Ethical dilemmas of translanguaging pedagogy in L2 and basic literacy education for adults: social justice and ethics of care

This paper explores the ethical challenges and possibilities of conducting responsible and transformative translanguaging pedagogy in adult education for second language learners with limited previous experience of schooling. We identify and explore ethical dilemmas in teachers’ interaction and multilingual teaching practices. The data was produced in a linguistic ethnography and action research project. It consists of classroom observations and interviews with teachers who teach in the programme Swedish for Immigrants (SFI). The teachers express and embody ambivalence in relation to the students’ use of their whole linguistic repertoires and the students are not always treated as competent to make informed decisions about their own use of linguistic repertoires. This touches on issues of citizenship and democracy and here the framework ethics of care offers context-specific ways of understanding and responding to the ethical challenges of multilingual teaching.


Introduction
The intention in this paper is to initiate a discussion about the ethical dilemmas of using a translanguaging pedagogy in linguistically diverse classrooms.The paper builds on a study of second language education for immigrant adults in Sweden.Since the 1960s, Sweden has offered Swedish language courses through the programme Swedish for Immigrants (SFI) for adult migrants who hold a residence permit.All immigrants who are residents and have a need to learn Swedish have the right to attend SFI (Swedish Education Act, chapter 20).Those immigrants who receive financial support need to attend SFI and other educational activities full time in order to keep the support.SFI is organised by municipalities and provided either by a municipal school for adults or by an external company for education.Both types of schools are regulated by a national syllabus and national tests, guiding the language instruction and the assessment of students' language ability.According to the syllabus, the tuition: should provide the language tools for communication and enable active participation in everyday life, in society, at work and in pursuing further studies.(…) The education is also intended to give adult immigrants who lack basic reading and writing skills the opportunity to acquire these skills (Swedish National Agency for Education 2022, 1).Thus, SFI is a language education provided exclusively for adult migrants, providing basic language tools for communication in different domains, and in that sense differs from L2 courses provided in primary and secondary school.Some employers require their employees to have passed the SFI course D, which is the final SFI course (Gunnarsson and Klingberg Hjort 2018).Students who wish to continue to study in Sweden continue to study Swedish as a Second Language in order to qualify for higher education.Teachers working in SFI should have a teacher's degree including at least 30 ECTS of Swedish as a Second language.However, only 58% of the teachers in SFI are qualified (SNAE 2024) and problems in regard to equity and quality have been addressed by the Swedish School |Inspectorate (2018,2024).83,4% of the SFI teachers have a permanent employment (Statistics Sweden 2024).
Over recent years, considerable attention has been paid to linguistic diversity in education, and particularly to translanguaging, in relation to equity and social justice (Paulsrud et al. 2017;Bonacina-Pugh, Costa da, and Huang 2021).Still, teachers in many educational settings express uncertainty regarding how to initiate translanguaging teaching practices, both in terms of ethical considerations and pedagogical choices.
Translanguaging has emerged as a theoretical perspective on language and as a critical pedagogy in language education (Cenoz and Gorter 2017;Juvonen and Källkvist 2021;Paulsrud et al. 2017), questioning the monolingual bias in bilingual research and education with the experiences of the multilingual individual as the point of departure.García and Wei (2014) define a translanguaging pedagogy as intentional work where the teacher 'sets up the affordances for students to engage in discursive and semiotic practices that respond to their cognitive and social intentions ' (2014, 93).A translanguaging pedagogy is not just about multilingual learning strategies but also about transformation, as it challenges a monolingual bias and hierarchies of language practices aiming at social justice (García and Leiva 2014).The objective of social justice is central in translanguaging pedagogy as it aims to address as well as transform social inequalities.In line with this, Li Wei (2024) argues that 'co-learning and transpositioning, therefore, are two driving forces of inclusion and social justice in the classroom and in rejecting abyssal thinking in the language and education of racialized bilingual learners' (Wei 2024, 11).Jaspers (2018), however, sharply questions the transformative potential of translanguaging pedagogy in regard to social justice, arguing: that translanguaging scholars share a number of convictions with the monolingual authorities they criticize, that their transformative claims trade on causality effects that cannot be taken for granted, and that translanguaging, at least in some of its representations, is becoming a dominating rather than a liberating force (Jaspers 2018, 2).
One such conviction is that language is a key for students' success in school although they do not agree which language -standardised majority language or the linguistic repertoire (home language) of the students.Scholars in translanguaging pedagogy do however still share the conviction that school success and social (in)equality are linguistic issues -if students are given the appropriate resources for language learning they have been given a fair opportunity to succeed.Thus, neither question the assumption that 'school fairly determines our place in society' (Jaspers 2018, 5).Still, translanguaging in an educational setting can be seen as a pluralistic teaching approach which involves teachers who can critically explore multilingual issues and make up their own minds about how these may be approached.Nevertheless, issues concerning multilingual education, including translanguaging, are characterised by a high degree of complexity and may provoke unpredictable responses in the classroom.In line with a pluralistic education, different conflicts of interest emerge as teachers bring up diverse concerns and values, as well as build on different knowledge resources.Teachers are often uncertain about how to handle translanguaging issues in teaching and may struggle with several challenges or professional dilemmas (Rosén and Lundgren 2021).
In this article, we address the transformative and critical aspects of translanguaging from a relational and contextual perspective using ethics of care (Noddings 2002;2010;2013;Tronto 2013).
The concept of ethics of care is grounded in feminist philosophy and focuses on a relational and contextual understanding of morality (Gilligan 1982).Gilligan (1982) critiqued developmental theories where men and their ways of thinking were seen as a norm.As a response to these, she presented an alternative development theory which included women's voices.Tronto (2013), however, argues that it is necessary to 'stop talking about "women's morality" and start talking instead about a care ethic that includes the values traditionally associated with women' (Tronto 2013, 3).She sees the relationship with other people as central to ethics of care.In line with Tronto, Noddings (2002) understands ethics of care in terms of an interdependent relationship between two individuals, one the care-giver and one the cared-for, and this relationship is a precondition for individuals to develop knowledge about life and living in the world.This means that care involves questions of social justice, and social justice involves questions of care.In contrast to dominant values in education, such as efficiency, autonomy and rationality, ethics of care can be used to emphasise that human beings are interdependent and that relationships, shared concern and emotions should therefore be valued.Over recent decades, Tronto (1993Tronto ( , 2013) ) and others have contributed to the development of the concept of ethics of care into a moral theory combining caring as both a value and a political practice that should concern 'institutions, societies, even global levels of thinking' (Tronto 1993, 145).By focusing on this so-called second-generation ethics of care, we want to contribute a critical understanding of multilingual education, including translanguaging pedagogy, and address dilemmas that may arise in language education in general and in the teaching of adult migrants in particular.This relational and situated approach to ethics can provide useful insights into how relations of power and political processes are integrated with educational processes.Through the perspective of ethics of care, we highlight the importance of a translanguaging pedagogy as a relational pedagogy, where languaging is dialogical.
The specific aim of this article is to explore ethical challenges and the possibility of implementing a responsible and transformative translanguaging pedagogy in adult education for L2 learners with limited previous experience of schooling.The study builds on material from classroom observations and interviews from one school.Our research questions are: 1. What ethical dilemmas are identified in the way SFI teachers speak about their multilingual teaching practices?2. What ethical dilemmas are identified in their multilingual teaching practices?

