formal also reflected, and perpetuated, the gender binaries and heterosexual normalcy in the school. Or, it can be view as the rituals that the adults socialize the young adults !70 into the female and male roles in the society. In this sense, the school rituals at Academic High also highlighted gender difference and naturalized heterosexual pairings. Sports and Masculinities Sport is another area that gender and masculinity was emphasized in the school. Academic High put an equal emphasis on studentsÕ participation in sports activities. The school had 26 athletic teams, and quite a number of the sports teams were competitive, and had won regional or state titles. Boys Varity Soccer Team was one such team. Samir, one of the students in Mrs. BrownÕs third hour, was on the Boys Varsity Soccer Team, and several of the other boys this year were on the Boys JV Soccer Team. Student athletes, particularly those who were on soccer teams and basketball teams, enjoyed high social recognition in the school. The popularity and social recognition that student athletes received constructed and reinforced a notion of hegemonic masculinity in the school Ð being socially popular and being good at both sports and academic study. As I will show in the later chapter, boys, both the immigrant adolescents and the native English speaking boys and some girl athletes, took up these notions of masculinity and took advantage of their popularity to further reinforce these notions in Academic High.  School as a Racialized Space Like issues of gender and sexuality, race was also a topic on which the school and staff took an avoidance approach. Although the school district and the schoolÕs official discourse was embracing diversity, some students felt that the school should have done more to encourage the students to engage with conversations around race and racism in the school and the community.  ÒRace was a topic that our teachers and our school donÕt talk about,Ó the only black girl in the Academic High Gender Equality Association commented when the group was talking about race that night. ÒI feel like our school is like, ÔOkay we have school choice students, and !71 we have diversity in our students now.Õ but, itÕs like we donÕt even have a non-white teacher in our school.Ó Another student added. The student was right. None of the teachers and administrators in the school were people of color, despite the fact that about 20 percent of the students were African American students and another 20 percent were students of color. Students at the AHGEA meeting basically regretted that race was a topic that was largely left to informal conversations or side topic.  Academic HighÕs discipline records also indicated that African American students, male students, and School of Choice students were disproportionally disciplined. As indicated in the graphs below, in the 2014-2015 school year African American students accounted for 39 percent of the referrals while they only made up 18 percent of the enrollment. Male students in the school accounted for 65 percent of the referrals while half of the school student population were males. Referral records also indicated that school of choice students received more discipline referrals.  A school wide survey conducted by one of the mathematics teacher at Academic High and her students also indicated that minoritized groups of students were more likely to think that the discipline in their classrooms was not fair to them, and they particularly felt that discipline outside of the classrooms was not fair to them. According to the survey results, minoritized students across all of the groups felt that the learning environment did not meet their needs. Although the survey did not include qualitative data, as I will discuss in the later chapters Omar, Tiger, and Chris all experienced racial microaggressions and racism in the school.    !72   Figure 1: A Comparison of Referrals and Enrollment at Academic High in 2014-2015  !!!73 Summary In this chapter I have introduced the boys, their classrooms, their school, and their teacher. I have also explained the methodological and analytical decisions that I made for the ethnographic field work and data interpretation. I argue that Academic High, in its efforts to strengthen academic achievement of the school, had largely taken an avoidance approach to sensitive and important issues like gender, sexuality, and race. As a gendered and racialized space, the constructed notions and discourses about these issues were either taken up, reinforced, or contested by students and teachers, as I will illustrate in the later chapters.                             !!!74 CHAPTER 3  MAPPING THE MARGINS: INTERSECTIONALITY, MASCULINITIES,  AND COMPOUNDING OPPRESSIONS AGAINST IMMIGRANT BOYS If, É, history and context determine the utility of identity politics, how then do we understand identity politics today, especially in light of our recognition of multiple dimensions of identity? More specifically, what does it mean to argue that gender identities have been obscured in antiracist discourses, just as race identities have been obscured in feminist discourses? Does that mean we cannot talk about identity? Or instead, that any discourse about identity has to acknowledge how our identities are constructed through the intersection of multiple dimensions?          (Crenshaw, 1991, p. 1299)  In her work on the intersectionality of Black womenÕs identities Crenshaw (1991) critiques the single-axis frameworks in feminism in the late 1980s, arguing that they have failed to recognize that Black women are subjected to compounding subordinations, and their experiences in criminal justice cannot be fully understood by looking at just sexism or just racism. Instead, criminal justice must recognize the intersectionality of racism, sexism, and classism in order to understand the impacts of compound subordinations on Black womenÕs experiences. She points out that focusing on only one dimension of their identities leads to misrepresentation of and injustice to Black women.  Drawing upon the concept of intersectionality (Block & Corona, 2014; Carbado, Crenshaw, Mays, & Tomlinson, 2013; Crenshaw, 1989, 1991; McCall, 2005), in this chapter I examine the three immigrant young menÕs identities, focusing on understanding the interconnectedness of their multiple identities and the intersectionality of their identities. Understanding the multiple dimensions of their identities with these two lenses Ð ÒinterconnectednessÓ and ÒintersectionalityÓ Ð allows us to see (1) how their multiple identities shaped their ways of doing masculinity; and (2) how the intersectional nature of multiple systems of inequality constructed the hierarchical order of masculinities in which these immigrant  !!!75 adolescent found themselves in. Therefore, the former lens looks at identities as categories of subjectivities, and the latter emphasizes the structural inequalities or systems of inequalities that construct the subject positions.  I argue that a framework of intersectionality is critical for understanding these immigrant young menÕs experiences because a singular framework can lead to partial understanding or misinterpretation of their ways of doing masculinities and doing school, which can result in misunderstanding and misdiagnosis of their challenges and needs in the classrooms. For example, when these minoritized young men were looked at within a single-axis framework of gender, they were then positioned as boys who were assigned patriarchal power, as if they enjoyed the same social positions as boys from the dominant group. When they were only looked at as ESL students, teachers failed to recognize that gender, race, religion, class, and sexuality also factored into their experiences, and influenced their access to opportunities of learning. The framework of intersectionality allows us to see the compounding oppressions against these minoritized young men, the fluidity of their identity negotiation of being simultaneously powerful and powerless, and the intragroup hierarchical order of masculinity among them.   In this chapter I first introduce each of these young men through an analysis of how they thought who they were along the lines of race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexuality, and language. I then move on to illustrate the interconnectedness of their identities by illustrating how their performances of masculinities were influenced by their other identities, through an analysis of classroom discussion on diversity. Afterwards, I use the framework of intersectionality to analyze how their masculine identities were inflected by their other identities, and how the compounding oppressions that they were subjected to influenced their identity negotiation and constructed the intragroup hierarchical order of masculinity among them. By  !!!76 teasing out the complexity in their identity negotiation and the social positions they occupied inside the classroom, this chapter also serves as background for the analysis of their masculinity performances in the coming chapters.  Omar Omar: Choice of Pseudonym and Ethnic Pride I met all the three boys, Omar, Tiger, and Chris, on my first visit to Mrs. BrownÕs classroom in the early September of 2014. Although I had been volunteering in Academic High the previous year, that day when I started my fieldwork, I still got lost on my way to Mrs. BrownÕs classroom Ð the theatre classroom, even though she had emailed me detailed instructions for how to get to the theatre classroom the week before. After I signed in at the central office, I headed down to the lower level of the building, which I had not been to on my previous trips. The rooms on the lower levels were student cafeterias, gyms, the teacher lounge, auditoriums, swimming pools, the printing and copy office, and a few classrooms. The lower level of the school had two main intersecting hallways intersecting. I missed the intersection and went down directly in one hallway. Although Mrs. Brown provided the number of the room, the first two people that I asked did not know where the room was either. Finally, the schoolÕs police officer helped me find the room. By the time I got to the theatre classroom, I was already 10 minutes late for the class.  When I walked into the classroom, Mrs. Brown was working with her students on the warm-up activity. She greeted me right away, and after finishing the warm-up activity, she asked me to introduce myself to the class, and then asked each of her students to introduce their names and their country to me. Omar stood out to me in my first encounter with the students first because his oral English seemed quite fluent to me, and he was also natural in maintaining eye  !!!77 contact with me when he was introducing himself, which I noticed some students did not do. He stood out to me also because he was the only student who explicitly emphasized that he was proud of his ethnic identity. He introduced himself, and said, ÒMy name is Omar, and IÕm from U.A.E. IÕm proud to be an Emirati.Ó All the rest of the students told me their names and their place of origin, and only Omar added that he was proud of his ethnic identity.  Omar was born and grew up in U.A.E. His mother was a U.S. citizen and a white woman, and his dad was an Emirati man. His parent met in the United States and then moved to live in U.A.E. The youngest child in his family, Omar had three older brothers and three older sisters. His oldest sister was 12 years older than him, and his least old brother was three years older than him. In 2011, when he was 12 years old, his parents separated. His mother left U.A.E. and returned to the United States. Although his mother tried to bring Omar and his least old brother with her, his father made the children stay. Omar told me in the interview, Òafter we argued with him for a year, me and my brother said ÔweÕre going to goÕ.Ó In 2013, when he was 13 years old, he came over to the United States with one of his older brothers, and reunited with his mother. One year later, another brother of his came over and joined them in the U.S. When my fieldwork started, his oldest brother, his three sisters, and his father were living in Tripoli. His father remarried. All of his sisters were married, and Omar had two nieces from her sistersÕ families. His youngest sister got married in May 2015, and Omar took a leave from the school and went back to attend her sisterÕs wedding before the spring semester ended, and spent three months in U.A.E. that summer.  Although Omar had dual citizenship Ð U.S. citizen and Emirati, he considered U.A.E. as Òhis countryÓ and the Emirati culture as Òhis culture.Ó OmarÕs attachment to the Emirati culture and ethnic identity was evident in his choice of pseudonym. In December of 2014, about three  !!!78 months into my fieldwork, I started to ask my research participants what name they would like me to use for them when I write my Òbook.Ó The first time when I asked Tiger what name he would like, he told me that he did not care about what name I use for him, and asked me to just use his real name. I was not sure if I should do that, and told him that I would like him to choose a pseudonym. The next week when I asked him again, he said I could use the name Tiger because he was born in the year of the tiger. While it took two rounds of questions for me to get Tiger to choose a name he wanted me to use, Omar, when asked, told me without any hesitation that he would like me to use the name Omar.    ÒWhy Omar?Ó I looked up from my notebook, and asked him.  ÒYou know, Omar is the name of the Lion of the Desert, the guy who I talked about with you in my country project.Ó He said.   Figure 2: OmarÕs Country Project, Omar the National Hero, and Ethnic Pride  !!!79 I then realized that he was referring to the name of Omar, an Emirati man who led the people in his country fighting against the colonization from the 1910s to 1930s. After two decades of resistance, Omar was captured by the colonizerÕs army in September 1931. He was hanged in front of his followers at the age of 73 years. Omar was regarded a national hero in U.A.E. In his country project for Mrs. BrownÕs sheltered ELA class, Omar included this martyr of the U.A.E. in his presentation. This country project that Mrs. Brown designed asked students to do research about their home country and select eight important topics to design a PowerPoint presentation about their country (see Figure 2). In his presentation Omar even quoted what Omar said before he was hanged.  Abdallah: OmarÕs Religious Identity Omar was a devout Muslim. It was not long after I started my fieldwork in the school that I realized that Islam was a huge part of his life. One Friday morning, after finishing observing the 2nd hour and the 3rd hour classes, as usual I went to take a break at the schoolÕs central office. I often just went there sitting in one of the two chairs at the corner of the office, and waiting for the late lunch time when I observed the students in the cafeteria. Academic High had a lunch schedule with two lunchtime slots Ð Early Lunch and Late Lunch. StudentsÕ lunchtime slots were decided by their 3rd and 4th hour classes. Because Omar, Tiger and Chris were having Late Lunch, I often went to the central office to organize my notes and my backpack after the 3rd hour. The corner chair in the central office became one of the spots that I liked to observe how students in Academic High went about doing school every day Ð their social life. Students often came to the main office to check with the two secretaries; teachers and administrators often passed through the office to get to their mailboxes; the administratorsÕ offices opened to the central office; and sometimes students were sent to the main office to the administrators if they  !!!80 were disciplined by their teachers. Another nice thing was that the office had glass walls, which also allowed me to observe students during the break time when they were hanging out with their friends in the Locker Common area, just outside the central office.  That morning, while I was sitting in the chair at the corner of the office, I noticed that Omar walked in with another Arabic boy, and they went up to the desk of one of the secretaries and asked for something. I did not hear what Omar said to the secretary, but the exchange between the students and the secretary was brief. It seemed to me that Omar and his fellow student did not have any difficulty getting what they needed from the office. Wondering why he was not in class, I asked Omar if there was anything wrong. He explained to me that everything was okay, and he was just leaving the 4th hour a little bit early so that he could go to the mosque. ÒEvery Friday I leave a few minutes early to grab some lunch in the cafeteria very quickly before I head out to the mosque,Ó he told me. That was the first time that I learned he was a Muslim. Later in an interview with him I also learned that he prayed five times a day. During the school time, he sometimes went to the Student Service Room to do his prayers. And the first thing that he would do after getting home from school was also to do prayer. Omar said that he started going to the mosque when he was seven years old in U.A.E. When he was little, he always begged his family to take him to the mosque. His older brothers started to take him to the mosque when he started to attend elementary school.   The centrality of Islamic religious belief in OmarÕs life was also reflected in his choice of another pseudonym, Abdallah. In late April 2015, I visited OmarÕs family and interviewed him at his house. During the interview, I checked with him if he still wanted me to use Omar as his pseudonym name. After I asked the question, he was silent for a few second, looking ahead with jaw raising a little bit upward. He then told me that he also liked to use the name Abdallah.  !!!81 Before I was able to ask him why he chose this name this time, he went on explaining that Abdallah meant Òthe slave of the god Allah.Ó ÒNot the slave in real sense, but more like a follower,Ó he said. After hearing he said he also liked me to use this name, I was puzzled, and wondered why he seemed to change his mind, and if his choices of names were contradictory since he had proposed two different pseudonym names. Then I realized that what his switch to the name Abdallah did not indicate contradiction, rather the centrality of both the two dimensions of his identity. His ethnic identity and religious identity were central to his sense of Self.   The centrality of his religious identity also came through his imagined identities. Omar took pride in his knowledge of Islam religion, and thought that he could make a profession out of it in the future.  When I asked him what he wanted to do in the future, he said, ÒI can even just go back to U.A.E. and become a teacher of QurÕan because I know so much about it. I donÕt have to work for other jobs.Ó  When I asked where he would like to work, he said that maybe he would go back to his home country U.A.E. if its situation could get more stable. Otherwise, he wanted to go to Arabic countries which do not have bars, like Jordan or Saudi Arabia where the Muslim traditions are stronger there.  Religious Identity: Omar and Muslim Students in Academic High Although Omar had a strong Islamic religious identity, he did not identify himself as part of the Muslim Student Association in Academic High. He has a close friend group and some of them were Muslim students, and all of his close Muslim friends were immigrant students. Like the 1.5 generation immigrant learners who drew boundaries between themselves and the second-generation immigrant learners documented in other studies (e.g. Ajrouch, 2004; Lee, 2001;  !!!82 Talmy, 2008), Omar also drew boundaries between himself and other Muslim students along the line of authenticity in their religious beliefs.  Academic High had a Muslim Student group, which met once a week after school. When I asked Omar if he knew any other Muslim students in the school, he said, ÒYea, I know some of them, but I donÕt hang out with them a lot.Ó I asked him why he did not like to be with them. He said that he went to the Muslim Student ClubÕs meeting once, and he did not like it because the activities the group did were not religious activities Ñ the activities the group organized were more social events or events just for fun. He did not like those activities, and he would rather participate in activities related to Islam.   OmarÕs religious identity was evident in his evaluative comments of the authenticity of other Muslim studentsÕ religious belief in the school. It seemed that he also drew lines between himself and some other Muslim students along the authenticity of their Islamic belief.  Commenting on his experiences in interacting with other Muslim students, he said, ÒI was surprised to know that some of the girls are Muslim because I never saw them wearing Hijab in school.Ó What was also worth noting in OmarÕs boundary drawing along the line of religion authenticity was the intersection of gender and religion, which I turn to in the next section.  Arabic ÒNew ManÓ: Style, Friends, and Family  Omar had a strong opinion of style of clothing he saw in the United States Ð he said that he could not understand why some American people just wear their pajamas and go out in public spaces. He said that in U.A.E. Òyou have to wear formal clothes in public places.Ó In his country project presentation, he included one slide that introduced clothing in U.A.E., and presented both the traditional and modern style of clothing (see Figure 3).   !!!83 In school Omar usually wore hoodies or T-shirts, jeans or sports pants, and sneakers. His hoodies or T-shirts were usually the schoolÕs sports clothes, or other brand name sports clothes. He told me that he chose what clothes to buy. I came to increasingly recognize OmarÕs sense of fashion and style one day when he started to wearing glasses. I noticed that he owned two pairs of glasses Ð one with a red frame and the other one with dark blue. Curious why he bought two pairs of glasses, I asked him. He laughed, ÒI wear the glasses so that they can be matched with my clothes.Ó    Figure 3: OmarÕs Country Project Slide Ð ÒClothingÓ Fashion and style were certainly part of life for several other ESL students as well. His Facebook posts included selfies that he and other boys took when they were trying on clothes at a local shopping mall. In OmarÕs performance of identity through clothing and fashion, we can see his consciousness of fitting into the local way of doing masculinity and his effort of drawing a boundary between him and American students through his urban fashion style. He adopted the  !!!84 local clothing style of hoodies and jeans to fit in, but at the same time bringing in his sense of urban fashion style and transnational cultural capital to show distinction and style in order to counter the social exclusion in school.   ÒWhat Are You Talking About, Bro?  IÕm an Arabic Boy.Ó: Racial Stereotypes, Boundary Drawing, and Academic Identity   Omar identified himself as a cool, sociable student, and often drew boundaries between him and nerds. This came clear to me particularly in a conversation I had with him before the final exam week of the first semester. Mrs. Brown printed studentsÕ grade reports and asked students to highlight the assignments they missed. She offered them the opportunities to make up the assignments they missed so that they could raise their grades. I was circling around the classroom, noticing Omar was chatting with Zaina, the girl from Syria. Attempting to get them to focus on study, I asked Omar what his grades were like.    ÒLook, bro! I got a B for English II, and a C for the 3rd hour.Ó He held his grade reports high in one hand and pointed on his grades with a pencil. He said it in a half joking way.   ÒWell. It seems that you can bump your grades to A if you make up some of the assignments here.Ó I pointed to some ÒzerosÓ he got on his grade reports.  ÒWhat are you talking about, bro!Ó he said. ÒI donÕt want to be a nerd, bro. What are you talking about? IÕm an Arabic boy, not an Asian boy.Ó  Omar had a calculated investment in academic work, which was congruent with his masculinity project Ð he wanted to do just enough schoolwork so that he could get a passing grade, and he also wanted to avoid being seen as invested too much in schoolwork. In school, showing too much investment in schoolwork and getting high grades is what nerds do, as Omar put it. This calculated investment, or carefully performed academic identity, did not mean that  !!!85 Omar was not interested in learning. Rather, he saw academic learning as an aspect of his identity project that he needed to carefully manage.  Tiger Tiger was born and grew up in the capital city of his home country. His parents divorced when he was three years old. He said that his father did not have a job at that time and spent all of his time gambling. His mother left and moved to the United States to study, leaving Tiger and his older sister Mary to live with his grandparents from his fatherÕs side. Tiger came to the United States in 2012 to reunite with his mother with who he had not been living for over 10 years by that time. His sister moved to the United States in year 2009, three years earlier than him. His sister started her sixth grade in the United States, and Tiger started his seventh grade. His sister had also taken ESL classes with Mrs. Brown in the middle school. A straight A student, she graduated from Academic High in 2014, and was admitted to a top-tier public university to study bioscience. Tiger was not as Òacademically successfulÓ as his sister, and at the end of his 9th grade he had a GPA of 1.81, which brought frustration to Tiger, as well as his mother. His mother earned a college degree in education in the United States, and was working as a kindergarten teacher in a school district nearby. His stepfather was a staff in Public University. His family considered themselves as a middle class family.  My interview with Tiger indicated that Tiger and his mother had a rather tense relationship because of his Òunsatisfactory performanceÓ in school. One day during homework support time, I asked Tiger why he did not finish his homework, and if I could help him with his homework.   ÒI donÕt care,Ó he said.  !!!86 ÒI think you can do this.Ó I then asked him why he did not care, and told him that he could do it because I thought he was smart. ÒNo, IÕm stupid,Ó he said. I was struck by TigerÕs response, and not sure why he thought he was Òstupid.Ó Not sure how to respond either, I started to talk with him in Chinese, hoping the ease of speaking Chinese would make him more comfortable to open himself up. After switching to Chinese, Tiger did seem to be less Òplayful,Ó and sounded more serious in our conversation. Two of TigerÕs frequently used sentences were ÒI donÕt knowÓ and ÒI donÕt care.Ó He usually used these sentences as responses to teachersÕ requesting him to give his answers or make up his homework. My observation indicated that he often did that in situations in which he felt that he was treated unfairly.  In our conversation in Chinese, Tiger told me that nobody in the school has called him stupid. It was his mother who would often do that. ÒWhen would your mother say things like that to you? When you did not finish your homework?Ó I asked. ÒYes. She sometimes calls me stupid even when IÕm doing chores, or for reasons that I donÕt know.Ó  It seemed to me that his motherÕs parenting style had created tension between Tiger and his parents. Mrs. Brown also told me in separate occasions that she thought TigerÕs parentsÕ ways of addressing TigerÕs issues in school were too negative. Mrs. Brown said that when TigerÕs mother came to the teacher-parent conference in March, the first question that TigerÕs mother asked Mrs. Brown was if Tiger has done something wrong in school that she needed to know of. Mrs. Brown commented that almost all parents would talk about their kidsÕ strengths at the teacher-parent conferences, and she was troubled that his mother was so negative about Tiger. The ÒnegativeÓ attitude that Mrs. Brown interpreted from his motherÕs questions might be a  !!!87 cultural difference in understanding teacher-parent conferences and parenting style. Research indicates that Asian parents usually are more dominant and harsh in their relationships with their children. While TigerÕs motherÕs parenting style negatively influenced their relationship, it seemed that his resentment toward his mother was partially because she did not raise him when he was little. ÒWhen I was living in XXX6, where was she?Ó he said.  Pseudonym, ÒFake Name,Ó and Ethnic Identities  The first time when I asked Tiger what name he would like me to use for him when I write my dissertation, he smiled with a little hesitation and embarrassment, ÒI donÕt care, and you can just use my real name.Ó It seemed to me that he felt uncomfortable to use another name to represent himself, which was understandable because names represent oneÕs identity, and figuring out a pseudonym is not a straightforward task. I also knew that Tiger often would just use ÒI donÕt careÓ to disengage with conversations if he did not feel that people cared about him. I waited for one more week before I asked him again. Concerned that he might not understand what it would entail if I used his real name in my writing, I approached him again two weeks later, and explained to him that, if I used his real name, people might know that I was writing about him in my study. After my explanation, he said that he wanted me to use ÒTigerÓ as his name.   ÒWhy Tiger?Ó I asked. ÒBecause I was born in the year of Tiger,Ó he said. Tiger was born in 1998, which, according to the Chinese lunar calendar and zodiac, was the year of tiger. His choice of the pseudonym Tiger seemed to indicate that he had a strong attachment to his ethnic identity. When I learned that his family was working on applying for !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!6 XXX stands for the name of TigerÕs home country.  !!!88 U.S. citizenship for him, I asked him if he felt more like American or XXX7ese. He said he felt more like XXXese, and he hoped he could go back to his home country because Òit was easier in XXX.Ó When I asked what he meant by Òeasier,Ó he said that everything would be easier. Supposed if he wanted to do better in study, he just needed to spend more time on it, and he would know that he then would do better. However, in the United States ÒitÕs hard to do that,Ó he said.  What Tiger implicitly articulated was the complex relationship between ethnic identity, social mobility, and exclusion. It seemed that his attachment to his ethnic identity was a result of both his connection to cultural heritage and his sense of struggle and being excluded in the United States. He felt that the barriers that he had in the United States were huge, and were totally out of his control, which would become the hurdle for his upward social mobility. As I illustrate in the latter sections, the challenges that he encounters were along the lines of language, culture, race, and sexuality. What was also interesting in TigerÕs choice of his pseudonym was his hint of his physical prowess. As I will explain in the next section, Tiger often compared himself with other boys in terms of his physical prowess, which was a way for him to show his masculinities.   ÒIÕm a Monster, a Lion, and a TankÓ: Self-positioning, Physical Prowess, and Masculinities  When I asked Tiger to use three nouns to describe himself, Tiger said, ÒIÕm a monster, a lion, and a tank.Ó Different from Chris, who identified himself as Òa reader, a son, and a brother,Ó TigerÕs self-positioning indicated that he focused on his physical prowess and his ability in sports activities, rather on academics. Tiger was on the school track and field varsity team, and he was a !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!7 XXX stands for TigerÕs home country.  !!!89 shot put athlete. He started to practice shot put in the middle school, and had won a regional champion title. He was taller and physically stronger than other boys in the ESL classes.   Academic High had a well-developed athletic department, with 26 sports team and programs. While participation in sports was common among students, the schoolÕs track and field team did not have many Asian students, particularly in the field sports program. Tiger was the only Asian student athlete on the shot put team. While participation in sports were expected and recognized, not all the sports events enjoyed the same recognition in the school. Traditional team sports like football, soccer, and basketball were certainly more popular in Academic High, and student athletes on those teams enjoyed more popularity in the school than other student athletes on other teams. It seemed to me that very few students in the ESL classroom knew that Tiger was a student athlete. Mrs. Brown did not know either, although she knew that another student Samir was on the school varsity soccer team, and was a soccer Ògenius.Ó Despite the differential social capital that he received from his sports, Tiger seemed to point to his physical strength when comparing himself with other boys in the school.   Tiger was a disciplined student athlete as well. Students who participated in the track and field sports were required to attend after-school practice four days a week from spring to late fall, and he followed the routine practice. Sometimes Omar invited him to go to movies after school, but he told him that he had sports practice after school and could not go. Recently he told me that he felt like he reached a plateau in his practice of shot put Ð he practiced very hard but did not feel like he was improving. The way that Tiger talked about his sports practice indicated that he was serious about it because he received recognition in the event. He said that he also had a close friend on the sports team. He told me that he had two best friends, one was Omar and the other was a student on the sports team of shot put.   !!!90 Language, Gay, and Discourse of Sexuality   One of the themes emerged from my observations of TigerÕs everyday school experiences is that discourses of sexuality has been employed by students as a way of putting down other students as well as performing heterosexuality and masculinity. Tiger has been subjected to this type of discourse. The following two episodes illustrate that discourse of sexuality, or referring to who is gay and who is not gay in the school, as a way for individuals to discursively perform their masculine identities, rather than to simply indicate that they are heterosexual. This discourse of sexuality was frequently used by both boys and girls to position individuals as abnormal, weaker, and being peripheral to certain social circles in the schools.   The first time that I heard Tiger was referred to as gay was in Mrs. BrownÕs ESL classroom. On November 12, 2014, Mrs. BrownÕs second hour class was focusing on learning how to write complex sentences with appositive clause. After introducing the concept of appositive phrase and giving the class several examples of appositive clauses, Mrs. Brown handed out some sentence strips to the students, and asked them to use the sentence parts to make up sentences with them using appositive clauses. When Mrs. Brown handed out the sentences strips to the students, she wanted them to work on it individually. After students started to work on making up their sentences, Mrs. Brown changed her mind. ÒOkay. I think it might be good for your guys to work in pairs to make up the sentences. How about you working with your third hour partner?Ó  Students slowly moved to their partners. I was sitting next to Tiger, and noticed that Zaina, the Muslim girl from Syria, walked over to Tiger. Zaina was a junior, and has been in Mrs. BrownÕs English II class for two years. She sat down in the chair next to Tiger, and tilted the  !!!91 direction of the chair a little bit to face to Tiger. Tiger slouched into his chair, looking away from her. He seemed not interested in working on this activity.    ÒTiger, what are you doing? Do you want to work with me?Ó Noticing Tiger looked away, Zaina became impatient.  ÒNo, I donÕt.Ó Tiger turned his head back, but still he was not looking at Zaina. He lowered down his head, and smiled while responding her.  ÒOh gosh! Mr. Qin, Tiger doesnÕt want to work with me. HeÕs gay.Ó Zaina became even more impatient, and started to complain to me. I was taken back by ZainaÕs language, not sure how to respond. Before I was going to say anything, Zaina pushed her chair closer to TigerÕs chair and pressed down the sentence strips on his chair. They started to work on making sentences with the sentence strips.   Several elements of this interaction between Tiger and Zaina are important to consider for analyzing the social positioning occurred. One is that Tiger and Zaina were interpreting their interaction with different frames (Goffman, 1974, 1981; Gumperz, 1982a). The concept of frame or framing can be understood as the metamessages sent between interactants which define whether the interaction is serious, playful, humorous, or related to other interactional purposes. It seemed that when Tiger said ÒNo, I donÕtÓ with a smile on his face, he was interacting with Zaina with a frame of being teasing or playful. His smile seemed to indicate that he did mean that he did not want to work with her; rather he was trying to be funny. (As I will illustrate in the next chapter, Òdoing funnyÓ was TigerÕs stylized speech style). However, Zaina was interacting with Tiger with a frame of being a serious learner, and she did not get his metamessage for this interaction.   !!!92 This misinterpretation of the frame led to ZainaÕs public, confrontational use of the discourse of sexuality against Tiger. By referring Tiger as a gay, Zaina positioned him as out of the line of heterosexual boys. For Zaina, boys should like to work with girls. If they do not like to work with girls, they are homosexual. Here Zaina was comparing Tiger with other heterosexual boys, and she was using the dominant heterosexual discourse to position Tiger as abnormal as a boy. Another social positioning along gender occurred between Zaina and Tiger. This utterance also indicated how Zaina positioned herself in relation to Tiger, and the power hierarchy she employed by using the discourse of heterosexuality. Her utterances, her body language, and her assertive attitude indicated her personality, but more importantly they showed that she was confident that she was in control of the social interaction. In the social positioning happening between the Muslim girl Zaina and the Eastern Asian boy Tiger, the gender hierarchy structured along male and female became less relevant, or even was reversed, because Zaina positioned herself as a heterosexual girl and Tiger as a homosexual boy. What happened here was that discourse of sexuality was used to gain power over the dominant power relations within the gender hierarchy.  ZainaÕs public use of ÒgayÓ discourse here was also indicative of the informal discourses around sexuality circulated in the school. As I explained in the previous chapter, Academic High school had adopted an avoidance approach to issues of sexuality, and the heterosexual normalcy discourses were still prevalent among students Ð both the native English speaking students and the multilingual students like Zaina and her fellow classmates. The students from the AHGEA group also told me that in the hallway sometimes they would hear students say ÒfaggotsÓ or ÒthatÕs so gay.Ó   !!!93 The second time that I heard Tiger positioned as gay was during a lunch hour. One day during the lunch hour, Tiger walked in with a group of boys (Abudela, Omar, Richard, Samir) into the computer lab in the library while I was working on organizing the data I collected that morning. Richard and Sam sat down in front of the computers to play a game. Abudela and Omar stood behind them, joking around. Tiger was holding a long string of rubber bands and a toy Ken, naked, at the end of the rubber band string. Librarians rushed in, puzzled by TigerÕs toy in his hand. I was sitting at a nearby desk. Seeing that, I explained to the librarians that I knew some Algebra classes were doing a bungee jump, what Tiger was holding might be his bungee jump project. Although I knew that Tiger was not taking Algebra this year (he was taking Geometry this year), I decided to save him from the librariansÕ criticism.  After the librarians left, the boys started to mock Tiger about his toy.   Abudela:  Tiger, why is he naked? Omar:  I bet the toy had clothes on and Tiger stripped down his clothes.   Samir:  Yeah. Tiger must like his muscles.  As the boys were teasing Tiger and watching their friends playing games on the computers, the bell rang and they dispersed into the hallway.   Here the boys were teasing Tiger about his naked toy Ken. Their jokes hinted that they thought Tiger was gay. At the same time, through their joke and teasing, the boys, Abudela, Omar, and Samir also performed their masculinity. As explained by Cameron (1997) in her research on gender talk and colleague studentsÕ performance of masculinity, what matters in boysÕ talk is less about their heterosexuality, but more their performance of their masculinity. BoysÕ participation of talking about other boysÕ sexuality becomes a way for them to seek group acceptance and to perform their masculinity.   !!!94 Chris Chris and TC2: Pseudonym and Ethnic Identity Chris was a 14-year-old boy. He came to the United States in 2013 to join his mother who started her doctoral study in the Public University in 2012. Chris started his 8th grade in the middle school in the United States. Like Omar and Tiger, Chris also took Mrs. BrownÕs ESL class in the middle school. Chris was living with his mother, stepfather, and a four-year-old half-brother in a small two-bedroom apartment. Both his parents were instructors of fishery when they were in their home country. While his mother was working on her academic study in Public University, his stepfather was working in a car factory that made Òexpensive car partsÓ in a town nearby. Chris said he grew up with the family on his motherÕs side because his mother was studying in Tanzania and Norway when he was young.  Initially I thought that, compared to Omar and Tiger, Chris might be much harder to write about because he seldom acted out in the classroom, and was always on task and attentive during class. Except that sometimes he was late for Mrs. BrownÕs class, I did not observe any instances that he was caught in Òtrouble.Ó It seemed to me that Chris was just a regular student with strong attachment to school. However, with more time in the classrooms and informal conversations with Chris, I gained a deeper understanding of ChrisÕs ethnic identity, academic identity, and masculine identity.  When I asked Chris what pseudonym he would like me to use for him, he smiled and said, ÒChris.Ó  ÒWhy Chris?Ó I asked. ÒI donÕt know. I just like the name ÔChrisÕ, and that kid said IÕm like Chris.Ó ÒWhoÕs that kid? Your classmate?Ó  !!!95 ÒWell. It was that kid who were on the school bus. The other day I was on the bus and some people asked what my name is. He just told him that IÕm Chris. I kind of like it.Ó  Chris later told me that it was his friend Matt from his Algebra class who told the other kids on the bus that he was ÒChris.Ó What happened was that one day after school Chris rode a school bus to the middle school to attend Mrs. BrownÕs after school tutoring program to get help with his homework, some of the boys on the bus asked who he was since that bus was not the school bus he would ride for school every day, and they did not know him. Matt, a U.S. kid from his Algebra class, who happened to be on the bus, played a joke on the other students, and told them that his name was ÒChris.Ó Since he also Òkind ofÓ liked the name, he did not correct his friend Matt.  When Chris told me that he would like to use the name Chris, I was not sure how to interpret his choice of pseudonym. What did it mean for him to use a name that seemed less connected to his cultural heritage? My initial interpretation was that Chris did not have a strong ethnic identity because he chose an anglicized pseudonym, which was different from Omar, who chose his pseudonym after the national hero of his country, or Tiger, who drew on cultural heritage for his pseudonym. However, with more understanding of ChrisÕs cultural background, it became clear to me that ChrisÕs choice of pseudonym could be explained by his familyÕs language, racial and ethnic socialization, which was shaped by the history and culture of his home country.  On March 12, 2015, the school had a half-day schedule due to the special arrangement of a parent-teacher conference week. ChrisÕs fifth hour Algebra class was scheduled as the second hour in the morning. After the class was over, Chris, as usual, lingered around in the classroom, waiting for Omar to come to class. Chris and Omar were taking Algebra with the same teacher,  !!!96 but Omar was in the 6th hour class. Chris usually stayed in the Algebra classroom during the break to wait for Omar. Sometimes he just waited to say hi to Omar; and sometimes he wanted to get something from Omar like his headphones or some chewing gum. That day, while waiting for Omar to come to the classroom, he helped the Algebra teacher Ms. Morris clean the whiteboard. Then he picked up a marker, and wrote ÒTC2 is hereÓ on the corner of the whiteboard. I know T is the initial letter of his real first name, but was not sure why he used C2. I thought he might also be writing an equation from the Algebra lesson because they were learning quadratic equations.  ÒChris, what does TC2 means?Ó I asked him. ÒIt is my name.Ó ÒBut why C squared? Is it your name for this math class?Ó ÒWell, my last name starts with a C and my middle name starts with a C too. ThatÕs why C squared.Ó Chris smiled and explained to me.  I did not know that Chris has a middle name because I never saw he used his middle name before. Curious, I asked, ÒHow do you spell your middle name?Ó ÒI donÕt know. ItÕs a British name. My father gave the middle name to me. But I donÕt know how to spell it.Ó  It then suddenly made sense to me why I saw his Algebra teacher used TC2 in her written feedback on his pop quiz, and why he would like to use ÒChris,Ó a more anglicized name, as his pseudonym. English names were not marked for Chris due to the language policies in his home country and his familyÕs language socialization. His home country was once BritainÕs colony. After its independence, English remained as its official language, and Chichewa, a regional indigenous language was also elevated to official status. Although its governments have  !!!97 promoted Chichewa and other regional indigenous languages to be used in education and mass communication, English, as a second language, remains the dominant language in his home country. It is a compulsory subject in all the schools, and is institutionalized to function as the primary instructional language of education starting from grade 4. It is also the language for documentation in government, commerce and industry, as well as for international communication. Therefore, English becomes the dominant language in his home country due to the political, economic, and social status accorded to it.    Language socialization practice in ChrisÕs family might also explain his choice of the anglicized name. Chris said that when they were living in his home country his mother decided to use English at home when he was 10 years old, because his mother wanted his younger brother to be exposed to more English. Both his mother and stepfather spoke English. Now after moving to the United States, his mother decided to speak more Chichewa at home because his young brother became more fluent in English and less so in Chichewa. It seemed that the goal of his family language socialization practices was to make sure that he and his brother could develop their bilingual competency in both English and Chichewa. This emphasis on English language might be one of the reasons why he Òkind of liked the name.Ó   What is equally important to consider is the naming practice in the United States, and the complex relationships between choice of names, cultural assimilation, and power relations. What reflected from ChrisÕs real name, and his choice of pseudonym is an intriguing case of how one immigrantÕs cultural identity is historicized in both his home culture and the culture of the new country he migrates to.  ChrisÕs choice of the pseudonym might also be explained by the unmarkedness of an anglicized name in the United States. Research has consistently shown that a personÕs name might determine how he or she is perceived by other people.   !!!98  ÒIÕm a Reader, a Son, and a BrotherÓ: Academic Identity and Masculine Identities  Chris identified himself as a reader. When I asked him to complete the sentence starter ÒIÕm a(n) ÉÓ with three nouns, Chris wrote down ÒIÕm a reader, a brother, and a son.Ó Although I have learned from my previous interactions with Chris that he really loves reading, I was still caught by his clear statement of his reader identity he claimed in his sentence.   As I will discuss in full length in Chapter 5, Chris was a passionate reader in English. One day Mrs. Brown was sick and had to stay home, she asked me to assist the substitute teacher that day to get students started on reading the novel Breaking Night. In class I asked students to write down their answers to two questions before we handed them the book: Do you enjoy reading? Why and why not? Chris wrote that he liked reading because reading could give him immigration and fantasy. Later he told me that he has been reading a series of fantasy-adventure novels featuring Percy Jackson and the Olympians. When I asked how he became interested in reading, he started to tell me a long story of how his mother gave him the first book in the series as a Christmas gift, and he just kept reading. He was one of the reading stars in Mrs. BrownÕs class in middle school during the reading competition in March the Reading Month. He got the award for getting a book, and he chose the second book from the series. He has finished reading the first four books in that series: The Lightning Thief, The Sea of Monsters, The TitanÕs Curse, and Battle of the Labyrinth. He told me that he was currently reading the latest book in the series The Last Olympian.   Chris even wrote his experiences of becoming interested in reading in one of his warm-up sentences.   ÒEven our smallest actions have an impact on those around us. For example, if parents tell their children to read when they are little when they grow up they may get an interest  !!!99 of reading and caring one another.Ó (Feb. 27, 2015, third hour class, ESL, warm-up writing assignment)  Chris also claimed his identity as a son and a brother in this statement. What was in common between these two identity claims was his emphasis on family and responsibility. Both the roles he saw himself in Ð ÒsonÓ and ÒbrotherÓ Ð were connected to the social unit of a family, and his sense of responsibility in the family.   ÒI Need Help with the Warm-upÓ: ChrisÕs Academic Identity  Mrs. BrownÕs second hour always started with a bell ringer writing activity, which she called as a warm-up sentence writing. This warm-up exercise usually asked students to complete a sentence starter or write up a sentence responding to a prompt. She created a warm-up sheet for this exercise which allowed students to write down their warm-up sentence each day. At the end of the week they turned in their warm-up sentences which were then graded and recorded into their gradebooks as part of their grades.  Today Mrs. Brown asked students to combine two sentences into one sentence, using appositive phrase. She said, ÒToday the warm-up sentences are taken from Mr. OmarÕs country project presentation.Ó After giving the instructions on the warm-up exercise, Mrs. Brown told the students that today they were going to read the novel Breaking Night in a small group instead of as a whole class. They would be reading the electronic version on the iPad. She has highlighted sections on the iPad and asked the students to just read the highlighted part as Òthe novel has too much details in it.Ó Mrs. Brown put a stack of the iPads on the desk near Valentina, asking students to get one after they finish writing their warm up sentence. Some students were focusing on writing their warm-up sentences. After finishing explaining instruction for the reading activity, Mrs.  !!!100 Brown returned to the warm-up exercise. ÒNow, letÕs look at the warm-up.Ó She walked over to the whiteboard.  ÒItÕs easy, the warm-up.Ó Zaina blurted when Mrs. Brown started to read out the warm-up sentences.  ÒMagrudÉ Did I read it correctly? Okay. Magrud is a home-made sweet cooked and soaked in honey. It is made from corn, milk, and flour, with brown dates in the middle. So here I want you to use an appositive phrase.  So how are you going to do that? Let me give you a hint. You are not going to put any of this to put in here this time. You got it. Okay. I mean you could use a participial phrase, but ÉÓ Mrs. Brown walked away from the whiteboard. I walked over to ZainaÕs desk to check if she got her warm-up sentence correct. I noticed that she did not get correct, and there were two predicates in her sentences without a conjunction word. She did not have an appositive phrase in her sentence either. Her sentence was ÒMagrud is a home-made sweet cooked and soaked in honey, is made from corn, milk, and flour, with brown dates in the middle.Ó I sat down in the chair next to her, preparing to explain to her how to fix her sentence.  ÒI got it correct, right?Ó Zaina asked. ÒNo.Ó ÒShe said it was correct.Ó Zaina seemed a little unhappy and grumpy about my evaluation of her sentence, which was different from the evaluation that she received from one of the student teachers who were volunteering in Mrs. BrownÕs classroom. It took me a little time to explain to Zaina why her sentence was not correct.  After she corrected her sentence, I walked away from her desk, noticing Chris was asking Mirlande, the girl who sat next to him on his left, ÒHow did you do the warm-up?Ó Mirlande was talking to Tiger, and did not respond to Chris. Chris then turned to the front, trying to get the  !!!101 attention from Valentina, the girl sitting in front of him. ÒValentina, Valentina, I need you. I need you.