“Decolonize Your Mind” (9) – Critical Language Awareness: What language can do to you and others (by Peter Michael Hintz, Emmanuel Agyapong, Emely Vogt, Hannah Wagner & Elim Ghebreyesus)
Editor’s note: Here is Team XV‘s first article on a decolonial school lesson in Phase 1 at the University of Education Karlsruhe in the context of the German-Ghanaian ASA Academia project #1107 2025.
Table of contents
- Background
- Part 1: Research findings of the German participants
- Theoretical background on Critical Language Awareness
- Didactic commentary on the lesson “Critical Language Awareness – what language can do to you and others”
- Subject analysis
- Experiences and reflections
- Shared Reflections on Our Preparation and Teaching Experience
- References
This article emerges from our participation in the ASA Academia global format programme in 2025, specifically the project “Decolonizing English Language Teaching and English Language Teaching Curricula Through a Bi-Directional Learning-and-Teaching Approach“, a collaboration between the Karlsruhe University of Education (KUE), the University of Cape Coast (UCC), and Engagement Global. As ASA participants endowed with full stipends from Engagement Global, we are part of a politically independent initiative, which is funded primarily by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) that supports young people from Germany and the Global South in working together on projects advancing global justice and sustainable development while the German project partner (PHKA) also contributes financially. Within this framework, our tandem-based collaboration brings together Ghanaian and German perspectives in a bi-directional learning process inspired by Prof. Dr. Isabel Martin’s framework.
Our lesson on Critical Language Awareness (CLA), developed in cooperation with local teachers and local KUE students in Prof. Martin’s “Decoloniality Praxis” seminar (English Department) is one concrete contribution to the goals of our ASA project #1107, which, on a larger scale, also aims to advance the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals #4 (Quality Education), #10 (Reduced Inequalities), #16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), and #17 (Partnerships for the Goals).
The group working on this particular lesson was formed during the “Decoloniality Praxis” seminar. It consisted of three German students enrolled in the class and two participants from the ASA project, who came together through the seminar to collaborate on developing and implementing a lesson that not only builds linguistic skills but also invites students to critically analyze how language shapes and is shaped by power, identity, and society.
Hello!
Part 1: Research findings of the German participants
Here are Elim Ghebreyesus, Emely Vogt, and Hannah Wagner, Bachelor students in the secondary teacher education degree at the University of Education Karlsruhe, Germany. Our article is about the concrete decolonial product we developed in the “Decoloniality Praxis” seminar offered by Prof. Martin in the summer term of 2025.
Below we delineate the creation, implementation, and results of our group project: A school lesson on a decoloninal topic for 9th graders. We chose the topic Critical Language Awareness (CLA). As our group consisted of students from diverse cultural and academic backgrounds, the topics decoloniality, linguistic inequality and historical perspectives naturally shaped our work.
The following sub-chapter comprises three parts: A brief theoretical overview of CLA, a didactic explanation of how we planned and conducted the lesson, and personal reflections on what we learned during the project. Together, these sections demonstrate why it is important for young learners today to discuss language critically and how such topics can be meaningfully integrated into English lessons.
Theoretical background on Critical Language Awareness
We use language every day; to talk, write, read, post, persuade – and the list goes on. But have you ever stopped to think about how language reflects and reinforces power in society?
That is the core idea behind Critical Language Awareness (CLA): Language is never neutral, and it plays a key role in shaping social realities. The term “Critical Language Awareness” was popularised by the British linguist Norman Fairclough, who argued that to truly understand language, we need to understand how it works within social structures. According to Fairclough, language is a material form of ideology, and language is invested by ideology (Fairclough, 1992, p. 8). In other words, the way we use language, whether in everyday conversation, the media, or politics, is shaped by the values and power structures of the society we live in. CLA is closely linked to Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), which examines how language contributes to the maintenance or challenge of social inequalities.
It also draws on sociolinguistics, especially in exploring why some language varieties like regional accents or dialects are seen as “wrong” or “less educated” (Milroy & Milroy,1999). These judgments are never just about language but about power, class, race, and identity. In practice, CLA involves critically examining language in various contexts: Why is certain political language loaded with metaphors like “waves” of refugees? What does it mean when one dialect is labeled “broken” and another “standard”? How do media headlines shape our perceptions of gender, race, and nationality? By engaging with these questions, CLA empowers people to become more conscious, critical users of language. And in a time of misinformation, hate speech, and social polarisation, this awareness is more important than ever.