Theoretical framework
In this section, we focus on translanguaging as a transformative pedagogy and ethics of care as the theoretical framework for the study.Social justice is an ethical dimension of teaching that is put forward as an argument for pedagogical translanguaging (García and Wei 2014;Cenoz and Gorter 2020).The use of the student's full linguistic repertoires in teaching is understood as linked to social justice in the sense that it offers students with diverse language backgrounds more equitable learning opportunities.
In this context, we view ethics of care as a useful perspective on the ethics of education in a linguistically diverse setting, as it implies that all students are unique individuals who should be respected and listened to carefully.Caring, according to Noddings, is rooted in receptivity, relatedness, and responsiveness (1984,2).Thus, caring is relational between the carer and the cared-for and, as Noddings asserts, 'caring is not controlled entirely by the carer-it is a mode of shared control ' (2002, 14).
In language education for adult migrants, the context studied here, dilemmas may arise in relation to the communicative strategies needed by the students in their everyday life and the interests of the teachers to teach the dominant language they assume the student needs in order to integrate into Swedish society.Criticisms have however been raised against Nodding's work, suggesting that ethics of care has no relevance in an educational setting because social relations between teachers and students are not exchanges among equals and their relationships are not voluntary.Furthermore, conflicts of justice also appear when teachers' and students' values are not in line with the economic or organisational values of the school (Colnerud 2006;Strike 1990).By following Tronto's focus on both care and democracy and by using her main characteristics of ethics of care and her moral vocabulary, we argue that ethics of care can still be a relevant tool for addressing the professional dilemmas teachers face in multilingual classrooms and in relation to translanguaging as a transformative pedagogy.Tronto suggests that 'the practice of care describes the qualities necessary for democratic citizens to live together well in a pluralistic society, and that only in a just, pluralist, democratic society can care flourish ' (1993, 161-162).
Having contributed to the exploration of how ethics of care can influence institutional practices and our understandings of politics, democracy and citizenship, Tronto argues that 'care always expresses an action or a disposition, a reaching out to something' (Tronto 2013, x).Tronto's understanding of care is important for critical education because it focuses on both the relational and political aspects of care and responsibility.Tronto (2013) relates ethics of care to democracy and citizenship, contending that: Citizenship, like caring, is both an expression of support (as when the government provides support for those who need care) and a burden -the burden of helping to maintain and preserve the political institutions and the community.Actually, to engage in such democratic caring requires citizens to think closely about their responsibilities to themselves and to others.(Tronto 2013, x) In her work, Tronto (2013) proposes five analytically separated but interconnected phases, each with a corresponding virtue and with different responsibilities: (i) caring about (attentiveness), (ii) caring for (responsibility), (iii) care giving (competence), (iv) care receiving (responsiveness) and (v) caring with (plurality, communication, trust, respect, solidarity).These corresponding moral elements are crucial to understanding ethics of care in education.
So, Tronto's (2013) five phases can be seen as a political argument for care within political and institutional systems (including education) as well as a focus on caring and empathy within interpersonal caring relations.Thus, ethics of care is not intended to be a guiding principle only on a one-to-one relation between teacher and students but also to be included in the education policy (see also Colnerud 2006).Tronto's phases of care are not a one-way flow from the caregiver to the caretaker.The positions of caregiver or caretaker shift over time and space.The relationship between care and responsibility is complex and it might be experienced as impossible to provide direct care to all those we feel responsible for or believe need care.In the context of L2 education, immigrants may be othered by the majority society.This othering may support discriminatory views about migrants, such as that they do not do enough to learn the majority language.
In summary, our analysis focuses on the relationship between two of the moral components or values: responsibility and responsiveness.When it comes to responsibility, teaching can actually involve dilemmas, for instance that caring for a student can be carried out without a sense of responsibility for the cared-for, but can in a sense be detached (Tronto 1993, 144).Responsiveness, on the other hand, means considering the other's position as it is expressed (Tronto 1993, 136), aiming at a symmetrical understanding of reciprocity through communication and interaction that acknowledges the specific positions of all involved parties and their unique life histories.