Ó Valentina was busy writing her warm-up sentence, and did not respond to ChrisÕs calling. Chris reached over his desk, held the top of the back of ValeryÕs chair, then stood up and pulled her chair towards his desk to get her attention. The space between ValeryÕs chair and ChrisÕ desk was very small, and ValentinaÕs chair was just pulled backward for a little bit. Valentina opened her arms to both sides of her body, balancing herself on the chair.  Chris said to Valentina, ÒI need you to help me with the warm-up.Ó   Valentina pulled her chair back, and smiled without looking back, ÒJust wait. IÕm working on my warm-up.Ó  Realizing Chris might need help, I walked over to his desk. He was a little bit embarrassed with the physical commotion he created in his effort to try to get help from his classmate. He smiled at me and said, ÒI need help with the warm-up.Ó   Chris was not shy in asking for help during the class when he needed help, which was different from Omar and Tiger. Tiger usually did not ask for help, but if I offered to help him, he would not refuse. Omar seldom asked for help, and when offered help, he would refuse, or he would take the help just for the sake of getting the work done so that he would not be bothered. I pointed out the differences between the ways that the boys sought or accepted help in the classroom not to make a case about whether they were embracing an academic identity, but rather they each had their own ways of engaging learning. My interpretation of OmarÕs way of engaging help was that he might perceive seeking and receiving help as a threat to their self-reliance and thus a threat to his masculinity. Omar was also critical of schoolÕs curriculum, and he thought that some of the homework from several classes was just crazy and the teaches were nuts. As I address in the later chapter, OmarÕs calculated investment in learning was also due to  !!!102 the disconnection between the curriculum and his interests. TigerÕs way of engaging with learning was embedded in social relations. As I illustrated in the last section of this chapter, he was often misread by teachers, and he also felt that he was treated unfairly because of his skin color and race. He felt adults in the school did not care about him, which led to his lower investment in learning. In his own words, ÒI donÕt want to do this for her.Ó ChrisÕs interest in learning was genuine, as illustrated in the episode above. However, what is also important to recognize is that ChrisÕs investment in learning and his obedience was congruent with the schoolÕs expectations, and he was thus rewarded by the teachers and the school.  Interconnectedness of Multiple Identities: Har!m, Religion Identity, and Masculine Identity The stories of Omar, Tiger, and Chris show that their ways of being a young man were influenced by multiple identities they subscribed to. Their ethnic and cultural backgrounds factored into the ways they positioned themselves as young men. In other words, their multiple identities were not separated; rather they were connected to shape their ways of being immigrant young men. For instance, TigerÕs masculine identity negotiation was informed by his identity as an athlete in that they drew on his physical prowess to show his masculinity. Chris drew upon his cultural identities and family values to present himself as a responsible young man.  In this section I analyze one classroom discussion to illustrate OmarÕs discursive performance of gender identity, which was closely connected to his religious identity as a Muslim boy. I illustrate that OmarÕs performance of maleness and patriarchal control was connected to his Islam religious identity. His use of Òhar!mÓ indicated that his religious identity was part of his masculine identity.  !!!103 On Thursday December 18, 2014, Mrs. BrownÕs third hour class was discussing issues of cultural diversity after watching the schoolÕs annual Multicultural Assembly in the auditorium. The Multicultural Assembly was an event in which different student groups put on performances like dancing, singing, skits, and other performances to celebrate their cultural heritages, as well as the cultural diversity in the school. After watching the performance at the schoolÕs auditorium, Mrs. Brown and her students went back to their classroom and had a discussion about what they noticed about the performances. In the episode below Mrs. Brown was facilitating a discussion of cultural differences, asking the students for their opinions on the ÒsexyÓ dancing which a group of African American girl students performed. The dancers, wearing tight, dark dancing clothes, put on an exuberant performance.  The class was sitting around the big table in the middle of the classroom. Mrs. Brown was sitting at the right end of the table, and the students were sitting around the table. Omar was sitting next to Chris on his right and Zaina on his left. OmarÕs use of the word Òhar!mÓ in the discussion indexed his religious identity and his masculine identities. Episode: Òhar!mÓ [ESL12182014]  ESL Class Discussion around Multiculturalism 1 Mrs. Brown:  I have to ask another question. I have to ask another questions. Now, here in Academic High School, and it can be different in other high school, and I donÕt mean this is a É in all parts of America. But in Academic High we are very liberal, in terms of, hmmm, eh, not beingÉ we are open-minded about the style of dance and, and É for example, you saw some sexy dancing. Would it be something you might see in your school in Thailand? Would you see people dancing in front of the whole school, and teachers doingÉ?  I donÕt know what else to call it besides calling it sexy dancing, but you know what I mean, right? Okay. Might you see that in school?Ó 2 Thidarat:  I mean É I donÕt actually go to high school but I was in a lower grade in my school.  3 Mrs. Brown:  YouÕre right. You were in lower grade. How about in Japan? 4 Allie:  No. 5 Mrs. Brown:  How about in U.A.E.?  !!!104 6 Omar:  Har!m.  7 Mrs. Brown:  ÒHar!m,Ó no.  Har!m means itÕs against Éeh.  Many people who are strict in Islamic religion, even to listen to music. So, sexy dancing, no way! How about Syria? 8 Zaina:  Not too much.  9 Mrs. Brown:  Not so much. Tiger! (Turning to Tiger who is surfing on Internet and sitting with his back toward the group).  Minimize this. YouÕre uninvolved in this conversation. Please! DonÕt bring it up again. Tiger, how about this kind of dancing in in your home country? 10 Tiger:  No. 11Mrs. Brown:  No. (Turning to Chris) In your home country?  12 Chris: I think so.  13 Mrs. Brown: Maybe? Hmm. Okay. The first time that you saw this kind of dance, or the first time you saw in our school girls dressing with very lo:::w dress, very hi:::gh, and very short skirts, whatÕs your first impression?   14 Thidarat: Oh! I like it! 15 Mrs. Brown: Okay, I just want to hear. My husband went to a private school. His private school wore uniform, and very strict, blahlahlah. He came here, and saw boys and girls kissing, kissing, kissing, kissing, you know, touching, touching, touching, touching, he was SHOCKED! He was shocked. He just said: ÔOh! My! Gosh!Õ  16 Zaina: ThatÕs different.  17 Mrs. Brown: So, what is your experience? The first time you experienced the kind of open, public display of affection and open kind of dancing, sexy dancing? What was your first impression?  18 Valentina: Normal. 19 Mrs. Brown: Okay. I just want to know. Thidarat? 20 Thidarat: I donÕt know. I like it because everyone can express themselves.  21 Mrs. Brown: So you feel the freedom. And you like the freedom.  22 Thidarat:  In my country you have to wear uniform.  23 Mrs. Brown: So, you feel in your country itÕs more strict because of the uniform requirement. How about you, Omar? Did you feel any adjustment when you came here from U.A.E.? 24 Omar: When I saw them, yeah, I was like, I said, ÒThatÕs why they have a lot of diseases in America.Ó     ((class laughing)) 25 Thidarat:  What? What? What did he say? 26 Mrs. Brown: ÒThatÕs why they have a lot of diseases,Ó STDs. In É. ((in Spanish)) So, you know whatÉ so, Omar, you know, thatÕs a natural conclusion. True. I can see that. So, after a little while, Omar, did you become a little more used to it, and you kind of donÕt feel surprised? 27 Omar:   IÕm still not used to it.  28 Mrs. Brown: YouÕre still not used to it. 29 Omar: I wish I could go back to my country.  30 Mrs. Brown:  You feel you feel more comfortable going back to your country? 31 Omar:  Yeah.   !!!105 32 Mrs. Brown:  Ah-ha, I know how students feel about this. Zaina, how about you? 33 Zaina:  Whew! I saw, and teachers saw them and he did not told anything.   34 Mrs. Brown: The teacher didnÕt say anything. You were really surprised the teacher didnÕt say anything. 35 Zaina: Why? Everyone is going around them, and they donÕt care. They did not say anything.  Do those stuff at home. DonÕt do it at school.  36 Mrs. Brown: Sometimes people say, ÒGet a room.Ó Have you heard that expression Òget a roomÓ? Tiger, how about your first time? Coming from your home country, you first see students kissing, or girls dressing too much skin showing, what did you think? 37 Tiger:  ItÕs okay.  38 Mrs. Brown: No, I wasnÕt asking for your judgment. I was saying whatÕs your first impression?  39 Omar: ThatÕs his first impression, ÒO:::::h, thatÕs exciting.Ó  40 Mrs. Brown: Omar, itÕs TigerÕs turn. The first time you saw, did you think Òwow,Ó or not surprised? 41 Tiger: Not surprised. 42 Mrs. Brown: Okay. Not surprised. What about you, Chris? 43 Chris: First I was shocked, and then I got used to it.  44 Mrs. Brown: First time youÕre shocked, and then you got used to it. Yeah. But Valentina? 45 Valentina: Okay. Dressing, normalÑbecause in some places in Columbia itÕs so warm we are dressing in Éyou know what I mean.  46 Mrs. Brown: Yeah. I observed.  47 Valentina: Okay. The second one. Okay. You can kiss a person, but you canÕt start in front of all people.  48 Mrs. Brown: Ah-ha.  49 Valentina: Okay. You can go to private. Do you know what I mean? But in front of all people? No. Maybe kiss, itÕs okay.  More than that, starting to touch.  ItÕs not okay. I donÕt like that. Go to a room.  50 Mrs. Brown: No, get a room. Not go to a room. Get a room.  51 Valentina: Get a room (laughter). 52 Mrs. Brown: Did you have something more to say? (Turning to Thidarat.) 53 Thidarat: I just kind of. My sister told me that I have become more like American people.  54 Mrs. Brown: Your sister said you become that kind of people? 55 Thidarat: She said that I grow up here.  56 Mrs. Brown: So, she thinks that youÕre showing too much affectionÉ or something like that? 57 Thidarat: The way I dress, stuff like that.  58 Mrs. Brown: No, I think you dress fine.  59 Omar: Chris É(Facing to Chris, joking that he has gotten used to it.)  É 60 Zaina: You know the girls who were singing the song at the beginning. She was singing something about Jerusalem? 61 Mrs. Brown: She was singing IsraelÕs national anthem. You know the Jewish people and Palestinians.   Israel believes and they want it to be their homeland. ÉYeah.    62 Omar:  Yeah. Keep it for a while, and weÕll take it back.  63 Thidarat:  Yea. ItÕs kind of like APAC.   !!!106 64 Mrs. Brown: APAC is a great clubÑAsian, Pacific Affairs Club?  65 Thidarat: Yeah. ThatÕs how I got to perform.  66 Zaina: I can do Arabic dancing. 67 Mrs. Brown: You can start an Arabic dancing club, and I would be your advisor if you want. You just find your members of your club, and I can be your advisor. Then if you want to practice after school, you could just get on the bus and come to the middle school.  IÕm not here after school, but you can go over there and you can practice in my room or in the library.  68 Omar: Har!m! Har!m! Har!m! 69 Mrs. Brown: Omar, itÕs not your job to be the É What do you call the police that in your country who go out and say ÒHar!m! Har!m! Har!m!Ó You donÕt have to be the police of morality in your country. What is called in your language the police? 70 Omar:  ItÕs not the police. ItÕs the guy who is Muslim.  71 Mrs. Brown: Okay. In many Islamic countries, there are police who go around saying Òcover up your head!Ó and ÒTurn off the music.Ó 72 Omar:  They donÕt. They donÕt. No. No. No. 73 Mrs. Brown: In some country, yes.  In Afghanistan.  74 Omar:  Afghanistan?  Those countries they have Taliban.  They are not the Arabic countries.  75 Mrs. Brown: Never mind. Valentina has a question.  76 Valentina:  Okay. If I go to like É her country, your country, or AsmaÕs country. 77 Omar:  You will dead! 78 Valentina:  I have É. (Laughter) 79 Mrs. Brown: Let her finish.  80 Valentina:  I have to cover É 81 Omar:  Especially AsmaÕs country.  82 Zaina:  Yeah. Just AsmaÕs country because itÕs all Muslim. In her country there is an area for non-Saudi people, but for anywhere else, you must wear.  ItÕs just AsmaÕs country. In my country we have Muslim, Christians and Jesus.   In the discussion above, Omar used the word har!m twice: one in Line 6 and the other one in Line 68. Har!m is an Arabic word with a root in Islamic religion and means Òsinful,Ó used to refer to any act that is prohibited in the QurÕan. As one of the five Islamic commandments (fard, mustahabb, mubah, makruh, and har!m), Har!m indicates that the action forbidden is of the highest status of prohibition. When Omar was saying Òhar!m,Ó he was sullen and was very serious. He was not looking at any people in the classroom. Instead, he was looking directly ahead of himself. I could see he was upset at those moments.  3 Mrs. Brown:  YouÕre right. You were in lower grade. How about in Japan?  !!!107 4 Akira:  No. 5 Mrs. Brown:  How about in U.A.E.? 6 Omar:  Har!m.  7 Mrs. Brown:  ÒHar!m,Ó no.  Har!m means itÕs against Éeh:::. Many people who are strict in Islamic religion, even to listen to music. So, sexy dancing, no way! How about Syria? 8 Zaina:  Not too much.    The first time when Omar used Òhar!mÓ in Line 6, he was answering Mrs. BrownÕs question Ñ whether he would see students doing sexy dancing in public in U.A.E. Instead of replying with the word Òno,Ó Omar answered her question by using the word har!m which has religious connotations. OmarÕs use of har!m here seemed to mean that sexy dancing is a sinful action according to the QurÕan, and is prohibited in the Islamic culture. His choice of using the Arabic word here instead of saying ÒnoÓ clearly indexed his strong Islamic beliefs.  66 Zaina: I can do Arabic dancing. 67 Mrs. Brown: You can start an Arabic dancing club, and I would be your advisor if you want. You just find your member of your club, and I can be your advisor. Then if you want to practice after school, you could just get on the bus and come to the middle school.  IÕm not here after school, but you can go over there and you can practice in my room or in the library.  68 Omar: Har!m! Har!m! Har!m! 69 Mrs. Brown: Omar, itÕs not your job to be the É What do you call the police that in your country who go out and say ÒHar!m! Har!m! Har!m!Ó You donÕt have to be the police of morality in your country.  What is called in your language the police? 70 Omar:  ItÕs not the police. ItÕs the guy who is Muslim.  71 Mrs. Brown: Okay. In many Islamic countries, there are police who go around saying Òcover up your head!Ó and ÒTurn off the music.Ó 72 Omar:  They donÕt. They donÕt. No. No. No.  When Omar used har!m for the second time in the discussion in Line 68, the term was used in a slightly different way to achieve a different communicative purpose. OmarÕs first use of the term har!m in Line 6 was to provide his answer to Mrs. BrownÕs question. But the second time when he used the term Òhar!m,Ó his intention was to forbid Zaina from organizing an Arabic Girl Dancing Club which Mrs. Brown suggested. The illocutionary act of using Òhar!mÓ  !!!108 here was not to provide information, rather it is used to Òdo things,Ó that is, to forbid the girl from initiating the girl dancing club, which was considered sinful in the QurÕan. OmarÕs use of har!m here not only indexed his Islamic religious identity but also performed his identity as a male. By forbidding Zaina from forming an Arabic girl dancing club, Omar was exerting his role as a male in maintaining the gender expectations defined by the Muslim culture. OmarÕs sanction of ZainaÕs action was similar to what Ajrouch (Ajrouch, 2004; Archer, 2003) and Archer (Ajrouch, 2004; Archer, 2003) found in their work with Muslim young men who tended to sanction Muslim girlsÕ behaviors.  Two other instances of OmarÕs performance of masculinity were worth noting in the class discussion above: OmarÕs teasing of Tiger and Chris in Line 39 and Line 59 when they were asked to comment on their impression of students showing affection in public spaces in Academic High. Although Omar was sullen during the most part of the discussion, his face beamed with an exaggerated smile when Mrs. Brown asked Tiger about his impression when he first saw sexy dancing. Before Tiger spoke, Omar (in Line 39) teased Tiger and offered what he thought Tiger would say. He said, ÒThis is his first impression, ÔO::::h, thatÕs excitingÕ.Ó In Line 59 he stared at Chris and smiled at him after Chris said that he got used to seeing public showing of affection. OmarÕs teasing of Tiger and Chris seemed to indicate that as a boy he thought he was demonstrating a high moral standard and he was adhering to the teaching of the QurÕan.  Intersectionality, Marginalization, and Hierarchy of Masculinities  These young menÕs identity negotiation should also be understood with the framework of intersectionality so that we can see the multiple forms of oppressions and compounding subordinations that they were subjected to. Their experiences cannot be captured wholly by just looking at one dimension of their identities, or looking at the different dimensions of those  !!!109 experiences separately. Rather, the intersection of racism, linguicism, homophobia, and Islamophobia factored into their ways of being and their investment in learning in important ways. The intersectional nature of these multiple forms of oppressions inflected their masculinity and their sense of Self.  ÒBecause Omar Is White, And She Is White. IÕm Not White.Ó Racism and Marginalization Racism was a salient form of oppression that Tiger and Chris were subject to, even though they each chose different ways to deal with it. My interviews and observation indicated that Tiger experienced different forms of racism: microagressions, racial slurs, and racial stereotypes. One time during the EXCEL hour Tiger stayed in Mrs. BrownÕs classroom. While checking in on Tiger if he needed any help with his homework, he and I started to talk in Chinese about his school experiences. I chose to talk with Tiger in Chinese first because we shared the same first language, and I felt it not genuine to speak English with Tiger, particularly in contexts in which we were not dealing with school work. I also chose to not speak English with Tiger to avoid making him feel powerless with having to talk in a language that was not his first language. In addition, I also noticed that when we talked in Chinese, Tiger seemed much more comfortable and authentic in sharing his ideas and opinions with me. Speaking Chinese also functioned as our exclusion tool in those contexts as the majority of the people in the classroom did not speak Chinese. It made both me and Tiger feel safer and more comfortable to share information which might be too sensitive to let other people know.   When I asked Tiger if he thought he has been treated differently because of his race, he told me that the gym teacher was racist because he did not allow him to enter the gym during the Excel hour (study hall). I asked Tiger if students had to reach certain GPA in order to spend their  !!!110 Excel hour in the gym. He said, ÒNo, because there were other white students who have similar GPA to mine. He let them in.Ó  ÒDid you ask him why he did not want you to get into the gym?Ó  ÒYes. I did.Ó  ÒWhat did he say?Ó  ÒHe didnÕt explain. He just said Ôyou canÕt be here.Õ I think he did not want me to be there because IÕm not white.Ó  Tiger also explained to me that he felt that he had also been treated differently from other students in the ESL classroom. He commented that Mrs. Brown treated him and Omar in different ways even though they might have just done the same thing. While Tiger and I were talking, some of the other students were working on their homework, and some were chatting in pairs or small groups. Omar was chatting with Asma. When Tiger saw Omar was using his cell phone, he started to comment in Chinese.  ÒYou see. Omar was playing on his phone. She did not take his phone away, just asked him to not use it. If I were using my phone she definitely would take my phone away. She might even write up a report on me or send me to the main office. But she is doing nothing to Omar. You know why? Because Omar is white, and she is white. IÕm not white.Ó Although the gym teacher and the ESL teacher might not be conscious about their different treatment about their students, and they might have different reasons for why they resorted to such different treatments, what mattered in these occasions was TigerÕs perception of the differential treatments he received. For Tiger, he was treated differently because of his race. These differential treatments promoted Tiger to engage in resistance to academic work assigned by the adults. He explained to me that he did not care about correcting his warm-up sentences or  !!!111 homework in the ESL classes because he did not think that the ESL teacher cared about him, and he was frustrated. He also said he intentionally neglected homework in the health class that was taught by the gym teacher because of his racist discrimination. As a result, he failed the health class.  ÒAnd, Like His Asian Accent.Ó Gossipy Boys and Racial Slur  TigerÕs perception that he was discriminated because of his Asian background aligned with my observation. The following episode of several boysÕ mean talk that happened in Mr. FordÕs Geometry class illustrated that discrimination was covert, and racism found its dark shadow and violence through discrimination against other aspects of a personÕs identity. In this case, racism found its ugliness in malicious group gossip engaged in by white native English speaking young men.   I observed Mr. FordÕs 6th hour Geometry class twice a week, and Tiger was in this class. I usually sat at the desk of the last row in the classroom. There were several talkative boys in the last two rows who often made jokes to kill time, either when Mr. Ford was delivering his teaching in the front of the classroom, or during the time when they were supposed to work individually on tasks. Their seats were far from the teacherÕs desk in the front, and he usually could not detect their small talks, or could not hear clearly about the nature of their gossip.  It was near the end of the 6th hour, and the class was getting rowdy because it was the last class of the day. Mr. Ford was wrapping up the class. Sitting at his desk, he cast a look over his students and started to check whether they understood what he covered during that class.  ÒÔI feel better now.Õ Raise your hand. ÔI feel pretty good when I walk out of the class today.Õ Raise your hand. ÔI might need your help on Thursday Excel on stuff like this.Õ Raise your hand. Perfect (...) Okay. WeÕre (...) climbing this mountains, doing alright. IÕve got a sheet  !!!112 of homework for you, which has a few more proofs on, and I want you to do repair job on todayÕs. Ah, just three proofs on here. Tiger will be around hand it out. Cindy will be around too.Ó Tiger slowly stood up from his seat as if his body was too tired. The boy sitting next to me, wearing a red jacket, long hair, leaned forward to the two students sitting in front of him, playing with his pencil by making his pencil swirling. I call this student Red Jacket from now on.  ÒOh, Tiger! He is like ÔYeah. Tiger is just a studÕ. Look at that eagle on his shirt. HeÕs like ... His retro glasses. The eagle? And his retro glasses. And like his Asian accent.Ó The boy who was sitting in the row in front of ÒRed JacketÓ turned his head back, and added to Red JacketÕs gossip jokingly, ÒHe has other jackets, right?Ó ÒI feel like ÔyesÕ, I couldnÕt imagine he didnÕt have another jacket, honestly. Stephanie, does he ever wear a black jacket?Ó ÒRed JacketÓ asked the girl in front of him. ÒYes,Ó Stephanie, a girl who usually participated in Red JacketÕs jokes, said, without turning her head and keeping working on her workbook. It seemed to me that Stephanie did not want to engage the boysÕ mean gossip. ÒRed JacketÓ continued his gossip, ÒYes, but he wears this one a lot (...) It SUITS him. Ethon will definitely notice that though. He says, ÔYeah, my boy Tiger is wearing a different shirtÕ.Ó I was shocked and seriously disturbed by the boysÕ gossip, and was also afraid that Tiger might hear that they were talking about him if he had moved too fast handing out the worksheet in the classroom. Before long, Tiger shuffled his feet and walked slowly toward the back of the class. He walked as if he was not certain where he should go.  ÒMom man! Mom man! Come here Tiger. Anthony has a rumor. Anthony, hit him, hit him.Ó ÒRed JacketÓ asked Tiger to come over to his desk where Anthony had just joined.   !!!113 It was hurtful to hear the boysÕ malicious gossip about a minoritized young man. While upset, I was relieved that Tiger did not hear what they said.  The content and the delivery of the boysÕ gossip showed how racism was at work. Their derision of TigerÕs attire and his accent gave the meaning to the racism they were engaging. Through boundary drawing and ridiculing TigerÕs clothes, appearance, and accent, they racialized and Othered Tiger. The ugliness of this form of racism lies in the fact that it was covert and hidden. What was also troubling was that racism was compounded with other forms of discriminations, classism and linguicism. By ridiculing TigerÕs clothes style, the gossipy boys drew a boundary between the way they dressed as boys and TigerÕs. By judging TigerÕs ÒAsian accent,Ó they discriminated against him and rendered him into a person with Òless valueÓ because he could not speak their language fluently.  N-word and ÒBecoming BlackÓ  In my interview with Chris, when I asked him if he felt that he had being treated differently, he said no. I was hesitant to ask him the question if he experienced racism because I was concerned that by asking the question, I might impose a racial category on him. I finally decided to word the question by asking him if he had felt that he was treated differently because his skin color was different. He smiled with embarrassment and said no. I realized that ChrisÕs reluctance to talk about the topic might be because it was not a comfortable topic to talk about.  Although Chris said he did not experience racism, I have heard teachers commenting that one student in the ESL classroom had used the N word to refer to Chris. One day after Mrs. BrownÕs third hour class, Mrs. BrownÕs para-pro walked over to me and Mrs. Brown and told us that she has to deal with several conversations with some students in the class.    ÒDid you hear what Sergio used when he talked to Chris during the class?Ó She asked us.  !!!114  ÒNo, I was busy with helping Omar, and was not paying attention.Ó I said.  ÒWell, he used the N-word. I had to tell him thatÕs not allowed in this country.Ó   The discrepancy between ChrisÕs response in my interview and the para-proÕs report might indicate that Chris felt that racial discrimination was personal and it was uncomfortable for him to bring it up. It was clear from this clash that racism also happened inside the immigrant student group. Sergio was a student from Columbia and he had fair skin. What was worth noting here was that Chris, an immigrant and continental African youth, was discursively forced into the racial category of Black in the U.S. society through a racial slur by Sergio, an immigrant and South American youth. Therefore, Chris was entered into the racial discursive space as Black, just like what Ibrahim (1999) found in his study on how a group of French-speaking refugee continental African youth attending a Francophone high school in Canada Òbecame Black.Ó   ÒI Just Look Like Other American BoysÓ and ÒTerroristÓ Omar was racially unmarked. Omar was mixed and had fair skin. He said that he looked just like other American students. Because of his phenotype, Omar did not feel like he had been treated differently. When I asked Omar what it was like for him to be an ESL student in the school, he said, ÒI donÕt feel any different. I look just like other American boys. Like except my hairÕs a little different, I look just like other American students.Ó He then told me that, although his father has very dark skin, he and his three brothers all have lighter skin. He said his sisters have lighter skin too, and one of his sisters has blonde hair and the other two have curly black hair.  OmarÕs response to my question Ð what it was like for him to be an ESL student in Academic High Ð revealed important information about his identity negotiation. First, skin color and phenotype were salient features of appearance for minoritized students. The fact that Omar  !!!115 explained to me the looks of all his family members without me asking him about it seemed to indicate that phenotype mattered for minoritized students in their negotiation of their identity. Second, OmarÕs response that he just looked like other American students indicated that he was aware of the system of power relations associated with race and skin color, and he felt at ease because he was similar to the dominant group at the school and the society. Lastly, OmarÕs positioning as belonging to the racial dominant group seemed to indicate that, in different social contexts, individuals foreground certain dimension of their identities to align with the dominant group to gain symbolic power.  This positioning act indicated the complex identity negotiation that immigrant learners like Omar were engaging in everyday life. For example, OmarÕs ethnic identity was complicated by his dual citizenship. When I asked him to what degree he felt was Emirati or American, he said it was hard to say. After pausing for a few second, he said that he was Ò70 percent Emirati and 30 percent American.Ó OmarÕs sense of belonging in term of nationality illustrated a hybridity of identity which, to a degree, captured the sense of self of all the transnational students like him. His hybridity underlies the transnational young menÕs love and hate of America. OmarÕs sense of belonging was also complicated by the larger intolerant discourses of Islamophobia in the United States. In both my interview with him and class discussion, Omar and other Muslim boys commented that they had experiences of being called terrorists both inside and outside of the school. Being called terrorists discriminated against the Arabic young men on multiple fronts, both their religious beliefs and their masculinity. They were being associated with violence and images of destructive forces. Omar was outspoken against the discourses of Islamophobia. On Facebook he actively shared posts and videos that included counter narratives against those intolerant and hateful discourses.     !!!116 Linguistic Competence, Linguistic Capital, and Linguicism  While racism, homophobia, and Islamophobia were impacting these three young men in different ways, linguicism was another form of oppression that these young men were subject to, and similarly, each of them was impacted to different degrees. English language proficiency, as linguistic capital, became a power differential and a form of discrimination that shaped the ESL studentsÕ learning and social experience in Academic High. ESL students in Academic High were implicitly ÒsortedÓ into different categories of learners, and the gauge was their English language proficiency which was evidenced in their test scores and their performance of English use in the classroom. In this section I draw upon the concept of linguistic capital (Bourdieu, 1977, 1991) and linguicism (Phillipson, 1992; Talmy, 2009) to explain how English language proficiency became linguistic capital, a form of cultural capital, which in turn became a power differential that complicated the gender dynamics and constructed the hierarchical order of masculinities in the ESL classroom. This linguistic capital impacted the ESL students both outside and inside the classroom.  When critiquing ChomskyÕs concept of linguistic competence that views language as a set of abstract linguistic competence that can generate an infinite number of grammatical sentences, Bourdieu (1977) wrote,  Briefly, we can say that a sociological critique subjects the concepts of linguistics to a threefold displacement. In place of grammaticalness it puts the notion of acceptability, or, to put it another way, in place of ÒtheÓ language (langue), the notion of the legitimate language. In place of relations of communication (or symbolic interaction) it puts relations of symbolic power, and so replaces the questions of the meaning of speech with the questions of the value and power of speech. Lastly, in place of specifically linguistic competence, it puts symbolic capital, which is inseparable from the speakerÕs position in the social structure. (p. 646)  Bourdieu (1991) later further expanded the notion of linguistic competence as a form of symbolic capital. He argued that, language competence, different from ChomskyÕs definition, is  !!!117 a form of capital, linguistic capital. BourdieuÕs concept of linguistic capital was connected to the notion of power relations. He explained that the value of a particular form of linguistic capital depended on the linguistic market which was controlled by speakers who had power. For instance, the linguistic market of the school values the standard American English and academic English. Native or native-like proficiency in English, especially proficiency in academic English, is not just a communicative tool, it is a form of capital. Proficiency in English, or the linguistic capital, becomes part of the cultural capital set one needs to have to navigate schools. As a group, the multilingual students like Omar, Tiger, and Chris were disadvantaged because their linguistic competence in their first language did not have the equal linguistic capital as English language. Among these multilingual students, their proficiency level in English also became a power differential because proficiency became linguistic capital. Phillipson (1992) and Talmy (2009) further expanded the notion of linguistic capital as symbolic power and used the term linguicism to refer to any forms of linguistic injustice that discriminates against individuals or groups along the line of language.  ESL Stigma All these boys were aware of their status of being an ESL student, which was associated with lack of English language proficiency and not Òcool.Ó They tried hard to avoid letting people know their ESL student status. When Mrs. Brown and her students were sharing the French language teacherÕs classroom, her students asked her not to put up their profile stories on the walls of the classroom. Mrs. Brown thought that her students made that request because they did not want other students in the school to know that they were taking the ESL classes.  My observation of Omar indicated that he was also aware of the stigma of ESL, which was evident in how he carefully avoided being seen going to his ESL classroom. In my fieldwork,  !!!118 Omar was in five of the classrooms that I regularly observed: the first hour U.S. History, the second hour ESL (ELA), the third hour ESL (ELD), the fourth hour Biology, and the sixth hour Algebra. His U.S. History classroom and the ESL classroom (that is, the Computer Lab) were located in the same wing. The Computer Lab was just one classroom down the hallway, and on the opposite side. I noticed that Omar usually did not go directly from the U.S. History classroom to the ESL classroom. Usually a few minutes before the bell ring, students in the U.S. History class would get their backpacks ready, waiting anxiously inside the door for the bell to ring and rush out the classroom. Omar was never in the rush like his fellow classmates were. He often seemed to be slowing down in collecting his stuff and packing them into his bag, and usually waited till his classmates left. I always sat at one of the desks near the door. When he strolled out of the classroom and passed by me, he often gave me a quick nod or eye contact to let me know that he noticed me. The eye contact and the nod was brief enough to be a polite gesture that was unnoticeable to students who were still lingering in the classroom or students who were walking out with him. Once outside the classroom, he often moved toward the opposite direction, away from the ESL classroom. Sometimes he would linger in the hallway and listen to the music to avoid eye contact with anyone. We might argue that Omar was not trying to hide his ESL status, and maybe that he just simply needed to use bathroom during the break, which was in the opposite direction to his ESL classroom. It might also be that he needed to get something from his locker for the ESL classes. However, it might be more likely that he was avoiding letting his classmates know that he was going to the ESL classroom.  Several times OmarÕs U.S. History class spent their class time doing online research in the larger computer lab, the room which gave access to the smaller computer lab that Mrs. Brown and her students were using. In those occasions, Omar would usually pack his bag and  !!!119 leave the larger computer lab as the rest of the class. He would then come back a few minutes later. OmarÕs avoidance of being associated with ESL indicated that the status of being an ESL student was associated with a stigma of having less value.  Linguistic Capital and Power Differentials Inside the ESL classroom, students were conscious and sensitive about their English language proficiency, and they were also aware of the power differentials associated with language proficiency levels. One way to gauge oneÕs English language proficiency was to listen for the teacherÕs evaluative comments on the studentÕs response and performance in the classroom; another way was to see which ESL class an ESL student was taking and why. Students who were taking ESL classes could be categorized as three groups according to which ESL class they were taking. The first group were students who were taking both the 2nd sheltered ELA class and the 3rd hour ELD class; the second group were those who were only taking the 2nd hour sheltered ELA class; and the third group were those who were only taking the 3rd hour ELD class. Generally speaking, ESL students who were in the third group were considered as most proficient in their English because they were taking the regular ELA class, and they only needed to be in the third hour to get homework support. Students who were in the second group were considered as more proficient than the first group because they did not need the vocabulary instruction or homework support in the third hour. Students who were taking both the second hour ELA and the third hour ELD classes were generally considered as students who were less proficient in English and needed both sheltered instruction and vocabulary development. If an ESL student wanted to be released from taking the second hour sheltered ELA class or the third hour ELD class, she should get the approval from Mrs. Brown.   !!!120 Omar, Tiger, and Chris were all taking both the two classes. Four of the girls, Mirlande, Nayara, Valentina, and Zaina were only taking the second hour with Mrs. Brown because Mrs. Brown did not think they needed to learn the vocabulary lessons which were the focus of her third hour ELD class. Therefore, Mrs. BrownÕs third hour class, which was intended for students whose English language proficiency was lower, had more boys than girls. The boys were aware of their female counterpartsÕ high language proficiency level, which was evidenced in the fact that they were losing out speaking turns in the ESL classroom, and Mrs. BrownÕs evaluative comments on their language performance in the classroom.  Table 5: StudentsÕ WIDA Examination Scores in the 2014-2015 School Year  Therefore, the boys, as a group, lost to the girls on the symbolic linguistic capital. Their losing of their ground was subtle but could be felt in the classroom. One day Mrs. Brown asked students to complete a warm-up activity which required the students to paraphrase the sentences. The first three students she picked to check on were all girls and she also publicly announced how excited she was that they all got correct Ð Mirlande, Nayara, and Valentina. When Mrs.  !!!121 Brown raved about the warm-up of three girls in a row, I could see the slight sense of embarrassment on OmarÕs face as he was struggling to get his paraphrased sentences down on paper.  The studentsÕ score reports also indicated that in general the girlsÕ language proficiency, as indicated by the scores they received in WIDA (World-Class Instructional Design and Assessment) assessment (see Table 5 above), an annual English language proficiency assessment mandated by the state for ELL students. Mirlande, Nayara, and ValentinaÕs overall score were all higher than the boyÕs scores.   I also observed that language proficiency served as power differentials at the individual level. One time during the class, Mrs. Brown invited Tiger to come to the front of the classroom to share his answer with the rest of the class. Tiger spoke English with a heavy accent, and his English was not fluent either. As he stood in front of the students, stooping his head and murmuring his sentences, I noticed that Nayara stared at him despicably from the corner of her eyes. Fortunately, Tiger did not notice. However, NayaraÕs stare clearly showed that she looked down upon Tiger because of his language proficiency level.  English language proficiency also became a form of discrimination, or a form of linguicism in these boysÕ experiences. When the boy in the red jacket laughed at TigerÕs Asian accent, he picked on what Tiger lacked in his use of English to demean Tiger as an individual. The boy judged TigerÕs value with the framework of English as the normative language, and American accents as one of the standards of the normative language. This form of discrimination in oneÕs use of language is a form of linguicism.   English language proficiency as linguistic capital also constructed intragroup hierarchical orders among the boys. Among the three boys, Omar and Chris enjoyed much more central  !!!122 social status than Tiger. One of the reasons was that both Omar and Chris spoke more fluent English than Tiger. The differences between their English language proficiency was easy to understand because Omar was exposed to more English at home, and Chris had learned much more English in his home country than Tiger before he came to the United States as English was the instructional language in the schools in ChrisÕs home country. However, linguistic capital was just one of the power differentials which compounded these boysÕ experiences. As I explained in the previous section, race, socio-economic status, and social capitals also intersected with their social positions as boys, which further reinforced and complicated the hierarchy of masculinities in the ESL classroom.  Summary: Intersectionality and Hierarchy of Masculinities  My analysis showed that Omar, Tiger, and Chris were subjected to different forms of oppressions. As ESL students they were socially excluded and discriminated because of their developing English proficiency. As minoritized students, each of them was imposed with subject positions that were socially, historically, and politically constructed, both locally and at the societal level, in the United States. Understanding their ways of being young men and their masculinity performance needs to take into account these compounding subordinations that they were subjected to.   What is equally important is that an interactional lens reminds us that these three young men also experienced the school with very different terms, due to the different combinations of systems of power they were subordinated to. Omar, Tiger, and Chris were good friends in the ESL classroom. Omar said both Chris and Tiger were his friends, but Chris and Tiger were just ÒokayÓ friends. Omar said that Chris did not like that Tiger was ÒtouchyÓ when they were in the middle school. However, inside the ESL classroom, Omar, Tiger, and Chris did not enjoy the  !!!123 same social position, or their masculine social position was inflected by the social capital they had. Omar was definitely the social center in the ESL classroom because he looked just like white American boys, he was wearing fashionable clothes, and he also spoke more fluent English. OmarÕs popularity among the girls was evidenced in one social phenomena in the ESL classroom, taking group selfie. Not only did some of the girls invite Omar to take group selfies with them during the class break, but Omar also initiated group selfie with the girls and the boys. However, Tiger and Chris were seldom invited by the girls for a group selfie. Tiger would always move out of the camera if he noticed that he would be in the background of a group selfie. Group selfie in this classroom, I argue, was more than an instance of narcissism and consumption. Instead, it needs to be viewed as a social practice that was indicative of status of each individual in the classroom. Tiger seemed to be at the bottom of the hierarchy of masculinity in the classroom. His lower English proficiency and Òacademic achievement,Ó coupled with racism and the gay discourse that he was subjected to, afforded him very limited social space inside and outside of the classrooms.   The differential social positions each of the boys claimed or was awarded indicated that there existed a hierarchy of masculinities inside the ESL classroom. This hierarchy was invisible, but was felt by each of the boys. They each exploited, ignored, or contested this hierarchical order of social relations. Their negotiation of their masculine identities within this social order was a huge part of their social life in school, as well as their learning. In the next two chapters I explain how their masculine identity projects inform and shape their investment in language and literacy learning.      !!!124 CHAPTER 4  ÒDOING FUNNYÓ: STYLIZING L2,  PERFORMING MASCULINITY, AND LANGUAGE LEARNING   Introduction  In this chapter I study how multilingual young menÕs discursive performance of masculinity was connected to their language learning opportunities in the ESL classroom. I mainly focus on one of the boys, Tiger, to analyze how he performed his masculine identities through his stylized second language (L2) speech in the ESL classroom. I use interactional sociolinguistic approach (Goffman, 1981; Gumperz, 1982a; Hymes, 1974) and poststructuralist discourse analysis (Baxter, 2003; Threadgold, 2003; Wetherell, 1998) as the analytical frameworks to address four related questions. (1)  How does Tiger perform and negotiate his masculine identities in and through his stylized use of English?  (2)  How is TigerÕs masculinity performance connected to the larger discourses around gender and masculinity?  (3)  How is his language learning impacted by his negotiation of masculine identities?  (4)  How are his masculine identity performances connected to the process of social identification of learner identities?   I draw on the concepts of identity performance (Butler, 1990, 2006b, Cameron, 2000, 2006), stylization (Cameron, 2000; Coupland, 2001; Rampton, 1995, 2013), and participant example (Wortham, 1994, 2006) to examine how the processes of stylizing language, performing masculinity, and academic learning were intertwined in one routinized language activity inside the ESL classroom. By addressing these questions, I aim to demonstrate in detail, like Wortham  !!!125 (2006), how social identification and academic learning, deeply interdependent, are unfolding in moment-to-moment classroom interaction. In addition, I also aim to extend WorthamÕs theorization of the intertwined nature of academic learning and the production of learner identities by incorporating how these processes were also shaped by both local discourses in the classroom and the larger normative discourses beyond the classroom and the school.  Stylization and Participant Example Stylization, Masculinity Performances, and Power Relations  I use the concept of stylization in sociolinguistics (Cameron, 2000; Coupland, 2001; Rampton, 1995, 2013) to analyze TigerÕs discursive performance of masculinity in one routinized classroom activity over time. Stylization is related to, but differs from, the concept style of language. While style can be understood as the distinctive linguistic and semiotic features associated with the formality of language (Cameron, 2000), stylization refers to individualsÕ intentional Òintensification or exaggeration of a particular way of speaking for symbolic and rhetorical effectÓ (Rampton, 2001, p.85). Sociolinguists and discourse analysts argue that stylization is not simply a matter of linguistic choice; rather it is a social practice and a reflexive communicative act that projects the speakerÕs identities in relation to the social relations in the local immediate contexts and those in the larger systems of power (Bucholtz, 2011; Coupland, 2001; Jaspers, 2006; Rampton, 2001, 2013). Stylization, therefore, is a theoretical lens for studying language use in its local social contexts, with an emphasis on the social and ideological values associated with oneÕs stylized language use. Stylization has been used in sociolinguistics research to understand indexicality of individualÕs language use and their identity performance. Rampton (1995) documents language crossing among multilingual young men, and their use of language from other groups to assert  !!!126 the identities of ÒOther.Ó Coupland (2001) analyzes the radio hostsÕ performance of Welsh cultural identity through their stylized speech style at the phonological level and lexical level. Jaspers (2006) documents how Moroccan adolescent boys using the act of stylizing standard Dutch to engage the practice of Òdoing ridiculousÓ as a way to show their resistance to the dominant ideologies of standardized Dutch circulated in the school. Bucholtz (2011) analyzed how white kids used African American Vernacular English (AAVE) in their language use, and formed their own style. However, except for Rampton (2013), few studies have studied L2 stylization, and to my knowledge, no research has been done examining masculinity performance through L2 stylization. In this chapter, through analyzing TigerÕs masculinity performance with his stylized use of English in the ESL classroom, I extend the current research on stylization by connecting stylized L2 speech with gender performance, and by studying how stylization influences the process of teaching and learning of the language. In addition, I also analyze the ideologies in TigerÕs stylization in L2.  Participant Example, Social Identification, and Identity Performances I also draw upon WorthamÕs (1994, 2006) concept of participant example to explain how TigerÕs language use in the classroom complicated his social positions in the classroom. In his work studying a ninth-grade, urban social studies class, Wortham (1994, 2006) theorizes one type of speech event in classroom interaction that explains how the process of socially identifying someone and the process of academic learning are independent in the process of teaching and learning. He defines this speech event as participant example. He explains (1994),  A participant example describes some actual or hypothetical event that includes at least one person also participating in the classroom conversation. Participants with a role in the example have two interactionally relevant identities: as a student or teacher in the classroom, and as a character in whatever event is described as the example. (p. 1)   !!!127 What the concept of participant example means that teachers or students sometimes would use an individual from the classroom to illustrate an idea in class, and the individual becomes an example in the classroom discourse of curriculum which often is connected with an identity category. Therefore, in this context, the individual simultaneously has two identities, and often time the identity assigned in the curriculum is imposed on the individual in the classroom. For example, in the social studies class in Wortham (1994), the curriculum is based on the Paideia curriculum. Students in this class read classical philosophical treaties about the proper relationship between individuals and society; and then they participate in teacher-led class discussions to think though the philosophical issues and relate the discussions to their own experiences. In the process of classroom discussion and debates, the teachers and the students often used particular students as examples to illustrate their ideas and positions from the curriculum. For example, Maurice, an outspoken African American boy was positioned as ÒbeastÓ and Òoutcast,Ó which were categories of identities emerged from the class discussions of the Paideia curriculum. These identifications, coupled with the locally circulated identity category Òresistant black males,Ó perpetuated MauriceÕs marginalized social positions in the classroom. The concept of participant example allows us to understand the process of how individuals become socially identified when categories of identity are used repeatedly to characterize them through speech that Òinvolves parallelism between descriptions of participants and the events that they enact in the event of speakingÓ (Wortham, 2003, p. 189).  Tiger: Marginalization and Agency As discussed in Chapter Three, Tiger, as an ESL student, was marginalized both inside and outside the ESL classroom, due to the multiple subordinations that he was subjected to. Academically he was not successful. When I started my fieldwork, Mrs. Brown told me that she  !!!128 had not yet found Òany inroads to motivate Tiger to learn.