Written by: Elim Ghebreyesus
Didactic commentary on the lesson “Critical Language Awareness – what language can do to you and others”
Prof. Martin did not set specific topics, but gave course participants time to identify a topic that mattered to them. The idea for our lesson topic evolved out of discussions in our work group about how English lessons can not only teach linguistic or communication skills, but also develop students’ critical thinking and intercultural competence, which are explicit goals in the Baden-Württemberg curriculum for English in Sekundarstufe I.
We discovered that topics such as discrimination, inclusion, and the power of language are rarely addressed directly in language learning and textbooks. But these issues are very relevant to adolescents, as they are forming their social identities and their understanding of justice. Moreover, the curriculum calls for the development of sociocultural orientation (“the role of the individual in the group”, “identity formation”, “peer groups”, “gender relations”, “social networks”) as well as functional communicative competences such as interpreting spoken and visual material, identifying implicit meaning, and expressing one’s opinion. We realised that Critical Language Awareness (CLA) offers a meaningful way to combine these curriculum goals, as it teaches language skills while exploring how language shapes realities and society.
Finally, recent public debates on racism, colonial legacies, and inclusive language in the media made the topic timely and relevant. By planning the lesson within these contexts, our aim was to engage many pupils in a way that is relevant to their lives and identities, and also to teach democratic discourse, which schools are meant to foster.
Our didactic thinking behind planning each lesson step:
Introduction and teacher presentation (3 min)
We begin with a short personal introduction by each teacher to establish a connection with the pupils. This meets the curriculum aim of creating authentic communicative situations in English, even in a teacher-led formats. The pedagogical reasoning behind this step is that students are more likely to engage in sensitive discussions if they feel they can trust the teacher. By starting with a warm and personal introduction, we set a collaborative tone and activated the students to engage.
Lead-in with cartoon analysis (3 min)
For our first worksheet, we designed a cartoon showing a boy carrying a backpack with heavy stones filled with hurtful words. The method “think-pair-share” is to be used in the following way: First the pupils think about the cartoon for themselves. This step gives every student time to form their own ideas, which supports inclusivity for quieter learners. The pair work is used to encourage low pressure communication in English. The third step – the plenary – builds confidence by sharing ideas already prepared.
This task connects to the curriculum by supporting the pupils’ functional communicative competence, as they extract the main ideas and underlying intentionality from visual material and in addition helps the pupils to understand the teacher’s intonation and their prior knowledge which they share with their collegues in class. It also supports the sociocultural orientation, as they relate language to emotions and identity. The cartoon is the visual prompt to bridge language barriers by making abstract concepts (like linguistic harm and micro-aggressions) concrete and visible. The move from individual to plenary discussion reduces anxiety and engages participation.
Elaboration phase with personal “heavy stones” activity (5 min)
Pupils are asked to think of times when they heard words or phrases that felt like a burden and write them on our second worksheet. This personal connection further shows them that CLA is not simply an abstract concept, but that it affects also them. Writing before speaking allows pupils to access vocabulary, process their feelings, and prepare for sharing. For sensitive topics, private writing is a safer starting point than immediate oral sharing.
Here you can see some of their thoughts:
Result-harvesting in plenary (7 min)
After the lesson, we invited volunteers to share examples, making it clear that participation was optional. This respects pupils’ emotional safety while valuing their own experiences. This connects to the curriculum by supporting their speaking competence (monologic), which includes expressing and justifying one’s opinion. It also emphasizes the sociocultural orientation, as they have to understand how language impacts social relationships. The pedagogical thought behind this is that it validates the learners’ voices and demonstrates that their perspectives matter in the classroom. That supports motivation in classroom and self-efficacy.
Elaboration II: Colonial legacies & language framing (20 min)
In the elaboration Phase II, we showed a photo of Cape Coast Castle in Ghana (a key site in the transatlantic slave trade)
and presented two different descriptions:
1. “Beautiful colonial architecture still shapes the cities”
After seeing this image, the pupils agreed that this would be a nice place to visit.
2. “Buildings of oppression remain in our streets”
Pupils were then asked to relate the second photo to the first. The (pluri-cultural) 9th graders did not take long to see how each phrase frames the same reality differently, so they were able to match the sentences to the images. The connection to the curriculum can be seen in the vocabulary, as they understand thematic vocabulary around history, politics and emotions. In addition, they develop their interpretation skills by identifying bias and power structures in texts. They understand historical contexts and their relevance today, which shapes their sociocultural orientation. This activity makes the power of words visible. It teaches that language is never neutral, a core insight of Critical Discourse Analysis (Fairclough, 1995). The contrast between the two sentences invites detailed interpretation and helps pupils to practise thinking critically.