Materials and methods
The empirical data was produced during a three-year research project the overarching aim of which was to research and develop basic literacy teaching for adult second language learners with short previous education. 1Teachers and students at four schools participated in the project.Due to organisational changes in the municipality, one school dropped out of the research project during the first year.At the schools the researchers worked in pairs, and in this article we focus on a school where the first author (Norlund Shaswar) and the fourth author (Wedin) were responsible for the cooperation with teachers and for observations and interviews.Five SFI teachers at the school participated in the project.At the time of the data production, the time that the teachers had been interacting with their students varied from a few weeks to two years.
The methodological framework consisted of a combination of linguistic ethnography (Copland and Creese 2015) and action research (Zeichner 2001).Through linguistic ethnography we paid close attention to situated interactions in the specific context while at the same time discussing it in relation to power (Rampton, Maybin, and Roberts 2014).The action research approach made it possible to co-operate with teachers, critically observing and transforming the teaching practices.The researchers were active during the planning of the actions but later, during the performative phase, took the role of observers.Thus, the researchers were not involved in the teaching at the school but observed some of the classes.In the end of each action, the participating teachers at the school had a reflective conversation with the researchers to reflect about the action.In these conversations, the teachers addressed different positive and challenging aspects.The teachers did not take part later in the analysis of the material.Norlund Shaswar took part in all these four meetings and Wedin took part in three of them.This study design gave the researchers tools to create both an understanding of the complex phenomena at hand and new knowledge in a process where researchers as well as teachers were active.The combination of action research with linguistic ethnography allowed an analysis of material on micro level in relation to processes and events on macro level, with aspects of power in focus, thus facilitating an understanding of complex and multi-layered phenomena.

Material
The data that this article builds on are fieldnotes, audio recordings and artefacts from 38 hours of classroom observations 2 , together with five individual and four focus group interviews with five SFI teachers at one school at which teachers did not have access to any multilingual teaching assistants.
As focus group interviews were conducted as part the reflective element of action research, the interaction in these sessions consisted of reflection on the actions that had been carried out, with teachers sharing their experiences and discussing their teaching as part of their participation in the project.The observations and individual interviews were carried out by the first author alone, and in three focus group interviews and some observations together with the fourth author.The data was transcribed by the first author.All authors have participated in the analytical process.

