| In this study, I examine how resistance is shaped by participants in an Arabic immersion program. Using ethnomethodology, I defined resistance by how contributions by students aligned or disaligned with the local social organization, and by extension, the work of the classroom, and how these contributions were taken up by other participants (both instructors and students). Through an emic, micro-level perspective on how resistance is enacted, I argue that the focal student used those acts of resistance to build a maladaptive identity of being "bad at Arabic". The purpose of this identity building activity, at least in the case the focal student of this study was to distance herself from the work of the classroom, and thus, maintain a coherent identity in a face-threatening environment---the immersion language classroom. Identity work in the classroom is adaptable and contingent on the participation of others. Co-participants, whether instructors or students, had a hand in shaping acts of resistance and its resulting identity work. Although there was an explicit (Arabic only) language policy for the program, in the form of a language pledge, instructors did not engage in forms of explicit language policing, which appears to be consistent with previous work on preference structure and correction. This reluctance to police English language, in addition to other iterations of local preference structure, helped the focal student to persist in constructing her oppositional identity.;Furthermore, I use the lens of complexity theory to conceptualize the immersion program and the individual classes within the program as complex systems. Program participants act and interact within these complex systems, which are themselves formed and reformed by the activities of the participants. Although critical theories, such as critical applied linguistics, can be useful for understanding student resistance in the language classroom, complexity theory, with its focus on the internal operation of the system (in this case, a language classroom), is more robust in the context of this study. Although external, macro-level influences, such as geopolitical, cultural, or religious ideologies can inform participants' stances, it is the actions of individuals in the classroom that construct the activity and culture of any given classroom. However, once these actions become commonplace in the system, it can be difficult to change interactional patterns. This is true at the individual level, as can be seen through the focal student's ambivalence toward the oppositional identity she created, as well as the systemic level, as instructors' practices engendered certain types of participations stances and interpretations of the language pledge. Although local organization is contingent and adaptable to local contexts, effecting change in the local organization requires consistent effort. |