Reflection & feedback (5 min)
We ended with a reflective writing exercise: “Write down one thing you learned about language today.” The answers were collected anonymously via Mentimeter (an App commonly used in German classrooms, where the pupils share their thoughts anonymously on the board). This reflection helps to secure new concepts in long-term memory. Anonymous collection ensures honest feedback and encourages participation from all students, including those less confident in speaking.
Our overall planning approach
In designing the lesson, we wanted a clear evolution:
Start from personal experiences → move on to peer discussion → connect the personal experiences to larger societal structures → conclude with critical historical examples → finally end with a personal reflection.
This mirrors the curriculum’s progression from concrete communicative situations to abstract, reflective competencies. It also aligns with constructivist learning theory, where learners build new understanding by linking prior knowledge to new contexts. We deliberately varied social forms (individual, pair, plenary) and media (visuals, oral discussion, writing) to address different skills and keep engagement high. The topic choice was linguistically rich and socially meaningful, ensuring that language learning was not isolated from the world students inhabit.
Written by: Emely Vogt
Editor’s note: When students at PH Karlsruhe plan school lessons in seminars and the “Ingrated Teaching Practicum”, they need to first analyse their lesson topic (“subject analysis”) in order to derive suitable materials and teaching techniques for the particular subject and teaching goals.
Critical Language Awareness (CLA) is a timeless topic that can appeal to pupils on a personal level. Language is not only viewed as a means of communication, but as a social instrument of power that both reproduces and challenges attitudes and social hierarchies.
The choice of topic is intended to enable learners to critically analyse linguistic factors and recognize connections between language, identity, vulnerability, and power. The focus is on everyday examples from the lives of the children, in this case from politics and historical contexts. This can be used to sensitize learners to the fact that language is not objective but always shaped by certain perspectives and interests.
Particularly relevant here is the question of how linguistic means, such as word choices, are used to influence opinions or portray social groups in a certain way. Pupils recognize that language not only describes reality but also constructs it (Granvile, 1993, iii-iv). The topic connects with learners’ prior knowledge, as they are already familiar with the influence of language in (social) media and daily interactions. This knowledge is activated at the beginning of the lesson through the analysis of the cartoon featuring hurtful language (“heavy stones”) and a reflection on their own experiences. It creates an accessible, real-life entry point that highlights the emotional and social impact of language. It fosters engagement not through abstract theory but through personal relevance and empathy.
As the lesson progresses, the focus shifts to the historical dimension of language use. The example of Cape Coast Castle is used to demonstrate how different linguistic framings affect the perception of history and current realities. Two contrasting example sentences (“Beautiful colonial architecture…” vs. “Buildings of oppression…”) serve as a starting point for discussing perspective and ideology in language. This phase combines cognitive engagement with social learning by encouraging pupils to reflect on global inequalities and postcolonial legacies.
The session reflects key aspects of the English Curriculum of Baden-Württemberg, a document that defines the educational goals, content, and methods for a specific educational institution or level. Especially the promotion of socio-cultural awareness, communicative competence, and intercultural understanding is shown. Pupils analyse visual and verbal texts, express their own opinions using appropriate language and learn to distinguish between different viewpoints.
The final reflection phase encourages conscious processing of what has been learned, for example through a personal written statement (e.g. via Mentimeter). The lesson was developed and delivered by an international team of university students including the ASA stipendiaries. This collaboration enabled a pluri-perspective approach and brought personal experiences with language and education into the process. The class benefits from this diversity in both content and method and the North-South teacher-tandem, who demonstrated that colonial language affects people to this day. The class fell completely silent when Emmanuel related the topic to himself and his great-grandparents – the possibility that they could have been amongst the enslaved people kept in these horiffic dungeons.
Ultimately, the bi- directional teaching approach moves beyond a purely normative understanding of language and toward a conscious and reflective view. Critical Language Awareness promotes democratic thinking and social participation by helping learners to recognize and question manipulative or ideologically charged language. It also fosters self-awareness in language use and encourages students to consider inclusive and alternative ways of expression.