Data analysis
As a first analytical step, we identified passages in audio recordings of interviews and classroom observations in which translanguaging practices or pedagogy were discussed or practiced. 3We also looked for instances in which teachers potentially could have implemented a translanguaging pedagogy but refrained from doing so, for example when students initiated translanguaging practices but teachers did not respond, or cases when they asked students not to use languages other than Swedish, thus explicitly trying to make the students refrain from participating in translanguaging practices.As a second step, we selected a number of data excerpts for closer analysis.The criterium for selection was that we identified an ethical dilemma that the teacher was faced with in the observational data, or that an ethical dilemma was discussed in the interview data.After the selection, as a third analytical step, we analysed whether and in what respects the teachers verbalised and/or practiced a translanguaging pedagogy in a way that may be related to social justice and ethics of care.A qualitive analysis (Boeije 2010) was used working in-between the empirical material and the theoretical framework to achieve an understanding of the classroom practices and how teachers reflect upon them.A number of ethical dilemmas were identified in the analysis, and to illustrate this process, the analysis of the dilemma of building trustful relationships through multilingual teaching practices (see page x) will be exemplified.Here, in a teaching situation, a student shared potentially sensitive information about himself with his teacher and the other students in the classroom.In the analysis of the audio recordings from the classroom interaction, we identified this as an ethical dilemma.In the analysis of it we saw connections between ethics of care, where the relationship between teacher and student was at the centre, and a translanguaging pedagogy, where translanguaging was practiced in the classroom.The dilemmas are presented in the results, where we discuss the possibilities and challenges of a transformative translanguaging pedagogy.
For the transcripts presented in the text the following transcription conventions have been used: 'reported speech' citation marks for reported speech STRESSED WORDS capital letters for extra stressed words or phrases (pause) the word 'pause' in brackets for pauses in utterances (…) three dots within brackets for omitted parts of utterances The project has been approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority. 4All participants in the study were given information both orally and in writing and were also informed that they could withdraw from the project at any time.Data was processed in a secure manner to ensure the privacy of the participants.The participants' names are replaced by pseudonyms.

Results
Here, we begin by showcasing a vignette from one of the observed lessons before we move on to presenting our analysis of the identified dilemmas in teachers' discussions.
The SFI school is close to the city centre of a medium-sized Swedish city.It is a morning at the end of May in 2021.I (Annika) arrive at the school and walk up the stairs to Desirée's classroom.The classroom is spacious with large windows, but due to the Covid-19 pandemic the class is divided into groups, and when I arrive only four students are present.It is almost 8.40 and the lesson will soon start when Desirée says that three more students are supposed to be there, but maybe they will soon arrive.She starts writing adjectives on the whiteboard: 'glad, tung, stark, vit, snäll' (happy, heavy, strong, white, kind) and soon Desirée and the students take part in a conversation about what polar bears are like, looking at a picture of a polar bear that is projected on the smartboard.Desirée says that it would be 'farligt' (dangerous) to meet the polar bear, and there is a discussion about the meaning of 'farligt' where the students try to translate the word into different languages to understand its meaning.This is an example of how a teacher supports her students in drawing on their different linguistic repertoires in the SFI teaching that is analysed in this article.

'Swedish-only' or a situated understanding of translanguaging?
In this first section we address the first research question about ethical dilemmas identified in the SFI teachers' discussions about their multilingual teaching practices.From the analysis we selected two ethical dilemmas, the first related to the lack of a school-wide language policy and the second to the fact that teachers express various and often ambiguous views on translanguaging practices in classrooms.

Lack of a common language policy
The first ethical dilemma concerning the lack of a school-wide language policy is mentioned by all teachers during the interviews as they were explicitly asked about this matter.The lack of a school-wide language policy can be viewed as problematic from a social-justice perspective, as teachers may practice different language policies (cf.Spolsky (2004) and Bonacina-Pugh (2012) on practiced language policy) in their classrooms, and as these are implicit and more or less conscious.As these policies are arbitrary, there is a risk that students will not be treated equally in school, or that their linguistic resources will not be used optimally for learning.In relation to these kinds of challenges, adopting the ethics-of-care perspective provides a constructive critical view of the relationships that are created between teacher and students in connection to practiced language policy.From this perspective on the potential consequences of language policy, and also from a contextual understanding of translanguaging, it is therefore of interest to see how the teachers address a need for an explicit language policy.
When asked about a school-wide language policy, the teachers tend to interpret the question as being about whether there is an explicit policy of only using Swedish in class.In the interview with Anna, she asks for a clarification when the interviewer asks about the language policy, if that means 'that we should only speak Swedish'.Anna then says: 'Yes, but we CAN 5 only speak Swedish.We have no (pause) (…) I don't know if there is a policy in the school.I haven't heard about it that it's general (…) but in my group, we talk Swedish and they tell each other "But now we speak, speak Swedish now"'.In regard to the qualities in ethics of care, Anna legitimises the Swedish-only policy in terms of caring for the needs of the students since Swedish is the one language that everyone has access to.She also takes responsibility for meeting the need and thus caring for the students.Anna says that there may be a general policy in the school but that, as a relatively new teacher at this school, she has not been given such information.
Another teacher at the school, Christina, voices a similar but perhaps less implicit understanding of language policy 6 :