Ó She said that he was getting Cs and Ds in his classes. TigerÕs Òlack of academic successÓ put him in a difficult situation both in the school and at home. Like the Chinese boys in McKay and Wong (1996), Tiger was impacted by the Asian model minority discourse. As an Asian boy, he did not fall into the model minority stereotypes of doing well in his studies. In addition, TigerÕs identity as a student athlete and his involvement in sports also defied the Asian model minority stereotypes. Although Tiger took pride in his physical prowess and strength in sports, and was quite serious in participating in the after-school sports practice every day, his participation in sports did not gain him the social capital, as the field sport games were less popular in the school than most other sports.  As a minoritized student, Tiger also experienced racial microaggressions and racism in different contexts in the school. As an ESL student, TigerÕs English speaking skills were less developed than his listening, reading, or writing skills. TigerÕs speaking English was not fluent, and he also spoke with an accent. As I illustrate in the next section, although this did not prevent him from creatively using his linguistic resources to construct his identities, lack of oral fluency in L2 also put him in a less favorable social position in the ESL classroom. In addition, Tiger had been labeled as gay. During my fieldwork, I noticed that students had called him ÒgayÓ in different contexts. Omar said that, when they were in middle school, sometimes he and other boys would call Tiger gay because he was Òtouchy.Ó The multiple subject positions that Tiger was in complicated his social positions in the classroom. These cultural, racial, and social identity markers were not separate from each other. Rather, they were interconnected, and intersected with each other. The concept of intersectionality recognizes that individuals simultaneously carry multiple identity markers, and more critically, intersectionality highlights how multiple forms of violence and discriminations,  !!!129 caused by the lines of differences, act together and impact certain individuals in a more severe way. In addition to the collective and cumulative nature of multiple identities, intersectionality also highlights the hierarchical nature of social positions due to the oppression created along lines of difference. All these identity categories that Tiger carried inflected his masculine subject positions and his social position in the ESL classroom. He seemed to be at the bottom of the hierarchical order of masculinity in the ESL classroom because of his race, language proficiency, and being labeled as Ògay.Ó Embedded in these power relations, Tiger had no choice but to carve out his own masculine space and social position in the ESL classroom.   Masculinity Performances, L2 Stylization, and Power Dynamics  In this section I analyze episodes of classroom interaction during a routinized language practice activity that included TigerÕs stylized speech to explain his masculinity performance and the intertwined nature of language learning and identity negotiation in the language classroom. I first present one classroom episode to explain how his use of English in one language practice activity led to the teacherÕs identifying him as Ònot serious.Ó I then move on to analyze additional classroom episodes to explain the features of TigerÕs stylization of English in this language activity Ð ÒDoing Funny,Ó and how his performance of a heterosexual and hyper masculine image through his stylized L2 speech were not in alignment with the goal of the language activity. Afterwards, I use the lens of poststructuralist discourse analysis to examine how heterosexual normalcy and hyper masculinity discourses impacted TigerÕs masculinity performance, and how the complex power dynamics shifted between the students and teachers in the ESL classroom. I end this chapter with an analysis on the solidification of TigerÕs identity as a problem student.   !!!130 Sentence Starters, ÒAdequate,Ó and ÒNot SeriousÓ Learner Identity TigerÕs stylized way of using English was particularly salient in one routinized language activity, the sentence starter practice activity, which was one of the signature language activities in Mrs. BrownÕs third hour ELD classes that focused exclusively on developing studentsÕ academic vocabulary. Each day the class studied one word considered as high frequency academic vocabulary by going through the information and activities on two PowerPoint slides.  The content of the two instructional slides always contained similar kinds of information for each word, and the instructional procedures were routinized. The first slide included the word, its part of speech and definition, and two sentence examples; the second slide had four sentence starters with the target word. Mrs. Brown usually would first read the word aloud, and ask students to repeat after her. She then would Òcold callÓ a student to identify its part of speech, and would also ask the student to explain what the part of speech meant. After that, she would march on to asking another student to read aloud two illustrative sentences. After the student read the example sentences, she often spent time paraphrasing them to the students. Mrs. Brown always included illustrative visuals on her PowerPoint slides to help students understand the meanings of the sentences. After finishing the first slide, Mrs. Brown then would ask students to work in pairs, and practice using the word with their partner by completing the four sentence starters on the second slide. They were always color-coded and listed in the same order: the first sentence in black, the second in blue, the third in green, and the last in red. After students finishing practicing the sentences starters with their partners, she would then bring the whole class back, and ask them to share their sentences with the rest of the class. This activity usually took about 20 minutes, and was strictly structured. However, as I illustrate below, Tiger was able to find ways to bring his identities into this language practice activity.   !!!131 It was the Monday morning of September 15, 2014. Mrs. Brown had to attend to her father in the hospital. That morning Mrs. Smith, a substitute teacher, was working in Mrs. BrownÕs classroom. Mrs. Smith, a white woman in her 60s, was a frequent substitute teacher for Mrs. Brown in both her high school and middle school classes. Therefore, she was quite familiar with the ESL students in the classroom, as well as the structure of this academic vocabulary activity. That morning, the third hour class was learning the word ÒadequateÓ (see the artifact below for the slides).  The episode below documented the classroom interactions of studentsÕ sharing their sentences with the rest of the class. Mrs. Smith and the class went through the first slide, which presented the definition of the word ÒadequateÓ and two example sentences. After modeling how to complete the first two sentence starters on the second slide, Mrs. Smith asked students to work with their partners to complete the last two sentence starters: the green sentence starter and the red one. The majority of the class was sitting in their chair forming a U-shape, and Tiger and Samir were sitting at the back of the classroom, away from the U-shape. Mrs. Smith had made the special sitting arrangement for the two boys because they were Òdistracting when sitting close to the other boys and separating them might help the class stay focused.Ó I was sitting next to Daniel, a Chinese student, helping him understand the lesson. After five minutes or so, Mrs. Smith felt the class were ready for sharing out their sentences. She moved to the middle of the classroom, standing right outside of the circle of the U-shape. She asked the class to volunteer themselves or their partners to share their own sentences, using the sentence starter: ÒIn order to study adequately for the exam, I plan to ÉÓ Tiger and Samir, sitting in the back corner, were laughing quietly at their own jokes.     !!!132   Figure 4: Academic Vocabulary Instruction Slides Ð ÒAdequateÓ   !!!133 Episode: ÒadequateÓ [ESL09152014] (See Appendix for transcription notations)  01 Mrs. Smith:  ((calling across the room)) all right (0.2) all right (0.2) letÕs hear some good answers (0.6) 02 Class:             ((talking in the background)) 03 Mrs. Smith:   whose partner had had a good answer 04 Tiger:  ((LF)) 05 Samir:  ((LF))  06 Mrs. Smith:  sh::h class! class! in order to study adequately for exam" I plan to (0.2) whose partner" Anina, did you have a good (.) answer for that one "  07 Anina:              ¡no¡                            08 Mrs. Smith:  no? Akira"(.) did you have a good one " 09 Akira:  (             ) 10 Mrs. Smith:  to start early!(.) in order to study adequately for the exam I plan to start early!thatÕs perfect! good (.) all right! Zaina" 11 Zaina:  <¡In order to study ad:d¡>= 12 Mrs Smith: =adequately= 13 Zaina:           =<¡adaquately (.) I plan to do (0.5) do project?¡>= 14 Mrs. Smith:  do a project? Okay (.) so youÕre gonna use the information you learned to do a project good (.) all right okay! Mirlande " 15 Mirlande:  In order to (0.2) in order to study adequately (0.2) for the exam I plan to study the precedents 16 Mrs. Smith:  study with "  17 Mirlande:  ¡precedent¡ 18 Mrs. Smith:  study with the presidents" oh" ((surprised)) 19 Nayara:  no:  ((writing down the word precedents on paper) 20 Mrs. Smith:  oh precedents ! okay (.) precedents means that the things came before? the things you learned in the past" 21 Tiger:  ((LF))  22 Samir:  ((LF))  23 Mrs. Smith:  the snickering (.) "has gone crazy back over there! 24 Tiger:  ((LF)) 25 Samir:  ((LF)) 26 Mrs. Smith:  all right! let's go to the next one= 27 Tiger:  =my partner= ((LF)) 28 Mrs. Smith:  =your partner "<okay Samir (.) in order to> (0.3) go ahead= 29 Samir:  =in order to study (0.2) 30 Mrs. Smith:  adequately=" 31 Samir:  =adequately (.) for the exam (0.2) I plan to study the lesson thay by thay 32 Mrs. Smith:  the lesson what" 33 Samir:  DAY BY DAY 34 Mrs. Smith:  day by day ! good! Those are good answers (.) your partner has a good one " Tiger" Tiger whatÕs yours" 35 Tiger:  <In order to study (.) adequately (.) for the test (.) for the exam (.) I plan to skip (0.2) to take (.) my girlfriend (.) to (.) relaxing for (.) exam>= ((LF)) & & & & & & & & & &  !!!134 36 Girls:  ((LF)) 37 Mrs. Smith: >=all right (.) ehmm (.) the apartment isn't very large but was adequate for (0.2)< actually IÕve heard your I thought that was a good one Chris! 38 Chris:  ¡The apartment wasnÕt very larger but (.) was (0.2) adequate (.) for a new couple¡ 39 Mrs. Smith:  for a what" 40 Chris:  new couple 41 Mrs. Smith:  for a new couple! Oh good (.) I donÕt! know your answers back there (.) how about somebody up here" okay" 42 Tiger:  ((LF)) 43 Samir:  ((LF))  44 Mrs. Smith:  LetÕs hear Xuexue! come on Xuexue! I want to hear what you think (.) read the sentence and you will remember 45 Xuexue:  <¡The apartment wasnÕt very large, but was adequate for (0.5) (     ) ¡> 46 Mrs. Smith:  for a what?  47 Xuexue:  for a party 48 Mrs. Smith:  for a party! 49 Kongji:  good! 50 Mrs. Smith:  okay good! anybody else wants to volunteer your partners"(0.3) ((Tiger raising his hand)) DO YOU TWO HAVE SERIOUS ANSWERS" ((turning to Tiger and Samir))  In the episode above Mrs. Smith invited the students to share out their sentences using the word Òadequate.Ó Six students were called upon, and five of them shared their sentences with the rest of the class: Akira (Lines 08-10), Zaina (Lines 10-14), Mirlande (Lines 14-20), Samir (Lines 28-34), and Tiger (Line 34-35). The interactions around each of the five studentsÕ sentence starter sharing out form a speech event (Hymes, 1972).  Table 6: Modified IRE Sequence in the Classroom Interaction  My analysis of these sentence starter sharing out speech events indicates that they all & &  !!!135 share a modified ÒIREÓ sequences (Cazden, 1988). The interaction between Mrs. Smith and Zaina illustrates this modified IRE sequence. Mrs. Smith initiated the interaction in Line 10 by calling on Zaina to share her sentence. In Line 11 Zaina started to share her sentence but had difficulty in pronouncing the word Òadequately.Ó Mrs. Smith assisted her in Line 12 and repaired her pronunciation. Zaina continued to complete her response in Line 13, saying that ÒI plan to do (0.5) do project.Ó In Line 14 Mrs. Smith first provided recast by checking if Zaina said Òdo a project.Ó After getting her confirmation, Mrs. Smith positively evaluated ZainaÕs response, and then move on to revoice her sentence by saying Òso youÕre gonna use the information you learned to do a project.Ó She then evaluated ZainaÕs response by saying Ògood, all right okay.Ó After completing this round of modified IRE sequence, she moved on and initiated the next round of interaction. This modified IRE sequence includes additional speech acts such as Òrepair,Ó Òconfirmation request,Ó Òrecast,Ó and Òrevoicing.Ó The interactions around Akira, Mirlande, and SamirÕs sharing out also demonstrated that they followed this modified IRE sequence.  Table 7: Interaction between Tiger and Mrs. Smith    The interactions between Tiger and Mrs. Smith, however, did not exemplify this modified IRE sequence. In the extract above, Mrs. Smith gave Tiger an opportunity to share his  !!!136 sentence in Line 34, after his conversation partner SamirÕs enthusiastic suggestion. In Line 35 Tiger shared his sentence, ÒIn order to study adequately for the test for the exam, I plan to skip [the class] to take my girlfriend to relax[ing] for [the] examÓ in Line 35. Despite the grammatical errors in TigerÕs sentence, Mrs. Smith did not recast his sentence or correct the errors in the sentence. Neither did Mrs. Smith offer any immediate evaluative comments. Instead, she said Òall rightÓ with a falling tone, and followed with a quick and brief filler Òuh.Ó Then she moved on right away to the next sentence starter. Therefore, Mrs. SmithÕs evaluation of TigerÕs sentence was carried out through the absence of corrective feedback, the falling tone, and the brief filler Òuh.Ó The abrupt and forceful falling tone indicated that Mrs. Smith was not happy with TigerÕs example, which was made explicit in Line 41 and Line 50 when she addressed Tiger and Samir, ÒI donÕt know your answers back thereÓ and Òdo you two have serious answers?Ó To Mrs. Smith, Tiger and Samir were not serious during this language practice activity, which led to their loss of opportunity to speak and practice the language during the last part of the activity. Tiger and Samir were called out as not serious for several reasons. First, they were laughing throughout the sentence starter sharing out activity, which might have prompted Mrs. Smith to view them as disrespectful. Second, TigerÕs sentence, ÒI plan to skip,Ó projected a laddish masculine identity that indexed non-school behavior of cutting classes, which was incongruent with the first part of the sentence Ð ÒIn order to study adequately for the exam.Ó Third, by saying Òtake my girlfriend to relax[ing] for [the] exam,Ó Tiger alluded to sex, which was considered inappropriate in this context.  While Mrs. Smith thought Tiger was not serious, my interviews with Tiger indicated that he thought the way he made up the sentence was funnier. Instead of constructing a positive good learner image, he chose to create a laddish image which was opposite to the first part of the  !!!137 sentence starter. He connected the opposition with the phrase Òto relax for the exam.Ó TigerÕs intentional appropriation of the meaning of the sentence starter occurred at the lexical level and the syntactic level. He juxtaposed the meaning of the two clauses of the sentence to create a funny effect, which led to Mrs. SmithÕs identifying him as Not Serious. This episode was not the only time that Tiger was referred as Ònot seriousÓ during the sentence starter sharing out activities. As I illustrated below, I observed TigerÕs consistent performance of a funny, ÒladdishÓ masculinity through his stylized speech during this routinized language practice activity. I did not ask him why he created sentences like that until in the late April 2015. When I asked him in Chinese, he smiled and told me in Chinese that ÒÓ (ÒThe way I said it was more funny. The activity itself isnÕt meant to be taken seriously.Ó) I categorize TigerÕs stylizing English in this language activity as ÒDoing Funny,Ó a way of using language to perform his gender and masculine identity and a way of contesting and subverting the routinized language instruction. In the sections that follow, I present additional classroom interaction episodes of TigerÕs stylized speech to explain that TigerÕs stylized speech was a means of performing a heterosexual, ÒladdishÓ masculine identity and a humorous boy image for himself in the ESL classroom. However, this stylization act of ÒDoing FunnyÓ was not in alignment with the teacherÕs implicit goal of socializing the students into a good learner identity through the language instruction. The competing goals between Tiger and the teacher led to Tiger being labeled as a Not Serious learner, and eventually the solidification of this learner identity.  Stylization, ÒDoing Funny,Ó and Humor TigerÕs way of ÒDoing FunnyÓ and his stylized speech style were actually recognized by Mrs. Brown in other contexts. On December 11th, 2014 the class was learning the word  !!!138 Òsubsequent,Ó and one of the sentence starters that students were asked to complete was Ð ÒI locked myself outside my apartment. Subsequently I had to ...Ó  Episode: ÒsubsequentlyÓ [ESL 12-11-2014]  01 Mrs. Brown: É A:::nd the red one? Ah? Daniel. 02 Daniel: (       ) 03 Mrs. Brown:     ((smiling)) you said you want to do the red one. 04 Daniel: I locked myself out of my house (.) subse (.) subsequently I had to  05  ask porlice for help. 06 Mrs. Brown:  Ask for whom to help? 07 Daniel: Ask the porlice for help 08 Mrs. Brown: Ask the poLICE for help. Okay the police maybe can get you back into  09  your house. All right. Truthfully I probably wouldnÕt call the police here in  10  Michigan to get into your house. I donÕt think they want that but there are  11  locksmiths. [A locksmith is a specialist to for keys.  12 Zaina:                     [I have one ((Raising her arm up into the air)). Oh please.  13 Mrs. Brown:  ((looking at Zaina)) TigerÕs got one too. I will call on you too Zaina. 14 Tiger: ((smirking)) I locked myself out of   15 Mrs. Brown:  I think I can tell by the look on TigerÕs face that I can predict what heÕs  16  gonna say. Maybe IÕm presuming what youÕre thinking?  17  but I think I have an idea. Okay. 18 Tiger:  ((laughing voice)) I locked (.) myself out of my house subsequently  19  I had to (.) call a robert.  20 Mrs. Brown: You have to do what? 21 Tiger: Call a robbert    22 Mrs. Brown: Call a robber? I didnÕt guess that. I thought you were gonna break the  23  window. ((joking)) I presume that you were going to smash the window  24  but you were going to call a thief and ask a thief to do it like an expert  25  like a pro to break into the house. Okay. Omar.  26 Valentina: Yas yas 27 Omar: I locked myself out of my house subsequently I had to start  28  a fire to keep me warm.   That morning Mrs. Brown was happy and relaxed, because it was the second day that her class officially moved their classroom from the theatre classroom to the computer lab. She was very happy that they were able to move out that ÒdingyÓ room. She and the class was still in the excitement of moving out of the basement classroom, and the whole sentence starter sharing out activity was carried out in a happy tone.  In Line 13 Mrs. Brown allowed Tiger to share after seeing him raising his hand to  !!!139 volunteer himself. In Line 14 Tiger started to share his sentence. In Line 15 Mrs. Brown commented and said she might know what Tiger was going to say based on Òthe look on TigerÕs face,Ó which indicated that she was aware of TigerÕs way of using words to create funny sentences. In Lines 18 and 19 Tiger finished sharing his sentence - ÒI locked myself out of my house, subsequently I had to call a robert [robber].Ó After checking with Tiger what he said in Lines 20 and 21, Mrs. Brown elaborated TigerÕs sentence in Line 22, ÒCall a robber? I didnÕt guess that. I thought you were gonna break the window. ((joking)) I presume that you were going to smash the window É.Ó Mrs. BrownÕs joke on Tiger again indicated that she knew that Tiger would create a funny sentence. Similar to his sentence with the word ÒadequatelyÓ in the last section, TigerÕs sentence here also carried a sense of humor in it, which was achieved by his stylized use of English Ð creating oppositions, or two incongruent scripts, in the sentence. ÒBreaking into the houseÓ solved the problem, but was in opposition to the intended meaning of getting back into the house in appropriate ways. Putting oppositions in one sentence is one of the ways to create humor (Attardo, 1997; Hay, 2000). In his sentence Ò<In order to study (.) adequately (.) for the test (.) for the exam (.) I plan to skip (0.2) to take (.) my girlfriend (.) to (.) relaxing for (.) exam>,Ó there was also two incongruent scripts Ð Òto study adequately for the examÓ and Òskipping class.Ó  TigerÕs stylized use of language was also accompanied by his smiling facial expression, his laughing voice, and his less fluent English. However, his English fluency did not impede him from Òdoing funny,Ó as both these two sentences conveyed his meaning well.   ÒDoing FunnyÓ vs. Socialization: Competing Goals of the Language Activity  TigerÕs stylized use of English, however, was not always received as humor; rather it was often considered as problematic, and his intended humor was often viewed as disruptive. For  !!!140 example, in the following episode TigerÕs linguistic performance was sanctioned by Mrs. Brown. Like Mrs. Smith the substitute teacher in the episode of Òadequate,Ó Mrs. Brown also called out Tiger as Ònot serious.Ó  Episode: ÒmaintainÓ [ESL 04-09-2015]  01 Mrs. Brown: Okay. Who would like to share their sentence for the red one? Chris. 02 Chris: In order to maintain high grades, a student should check  03  his grades in PowerSchool every day. 04 Mrs. Brown: Great. You can check your grades in your grade book on PowerSchool,  05  and if you see a zero for any of your homework, you can check with  06  your teachers. If you missed the homework, you can make up the assignment 07  to get credits for the assignment. Who else? Tiger.  08 Tiger: In order to maintain high grades, a student should sleep every day so 09 that he can relax and focus. 10 Mrs. Brown: YouÕre not serious. Step to the hallway, Tiger. IÕll be with you in one second.  In this episode the class was learning the word Òmaintain,Ó and the sentence starter they were asked to practice using the word was ÒIn order to maintain high grades, a student should ÉÓ In Line 2 Chris shared his sentence ÒIn order to maintain high grades, a student should check his grades in PowerSchool every day.Ó PowerSchool was the online system that Academic High was using for keeping track of studentsÕ grades in each course. Thus, Chris created a good learner image in his sentence. However, Tiger did not. His sentence, ÒIn order to maintain high grades, a student should sleep every day so that he can relax and focus,Ó created two incongruent scripts, Òmaintaining high gradesÓ and Òsleeping every day.Ó He then used Òhe can relax and focusÓ as the punch line to link the two incongruent scripts to create the humorous effect. However, this act of doing funny was not appropriate to Mrs. Brown because his sentence was not in alignment with her instructional goal for this language activity.  This conflict arose from the fact that Mrs. Brown and Tiger had different goals for this sentence starter language activity. My analysis shows that sentence starter activities in Mrs. BrownÕs class seemed to serve two instructional goals, which I categorize as explicit linguistic  !!!141 goal and implicit socialization goal. By Òexplicit linguistic goal,Ó I refer to the fact that all the sentence starters were designed to develop studentsÕ academic vocabulary knowledge. The linguistic goal of sentence starters was to get students practice using the target English language vocabulary, which was believed to lead to the development of academic language proficiency. By Òimplicit socialization goal,Ó I mean that some of the sentence starters also served an implicit, but more important, goal of socializing students into a ÒGood LearnerÓ identity, or socializing them to get accustomed to the American culture and values. For example, the sentence starter with the word ÒadequateÓ is a typical example of how the language practice activity also serves the implicit goal for socializing the ESL students into a ÒGood LearnerÓ identity. ÒIn order to adequately prepare for the exam, I plan to ÉÓ In this sentence, the explicit linguistic goal was to get students to practice using the word Òadequate.Ó Yet, the sentence starter also served as a  Table 8: Examples of Sentence Starters Illustrating the Implicit Socialization Goal  narrative frame that invited students to articulate their plan for what they would do as Ògood  learnersÓ to prepare for exam, which implicitly aimed at socializing students to be good learners. The table below lists some examples of sentence starters that included the topics of Òexam,Ó  !!!142 Òtest,Ó or Ògrades,Ó which illustrates the emphasis on this implicit socialization goal embedded in this language activity.   Figure 5: Academic Vocabulary Instruction Example ÐÒCrucialÓ This emphasis of socializing students into ÒGood LearnerÓ identity was also evident through analyzing the example sentences and sentence starters that Mrs. Brown included in her instruction. As we can see from the six sentences and sentence starters that she created for  !!!143 teaching the word ÒcrucialÓ on the two slides below, five of them were related to good learning habits, understanding school procedures or classroom rules, or the nature of an academic activity.  !Figure 6: Multiple Goals of Sentence Starter Language Practices in the ESL Classroom My analysis of all the sentence starters in Mrs. BrownÕs curriculum indicates that about 64 percent of the sentence starters had an implicit socialization goal. Mrs. Brown created 26 sets of academic vocabulary for her two-year curriculum plan. Each set included 10 high-frequency words in academic texts, and the 10 words were usually covered over two weeks. At the end of the second week of learning each set of the vocabulary, students were given a small quiz on their learning of the academic vocabulary. My analysis indicated that about 64 percent of 1560 sentence starters had an implicit socialization goal. About 42 percent of the total sentence starters !"#$%"&'"()*+,-./01+(",-"2,"'+#)*+,-3)*++4)!5,6#56)745#'"'89:01+(",-"2,"'+#)*+,-3);%-'%6,-)<#+=-54$5::0>?!@7A!B)*CD!1)CE)1BF@BF;B)1@DG@BG1 !!!144 focused on topics related to ÒGood LearnerÓ behaviors, and about 22 percent of the total set of the sentence starters had a goal of getting students accustomed to the American culture or local cultural or social practices. The rest of the 36 percent of the sentences and sentence starters were mainly language practice for helping students understand the meaning of the academic vocabulary. Therefore, it is evident that the sentence starters served double missions: the linguistic mission of developing the language learnersÕ English language proficiency through repeated and structured language practice, and the non-linguistic mission of cultivating the multilingual learners into a Ògood studentÓ in Academic High. The sentence starters, therefore, became narrative frames for socializing students into an ideal good learner. More importantly, these semiotic symbols weaved invisible but powerful Good Learner discourses in the ESL classroom. These discourses were not just present in Mrs. BrownÕs classroom Ð they were also present at the school level. Starting from fall 2015, Academic High put on banners of universities and colleges in the hallway, over the classroom doors, or on the wall above the lockers. Teachers were also asked to put their diploma and the names of alma mater on the doors of their classrooms. The principal explained at a parent-council meeting that those were some of the initiatives that the school was working on to foster Òpositive attitudeÓ towards learning and academic work among the students.  TigerÕs stylized speech, however, was not aligned to this socialization goal. His performance of a laddish image was compelled to create a humorous and masculine identity, but it was in conflict with the teacherÕs goal of socializing the students into good learners. Tiger stylized speech should also be interpreted as his resistance to the routinized and structured language practice activity. As discussed in the previous section, Tiger told me that the activity was too boring, and his sentences were funnier. His stylized speech then should be considered as  !!!145 a social and ideological practice for performing a funny laddish masculine image and for resisting the banal curriculum and routinized language activities.  This use of humor to perform masculinity and to Òhave a laughÓ in boring classrooms has been documented in previous work on young menÕs doing school (Jaspers, 2006; Kehily & Nayak, 1997; Woods, 1976, 1990). For example, Woods (1976) describes laughter as an provides a means of escapism for students to get through the boring classes. Woods (1990) suggests that humor is a way of dealing with the harsh realities of schooling. Kehily and Nayak (1997) argue that humor is a way for young men to perform their masculinity, as well as a way for young men to ÒtransformÓ the harsh realities of schools, and a means of suspending the rules of school, and a response to being in the oppressive institution of school.  Participant Example, Performativity of Masculinities, and Production of ÒNot SeriousÓ Learner Identity What was also interesting here was that TigerÕs discursive performance of masculine identity was made possible through a speech event of participant example. To understand how TigerÕs masculine identities got performed and negotiated in this classroom interaction, it is important to analyze the instructional design of this highly structured language activity and the instructional purposes that Mrs. Brown wanted to achieve. In this section I illustrate how the instructional design made it possible for the students to perform their identities through a speech event of participant example, which at the same time, and more importantly, complicated TigerÕs identity negotiation and language learning.  As I explained in the previous section, one implicit goal of the sentence starter activity was to use this language activity to socialize her ESL students into the world of a Ògood studentÓ in the school. Mrs. Brown also stated in her syllabus that one of her goals was to teach students  !!!146 strategies and develop their ÒgoodÓ habits of learning, in addition to their development of academic vocabulary. For example, in the particular sentence starter ÒIn order to study adequately for the exam, I plan to É,Ó by using ÒI plan to ...,Ó she invited her ESL students to reflect on and articulate their learning habits in order to socialize them into the cultural ways of learning in this U.S. school. Mrs. Brown also reinforced this idea of learning to becoming a Ògood studentÓ in an American school. The first week of the school year Mrs. Brown worked with students on a study guide, which included instructions on how to manage daily schedule, complete homework, and take notes in classes.  Table 9: Participant Examples of ÒGood LearnerÓ   This invitation of inserting the speaker herself into the language examples offered the students a venue to bring their identities into the speech events. As illustrated in the transcribed classroom interactions above, Akira (Line 09), Zaina (Line13), Mirandle (Line 15), Samir (Line 31), and Tiger (Line 35) all included themselves into their sentences. All but TigerÕs example were socially appropriate. All the other sentences constructed a Good Student image. What Mrs.  !!!147 Smith evaluated was the meaning of studentsÕ sentences, with a reference to an Òideal,Ó ÒgoodÓ student image, not the grammatical correctness of the sentences. TigerÕs sentence and the interaction around it was a typical speech event of a participant example. Tiger, as a classroom participant, inserted himself into the sentence with ÒIÓ as an example (Line 35); thus, Tiger had two roles in the speech event: Tiger-the-Student-in-the ESL-Classroom, and Tiger-the-Boy-in-the-Example. As explained by Wortham (1994), ÒParticipant examples have rich interactional implications because they double participant roles. Participants who become characters in the example have a role within the example, as well as their ongoing role as teacher or student in the classroomÓ (p. 2). This participant example allowed Tiger to act out his masculine identity in the speech event. Tiger-the-Boy-in-the-Example was a boy who showed non-school behaviors and laddish masculinities Ð cutting class, hanging out with girlfriend, alluding to sex, and not caring about exams. Tiger-the-Boy-in-the-Classroom was a boy who wanted to create a humorous boy image for himself through creating an inappropriate sentence.  The part of TigerÕs sentence got evaluated was Tiger-the-Boy-in-the-Example. When Mrs. Smith commented to Tiger and Samir, Òdo you two have serious answers,Ó Mrs. Smith the teacher in the classroom was evaluating the Tiger-the-Boy-in-the-Example. Tiger-the-Student was trying to do two things in the classroom: to comply with the teacher to complete the sentence starter language practice, and to construct a heterosexual and laddish image of boy students for himself. The latter was achieved through the participant example. However, Tiger-the-Boy-in-the-Example was evaluated as not serious. This evaluation was simultaneously applied to Tiger-the-Student-in-the ESL-Classroom. Although two roles had minor difference, they provided the platform for Tiger to perform his identities.   !!!148 Mrs. Smith the substitute teacher was not able to differentiate the two participants in this speech event. Tiger-the-Student-in-the-ESL-Classroom actually demonstrated adequate vocabulary knowledge, and his sentence was by and larger grammatically correct with minor errors. What Mrs. Smith evaluated was Tiger-the-Boy-in-the-Example.   On Tuesday September 22, 2015, Mrs. Brown asked students to complete a sentence starter with the word ÒtheorizeÓ Ð ÒPolice investigators theorized that the murder was committed by... and that the weapon was a ....Ó Tiger was eager to share his sentence, and Mrs. Brown allowed it. His sentence was ÒPolice investigators theorized that the murder was committed by Tiger and that the weapon was gun.Ó Like Mrs. Smith, Mrs. Brown quickly snapped back with a stern voice, ÒyouÕre not being serious,Ó and even did not fix the grammatical error in his sentence (the missing of the article ÒaÓ before the word ÒgunÓ). In this sentence starter, Tiger-the-Boy-in-the-Example became a murderer. The violent image that he constructed for him probably made Mrs. Brown felt uncomfortable, which might be the reason that she quickly shut down the conversation by telling him that he was not serious to connect himself to violence like murder and gun. Here again, the evaluation of Tiger-the-Boy-in-the-Example was applied to Tiger-the-Student-in-the-ESL-Classroom. Heterosexual Normalcy and Masculinity Discourses   TigerÕs masculinity performance should also be understood as the result of the heterosexual normalcy and hyper masculinity discourses. As illustrated in the previous sections, through his stylized L2 speech, Tiger discursively performed a heterosexual, and hyper masculine image, which also illustrates how compulsive heterosexuality (Pascoe, 2012a) influences the ways boys present themselves in social contexts to perform their heterosexuality and maleness. Pascoe (2012) uses the term compulsive heterosexuality to highlight the  !!!149 oppressive nature of heterosexuality normalcy discourses, arguing that being heterosexual is one of the implicit but invasive social norms which police the ways that boys do gender in everyday life.   Therefore, TigerÕs construction of heterosexual image maybe then was less an indication of his sexuality than a counter strategy that he used to protect his heterosexual image so that he would gain the dominant social position of Òbeing straightÓ and heterosexual. Scholars who take critical approaches to the issues of the education of male students argue that ÒboysÕ underachievementÓ is a result of both schoolsÕ uncaring instructional practices and the harm of the traditional forms of masculinity (Connell, 2005; Martin, 2013; Noguera, Hurtado, & Fergus, 2012; Pascoe, 2012a). Noguera argues that, while we need to recognize the biases in teaching towards boys who tend to Òact out,Ó we need to, more importantly, understand that masculinity discourses and heterosexual normalcy discourses are the roots of the problem because they promote boys to view school work as not masculine, and force them to put on a cool and hardcore male image so that they will not be excluded from social circles in school.  In order to achieve that cool, hardcore boy image, boys like Tiger need to distance themselves from the image of a compliant student or a nerd, which was exactly what TigerÕs utterances tried to achieve. Cutting off the connections with a nerd image was particularly important for Tiger because he, an Asian boy, was also subject to the Asian model minority discourse which views all Asian students as high academic achievers and successful in schools. By referencing skipping classes and hanging out with his imagined girlfriend, Tiger evoked the traditional heterosexual male image and distanced himself from the stereotyped image of Asian boys as nerds. Identifying Tiger as a Not Serious learner, therefore, failed to recognize that TigerÕs discursive performance of masculinity was shaped by the larger metanarratives about  !!!150 heterosexual normalcy and hyper masculinity.  Table 10: TigerÕs Masculinity Performances and Ideological Discourses at Work  TigerÕs discursive performance of masculinity also shows that the hyper masculinity discourses are at work. Through the words such as Òrobber,Ó Òmurder,Ó Òweapon,Ó and Ògun,Ó Tiger constructed for himself an image of a male who was associated to prowess, violence, and even crime, and aligned himself to the hard-core, manly male image of hyper masculinity discourses. The last sentence is particularly a telling example for how hyper masculinity discourses are at play. The sentence starter, ÒPolice investigators theorized that the murder was committed by... and that the weapon was a ...,Ó presented a crime scene with Òpolice,Ó Òmurder,Ó and Òweapon,Ó a scene full of violence. It is worth noting that Tiger willingly wrote himself into the narrative frame, positioned himself as a murder, and associated himself with the crime and violence. In the second sentence starter Tiger-the-Boy-in-the-Example became an accomplice of the robber who was going to break into his apartment.   !!!151 TigerÕs discursive performance could be interpreted as Tiger explained: he simply did not take this sentence starter practice as a serious academic learning activity, but rather thought he wanted to get Òsome funÓ out of it. However, TigerÕs taking over these narrative frames and making fun out of them illustrated how he presented himself as a male. To be a boy the least that he wants to do is to present himself as weak or feminine. By asserting himself into the third sentence starter, Tiger associated himself with violence and control, and the masculinity discourses that shadow boys and men in this society. His reference to ÒmurderÓ and ÒgunÓ was disturbing as it reflected a larger discourse of violent masculinity. It is evident that the invisible and powerful discourse of hyper masculinity exerted its influence upon Tiger at this micro-level classroom interaction. His response might even be read as disturbing and discomfiting, in how it positions him in relation to the violence that was already in the sentence. However, this should not be simply interpreted as TigerÕs problem, rather the culprit was the larger meta-narratives about masculinity and violence his words spoke within. TigerÕs sentence - ÒPolice investigators theorized that the murder was committed by Tiger and that the weapon was gunÓ- evoked the discourse of hyper masculinity which is linked to prowess and violence. With increasing attention to the issue of gun violence in the American society, it was no wonder that Mrs. Brown was trying to dismiss TigerÕs sentence by saying that he was not being serious. However, this dismissal of TigerÕs sentence as not serious missed the larger, deeper issue Ð the real root of this problem is the larger hyper masculinity discourses. Scholars in menÕs studies and masculinity studies have argued that masculinity discourses are the root of violence (DeKeseredy and Schwartz, 2006; Messerschmidt, 2006; Pascoe, 2012). Messerschmidt (2006) argues that crime and violence are connected to the ways that men are Òdoing genderÓ within the social-structural constraints of the norms of masculinities,  !!!152 which he theorizes as gender as structured action. He argues that in different cultures and societies the ways that people do gender are constrained by the social norms of what is acceptable or desirable to be a man or a woman. These social norms are regular and patterned interaction over time constructed through everyday life, which in turn shapes everyday life, constraint or enable behavior in specific ways. DeKeseredy and Schwartz (2005) argues that: There are many theories that attempt to lay out which offender characteristics best predict interpersonal violence, but the single best determinant of who commit beatings, homicide, rapes, and so on is whether the offender is male. Why are most violent offenders men? As stated before, it has little to do with their biological makeup or with factors identified by evolutionary psychologists. The best answer is provided by masculinities studies and research on how masculinities conducive to violence are shaped by male subcultural dynamics. Clearly for many men, violence is, under certain situations, the only perceived available technique of expressing and validating masculinity, and male peer support strongly encourages and legitimates such aggression. (P. 363)   Therefore, masculinity scholars argue that violence and aggression are used to construct hard-core, tough masculine image by boys and men. Tiger was not the exception; the fact that he willingly inserted himself as an example in the sentence starters to associate himself with crime and violence is a telling example of how hyper masculinity discourses influence the way boys and men perform their masculine identities.  Gender Dynamics, Patriarchy Control, and Institutional Authority   It also seems that the gender dynamics, male dominance, and institutional control were played out in a complex way across the classroom interactions above. In the discursive performance of masculinities, the gender dynamics juxtaposed in an interesting way with the patriarchal control represented by Tiger and institutional authority represented by Mrs. Smith and Mrs. Brown. I sympathize with Mrs. Smith and Mrs. Brown in these situations and the instructional decisions that they made because the linguistic narration that Tiger produced represented highly gendered speech, full of male dominance and patriarchal control.   !!!153  In TigerÕs sentence the allusion to sex and overpowering a girlfriend by asking her to cut class with him to relax clearly illustrated the larger social norms and the power relations between men and women. In that sentence Tiger symbolically turned female into sexual object through his discursive construction of a heterosexual boy with an imaged girlfriend. As Cameron (2006) argued, what mattered here was not TigerÕs sexuality; rather it was that his discursive performance of heterosexuality, which allowed him to gain into the social circle or the social status of heterosexual boys in the classroom and the school. However, this act of performing a heterosexual identity also represented a patriarchal control, which seemed to make the female teachers like Mrs. Brown and Mrs. Smith uncomfortable or not sure what to do because of the male dominance from a student who was at the lower level of the power relations between teachers and students.   Similarly in the third sentence starter, the kind of violence that Tiger willingly associated himself with also illustrated the prowess and the physical strength that men are usually expected to have. This discursive performance of hyper masculinity distanced Tiger from femininity or nerd boy image which tends to be associated with Asian boys. At the same time, this performance of violent masculinity and physical strength also overpowered the femininity of women that Mrs. Brown and Mrs. Smith were associated with. Thus, in these classroom interactions the female was made to signify as the powerless object of male dominance and male sexual discourses. Tiger cannot be simply conceptualized as a powerless student oppressed by the authority of the teacher, who in turn represents the control of educational institution. Nor can he simply be understood as the Òperpetrators of patriarchal social relations. He had the potential to be produced as subjects of both discourses, as simultaneously powerful and powerlessÓ (Baxter, 2003, p. 47). In the classroom interactions, the teachers used their teacher authority that  !!!154 they were given by being associated with the institutional power of the school to shut down TigerÕs discursive performance of hyper masculinity. From the poststructuralist perspectives, with the institutional power from the school, the female teachers superseded the patriarchal control and the male dominance symbolized in TigerÕs discursive construction of masculine identities.   Tiger as a ÒProblem StudentÓ:  Solidification of Learner Identity and School as an Oppressive Institution A ÒBehavior ContractÓ captured the solidification of TigerÕs Not Serious learner identity. In late August 2015 Mrs. Brown emailed me and asked if I would like to meet with her, Tiger, and TigerÕs mother to address some behavior issues that Tiger had from last semester in order for him to get enrolled in her 3rd hour in the coming academic school year. When I received Mrs. BrownÕs email, I was troubled, although not surprised, to read in text that Tiger was being considered as a ÒproblemÓ student. As I knew from my interviews with Tiger, the ÒproblematicÓ behaviors were actually a response from Tiger to multiple factors - uncaring education and social exclusion in school, as well as tense relations with his parents at home.  As indicated in Mrs. BrownÕs email, Tiger was considered as Òa distraction to other students,Ó and needed to Òchange his approach and attitude.Ó   Hi Kongji, É  I spoke on the phone with TigerÕs mom, XXX XXX. She reports that for various reasons Tiger does not want to return to Academic High School and wishes to live with his father in his home country and continue his schooling there. XXX states that as his mother, she will not permit this.   She would like Tiger to stay at Academic High School and remain in ESL 3rd hr. I told her that he did not make productive use of his time last year in 3rd hr and that in fact, he was somewhat of a distraction to other students. The bottom line is that she would like to set up a meeting with Tiger, me, and possibly you, if you are available, to help evaluate  !!!155 whether Tiger is prepared to turn himself around this year in terms of his work ethic. We discussed possibly setting up an action plan for expected behaviors that would allow him to remain in 3rd hr. I was adamant with Mrs. XXX that I would only support his being in 3rd hr if Tiger himself wanted to change his approach and attitude. I do not want him to agree to take 3rd hr only because his mother tells him to do this. To be honest, I am not very confident that he will be able to make this change; however, as a mom, I know how desperate she must feel and I am willing to give it a try for her sake.   Thank you, Mrs. Brown  I agreed to talk with TigerÕs mother, and agreed to meet with them as well. TigerÕs mother and I talked over the phone, and I learned from her that Tiger went back to his home country to visit his grandparents and his biological father. Tiger was reluctant to return to the U.S. because he was not happy with what he achieved during the past two year. He told his mother that he Òhad not felt any success at all,Ó and he thought that Òthere was no way out for him.Ó He said that that he had given it a try for two years and it seemed that he could not achieve any success. He was worried that he might not be able to graduate from the school. TigerÕs GPA was just a little short of 1.80, the required GPA for a student to graduate from Academic High. It seemed that Tiger was realizing that he was not able to Òmake itÓ in Academic High. However, sadly he could not realize that it was not simply his problem, rather the school and the instruction had not attended to his needs in learning. TigerÕs mother was persistent in getting him back to the U.S., although she was not happy with what the school was able to offer to students like her son. In my conversation with TigerÕs mother, she explained that she wished the school could offer more vocational courses so that her son could learn a technical skill for a profession that could allow him to support himself in the future.  With no control over any of the issues at all, I offered suggestions to TigerÕs mother and hinted to her that Tiger needed encouragement from parents as well as from teachers. I had learned from my interview that Tiger felt that his mother was too critical of his school work and  !!!156 academic performance. He felt like that his mother often compared him with his sister Ð a straight A student. I explained to TigerÕs mother that I learned from my interactions with Tiger that he did care about school, and was able to complete work. I told her that when I sat down and worked with Tiger on a one-on-one basis, I could see that he was actually able to complete the majority of the tasks himself. It seemed to me that he needed more confidence and the kind of encouragement from adults that could boost his confidence.   On August 25, 2015, Mrs. Brown, Tiger, TigerÕs mother, TigerÕs sister and I, met at one of the meeting rooms in the schoolÕs main office. After greetings and asking about how each spent the summer, Mrs. Brown brought out the behavior contract below and asked Tiger and TigerÕs mother to sign the form. I was surprised at finding that a behavior contract was going to be signed and documented because I thought the meeting was just to talk through the challenges and to communicate to figure out action plans. Tiger and his mother signed the contract. Mrs. Brown then asked the schoolÕs assistant principal signed the contract as well.  As a researcher and an adult who has been much involved in TigerÕs life in school, I felt that I was an accomplice in this process that labeled Tiger as a ÒProblem StudentÓ because of my inaction. My fieldwork and my interviews with Tiger and his mother indicated that a range of factors were involved in TigerÕs Òacting outÓ in the classroom. Those factors were interpersonal, institutional, and cultural forces which, of course, no individual could possibly to reverse all of them. As my analysis in this chapter indicated that TigerÕs acting out was actually trying to carve out a social space for himself in social contexts in which he has been marginalized in a variety of ways, and by variety of larger social, cultural, and ideological discourses. However, his way of  !!!157 !Figure 7: TigerÕs Behavior Contact doing funny and his masculinity performance were not in agreement with the ÒGood LearnerÓ discourses embraced by the teacher and the school, which ultimately led to the solidification of his problem student identity. As I explained in the previous chapter, my interviews with him indicated that as an Asian boy he has experienced racial macroaggressions in the school, and he also suffered from the negative racial stereotypes of Asian studentsÕ as the Model Minority students in the larger societal discourse. School as a racialized space has presented an oppressive environment for immigrant learners like Tiger. This racialized space, coupled with other forms of oppression and the subtractive education similar to that documented in Valenzuela (1999), resulted in Tiger being labelled as a problem student.  Sadly, this behavior contract solidified the Òproblem studentÓ identity for Tiger, which  !!!158 further impacted his learning opportunities. Just like when he was labeled as ÒNot SeriousÓ student in the classroom interactions, this behavior contract loudly announced the triumphant power of the institution and the violence of school as an oppressive institution. It reminds us that we still need much more imagination and caring to understand adolescent young men like Tiger, their identity negotiation, their marginalized experiences, and their yearning for understanding, affirmation, and love.                     !!!159 CHAPTER 5  ÒDUDE! DID YOU JUST SAY THE R-WORD?Ó:  PERFORMING MASCULINITIES AND CONSTRUCTING READER IDENTITIES Introduction On the morning of March 6th, 2015 some of Mrs. BrownÕs ESL students was taking the WIDA exams, an annual assessment mandated by the state for evaluating English language learnersÕ development of English language proficiency. Because students needed to take the tests by their proficiency level, that morning students with the beginning level of English proficiency were taking the exam. Omar, Chris and Mirlande were not because they were put into the group of the students with higher proficiency level. Mrs. Brown sent the three students to the library, asking them to work on their homework or read for their Reading Month Project while waiting the rest of the ESL class to finish their exam. Since Mrs. Brown and her para-pro were proctoring, she asked me to go to the library to work with them in case they needed any help.  