Written by: Hannah Wagner
My personal experience: By Elim Ghebreyesus
At the start of the semester, our English seminar required us to form groups for a collaborative project. I joined two fellow students, and we quickly settled on a topic. Everything seemed straightforward. Then, quite unexpectedly, our group changed after the arrival of the ASA students two weeks later: Emmanuel, a teacher from Ghana, and Peter, a student from Darmstadt who is not studying teacher education, joined us. This not only increased our group size from three to five, but also meant we had to abandon the topic we had first chosen which was “Exploring places in Karlsruhe connected to inappropriate language and colonialism” and start from scratch. I must admit, my initial reaction was cautious, because this change also meant that our group work was no longer aiming at a presentation for the seminar. We now had to prepare a lesson for actual classes in schools, as this was an ASA project requirement for our two new group members.
We quickly agreed on the topic Critical Language Awareness. At first, I was not sure what to expect from this shift, but as we dived deeper into the subject, it became both engaging and thought-provoking. The international perspectives and the different academic backgrounds within our group enriched our understanding of how language relates to power, identity, and social inequality. Each member could contribute insights drawn from their own linguistic and cultural backgrounds, which made our discussions more dynamic and layered. From our very first meeting as a larger group, it became clear that everyone was highly motivated and willing to contribute. Rather than slowing us down, the diversity of our team improved the quality of our work.
We divided tasks fairly, supported each other, and developed a lesson that reflected the combined strengths of all five members. By the end of the project, I was genuinely impressed by how well we collaborated. What I had initially viewed as a disruption turned out to be one of the best parts of the seminar. This experience taught me an important lesson: Sometimes, unexpected changes are opportunities in disguise. Being open to new situations, new people, and new ideas can lead to outcomes far better than the ones we originally planned – and in this case, it also deepened my understanding of Critical Language Awareness in a truly collaborative way.
My personal experience: By Emely Vogt
When we first heard about having to change our original plan to designing and holding a lesson, I thought it would be a straightforward project. I imagined choosing some texts, explaining a few theories, and find examples the pupils could understand. But during the process I quickly learned that it is so much more than that. It became a way of questioning my own beliefs about language, power, and education.
Working together with a teacher from Ghana and a student from Darmstadt who was not studying language education pushed me to see things from completely new angles. We had to ask ourselves not just what we wanted to teach, but also how to make this complex topic meaningful and accessible for adolescents. Along the way we rewrote and rethought our lesson several times, and each time it taught me something new about the topic and teaching it.
In this article, I would like to share what I learned, not only about Critical Language Awareness, but also about working across cultures, about turning theory into practice, and about growing as a person and teacher through the process. The first part will describe my own growth and learning, the second one is about collaboration, the third one about the process itself and finally some insights for the future.
I already knew that language can carry different meanings and also power structures, as I also study politics and, for example, learned about discourse analysis, which studies language in context and examines how language is used to create social realities (cf. Foucault, 1972). But before working on our lesson, we had to search for literature about the theories of Critical Language Awareness, and I learned many new things. Working on this lesson really changed the way I see language and its power because I noticed that even in my daily life, I am now more aware of it and I also talk about it to other people. When someone says something that is not critically aware, I now tell them and can give concrete and well-founded arguments, as I have all the background information and theory.
At first, I thought that this topic would be too complex for adolescents to understand. I even asked my old English teacher for advice, and he told me it would be too hard. He said he had never taught such a lesson and had never heard of it being done in school. But I think we managed this really well, because we turned these complex ideas into understandable and interesting topics for the 9th graders. We used many pictures and also connected Critical Language Awareness to their own lives and experiences. It really surprised me, especially because what my old English teacher said was completely wrong. It was not too complex for them.
On the contrary, they understood everything very well and engaged and participated all the time. Even in the 90-minute lesson (we taught another 45-minute one), the (pluricultural) pupils stayed focused all the time and shared a lot of their thoughts and opinions. They even wanted to take group pictures in the end. At the end of our lesson, we used Mentimeter to see what they learned, and the answers were amazing. You could clearly see that the learning progress and the interest in the topic were huge. It was by no means too complex, difficult, or boring for them, because they were already experienced in the subject from their lived experiences. It almost seemed like our lesson struck a chord that had not been struck in a school lesson before.
Teachers just need to be (more) open-minded, motivated, and creative when it comes to turning abstract theories into comprehensible lessons for their particular learners. I learned that you can and should include such topics in your teaching, because it is really important that children learn about them, and besides, one of the Guiding Principles in the Curriculum is “education for tolerance and acceptance”. Another reason to include themes like decolonization or CLA in German classrooms is that many school children are affected themselves by stereotypes or racism. This became very clear when they filled out the worksheet with expressions or sentences they often hear in their daily lives. Through this, they learned about the term “Micro-aggressions”, and could relate. Now they know exactly what these expressions are, where they come from, and that it is not their fault but caused by the disrespect and lack of awarenes by the people using these terms.