Excerpt 1 (individual interview)
We really try.I have these, kind of, scolding moments, lessons when I tell, show: 'How much are you in school?How much do you talk Swedish?Yes, but that's' the tiny bit.Well then we speak Swedish here'.And I use to show, the border is at the door and I use to (stands up) 'Go in!' and then I say 'Now we talk Swedish', and then I go out 'Arabic, Swedish, Arabic'.
Christina says that she thinks that all teachers at the school apply similar rules in their classrooms.So, language policy is understood as rules made by the school and/or the teachers and implemented in the classroom with little or no opportunity for students to participate in the process.Christina physically manifests the linguistic threshold for her students by telling them to leave other languages outside the classroom.
In contrast, Berit claims that there is no common policy at the school, and that she does not have any rules concerning the use of languages other than Swedish in her classroom, although she is aware that other teachers have such rules.She makes a comparison with the situation her mother, who is a Meänkieli speaker, faced when she was forbidden to speak Meänkieli at school and to her own experience, as Berit and her siblings never learned that language.She says that she likes students to use their mother tongues.She relates this to her own studies as a teacher of Swedish as a second language and her own experience of using Swedish when she studies Spanish.Berit thus positions herself as different to her colleagues and justifies doing so by referring to historical injustices faced by Sweden's national minorities, specifically her mother.
Desirée and Erika also claim to be unaware of any school-wide language policy, but they both say that they regard students' languages as resources and that they encourage students to use their various languages.At the same time, both Desirée and Erika highlight the importance of using Swedish.This can be exemplified by the following excerpt from the interview with Desirée:

Excerpt 2 (individual interview)
But it is really necessary that they help each other sometimes.Really good that you have them, that one Somali speaker can explain to one who has arrived recently and does not understand.It is super good that they kind of can interpret for each other and but I am rather a lot like the way that I too talk about that if I come back after a break and then I hear that the Arabic speak Arabic, then I use to try to talk about it (…)and this time in school is very valuable for them to speak Swedish.(…)It is a pity to sit and just talk and babble in your mother tongue exactly when you are here.But we also use to talk about the asset and that it is important that their talk Desirée recognises the need for students to use other languages for meaning making, but at the same time encourages the students to prioritise using Swedish in school.This is an example of ambivalence between promoting monolingual and multilingual linguistic practices in the classroom.Thus, while there is no explicit school-wide language policy, individual teachers claim to have conscious policies in their classrooms.
An additional aspect of the lack a common language policy is that the teachers have not discussed how to use students' diverse linguistic resources in classrooms.According to Tronto's (2013) model, the teachers should already in the first phase become aware of and pay attention to the need for caring.If there is little or no attentiveness, then there is a risk that ignorance will serve to maintain conditions of inequality.We have, for example, identified this ethical dilemma in the interview with Desirée:

Excerpt 3 (individual interview)
Annika: What is it like in the groups concerning languages, is it like many who talk Arabic or is it that they have does everyone have someone with whom they can talk in another language than Swedish or? Desirée: Yes, almost everyone has someone with the same language in in the group and they often understand each other anyway even Annika: Yeah.They often have more than one language in addition to Swedish Desirée: Yes, exactly.They are very resourceful in the way that they can talk several languages.

Annika: Yes.
Desirée: So it is very seldom I think that they are left all alone with their language Annika: Mm Desirée: But it has surely happened some time.
Desirée acknowledges that individual students may be left alone without someone to talk to because their linguistic repertoires do not match those of the other students in the classroom.This highlights a possible dilemma since the teacher needs to care for and with not only one individual student but all students in the class.Care needs to balance between the individual and the collective, Hence the potentially empowering and supportive translanguaging pedagogy may risk leaving some students in a marginalised position.As a result, there is a risk that those students will lose confidence in their teachers and that the teacher-student relationship will be compromised.
In summary, the lack of an explicit and conscious language policy means that the teachers have not reflected on their use of students' linguistic repertoires.This also means that, to some extent, the teachers are left to their own devices when dealing with situations that may test relationships with students, such as in the excerpt from the interview with Desirée above.At the same time, this results in ambiguity concerning the use of students' diverse linguistic resources.In pluralistic education, different conflicts of interest emerge as teachers grapple with diverse concerns and values and build on different knowledge resources.Our analysis shows that the teachers are not certain about how to handle translanguaging practices in teaching and that they struggle with several challenges and ethical dilemmas.