When I got to the library, Mirlande was already there, sitting in the corner of the reading room with her earphones on. As I was settling down in the sofa chair next to her, Chris and Omar wandered into the library. They walked over toward us and sat down in the armchairs on the other side of Mirlande. I stood up and positioned myself in front of them. Chris was searching in his backpack, and Omar was untangling the cord of his earphone. He leaned over toward Mirlande and asked her what music she was listening to. I asked the group, ÒSo, whatÕre you guys planning to do during this hour? ÒI donÕt know,Ó Omar smiled to me, and quickly turned back to Mirlande to study the songs on her phone. I also turned to Mirlande, waiting for her answer. Mirlande took my non-linguistic cue and echoed Omar, ÒI donÕt know either.Ó  !!!160 ÒOkay. WhatÕre you going to work on, Chris?Ó I turned to Chris. ÒWell É IÕm going to read this book. I just started this book this weekend.Ó He took out a book from his backpack and showed to me. ÒIs it the new book in the Percy Jackson series you mentioned to me the other day?" Before Chris could answer my question, Omar suddenly cried out, ÒDude! Did you just say the R-word?Ó He jerked his body away from Chris as if an electric shock had hit him. Omar was going to put his earphones on to listen to music when he burst out his surprise. It took me quite a bit of time to figure out what he exactly meant by the ÒR-word,Ó and I was completely taken hold by his coinage after realizing what he meant, and quickly wrote down in my note book Ð ÒDude! Did you just say the R-word?Ó  By ÒR-word,Ó Omar actually meant Òread.Ó His question was asking Chris if he just said that he was going to read. In this chapter I seek to understand why Omar said ÒDude! Did you just say the R-word?Ó to Chris in that social context, and what OmarÕs discursive performance of identities could inform us about the complexity of the relationship between identity negotiation and reading engagement of multilingual young men. Therefore, the goal of this chapter is to explore the relationship between the three immigrant adolescent young menÕs identity negotiation and their investment in literacy practices. I examine these young menÕs performance of reader identities through analyzing a class discussion in the ESL classroom, and through connecting their performance of identities to the constructed notions of reading in this classroom.  I start this chapter with an overview of current scholarly debates on the Òboy crisisÓ in literacy learning, with the goal of situating my arguments within these debates. I then move on to analyze Omar, Chris, and TigerÕs reader identities through analyzing on a class discussion about  !!!161 reading in Mrs. BrownÕs classroom. In addition to the analysis of the young menÕs performance of reader identities, I also examine Mrs. BrownÕs reading instruction in order to understand how her reading instruction constructed a culture of reading in the classroom that features autonomous view of reading. I illustrate how each of the students took up, glided with, or resisted this socially constructed notions of reading in the ESL classroom. I conclude this chapter with a discussion on the implications of the three young menÕs Òlove and hateÓ with reading in a new language for the research and practice of literacy instruction for multilingual learners. Current Debates on ÒBoy CrisisÓ in the Field of Reading  In a 2012 op-ed piece in The New York Times, David Brooks argues that the increasingly feminized instructional practices in AmericaÕs schools and colleges have led to the growing Òachievement gapÓ between the boys and their female counterparts. He asserts that Òthe education system has become culturally cohesive, rewarding and encouraging a certain sort of person: one who is nurturing, collaborative, disciplined, neat, studious, industrious and ambitious.Ó He states that, however, boys and young men do not fare well with this system. He cites the achievement gap in reading and writing along gender line in schools, arguing that the current pedagogical approaches and curriculum are not responsive to boysÕ learning styles. To accommodate boys who do not fit into that pedagogical approach, he urges not only Òprograms that work like friendship circlesÓ but also ones that work like Òboot camp.Ó He wants Ònot just teachers who honor environmental virtues, but teachers who honor military virtues.Ó In a similar op-ed piece in The New York Times in 2006, David Brooks focuses on the same topic of declining academic achievement of boys and young men, and argues for a gender-based reading curriculum and single-sex education for addressing the problem. He asserts that, Òfor most kids it would be a start if they were assigned books they might actually care about. For boys, that  !!!162 probably means more Hemingway, Tolstoy, Homer and Twain.Ó  The Òboy crisisÓ framed by David Brooks in his posts represents one popular but simplistic view of reading circulated in the media, and it also reflects the essentialist views of gender and gender differences in the achievement gap discourses. One of the essentialist views on gender and reading is based on biological determinism, which argues that boysÕ difficulties in school are a result of biological differences. Michael Gurian (1997, 1998, 2001) is one researcher who holds this view of biological determinism. Informed by his neurobiological research, he puts forward the argument that menÕs and womenÕs brains exhibit neurobiological differences, a finding which explains the differences in achievement. Gurian and Stevens (2004) argue that girlsÕ brains have stronger neural connectors than boysÕ brains, which explains boysÕ and girlsÕ different behaviors in the process of learning.   The second type of the essentialist views, scholars argue, is informed by the essentialist views that embrace a gender binary (Blackburn, 2005; Dutro, 2002, 2008; Young, 2000). Some critics of biological determinism states that no evidence has been provided on the causal links between biological differences and behaviors. Instead, they argue that boys and girls are socialized into gender in different ways, and due the influence of the feminist movements on the teaching and learning in school, they are concerned that girlsÕ empowerment has led to the decline of boysÕ achievement because boysÕ needs are neglected. Therefore, to address this problem, they argue for gender-based reading curriculum, through which boys can read topics that are manly and masculine and thus they can be motivated to read, just as David Brooks has proposed in his New York Times op-ed pieces. Literacy researchers like Christina Hoff Sommers (2000) and William Brozo (2001; Young & Brozo, 2001) are proponents of this socio-constructivist view of gender and literacy, promoting the idea that instruction and curriculum  !!!163 should be used to promote boysÕ male role and masculinities, which would motivate boys to learn.   Scholars who oppose such essentialist stances problematize the binaries in both the existing views of gender and literacy. They argue that gender is not about biological or sex differences, rather gender is discursively constructed and performed. Anti-essentialist researchers often draw upon poststructuralist views of gender (Butler, 1990), arguing that individuals perform their identities within the larger social norms of what it is to be men or women. Poststructuralist views of gender also argue that masculinity and femininity is not fixed to the biological body of the sex. Rather both male and female can perform femininity and masculinity. Poststructuralists also problematize the notion of a Òboy crisisÓ in school literacy (Dutro, 2002, 2008; Young, 2001; Blackburn, 2005). Instead arguing that boys are failing or lagging behind in reading and other literacy achievement, they argue that schools have failed these students because literacy and reading are narrowly defined. Literacy scholars who embrace this view of literacy do not think the Òboy crisisÓ narratives in popular media and some scholarly discussions have captured the complexity of literacy development and the intersectionality of gender and other forms of oppression in education.  ÒDude! Did You Just Say the R-word?Ó: Performing Masculinity and Reader Identity Before I move to analyzing the class discussion to see how Omar, Tiger, and Chris positioned themselves, and were positioned, as different readers in the ESL classroom, I return to the story at the beginning of this chapter. That interaction between Omar and Chris had a lot to say about OmarÕs performance of masculinity and reader identity.  !!!164 Several interpretations about reader identity, masculine identities, and other social identities can be made through analyzing this interaction. First, it seems that Omar was performing a non-reader identity in this context. Different from ChrisÕs strong passion about reading, Omar discursively performed his ÒdislikeÓ of the type of reading that Chris was doing. Chris was an avid reader, and his investment in reading was also affirmed by Mrs. Brown. Chris had been reading the Percy Jackson and the Olympia books series. In eighth grade Chris also won the March Reading Month Competition run by Mrs. Brown. His reader identity was affirmed in the classroom and in his family. Omar, with his coinageÑthe R-word, derogated the practice of reading as if it was a taboo, a forbidden topic, or an insulting issue for him to talk about, just like people use euphemisms such as ÒF-word,Ó ÒS-word,Ó or ÒN-wordÓ to avoid directly spelling out social taboos. Through his coinage of ÒR-word,Ó Omar declared that reading was not part of his world. Even though I had already learned from my prior observations that he did not want to engage with reading activities in the ESL classroom, I was still surprised by his creative use of language to show his ÒdisdainÓ for reading and discursively perform his masculine identities. Omar not only forcefully created a new phrase to show his dislike of reading, but also performed it by his sudden and dramatic body movement as if he wanted to distance himself from Chris the Reader. Through his creative language use and body movement, Omar enacted a non-reader identity in this social speech event. I use italicization to emphasize that OmarÕs performance of Ònon-reader identityÓ does not mean that he did not read, but rather that he was against the reading required by school. In addition, I also aim to stress that this performance of Ònon-reader identityÓ is ÒsocialÓ in the sense that it serves multiple social purposes in OmarÕs project of constructing himself as a cool young man in the classroom and in the friend circle.   !!!165 To understand the social factors involved in OmarÕs identity negotiation, we need to situate OmarÕs discursive performance of Ònon-reader identityÓ in relation to his masculine identities, other social identities, English proficiency level, and the socially constructed notions of reading in the ESL classroom and in the school. First, by performing a non-reader identity, Omar disassociated himself with a version of masculinity that he did not want to fit into, the feminine and nerdy image of reading. By derogating reading he constructed for himself an image of a cool boy who did not engage with the feminine activity of reading. This performance of non-nerd masculine identity was relevant because research shows that boys tends to view reading practices as a feminine activity (Young & Brozo, 2001). OmarÕs performance of non-reader identity also had a root in the discourse around reading socially constructed in the ESL classroom. Most of the girls were good readers or at least they were being cooperative enough to be as a Ògood reader.Ó The larger discourse of reading as not masculine and the local discourse of reading in the classroom resulted in OmarÕs choice of constructing himself as a non-traditional reader. OmarÕs discursive performance of the non-reader identity was also connected to his negotiation of masculinities in relation to the larger discourse about Arabic young men. One time during the class he showed me his grade report when Mrs. Brown handed their grades. He got a B for his second hour and A- for his third hour class. I looked at his grade report and said, ÒIt seems that you would be able to pull your grade up to an A if you could finish the assignments you were not able to complete.Ó He looked at me and said, ÒWhatÕre you joking about? IÕm not an Asian boy! IÕm an Arabic boy. I donÕt want to get As. ThatÕs what Asian boys do.Ó  It is clear from this interaction between Omar and me that he took upon the discourses about Arabic masculinity and the Asian model minority discourses to justify his deliberate  !!!166 investment in learning. For him, Asian students were different from Arabic students because Asian students just devoted their time and energy to academic work, and they were nerds. An Arabic young man should not be nerdy or bookish; instead, he should be cool, and should not show too much interest in learning at school. This interest thus needs to be calculated to the right amount so that he could do just enough to pass the requirements, but not invest too much to be viewed as a nerd. This judged and measured investment shows that immigrant adolescentsÕ school experience is not just about academic work. They have to navigate the complicated process of doing school and doing the social. Influenced simultaneously by various discourses of being, they dance a balancing act in the social spheres of a school which shapes what they can be.   In addition to this influence of racial stereotypes on OmarÕs performance of his masculine identities, OmarÕs non-reader identity also needs to be understood in relation to his English language proficiency. As a language learner, Omar was strong in spoken English, listening and explaining abstract concepts, due to the fact that he spoke English with his mother at home. However, his writing and decoding skills were low. My analysis of OmarÕs written assignments and my observation indicated that Omar had difficulty in sound-letter decoding. By devaluing the practice of reading, Omar conveniently covered up one weak area of his language skills, and avoided a negative image that might threaten his social position in the ESL classroom.  In addition to these social factors feeding into OmarÕs performance of Ònon-reader identity,Ó I argue that the socially constructed notions of reading has also promoted OmarÕs enactment of Ònon-reader identity.Ó In the section that follows, I analyze one class discussion, and Mrs. BrownÕs reading curriculum and instructional practices to illustrate how the socially and pedagogically constructed notions of reading perpetuated these immigrant young menÕs  !!!167 Òlove and hateÓ of L2 reading. I argue that the instructional practices constructed as an autonomous model of reading that focuses on deciphering texts in segmented chunks that were distant from these studentsÕ identities. This autonomous model of reading, coupled with the narrow and reductive conception of learning, led to studentsÕ rebellion to rigid school oppression through putting on Ònon-reader identity.Ó Performing Reader Identities and Contested Notions of Reading and Readers  In this section I analyze the classroom interactions during one class session in Mrs. BrownÕs 2nd hour ESL class to understand how Omar, Chris, and Tiger performed their Òreader identities,Ó and how they were positioned as ÒreadersÓ or Ònon-readers.Ó In addition to analyzing the positioning acts at the micro level of classroom interactions, I also aim to investigate how different socially constructed notions of reading and being a reader in the school and the society played out in the process of teaching and learning to read in this ESL classroom.  On the morning of Tuesday February 10, 2015, I was a couple of minutes late for the 2nd hour class. When I walked into Mrs. Brown classroom, I felt there was a little bit of uneasiness in the air. As I was settling down at the back of the classroom, I realized that Mrs. Brown had just finished checking her studentsÕ homework for the previous day, and she had found out that five students had not completed their homework. She decided to have a class discussion with her students to figure out what was going on. The homework for the previous day was to answer four questions in their homework study packet that Mrs. Brown designed for checking their reading comprehension of the book Breaking Night, a novel that Mrs. Brown and her 2nd hour class were reading since late January. The full title of the book was Breaking Night: A Memoir of Forgiveness, Survival, and My Journey from Homeless to Harvard. It was an autobiography of Liz Murray, who, a daughter from a family with parents who were both drug addicts, overcame  !!!168 tremendous challenges in life and in the end became a successful student in Harvard University. The book was 334 pages long. Mrs. Brown decided to choose this book because she wanted her students Òto learn from Liz MurrayÕs storyÓ so that they could develop the growth mindset, and be inspired to be tough to achieve in spite of difficulties in life. She also chose this book because it included lots of instances of the use of figurative language, which was one of the themes that the class had learned during the previous short-story unit.  Mrs. Brown, noticing that almost half of her class did not complete the homework, opened up the floor for discussion on why some students ÒdidnÕt doÓ their homework Ð Òanswering four questionsÓ related to the book Breaking Night. In the beginning two stanzas, we see a teacher who was reaching out to her students and trying to understand the challenges that she saw in studentsÕ attitude toward their reading assignments. This act of reaching out might seem to be a move toward dialogic instruction and an act of reflective instructional practices. However, by asking the question Ð Òwhy is it that answering four questions is something that you didnÕt do?Ó Mrs. Brown framed the issue of not completing the homework as the studentsÕ problem, even though she softened her tone and explicitly stated that she was not Òpunishing or mad.Ó She was trying to understand why her students failed to complete the assignments, rather than how the students felt about the assignments and reading. In other words, even though Mrs. Brown explained that she wanted to discuss so that she could understand the situation, she framed the situation as the studentsÕ problem. I chose to analyze the class discussions first because it captured a reading instruction challenge in this ESL classroom Ð studentsÕ Òlack of interestÓ in reading the book and the reading assignment. Tensions around this instructional challenge gradually developed over time. Analyzing how this conflict came to be can allow us to see how notions of reading, in  !!!169 conjunction with the reading instruction in the classroom, influenced how the immigrant youths positioned themselves and were positioned as Òreaders.Ó Second, I also decided to focus on this class discussion because it involved all the students and several adults in the classroom. Each of them brought into the discussion their notions of reading and their priorities in the teaching and learning of reading. In addition to Mrs. Brown, one teacher candidate who was doing senior year placement in Mrs. BrownÕs classroom and I also participated in the discussion. The different notions of reading that the adults and the students articulated in the discussion revealed that reading was a contested concept, and each individual viewed reading in starkly different ways, which led to the challenge of solving issues related to reading in the classroom. Lastly, and more importantly, Omar, Chris, and Tiger positioned themselves, and were positioned, as different types of readers and students in the discussion. These acts of other-positioning and reflective positioning also illustrated the contested notions of reading, literacy, and learning. Teasing out these complex connections between these young menÕs identity negotiation around reading and the socially constructed notions of reading can allow us to see that both locally circulated discourses and larger ideological discourses around reading and learning were impacting how these young men perceived who they were as boys, readers, and students in this classroom and schools.  I mainly use the Stanza Tool, one of the discourse analysis tools in Gee (2008, 2014), to organize and present the data Ð the transcriptions of the classroom interactions. Ochs (1979) argues that transcription itself is a process of theorization because how discourse analysts select what to transcribe data, and make decisions about how to transcribe and represent data, reflects their theoretical perspectives and purposes for analyzing the data. I choose the Stanza Tool first because it allows me to the high-order structure of this episode of classroom discussion.  !!!170 Informed by American sociolinguistics to language, Gee (2004) argues that the goal of discourse analysis is to interpret not what people say, but how they use the language to do things. He states that speech is produced in tone units or idea units. Sometimes idea units are Òtoo small to handle all that the speaker wants to sayÓ (2014, p. 80). Therefore, when analyzing a longer piece of interaction, it is usually necessary to organize the idea units into a larger block of information, which he calls Òstanzas.Ó Gee further explains that organizing speeches to stanzas can allow discourse analysts to trace the macro-structure of the speech or narrative. Second, I choose to organize the transcripts into stanzas because separating the interaction into groups of idea units allows me to focus on the themes of each segment of the interaction. This bottom-up approach, Òidea units Ð stanzas Ð parts,Ó thus allows me to examine both the macro- and the micro- structure of this episode of classroom interactions. Lastly, I complement the Stanza Tool with additional sociolinguistics tools, particularly contextualization cues, in order to capture the para-linguistics features (stress, pitch, tone, loudness, pace, etc.) and non-linguistic features (body movement, gestures, eye contacts, facial expressions, etc.) associated with the interactions to analyze how identity work was negotiated and enacted in this classroom discussion. In GeeÕs work, the Stanza Tool has mainly been used to analyze monologues or speeches. Applying this tool of discourse analysis to interactional data also allows us to see how different tools can be used to address the questions that we are interested in.   In order to show the progression of the discussion and the rhetoric moves across the discussion, I choose to present the first fourteen stanzas as a whole piece. Then I will move on to analyze the themes of each section to study how the participants in this discussion articulated their different notions of reading, and how Mrs. Brown constructed her version of reading and  !!!171 reading instruction. Presenting the transcripts in its entirety and separating them into stanzas with highlighted themes allows us to trace the development of the classroom discourse.    Section 1 ÒMost of the people HATE reading in this classÓ  STANZA 1:  Posing the Problem of Not Doing the Reading Homework  1 Mrs. Brown: You had too much math, science and social studies, 2  And you donÕt think about ESL homework?  3  Or you forgot to look at your planner?  4  Or, what is it?  5  What is it that is going on?  6  ÔCause I need some help with understanding  7  Why, one, two, three, four, five people, five people,  8  Half of the class didnÕt do it.   STANZA 2:  Framing the Discussion of the Problem   9  So, whatÕs going on?  10  Can you help me::?  11 Class:   ((The class remain silent)) 12 Mrs. B:  Go ahead and be honest.  13 I just want to have a discussion.  14 IÕm not punishing or mad.  15 IÕm just trying to understand (.)  16 Why is it that answering four questions is 17 Something you didnÕt do?  18 Class: ((Remaining silent for about 5 to 8 seconds))  STANZA 3:  Positioning Omar and OmarÕs Reflexive Positioning  19 Mrs. B: Hmmm, hmmm, hmmm (.2).  20 Omar, you usually know  21 Why you donÕt do things  22 Can you share with us? 23 Omar: All of us (         ).  24 Most of the people HATE reading in this class.  25 I talked to them like  26 ÒWhy you didnÕt do it?Ó  27 ÒI donÕt like the reading.Ó  28 Everybody is like that.  Section 2 ÒYou Had to [Read]Ó  STANZA 4: Different ÒReadingsÓ in Different Classrooms  !!!172 29 Mrs. B:   DonÕt like reading.  30 All right, you know.  31 LetÕs try to problem solve that.  32 Is uh is the task of reading  33 Ever going to go away in school?  34 Omar: No. Usually for my other classes I donÕt like reading. = 35 Mrs. B: = I know you donÕt like it = 36 Omar: = They never gave us books you donÕt need to read. 37 Mrs. B:  = Oh you say you can get away  38 With not reading in your other classes? 39 Is that what you were saying? 40 As long as you pay attention in the class,  41 You donÕt really have to read the chapters.  42 Is that what you were saying?  43 Omar: Yes.  STANZA 5: Contrasting Reading in English Classes with That in Other Classes  44 Mrs. B: Okay. Mirlande, youÕre saying the same thing?  45 Can you articulate a little bit more?  56 Tell us a little bit what you mean?  57 Mirlande: I donÕt have to read (       ) 58 Mrs. B: Maybe thatÕs true for science or social studies classes.   STANZA 6: Continuing to Differentiate School Reading   59  Uh is there anybody else?  60 YouÕre taking a regular English class right? ((Turning to Valentina)) 61Valentina: Yeah. I had to do reading a lot. 62 Mrs. B: So, Valentina! Valentina, you know (.) ((Excited, speaking with fast pace)) 63 Do you like reading? 64 V:  Yes I love reading. 65 Mrs. B: Is there anybody else  66 WhoÕs been in a general English Ed class? 67 I think Akira you were.  68 You were in Western End right?  69 In an English class.  70 So was it possible for you in Western End 71 In your English class  72 To just not read the book? 73 Akira: I had to read. 74 Mrs. B:  You had to. Really!   STANZA 7: Continuing to Differentiate School Reading  75 Mrs. B: In reading literature in English class,  76 ItÕs just not possible you canÕt,   !!!173 77 The teacher isnÕt going to give you  78 Enough information in a class period  79 For you to get by on the test  80 Without reading the chapters in the books.  81 And Valentina, even without loving reading.  82 I know you love reading  83 But that part aside.  84 In your English class, whoÕs your English teacher?  85 Mrs. Hamali, Mrs. Hamali is your teacher. 86 Would it be even possible for you to pass that class  87 If you didnÕt read the book?  88 Not possible.  Section 3 ÒIf You DonÕt Read Those Books, YouÕll Fail the Class.Ó  STANZA 8: Metaphor: ESL Students as Baby Birds    89 Mrs. B:  So here is the thing.  90 All of us in my room are  91 In my English class right now, and  92 I use this metaphor  93 When we learned about metaphors.  94 I use this metaphor a lot and  95 I think youÕre going to understand it.  96 Right now youÕre like birds,  97 Baby birds in the nest. Right?  98 You just came out of the egg, right?  99 And youÕre little birds in the nest,  101 But the plan is not for you to stay  102 In the nest forever, right?  103 YouÕre going to fly out of the nest  104 When youÕre ready  105 When youÕre ready  106 For English class that Valentina is in right now,  107 YouÕre gonna leave this English class and  108 Go to another one.  STANZA 9: English III: Extremely Difficult Books    109 Mrs. B:  If you do that by English III,  110 YouÕre gonna be reading  111 Extre:::mely difficult books, 112 Really really difficult books,  113 The Scarlet Letter for instance 114 Written hundreds hundreds of years ago  115 In old old English.   !!!174 116 If you donÕt read those books,  117 YouÕll fail the class.  Section 4 Building ÒReading MusclesÓ  STANZA 10: Getting into the Habit of Reading    118 Mrs. B:  The REASON that I expect you to read  119 On your OWN,  120 AT HOME,  121 In THIS CLASS.  122 IÕm giving you highly interesting engaging books  123 That I think thatÕs not too hard for you, but  124 I think itÕs really interesting for you  125 So you can practice and  126 Get into the habit of reading  127 On your own at home.  128 So youÕll have the skills and habits, and  129 Then youÕll be able to  130 Use those skills and habits  131 When youÕre not in my ENGLISH class but  132 In somebodyÕs English III class someday.  133 Do you understand what IÕm saying?  134 Does that make sense?   STANZA 11: Reading and Practicing Weight-Lifting    135 Mrs. B:  So just like my son exercise at the gym,  136 And heÕs been doing this for many years.  137 And when (.) right now he lifts these GIANT bar bells  138 Like you canÕt believe  139 How big how much weight he lifts  140 How much what it is 141 ItÕs huge just huge but  142 He didnÕt do that at his first day.  143 On his first days  144 He lifted those little ones and  145 He did the little ones for a couple of weeks.  146 And then he felt like that was easy and  147 He moved to the heavier ones and  148 He did that for a few weeks. And then  149 He moved up to bigger ones and  150 He progresses little by little  151 Until now he is able to  152 Lift these super super heavy bells.    !!!175 STANZA 12: Short Story Unit and Practicing Reading Muscles    153 Mrs. B:  ThatÕs what I have been trying to do  154 In the short story unit.  155 In that short story unit  156 You could get used to reading literature and  157 Analyze it and then now  158 IÕm pulling away from reading everything in class and  159 Asking you to read it on your own  160 Because I want to have you practice  161 Those muscles those reading muscles.  162 Does that make sense?    Section 5 A Different Type of Reading  STANAZ 13: Proposing a Different Version of Reading  163 Mrs. B: Yeah. Mr. Qin? 164 Kongji: I remember  165 when we started the book,  166 I asked  167 if they think theyÕre readers and  168 if they read,  169 Everyone raised their hand.    170 Mrs. B: ThatÕs right. 171 Kongji: Because reading for me  172 sometimes  173 I have to force myself into it  174 so right now at MSU  175 I have to read a lot to do my coursework.   STANZA 14: Reading for Pleasure  176 Kongji: IÕm interested in hearing from you  177 Besides reading textbooks or novels from this class,  178 Do you think that youÕre engaging?  179 Do you think youÕre reading every day?  180 Are you reading other kinds of things every day?  181 And what 182 Mrs. B: For pleasure you mean? 183 Kongji: Yeah, for pleasure.  184 If you are interested in certain things,  185 what topics are you reading?  186 Where do you read?  187 What kind of materials do you read?    !!!176 I divided the transcripts of the first part of the class discussion into stanzas and sections, for the purpose of tracing the flow of the conversation, the shifts of the topics across the discussion, and the locus of the control of the conversation. I also numbered the lines to show the continuity of the transcripts, particularly the continuity between the transcript in this section and those in the later sections of this chapter. These transcripts of the class discussion, from Section 1 to Section 5, represent the beginning part of the conversation that I was able to record. (I missed the first few minutes of the conversation because I was late for the second hour.)  In Stanza 1 Mrs. Brown opened up the floor for discussing why the student had not completed their reading homework. As the titles of the sections indicate, in Section 1 Omar voiced his opinion and said that most of the students in the ESL classroom did not like the reading. In Section 2, Mrs. Brown shifted the conversation and avoided asking her students why they did not like the reading. Instead she reminded students that for an English class, they had to read. In Section 3, she further elaborated the importance of reading for advanced English class, and told the class that Òif you donÕt read those books, youÕll fail the class.Ó In Section 4, she explained her notions of reading, and told the students that they needed to get into the habit of reading, and read every day so that they could build their Òreading muscles.Ó In Section 5, I joined the class discussion, and asked the class a question to change the discussion. I asked them to talk a little bit their reading outside of the school. I focus on three themes here: (1) teacher authority and control of the flow of the conversation, (2) the contrasting perspectives on the reading problem between the students and the teacher, and (3) Mrs. BrownÕs notion of reading as Òbuilding reading muscles.Ó    !!!177 Framing the Problem and Controlling the Conversation   My analysis indicates that, although Mrs. Brown opened up the discussion to seek studentsÕ opinion and thoughts on why they did not complete the reading assignment, she framed the problem as the studentsÕ. This framing of the issue was indicative of Mrs. BrownÕs teacher-centered approach to instruction. Even though the key of the conversation was friendly, and Mrs. Brown also sounded patient, this implicit frame of ÒblamingÓ was picked up by students, which gradually built up the tension in the discussion.  STANZA 1:  Posing the Problem of Not Doing the Reading Homework  1 Mrs. Brown: You had too much math, science and social studies, 2  And you donÕt think about ESL homework?  3  Or you forgot to look at your planner?  4  Or, what is it?  5  What is it that is going on?  6  ÔCause I need some help with understanding  7  Why, one, two, three, four, five people, five people,  8  Half of the class didnÕt do it.   STANZA 2:  Framing the Discussion of the Problem   9  So, whatÕs going on?  10  Can you help me::?  11 Class:   ((The class remain silent)) 12 Mrs. B:  Go ahead and be honest.  13 I just want to have a discussion.  14 IÕm not punishing or mad.  15 IÕm just trying to understand (.)  16 Why is it that answering four questions is 17 Something you didnÕt do?  18 Class: ((Remaining silent for about 5 to 8 seconds))  Mrs. BrownÕs questions in Stanzas 1 and 2 were indicative of her frame of Òblaming.Ó In Line 1-3, she posed her question with two hypothetical scenarios that framed the issue as students forgetting their responsibility to do their homework. She said, ÒYou had too much math, science and social studies, and you donÕt think about ESL homework? Or you forgot to look at  !!!178 your planner? Or, what is it?Ó The two hypothetical scenarios Ð Òyou donÕt think about ESL homeworkÓ and Òyou forgot to look at your plannerÓ Ð placed the blame on the students. Even though she elongated the vowel in Òme::Ó in Line 10, pleaded the students to share their opinions, and promised the students that she was just to Òwant to have a discussionÓ (in Line 13) and Òtry[ing] to understandÓ (in Line 14), she kept to use the frame of blaming in Lines 16-17,  Òwhy is it that answering four questions is something that you didnÕt do?Ó Mrs. BrownÕs perspective to this reading challenge Ð framing it as the studentsÕ problem Ð was also accomplished by her control of the flow of the conversation. Throughout the discussion, she steered the conversation to ensure that students needed to understand that (1) the task of reading was not going to go away (Lines 32-33), (2) it would not be possible for them to pass an English class if they did not read the book (Lines 86-87), (3) if they did not read those books, they would fail the class (Lines 116-117), and (4) she wanted them to Òget into the habit of reading on their [your] own at homeÓ (Lines 125-126) and to practice to build their Òreading musclesÓ (Line 161-162).  Mrs. BrownÕs dominance of the conversation was achieved through structuring the problem, which was particularly evident in the shift of the conversation between Stanza 3 and Stanza 4. In Stanza 3 from Lines 20-22 Mrs. Brown called upon Omar asking why he did not complete the homework, which simultaneously positioned Omar as two types of students. First, it spotlighted Omar as Òa student who did not complete the homework.Ó The word ÒusuallyÓ (in Line 20), and the present tense in the sentence Òwhy you donÕt do thingsÓ seemed to indicate that Mrs. Brown was indirectly referring to a regularly occurring pattern, that is, Omar sometimes did not follow the instructions for homework and assignments. At the same time, by stating, Òyou usually know why you donÕt do thingsÓ (in Lines 20-21) and stressing the two words Òusually  !!!179 know,Ó Mrs. Brown simultaneously positioned Omar as Òa student who was outspoken, and who was different from other students in the classroom.Ó  STANZA 3:  Positioning Omar and OmarÕs Reflexive Positioning 19 Mrs. B: Hmmm, hmmm, hmmm (.2).  20 Omar, you usually know  21 Why you donÕt do things  22 Can you share with us? 23 Omar: All of us (         ).  24 Most of the people HATE reading in this class.  25 I talked to them like  26 ÒWhy you didnÕt do it?Ó  27 ÒI donÕt like the reading.Ó  28 Everybody is like that.  STANZA 4: Different ÒReadingsÓ in Different Classrooms  29 Mrs. B:   DonÕt like reading.  30 All right, you know.  31 LetÕs try to problem solve that.  32 Is uh is the task of reading  33 Ever going to go away in school?  34 Omar: No. Usually for my other classes I donÕt like reading. = 35 Mrs. B: = I know you donÕt like it = 36 Omar: = They never gave us books you donÕt need to read. 37 Mrs. B:  = Oh you say you can get away  38 With not reading in your other classes? 39 Is that what you were saying? 40 As long as you pay attention in the class,  41 You donÕt really have to read the chapters.  42 Is that what you were saying?  43 Omar: Yes.  OmarÕs response indirectly indicated his dislike of the reading in the ESL classroom. Instead of using ÒI,Ó he used Òall of usÓ (in Line 23), Òmost of the peopleÓ (in Line 24), and ÒeverybodyÓ (in Line 28) to indicate that it was not just himself who disliked reading in this class; rather almost all of the students did not like reading. Therefore, he evoked a Ògroup membershipÓ to indicate that it was not just him, but quite a number of students did not like reading in the ESL class. In addition, he also used Òdouble voicingÓ to highlight the authenticity of his claim of his  !!!180 peerÕs dislike of reading in the ESL classroom. Instead of using indirect reported speech to describe what he learned about his fellow classmatesÕ dislike toward reading, he used direct reported speech (in Lines 25-27) Ð ÒI talked to them like Ôwhy you didnÕt do it?Õ ÔI donÕt like the readingÕÓ Ð to report their aversion to reading. This use of double voicing also allowed Omar to express his opinions without being too direct and confrontational because he avoided referencing himself, but still was able to forcefully communicate his dislike of reading in the classroom. Omar also stressed his dislike of the reading by using a word carrying much intense dislike Ð Òhate,Ó and by emphasizing this word in his sentence ÒMost of the people HATE reading in this classÓ (in Line 24). It is also important to notice that Omar particularly pointed out that they disliked the reading in ÒthisÓ class Ð Mrs. BrownÕs ESL class. In addition to the demonstrative pronoun ÒthisÓ to refer to the specific class, the article ÒtheÓ in the reported speech ÒI donÕt like the readingÓ (in Line 27) also indicated that Omar was talking about the reading that both the students and Mrs. Brown knew.  However, in Stanza 4, instead of probing on what about the reading Omar and his fellow classmates did not like, Mrs. Brown reframed the discussion, shifting the focus again back on studentsÕ responsibility in doing reading. In Stanza 4 Mrs. Brown reframed OmarÕs critique on the reading in the ESL classroom (Most of the people HATE reading in this class), and shifted the conversation by moving away from the topic that was raised in OmarÕs answer. In Line 31 she started to Òproblem solveÓ the studentsÕ Òdislike of the readingÓ by drawing their attention to the importance of reading in school. She asked in Lines 32-33, ÒIs the task of reading ever going to go away in school?Ó This question ÒeffectivelyÓ redirected the discussion back to her framing of the problem Ð ÒReading is important, and you should do it. If you donÕt do it, it is your problem.Ó  !!!181 Building ÒReading MusclesÓ and Different Notions of Reading  In this discussion Mrs. Brown articulated her values in reading, reading complex literature books and building Òreading musclesÓ were two of the areas that she focused on in her notions of reading. Through my observation of her reading instruction and my analysis of her articulated ideas of reading, I came to see her reading instruction reflected the autonomous model of literacy instruction emphasizing decontextualized reading and the development of reading strategies and skills without attending to the social and ideological nature of reading and writing practices (Street, 1984, 1995, 2005).  STANZA 7: Continuing to Differentiate School Reading  75 Mrs. B: In reading literature in English class,  76 ItÕs just not possible you canÕt,  77 The teacher isnÕt going to give you  78 Enough information in a class period  79 For you to get by on the test  80 Without reading the chapters in the books.  81 And Valentina, even without loving reading.  82 I know you love reading  83 But that part aside.  84 In your English class, whoÕs your English teacher?  85 Mrs. Hamali, Mrs. Hamali is your teacher. 86 Would it be even possible for you to pass that class  87 If you didnÕt read the book?  88 Not possible.  Section 3 ÒIf You DonÕt Read Those Books, YouÕll Fail the Class.Ó  STANZA 8: Metaphor: ESL Students as Baby Birds    89 Mrs. B:  So here is the thing.  90 All of us in my room are  91 In my English class right now, and  92 I use this metaphor  93 When we learned about metaphors.  94 I use this metaphor a lot and  95 I think youÕre going to understand it.  96 Right now youÕre like birds,  97 Baby birds in the nest. Right?  98 You just came out of the egg, right?   !!!182 99 And youÕre little birds in the nest,  101 But the plan is not for you to stay  102 In the nest forever, right?  103 YouÕre going to fly out of the nest  104 When youÕre ready  105 When youÕre ready  106 For English class that Valentina is in right now,  107 YouÕre gonna leave this English class and  108 Go to another one.  STANZA 9: English III: Extremely Difficult Books    109 Mrs. B:  If you do that by English III,  110 YouÕre gonna be reading  111 Extre:::mely difficult books, 112 Really really difficult books,  113 The Scarlet Letter for instance 114 Written hundreds hundreds of years ago  115 In old old English.  116 If you donÕt read those books,  117 YouÕll fail the class.   The classroom interactions and Mrs. BrownÕs monologue in sections 2 and 3 above reflected her views about reading in a Òregular English classÓ (ELA class, Line 60) or a Ògeneral English Ed classÓ (Line 66). Reading in an English class, as assumed in Mrs. BrownÕs articulation, should be focused on Òreading literatureÓ (Line 75), chapter books (Line 80), Òextremely difficult books,Ó and books Òin old old EnglishÓ (Line 115). Emphasizing literature and challenging texts was not necessarily a bad thing. However, what was missing from this view were studentsÕ interest, different types of texts and literacy practices, and the ideological dimensions of reading and writing.  STANZA 10: Getting into the Habit of Reading    118 Mrs. B:  The REASON that I expect you to read  119 On your OWN,  120 AT HOME,  121 In THIS CLASS.  122 IÕm giving you highly interesting engaging books  123 That I think thatÕs not too hard for you, but   !!!183 124 I think itÕs really interesting for you  125 So you can practice and  126 Get into the habit of reading  127 On your own at home.  128 So youÕll have the skills and habits, and  129 Then youÕll be able to  130 Use those skills and habits  131 When youÕre not in my ENGLISH class but  132 In somebodyÕs English III class someday.  133 Do you understand what IÕm saying?  134 Does that make sense?   Mrs. BrownÕs metaphor of building and practicing Òreading musclesÓ (Line 161) was also indicative of her autonomous view of literacy instruction. In Stanza 10 she explained to students that the reason that she wanted them to read at home was to have them Ògetting into the habit of readingÓ on their own at home so that they would have the skills and habits for more advanced English classes after they exited from her sheltered ELA class. These skills, as reflected in the homework assignments created by Mrs. Brown, included understanding the meaning of vocabulary from the context, answering specific questions related to the stories, interpreting the meaning of sentences with figurative speech, or explaining a plot of part of the story. These skills were all decontextualized, and those homework assignments was boring to the students. What I observed was that students just focused on searching for answer from the text without actually reading the texts.  I found myself involved in the classroom discussion. Section 5 below documented how I joined and participated the class discussion. In Stanza 14 I asked the students what topics they were interested in reading outside of school (Lines 176- 187), although I realized during transcription and analysis that my questions could have been better phrased. I made a decision right at that moment to join the conversation because I realized that the discussion had been solely focused on what the students should do, rather than on what they thought they wanted to  !!!184 read. By that time, I had already learned from my observation and my interviews with the students that they read on a variety of topics outside the classroom. Therefore, I wanted to join the conversation to create an opportunity for the students to share their reading interest to the class and Mrs. Brown. Another reason that I made the decision to join the discussion was that I had observed that the students were not interested in the novel Breaking Night, for a variety of reason, but mainly because the book was too thick and the text was challenging for them. By joining the conversation and asking the students to share their reading interest, I was hoping to suggest another way to think about reading: studentsÕ reading interest and their out-of-school reading practices.  Section 5 A Different Type of Reading  STANAZ 13: Proposing a Different Version of Reading  163 Mrs. B: Yeah. Mr. Qin? 164 Kongji: I remember  165 when we started the book,  166 I asked  167 if they think theyÕre readers and  168 if they read,  169 Everyone raised their hand.    170 Mrs. B: ThatÕs right. 171 Kongji: Because reading for me  172 sometimes  173 I have to force myself into it  174 so right now at MSU  175 I have to read a lot to do my coursework.   STANZA 14: Reading for Pleasure  176 Kongji: IÕm interested in hearing from you  177 Besides reading textbooks or novels from this class,  178 Do you think that youÕre engaging?  179 Do you think youÕre reading every day?  180 Are you reading other kinds of things every day?  181 And what 182 Mrs. B: For pleasure you mean? 183 Kongji: Yeah, for pleasure.   !!!185 184 If you are interested in certain things,  185 what topics are you reading?  186 Where do you read?  187 What kind of materials do you read?   However, it was painfully clear to me that I have inadvertently ÒintrudedÓ in the class discussion. As I explained in the first chapter, as a researcher who spent significant time in the research classrooms, a huge challenge for me during the fieldwork was to navigate the multiple roles I had and balance my action in the classrooms. My identity as a researcher and my identity as a volunteer to Mrs. BrownÕs class, at many occasions, were hard to balance. It was difficult to navigate first because my two identities were blurred. Mrs. Brown sometimes approached me to ask for my suggestions on what to do if she faced an instructional issue in teaching. She would also ask me what I thought about her new activities. Another reason that my role was complicated was that, for several times, I had been asked by Mrs. Brown to step in to teach her class. A couple of times when she had to use a substitute teacher, she asked me to teach, and asked the substitute teacher to just take attendance because I knew her curriculum, lessons, and her students. In a certain sense, my established role in the class also called on me to join in the conversation since I knew the students well and I wanted to create an opportunity for them to voice their ideas. However, I knew at that moment it was a difficult choice to join in the discussion, and I realized even more clearly as I was analyzing the conversation that my participation was an intrusion. I knew that, when I became more involved, as I was here, even though I had good intentions, I still felt it was a difficult position to balance.  The delicate negotiation of my role was reflected in how I framed my questions in the discussion. As documented in Stanza 13, I first explained how I knew that they all said they liked to read, as a way to hint to Mrs. Brown that I wish I was not interrupting the discussion. I also positioned myself as a reader who had to force himself to read in order to relegate my standing  !!!186 so that the students would not feel they were intimated by me. In that sense I was trying to soften my ÒintrusionÓ to appease both the teacher and the students.  Regardless of my consciousness of my intrusion, this change of the topic of the conversation did open up the floor for the students to share their identities as a reader. In the section that follows, I turn to to analyze, by following the natural flow of the discussion, how each of the three young men positioned themselves and was positioned as a learner in relation to reading, and how categories of reader identities were constructed and dichotomized.   Performing Identities and Constructing Reader Identities   ÒMy Own CountryÓ: OmarÕs Ethnic Identity and Reading Investment STANZA 15: Reading for Pleasure and ÒMy Own CountryÓ  188 Mrs. B:  So, do you ever surf on the Internet  189 On a topic that youÕre interested in,  190 Kind of that.  191 For example,  192 youÕre interested in a certain video game  193 Or youÕre interested in certain sports.  194 Do you ever look for articles in Reddit or anywhere  195 And read about that sports  196 Like you know whatÕs going on in the World Cup?  197 Or whatÕs going on in anything  198 YouÕre interested in reading about it?  199 Anybody?  200 Omar yeah. 201 Omar: My home country.  202 Mrs. B: Say it again.  203 Omar: My own country.   STANZA 16: ÒIf I DonÕt Believe it I read Arabic.Ó  204 Mrs. B: So you DO read about your own country?  205 Omar: (             ) 206 Kongji: In English or in Arabic? 207 Mrs. B:  In English or Arabic?  208 ThatÕs Mr. QinÕs question.  209 Omar: Both.  210 Like you know I check in English   !!!187 211 And uh and if I donÕt really believe it  212 I read Arabic. SoÉ 213 Mrs. B: Gotta you.  In Stanza 15 when Mrs. Brown asked her students to share about their reading practices outside school, Omar was the first student who raised his hand and volunteered to share, which was an interesting and important contrast to his previous comment on his dislike of the reading in the ESL class. This contrast also indicated that he was connected to a different type of reading outside of the school. In Line 201, in his response to Mrs. BrownÕs question of what ÒyouÕre interested in readingÓ in free time, he said, Òmy home country,Ó which he meant that he was interested in reading about news of his home country U.A.E. Notice that he said two phrases when answering the question about what he read outside school: ÒMy home countryÓ (in Line 201), and ÒMy own countryÓ (in Line 203). Instead of directly saying U.A.E., Omar used these two phrases to emphasize what the topics that he was reading outside school meant for him. The phrases Òhome countryÓ and Òown countryÓ clearly indexed his ethnic identity, indicating that OmarÕs reading practices was connected to his ethnic identities. As I explained in Chapter 3, although Omar has dual citizenship Ð Emirati and U.S. citizen, he identified himself more as an Emirati than a U.S. citizen. When I asked him whether he thought he was Emirati or American, he said that he was Ò70 percent Emirati and 30 percent American.Ó  OmarÕs response also indicated that his out-of-school literacy practice was multilingual and multimodal. When I asked him whether he read in English or in Arabic (in Line 206), he responded that he read texts in both languages. What was also important was that Omar had different judgment on news written in English and that in Arabic. In Lines 210-212, he said, ÒLike you know I check in English and uh and if I donÕt really believe it I read Arabic.Ó This quote seemed to indicate that OmarÕs reading practice was ideological in both his selection of   !!!188  Figure 8: OmarÕs Reading Log for March Reading Month Competition topics to read and his evaluation of the authenticity of the news written in English and Arabic. It also indicated that he was a critical reader, particularly in the way that he evaluated value, stance, and accuracy of texts. He explained to me in informal interviews that he was really upset that when an incident occurred in U.A.E. Western media only reported the number of victims who  !!!189 were from Western countries, but they did not report any information about the victims who were Emirati.   My observation indicated that OmarÕs out-of-school reading mainly focused on three areas: news about U.A.E., conflicts between Israel and Palestine, and information that counters the discourses of Muslims as terrorists. His reading logs during the March Reading Month and his Facebook posts demonstrated that OmarÕs literacy practices were closely tied to his ethnic identity, pan-Arabic identity, and religious identity. Like the adolescents in Moje (2004), Omar read to be connected to his home country and to enact cultural and religious identities. For example, during the March Reading Month, Mrs. Brown asked her students to read for at least 30 minutes each day, and log their reading activities each day by summarizing what they read and their personal responses to the reading. Throughout the four weeks in March, OmarÕs reading logs documented his strong ethnic identity Ð every entry of his reading logs was about news in U.A.E.   