After delineating my own and the pupils’ learning process, I would like to focus on our group collaboration. My understanding and also the pupils’ understanding of language and its power was strongly influenced by our student from Ghana. He could give personal insights, for instance when he talked about how the Cape Coast Castle in Ghana is described in two different ways (“beautiful architecture” vs. “a building of oppression”). He explained it in a gentle and non-judgmental but moving way and thereby created a direct emotional connection with the class. This was probably also the reason why the pupils became interested and stayed focused throughout.
I also really liked working together with the other ASA student from Darmstadt, who always reminded the group that we need to base our lesson on literature and theories, even if we simplify it for the learners. These different backgrounds always helped to see blind spots we might have missed on our own. Overall, the group collaboration worked really well, because we all respected each other and every opinion. Everyone could bring in their own ideas in the lesson and everyone contributed what they could do the best, for example creating worksheets. We always worked together on this project; nobody had to do anything alone or felt left out. I am really thankful for having had such a great group. Of course, there where some challenges, especially when it came to simplifying complex theories for children and managing the time limitation of a school lesson. But since we had a teacher and three future teachers in our group, we handled that very well.
About the process itself I want to explain why we changed parts of our lesson after the first drafts and what it taught me. We edited or changed some parts, because after talking to Prof. Martin, the professor of our university course, and to her tutor Alastair Allan, we saw that the lesson could be too dry for the children. So, we tried to change that by including many activities for them. We wanted to catch their attention right from the start with the cartoon so they could directly connect their own experiences. After that we used many activating methods like “Think-pair-share” so the students are confident to speak. As they first think about their own ideas individually, then talk about them to a partner and after getting this security share in the plenum. I also think that the input of our student from Ghana really interested them and made them think more deeply about what he told them. As I mentioned before, we also used Mentimeter at the end of the lesson, which was great for their motivation, because students always enjoy using digital tools. By adding these parts, we really caught their attention.
The most difficult part of transforming theoretical concepts into meaningful practice was definitely making it understandable for adolescents without leaving out key concepts. When we started searching for literature, I thought it would only give us the background knowledge we needed. But reading more deeply really shaped the lesson. It made me realise that CLA is not just about word choice and grammar, but also about power dynamics, identity and society. That is why we also included two pictures and two sentences that showed the same thing but from completely different power perspectives. Instead of only explaining what language can do, we were able to show it through pictures and relatable examples.
In the end the process of reading and discussing what we found helped us to move from a purely theoretical plan to something practical and relevant to the learners. It taught me that good teaching is not just about knowing things yourself but about translating ideas into something others can connect with. Looking back, the end of the lesson made me the proudest, as we could really see that the students learned about CLA and were really interested. As a future teacher, I definitely want to explore more topics related to Decoloniality Praxis and include them in my teaching. This project and the resulting lesson really showed me how important it is for children to learn about these topics and that my old teacher was wrong. It is not too complex or boring for them if you are doing it the right way.
My personal experience: By Hannah Wagner
As part of our English seminar, I had the opportunity to participate in a very special group project during the summer semester of 2025. It was an experience that enriched me not only professionally, but also personally. Originally, I was assigned to a fixed group with two fellow students, and we had already chosen a topic for our presentation. Then, two ASA students joined our group, which meant that we had to start over again. The topic was changed and we were now supposed to design a lesson together. At first, the situation was a bit challenging, not only because we had to change our topic, but also because we first had to adjust to a new group structure, different working methods and, of course, different linguistic and cultural backgrounds.
Finding a topic was particularly difficult at first. However, it quickly became clear that working with the two ASA students was a great enrichment. Despite the initial uncertainties, a very productive, pleasant and creative collaboration developed. We worked intensively together, exchanged ideas and always supported each other. It was particularly exciting to see how different perspectives and approaches led to a common result. What makes me particularly happy is that friendships have developed from the group work. Not only did we work well together professionally, but we also immediately hit it off on a personal level. This intercultural collaboration has shown to me how much potential we have when we are willing to approach each other openly and find solutions together. Looking back, this group work was a very educational experience in my studies so far. I was able to learn how respectful and supportive group work can be achieved through communication and openness. My experience in previous seminars was that group work sometimes had the opposite effect, because some group participants were not fully involved and some actually did not contribute at all.