'Babble' or an opportunity to develop mutual relations through interactive communication?
The second dilemma relates to teachers' diverse views on which languages are appropriate to use in class.It appears in the teachers' discussions about language practices in the classrooms.The two teachers who most strongly express a Swedish-only policy in their classrooms still talk about how they use students' varied languages.Christina, who said that she had what she called 'scolding moments' when she demanded that students stop using other languages, also says that she has grouped her classes so that students who share languages can help each other: 'You also make use of the one who understands.So it's both ways'.Anna, who says that it is only possible for students to speak Swedish in her class, also says that they use various languages and she claims to allow this.On the other hand, Berit, who spontaneously starts talking about translanguaging and the importance of using prior language skills when studying a new language, still expresses some ambiguity in relation to the use of students' whole linguistic repertoires.She says that if students talk in their mother tongue for a long time, she asks them 'Yes but what is that in Swedish, how do you translate that into Swedish?'She states that she does so in order to make the students speak Swedish again.Desirée more obviously expresses ambiguity concerning the use of multiple languages, saying that she encourages the students to explain to each other in 'their languages' but underlines that she used to say: 'Now we talk Swedish in class'.While she talks about the diversity of languages as an asset, she also speaks about students' conversations in other languages during breaks as 'babbling in their mother tongue'.The term babbling has negative connotations which stand in sharp contrast to her description of the students' languages as valuable.It seems that it is in relation to their L2 learning that Desirée sees the students' linguistic repertoires as valuable.Erika expresses a similar ambiguity, saying that the languages are a positive asset but also: 'when a lot of babbling in other languages begins (…) then you have to tell them'.
On the other hand, the teachers' discussions also depict translanguaging practices as essential for the students to understand the instruction in the classroom and for building relationships with one another and with the teacher.This is in line with the oral components of ethics of care in the sense that if the students do not understand the content, their opportunities to participate are limited and their needs are not cared for.Some of these views are discussed in the focus group interviews.Several teachers say that students need to be able to explain to each other, but only Berit mentions that she explicitly asks for translations in other languages:

Excerpt 4 (individual interview)
Berit: But I usually ask 'What is that in Somali?' or 'How do you say that in Kurdish?' and then I try to pronounce it and they just Annika: (laughs) Berit: they laugh very much and think Annika: Yeah Berit: that it is funny Annika: Yeah Berit: and a little I think that I after all want to show that yes but it doesn't matter what language, all languages are of equal worth.
As shown in the excerpt, Berit declares that she wants to show the students that all languages are equal and that it doesn't matter which language you speak.She states that she applies this in her teaching practice by encouraging the students to use other languages as resources for learning Swedish.Furthermore, she also challenges the asymmetry in power between her and the students by positioning herself as a learner, trying to learn words from the languages spoken by the students.When teachers talk about students' use of languages other than Swedish, there seems to be an assumption that Swedishonly is the norm, for example when they say that they 'allow' students or that they do 'not forbid' them to use other languages.Greta also highlights that there may be mistakes in students' own interpretations.Some of the teachers have observed each other's teaching and they give examples of how they have observed students helping each other in various ways, translating and using the internet.In summary, there are contradictions between students' linguistic repertoires on the one hand being described and treated in a slightly derogatory manner, and on the other hand being construed as valuable resources.