As illustrated in the reading logs, Omar consistently devoted his time reading news about his home country U.A.E. All his reading log entries were about U.A.E., particularly about the conflicts (March 3rd), civil war (March 4th), and its political leaders (March 5th). OmarÕs out-of-school reading practices indicated that adolescents are very purposeful in the reading they do. As Turner (in press) points out that learners read to learn and to be connected. What we also see from OmarÕs case is that immigrant adolescents read to be connected to their ethnic identity and other identities.  In addition to reading about the current affairs in U.A.E., Omar also read a lot about the conflicts between Israel and Palestine and narratives countering the discourses of Muslims as terrorists. OmarÕs Facebook posts illustrated the connection between his reading practices and  !!!190 his religious identity. But more importantly his Facebook use showed his agency as a social actor to speak up and speak back against the larger discourses against Muslims, which has become particularly contentious during the immigration crisis in Europe and the debates around immigration in the United States. OmarÕs Facebook featured Òsilent sharingÓ posts Ð he shared online information, videos, or news that directly countered the intolerant discourses against Muslims.   Figure 9: OmarÕs Facebook Post on February 21, 2016  !!!191 Tiger: A Misidentified Non-Reader STANZA 16: ÒTiger É why havenÕt you?Ó   214  Mrs. B:  Now letÕs just get over the obstacles.  215 So, if you know that IÕm expecting you to read tonight.  216 You know that you have the audio  217 When youÕre reading.  218 My next question is why youÕre not doing it?  219 If you admitted that it would help you.  220 Tiger, you know it would help you  221 If you read it  222 And you could listen to it the same time?  223 So, just a question.  224 Why havenÕt you?  225 Tiger: I think reading is interesting? 226 Mrs. B: You think what?  227 Tiger: Reading is interesting. 228 Mrs. B: Oh, but are you reading?  229 Tim: (          ) 230 Mrs. B:  Oh, yeah. You did it.  240 Sorry. Okay.  250 But you can read it  251 While you listen to it, right?   In this stanza Mrs. Brown started asking students whether they had visited her website to listen to the audio recordings of the book Breaking Night. She decided to provide the audio to students because she knew that some students found it easier to listen to the audio while reading the book. However, very few students followed her suggestion to listen to the audio.   Starting from Line 214, Mrs. Brown asked students why they did not listen to the audio even though they agreed that listening would have helped them understand the reading. In Line 224 she asked Tiger why he did not listen to the audio. Misunderstanding that Mrs. Brown asked what he thought about the reading, Tiger said in Line 227, ÒI think reading is interesting.Ó Finding TigerÕs response confusing, in Line 228 Mrs. Brown asked him if he read the book. Tiger said he did read the section required for the homework assignment and completed the homework as well.   !!!192  This episode of classroom interactions is worth a detailed analysis. First, Mrs. BrownÕs misidentification of Tiger as a student who had not read was indicative of how she positioned Tiger in this classroom. Here she misidentified him as a non-reader, despite that he had actually read. As illustrated in the analysis in the previous chapter, Tiger was being labeled as a ÒNot SeriousÓ student due to his performance of masculine identities in this classroom and the teacherÕs lack of understanding of TigerÕs negotiation of identities in and through language in the classroom. It seemed that Mrs. Brown automatically assumed that Tiger had not completed the reading and the homework. Different from Omar, who was being identified as a non-reader (in Stanza 3), and Chris, who was being identified as an avid reader (in the next section), TigerÕs engagement with reading was misidentified by Mrs. Brown.   Second, Mrs. BrownÕs use of pronouns here in this stanza also conveys teacher authority and a ÒnegativeÓ attitude to her audience Ð her students. She used the second person pronoun ÒyouÓ for 18 times, as highlighted in the transcript. Her use of the second person pronoun clearly showed the asymmetrical power relationship between teacher-student in the classroom. Mrs. Brown used both the singular and plural second person pronoun ÒyouÓ: those in Lines 215-219 are plural form ÒyouÓ addressing the class, and those in Lines 220-251 are the singular form ÒyouÓ addressing Tiger. Particularly she paired up the first person pronoun ÒIÓ and ÒmyÓ in opposition to the second person pronoun Òyou.Ó For example, in the sentence Òif you know that IÕm expecting you to read tonightÓ and Òmy next question is why youÕre not doing it?Ó This I-you opposition and the predominant use of ÒyouÓ as a means of addressing the students can be interpreted as sending a message of power, which has been documented in previous studies of pronoun uses (Aers & Kress, 1981; Hodge & Kress, 1988; Rowland, 1999). For example, Rowland explains that in his study the teacher frequently uses ÒyouÓ to address the student. But   !!!193  Figure 10: TigerÕs Reading Log for March Reading Month Competition  !!!194  the child rarely uses ÒyouÓ to address the teacher. Mrs. BrownÕs use of you here signaled her controlling teacher authority, which was also part of the reason that her students were resistant to  her teaching. As I will further illustrate in Chapter 6, her use of teacher authority and dominating approach led to conflict with the boys.    In addition, in contrast to the teacherÕs misidentification of Tiger as a Non-Reader, Tiger actually found reading interesting. In the March Reading Month Reading Competition, Tiger read The Dangerous Days of Daniel X, a science fiction by James Patterson and Michael Ledwidge. His reading logs seemed to indicate that he was actually invested in reading the book outside of school, and his summaries of the reading also indicated that he was making connection with the stories and the characters in the book. For example, in his first personal reaction entry, he wrote, ÒI wondered [if] Daniel can be good in the high school [b]ecause I know its [itÕs] hard to join the big kids group when I [was] just ten.Ó This entry seemed to indicate that Tiger was making connection between his school experiences and that of the character in the novel. I argue that, like the misinterpretation of his doing funny as not serious, Tiger was also being misidentified as a non-reader. Chris: ÒI Like Every Percy Jackson Book.Ó   Stanza 17: ÒI Know You ReadÓ Ð Chris as a Reader 252 Mrs. B: Okay. I want to go back to Mr. QinÕs question.  253 So who else? Chris?  254 I know you read 255 I know you borrowed a lot of books  256 From my middle school library in the past.  257 In general, do you like to read topics  258 That youÕre interested in  259 And look up for information  260 About something on the Internet  261 Or wherever you can get to read?  262 Or no?   !!!195 263 ST: I thought your Percy Jackson books.  264 Mrs. B: ThatÕs what IÕm saying.  265 I know you do.  266 So you like fantasy books.  267 You kind of enjoy those, right?   Stanza 18: ÒI Like Every Percy Jackson Book.Ó Ð Chris as a Reader  268 Tiger: ((Turning back and smiling at Omar)) 269 Omar: ((Turning sideway to Chris, and smiling in a joking and friendly way))  270 Those are most disgusting books. 271 Mrs. B: Just give us your answer. 272 Chris: Yeah. 273 Mrs. B: Omar, you donÕt have to answer it for him, okay.  274 What? ((Turning to Chris))  275 A little bit louder please.  276 Chris: I like every Percy Jackson book.  Stanza 19: ÒJust Books.Ó Ð Chris as a Reader  277 Mrs. B: So you have one author  278 That youÕre running with right now  279 And this is fun for you.  280 But in general besides that,  281 ThatÕs AWESOME 282 ThatÕs GREA:::T.  283 Those Percy Jackson books are great  284 But besides that in general reading? 285 Chris: Sometimes I do.  286 Mrs. B: Sometimes?  287 Like what kind of things do you read  288 Chris: Just books. 289 Mrs. B: Just books. Mostly fiction that you like?   In Stanzas 17 to 19, Chris was at the center of stage. He was affirmed by two adults in the classroom, Mrs. Brown and the student teacher, as a reader. In Lines 254-255 Mrs. Brown said to him and to the rest of the class, ÒI know you read. I know you borrowed a lot of books from my middle school library in the past.Ó The student teacher also positioned him as a reader by suggesting to him that his Percy Jackson books could be considered as out-of-school reading. In addition, in Stanza 19 Mrs. Brown further affirmed his position as a reader. Mrs. Brown used the  !!!196 sentences like, Òthis is fun for you,Ó ÒThatÕs AWESOME,Ó and ÒThatÕs GREA:::TÓ to commend ChrisÕs investment and interest in reading. Both the words AWESOME and GREAT were emphasized, and the vowel in the word great was elongated, which showed Mrs. BrownÕs positive attidue. Therefore, the adults in this social space legitimated and affirmed ChrisÕs reading practices and positioned him as Òa reader.Ó Chris also identified himself as a read by saying that ÒI like every Percy Jackson book.Ó  ChrisÕs passion in reading was legitimated, affirmed, and rewarded in the school because his out-of-school reading practices fit into the norm of the school reading practices. He was reading long chapter books with complex story lines, which was aligned to the traditional and orthodoxy school literacy practices. In Line 288, after Mrs. Brown asked him what kinds of things he read besides Percy Jackson, he said Òjust books.Ó This alignment further affirmed his identity as a reader inside the classroom. This positioning of Chris as a reader also echoes with my observation and data from the interview. When I asked him to complete the sentence starter - ÒIÕm a(n) ÉÓ with three nouns, Chris wrote down ÒIÕm a reader, a brother, and a son.Ó Although I have learned from my previous interactions with Chris that he really loves reading, I was still caught by his clear statement of his reader identity he claimed in his sentence. In addition to this claim of reader identity, Chris also performed his identity as a reader in other class discussion.  On Wednesday January 21, 2015, Mrs. Brown had to stay home because she was sick with the flu, she asked me to assist the substitute teacher that day to get students started on the reading. For her second hour English II class, she planned to start to read the book Breaking Night with her students. She asked me to let students check out a copy of the books so that they could be ready the next day to start in class. In class, before I handed the books to the students, I  !!!197 asked them to write down their answers to two questions as a way for me to understand their likes and dislikes about reading: ÒWhat do you enjoy about reading?Ó ÒWhat do you worry about reading?Ó Chris wrote that he likes reading because reading can give him the imagination and fantasy. Later he told me that he has been reading a series of fantasy novels Ð adventure novels featuring Percy Jackson and the Olympians. When I asked how he became interested in reading, he started to tell me a long story of how his mother gave him the first book in the series as a Christmas gift.  He just kept reading. He was one of the reading stars in the March Reading Month Competition in Mrs. BrownÕs class in middle school, and got the award for getting a book for him and he chose the second book from the series. He has finished reading the first four books in that series: The Lightning Thief, The Sea of Monsters, The TitanÕs Curse, and Battle of the Labyrinth.  In the spring of 2015 he was reading the latest book in the series The Last Olympian. In March the Reading Month Competition this time, Mrs. Brown asked students to read at least 30 minutes a day. Students were asked to document their reading on a reading log. Chris actually read for one hour each day. Chris even wrote his experiences of becoming interested in reading in one of his warm-up sentences.   ÒEven our smallest actions have an impact on those around us. For example, if parents tell their children to read when they are little when they grow up they may get an interest of reading and caring one another.Ó (Feb. 27, 2015, third hour class, ESL, warm-up writing assignment) In this warm-up sentence Chris became a participant example (Wortham, 1994, 2006). He implicitly used himself as an example for how his momÕs encouragement had helped him become more interested in reading.   !!!198 Gender Displays: Performing Masculinity and Reader Identities  Stanza 18: ÒI Like Every Percy Jackson Book.Ó Ð Chris as a Reader  268 Tiger: ((Turning back and smiling at Omar)) 269 Omar: ((Turning sideway to Chris, and smiling in a joking and friendly way))  270 Those are most disgusting books. 271 Mrs. B: Just give us your answer. 272 Chris: Yeah. 273 Mrs. B: Omar, you donÕt have to answer it for him, okay.  274 What? ((Turning to Chris))  275 A little bit louder please.  276 Chris: I like every Percy Jackson book.   ChrisÕs reader identity, however, was also contested in the social circle of the boys in the classroom. Or, the teacher and the student teacherÕs discursive positioning of Chris as a reader was contested by the boys. At the end of Stanza 17, Mrs. Brown asked Chris if fantasy novels were what he was interested in reading. In Stanza 18, Omar and Tiger put on a teasing act on Chris to show their identities as boys, their defiance toward the adults, and their resistance to the narrowly defined school literacy.   As indicated in the transcript above, after hearing Mrs. BrownÕs question to Chris, both Omar and Tiger turned to Chris and started smiling at him. Omar was sitting in the same row with Chris, and with Mirlande sitting between them. Omar actually moved his chair back to free up some space so that he could turn sideway in order to look at Chris directly. Tiger was sitting in the front row, and after Mrs. Brown posed her questions, he turned back and started to smile at Chris too, just like Omar was doing. Both of them knew that Chris was into reading, and they were trying to tease him and pressure him to stop him from saying that he loved reading. They were probably trying to signal to Chris that they were male students, if they two were telling the class they boys did not like reading, Chris should show solidarity with them as a group, and he should not confirm Mrs. Brown and the internÕs statement.   !!!199 Their teasing act can also be interpreted as friendly teasing, and they were just trying to show that they were ÒcoolÓ because they were not into reading, and they wanted to just tease the Chris the reader. In this sense, they were performing their masculinity through showing their dislike of reading by teasing Chris the Reader. For Omar and Tiger, reading was both a gendered and a schoolish practice in conflict with their masculinity work. To be a boy, you need to not show too much interest in academic work, and actually you need to be rebellious against academic work sometimes. Their teasing act was carried out in a friendly way because when Omar said Òthose are most disgusting books,Ó he was smiling at Chris, which indicated that he was speaking with a playful frame and should not be taken seriously. More importantly, this playful frame served the performance of his masculinity. However, this frame was misinterpreted by the student teacher, as we will see in my analysis in the next section. This gendered notion of reading might be also related to the differences between the ways that boys and girls in this ESL classroom were engaging with language learning and reading. As we learn from Chapter 3, girls in general were demonstrating a higher level of language proficiency in this classroom. As indicated in Stanza 5 and Stanza 6, both Valentina and Akira said that they liked reading or they had to read. The differences of their language proficiency and their seemingly different investment in reading might have also prompted the boys to put on the teasing to perform their masculinity.  Dichotomizing Reader Identities Stanza 20: ÒIf YouÕre a Reader, Be Proud of That YouÕre a ReaderÓ  290 ST: ((Signaling to Mrs. B that she would like to speak)) 291 Mrs. B: Yeah. 293 ST:  If youÕre a reader  294 Or if youÕre trying to be a reader 295 Be proud of that youÕre a reader.  296 Be proud that you actually want to read   !!!200 297 If youÕre a reader  298 Because that takes you places.  299 It really does. 300 Mrs. B: ThatÕs a really good point.  Stanza 21: ÒTheyÕre Not Much a Reader ThemselvesÓ  301 ST: So, Chris, be proud of youÕre a reader  302 In spite of anyone else says anything  303 It doesnÕt matter to what you read  304 If that person makes it funny  305 Half those persons tease you  306 That you read  307 That theyÕre not much a reader themselves.  308 Mrs. B: Right. 309 ST: So be proud that you read!  310 Be proud of it!  311 Keep trying!   Stanza 22: ÒBecause ThereÕs Kind of CultureÓ  312 Mrs. B: ThatÕs such a good point, XX (internÕs name).  313 Because because thereÕs kind of culture  314 In our school and in our society  315 Of like ÒYeah, No. Really?! BOOKS? Err:::.Ó  316 You know,  317 ThereÕs a little bit of attitude  318 ThatÕs the cool attitude to have.  319 Right?  320 You know what IÕm saying.  321 Omar: No. Everyone reads.  322 Mirlande: Everyone reads in America.  323 Mrs. B: What? Everyone reads in America? Hmm:::    In these stanzas, reader identities were dichotomized into readers and non-reader by the student teacher (ST) (in Stanza 21, Lines 301-311), whose stance was affirmed by Mrs. Brown (in both Line 300 and Line 312). The student teacher, an African American female in her early 20s, was a teacher candidate majoring in English education with a minor in TESOL endorsement. She was doing her senior-year, semester-long placement in Mrs. BrownÕs classroom, spending two hours each week observing and tutoring her students. Although the student teacher did not  !!!201 have the same authority as Mrs. Brown, as an adult with the becoming identity as a teacher she had the power to shape the conversation with the students. She was sitting in a chair in the front of the classroom, folding her arms across her chest and leaning back against the back of the chair. Her posture and tone of her voice also indicated that she was claiming authority and legitimacy when speaking.  In Stanza 20 from Line 293-299, the student teacher voiced her support to students who wanted to read by saying Òif youÕre a reader, or if youÕre trying to be a reader, be proud that you actually want to read if youÕre a reader because that takes you places.Ó Although she used the general plural form of the second person pronoun Òyou,Ó it seemed that she was speaking to Chris to say that he should not be bothered by other peopleÕs teasing, hinting that she did not appreciate Omar and Tiger making fun of Chris when he said he liked reading in Stanza 18. In Line 301 she made it clear that she was voicing her support to Chris Ð ÒSo, Chris, be proud of youÕre a reader.Ó She went on further to call out that Òit doesnÕt matter to what you read if that person makes it funny; half those persons tease you that you read, that theyÕre not much a reader themselves.Ó   While the student teacher affirmed ChrisÕs reading practices and his reader identity, she, unfortunately, held an essentialist views toward reading, and dichotomized the category of readers in the classroom into ÒreadersÓ and Ònon-readers.Ó By saying Òhalf those persons tease you that you read, that theyÕre not much a reader themselves,Ó she positioned students like Omar and Tiger as non-readers. Even though she did not mention the names of the two boys, her use of the pronouns ÒthatÓ (in Line 304), ÒthoseÓ (in Line 305), ÒtheyÓ (in Line 307), and ÒthemselvesÓ (in Line 307) positioned the boys as in an Òopposition group,Ó and excluded them from the category of students who read.   !!!202  However, as I explained in previous section, interpreting Omar and TigerÕs teasing of Chris as an indicator that they were not readers, or they did not read, failed to recognize that the two boys were performing their masculinity through their act of teasing, which did not necessarily mean that they did not read. It seems that they were teasing Chris because his conformity to the school required reading was not Òcool,Ó because conformity and obedience were not associated with being masculine. The student teacher misinterpreted the performative nature of identity in this social context. This misdiagnosis of the studentsÕ behavior, coupled with her essentialist views on reader and reading practices, led to her lecturing the students and further perpetuating the dichotomy of ÒreadersÓ and Ònon-readers.Ó      Dichotomizing students into ÒreadersÓ and Ònon-readersÓ was also problematic, because, as we have seen from how Omar talked about his reading interest, and how Tiger was invested in reading but was misidentified, putting students into arbitrary categories of readers missed the rich reading practices that they were engaging outside of school. This discursive construction of students identities into someone who was either motivated to read, or someone who was just not motivated to read, also failed to recognize the fact that students might have different notions of reading, and they also read multimodal materials other than just print and chapter books.   Not surprisingly though, students voiced their disagreement of putting them into non-reader identity category. Both Omar and Mirlande said, Òeveryone readsÓ In Line 321 and Line 322.  Reading Instruction for Immigrant Learners: Challenges, Possibilities and Complexities That morning at the end of the class discussion, Mrs. Brown reached a compromise with the students Ð she decided that each day in class they were going to read the novel together and  !!!203 finish the reading questions in class. The change was made because several students expressed their preference to read together as a group. Mrs. Brown also made another decision. Because the novel was too long, in order to finish reading the text within the planned instructional time, she decided that they were not going to read the book. Instead, she printed a version of the novel by chapter and highlighted some of the texts for the students to read.  These changes did not solve the reading problem; rather the situation became even more challenging. Students became more frustrated. It was getting hard for both the students and Mrs. Brown as the semester went on. Mrs. Brown said she just wanted to get over with it so that she could move on to the next instructional unit. In this section I analyze one aspect of her teaching that created the deadlock and discuss the insights I gained from working with Mrs. Brown on a collaborative reading project, which I planned to somehow influence her reading instruction.  Fragmented Texts and Frustrated Readers The February of 2015 I also found it getting hard for me to be a participant in the second hour in Mrs. BrownÕs classroom. What I saw as the challenge was that some of the studentsÕ disengagement with the reading activities and homework might be attributable to Mrs. BrownÕs reading instruction, which reflected (Street, 1984, 1995, 2005) the autonomous model of literacy instruction that was neither attentive to the studentsÕ identities or the ideological nature of literacy practices. Her decision to use printed copy of highlighted excerpts from the novel further frustrated the students.   In order to solve the level of difficulty of the novel, and to ensure that the class finished reading in class, Mrs. Brown decided to not use the book any more. Instead, she located a digital copy of the book, highlighted sections of the texts that she thought was important, and printed the highlighted text for class use. The highlighted texts simply corresponded to the reading  !!!204 handout that she created. The majority of the reading comprehension questions took the questions out of the contexts and just focused on understanding the meaning of vocabulary, the meaning of sentences with figurative speeches, or answering questions related to the specific details. However, the highlighted texts became fragmented texts, which created even more comprehension challenges for students. In class students were just asked to read the highlighted texts, they were frustrated and just spent their time searching for the answers, from the fragmented pieces of frustrating words.  A Collaborative Reading Project: Possibilities and Complexities  It would also be a misrepresentation of Mrs. Brown if we just focus on this challenge of her reading practices. On many criteria Mrs. Brown was a devoted teacher who was committed to help her students succeed. She held high expectations for her students and created after school tutoring programs to provide additional homework support for her students. As the Òhome roomÓ teacher for ESL students at Academic High, she was everything for them. She had to modified  the language of the exams and quizzes that content classroom teachers sent to her for ESL students to take in her classroom. And she had to be the counselor for her students and to work with their parents to figure out the best course schedules. She was simply overstretched.  However, Mrs. BrownÕs reading instruction was not attentive to the studentsÕ interest, their language proficiency level, their identities, and their out-of-school practices. In the spring of 2015 I initiated a collaborative reading project with Mrs. Brown. I was teaching a childrenÕs literature course at a university and I was using a graphic novel in my course The Arrival, which is a graphic novel by Shan Tan, an Australian artist and writer. The book was created with themes of immigration and dislocation through surrealist drawing without any texts. I approached Mrs. Brown and asked her if she would be willing to use the book in her classroom,  !!!205 and her students and my students in my college course could work on a collaborative project. After several meetings, Mrs. Brown and I worked on this collaborative project. She used the book in her middle school classroom, and our classes both read the book before we met at her middle school classroom to work on one class session during which my students worked with her  students to write a letter to the author about their appreciation of the book and the connections they made with the book in relation to their familyÕs stories in migrating to another country. In the end, Mrs. Brown was very excited that her middle school students loved the book, and she decided to use the book in her class at Academic High as well.  In the summer of 2015 Mrs. Brown and I met in a caf” to catch up with our summer stories. I asked her how the book went in the high school and she said,  So, they just got into it. Some surprised me. David surprised me, like how much he got into it because his family is artistic. And I guess I shouldnÕt be surprised. It just É he really picked up some images that resonated with him and appreciated the details in the photos that I didnÕt get to see. And Zaina and Valentina, during some of the exploration of the bookÕs background, because those two were so social they just talked talked talked about it and they stayed on topic! I was happy to see that too. It was another surprise because both Zaina and Valentina, it is easy for them to get off to their friends or boys but they didnÕt at all. They stayed with the topic and engaged, and they also noticed something they noticed but I didnÕt notice there were subplot. I did not remember which one it was some little subplot you could see through the pictures. I said, ÒReally? I didnÕt even see that.Ó   I havenÕt been able to find any literature that could connect to every single person. Students with minimal English could connect to it. XX and XX in the middle school, and some students who sometimes with the literature and chapter books had no barriers. I love the literature with no barriers. So that was fun. I love the ways who werenÕt in my class. I had a student who used to be in my classroom last year and he exited this semester. And he came back for testing the WIDA test. He finished his test early one day, I gave him a copy of the book to look at. He just freaked it out and he loved it so much. He asked me to borrow it and he took a copy and went back to his six grade homeroom and his teacher contacted me and just pulled me aside after a meeting to say that this kid is on fire about that book. He just shared the book with the kids in his homeroom and all the American kids in his homeroom well how this story resonated with him and how look at the face on the character itÕs just the way my family came. When we came here I just think wow this is somebody who was even not in my class and it clicked with him because I really never had a book that clicked so much with people. That surprised me  !!!206 because it was so the opposite of my initial reaction I am so dependent on the written words for my learning and my engagement that to have no written words I think I told you I searched searched searched for a cheat website that would tell the story just makes me not sweat through what happened in the surrealistic images, and itÕs so different for them, and they didnÕt have that at all, so it was really great. So I think that you know just they connect and their parents connect you know it helps them to feel that you know that I respect their heritage, their background, and their struggles I guess primarily hmmm for that reason, just the limitless possibility for me to do it in terms of reading É    The book itself in isolation doesnÕt have much for reading literacy except the readings I gave them to provide background, I mean thatÕs what I think. I like to hear your impression or your thoughts on this. For specifically for reading maybe one goal that would benefit some students who just had a negative impression about books all together like Omar and Tiger, for instance, just really did not like to open up a book to read for pleasure, but, maybe this can, because the language is gone, maybe their approach to books can be just a little more positive now they have. So that is always a goal of mine to make reading fun and successful and enjoyable, so this is breaking through that barrier, I think, so thatÕs good. But then in term of just approaching reading, and reading analytically, and bringing up the skills that I try to teach to figure out vocabulary from context, reading for the gist with each segment, that interacting with the text and talking with that, all that they can get is from doing background readings.     As Mrs. Brown articulated in the quotes above, using the book made her realize that it is possible to choose a book that could connect to students with different language proficiency levels and make students feel they are respected and recognized. However, Mrs. Brown still holds a rather narrow view of reading and literacy, thinking that a graphic novel could not offer opportunities for students to read analytically. And her definition of Òreading analyticallyÓ was still representative of the autonomous model of literacy.  Summary In this chapter I analyzed the three young menÕs reading practices and reading identities. Through an analysis of a classroom discussion and Mrs. BrownÕs reading practices, I illustrated how Omar, Tiger, and Chris positioned themselves and were positioned as readers in the classroom interaction, how their performance of reading identities was connected to their  !!!207 masculine identities and their gendered notion of reading, and how reader identities were created and constructed for each of these three young men.   My analysis shows that reading to these multilingual young men is not simply a cognitive activity that develops their English proficiency; rather, it is social and ideological. It serves as a way of enacting their social identities as young men and learners. They performed their masculine identities and learner identities in social spaces by constructing their connection to, or detachment from, reading. In other words, their investment in reading is informed by their identity negotiation of what it means for them as young men in different social spaces. Their connection and their performed (dis)engagement with reading illustrated Bonny NortonÕs (1997, 2013) concept of investment in language learning. Instead of using motivation to categorize learners, Norton uses the concept investment to argue for a different theoretical stance toward positioning students in relation to academic work. Norton argues that the concept of motivation, developed in the cognitive and psychological research of learning, fails to recognize the impact of social factors and social relations on learnersÕ engagement with learning. Through analyzing how gendered social relations constrained the adult female immigrant learnersÕ access to opportunities of using and learning English, Norton illustrates that, although all the adult learners in her study were highly motivated to learn English, they sometimes were not invested in speaking English because the power relations they were embedded in often rendered them into powerless positions to speak, or they shut down in those social contexts. Therefore, the concept of investment shifts the deficit views towards learners to viewing learners as agents constrained and/or empowered by social relations. These three young menÕs engagements in reading also illustrated this concept. Although they were engaged in out-of-school literacy practice, they were  !!!208 not invested in the reading in the ESL class because the reading instruction did not connect to their identities.   Second, these young men view reading as a social practice to enact the sense of self students felt was demanded or appropriate for a particular time, space, or relationship (Moje, 2004), particularly in relation to their racial and ethnic identities. In addition, reading and writing those texts served as a means of gaining information needed to enact or develop new identities.  Third, my analysis indicates that the socially constructed notions of reading in this ESL classroom and the school are the forces that has promoted the boysÕ performance of reader identities. Their investment in reading is complexly connected to their identities, language proficiencies, social positions, as well as the pedagogies of reading instruction. For these multilingual young men, their investment in reading needs to be understood in the light of how these different factors collectively contribute to their Òlove and hateÓ reading in a new language, rather than to establish a single narrative, or a causal relation between one factor and their investment in reading.  In addition, through analyzing the reading instruction in the ESL classroom in relation to the boysÕ responses to reading activities, I illustrated that autonomous reading instruction tends to reduce readings to basic and decontextualized reading comprehension practices, which leads to studentsÕ de-investment in reading in the classroom. This autonomous view of reading, coupled with the disconnect between school literacy instruction and the young menÕs outside school literacy practices, further perpetuated their ÒcrisisÓ in reading. Therefore, the ultimately goal of this study is to problematize the notion of reading and literacy promoted by school, and argue for a more inclusive view of literacy or multiliteracy for immigrant learners.    !!!209 CHAPTER 6  PEDAGOGY, CONTROL, AND MASCULINITIES A key step in understanding gender in school is to Òthink institutionally,Ó É As with corporations, workplaces, and the state, gender is embedded in the institutional arrangements through which a school functions: division of labor, authority patterns, and so on. The totality of these arrangements is a schoolÕs gender regime.  (Connell, 1996, p. 213)  Connell (1996) argues that school like other social institutions is a gender regime that reproduces and enforces social norms around gender and masculinity. He lists several types of practices in schools that makes masculinities, referring to them as Òmasculinity vortices,Ó or forces that shape masculinities in schools. He argues that curriculum, sports, and disciplines are the main vortices that enforce gender lines and construct masculine hierarchy. In this chapter I examine another form of masculinity vortices, pedagogy, to explain how the ways teachers at Academic High organize their teaching reinforced, contested, or challenged the social norms of gender and masculinity.  Like students, adults in the school such as teachers, administrators, school policemen and security guards, and volunteers also play an important role in shaping masculinities in Academic High. They do so both outside and inside their classrooms. During class breaks, teachers walk out of their classrooms, standing along the walls greeting students and monitoring the busy hallway while exchanging anecdotes with colleagues. They shout out to students who are running or fooling around to ensure they move along the crowds safely to their next classroom. Principals and the school policemen often walk out to the open area in front of the library, monitoring the hustling crowds in the Locker Common area, where all the studentsÕ lockers are. The adultsÕ gaze and monitoring at the public spaces in the school control studentsÕ behaviors their language, their bodies, and their ways of doing gender.   !!!210 Inside their classrooms teachers deploy additional means of control. Pedagogy, at the intersection between curriculum, teacher, and students, is one of the invisible tools that teachers use to manage masculinity, either consciously or unconsciously. Here I take a loose definition of pedagogy, referring to it broadly as the way that teachers organize teaching in relation to curriculum and students. In this sense, how teachers structure and organize teaching is not value- free, rather it is infused with cultural values, attitudes, and identities. This invisible aspect of teaching is often referred as the hidden curriculum (Jackson, 1968), through which inequality, such as racism, sexism, and class bias, is sustained or challenged. In this chapter I examine how the way that three teachers organized their teaching perpetuated issues of masculinity in their classroom and in Academic High.  During my fieldwork, in addition to time in the ESL classes, I also spent time in subject area classrooms observing how Chris, Omar, and Tiger were engaging learning in spaces outside their ESL classroom. As I was interested in understanding how these minoritized young men positioned themselves as learners and male students, and how they went about learning or not learning the content in these classrooms, I also became increasingly intrigued by how teachers in these classrooms performed their identities and implemented their pedagogy in their classrooms. Their pedagogy became the sites of their teacher identity performance. I focus on analyzing the pedagogies of three teachers, Mrs. Brown, Ms. Morris, and Mr. Ford. My analysis of their pedagogies and their identity performance indicated that each of them resorted to different strategies in response to maleness and masculinities in school. Their pedagogies and their teaching practices are influenced by their ideas of control and discipline, which in turn has contributed to the gender regime and the reproduction of masculinity hierarchy in the schools.   !!!211 Ms. Morris, a mathematics teacher in their early 40s, and was teaching Algebra I and Algebra II during the 2014-2015 school year. Both Chris and Omar were taking Algebra I with her: Chris was in her fifth hour and Omar in her sixth hour. Mr. Ford was in his late 40s, and was teaching Geometry and Calculus. Tiger was taking Geometry with him in his sixth hour class, although the majority of the students were sophomores. Tiger was one of the few freshmen that were recommended to take Geometry instead of Algebra I because he excelled in mathematics in middle school, thanks to his mathematics classes taken in his home country. I started to observe Ms. Morris and Mr. FordÕs classes from December 2014, at least twice each week.  I decided to focus on these two teachers and Mrs. Brown because their pedagogies and identities showed interesting contrasts. Right after I extended my fieldwork to Ms. MorrisÕs and Mr. FordÕs classrooms, I noticed the differences between their teaching practice. They each organized their teaching differently in responding to the ÒboysÕ problems,Ó but at the same time all contributed to the perpetuation of the masculinity regime in the school. My interest in viewing the pedagogy was to see how the regimes in which these young men were preforming their identities were being constructed and controlled. The teachersÕ pedagogies were not only teaching the subject, but masculinities, and as people in positions of power in the school, they were not only performing their teacher identities but constructing school notions of masculinity. Their teaching practices, therefore, created both a curriculum space and a social space for students in their classrooms, which impacted how students experienced the curriculum and engaged learning. It was within these worlds that these young men were negotiating their own identities. I engage analysis of the teachersÕ pedagogy not to evaluate their teaching, even though their teaching will be under scrutiny in the process of analysis; rather, the goal of this analysis is  !!!212 to explain how their ways of organizing teaching were shaped by the social norms and the institutional power they were assigned to and within which they were speaking. These teachers, by many standards, were teachers who cared for their studentsÕ learning, despite the limits they demonstrated in their teaching. Therefore, it is not my intention that the analysis be read as a critique of their teaching. My ultimate goal is to theorize how pedagogy is also a gender and masculinity regime in the classrooms and the school. My decision to analyze the pedagogy was also informed by the theoretical and analytical lenses that I have been using in this study to look at how different spaces are shrouded in different type of discourses that shape the space, as well as are shaped by the individualsÕ discursive practices and actions in the space. In other words, space is both constituted through social relations and constitutive of them (Lefebvre, 1991; Massey, 2005). In this sense, I conceptualize the classroom as both a learning space and a social space. My goal of analyzing how these three teachers constructed notions of gender and masculinity through their teaching practices is then to explain how their teaching shaped a notion of gender and masculinity out of the physical space of their classroom. Understanding the formation and construction of the social space of a classroom is important as we know, from the analysis in previous chapters, that students learn about how to be a student, an immigrant young man, and a reader from those constructed notions in their classrooms. How and what kinds of notions of gender and masculinity that teachers construct in their classroom matters too, as it shapes the boys and the girls inside the classroom.     !!!213 ÒI Take Control of a Situation Pretty Easily.Ó: Participant Example, Teacher Control, and Constructing ÒProblem BoysÓ  ÒYouÕre our school mom,Ó Zaina said to Mrs. Brown one morning in class, when Valentina made Mrs. Brown upset. What happened was that Valentina was talkative, and that day Mrs. Brown moved her to a seat which was separated from the rest of the class. Valentina obeyed, but said to Mrs. Brown in a joking way with a laughing voice, ÒYouÕre mean, Mrs. Brown.Ó Zaina comforted Mrs. Brown telling her she loved her because she was their Òschool mom.Ó As I explained in previous chapters, Mrs. Brown was everything for these students in Academic High. She was their Òschool mom.Ó  Mrs. Brown was also a tough Òschool mom,Ó particularly for the less obedient students. As I have illustrated in Chapter 4, she asked Tiger to step out of the classroom to the hallway when his stylized speech was unfortunately misinterpreted. In Chapter 5, she controlled the class discussion to frame the reading problem in the classroom as a result of the studentsÕ fault. The behavior contract that she asked Tiger and his mother to sign was an ultimate example of her control of students. In this section I analyze a section of classroom interaction to show both her discursive performance of a controlling teacher identity and her enacting the controlling and tough Òschool momÓ identity in the process of teaching.     I chose to analyze this classroom episode because, first, it illustrated another instance of identity performance in the process of teaching through the speech act of participant example (Wortham, 1994, 2006). Different from what I examined how Tiger performed his masculine identities through participant example in Chapter 4, I present a case of how Mrs. Brown performed her dominating and controlling teacher identity in the process of teaching the content. Second, this classroom episode also included her enactment of her identity through both the way  !!!214 she structured the classroom interaction and the way she handled a classroom ÒproblemÓ involved Tiger. Lastly, this classroom added further detail about the process of social construction of the so-called Òproblem boys.Ó In this classroom episode Tiger was again ordered by Mrs. Brown to step out of the classroom. The analysis here further illustrates the troubling and problematic process of how he was rendered into a problem student. This classroom interaction was from Mrs. BrownÕs third hour class on September 17, 2015. At that time, Chris had left the ESL classes. Omar and Tiger were only taking the third hour class with Mrs. Brown. Her class enrollment increased dramatically to twenty-two students. At that time Mrs. Brown just moved to the Craft Arts Classroom, a classroom at a corner of the school building. The size of the classroom was larger than the other regular classroom, and it also had three side rooms. Mrs. Brown had to raise her voice to teach in this big class. Although voice was not my major analytical concern here, the volume and the feature of her voice did matter in the classroom. Her voice was tenser, more assertive, and more forceful. In this sense, her voice formed a different soundscape in her classroom than that of Ms. MorrisÕs classroom, as my analysis of the latter shows. In addition, the physical arrangement of the desks also contributed to the challenge of teaching. In the Craft Arts Classroom, the desks were fixed to the floor, and were all facing backward, because the tops of the desks were all slanted down to the direction of the whiteboard, which meant that students had to sit between their desks and the whiteboard, where Mrs. Brown stood. Therefore, when they were doing individual work at their desks, they had to sit at their desk with their back towards the whiteboard. When Mrs. Brown was teaching, they needed to turn around to face to the whiteboard. As I analyze below, this physical make-up of the classroom also created much problem.   !!!215 !!Figure 11: ESL Academic Vocabulary Instructional Slides Ð ÒAssertÓ  !!!216 In this class Mrs. Brown was teaching her students the word Òassert,Ó which was shown on the two instructional slides below. The transcript documented about ten minutes of the  beginning part of the third hour classroom interaction in which Mrs. Brown was teaching the first slide, the pronunciation, definition, noun forms, and two example sentences with Òassert.Ó   Episode: ÒassertÓ  [ESL, third hour, 2015-09-17, The Craft Arts Classroom]  1 Mrs. Brown:  Okay. All right. Everybody repeat the word, assert.  2 Class: Assert (Just a few students repeating after Ms. Brown) 3 Mrs. Brown: Everybody 4 Class:  Assert 5 Mrs. Brown: Okay. Just the girls as loudly as you can, assert.  6 Girls: Assert 7 Mrs. Brown: Just the boys.  8 Boys: Assert 9 Mrs. Brown: Oh the boys win that competition. All right assert is a verb. What do we  10 mean by a verb? Omar. WhatÕs a verb? 11 Omar: Action. 12 Mrs. Brown: An action. Something you do. So if you assert yourself, youÕre doing  13 something. What does it mean? One meaning is to Òbehave forcefully, to  14 exercise your power and influence in an obvious way.Ó So::::: an  15 example of that would be to you walk into a party and you say, ÒHello  16 everyone. IÕm here.Ó You kind of push yourself into the party in a  17 powerful open kind of out there way. All right the second definition  18 which you also need to copy is Òto state clearly and strongly that  19 something is true.Ó So, if someone says to me, ÒyouÕre not the teacher in  20 this room.Ó I would say, ÒNo, IÕm the teacher in the room. Look at the  21 schedule it says ÔMrs. Brown.Õ My name is Mrs. Brown. IÕm the  22 teacher.Ó So, I am asserting to tell you something is true. Okay.  23 So, letÕs repeat this word. This is noun form. Assertiveness.  24 Class: Assertiveness (scattered voice) 25 Mrs. Brown: Everyone. 26 Class: Assertiveness (more students repeating) 27 Mrs. Brown: Okay. And assertion. This one means the quality that someone has. I  28 have a lot of assertiveness, and when IÕm in a situation, I take a  29 leadership role, I take control of a situation pretty easily. But somebody  30 who doesnÕt have a lot of these quality of assertiveness. If there is a  31 situation they usually stand back and they let other people be the the  32 leaders or the organizers or in control. I think Omar has the  33 assertiveness. When we have to do something in the class, usually Omar  34 if IÕm a little bit not sure what to do, Omar would stand up and say   !!!217 35 ÒListen listen listen. I know the solution. I know what we can do.Ó IÕve  36 seen this happen. Anyone knows Omar would have seen that a lot of  37 times. Am I right?  38 Boys: Yeah. (Several boys agreeing) 39 Mrs. Brown: Yes. He has that assertiveness. Okay. But somebody who just says, ÒI  40  donÕt know. I donÕt know. DonÕt ask me. DonÕt ask me. I donÕt know.Ó  41 That person is lacking assertiveness. ItÕs not to say thatÕs bad. ItÕs just  42 different. Okay. And then assertion is noun meaning the things that you  43 say is true. I could say that my assertion is that I am the teacher in this  44 room. Or a twenty-five-year oldÕs assertion is that he is old enough to  45 buy a beer if he wants to. ThatÕs the thing that he says is the assertion.  46 Make sense? Okay. Do I have a volunteer to read the first sentence?  47 Every hand should be up. Because as you know that brings energy into  48 our class that shows youÕre engaged in the class. But IÕd still call on you  49 if your hand is not up because I do cold calling. But I like the energy  50 seeing your hands up. Tiger, Nelson, Catherine8, like all hands up. All  51 right. Akira.    52 Akira: ÒHe reached out to shake hands before the job interview. This showed  53 his assertiveness.Ó 54 Mrs. Brown: Okay. Second one. Now before we do the second one. The first one.  55 Does that go with the first definition or the second one? Tiger? Answer  56 the question, please.  57 Tiger: What question?  58 Mrs. Brown: Yeah. ThatÕs what I thought. Hmmm. WeÕre gonna have to change seats.  59 Tiger: What? I didnÕt do anything.  60 Mrs. Brown: You werenÕt listening. You were listening to Omar. So what weÕre  62 gonna do here? IÕm gonna have to move the desk. All right. Tiger, for  63 now, come up here. Bring everything yours up here. This is where  64 youÕre going to stay for all of the third hour Today. Okay. This one goes  65 with one or two? Show me with your fingers. One or two. This sentence  66 goes with Òbehave forcefullyÓ or Òstate clearly and strongly that  67 something is true.Ó Exactly. Number one. Okay. Now Allen9. Read the  68 second sentence.  69 Allen: The prisoner (.) 70 Mrs. Brown: Asserted 71 Allen: Asserted his innocence 72 Mrs. Brown: Innocence meaning he didnÕt do the bad thing.  73 Allen: Even thought 74 Mrs. Brown: Even though  75 Allen: The evidence [i:videns] 76 Mrs. Brown: The evidence or the proof 77 Allen: (     ) 78 Mrs. Brown: suggested  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!8 Nelson and Catherine were freshmen in the 2015-2016 school year. 9 Allen was a freshman in the 2015-2016 school year.!! !!!218 79 Allen: suggested that he was guilt. 80 Mrs. Brown: Very good. So, this prisoner says what? Everybody read.  81 Class: IÕm innocent.  82 Mrs. Brown: IÕm innocent. I didnÕt kill that victim. Okay. Or I didnÕt steal that  83 computer. All right. He said I didnÕt do it. He asserted that he didnÕt do  84 it. (Staring at Tiger for ten second; Tiger sitting with his back to the  86 whiteboard) 87 Tiger: What? 88 Mrs. Brown: IÕm teaching.  89 Tiger: So what? I didnÕt say anything.  90 (Silence of two second) 91 Mrs. Brown: Okay. Next slide. Tiger, step out to the hall. All right (to the class). Step  92 into the hall please. An assertive person often gets what he or she wants  93 or makes his position clear by doing what. So we talked about how  94 Omar is an assertive person and IÕm an assertive person. If you want to  95 get something you want, how do you do it? What do you do? Do you  96 stand in the back in the room and just kind of wait for your teacher to  97 notice you or wait for your boss to notice you? Or what do you do to  98 make what you want clear? Is it possible for you to lead for a minute or  99 two so I just talk to Tiger? 100 Kongji: Sure. Yeah.  !Participant Example and Performing Teacher Identity !In this extract of classroom discourse above Mrs. Brown was explaining the meaning of the academic vocabulary word Òassertiveness.Ó She used two examples in her elaboration of its meaning Ð herself (in Lines 27-30) and Omar (in Lines 32-39). For example, she said that ÒI have a lot of assertiveness, and when IÕm in a situation, I take a leadership role. I take control of a situation pretty easily.Ó Mrs. Brown used her own personality as an example to explain the meaning of the word Òassertiveness.Ó When she used ÒIÓ in her illustrative sentences, she performed her own identity through autobiographic narration, at the same time, she also achieved the goal of explaining the meaning of the word to the students. Therefore, Mrs. Brown-the-Example-in-the-Sentence and Mrs. Brown-the-Teacher-in-the-Classroom became the same person. In her use of this participant example, she also emphasized the value of being assertive and being able to take control of a situation.  !!!219 27 Mrs. Brown: Okay. And assertion. This one means the quality that someone has. I  28 have a lot of assertiveness, and when IÕm in a situation, I take a  29 leadership role. I take control of a situation pretty easily. But somebody  30 who doesnÕt have a lot of these quality of assertiveness. If there is a  31 situation they usually stand back and they let other people be the the  32 leaders or the organizers or in control. I think Omar has the  33 assertiveness. When we have to do something in the class, usually Omar  34 if IÕm a little bit not sure what to do, Omar would stand up and say  35 ÒListen listen listen. I know the solution. I know what we can do.Ó IÕve  36 seen this happen. Anyone knows Omar would have seen that a lot of  37 times. Am I right?  38 Boys: Yeah. (Several boys agreeing) 39 Mrs. Brown: Yes. He has that assertiveness. Okay. But somebody who just says, ÒI  40  donÕt know. I donÕt know. DonÕt ask me. DonÕt ask me. I donÕt know.Ó  41 That person is lacking assertiveness. ItÕs not to say thatÕs bad. ItÕs just  42 different. Okay. And then assertion is noun meaning the things that you  43 say is true. I could say that my assertion is that I am the teacher in this  44 room. Or a twenty-five-year oldÕs assertion is that he is old enough to  45 buy a beer if he wants to. ThatÕs the thing that he says is the assertion.  46 Make sense? Okay. Do I have a volunteer to read the first sentence?  47 Every hand should be up. Because as you know that brings energy into  48 our class that shows youÕre engaged in the class. But IÕd still call on you  49 if your hand is not up because I do cold calling. But I like the energy  50 seeing your hands up. Tiger, Nelson, Catherine, like all hands up. All  51 right. Akira.     In other contexts, Mrs. Brown had also articulated her controlling personality. For example, on day when the class was learning the word Òintrinsic,Ó there was one sentence starter Ð ÒAn intrinsic part of my personality is _______. I donÕt have to think about it, it just happens naturally.Ó When explaining the meaning of the sentence to her student, she again put herself into the narrative frame of the sentence starter and narrative her personality as out-going, friendly, but not patient.  An intrinsic part of my personality is being out-going and friendly. I donÕt have to concentrate on, ÒOkay. How can I come out myself and be more outgoing and more friendly today?Ó I never have to think about that. ItÕs natural in me. ItÕs built in. I was born that way. Now, there are other parts of me that are not intrinsic. IÕm not intrinsically patient. YouÕll all experienced. I lose my patience like that (snapping her fingers). So, thatÕs not a natural part of me. I have to work on that. Do you understand the difference?    !!!220 ÒEveryone, Repeat the Word.Ó: Pedagogy and Control of Attention and Body Mrs. BrownÕs controlling personality was enacted in her pedagogy in the form of rigid control of studentsÕ attention and their bodies. In the first episode, she was teaching students to pronounce the word Òassert.Ó Notice that she employed the technique of repetition drills that features the audio-lingual method of language teaching, which emphasizes the development of accuracy of language through imitation and drills, and teachers play the role of directing and control of studentsÕ language behavior (Larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011). Mrs. Brown ordered four rounds of repetition in Episode 1, and required all students to participate. She repeated this method of repetition when teaching students to say the noun form of the word Ð assertiveness, as shown in the transcript of Episode 2.  1 Mrs. Brown:  Okay. All right. Everybody, repeat the word, assert.  2 Class: Assert (Just a few students repeating after Ms. Brown) 3 Mrs. Brown: Everybody. 4 Class:  Assert. 5 Mrs. Brown: Okay. Just the girls as loudly as you can, assert.  6 Girls: Assert. 7 Mrs. Brown: Just the boys.  8 Boys: Assert. 9 Mrs. Brown: Oh the boys win that competition. All right assert is a verb. What do we  10 mean by a verb? Omar. WhatÕs a verb? 11 Omar: Action.   Episode 2: 23 So, letÕs repeat this word. This is noun form. Assertiveness.  24 Class: Assertiveness (Scattered voice) 25 Mrs. Brown: Everyone. 26 Class: Assertiveness (More students repeating)   In Episode three Mrs. Brown enacted another form of control over students Ð controlling their body. As illustrated in Lines 47-51, she required all the students to raise their hand in response to her call for volunteer to read the example sentence on the first slide. Her order over students for raising their hand was an illustration of teacher-student power differentials. And  !!!221 asymmetric power reached every corner of the space of the classroom, weaving a rigid web of control and monitoring. As we see from the transcript below, Òevery hand should be upÓ (in Line 47), ÒBut IÕd still call on you if your hand is not up because I do cold callingÓ (in Lines 49-50), and ÒTiger, Nelson, Catherine, like all hands upÓ (in Lines 50-51), these orders illustrated her demand for attention from all students through controlling their body. Although this order applied to all students, my observation showed that it was the boys that received the most sanctions in the form of disciplining their bodies. Like illustrated in the next section, Mrs. Brown ordered Tiger to move to a different seat in order to control his body so that he could be Òengaged.Ó 39 Mrs. Brown: Yes. He has that assertiveness. Okay. But somebody who just says, ÒI  40  donÕt know. I donÕt know. DonÕt ask me. DonÕt ask me. I donÕt know.Ó  41 That person is lacking assertiveness. ItÕs not to say thatÕs bad. ItÕs just  42 different. Okay. And then assertion is noun meaning the things that you  43 say is true. I could say that my assertion is that I am the teacher in this  44 room. Or a twenty-five-year oldÕs assertion is that he is old enough to  45 buy a beer if he wants to. ThatÕs the thing that he says is the assertion.  46 Make sense? Okay. Do I have a volunteer to read the first sentence?  47 Every hand should be up. Because as you know that brings energy into  48 our class that shows youÕre engaged in the class. But IÕd still call on  49 you if your hand is not up because I do cold calling. But I like the  50 energy seeing your hands up. Tiger, Nelson, Catherine, like all hands  51 up. All right. Akira.     ÒTiger, For Now, Come Up Here.Ó Confronting and Controlling Male Body 54 Mrs. Brown: Okay. Second one. Now before we do the second one. The first one.  55 Does that go with the first definition or the second one?  56 Tiger? Answer the question, please.  57 Tiger: What question?  58 Mrs. Brown: Yeah. ThatÕs what I thought. Hmmm. WeÕre gonna have to change seats.  59 Tiger: What? I didnÕt do anything.  60 Mrs. Brown: You werenÕt listening. You were listening to Omar. So what weÕre  62 gonna do here? IÕm gonna have to move the seat. All right. Tiger, for  63 now, come up here. Bring everything yours up here. This is where  64 youÕre going to stay for all of the third hour Today. Okay. This one goes  65 with one or two? Show me with your fingers. One or two. This sentence   !!!222 66 goes with Òbehave forcefullyÓ or Òstate clearly and strongly that  67 something is true.Ó Exactly. Number one. Okay. Now Allen. Read the  68 second sentence.  69 Allen: The prisoner (.) 70 Mrs. Brown: Asserted 71 Allen: Asserted his innocence 72 Mrs. Brown: Innocence meaning he didnÕt do the bad thing.  73 Allen: Even thought 74 Mrs. Brown: Even though  75 Allen: The evidence (pronounced as /i:videns/)  76 Mrs. Brown: The evidence or the proof 77 Allen: (     ) 78 Mrs. Brown: suggested  79 Allen: suggested that he was guilt. 80 Mrs. Brown: Very good. So, this prisoner says what? Everybody read.  81 Class: IÕm innocent.  82 Mrs. Brown: IÕm innocent. I didnÕt kill that victim. Okay. Or I didnÕt steal that  83 computer. All right. He said I didnÕt do it. He asserted that he didnÕt do  84 it. (Staring at Tiger for ten second; Tiger sitting with his back to the  86 whiteboard) 87 Tiger: What? 88 Mrs. Brown: IÕm teaching.  89 Tiger: So what? I didnÕt say anything.  90 (Silence of two second) 91 Mrs. Brown: Okay. Next slide. Tiger, step out to the hall. All right (to the class). Step  92 into the hall please. An assertive person often gets what he or she wants  93 or makes his position clear by doing what. So we talked about how  94 Omar is an assertive person and IÕm an assertive person. If you want to  95 get something you want, how do you do it? What do you do? Do you  96 stand in the back in the room and just kind of wait for your teacher to  97 notice you or wait for your boss to notice you? Or what do you do to  98 make what you want clear? Is it possible for you to lead for a minute or  99 two so I just talk to Tiger? 100 Kongji: Sure. Yeah.   In the interaction above, Mrs. Brown called on Tiger (in Line 56) to answer the question because she noticed him talking with Omar. Notice that Mrs. BrownÕs intention was not to check if Tiger understood the meaning of the word ÒassertivenessÓ in the first sentence on Slide 1 (see below) Ð ÒHe reached out to shake hands before the job interview.Ó Rather she was using the opportunity to check if he was off task, or she was using it as a way to bring TigerÕs attention back to the class, since she saw Tiger was talking with Omar, as she stated in Line 58 Ð ÒYeah.  !!!223 ThatÕs what I thought.Ó That sentence indicated that Mrs. Brown knew he was not paying attention. After Mrs. Brown said that she was going to move TigerÕs seat and move him to a different desk, Tiger became resistant and challenged her, ÒWhat? I didnÕt do anything.Ó In Lines 60, Mrs. Brown put Tiger on the spot publicly, telling him that ÒYou werenÕt listening. You were listening to Omar.Ó In Lines 62-63, she ordered Tiger to move to the teacherÕs desk, and bring all his stuff with him. Tiger turned back to his desk, beginning to collect his notebooks and bag.  The physical arrangement of the desks also contributed to constructing a space that was conducive to misunderstanding and tension in this classroom. As I previously explained, when students needed to access their desks, they had to sit with their back towards the whiteboard. After Mrs. Brown ordered Tiger to collect his things to move to the front, Tiger turned around to face his desk to pack. As we see in Line 84, when Mrs. Brown saw Tiger was sitting with his back to her, she paused teaching for ten seconds, staring at Tiger. Her long stare led to the rest of class all turning their eyes back on Tiger, who was unhappily collecting his materials in order to move to the front. After noticing all the class were staring at him, he moved his head backward, and said, Òwhat?Ó in Line 87. In Line 88, Mrs. Brown uttered a statement with a sullen voice, ÒIÕm teaching.Ó This statement though was not said to state a fact, rather she was blaming TigerÕs inappropriateness of turning his back on her. However, Tiger might have misinterpreted her tone, and said in Line 89, ÒSo what? I didnÕt say anything.Ó TigerÕs question seemed to say, ÒI was quiet now, but why did you pick at me.Ó The effect of TigerÕs question was direct confrontation with the teacher authority. After two second of silence, Mrs. Brown quickly moved on to the second slide, and asked Tiger to step into the hallway.  The starting and the escalation of this classroom conflict, as my analysis shows, was attributable to several factors Ð the challenge of the physical arrangement of desk in the  !!!224 classroom and the participantsÕ misinterpretation of each otherÕs utterance. However, Mrs. BrownÕs public confrontational approach to classroom management was one of the main reasons that led to the escalation of the conflict. At this time, TigerÕs identity as a Òproblem studentÓ had already solidified. As I have illustrated in Chapter 4, the materiality of language and discourses was exemplified in the social identification of Tiger as a problem boy, from being called out as ÒNot Serious,Ó to being misidentified as a Ònon-reader, and to being forced into the subject position of a problem student in the Behavior Contract.   Here, however, I need to connect my analysis of the construction of the Òproblem boyÓ identity for Tiger with my critique of the institutional discrimination at Academic High. As I have argued in Chapter 2, Mrs. BrownÕs students received unequal treatment in getting access to resources at the school. Both the school and the school district had not provided professional development for teachers on how to work with multilingual students in their classroom, as evidenced in the principal and the superintendentÕs words. And, Mrs. Brown had to switch her classroom for five times over the course of three years, and most of the spaces assigned to her were not conducive to teaching and learning. The institutionÕs neglect of these minoritized studentsÕ needs and rights, here in the form of unequal treatment in classroom assignment, was also responsible. The fixed desks were the handcuff of the violence of an institutionÕs discrimination. TigerÕs male body was stuck and punished by the restraining desks. He ÒdidnÕt do anything.Ó  ÒI Think I Learned Banter That I Do with The Boys.Ó: Math Curriculum and Pedagogy of Masculinity  When I asked the boys to rank their classes during my one-on-one interviews with them, both Omar and Chris told me that their favorite class was their Algebra I class. They also told me  !!!225 that Ms. Morris, the teacher of Algebra I, was their favorite teacher. The boys said that she was funny and cool. Omar said that she was cool because she allowed her students to listen to music when they were doing individual work. Listening to music could help him stay focused, he said. He said he liked her class also because math was easy for him. Chris also thought Ms. Morris was cool. He always went to her Excel Hours on Tuesday and Thursday mornings. Academic High had a study hall called Excel Hour every Tuesday and Thursday morning, and during the Excel Hour students could go to any teachers to get help on their homework or other assignments. Most of the time the majority of the ESL students stayed in Mrs. BrownÕs classroom to get help from Mrs. Brown, her para-pro, student teachers, and other adult volunteers in her classroom. However, Chris consistently went to Ms. MorrisÕs classroom for Excel Hours to get help with his math homework.   Ms. Morris was also a welcoming teacher to me. In December I started to contact teachers asking for their permission to observe their classes that the boys were attending. Ms. Morris was the only teacher who responded to my email inquiry at the first round. On my first visit to her classroom, she told me, Òyou can drop by any time you want.Ó At the time when I had to negotiate my access to other classrooms, her welcoming gesture and opening up her classroom for me was much appreciated. At the same time, her welcoming gestures also seemed to indicate that she was confident about her teaching.   I kept a schedule of regularly observing Ms. MorrisÕs afternoon classes, at least twice a week. Sometimes I observed them three or four times a week Ð after Mrs. BrownÕs ESL classroom, Ms. MorrisÕs classroom was the classroom that I spent the most time in. With more time in her classroom, I started to understand why the boys, like the majority of the students in Ms. MorrisÕs classroom, rated her as their favorite teacher. Ms. MorrisÕs fifth hour Algebra I  !!!226 class had 18 students, with 13 boys and 5 girls. In contrast, her sixth hour class had more girls than boys. Since I was able to observe her deliver the same lesson to these two different groups of students, I gradually noticed that she had a unique way of working with male students.   My analysis of Ms. MorrisÕs Algebra I curriculum, classroom interaction data, and interview data indicates that she established a bond with the male students in her classroom through creating sports-based math curriculum and through her bantering speech style. My analysis shows that what I call her pedagogy of masculinity created both opportunities and constraints. The sports-based math curriculum and her interactional style allowed her to enter masculine discourses with some of the loud boys and girls in her classroom. At the same time, they also unintentionally frustrated some. In other words, Ms. MorrisÕs pedagogy and curriculum played into the hegemonic masculinity in the school, which allowed some students to gain benefit from their hegemonic social positions. However, it further perpetuated the gender and masculinity regime in the classroom and the school.   In this section I first explain how Ms. Morris developed her teaching approach of using sports-based curriculum to engage male students in math classroom. I then move on to analyze the feature of speech style of bantering to illustrate how her use of language allowed her to enter the highly masculine discourses with the young men and girls in her classroom. I conclude the section with discussion on the affordance and constraints of the pedagogy of masculinity.  ÒIf IÕm in Charge of Making the Problems, They Are Usually Sports-based.Ó: Sports, Curriculum, and Pedagogy of Masculinity   On March 11 2015 Ms. Morris put a huge NCAA (The National Collegiate Athletic Association) Basketball Tournament Bracket up on the wall on the right hand side of the door. She asked her students to do their brackets too. She told me that she used to do Òtwo weeks on  !!!227 probability and statistics for March MadnessÓ in her Algebra II class. She said, ÒI would stop whatever we were doing, and I would just say, ÔHere you go. WeÕre doing something new.Õ We do computer stuff, predictions, statistics, graphs, and it was awesome, and I can do but not everyoneÕs into it. You know.Ó Although she still included sports-based activities in her instruction, she said, ÒYou know, things are different now. I used to have a lot of freedom. Now the four teachers do the same thing. ItÕs a little É on the same day É weÕre on the same page on the same day all Algebra I teachers, or Algebra II.Ó What Ms. Morris was referring to was that the mathematics department at Academic High had started to align their curriculum with the Common Core Standards three years ago. Although she felt she missed the freedom to do more sports-based activities, she liked the alignment and collegial support in the department from their weekly group meetings.    Getting her students to become interested in the bracket for the NCAA and using the predictions involved in creating the brackets for teaching probability and statistics was one example of Ms. MorrisÕs sports-based math curriculum. Although the math departmentÕs curriculum alignment initiative had limited her freedom of creating more sports-based curriculum, she told me that she was able to introduce some of the sports-related projects she had created to the team, and the teachers were using them in their own classrooms. For example, in her Algebra I class she asked her students to calculate the force they need to use to throw a ball into the air, and use the quadratics function to calculate the height and the distance it would travel. Another project that she created was to asked her students to use the mathematic concepts of linear function and quadratics function to participate in a bungee jump competition (using dolls) between her class and another math teacherÕs Algebra I class. The project asked their students to use rubber bands to create an elastic string, like a bungee rope, for the doll that they  !!!228 chose. And they then needed to calculate the rate of elasticity of their rubber bands when attached to their doll so that they could work out a function that they could use to figure out how many rubber bands they would need for their rope so that their doll could complete the scariest jump. The one with the closest distance to the floor of the gym won the competition.    In her Algebra II class, she asked her students to predict the chance of each basketball team in the NCAA winning their game, and put their numbers into an online website where they could further study the concept of binomial probability, or a tree diagram. She showed me the website she used for her Algebra II class. Ms. Morris: So I found this. This was Tuesday we started to talk about the bracket. I had the studentsÕ pool. They had to log in, about 70, and 70some. If you go to, look at this. If you go close, itÕs a tree diagram, a binomial probability. So, itÕs interactive. This is probability of having the Red Team10 winning their first game. You know Purple Team of course is 39.2. And you can follow them all the way through. They say zero percent to this. Yeah. If you click on a game, this is all the team that would fail this game. They already knocked out Blue Team. But I just found that was so cool so this is a tree diagram. We do tree diagrams in Algebra II. So I already talked about. WeÕre going to bring this back. IsnÕt that cool?! Anyway. IÕve never seen an interactive tree diagram like that before. So. Anyway.    Ms. Morris said that the sports-based math curriculum was one of the ways that she established connection with boys in her classroom. After the class session during which she talked with her students about the brackets, I asked her if she was consciously using sports-based activities in her class in order to keep the male students more engaged. She said yes. In the interaction below, Ms. Morris explained how she thought it was easy for her to connect with the female students in her classroom because of their gender. To connect with the male students, she used their shared interest in sports. As I was talking with Ms. Morris, one male student Christian walked into her classroom to get the exam paper from the class session that he missed earlier that day. Both my interaction with her and the interaction between Christian and her illustrate Ms. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!10 The teamÕs names are pseudonyms.  !!!229 MorrisÕs sports identity and her use of sports to build connections with her students, particularly the male students. 1 Kongji: Were you conscious about that when you were talking about sports in the  2  classroom you wanted it to be more connected to the boys?  3 Ms. Morris: Umm, itÕs certain É but I can connect with girls just because IÕm a girl. So we É  4   when they break up with their boyfriends they can come cry to me. And I É you  5   know I can understand that. When they get to select their prom dresses. Christian  6   your test is over there. ItÕs right by the creepy bÉ  7 Christian: I donÕt know if IÕm gonna take it. IÕm ready to cry. I lost three hundred and 8  twenty points. 9 Ms. Morris: Did you just see that? I was just freaking out.  10 Christian: Dude, I just lost three hundred and twenty points.  11 Ms. Morris: Me too. I had them go to the final four. 12 Christian: I have them to go to the champion game. 13 Ms. Morris: Woooooo. ((Loud voice and emphasis)) Yeah. YouÕre done! 14 Christian: At least Yellow TeamÕs going up. 15 Ms. Morris: I donÕt have that. Red TeamÕs winning. No.  16 Christian: Kentucky is É you know what it should be? It should be É with Yellow Team  17  on it. 18 Ms. Morris: ThatÕs why they played the game. You know. ItÕs up there. One of the bunches of  19  papers, and one of them has your name. Right there. YouÕre in the right spot. Just  20  find your name. So, you know, as a woman I can already connect with them and  21  at how many levels, ÒLook at your shirts. I like your ÉÓ you know. But with the  22  boys you donÕt have much. Because I have/love sports. I watch their games. I  23  LOVE it. Like I go to their football games, you know. ItÕs an easy connector with  24  the boys.     In the conversations above Ms. Morris both explained and performed her sports identity. In Line 3 she started to explain how she could connect with girls in her classroom because they were both female, and they could come to her if they experienced breakups or if they needed her opinions on their prom dresses. She explained that their shared gender allowed her to connect with girls in her classroom at many levels (in Line 20). To establish connection with the boys, she turned to her passion in sports, which, she said, is Òan easy connector.Ó  In addition to explaining her reasons for sports-based curriculum, Ms. Morris also discursively performed her sports identity as a basketball fan through the short exchanges with the male student Christian. As illustrated from the interactions above, in Line 5 when Ms. Morris  !!!230 directed Christian to get his exam paper, he shared with her that he lost his bet on the basketball game that finished that day in Line 7. The exchange between Christian and Ms. Morris indicated that they shared the same knowledge about the bracket and the basketball games. Their shared repertoire of sports, NCAA basketball games and brackets was illustrated through the way they maintained their conversation from Line 7 to Line 17. Christian did not even mention the basketball game, and just said he lost three hundred and twenty points, which Ms. Morris immediately and correctly interpreted as he was talking about the basketball game. Their interactional turns were also latched onto each other, which indicated that they knew how to keep the conversation going within the frame of talking about NCAA basketball bracket. Although I knew about Match Madness, I was not able to follow the names of the teams at the moment when they were talking. Neither did I feel that I could enter their discussion about the games and the team because I was an outsider to the community of sports fan that Ms. Morris and Christian constructed through their interactions about the recent development in the tournament.  In her explanations Ms. Morris also articulated her gendered notions about girlsÕ and boysÕ interests. For example, she referred to girls and their boyfriends, their prom dresses, and their shirts, etc. Her explanation also presupposed that all the boys like sports. It might be that she was influenced by my initial question in the conversation, as my question asked her if she was tailoring the curriculum to the boysÕ interested in sports. However, her explanation seemed to be in agreement with her explanation in one interview about her experience of using sports based curriculum in Algebra II and in her classroom in Denver, as illustrated below.  Kongji: Many of them said youÕre their favorite teacher. Ms. Morris: Yes. Of course. But yeah. I think kind of I think I learned banter that I do with the boys. You know just like the quick banter that I had with them. I learned that in sports.  You know just that kind of competitive like ... You know you just trash talk, if you will. Like you know just kind of give them a jibe here and there. I  !!!231 learned that by growing up with sports. I think that comes from that. I never thought about that.  Kongji: Have you seen other teachers doing this in their classrooms? Ms. Morris: Umm, female teachers? I donÕt É((laughing)) doesnÕt happen that often. No. So, in my school in Denver there were two math teachers of my age who were equally into sports. One of them was big into extreme sports so snowboarding kind of because she grew up in Colorado. So she was able to teach me a lot about É so we made a lot of lessons that Denver students were way more into. Kongji: Integrated into your curriculum? Ms. Morris: Yes. Yes. The students in Denver were not much into March Madness as my students in Michigan because theyÕre more into É theyÕre just snowboarding right now. They are into extreme sports. So she helped me to create lessons connected with those kids. Yes yes. ItÕs interesting. In 6th hour when they walked in there was a game on, she was like ÒAll right. ((sad voice))Ó Then I said, ÒListen, Allie. You have to know how to read a bracket because in every office thereÕs bracket pool. At least you know what they are talking about. You donÕt have to watch it. At least you have seen it and you know what it means ((louder volume)).Ó  Ms. Morris did not just create the sports-based activities to establish connections with the male students. Her pedagogy was related to her identity as an athlete and a coach. She was a field hockey athlete in high school and college. She told me that she won a sport scholarship for college, which allowed her to continue playing field hockey at the university. After finishing her education degree and mathematics degree, she taught math in one high school in Michigan and coached the schoolÕs field hockey team during her first two years as a teacher. After that, she moved to Denver and coached a field hockey team for five years before she moved back to Michigan with family and kids. She stayed at home for four years before she returned to teaching. She said she would consider coaching cross-country when her kids get older.  Bantering: Ms. MorrisÕs Speech Style and Pedagogy  Ms. Morris had a unique way of interacting with the boys in teaching Ð fast, quick back-and-forth bantering. She said she learned this kind of banter that she did with the boys through her experience growing up with two brothers, one on each side of her, playing competitive sports in high school and college, and coaching field hockey when she was teaching mathematics in  !!!232 another school before she came to Academic High. In this section I analyze the classroom interaction to explain Ms. MorrisÕs bantering speech style, and her style of interacting with the loud boys in her class while maintaining the control of the conversation.  In the episode above Ms. Morris was directing her students to get ready for the class. She was asking them to get seated and take out their homework so that she could check it. In the meantime, she also had two problems (72 ; 232) on the board as the warm-up activity for the students. Brandon and Jordan were two boys who regularly caught peopleÕs attention in the classroom.  Table 11: Ms. MorrisÕs Algebra Classroom Interactions    !!!233 Table 11 (contÕd)   !!!234 Table 11 (contÕd)   !!!235 Table 11 (contÕd)  In this excerpt of classroom interactions, which lasted for about 5 minutes, Ms. Morris was getting students to be ready for the class. In order to get students into the mode of doing mathematics, she always had two or three math calculation problems on the board. The focus of the lesson that day was on '()*+,-!.)/0,+' and square root problems. She had two square number math problems on the board. In Line 1 she asked students to be seated and get out their homework (spirals) so she could check them. Then she explained to students that they should not use calculator to do the square number problems on the board. After that, she also reminded students that their schedule for the next day was different because of the parent-teacher conferences (from Line 73 to Line 84). At the end of the episode, she explained to students that they are going to do a timed square quiz in which they were asked to write out the square of number from 1- 27.   In this episode Ms. MorrisÕs interaction with the students, particularly two loud boys Brandon and Jordan, illustrated her bantering style and the way of controlling the rowdy classroom. One way of directing the students to be ready for activity is through giving students a sense of time framework. Often time Ms. Morris used exaggeration to create a funny effect while  !!!236 still achieving her goal of getting students to do the work immediately. For example, in Line 4 she asked Bobby and Jordan to start to focus on the warm up questions on the board. In order to get them to do what she asked them to do, she did not order them, instead she said ÒI believe you have twenty seconds.Ó Jordan knew that Ms. Morris did not literally mean twenty seconds, and he interpreted that it was said with a playful frame (Goffman, 1974). He understood that she was using a hyperbole to tell him and Bobby that they needed to get started on the warm-up activity.  Table 12: Ms. MorrisÕs Bantering Style of Speech  In Line 8 Jordan asked Ms. Morris with a playful tone too if she really meant twenty seconds. In Line 10, instead of sanctioning him, Ms. Morris engaged his playful questioning with another playful response and said Òforty.Ó In Line 11, Jordan continued this interaction by repeating questioning if she literally meant forty seconds, which met with Ms. MorrisÕs maintenance of the playful interaction by saying ÒForty,Ó but also a falling tone to indicate the closure of the playful frame. At that point, the other boy Bobby stated the obvious to Jordan that he was just wasting time, and Jordan stopped joking around.   The interactions between Ms. Morris and Brandon illustrates another way of her using teasing to interact with students without directly confronting or sanctioning them. In Line 56, after explaining why she thought that memorizing the squared value of numbers from 1-27 is  !!!237 important, Ms. Morris planned to explain another agenda for the class that day. But she quickly changed the frame and started a side conversation with students by asking them ÒDid you miss me yesterday?Ó in Line 57. This change of the topic was sudden, but also indicated her rapport with the students. Maybe she decided to add this social conversation because she just told students that they were going to do the boring math activity of memorizing the squared value of numbers. In Line 59, some girl students in the classroom knew that Ms. Morris was teasing them, and they playfully responded by saying Ònay.Ó M. Morris then teased Chris in Line 60. In Line 63, Brandon joined in the interaction by making up a song to tease Ms. Morris. The lyric that he created alluded to the fact that Ms. Morris had been gone the day before. By singing ÒI go:::t ba:::ck lo:::lo:::,Ó Brandon teased Ms. Morris by indicating that Ms. Morris was announcing she just returned to the classroom after taking a day off the work.  Ms. Morris picked up his teasing and responded in Line 62 with smile on her face, ÒI definitely MISSED YOU.Ó Brandon continued the playful interaction in Line 63, but also add in banter. His theatrical performance ÒHey Ms. Morri:::s How are you doing girl::::::" You look like flowers today!Ó was playful. But his utterance was also highly sexist and was considered as inappropriate in the classroom. The rest of the class kind of took a laugh at his loud tease, but also booed him for his inappropriateness as his sentences indicated sexualizing Ms. Morris to a young equivalent.  Ms. Morris took BrandonÕs utterance within the teasing frame as well. Instead directly sanctioning him, she put him down by indirectly commenting BrandonÕs utterance saying, ÒThings!I think"IÕm never gonna hear" Usually I hear them in 5th hour.Ó This indirect evaluation did not tell Brandon that he was inappropriate, which saved BrandonÕs face. This also saved her own face as well because (1) she put on a witty and funny image by showing her    !!!238 Table 13: Ms. Morris and Performing Teacher Identity  ability to deal with sexual banter, and (2) she regained the teacher power and kept it cool by not directly commenting on BrandonÕs language. In Line 70, after the indirect sanction did not take effect, she used a direct comment to indicate that it was time to put an end to the banter. Again, she did not explicitly order Brandon to stop, rather she used a statement. The form of the statement is less face threatening than an order.   !!!239 In addition to her ability to banter with the loud boys, Ms. Morris also engaged in a discursive act of self-depreciation to temporarily lower her own status in the classroom to increase her likeability. The self-depreciation also created a humorous image of herself. For example, in Line 116 she said ÒI kind of forgot how to do that,Ó when she was demonstrating how to write out 232 if they could not remember the value.  Table 14: Ms. MorrisÕs Gestures and Pedagogy  Another feature of Ms. MorrisÕs speech style involved the tonal features of her voice. As indicated through the contextualization cues in the transcription above, she used different tones and pitches in teaching. For example, in the excerpt below, she put on a deep manly voice in Lines 27 and 28 when she was asking Jordan to get seated to work on the warm up questions. Because she was directing specifically at an individual student, she used a mid-range voice. And the deep manly voice seemed to indicate that she was trying to add a layer of masculine power to her order since she was interacting with a male student. Right after, she switched to a dramatic acting voice to address the whole class with ÒHello guys,Ó and this voice had a far-reaching effect as well because she was addressing a larger audience. I describe her voice in Line 29 as Òdramatic acting voiceÓ because it is different from the traditional Òteacher voice.Ó Her voice there was more dramatic, like an actor on the stage greeting her audience. Her voice in Line 29  !!!240 was significantly different from the other parts, which added to the variety and richness of sounds in the classroom. Van Leeuwen argues (Van Leeuwen, 2006) that sound can also indirectly indicates social distance.  [S]ound creates relations of different degrees of formality between what is represented and the viewer or listener, such as intimacy (É the whispered voice), informality (the close or medium close shot, the relaxed, casual voice), formality (the louder, higher and tenser voice which ÒprojectsÓ the message) (p. 182). Table 15: Musicality and Performances of Identity  There was also a musicality in Ms. MorrisÕs voice. In the excerpt below I presented her utterances into tonal units to show the feature of musicality in her voice. As illustrated in the transcription, she paused after each of the tone and idea units, and her linguistic utterances were accompanied with hand gestures to show emphasis as well as to elaborate meanings. The juxtaposition of short and long tonal units from Line 44 to Line 57, and the singing voice she used in Line 53 created a soundscape that was similar to music.   !!!241 Table 16: Performing Teacher Identity and Gestures  An important element of the musicality of Ms. MorrisÕs language was the performance element. Her body movement, hand gestures, and facial expressions, as well as the stresses and elongation of sounds, were part of the meaning she created through the performance. These non-linguistic and paralinguistic elements of discourse also gave meanings to the linguistic elements of her utterances. For example, in Line 46 she said the word ÒthisÓ while rhythmically touching the written words on the whiteboard with her hand, which clarified the meaning of Òthis.Ó In Line 52-53 she used a singing voice when saying ÒJUST for the SAKE of memorizing the RIDICULOUS thing,Ó which created a feeling of exaggeration that indicated her dislike of memorization in her class. From Line 49 to Line 53, all the capitalized words were accompanied by her hand gestures to put stress on each of those words, just like a conductor giving emphasis when directing a piece of music performance.     !!!242  Ò"#$%!&'(!)$*!+(*!',!*#$!-./01!&'(!".%*!*'!2(0*/3045Ó: Mathematics Concepts and Sexual Banter   Banter was not only a way for the teacher and her students to create a relaxed classroom environment, but also was used as a way to explain mathematics concepts. In the class episode below Ms. Morris was working with her students on simplifying numbers which had a square root in them.  For example, 9 should be simplified as 3, and 72 should be simplified as 62. After introducing these easier simplification problems, she wrote 5200 on the board. She considered this as more complex than the previous ones because simplifying  5200  required students to work out the square root of 200, and the mathematic relationship between 5 and the number of the square root.   1 Ms. Morris: Okay this time I added a piece. There is already a number multiple out front.  2  Two hundred. Oh, so much. Help me. Chris, Go! 3 Chris: Write twenty five times twenty. 4 Ms. Morris: Twenty five times twenty. No. Write down two hundred first, who is perfect  5  within two hundred? 6 Brandon: One hundred.  7 Ms. Morris: A hundred. One hundred times what? 8 Students: Two.  9 Brandon: Two! ((Loud volume)) 10 Girl voice: Wait, what?! 11 Ms. Morris: IÕm just break it down, break it down. Same skill. WhoÕs perfect to stuck?  12  One hundred. Who gets out? Okay? 13 Brandon: A hundred. 14 Ms. Morris: Why? 15 Brandon: Because itÕs a perfect square. 16 Ms. Morris: What is a square root of one hundred? 17 Brandon: Tie:::n. (.) TEN! 18 Ms. Morris: What is a square root of one hundred? 19 Brandon: Ten! 20 Ms. Morris: Ten. WhatÕs left? 21 Brandon: two.  22 Ms. Morris: So two is still stuck. So whatÕs going on here? You multiply. Ten times 5. 50.  23  Can I tell you something my second hour says and youÕre not going to get me  24  fired or something?  25 Brandon: Yeah. Sure. Yeah. GO AHED. GO AHEAD.  26 Ms. Morris: So my second hour this year Algebra II just went through quadratics. They  !!!243 27  have a hard time to remember this is a hundred and five or fifteen. They had a  28  hard time to remember the multiply step. So then this one kid goes ÒI have an  29  idea how to remember it.Ó I was like Ð it was questionable. I was like, ÒIs it  30  appropriate?Ó He was like, Òen.Ó  31 Brandon: AHAHAHA. 32 Ms. Morris: I said, ÒGo for it.Ó You know. He said, ÒWell, when youÕre perfect, you get  33  out the jail.Ó I said, ÒYes.Ó He said, ÒWhen you get out of the jail, you want to  34  multiply.Ó  35 Students: Oh::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ((volume increases)) 36 Ms. Morris: And I tell you what? Nobody nobody got it wrong on that test. When I handed  37  that quiz back, I said, ÒGo, get some from the jelly jar.Ó It was questionable,  38  but they remembered. Just like youÕll remember the mother function11. YouÕll  39  remember. So. 40 Brandon: Hey. ThatÕs a good one. ThatÕs a good one.  41 Ms. Morris: Okay. HereÕs what I want you to try. Okay. Actually, first we need to clean up  42  a little bit. Please donÕt pack yet. We have four minutes and we have plenty of  43  time. I need you to erase your desk.   In the excerpt above, from Line 1 to Line 21 Ms. Morris walked her students through how to simplify 5200. In Line 22, after finishing explaining the steps to do the simplification, Ms. Morris asked her students if it would be okay for her to share with them what a student from her second hour said. She prefaced the joke and also set up a playful frame for the interaction below. Starting from Line 26 she told the students the sexual joke that one male student created in order to remember the mathematical relationship between the radical 5 and the square root 100, which was important because some students think that they should add 10 to 5, rather than multiply 10 with 5. In Line 32, she shared the joke, which had two parts, with the students. The first part, Òwhen youÕre perfect, you get out the jail,Ó means that, if a number inside the square root symbol is a perfect number, it can be moved out of the ÒjailÓ Ð the square root symbol. The second part of the joke, Òwhen you get out of the jail, you want to multiply,Ó had a punchline with a word play of ÒmultiplyÓ referencing to both a mathematics concept and a sexual allusion. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11 The phrase, Òthe mother function,Ó that Mrs. Morris refers to here is Òthe parent function,Ó  f(x) = X2, for all quadratic functions. It is interesting that she chooses to use a different word ÒmotherÓ than ÒparentÓ in the commonly used phrase, the ÒparentÓ function.  !!!244 Mathematically, multiply here means that when 100 is simplified and moved out of the square root symbol, it becomes a 10. Then 10 should be multiplied with 5, which become 50. Therefore, the simplified writing of 5200  becomes 502. However, multiply here was also used to refer to its other meaning - Òsexual reproduction.Ó  This ÒmultiplyÓ joke illustrated how both students and teachers exploited sexual language in the process of teaching and learning. Academic learning is often intertwined with the social aspect of schooling. In this case, the teaching and learning of a mathematic concept were connected to a sexual allusion.  Pedagogy of Masculinity and Perpetuating Masculinity Regime   Ms. Morris was popular among her students. Not only Chris and Omar rated her as their favorite teacher. The majority of the students in her 5th and 6th hour classes said that they loved her class because she was cool and funny. Her style interacting with the loud boys in her classroom was of particular interest because she effectively used bantering speech style when interacting with boys like Brandon and Jordan. As illustrated in the classroom interactions in the previous sections, these two boys drew much attention from the teacher and dominated much of the classroom discussion. Some of their classroom participation could be viewed as disruptive? and some of their utterances were highly masculine in that they sexualized the teacher and subverted the power relations between a teacher and a student.   Ms. MorrisÕs bantering speech style allowed her to enter the highly masculine discourses that the loud boys constructed. She used teasing to engage with the boysÕ acting out, and at the same time to gain control through her witty jokes and give and take, which indirectly and effectively outweighed the boysÕ teasing. Her non-threatening speech style also saved the face of the boys, creating a more relaxed classroom environment and social space in her classroom.   !!!245  Ms. MorrisÕs bantering speech style and sports-based mathematics curriculum gained popularity among the students, particularly the boys and some of the competitive girls. For example, two of the girls in her fifth hour class were also very active in the class. One was on the schoolÕs basketball varsity team, and the other was an active member in the theatre club. Compared to other girls and some of the quieter boys, they were more talkative in the classroom, and also frequently participated in the highly competitive interaction with the loud boys. Despite these successful ways of connecting with many students, Ms. MorrisÕs highly masculine pedagogy, while playing into the masculine discourses favored by the majority of the boys and some girls, left some boys and girls at a disadvantaged place because they were not able to participate or feel comfortable with such style or sexual teasing. At the end of my fieldwork, I interviewed the students in her classroom, and realized that at least three boys did not regard her as their favorite teacher. Those boys were also the quieter ones in the class. This differential effect from Ms. MorrisÕs pedagogy shows that, unless the masculinity discourses and norms are critically discussed, playing into dominant discourses could perpetuate the regime of dominant masculinity in the classroom.  ÒItÕs Really a Parallel.Ó:  Coaching Football, Teaching Geometry, and Masculinity  Mr. Ford was in his late 40s, and a mathematics teacher and football coach at Academic High. He was teaching Geometry and Calculus courses, and coaching the Junior Varsity Football Team. Over six feet in height, he was a strongly built man with a husky voice. Although he looked sullen, he was actually very easy to approach and talk. It did not take too much effort for me to get his approval to observe in his classroom. The second week after I handed him the research participant information and consent form, I saw him standing at the corner of the library  !!!246 during the class break. I walked over and greeted him. Before I asked him when I should start, he told me, ÒI thought about your request. I was a little bit hesitant because the fifth and sixth hours are rowdy. But IÕm now okay with it. Just come any time you want.Ó  I ended up observing only his sixth hour Geometry class because Tiger was taking his sixth hour class. I visited his classroom twice a week, usually on Tuesdays and Wednesdays. After finishing observing Ms. MorrisÕs fifth hour, I walked across the Locker Common area to his classroom for the sixth hour. Mr. FordÕs classroom did not have much decoration. In front of the classroom, a tall bookshelf stood at the northwest corner of his classroom, with several copies of textbooks and boxes of pencils and rulers. Near the bookshelf was an overhead projector. At the northeast comer of the classroom was his desk. At the southwest corner of his classroom hung a magazine pocket organizer with dozens of calculators in them. Four rows of desks were arranged in the classroom, with an aisle in the middle. Rows were formed by two desks in each row.    Mr. Ford has been teaching in Academic High since 2002. He said that he actually completed his student teaching at Academic High in the 1990s, and his mentor teacher was a well-respected football coach and math teacher as well. Mr. FordÕs interest in coaching football came from his own experience playing football in high school, and he was passionate about football. He explained, ÒI think most people who are coaching they just have a passion for the sports they are coaching. IÕm not different than that way Ð I just love football. And when my playing games were done, um, I wanted to stay involved somehow in coaching.Ó Ever since becoming a teacher, he has always been a math teacher and football coach. Prior to coming to Academic High, he was a head coach of a football team in a high school in the western part of the state.   !!!247 Mr. Ford explained that one advantage of his coaching football was that he was able to know the student athletes in his math classroom better for having also worked with them as a coach. When I asked him in what ways he thought his experience working as a football coach influenced his teaching, he explained: What I really noticed was that the kids go from August ten then we start football practice, and September 5th is the first day of the school. So, IÕm sitting in the hallway on the first day of the school, I already know a lot of kids because I have worked with them every day in the football practice, um, maybe I have five of them in my classroom of thirty kids. ThatÕs a difference maker on day one, with the regards to that youÕve already got reputation established, and youÕve got trust established. Um, some kids who play football can have behavior problems who are also in my class. You know, weÕve been É when we are coaching for the month of August, and they carry themselves in the right way, you know if you can get kids to do that, it becomes contagious in you class. You never fail to really help get started in the school year in term of setting up the positive tone.   What Mr. Ford articulated were two ideas about how he thought coaching football influenced his teaching in classroom. First, the time he spent working with studentsÕ athletes gave him more opportunities to get to know student athletes to build relationships and trust, which would lead to good student-teacher relationship and in turn learning. Second, sportsmanship can be translated to learning in the classroom.  ÒJust Everything I Do in Class I Feel Like I Do the Same Stuff in Football.Ó To Mr. Ford, teaching mathematics was Òreally a parallelÓ to coaching football. He said, ÒAnd I É just everything I do in class I feel like I do that same stuff in football. ItÕs really a parallel. ItÕs simply teaching, thatÕs a simply task. But itÕs every bit of teaching when I get to my calculus class.Ó Intrigued by his comparison, I asked him to explain more about what he meant by the parallel between coaching football and teaching mathematics.  So, you know I plan football, I plan for class. I plan for practice and anticipate whatÕs going to happen from. For students in the classroom, I know a studentÕs gonna struggle. Put it this way maybe a kid had a bad day yesterday. I can anticipate what happen in the day and give him a boost before we even blow that first whistle so there is a lot of personal issues going on that I track both in the classroom and football. And I think a big  !!!248 part of my challenge is taking some complicated math making it simple and understandable. Football is super complicated too if you allow it. So you have to know to find that line where students can still be aggressive and understand what they are doing. Um because there are the paralyses that happen when I give them too much of upstairs so um you have to be really careful at the pace which you teach math, and the pace which you teach football and install new play and things like that. So there is just a whole lot parallel between these two.   Mr. Ford articulated several parallels that he had seen between coaching football and teaching Geometry: planning for football training and planning for a mathematics lesson, anticipating a playerÕs struggle for a game on a particular day and anticipating a studentÕs struggle in the classroom, making complicated strategies simple so that the players and students can understand, and knowing the fine line between the studentÕs current level and the level they can reach. These similarities are more obvious parallels. The fact that he articulated so many parallels also indicated his strong passion for both of the tasks in his life. On the other hand, the number of parallels that he saw also indicated that his ways of doing things in one area might transfer to his practice in the other area, even in a subconscious way, something I saw in my analysis of his use of language in teaching.    My observation of Mr. FordÕs classes informed me that there were other parallels between his teaching and football coaching. In this section through analyzing classroom interactions, I explain that Mr. FordÕs identity as a football coach influenced his teaching of Geometry. His performance of masculinity in teaching was achieved through control, efficiency, and use of sexual allusion.   Class Routine, Efficiency, and Reducing of Learning  Mr. Ford, like other teachers, also had routinized procedures for checking homework at the beginning of each class period. Different from the other teachers I observed, he did not take his grade book with him as he was circulating in the classroom to check the homework. Instead  !!!249 he took a laser pen with him. Students were supposed to lay their homework open on their desk when Mr. Ford was moving along each row and dancing the green lights of the laser pen over studentsÕ notebooks or the piece of paper which they just got from their desk mate and wrote their homework on.  1 Mr. Ford:  No horseshoes and grenades today. 2 Boys: Yay:::: 3 Mr. Ford: IÕm gonna have a drive of my homework checking for today. [You can] have  4 Boys:                       [No::::] 5 Mr. Ford: Yes. IÕm coming around the mountains (two second) Great job today Chelsea.  