Shared Reflections on Our Preparation and Teaching Experience: Peter Hintz and Emmanuel Agyapong
The decision was to reflect jointly on our preparation and teaching experience. Since our work was grounded in a bi-directional learning process, it felt more authentic to articulate our insights in a shared voice rather than in separate personal accounts.
Our partnership did not begin without challenges. In the early stages of preparation, we realized that our working styles differed significantly. The Ghanaian perspective favoured a more flexible and adaptive approach, grounded in the belief that creativity flourishes when there is room for spontaneity and contextual adjustment. The German perspective, on the other hand, emphasised detailed planning and structured preparation to ensure clarity, security, and reliable alternatives in case of unforeseen classroom situations.
At first, these approaches seemed incompatible. Yet, in retrospect, it was precisely this tension that became productive. The combination of flexibility and structure created a balanced lesson design: carefully planned, yet open enough to respond to the dynamics of the classroom. As a bi-national tandem with backgrounds in Educational Sciences and professional teaching practice, our collaboration was shaped by the interplay between theoretical reflection and pedagogical experience. Our engagement with Critical Language Awareness (CLA), Critical Discourse Analysis, and decolonial theory provided a strong conceptual foundation, while practical classroom knowledge ensured that these ideas were translated into age-appropriate and engaging activities.
The creative and carefully designed worksheets and lesson structure developed together with our group partners — Emely, Elim, and Hannah — further strengthened this process. Their thoughtful planning and didactic sensitivity laid the groundwork for three successful school implementations. The lesson’s progression from personal experiences (“heavy stones”) to broader societal and historical framings proved particularly effective. By connecting the topic to the learners’ daily lives, we observed high levels of engagement and participation.
The inclusion of examples from Ghana, especially in relation to Cape Coast Castle, added an emotional and authentic dimension to the lesson. For some students, these narratives were not abstract historical references but lived realities they could relate to directly. This moment demonstrated the power of bi-directional exchange: knowledge did not flow in one direction but emerged dialogically from shared perspectives and experiences.
Our satisfaction does not stem solely from having conducted well-structured and engaging lessons. Rather, it arises from the sense that we contributed even in a small way to fostering critical awareness among young learners. If students begin to question how language shapes perceptions, identities, and power relations, then the process of decolonising knowledge and thought has already begun.
Through this experience, we came to understand that decolonization is not a singular event, but an ongoing practice — one that requires openness, negotiation, humility, and collaboration. In this sense, our tandem-work embodied the very principles we sought to teach: dialogue over dominance, plurality over hierarchy, and reflection over reproduction.
Our lesson on Critical Language Awareness is therefore not an isolated university assignment, but part of a broader ASA-supported transformation process that seeks to rethink how English is taught, learned, and owned across North-South contexts. Through structured reflection, tandem collaboration, school cooperation, and engagement with the five axes of unlearning, we are gradually challenging binary epistemologies and confronting colonial continuities in English Language Teaching.
The ASA framework provides the institutional, financial, and pedagogical space for this work: it enables intercultural partnerships, supports sustainable educational innovation, and connects local classroom practice to global questions of equity and justice. In this sense, our project demonstrates how international collaboration between PHKA and UCC can translate the goals of the ASA programme into tangible classroom realities contributing to more inclusive, critically aware, and linguistically just educational spaces in both Germany and Ghana.
Text by Emmanuel Agyapong, Elim Ghebreyesus, Peter Michael Hintz, Emely Vogt & Hannah Wagner
Photos by Emmanuel Agyapong, Sara Aleid & Isabel Martin
Granville, S. (1993). Language, advertising & power. In H. Janks (Ed.), Critical language awareness series (pp. iii–iv). Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press & Hodder & Stoughton Educational.
Mentimeter (n.d.). https://www.mentimeter.com/de-DE (accessed: 01 March 2026)
(Ministerium für Kultus, Jugend und Sport Baden-Württemberg, 2016, Bildungsplan: Englisch Realschule. https://www.bildungsplaene-bw.de/,Lde/BP2016BW_ALLG_SEK1_E1
Fairclough, N. (1992). Critical Language Awareness. London: Longman. Milroy, J., & Milroy, L. (1999). Authority in Language: Investigating Standard English (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.
Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge (A. M. Sheridan Smith, Trans.). London: Tavistock.
You must be logged in to post a comment.