Responsibility and responsiveness in a translanguaging pedagogy
Our analysis of the two dilemmas above shows that translanguaging in an educational setting can be seen as a pluralistic teaching approach that involves teachers who can critically explore multilingual issues and make up their own minds about how these may be approached.However, it is also apparent from the teachers' discussions that the students' agency appears to be limited in the classroom.Some teachers express an understanding of translanguaging as a practice they are responsible for and need to implement rather than a responsibility shared with their students.From the perspective of ethics of care, it is in the interactive communication with the students that language choices are made.
Focusing on Tronto's (2013) values, responsibility and responsiveness, the dilemmas identified in the teachers' discussion of linguistic diversity in the classrooms highlight the challenges and possibilities associated with achieving a caring practice in teaching.Caring for refers to taking responsibility for identifying and responding to students' needs.On the one hand, teachers express a responsibility to teach Swedish to the students and argue that, in order to do so, the students need to hear and speak as much Swedish as possible in the classroom.On the other hand, the teachers convey that it is important for their learning that students can use their whole linguistic repertoires in classroom interactions.The lack of an explicit school-wide policy means that each teacher needs to solve dilemmas individually, as reflected in their different approaches.A school-wide language policy can contribute to more elaborated teaching practices for teachers to have the space to promote equity and to adjust their instruction to the needs and interests in relation to a collective solidarity that is open to the creativity of students and teachers alike.
Importantly, care receiving involves both the one being cared for and the one responding to the care that is given by the caregiver; that is responsiveness.In education, a moral problem within care involves vulnerability and inequality between the caregiver and cared-for.While Christina says that she makes it clear to her students that the threshold for Swedish-only is the classroom door, Berit says that she invites her students to interaction and dialogue, building mutual relationships.Berit also takes on various roles in this communication herself and invites her students to do so, thus challenging the asymmetrical power relationship between teacher and students.Tronto (2013) argues that caring needs to be consistent with democratic commitments to justice, equality and freedom for all.The moral elements of education from an ethics-of-care perspective are plurality, trust, respect and solidarity.Such solidarity is built by Berit when she tries to pronounce words in her students' native languages in order to illustrate the equal worth of all languages.This is an example of conditions of trust being created where reliance can be developed through the caring practices of others.These qualities are necessary for taking collective responsibility for linguistic diversity in society.

Building trustful relationships through multilingual teaching practices
Turning to the second research question, which concerns dilemmas in multilingual teaching practices, we conclude that teachers and students use translanguaging in various ways and that teachers especially initiate translanguaging in order to increase students' participation.In the analysis, we identified how teachers were met with ethical dilemmas in relation to issues raised by the students in the interaction.In one lesson in Berit's class in course D, one of the students (Student 1) tells the teacher and fellow students that he has been smuggling goods.He brings this up in a lesson where the subject of professional work is discussed.Only four students are present in the classroom, and they have first talked about this theme in pairs.In their pair interaction, Student 1 and Student 2 have interacted mainly in Swedish but have also used some Arabic, Danish and English.After a while the teacher asks them to tell the other two students what they have talked about.When Student 2 has reported what has been told by Student 1, the interaction below takes place (italics for Kurdish): Student 2 does not say that Student 1 has told him about being a smuggler so Student 1 starts adding this information but is not sure how to say the Swedish word 'smugglare' (smuggler).He first uses the Danish word but as nobody understands him, he turns to the researcher, Annika, and asks her in Kurdish (Sorani) what smuggler is in Swedish.When he is given this word and repeats it to Berit, she suggests that maybe Student 2 forgot to say this.The atmosphere in the classroom is open and humorous, and our analysis is that the teacher gives this suggestion as a way of dealing with the sensitive information that has been conveyed about Student 1. Student 1 accepts her somewhat comic suggestion that Student 2 has 'forgotten' to say that Student 1 has worked as a smuggler.Then Student 1 repeats this explanation, which can be understood as a way of showing that he accepts it.This can be seen as the teacher showing awareness of the need for caring and the student accepting it.Berit's suggestion does not involve translanguaging, but the translanguaging practiced by the students and researcher is essential to create a common understanding of the topic.Berit is open to translanguaging, which can be implicitly deducted from the translanguaging initiated by Student 2 as well as the interest Berit shows in what the student is trying to communicate when he translanguages.Moreover, by joking Berit shows care by saving face on behalf of the students and not putting them in an uncomfortable situation.
A little later in the same lesson, an interaction between the teacher and students takes place in the form of meaning making focussing on the understanding of the word 'smugglare (smuggler)'.Translanguaging is used in this situation, initiated by the teacher as well as by the students.Here is an example of translanguaging initiated by the teacher a little bit later in the same lesson (underlined for Kurdish): The talk about what a smuggler is has been going on for a while when the interaction above takes place.As we understand it, the teacher initiates translanguaging here to help all four students understand the meaning of the word 'smuggler'.
In contrast to Desirée, who initiates translanguaging in the classroom in the excerpts above, Christina, who teachers course A, on several occasions asks the students not to speak Arabic.In this lesson three students are present in the classroom, and they are talking about a text about a woman who sees her neighbour steal a chocolate bar.They talk about the meaning of the words in the text when the following interaction takes place (bold for Arabic): In this interaction about neighbours, Student 2 wants to say that his neighbour is single and he asks Student 1 in Arabic how to say the word 'single' in Swedish, but the teacher admonishes him not to speak Arabic.In our analysis, this is an example of lack of attentiveness, as the teacher is not attentive to the students' need to draw on their linguistic repertoires in order to help each other express themselves in Swedish.