6  Homework. 7  Homework. 8  ((making two consecutive, short whistle sounds)) ten 9  ((making two consecutive, short whistle sounds)) ten 10  ((making a short whistle sound, and a long cuckoo sound)) =  11 Girl voice: = Five 12 Mr. Ford: Late. 13  ((making two consecutive, short whistle sounds)) ten 14  ((making two consecutive, short whistle sounds)) ten 15  ((making two consecutive, short whistle sounds)) ten 16  Zaina, do it now. Get it done! Late. 17  ((making two consecutive, short whistle sounds)) ten 18  ((making two consecutive, short whistle sounds)) Ten! Very Nice. 19  Show me the light. ((making two consecutive, short whistle sounds)) ten 20  Bring me the noise. ((making two consecutive, short whistle sounds)) ten 21  Seven. Do you know why?  22  Things arenÕt labelled or marked. YouÕll see in a minute how important it is. 23  All right? 24  Nine. I only wish IÕd seen straight lines. Okay? 25  ((making two consecutive, short whistle sounds)) ten 26  Nine. 27 Girl: = what?! 28 Mr. Ford: Straight edge drawings.  29 Girl: I traced them from the book. 30 Mr. Ford: Straight edge drawings ((manly voice)) 31 Girl: I did. I traced them from the book. 32 Mr. Ford: you tell me this is straight edge?  33 Girl: yeah. I traced it from the book. 34 Mr. Ford: When you traced it free hand from the book.  35   ((making two consecutive, short whistle sounds)) Nine.  36 Boy: Nine? 37 Mr. Ford: For no straight edge.  !!!250 38 Boy: Uh::: That was ONE drawing ((Shouting to the back of Mr. Ford who was moving back to his desk)) 39 Chelsea: One drawing that I did five minutes ago. ((Teasing the boy student)) 40 Mr. Ford: No right way to do the wrong thing. 41 Boy: I thought I would get away with it.   The transcript above documents Mr. FordÕs typical homework checking procedure. In Line 3 he announced that he was going to start a drive of homework checking. Notice that the word ÒdriveÓ is also football terminology, meaning a series of offensive plays that advance the ball for the purpose of a score. Mr. FordÕs choice of the word ÒdriveÓ here also indexed his identity as a football coach. The fact that he used a football vocabulary to describe an instructional activity has much to say about his identity and his pedagogy. We could argue that he looked at teaching as coaching football, and his students like his football players. Mr. FordÕs performance of masculinity and identity as a coach was also evident in the language he used in the next section.  In Line 6 he started to move along the rows of desk to check their homework. His direction was short and efficient, just one word ÒHomework.Ó And his evaluation was short as well, just a number. The whistle and bird sounds he made was also used to fulfill the goal of efficiency. Two consecutive, short whistle sounds usually indicated that the studentÕs work was good, and they usually received a score of 10 or 9. If a long cuckoo sound was made, it meant that the studentÕs homework was not good enough, like in Line 10. After hearing Mr. Ford make such a combination of sounds, one girl teased the student that he was going to receive a score of 5 because they all knew that such sounds had negative meanings. In Line 12 Mr. Ford gave the student an evaluation of ÒLate,Ó which meant that the student could redo the homework and turn it to Mr. Ford as late work.   !!!251 The whole process of checking and assigning a score to one studentÕs homework took no more than 5 seconds. What Mr. Ford would do was that he stood up straight like a lamp post in front of a studentÕs desk, holding the laser pen in one hand and giving direction to the student with the laser pen to ask him or her turn the page so that he could see their homework. Once he sighted the homework, he shouted out a score. Students were supposed to remember their score because they needed to report the score back to him so that he could record them in the gradebook. Once after checking all the studentsÕ homework, he returned to his desk in the front of the class, and asked students to shout out the score he assigned back to him. Ò601, 2, 3, 4Ó: Numbers, Football, and Control 1 Mr. Ford:  Okay. Game. Ready, Chelsea? 2 Chelsea: Yes, IÕm ready. 3 Mr. Ford: 601, 2, 3, 4 4 Girl Student: Ten 5 Boy Student: Nine 6 Mr. Ford: 605, 6, 7, 8 7 Girl Student: Ten. 8 Mr. Ford: Say ÒLate,Ó Tim. 9 Tiger: Late. 10 Boy Student: Nine. 11 Girl Student: Late.   This episode of classroom interaction also showed his performance of masculinity and identity as a football coach. In this episode, Mr. Ford was asking students to shout back to him their scores for their homework that he had just assigned, so that he could enter them into his gradebook.  One discursive performance of his football coach identity was his use of the word ÒgameÓ in Line 1. The word ÒgameÓ in Line 1 seemed to be another example in which Mr. Ford used a sports vocabulary to demarcate an instructional activity. Game here seemed to mean that ÒletÕs get ready to give me your grades so that I can enter them into the gradebook.Ó The reason that  !!!252 Mr. Ford used the word game seemed to indicate that students needed to focus to listen to their code number as he was going to read their codes out and they must be attentive and be in the mode for the game like football players should be for playing.  Mr. FordÕs students each had a code in his gradebook, and the code was a three-digit number. During class when Mr. Ford needed to record their grades of their homework, he would shout out the codes, usually four codes in a row, and students needed to shout back to him the score they received from him. The excerpt below shows how the codes were used and how the recording of grades was done. In this episode of classroom interaction, Mr. Ford started to record studentsÕ homework grade in Line 1. In Line 3, he read out four codes, which represented four students in the classroom. Only two of the first four students were present that day, and one shouted out her score in Line 4, the other in Line 5.  In Line 6, Mr. Ford read out another four codes, 605, 6, 7, 8, 9. TigerÕs code was 606, and in Line 8 Mr. Ford reminded Tiger to say ÒLateÓ because he did not complete his homework that day. In Line 10, the student whose code was 607 shouted out his score, and in Line 10 the girl whose code was 608 did hers.   Mr. FordÕs use of numbers to call out students in this activity illustrated an interesting and troubling parallel between teaching and coaching football. It seemed that students, like football players, became a number in the classroom. Like the number on the jerseys of football players, these codes became the identifier of the students. Reducing students to a number parallels what a football coach would do when commanding his team. Both show the hierarchical power relations between the superordinate and the subordinates. Reducing students to a number shows the logic of efficiency for management and in maintaining control. What was troubling in this process was that students were rendered into numbers and their individualities was erased or neglected, which was consequential for both teaching and learning.   !!!253  ÒYeah, Yeah, Oh Yeah, Yeah, Yeah, Yeah!Ó Male Control and Sexual Allusion in Teaching  Mr. Ford also performed the type of male control which was rife with sexual allusion. In the episode below, he asked one girl student Valentina to answer a question about why she would think the two triangles on the board were congruent, which was the concept they were learning that day. After Valentina correctly answered the question, Mr. Ford said an elongated ÒyeahÓ with a rising tone. A few students started to chuckle after his unusual way of saying the word because the way he said it like how men would say it during sex. The second Òyeah,Ó with a prolonged extension of the vowel sound and a rising-falling-rising tone, had more explicit sexual allusion, which led to more studentsÕ laughing uneasily. In Line 7, he added an ÒohÓ to his exclamation. In Line 8, perhaps sensing the uneasiness among the students, he shouted out three faster ÒyeahÓs. He then returned to the topic in Line 11, and restated the conclusion.  1 Mr. Ford: Valentina, why then are we gonna say these two triangles are congruent? 2  HereÕre your options, side side side, side angle side, angle side angle, or 3 angle angle side?  4 Valentina: Angle side angle. 5 Mr. Ford: Yeah ((students chuckling)) 6 Yea:::h ((students chuckling)) 7 Oh yeah ((students laughing)) 8 Yeah 9 Yeah 10 Yeah 11 So, now IÕm showing you that these two triangles are congruent.   Mr. Ford was not the only teacher that I observed who would ',1)*234,!56,3+!72*''+88/!3.5,+*7538.'. During my observation of another male teacherÕs classroom, he also engaged sexual banter during classroom interaction. For example, when one female student intentionally pronounced the state name ÒVirginiaÓ as Òvaginal,Ó he commented, ÒThere isnÕt an a in Virginia.Ó These cases indicated that adults in school would exploit sexual topics to construct a witty and  !!!254 heterosexual image for themselves. Their choice of engaging with sexual banter is also sexist because girls were sexualized in these instances. At the same time, they were also influenced by the larger social norms around gender, masculinity, and sexuality. Their act of engaging sexual banter in turn also further perpetuated these normative discourses. As I discussed in the conclusion chapter, teachers need to be reflexive about their role in socializing students into their gender identities. These everyday linguistic interactions might seem mundane, but they shape, inform, and perpetuate our notions about what is normal and abnormal, and what it means to be a boy or a girl.    Summary   In this chapter I analyzed three teachersÕ performances of teacher identities and masculinities in their teaching, their ways of interacting with students around issues of gender, sex, and sexuality, and their ways of responding to and managing maleness in their classroom. My analysis of their pedagogies of masculinity and discursive performances of identities has revealed the diversity in their production of gender and masculinity, as well as consistent similarities in their ways of perpetuating the normative discourses around gender, sexualities, and masculinities.   First, the three teachers each constructed and enacted a version of masculine or masculinist pedagogy. Mrs. Brown performed a dominating and controlling motherly teacher identity associated with maternal and rigid control of studentsÕ body in her classroom, like the rigid drills in her language teaching practice, constant demand of studentsÕ attention, and the military order she gave to Tiger. Ms. Morris performed masculine, cool, and humorous teacher identities, playing into the masculine, sexual, and competitive discourses of young men in her  !!!255 classroom, which shaped and controlled the maleness in her classroom. Mr. Ford performed a manly, and highly sexualized masculinity through his pedagogy. Second, underlying the differences of their ways of managing and constructing masculinities were shared similarities. For example, there was a style of maternal control of the students in their classrooms in both Mrs. BrownÕs and Ms. MorrisÕs pedagogy. Mrs. Brown performed a dominating and controlling teacher image. Ms. Morris performed a teacher who was into sports and was able to enter into the highly masculine discourses of the male students in her classroom. Mrs. Brown and Ms. Morris, however, adopted quite different styles in dealing with the so-called Òproblem boys.Ó Ms. Morris chose a bantering style to tease the boys, and was actually won the attention from the boys like Brandon and Jordan. Ms. Morris explained to me in interviews that she knew when boys were loud just to draw attention, and when they were loud to disrupt. Ms. Brown, however, adopted a controlling style to try to gain studentsÕ attention, which failed and created even more challenges for both herself and the students.  Between Ms. Morris and Mr. Ford, we also see similarities in how they responded to masculinity in their classroom. They both performed a coach identity in their teaching. Ms. Morris used sports-based curriculum to engage male students, and Mr. Ford used sports language and coach language to structure his Geometry instruction. Another similarity is that they both engage sexual bantering in teaching to construct a witty and heterosexual image for themselves. Ms. Morris shared the multiply story to help her students solve a mathematics problems, and Mr. Ford used sexually loaded language to spice his teaching. Another similarity is that Ms. Morris and Mrs. Brown both performed a masculine image through their teaching, which shows how masculinity and femininity are not the exclusive province of ÔappropriatelyÕ sexed bodies (Halberstam, 1998). Hence this finding supports social  !!!256 constructionist and poststructuralist work that argue for more productive conceptualization of dislodging masculinity and femininity from gender (Francis, 2002, 2008; Halberstam, 1998; Pascoe, 2012b).  Between the differences and similarities in their ways of doing gender and masculinity in their classrooms, however, they each constructed a different version of the same gendered, masculine, and heterosexual discourses in their classroom that feature control, competition, and dominance. The superficial differences between these discursively constructed social spaces added to the power of the normative heterosexual and masculine discourses. In other words, these young men were encountering different version of the same discourses of gender and sexuality, and masculinity as they moved out of and entered into different classrooms each day. When students move in and out of different classroom, they received different version of masculine and heterosexual and sexist discourses. The differences of the sameness amplify and multiply the normative effect.  Unfortunately, none of these spaces provided opportunities for the students to disrupt these highly problematic and normative gendered notions and discursively constructed subject positions, or allow them to develop alternative views of gender, sexuality, femininity, or masculinity. As I discuss in the previous chapters, the schoolÕs official policy adopted an avoidance approach to issues around gender, sexuality, and masculinity in the school. Most of the students also said that their teachers would not initiate discussion around these issues in their classroom. Even though the school had different scattered spaces, such as the AHGEA meetings and Straight and Gay Alliance Group, in which students could go to seek support or engage critical conversations, by and large, these issues were left to students themselves to figure out. As  !!!257 I move to the final chapter, I will further address how these discourses posed challenges for change.                        !!!258 CHAPTER 7  LANGUAGE, MASCULINITY, AND SCHOOLING OF IMMIGRANT ADOLESCENTS:  THEORETICAL, METHODOLOGICAL, AND PEDAGOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS Late January of 2016, when students at Academic High reconvened for classes after the final exam of the fall semester, Tiger was the only one among the three young men who was still enrolled in an ESL class Ð Mrs. BrownÕs third hour ELD (English Language Development) class. Omar decided to not take the third hour ELD classes any more, and worked with the counselor and switched to a World Civilization class for his third hour. Chris had already been out of the ESL classes for one semester; beginning from his sophomore year he was no longer taking any ESL classes. Tiger was still an ESL student, but Omar and Chris not any more.  The two boys would still drop by Mrs. BrownÕs ESL classroom. Omar often hung out with several male students from Mrs. BrownÕs classes during the class break time. Outside the corner of the craft arts classroom that Mrs. Brown shared was a triangular area formed by a turn of the zigzag hallway. Since the classroom was at the far end of the school building, this triangular space became 56,!8.29!:2*7,!56,9!78)2-!;8!*5!:*''!53/,. They briefly met to chill for a couple of minutes, exchanging headphones to share with each other their music on their phones, joking around, or quickly polling for ideas for what to do during the weekends. From inside her classroom, Mrs. Brown would occasionally cast a watchful look at the hallway through the glass walls at the corner of the classroom. She said to me one time, disapprovingly shaking her head when looking at the boys, ÒIt seemed that weÕre having a group now.Ó She meant that the group of the boys who regularly hang out with Omar in the hallway.  Chris did not hang out with the group, but he would occasionally drop by Mrs. BrownÕs classroom and pop in to say hello or to ask for her signature on the bus ticket to ride the bus to  !!!259 her after-school tutoring program in the middle school. He was starting to read the latest book in the Percy Jackson series. He had kindly given me those earlier Percy Jackson books he owned after I told him that my nephew was a middle schooler in China who also liked to read. He asked me to give them to my nephew.  I continued to visit the ESL classroom this spring, but visits were not as frequent as the previous year. I usually went to Academic High once a week for two hours to help the students in Mrs. BrownÕs classroom with their homework. Her class got even bigger in the spring with several newly arrived students. Mrs. Brown became much busier with the increased enrollment. Adding to that, her para-pro decided to move to another state due to her husbandÕs new job. Mrs. Brown had to train a new para-pro.   I kept writing notes in my journal when I was not working with students in the classroom. I have continued attending the parent council meeting, school district board of education meetings, and the meetings of the student group Gender Equality Association. Inside the ESL classroom, due to the changed configurations of students, the attention, or the maternal gaze, on Tiger was reduced. He was no longer the only boy who would make ÒtroubleÓ in the classroom. Two other boys started to gain attention in the classroom, which took some attention and pressure off Tiger. However, he would still crack jokes, and would occasionally receive sanctions from the teacher. Mrs. Brown put his seat right front in the first row, just an armÕs length away from her.  I started this research project in fall 2014 with a rather general goal to understand what it was like for these immigrant young men to learn to be a student in Academic High, and to learn to do the academic work inside and outside the ESL classroom. As my time spent in Academic High increased, my understanding of language, gender, masculinities, and schooling also  !!!260 evolved as I put the theories in conversation with what I saw, heard, felt, and experienced across the classrooms and spaces, and from and with these multilingual young men, their classmates, and their teachers.  My presence in the school also evolved over times, from being not sure where to sit in the main office at the beginning to chatting with the secretaries causally as my fieldwork dwindled down. I have become a regular presence at Academic High. I had made acquaintances with many students on campus; they smiled back to me or waved to me when seeing me in the hallway or in the cafeteria. Adults in the building would ask me ÒHowÕs it going, Mr. Qin?Ó I made friends with students from Mrs. BrownÕs class. They would ask me where I was if I missed my regular visit to her classes, or if I went on a different day. Some of them found me on Facebook and became my Facebook friends.  In this final chapter I review what I have learned from the stories of Omar, Tiger, Chris, and their teachers at Academic High, and from their words, their voices, and their trust in opening up their lives to me. As a researcher informed by poststructuralist views on knowledge production, I know what I came to understand and what I have written down is not Òtruth.Ó My texts are also discourses constructed from my views and stance. As I have been moving in and out of my analysis throughout the dissertation to reveal my researcher voice and stance, I have aimed at offering a different story that reveals the complexity of these young menÕs identity negotiation.    In the sections that follow, I discuss what these stories mean for the research and the practice of second language education and the education of multilingual adolescents like Omar, Tiger, and Chris. I first recapitulate what I have discussed about language, masculinity, and schooling in the previous chapters. I then discuss how this dissertation adds to the knowledge  !!!261 base of SLA identity research, and reflect on how the methodological decisions have afforded analytical rigor and depth. I conclude the chapter with discussion on the possibilities and challenges for addressing issues of gender, sexuality and masculinity in school.  Summaries Intersectionality of Masculinities In Chapter 3 my goal is to understand the multiple identities that Omar, Tiger, and Chris took on or were ascribed to. I explained that these multilingual young menÕs masculine identities were connected to their other social identities; in addition, their masculine identities were intersected with these identity markers, which created the hierarchical order of masculinities in which these immigrant young men found themselves. I first analyzed the interconnectedness of their masculine identities and their other social identities. For example, OmarÕs way of doing masculinities was closely connected to his ethnic, racial, and religious identities. As a young man, he performed strong ethnic identity and was proud of the cultural and history of his home country. His evoking of mixed race identity indicated that he was aware of the unmarkedness and the privilege of being white in the United States. Therefore, his phenotype afforded him more power to be identified as white and a member of the dominant group, rather than an ESL student. As a devout Muslim, Omar also held strong religious notion about what it meant to be a man. The idea of male dominance and heterosexual normalcy was evident in his performance of identities during classroom discussions.  Drawing upon CrenshawÕs (1991) concept of intersectionality, in this chapter I also examined the intersectionality of their identities. I argued that a framework of intersectionality is critical to understand these boysÕ experiences because a singular framework often would lead to partial understanding or misinterpretation of these boysÕ ways of doing masculinity and doing  !!!262 school, resulting in misunderstanding of their challenges and needs in the classrooms and the school. When they were only looked at as ESL students, teachers failed to recognize that gender, race, religion, language, and sexuality also factored into their experiences, and influenced their access to opportunities for learning. When the boys were looked at within the gender framework, their other important identities were ignored. The framework of intersectionality promotes us to see the multiple dimensions of these immigrant adolescent boysÕ identities and the compounding oppressions against them. For example, as a group these boys were marginalized in the school due to their status as ESL students and their developing English language proficiency. However, due to the other identity markers to which they were ascribed, they were also positioned differently in the ESL classroom. Take Tiger as an example. As an Asian student, he did not fit into the Model Minority image because he was not doing well in his grades. He also experienced racism at school as illustrated in the case of the gym teacher refusing him to enter the gym during the Excel Hour (study hall). In addition, his less fluent spoken English further impacted his social position in the ESL classroom. These multiple forms of discrimination and marginalization put Tiger at the lower end of the social hierarchy in the ESL classroom, which led to his low investment in learning (Norton, 2013; Norton Peirce, 1995).  Intertwined Nature of Identity Performances and Language Instruction  In Chapter 4 I analyzed these immigrant adolescentsÕ masculinity performance in the ESL language classroom. I examined classroom interactions to explain how these immigrant young men performed their masculine identities, and how their perceived masculinity subject positions shaped their investment in language learning. Drawing on two concepts in sociolinguistics Ð stylization (Bucholtz, 2011; Cameron, 2000; Coupland, 2001; Rampton, 1995, 2001) and participant example (Wortham, 1994, 2006), I explain that, through their stylized L2  !!!263 speech, Tiger indexed his masculinities in the classroom interaction. Their masculinities performance was informed by the idea of what it meant to be a young man in the United States. TigerÕs performance of a funny, laddish masculine image was a response to his marginalized social positions in the ESL classroom; at the same time his discursive performance of masculinity was constrained by the larger normative discourses around heterosexuality and hyper masculinity. His stylized L2 speech style during the sentence starter sharing out activity illustrates his intentional use of language for identity construction. OmarÕs stylized L2 speech, his word play, was connected to his performance of a cool, hard-core masculine identity and his identity as an outspoken young man. His use of ÒR-word,Ó and Òsecond-class citizenÓ illustrates a different type of L2 stylization Ð using lexical appropriation to assert his identities. His performance of a calculated investment in academic work showed his intentional identity negotiation acts of protecting himself from being associated with being feminine and nerdy.   Both Tiger and Omar brought their identities into the language activities in the classroom, which illustrates these immigrant adolescent young menÕs agentive use of language and the intertwined nature of identity performance and language learning. They were not satisfied with the banal language practice or the practice of socializing them into a ÒGood LearnerÓ identity that is narrowly defined. In this sense, their stylized use of L2 was a form of resistance to the disconnection between language instruction and their needs and experiences as marginalized youths in school and in the society.  L2 Reading Practices and Masculine Identities  In Chapter 5 I turned to examine the relationship between masculinity, reader identity, and L2 reading instruction in the ESL classroom. My goal was to understand to what extent these immigrant young menÕs engagement and disengagement in reading was connected to their  !!!264 masculine identities. Through analyzing classroom interaction about reading and the reading instruction in the classroom, I explained that (1) adolescentsÕ investment in reading was socially constructed, and was connected to their idea of being a young man; (2) boys engage with a wide range of multilingual literacy practices that were connected to their identities, that is, reading was not a monolingual, autonomous activity, rather it was a practice that was deeply connected to their identities and lives; (3) the autonomous model of L2 reading practice in the classroom contributed to studentsÕ disengagement in reading or minimal investment in reading.   OmarÕs performance of a non-reader identity in social interaction illustrates the impact of his negotiation of masculine identities on his investment in reading. In order to put on a cool image, he distanced himself from the school reading activities. However, his performance of a non-reader identity in social contexts did not mean that he did not do reading. Rather, his literacy practices were related to reading news and texts that were connected to his identities. For example, he followed news about and in his home country in both Arabic and English. He expressed his opinions about Islamophobia and hatred again Muslim on Facebook. His reading and digital literacy experiences indicated that immigrant adolescents view literacy as site for identity negotiation. In contrast, ChrisÕs strong passion in reading was connected to his identity as a good learner, which was in turn rewarded by the teacher. However, he was teased by the other two boys for his engagement in reading during the classroom interaction.  Pedagogy, Control, and Masculinities  In Chapter 6 I move on to examine the relationship between pedagogy, control, and masculinities. I view pedagogy as one of the masculinity regimes in the school that teachers used to manage and construct gendered notions of being a male or female student in the school (Connell, 1996). Through an analysis of the pedagogical practices of three teachers, Mrs. Brown,  !!!265 Ms. Morris, and Mr. Ford, as well as the interview data, I explain how their pedagogical decisions and choices reflected their approaches to working with male students. I analyze these teachersÕ performance of masculinity in their own practices, arguing that teachers as adults respond to (and construct) gender and masculinity within the heterosexual normalcy discourses. Despite their differences in how they were working with the boys, their pedagogies perpetuated the heterosexual normalcy discourses and hyper masculinity discourses.  Mrs. BrownÕs performance of dominating identity in classroom interaction provided an explanation of the complexity of her relationship with the students. While she cared for her students and worked hard to assist them in their learning, she also implemented a dominant teaching style that relied on teacher authority to monitor and manage masculinity in her classroom. Her motherly control and maternal gaze led to resistance among some of the boys, particularly Tiger, leading to her identification of him as a Òproblem student.Ó Mrs. MorrisÕs performance of banter and her use of teasing and sport-based curriculum illustrated a contrasting approach to managing masculinity. Her interactional style and humor created a space that catered to highly masculine discourses. However, although her pedagogy attracted some of the students, other students felt they were left out in the classroom. Mr. FordÕs approach to working with his students in his Geometry classroom was indicative of his identity as a football coach in that he managed the students in the classroom like managing football players on the sports field. This style was reflected in his discursive style of using of highly masculine tone in teaching, and his use of code and numbers to refer to students, rather than their names.   Language, Masculine Identities, and the Identity Approach to SLA In this section I discuss how this work contributes to the Identity Approach to SLA by addressing several theoretical considerations. Since the publication of NortonÕs work on the  !!!266 identity and language learning of adult, female immigrants in the mid 1990s (Norton, 1997, 2000; Norton Peirce, 1995), identity has become one of the central constructs in the field of SLA research, and one established approach to SLA research. Norton and her colleagues summarize the two central arguments of the identity approach to SLA as (1) understanding the language learnerÕs multiple identities and their agency in speaking from different identity positions, and (2) understanding that language learners are subjected to relations of power which may constrain their opportunities to speak language (Darvin & Norton, 2015; De Costa & Norton, 2016; Norton & McKinney, 2011).  Research on identity and language learning has since developed into an established approach in SLA studies (Atkinson, 2011), the Identity Approach, one of the socioculturally- oriented SLA approaches that depart from the dominant cognitivist approaches to SLA. Research falling under the Identity Approach has examined the ways in which a wide range of identity categories may impact the process and outcome of language learning. This critical sociolinguistic ethnography adds to the knowledge base of identity and second language learning in the following important areas. First, it unpacks the role of gender identities and masculine identities in the process of language learning for immigrant adolescents. Second, it brings into this research a conceptualization of identity as performance. Third, it highlights the intersectionality of identities, focusing on understanding the compounding subordinations that minoritized youth are subjected to, and the hierarchical order of masculinities. Lastly, it illuminates the intertwined nature of identity performance and language learning.  Masculinities and Identity Approach to SLA  The stories of Omar, Tiger, and Chris show that their sense of self as young men, their masculine identities, is central to their being a student of language learning. SLA research on  !!!267 gender and identities has largely left out male learners, and essentialized them as one unified group who either are not interested in language learning, or who lack the aptitude to learn the language. My work highlighted that these boys struggled with their subject positions as young men in a context where they are simultaneously marked and invisible. As multilingual learners, their developing proficiency of English made them more visible when they spoke. Their bodies, their physiology, their style, and their movement sometimes became visible because they were made minoritized and were stilling developing the new habitus of being a young man in the United States. They were made invisible, together with their masculinities, because of the identity markers they carry. Their stories call for attention to male immigrant adolescentsÕ identity negotiation, particularly their resilience as well as their vulnerability.   Conceptualization of Identity in SLA Research  Norton (2013) defines identity as a term Òto reference how a person understands his or her relationship to the world, how that relationship is constructed across time and space, and how the person understands possibilities for the futureÓ (p. 5). Drawing upon the poststructuralist theory, Norton and her colleagues lay out three core concepts about identity in the SLA research: the multiple, non-unitary nature of identity; identity as a site of struggle; and identity as changing over time (Darvin & Norton, 2015; Norton, 2013; Norton & McKinney, 2011). These young menÕs use of L2 in their language classroom indicates that the Identity Approach to SLA research also needs to attend to the performative nature of identity.   Identity as performance (Butler, 1990) focuses on the constitutive relationship between identity and language, that is identity mediates, and is mediated by language learning. Language constructs the norms and ideologies that shape how language learners understand gender, race, ethnicity, social class, sexuality, or religion. At the same time, individuals perform their  !!!268 identities through language to take up, negotiate, or contest the ascribed subject positions (Moje & Luke, 2009; Wortham, 2010). A view of identity as performance that highlights the discursive nature of identity negotiation is particularly relevant to SLA research because language is both the goal and the means of language learning. As we have seen in the previous chapters, these multilingual young men did not simply view language learning as a an attempt to develop their language skills; they used the opportunities of learning and using language to express who they were as racialized, gendered, classed, and Othered young men.   This view of identity and language echoes KramschÕs (2009) stance on language and identity. She views language as a symbolic system with values and power, and argues that language learning is not just about learning the vocabulary, grammar, or phonology, it is also about learning the value systems. What identity as performance also means is that language is material and consequential. Language is not only the semiotic tools for communicating meanings, but also constructs social realties. As my work illustrated, the language used in the classrooms, the texts, and the subject positions imposed on these young men constructed realities for them. This identity performance should be highlighted in the SLA literature because it pertains to both how we conceptualize language and language instruction.   Intersectionality of Identities vs. Multiple Identities   As I explained in the previous section, Norton (2013) highlights that identity is multiple, and individuals are ascribed multiple subject positions, and they often find their strongest voice when speaking from their positions in which they have the most power. Norton and McKinney (2011) explains, ÒThe construct of identity as multiple is particularly powerful because learners who struggle to speak one identity position can reframe their relationship with their interlocutors and reclaim alternative, more powerful identities from which to speakÓ(p. 74). Norton illustrates  !!!269 this conception of multiple identities with the example from her study of Martina, who used her identity as mother to put herself at a stronger social position in relation to her younger co-workers who asked her to do the cleaning job at work place. This view of multiple identities is valuable because it accentuates the agency of language learners, and because it captures the negotiated nature of identity.   Complementing, and complicating, this view of multiple identities, I argue that the intersectional nature of identities should also be highlighted in the SLA research. As I have discussed in Chapter 3, these immigrant young men took on multiple identities, and their sense of being a young man was influenced by their ethnic, racial, language, religion and sexual identities. However, the intersectionality perspective also allows us to see that these young men were not only gendered, but they were also racialized, classed, and discriminated against by their language, religion, and perceived sexuality. Intersectionality perspective asks us to see the compounding effects of multiple forms of oppression that these young men were subjected to. For instance, Tiger was subjected to multiple subordinations Ð racism, linguicism, and homophobia discourse, and he was not only marginalized in the school, but also in the ESL classroom. To highlight their multiple subordinations, of course, does not mean to view them as passive individuals without agency. Actually these boys understood their being discriminated, and they often spoke up against the injustice.  Intertwined Nature of Identity Performance, Language Use, and Social Identification   This study also indicates that identities influenced these young menÕs investment in language learning. In addition, their identity performance was intertwined with the process of language teaching and learning. TigerÕs performance of masculinity through stylized L2 speech is one example. He creatively appropriated the language practice activity and transformed the  !!!270 sentence starters into narrative frames for his identity performance. However, his performance of masculine identities was not in alignment with the teacherÕs goal of socializing these students into Ògood learnerÓ identities. Therefore, the misalignment led to the teacherÕs identifying him as ÒNot SeriousÓ student. This intertwined nature of language learning and identity performance illustrates the complex nature of classroom interaction in the language classroom, which needs to be highlighted in both research and practice. Discourse Analysis and Researching Identities In this ethnographic research, I situated my analysis of identity performance and negotiation in multiple layers of discourses, which I have come to realize as a productive conceptualization for examining the complexities of identity negotiation and learning. I looked at discourse at three levels: the micro-level classroom interaction, the meso-level school discourses, and the macro level normative discourses. Integrating the micro and macro level of analysis is not newly, as it has been called for and done by different researchers (e.g. Baxter, 2008; De Costa, 2010; Holland, 2007; Juzwik, 2006; Rampton, 2013). I reflect on how including multiple layers of discourses in the research allowed me to reach nuanced interpretation of these young menÕs identity negotiation and their engagement with learning.   As I illustrated in my analysis in Chapter 4, I started with my analysis of TigerÕs performance of a funny, ÒladdishÓ masculine identity through analyzing the features of his use of language, both the content and the structure of his language use (Bucholtz & Hall, 2008; Juzwik, 2006; Talmy, 2011). Informed by the analytic lens and tools of interactional sociolinguistics, I focused on what type of words he used, how he said them, in what contexts he used the language in that stylized way, and for what purpose, and how his use of language invited different acts of positioning. This micro-level analysis allowed me to see both his stylized L2 use and the socially  !!!271 situated nature of his stylized speech. My analysis indicated that Tiger used his stylized L2 speech to construct a humorous image. His Òdoing funnyÓ in the sentence starter language activities was also a way to challenge the discourse of ÒGood LearnerÓ circulated in the school and enacted in Mrs. BrownÕs language teaching. It was this second layer of meso discourse that allowed me to see why Mrs. Brown positioned him as a ÒNot SeriousÓ learner. When I analyzed all the sentence starters that she used in her ESL curriculum, I realized that there was a discourse of ÒGood LearnerÓ embraced by the teacher and circulated in the school, which shaped Mrs. BrownÕs design of the language curriculum. Attending to the macro-level discourses in the analysis allowed me to connect TigerÕs local use of language and identity performance with the larger normative discourses like heterosexual normalcy discourses, hyper masculinity discourses, and normative notions about race, language, religion, etc.  Leaving out any layer of the analysis would result in a less nuanced understanding of these young menÕs identity negotiation and their ways of engaging learning. If we stop the analysis at the first two levels, we would be led to blame Tiger for his reproductive resistance. With critical discourse analysis of the hyper masculinity discourses, I have argued that TigerÕs acting out and his performance of the nonschoolish masculinity was a result of conforming to the social norms of doing gender as a young man. Therefore, the root of the problem was not the man, but the normative discourses that define what the man should do and should not do. Similarly, as my analysis shows in Chapter 5, OmarÕs performance of Ònon-reader identityÓ was social, which means that his putting on the non-reader identity in the social contexts in order to construct a cool, non-nerdish identity, which again illustrates that these young menÕs identity  !!!272 negotiation were shaped by the normative discourses of masculinity and the notion of reading as feminine.  If we leave out the micro-level analysis, we would not be able to understand how learner identity category such as a ÒNot SeriousÓ Learner was discursively constructed. Through analyzing the moment-to-moment classroom interaction, I have illustrated how TigerÕs stylized L2 during the language practice activities led to the teachersÕ identification of him as being Ònot serious.Ó The language, both used by the student and the teachers, was material and consequential. The teachersÕ use of Ònot seriousÓ over time constructed Tiger the Not Serious Learner identity. This discursive construction of learner identity also played out in the class discussion of their engagement with reading, during which the three young men were positioned as different readers. The micro-level analysis of classroom interaction also allowed us to see even how TigerÕs masculinity performance contributed to the formation of the larger norms. His stylized speech infused with language of heterosexuality, masculinity, and violence, which further perpetuated the image of men defined and constrained by the normative discourses.  This multiple-layer discourse analysis afforded analytical depth, particularly productive for research aiming at understanding the complexity and the situated nature of identity negotiation. Future discourse based research might further seek new approaches integrating micro and macro analysis, as well as more understanding of the analytical tensions in doing this type of research.   Masculinities and Multilingual Education: Concluding Thoughts On a Sunday morning in the early April of 2016 Mrs. Brown and I met in a coffee house. I invited her to meet. I wanted to talk with her about an idea that I have been considering for quite a period of time Ð how to disrupt the ÒgayÓ discourses and the heterosexual normalcy  !!!273 discourses circulated among the students.  One reason that I wanted to initiate this possibility was that I increasingly became aware of the prevalence of the ÒgayÓ discourses circulating among students, not only among some of the immigrant young men, but also among the girls, as well as among the local students. As I discussed in Chapter 3 in different contexts Tiger was put down or teased by different students with the ÒgayÓ discourses. In other contexts, Omar also shared intolerant comments on homosexual men. Girls also participated in using this type of discourses to judge people. As I illustrated in the interaction between Zaina and Tiger in Chapter 3, Zaina picked up the heterosexual normalcy discourses. During the Homecoming Parade in September of 2015, Xuexue a Chinese girl also teased a freshman boy from China, commenting that the boyÕs face flushed whenever he talked to Omar. She was hinting that this boy might be gay. As I discussed in Chapter 2, the AHGEA group members also explained that ÒgayÓ slur was not uncommon in the hallway and locker common areas that were out of the gaze of adults.  Two particular incidents in which Tiger was part of it made me realize the perpetuating forces of the ÒgayÓ discourse. Although Tiger had been the target of the ÒgayÓ discourse, he had also used it to put down other students. For example, one time during the noisy class break time in Mr. FordÕs classroom, Tiger and Anthony, one of the boys in the Geometry class, were joking around in the classroom. He grabbed Anthony and hugged him from the side, with one arm tied around AnthonyÕs neck and his head against his captiveÕs. Although they both seemed to be knowing that they were just joking around, I was surprised and upset that Tiger teased Anthony, showing off and telling to the bystander boys that ÒLook! AnthonyÕs gay.Ó It troubled me because he imposed onto another boy the same oppressive ÒgayÓ discourse he was subject to. Even though that was enacted within a playful frame, it illustrated the pervasiveness of  !!!274 heterosexual norms.  Another incident is that Tiger also asked me if I had a girlfriend. Once during homework support time, he asked if I had a girlfriend, I told him that I did not. Then he asked me why. When he asked me, he was smiling. I did not know how to respond, I just said I was too busy with school work. He then dropped the topic. That was not the only time he asked. The second time I used the same answer. I could not figure out why he asked me the question. Maybe he was just curious. But whatever the reason was, he was asking within a heterosexual frame. His questions dragged me back to my painful memory of the time when I was in China. My colleagues and my parents would always push me and ask me where my girlfriend was. I came to the United States not just for academic pursuit, but also for escape. I was not prepared for the issues of sexuality when I started the research. However, I did realize I needed to do something. This realization was not just because I found myself being subjected to the scrutiny of normative discourses. More importantly, it was a result of my reflection on my responsibility as a researcher, more specifically my increased understanding of participatory research. On December 5 2015 I wrote a memo, on my phone at midnight, about how I came to recognize my researcher responsibility and the need for participatory research. At that time I was attending the Literacy Research Association 2015 Annual Conference.    My understanding of feminist poststructuralist perspectives on masculinities and gender identities has also been an evolving process. My critical perspective also pushed me to critically examine my own assumptions, my own action, and any violence I might have done to the three young men that I worked with. On December 5, 2015 in that hotel room at Carlsbad, I lost my sleep, not because of insomnia, but because of a mixture of self-examination of research responsibility and excitement about my new understanding of what it meant to be a responsible researcher. Michelle Fine called for participatory research this afternoon in her invited speech at the conference. What does it mean for me to engage a participatory approach in my study? What should I do to help these young men understand how to disrupt gender binary and critically examine the heterosexuality normalcy discourses they are immersed in and subscribed to? What does it mean to these young men when I remained silent about my own sexuality and their jokes about or  !!!275 intolerant speeches about homosexuality? Should I do anything about it? Am I perpetuating the norms by avoiding confronting TigerÕs questions and OmarÕs speech, and by leaving the issues untouched?  After getting back to campus from the LRA conference, I talked to my colleagues and my advisor about my reflection and my thinking of needing to do something to change these young men and other ESL studentsÕ understanding of gender and sexuality. My plan was to first consult with Mrs. Brown to see if she would have any suggestions for how to integrate discussions about sexuality in her classes.   Mrs. Brown and I talked over coffee about this issue. I decided to include the transcripts of part of our conversation to illustrate a complexity involved in seeking for possibilities of disrupting normative discourses, particularly because issues of sexuality intersect with religious beliefs. As Mrs. Brown articulated in her thoughtful reflection, although she held strong beliefs about the problems of heterosexual normalcy discourses, she felt it was an issue too complicated to be formally addressed in her classroom through curriculum design, due to the super-diversity of differences in the space of her classroom.  Kongji:  So one thing that IÕve been thinking about is that Academic High is a school that focuses quite a bit on teaching students to be tolerant and understanding, along the lines of differences of culture, religion, race, etc. I have been hearing students, like different students, both boys and girls, sometimes they could say, Òoh, youÕre gay.Ó  Mrs. B: I wondered if you were heading in that direction. That is the area that I think a lot of students are too cavalier about using that word as a catch-all insult. They see it as an insult and just in general like I when you were there. Omar would bring up things now and then. Like there was a vocabulary word where you know the word was Òobject toÓ or Òprotest,Ó he would say, ÒI object to the idea that man and man could be together or whatever like that.Ó I know where he is coming from because he is strict strict Muslim and that how they are. But it is really a difficult line to walk in ESL because of the religious reasons. I always told them like, ÒIÕm not going to tolerate you talking that way. I understand your opinion, anyway.Ó Go ahead. I will let you go ahead.  Kongji: Have you noticed if any other students have also done that? Mrs. B: Oh, yeah. I think students do. ItÕs definitely a thing yeah.  Kongji: I was wondering if you have thought about using curriculum to talk about these issues.  Mrs. B: ItÕs very hard because the father that you just met. Their family feels very strongly about this belief. You know. It has always been a struggle for me to address  !!!276 it specifically, maybe to bring in some short stories or whatever, because that is just one issue I feel strongly that itÕs not a sin. That is how somebody is. That is oneÕs genetic makeup, which is not something under your control. Giving the culture of some places have, who would choose that to endure that? It was not a choice, but itÕs just who you are. So I feel it very strongly. I do have a very hard time knowing I would be teaching something that would be so fundamental to their religion that if I came how they what is really like. I think I would have some strong opposition from their family. IÕm quite sure I would. So IÕve just chosen to, for example, on the day of silence that we used to have it, I would address it and say, ÒI understand some people in the classroom think this is a sin, but I ask you today to just keep your opinion because that is something I donÕt agree with and our school doesnÕt agree with. WeÕre trying to change the culture here and if you have that opinion, youÕre entitled to your opinion.Ó But I donÕt think we would get into, hmm, you know being outspoken about Ògay is wrongÓ and Ògay is a choiceÓ and Ògay is a sin.Ó So, I kind of walk a line stating what I stand, where our school stands without making it a big focus, or part of my curriculum, because I would really cause too many families in that way. IÕve decided, you know, there are some issues that I think they are now in my lands things have to change. For example, in some other culture, boys have to be separated from girls for education, and in the classroom they want the boys to stay here and the girls there. I used to do that but now I come around and thought you know thatÕs something that their traditions have to adapt to but thatÕs a cultural thing, not a religious thing. Sort of, but anyway. But itÕs very hard for me to fight the QurÕan, you know. And even some of my students, although I donÕt hear much about this. There are some Christians who believe that. But I havenÕt encountered that in my classroom. But yeah, thatÕs where IÕm coming from. They know clearly where I stand, and I wonÕt tolerate it in the room, but trying to change their view I canÕt go that far.   É  It just feels like they would be torn because they really do respect whatever I share and teach. They would want to embrace that, but then their home teaching, their holy book teaching [is different.] I think they would feel really [torn] the ones who [are Muslims]. But at the same time I hear what youÕre saying Ð If I do have students who need a place for that, would I be able to let them know that there is a space. Yeah. I thought about this for a long time, you know. I just think I am at the place where I feel the most that IÕm not going to offense. This is a place their kids are going to be instructed and against their family tradition. And I donÕt talk about pre-marital sex even though my strong opinion is that É That would É family would be really upset about that.   Mrs. BrownÕs response indicated that teachers are constrained by their professional role in what they can do to address sensitive issues like gender, sexuality, race, and religion. It also seems that it would require efforts from schools, communities, and families. As I am writing this dissertation, I have learned Academic High is in the process of revamping it sex education  !!!277 curriculum, and several students from the AHGEA group have been involved in this effort. The AHGEA group made a milestone in their social justice activism of promoting gender and sexuality equality in the school, which might be a viable way to tackle these challenging and sensitive issues. On one evening in May 2016, the Academic High Gender Equality Association group held a special weekly meeting Ð meeting with the districtÕs School Board of Education and school administrators. Six of the eight members of School Board of Education and one assistant principal joined the groupÕs meeting that evening. At the meeting the AHGEA group members made two proposals to the Board and the school Ð opening a gender-neutral restroom and making gender and sexuality education part of the teachersÕ professional development program. At the meeting the proposal of the opening of a gender-neutral restroom was received with little resistance from the Board and the school administrator. However, the second proposal did not gain much approval from the districtÕs superintendent. She was ambivalent about the possibility of including the professional development sessions on gender and sexuality education for the schoolÕs teachers. She explained that she was worried that adding professional development sessions on this topic would mean that other programs would need to go, which she was not sure about. At the meeting I also made a suggestion, asking the school to consider to reinstate the Day of Silence as a way to promote awareness of the LGBT rights and the discriminations against this sexual minority group. The Day of Silence was a school wide event that used to be observed at Academic High. Through my interview with teachers and students, I learned that the school used to have more school-wide events related to LGBT issues because of one openly coming out lesbian teacher who was outspoken and active in promoting awareness among students. On the Day of Silence any student could wear a sticker say that they would like to choose to be silent that day to show their solidarity to the LGBT individuals who are silenced by injustice and  !!!278 discriminations. When the teacher left the school due to health, the events she organized also ended. I explained at the meeting that this school wide event can be a great opportunity for both teachers and students to engage conversations and discussions which otherwise might not be possible to initiate.  About one month later, at their regular bi-weekly meeting the school districtÕs Board of Education passed the motion of opening a gender-neutral restroom at Academic High. They decided to remodel one of the existing restrooms and change it into a gender-neutral restroom. However, the Board membersÕ discussions about the motion at the meeting indicated that they were divided on the urgency of opening the restroom, and more work is needed to disrupt gender binary and promote justice for sexual minorities. At the meeting two of the Board members were reluctant to pass the motion because they were concerned about the building code regulations and the financial cost for remodeling one of the existing restrooms into a gender-neutral restroom. They argued that changing one of the existing restrooms, either boysÕ restrooms or girlÕs restrooms, would reduce the number of the restrooms for boys or girls, which might violate the current building codes of required number of restrooms for either boys or girls. In the end the motion was revised to say that the Board asks the superintendent to open a gender neutral restroom at Academic High in the fall of 2016 with the condition that the current proposal does not violate building codes. What the Board discussion revealed was that gender binary is still prevalent in the publicÕs understanding of gender, and gender identities are often confused with sex. And bureaucratic policies can still trump social principles. The argument of building codes of restrooms is an example of using the notion of sex differences to interpret the concept of gender identities that is created to disrupt the deeply rooted notion of matching gender to sexual bodies. Excited by the progress and, at the same time, reminded again of the force of normative  !!!279 discourses, I plan to attend the next Board meeting to speak at the public comment time. I plan to bring up the AHGEA groupÕs proposal of offering professional development for teachers because I realize that without preparing teachers for discussing these issues with their students, a gender-neutral restroom might just be a token, leaving the normative discourses untouched and unchallenged.   The progressive motion that the Board passed occurred against a backdrop of the whole societyÕs debates on gender equality, gender identities, LGBT rights, and womenÕs abortion rights. The fruit of the AHGEA groupÕs activism might have required more time, if it were a different context. Although none of the three young men was involved in the AHGEA group, I hope, with more activism at both the local and societal level, they will be exposed to explicit curriculum in gender and sexuality curriculum in the near future, and gain diverse perspectives on doing masculinities and learning.  While changes are taking place, schools like Academic High still have much work to do to improve their education for immigrant young men like Omar, Tiger, and Chris. My work with them and their teachers illustrated that they were simultaneously marked and invisible, and were marginalized in their classrooms and the school. Their negotiation of masculinity led them to engaging complex identity negotiation and performing their identities in the ways that frustrated, baffled, and sometimes amused their teachers and fellow classmates. The social nature of immigrant young menÕs identity performances, their invisibility as minoritized individuals, and their vulnerability as marginalized students, are worth of particular attention from educators and teachers.  The stories of Omar, Tiger, and Chris presented a convincing plea that education is not just about academics, and it is much more than teaching them the words or developing the skills  !!!280 to read and write. Education is about identities and empowering young minds to develop their identities and make social changes. As we see across the chapters, each of these young men brought their identities to the business of teaching and learning into the classrooms. They spoke, read, and wrote to tell people who they were, and to connect and construct their identities. However, this part of their learning and school lives were largely ignored and even misunderstood.  The school, the classrooms, and the society constructed social spaces and discourses that shaped these young menÕs subjectivities. The discourses that they were living within and were subjected to impacted their experiences and their learning. The null curriculum of gender, sexuality, race, and religion in Academic High, the ÒGood LearnerÓ discourses constructed in the ESL classroom, the gender and masculinity discourses shaped by the teachersÕ pedagogies, combined with the local and societal discourses of immigrant, race, language, and religion, weaved the discourses that these young men had to live through, rebel against, and be subjected to. The discursive construction of Tiger as a ÒNot SeriousÓ, Omar as a non-reader, and Chris as a reader illustrated that language and discourses are tools that shape subjectivities, and these discourses are powerful social mechanisms that dictate their learning outcomes and future.  However, these systems of power are often left unexamined and unchallenged in schools and in our debates about schools. As migration is increasingly entangled with discourses of nationalism, diversity, globalization, race, and religion in both local and global contexts, the issues that revealed from the stories of Omar, Tiger, and Chris are more than ever present and compelling. It is our responsibility to care for them and take action to construct discourses that are liberating and empowering for these minoritized learners and many other individuals like them.     !!!281           APPENDICES              !!!282 APPENDIX A   Transcription Notations Table 17: Transcription Notations !     !!!283 APPENDIX B   Research Participant Information and Consent Form  You are being asked to participate in a research study. Researchers are required to provide a consent form to inform you about the research study, to convey that participation is voluntary, to explain risks and benefits of participation, and to empower you to make an informed decision. You should feel free to ask the researchers any questions you may have.   Study Title: Adolescent English-Learner StudentsÕ Identity Negotiation And Their Trajectories of Learning to Become Students in a U.S. High School Researcher and Title:  Kongji Qin, doctoral student Department and Institution:  Department of Teacher Education, College of Education, Michigan State University Address and Contact Information:  Department of Teacher Education 620 Farm Lane   Room 301D, Erickson Hall Michigan State University East Lansing, MI  48824 Sponsor: Dr. Lynn Paine   1.  PURPOSE OF RESEARCH  You are being asked to participate in a research study of adolescent immigrant studentsÕ identity development and their learning in school.  You have been selected as a possible participant in this study because your name has appeared on the list of names involved in the ESL program.  From this study, the researchers hope to learn how immigrant students negotiate their identities in school, how they learn and use the English language, and how they engage with other academic work and social events inside and outside school.  This study will last for one year.  If you are under 18, you cannot be in this study without parental permission.  2. WHAT YOU WILL DO  In this study you will participate in interviews with the researcher.  The interviews will be conducted only between you and the researcher in a room with no other individualsÕ presence.  You will write weekly journals on how you learn and use English inside and outside school.  The researcher will collect your weekly journals and your homework and other assignments that you have turned in for class as part of the research data.  In order to keep your participation in this study confidential, you will be provided with an audio recorder so that you can record yourself in class and/or other spaces.  None of your participation on this study will not be graded or evaluated.   3. POTENTIAL BENEFITS    !!!284 You will not directly benefit from your participation in this study. However, your participation in this study may contribute to your understanding of language learning process and may build your confidence in learning.   4. POTENTIAL RISKS  There are no foreseeable risks associated with participation in this study.  During my fieldwork I will keep the participants' identity confidential.  I will try to protect their confidentiality by not isolating any particular participant in public spaces.  When I visit any classroom, I will not identify any individual student, and will explain to teachers that I am interested in that class.     Measures to ensure confidentiality also include the use of pseudonyms and the alteration of details (not central to the nature of the data) that may lead to the identification of subjects and/or circumstances.  Audio and video recordings will be filed electronically and will not be shown to any individual without permission from all of the participants involved.     5. PRIVACY AND CONFIDENTIALITY  The data for this project will be collected anonymously. The data for this project will be kept confidential.  Your names and other related information in the data will be de-identified. Your teachers at the school and the administrators in the school will not have access to the data.  Only the researcher, the sponsor, and the Institutional Review Board at Michigan State University will have access to the data. The data collected will be stored on a laptop disconnected from the Internet during the study.  Once the transcription of the recordings is done, the recordings will be destroyed.   Although we will make every effort to keep your data confidential there are certain times, such as a court order, where we may have to disclose your data.  In situations such as child abuse the researcher is required by law to report, and in circumstances like suicide or homicide your information will also be released.   The results of this study may be published or presented at professional meetings, but the identities of all research participants will remain anonymous.   However, if you would like to be identified, please sign below by writing your initials in the blank.  o!I agree to allow my identity to be disclosed in reports and presentations.  Yes   No  Initials ____________  The study requires audio recording and, occasionally, video recording of your participation in class and the interviews. Please sign below by writing your initials in the blank.  o!I agree to allow audiotaping/videotaping of the interview.  Yes   No  Initials ____________  6. YOUR RIGHTS TO PARTICIPATE, SAY NO, OR WITHDRAW     Participation is voluntary. Refusal to participate will involve no penalty or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. You may discontinue participation at any time without penalty or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled.  !!!285 ¥!You have the right to say no. ¥!You may change your mind at any time and withdraw.  ¥!You may choose not to answer specific questions or to stop participating at any time.   7.  COSTS AND COMPENSATION FOR BEING IN THE STUDY      Your participation in this study will not incur costs.  In situations that you might need to use other transportations than school bus due to your participation of the study, the researcher will provide transportation for you.    8.  CONTACT INFORMATION    If you have concerns or questions about this study, such as scientific issues, how to do any part of it, or to report an injury, please contact the researcher Kongji Qin at XXX, or by e-mail XXX, or by regular mail at Department of Teacher Education, Michigan State University, Erickson Hall 301D, 620 Farm Lane, East Lansing, MI 48824.  If you have questions or concerns about your role and rights as a research participant, would like to obtain information or offer input, or would like to register a complaint about this study, you may contact, anonymously if you wish, the Michigan State UniversityÕs Human Research Protection Program at 517-355-2180, Fax 517-432-4503, or e-mail irb@msu.edu or regular mail at Olds Hall, 408 West Circle Drive #207, MSU, East Lansing, MI 48824.  9.  DOCUMENTATION OF INFORMED CONSENT.  Your signature below means that you voluntarily agree to participate in this research study.    ________________________________________  _____________________________ Signature        Date  ________________________________________  _____________________________ Signature of Assenting Child (13-17; if appropriate)   Date  You will be given a copy of this form to keep.          !!!286 APPENDIX C  Letter to the Principal for Permission  August 17, 2014  Dear Mr. XXX:  My name is Kongji Qin, and I am currently a doctoral student in the Department of Teacher Education of the College of Education at Michigan State University.  I am writing to seek your approval to conduct my dissertation study at XXX High School.  My research interest is in English language learnersÕ language development and their identity.  Next semester I will be working on my dissertation study.  My goal for the dissertation study is to understand the relationship between English language learnersÕ language use, identity negotiation and their engagement with schoolwork.  I will be focusing on examining how they use language(s) to express their identity, and how language is used as a resource to construct their identity.    I hope to focus on three to five immigrant students in this study.  It is also my hope that I can interview other people in the school who work with these students to gain multiple perspectives on the issues that I am seeking to understand.  My plan is that I will invite some students to participate in my study starting from the beginning of the school year.  I will observe the focal students mainly in their ESL classes.  I also hope the students will recommend other classes they would like me to see in order to understand how they negotiate their identities and engage with academic work at different spaces in the school.  I will need to audio tape the focal studentsÕ participation in the classroom.  If it is possible, I want to occasionally use videotaping.    I know you must be extremely busy as the fall semester is approaching.  I welcome any question as you consider my request.  I am best reached through email (XXX).  If you would prefer to talk in person or by phone, however, I would be happy to set up a time.   Thank you very much for considering my request.  I look forward to your reply.  Sincerely,  Kongji Qin  Ph.D. Student in Curriculum, Instruction and Teacher Education Department of Teacher Education Michigan State University    !!!287 APPENDIX D  Interview Protocols with Student Participants Interview 1 Background Information 1.!Can you tell me a little about yourself?  a.!Where were you born?  b.!Where did you grow up?  c.!How long have you been living in the United States?  2.!Can you tell me a little about your family?   a.!How many people are there in your family?  b.!Who are you living with?  c.!Where do your family live in town? d.!What do they do for work? Where do they go for school/college?  3.!When did your family come to the United States?  a.!When did you come to the U.S.?  b.!Who did you come with? c.!Why did your family choose to come to the United States?  d.!What type of work did your _____ (family members) do before they come here? e.!What was it like for you to come to the United States?   4.!What language do your family speak at home? a.!What languages do you speak? b.!What do you usually use this language for? (e.g. listening, speaking, reading, writing) c.!Who do you usually speak this language with?  d.!Where do you often use this language?  e.!Is there a time that you avoid using this language? When and why?   School Experiences before Coming to the U.S. 5.!Where did you go for school before you came to the United States?  a.!Can you tell me a little bit about your school? ¥!Where is the school located? ¥!What does the building look like? ¥!What students go to the school? b.!How did you like your school there?  6.!Tell me a little bit about what your school day was like.   a.!When did you get up?  b.!When did you go to school?  c.!How did you go to school?   !!!288 d.!What did you often do after school?  e.!What did you enjoy doing after school?  7.!What subjects did you study at school? What subjects did you like best? Why?  8.!Who was your best friend at school?   a.!Describe your best friend. b.!What did you do together?  9.!What did you like most about school? Why? a.!What has been most positive about your experience at that school? Explain. b.!What did you like least about that school? c.!What has been your most discouraging experience at the school? Explain.  10.!Who was your favorite teacher? Why did you like him/her?  11.!How would you describe yourself as a student in your school before you came to the United States? What five words would you use to describe yourself?  12.!How would you describe the students in your school? Tell me a little bit about the other students in your school.   Interview 2 The goal of the second interview is to gain an understanding of the student participantsÕ life in their current U.S. school, focusing on how they think about the importance of learning the English language, on their language use and language socialization and their identities, and on how they think they are as learners and individuals in different social spaces in the school.  Languages and the Academic Learning in the U.S. School 1.!When did you start to learn English? a.!How long have you been taking ESL classes?  b.!How do you like your ESL classes? Why or why not? c.!How do you like the students in your ESL classes? d.!Do you think your ESL classes are as important as other classes? Why or why not? e.!What else do you often do to learn English?  2.!How do you think about your English? a.!Do you feel that you can understand your textbooks? b.!What do you usually do if you donÕt understand the textbooks or the lessons?  3.!How often do you participate in class discussion?  a.!Do you enjoy speaking English in class? Why or why not? b.!Give me an example of the situation in which you did not feel like wanting to speak in class. c.!Give me an example of a situation in which you really wanted to speak in class.  !!!289  4.!Who is your favorite teacher at the school? Tell me a little bit about him/her. a.!What subject does he/she teach? b.!How many classes have you taken with him/her? c.!What makes you like him/her? Give me some examples of things about him or her that you liked.  Languages and the Socialization in the U.S. School 5.!When do you usually eat lunch? Do you have early lunch hour or late lunch hour?  a.!Do you eat lunch yourself or with someone? b.!Who do you usually go together to the cafeteria for lunch? c.!Where do you usually sit eating your lunch? d.!What do you usually talk about with your lunch partner(s)? e.!What language do you use? f.!What is it like for you to go eat lunch at the cafeteria?   6.!What hobbies do you have? What do you enjoy doing after school?  7.!What are your favorite places on campus? Why? a.!Who do you usually hang out with at these places? Describe the people who usually go to these places. b.!What do you do at these places?  8.!Tell me a little bit about your best friend(s) in this school. a.!Tell me when you got to know him/her. b.!Why do you like him/her as friends? c.!What do you often do when getting together? d.!What languages do you speak with your best friends? e.!What is it like to be with your friends?  9.!How would you describe yourself now in this school?  What five words would you use to describe yourself?  Languages and Relations with Family Members 10.!What language do you speak at home now? a.!Do you speak English at home? When do you speak English at home? b.!Do you speak your native language at home? With whom do you usually speak your native language?  11.!Do you watch TV at home? What are your favorite TV programs? a.!Do you watch TV online? Do you watch TV programs in your native language? b.!Do you read websites in your native language?  12.!Besides your family members, who else do you speak your native language? a.!When do you use your native language? b.!What do you use your native language for?  !!!290 c.!How do you use your native language?  Interview 3 1.!How do you like your life in the U.S.?  a.!Do you feel at home in the U.S.? b.!What makes you like it, or not like it? c.!Why?  2.!How would you describe yourself?  Would you say you are _________ (Chinese, Cuban É) or É?  3.!How important do you think it is for you to be a ______? Why?  4.!How important do you think it is for you to speak _______? Why?  5.!What does speaking English mean for you? What is it like for you to speak English?                  !!!291 APPENDIX E  Interview Protocols with Teacher Participants  1.!Can you tell me a little about yourself as a teacher?  a.!When did you become a teacher?  b.!And how long have you been teaching _____ in this school? c.!Besides teaching ______, have you taught any other subjects?  2.!If someone were to visit your classroom next week, what would this person see?  a.!For example, how do you organize the students' desks? b.!What is displayed on the classroom walls and why?  c.!How do the children behave?  3.!It is four weeks after the start of the school year. The principal informs you that a monolingual Vietnamese child will be joining your class next week. How do you respond? What preparations might you make? Why?  4.!If I were the parent of a child who is an ESL student, why would I want my child in your class? (Probes: knowledge, skills and experiences working with ESL students)  5.!Afredo just joined the school earlier this year as a junior. His previous schooling was in Spanish and his reports indicate that he had been an above average student.  Although he is making progress in learning English, his English is still insufficient for him to deal with the abstract concepts. The question you have been asked to address is whether Afredo should be enrolled in Algebra II. His father wants him to study Algebra II because he has already finished Algebra I in his school in Cuba. The guidance counselor believes that Afredo should be enrolled in Algebra I so that he can use the time saved from taking easier courses for additional English.   6.!Jihea comes from South Korea, and she has been in your class for three weeks. The transfer to the present school has been a difficult one for her. She left a close circle of friends in Korea and for the first few weeks appeared insecure and reticent.  Her English-speaking classmates complaints that her English is too difficult to understand, and nobody wants to have her during small group work time. What would you do? Why?  7.!What do you think your students might learn from you that you don't explicitly teach?  8.!If I ask you to give me a metaphor for ESL students, what metaphor would you use? Please explain why you use this metaphor. !   !!!292            BIBLIOGRAPHY              !!!293 BIBLIOGRAPHY  Aers, D., & Kress, G. R. (1981). The language of social order: Individual, society and historical process in King Lear. In D. Aers, B. Hodge, & G. R. Kress (Eds.), Literature, language, and society in England, 1580-1680 (pp. 75Ð99). Dublin: Gill and Macmillan. Ajrouch, K. J. (2004). Gender, race, and symbolic boundaries: Contested spaces of identity among Arab American adolescents. Sociological Perspectives, 47(4), 371Ð391. Alloway, N., & Gilbert, P. (1997). Boys and literacy: Lessons from Australia. Gender and Education, 9(1), 49Ð60. http://doi.org/10.1080/09540259721448 Alsultany, E. (2012). Arabs and Muslims in the media: Race and representation after 9/11. New York: New York University Press. Andrews, D. J. C. (2009). The construction of Black high-achiever identities in a predominantly White high school. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 40(3), 297Ð317. Archer, L. (2003). Race, masculinity and schooling: Muslim boys and education. Buckingham: Open University. Atkinson, D. (Ed.). (2011). Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (1st ed). New York, NY: Routledge. Attardo, S. (1997). The semantic foundations of cognitive theories of humor. Humor-International Journal of Humor Research, 10(4), 395Ð420. Bartlett, L. (2008). Bilingual literacies, social identification, and educational trajectories. Linguistics and Education, 18(3Ð4), 215Ð231. Baxter, J. (2003). Positioning gender in discourse: A feminist methodology. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Baxter, J. (2008). Post-structuralist analysis of classroom discourse. In M. Martin-Jones, A.-M. de Mejia, & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Language and Education (Vol. 3, pp. 826Ð836). New York, NY: Springer. Bendle, M. F. (2002). The crisis of ÒidentityÓ in high modernity. The British Journal of Sociology, 53(1), 1Ð18. Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The location of culture. New York, NY: Routledge.  !!!294 Blackburn, M. V. (2005). Disrupting dichotomies for social change: A review of, critique of, and complement to current educational literacy scholarship on gender. Research in the Teaching of English, 39(4), 398Ð416. Block, D., & Corona, V. (2014). Exploring class-based intersectionality. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 27(1), 27Ð42. http://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.894053 Bloome, D. (2005). Discourse analysis and the study of classroom language and literacy events: A microethnographic perspective. Mahwah, N.J: L. Erlbaum Associates. Bloome, D., Carter, S. P., Christian, B. M., Madrid, S., Otto, S., Shuart-Faris, N., & Smith, M. (2008). On discourse analysis in classrooms: Approaches to language and literacy research. New York: Teachers College Press. Blow, C. M. (2014, July 10). The crisis of children at the border. The New York Times, p. NA(L). New York, N.Y. Bourdieu, P. (1977). The economics of linguistic exchanges. Social Science Information, 16(6), 645Ð668. http://doi.org/10.1177/053901847701600601 Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. Bucholtz, M. (2003). Theories of discourse as theories of gender: Discourse analysis in language and gender studies. In J. Holmes & M. Meyerhoff (Eds.), The handbook of language and gender (pp. 43Ð68). Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub. Bucholtz, M. (2011). White kids: Language, race and styles of youth identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bucholtz, M., & Hall, K. (2005). Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies, 7(4Ð5), 585Ð614. Bucholtz, M., & Hall, K. (2008). Finding identity: Theory and data. Multilingua - Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication, 27(1Ð2), 151Ð163. Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York, NY: Routledge. Butler, J. (2006a). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York, NY: Routledge. Butler, J. (2006b). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge.  !!!295 Cameron, D. (1997). Theoretical debates in feminist linguistics: Questions of sex and gender. In R. Wodak (Ed.), Gender and discourse (pp. 21Ð36). Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications. Cameron, D. (2000). Styling the worker: Gender and the commodification of language in the globalized service economy. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 4(3), 323Ð347. http://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9481.00119 Cameron, D. (2006). On language and sexual politics. New York, NY: Routledge. Carbado, D. W., Crenshaw, K. W., Mays, V. M., & Tomlinson, B. (2013). Intersectionality: Mapping the movement of a theory. Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race, 10(2), 303Ð312. http://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X13000349 Carter, P. L. (2005). KeepinÕ it real: School success beyond black and white. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Cisneros, J. D. (2015). A nation of immigrants and a nation of laws: Race, multiculturalism, and neoliberal exception in Barack ObamaÕs immigration discourse. Communication, Culture & Critique, 8(3), 356Ð375. http://doi.org/10.1111/cccr.12088 Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities (1st ed.). Berkeley, Calif: University of California Press. Connell, R. W. (1996). Teaching the boys: New research on masculinity, and gender strategies for schools. Teachers College Record, 98(2), 206Ð235. Connell, R. W. (2005). Masculinities (2nd ed.). Berkeley, Calif: University of California Press. Coupland, N. (2001). Dialect stylization in radio talk. Language in Society, 30(3), 345Ð375. Crenshaw, K. W. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), 139. Crenshaw, K. W. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241Ð1299. Darvin, R., & Norton, B. (2014). Social class, identity, and migrant students. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 13(2), 111Ð117. Darvin, R., & Norton, B. (2015). Identity and a model of investment in applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 35, 36Ð56. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190514000191 Davidson, A. L. (1996). Making and molding identity in schools: Student narratives on race, gender, and academic engagement. Albany: State University of New York Press.  !!!296 Davies, B., & Harr”, R. (1990). Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20(1), 43Ð63. De Costa, P. I. (2010). Reconceptualizing language, language learning, and the adolescent immigrant language learner in the age of postmodern globalization. Language and Linguistics Compass, 4(9), 769Ð781. De Costa, P. I., & Norton, B. (2016). Future directions in identity research on language learning and teaching. In S. Preece (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Language and Identity (pp. 586Ð601). Routledge. Dutro, E. (2002). ÒUs boys like to read football and boy stuffÓ: Reading masculinities, performing boyhood. Journal of Literacy Research, 34(4), 465Ð500. Dutro, E. (2008). Boys reading ÒAmerican girlsÓ: WhatÕs at stake in debates about what boys wonÕt read. In R. F. Hammett & K. Sanford (Eds.), Boys, girls, and the myths of literacies and learning (pp. 69Ð90). Toronto: Canadian ScholarsÕ Press. Eisner, E. W. (1985). The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of school programs (2nd ed). New York, N.Y.: Macmillan. Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis (1st ed.). New York: Norton. Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. New York, NY: Longman. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. New York, NY: Longman. Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. New York, NY: Routledge. Ferguson, A. A. (2000). Bad boys: public schools in the making of black masculinity. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Fix, M., & Passel, J. S. (2003). U.S. immigration: Trends and implications for schools. Presented at the National Association for Bilingual EducationÕs NCLB Implementation, New Orleans, LA. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED474609 Flinders, D. J., Noddings, N., & Thornton, S. J. (1986). The null curriculum: Its theoretical basis and practical implications. Curriculum Inquiry, 16(1), 33. http://doi.org/10.2307/1179551 Flores-Gonz⁄lez, N. (2002). School kids/street kids: Identity development in Latino students. New York: Teachers College Press. Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge (1st ed.). New York, NY: Pantheon Books.  !!!297 Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977. New York, NY: Pantheon Books. Francis, B. (2002). Relativism, Realism, and Feminism: An analysis of some theoretical tensions in research on gender identity. Journal of Gender Studies, 11(1), 39Ð54. http://doi.org/10.1080/09589230120115158 Francis, B. (2008). Teaching manfully? Exploring gendered subjectivities and power via analysis of men teachersÕ gender performance. Gender and Education, 20(2), 109Ð122. http://doi.org/10.1080/09540250701797226 Garc™a, O., Kleifgen, J. A., & Falchi, L. (2008). From English language learners to emergent bilinguals. Teachers College, Columbia University.  Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall. Gee, J. P. (1985). The narrativization of experience in the oral style. The Journal of Education, 167(1), 9Ð35. Gee, J. P. (2000). Identity as an analytic lens for research in education. Review of Research in Education, 25, 99Ð125. Gee, J. P. (2011). Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses (4th ed.). Routledge. Gee, J. P. (2014). How to do discourse analysis: A toolkit (Second Edition). New York: Routledge. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper & Row. Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Goffman, E. (1983). The interaction order: American Sociological Association 1982 Presidential Address. American Sociological Review, 48(1), 1. http://doi.org/10.2307/2095141 Gumperz, J. J. (1977). Sociocultural knowledge in conversational inference. In M. Saville-Troike (Ed.), Linguistics and Anthropology: [papers] (pp. 191Ð211). Washington: Georgetown University Press. Gumperz, J. J. (1982a). Discourse strategies. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Gumperz, J. J. (1982b). Language and social identity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Gumperz, J. J., & Cook-Gumperz, J. (2008). Studying language, culture, and society: Sociolinguistics or linguistic anthropology? Journal of Sociolinguistics, 12(4), 532Ð545.  !!!298 Halberstam, J. (1998). Female masculinity. Durham: Duke University Press. Hall, S. (1996). Who needs ÒidentityÓ? In S. Hall & P. Du Gay (Eds.), Questions of cultural identity (pp. 1Ð18). Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage. Hall, S. (Ed.). (1997). Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices. London: Sage Publications. Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman. Harklau, L. (1994). ESL versus mainstream classes: Contrasting L2 learning environments. TESOL Quarterly, 28(2), 241. http://doi.org/10.2307/3587433 Harklau, L. (2007). The adolescent English language learner: Identities lost and found. In J. Cummins & C. Davison (Eds.), International handbook of English language teaching (pp. 639Ð653). New York, NY: Springer. Hay, J. (2000). Function of humor in the conversations of men and women. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 709Ð742. Heller, M. (2006). Linguistic minorities and modernity: A sociolinguistic ethnography (2nd ed). New York, NY: Continuum. Heller, M. (2011). Paths to post-nationalism: A critical ethnography of language and identity. New York: Oxford University Press. Hodge, B., & Kress, G. R. (1988). Social semiotics. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press. Holland, D. (2007). Local matters: The time/space of social identification and learning: Essay Review of Learning Identity: The Joint Emergence of Social Identification and Academic Learning by Stanton Wortham. Human Development, 50(2Ð3), 165Ð170. Holland, D., & Lachicotte, W. (2007). Vygotsky, Mead, and the new sociocultural studies of identity. In H. Daniels, M. Cole, & J. Wertsch (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to Vygotsky (pp. 101Ð135). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Holland, D., Lachicotte, W., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (1998). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. Holland, D., & Leander, K. (2004). Ethnographic studies of positioning and subjectivity: An introduction. Ethos, 32(2), 127Ð139. Hruska, B. L. (2004). Constructing gender in an English dominant kindergarten: Implications for second language learners. TESOL Quarterly, 38(3), 459Ð485. http://doi.org/10.2307/3588349  !!!299 Hymes, D. (1962). The ethnography of speaking. In Anthropology and Human Behavior (pp. 13Ð53). Washington, D.C.: Anthropological Society of Washington. Hymes, D. (1974). Foundations in sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Ibrahim, A. E. K. M. (1999). Becoming black: Rap and hip-hop, race, gender, identity, and the politics of ESL learning. TESOL Quarterly, 33(3), 349. http://doi.org/10.2307/3587669 Ismaili, K. (2010). Surveying the many fronts of the war on immigrants in post"9/11 US society. Contemporary Justice Review, 13(1), 71Ð93. http://doi.org/10.1080/10282580903549235 Jaspers, J. (2006). Stylizing standard Dutch by Moroccan boys in Antwerp. Linguistics and Education, 17(2), 131Ð156. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2006.09.001 Jaworski, A., & Coupland, N. (2006). Introduction: Perspectives on discourse analysis. In A. Jaworski & N. Coupland (Eds.), The discourse reader (2. ed, pp. 1Ð37). London: Routledge. Juzwik, M. M. (2006). Situating narrative-minded research: A commentary on Anna Sfard and Anna PrusakÕs ÒTelling Identities.Ó Educational Researcher, 35(9), 13Ð21. Kehily, M. J., & Nayak, A. (1997). ÒLads and LaughterÓ: Humour and the production of heterosexual hierarchies. Gender and Education, 9(1), 69Ð88. http://doi.org/10.1080/09540259721466 Kissau, S., & Wierzalis, E. (2008). Gender identity and homophobia: The impact on adolescent males studying French. The Modern Language Journal, 92(3), 402Ð413. Kramsch, C. J. (2010). The multilingual subject: What foreign language learners say about their experience and why it matters. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Larsen-Freeman, D., & Anderson, M. (2011). Techniques and principles in language teaching (3rd ed). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Lee, J. S., & Anderson, K. T. (2009). Negotiating linguistic and cultural identities: Theorizing and constructing opportunities and risks in education. Review of Research in Education, 33(1), 181Ð211. Lee, S. J. (2001). More than Òmodel minoritiesÓ or ÒdelinquentsÓ: A look at Hmong American high school students. Harvard Educational Review, 71(3), 505Ð528. Lee, S. J. (2004). Hmong American masculinities: Creating new identities in the United States. In N. Way & J. Y. Chu (Eds.), Adolescent boys: Exploring diverse cultures of boyhood (pp. 13Ð30). New York: New York University Press.  !!!300 Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. Oxford, OX, UK"; Cambridge, Mass., USA: Blackwell. Li, G., & Wang, L. (Eds.). (2008). Model minority myth revisited: An interdisciplinary approach to demystifying Asian American educational experiences. Charlotte, NC: IAP. Liaw, K.-L., & Frey, W. H. (2007). Multivariate explanation of the 1985Ð1990 and 1995Ð2000 destination choices of newly arrived immigrants in the United States: the beginning of a new trend? Population, Space and Place, 13(5), 377Ð399. http://doi.org/10.1002/psp.459 Mac an Ghaill, M. (1994). The making of men: Masculinities, sexualities and schooling. Buckingham: Open University Press. Martin, M. (2013, February 13). Dads weigh in on why boys fall behind. Tell Me More. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/2013/02/12/171806325/dads-weigh-in-on-why-boys-fall-behind Mart™nez-Rold⁄n, C. M., & Malav”, G. (2004). Language ideologies mediating literacy and identity in bilingual contexts. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 4(2), 155Ð180. Massey, D. B. (2005). For space. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE. McCall, L. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30(3), 1771Ð1800. http://doi.org/10.1086/426800 McKay, S. L., & Wong, S.-L. C. (1996). Multiple discourses, multiple identities: Investment and agency in second-language learning among Chinese adolescent immigrant students. Harvard Educational Review, 66(3), 577Ð608. Mead, G. H. (1917). The conscientious objector. New York, NY: National Security League. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self and society from the standpoint of a social behaviorist. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press. Mishler, E. G. (1991). Representing discourse: The rhetoric of transcription. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 1(4), 255Ð280. Moje, E. B., & Luke, A. (2009). Literacy and identity: Examining the metaphors in history and contemporary research. Reading Research Quarterly, 44(4), 415Ð437. Nader, L. (2011). Ethnography as theory. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 1(1), 211Ð219. National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition. (2015). Title III Served English Learners (ELs) in State School Districts. Retrieved June 23, 2016, from http://ncela.ed.gov/t3sis/Michigan.php  !!!301 Nelson, C. (1999). Sexual identities in ESL: Queer theory and classroom inquiry. TESOL Quarterly, 371Ð391. Newland, K. (2014, June 10). What is the right policy toward unaccompanied children at U.S. borders? Retrieved July 2, 2016, from http://www.migrationpolicy.org/news/what-right-policy-toward-unaccompanied-children-us-borders Noguera, P., Hurtado, A., & Fergus, E. (Eds.). (2012). Invisible no more: The status and experience of Latino males from multidisciplinary perspectives. In P. Noguera & A. Hurtado, Invisible no more: Understanding the disenfranchisement of Latino men and boys (pp. 1Ð26). New York: Routledge. Norton, B. (1997). Language, identity, and the ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly, 31(3), 409Ð429. Norton, B. (2000). Identity and language learning: Gender, ethnicity and educational change. New York, NY: Longman. Norton, B. (2013). Identity and language learning: Extending the conversation (2nd ed). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Norton, B., & McKinney, C. (2011). An identity approach to second language acquisition. In D. Atkinson (Ed.), Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (1st ed, pp. 73Ð94). New York, NY: Routledge. Norton, B., & Toohey, K. (2011). Identity, language learning, and social change. Language Teaching, 44(4), 412Ð446. Norton Peirce, B. (1995). Social identity, investment, and language learning. TESOL Quarterly, 29(1), 9Ð31. Nussbaum, E. (2015, March 9). ÒFresh Off the BoatÓ and ÒBlack-ishÓ reviews. Retrieved July 4, 2016, from http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/03/09/home-cooking-television-emily-nussbaum Nystrand, M. (1997). Opening dialogue: Understanding the dynamics of languageand learning in the English classroom. New York: Teachers College Press. Nystrand, M. (2006). Research on the Role of Classroom Discourse as It Affects Reading Comprehension. Research in the Teaching of English, 40(4), 392Ð412. Nystrand, M., Wu, L., Gamoran, A., Zeiser, S., & Long, D. (2003). Questions in time: Investigating the structure and dynamics of unfolding classroom discourse. Discourse Processes, 35, 135Ð196.  !!!302 Ochs, E. (1979). Transcription as theory. In E. Ochs & B. B. Schieffelin (Eds.), Developmental pragmatics (pp. 43Ð72). New York: Academic Press. Ogbu, J. U., & Simons, H. D. (1998). Voluntary and involuntary minorities: A cultural-ecological theory of school performance with some implications for education. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 29(2), 155Ð188. Pascoe, C. J. (2012a). Dude, youÕre a fag: masculinity and sexuality in high school. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press. Pascoe, C. J. (2012b). Dude, youÕre a fag: Masculinity and sexuality in high school. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press. Pavlenko, A. (2001). Language learning memoirs as a gendered genre. Applied Linguistics, 22(2), 213Ð240. Pavlenko, A. (2002). Poststructuralist approaches to the study of social factors in second language learning and use. In V. Cook (Ed.), Portraits of the L2 user (pp. 277Ð302). Buffalo, NY: Multilingual Matters. Pavlenko, A., & Piller, I. (2008). Language education and gender. In N. H. Hornberger (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Education (pp. 57Ð69). New York, NY: Springer. Penuel, W. R., & Wertsch, J. V. (1995). Vygotsky and identity formation: A sociocultural approach. Educational Psychologist, 30(2), 83Ð92. Peterson, W. (1966, January 9). Success story, Japanese-american style. New York Times, p. 180. New York, N.Y. Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic imperialism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Phinney, J. S. (1990). Ethnic identity in adolescents and adults: Review of research. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 499Ð514. Psathas, G., & Anderson, T. (1990). The ÕpracticesÕ of transcription in conversation analysis. Semiotica, 78(1Ð2), 75Ð100. http://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1990.78.1-2.75 Qin, D. B. (2009). Being ÒgoodÓ or being ÒpopularÓ: Gender and ethnic identity negotiations of Chinese immigrant adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 24(1), 37Ð66. Quintana, S. M. (2007). Racial and ethnic identity: Developmental perspectives and research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54(3), 259Ð270. Rampton, B. (1995). Crossing: Language and ethnicity among adolescents. London: Addison Wesley Publishing Company.  !!!303 Rampton, B. (2001). Critique in Interaction. Critique of Anthropology, 21(1), 83Ð107. http://doi.org/10.1177/0308275X0102100105 Rampton, B. (2013). Styling in a language learned later in life. The Modern Language Journal, 97(2), 360Ð382. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12010.x Rebecca Rogers, Elizabeth Malancharuvil-Berkes, Melissa Mosley, Diane Hui, & Glynis OÕGarro Joseph. (2005). Critical Discourse Analysis in Education: A Review of the Literature. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 365Ð416. Rowland, T. (1999). Pronouns in mathematics talk: Power, vagueness and generalisation. For the Learning of Mathematics, 19(2), 19Ð26. Sfard, A. (2006). Telling ideas by the company they keep: A response to the critique by Mary Juzwik. Educational Researcher, 35(9), 22Ð27. Shuck, G. (2006). Racializing the nonnative English speaker. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 5(4), 259Ð276. Silverstein, M., & Urban, G. (1996). The natural history of discourse. In M. Silverstein & G. Urban (Eds.), Natural histories of discourse (pp. 1Ð17). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. State Department of Education. (2013). Demographic overview of the LEP and FLEP population in State (2011-2012). State: State Department of Education.  Street, B. V. (1984). Literacy in theory and practice. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Street, B. V. (1995). Social literacies: Critical approaches to literacy in development, ethnography and education. London: Longman. Street, B. V. (2005). Recent applications of New Literacy Studies in educational contexts. Research in the Teaching of English, 39(4), 417Ð423. Su⁄rez-Orozco, C., & Qin-Hilliard, D. B. (2004). Immigrant boysÕ experience in U.S. schools. In N. Way & J. Y. Chu (Eds.), Adolescent boys: Exploring diverse cultures of boyhood (pp. 295Ð316). New York: New York University Press. Talmy, S. (2008). The cultural productions of the ESL student at Tradewinds High: Contingency, multidirectionality, and identity in l2 socialization. Applied Linguistics, 29(4), 619Ð644. Talmy, S. (2009). A very important lesson: Respect and the socialization of order(s) in high school ESL. Linguistics and Education, 20(3), 235Ð253. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2008.10.002  !!!304 Talmy, S. (2011). The interview as collaborative achievement: Interaction, identity, and ideology in a speech event. Applied Linguistics, 32(1), 25Ð42. Tan, S.-L., & Moghaddam, F. M. (1995). Reflexive positioning and culture. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 25(4), 387Ð400. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.1995.tb00281.x Teutsch-Dwyer, M. (2001). (Re)constructing masculinity in a new linguistic reality. In A. Pavlenko, A. Blackledge, I. Piller, & M. Teutsch-Dwyer (Eds.), Multilingualism, second language learning, and gender (pp. 175Ð198). New York,  NY: Mouton de Gruyter. The Editorial Board. (2013, April 21). Immigration and fear. The New York Times, p. 12(L). New York, N.Y. Threadgold, T. (2003). Cultural studies, critical theory, critical discourse analysis: Histories, remembering and futures. Linguistik Online, 14(2). http://doi.org/10.13092/lo.14.821 U.S. Customs and Border Protection. (2014). Southwest border unaccompanied alien children FY 2014. Retrieved July 4, 2016, from https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/southwest-border-unaccompanied-children/fy-2014 Vald”s, G. (2001). Learning and not learning English: Latino students in American schools. New York: Teachers College Press. Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive schooling: U.S.-Mexican youth and the politics of caring. Albany: State University of New York Press. Van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Sound in perspective. In A. Jaworski & N. Coupland (Eds.), The discourse reader (2. ed, pp. 179Ð193). London: Routledge. Way, N. (2013). BoysÕ friendships during adolescence: Intimacy, desire, and loss. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 23(2), 201Ð213. http://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12047 Way, N., & Chu, J. Y. (Eds.). (2004). Adolescent boys: Exploring diverse cultures in boyhood. New York: New York University Press. Weaver-Hightower, M. (2003). The Òboy turnÓ in research on gender and education. Review of Educational Research, 73(4), 471Ð498. Weedon, C. (1987). Feminist practice and poststructuralist theory (1st ed). Cambridge, Mass: Blackwell Pub. Wetherell, M. (1998). Positioning and interpretative repertoires: Conversation analysis and post-structuralism in dialogue. Discourse & Society, 9(3), 387Ð412. http://doi.org/10.1177/0957926598009003005  !!!305 Willis, P. E. (1977). Learning to labor: How working class kids get working class jobs. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Woods, P. (1976). Having a laugh: An antidote to schooling. In M. Hammersley & P. Woods (Eds.), The process of schooling: A sociological reader (pp. 178Ð88). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Woods, P. (1990). The happiest days?: how pupils cope with school. London"; New York: Falmer Press. Wortham, S. (1994). Acting out participant examples in the classroom. Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins Publishing. Wortham, S. (2003). Accomplishing identity in participant-denoting discourse. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 13(2), 189Ð210. http://doi.org/10.1525/jlin.2003.13.2.189 Wortham, S. (2006). Learning identity: The joint emergence of social identification and academic learning. Cambridge"; New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Wortham, S. (2010). Shifting identities in the classroom. In C. R. Caldas-Coulthard & R. Iedema (Eds.), Identity trouble: Critical discourse and contested identities (pp. 205Ð228). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Young, J. P. (2000). Boy talk: Critical literacy and masculinities. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(3), 312Ð337. Young, J. P., & Brozo, W. G. (2001). Conversations: Boys will be boys, or will they? Literacy and masculinities. Reading Research Quarterly, 316Ð325.