Translanguaging space and morality in education
Teacher Berit above takes responsibility for responding to her students' needs by creating space for translanguaging so that they can express their experiences and views about the topics under discussion.Translanguaging makes it possible for the students to engage with issues that are important to them and for the teachers to better understand the real needs and interests of the students, rather than their needs as perceived by the teachers.In this kind of interaction, it is obvious that Berit performs what we would call translanguaging pedagogy, being aware of and encouraging her students to use their linguistic repertoires, and that this pedagogy involves moral qualities like trust, respect, solidarity and plurality (Tronto 2013).The examples from Berit show that the moral components are at work in her teaching in the sense that the students show responsiveness by engaging with the topic at hand.In her endeavour to understand and be understood, Berit seems to take responsibility by being aware of and acting upon the fact that, in education, a moral problem of care involves vulnerability and inequality between the caregiver and the cared-for.Berit, in the first excerpt above, also takes responsibility for building trusting relationships by telling a white lie when she says that the student forgot to mention that his classmate had been a smuggler.Conditions of trust and respect are created where reliance can be developed through the caring practices of others.In line with Noddings (2002), it is important to highlight this dimension of ethics of care, namely that education is a moral practice and should support moral education.As Noddings writes: 'students should be encouraged to work together, to help one other -not just to improve academic performance, but to gain competence in caring ' (2002, 20).Thus, ethics of care is not only about student -teacher relations, it includes the pedagogy as well as the school as an institution.Although we have focused mainly on the relation between the teacher and student/s here, it is important to emphasise that ethics of care also includes the relations between students.

Discussion
Our exploration of ethical dilemmas shows that various conflicts of interest emerge as the teachers in this study encounter and address diverse concerns and values and build on diverse knowledge resources.In the analysed data, the teachers express and embody ambivalence about their students' utilising their entire linguistic repertoires (cf.García and Wei 2014) in the classroom; on the one hand, they value and encourage students' use of diverse linguistic repertoires as a support for learning but, on the other, they espouse a monolingual norm legitimatised by a discourse of care for the students and their integration.So, when taking on the role of disciplining and knowing what is best for their students, the teachers do not fully treat them as knowers or adults who are competent to make informed decisions about their language use and their language learning.In doing so and telling themselves that it is because they care for and want the best for their students, they legitimise the asymmetry in power between teacher and students.The teachers' discussions suggest that they feel responsible for not only their students' learning but also their integration into Swedish society.However, at the same time the analysis of classroom observations indicates that the teachers on some occasions seem to lack interest in the responsiveness and voice of their students.Although teachers might be caring for the students, their language learning and their life situations, we argue that language education for adults should build democratic values, social justice, equality and relations where teachers are caring with (Tronto 2013) the students as competent subjects.Although social justice is often expressed as a central aim of translanguaging pedagogy, advocating language teaching that builds on students' prior knowledge, experiences and linguistic repertoires (Juvonen and Källkvist 2021, 1; García et al. 2021García et al. , 2018)), the relations need to build on responsiveness and reciprocity rather than just recognition.
Tronto's (2013) framework demonstrates the significance of ethics of care as a transformative way of thinking about global responsibilities and highlights the necessity of thinking about ethics of care as a way of achieving justice and wellbeing in both policy and practice.This framework encompasses issues of citizenship and democracy that are central to education and therefore offers context-specific ways of understanding and responding to the ethical challenges in multilingual teaching.We hope that our study contributes to a growing contextualised understanding of power in education for linguistic diversity.By focusing on the educational setting of SFI, we have explored and tried to contribute to the understanding of a caring and critical approach to multicultural education for adults with limited previous schooling.Asymmetrical power relations between teachers and students are part of education as an institution but in the case of SFI this is further reinforced in regard to access to the majority language and even further in regard to students who lack formal education.Thus, a translanguaging pedagogy that strives for social justice (García and Wei 2014) needs to include not only care for students' diverse needs and interests but also, and foremost, to care with (Tronto 2013) in order to strengthen students' agency to act in school and society.

Notes
1. Literacy education at a basic level in Swedish for immigrants (2020 -2022).This project was supported by the Swedish Institute for Educational Research, under grant [number 2019/ 0001].2. There is also a small number of classroom observations that were not audio recorded because one or more student present had not yet received information about the study.3.In this study we limit our analysis of translanguaging to verbal interaction.We are aware that translanguaging is also made up of other semiotic resources or objects but those are thus not analysed here due to the type of empirical material.4. Dnr 2019-06278. 5. Capital letters for extra stress.6.We have translated to English and only present the English version, unless we find the Swedish necessary.