14653435, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.12537 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [28/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License Received: 15 March 2021 | Revised: 18 January 2022 | Accepted: 22 March 2022 DOI: 10.1111/ejed.12537 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Languages of origin and education in Europe: A systematic review Astrid Codana Alcántara1 | Angelina Sánchez-­Martí2 | Jordi Pàmies Rovira3 1 Department of Systematic and Social Pedagogy, Universitat Autònoma de Abstract Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain European education policies have tended to cultivate lin- 2 Department of Applied Pedagogy, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, guistic hegemony and preserve cultural uniformity, which Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain has made it difficult for schools to support different cul- 3 Department of Theories of Education and tural backgrounds. This has contributed to the promotion Social Pedagogy, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain of artificial monolingual interactions that reinforce linguis- tic decapitalisation processes. The aim of the review on Correspondence Astrid Codana Alcántara, Department which this article reports was to investigate the treatment of Systematic and Social Pedagogy, and education of languages of origin in Europe. We present Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Office 144, Building G6, Plaça del Coneixement, findings from a systematic review of scientific articles pub- Campus de la UAB, Cerdanyola del Vallès, lished during the period 2010–­2020. The main findings indi- 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain. Email: astrid.codana@gmail.com cate that language and nationality are equated in European discourses and that public policies are promoted accord- ingly. These articulations draw on models that alternate between assimilationism and multiculturalism. Both assimi- lationist and multiculturalist approaches are detrimental to the supposed objective: that of promoting multilingualism. Thus, it is urgent that a consensus be reached, and certain public policies and educational practices promoted which are respectful of linguistic diversity, since the future social cohesion of our multicultural societies depends on this. 1 | I NTRO D U C TI O N There are around 7,000 languages in the world, distributed among 193 states (Eurydice, 2019). The coexistence of several languages within one country is therefore commonplace in most states (González & Sevilla, 2016). In This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. © 2022 The Authors. European Journal of Education published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Eur J Educ. 2023;58:151–165.  wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/ejed | 151 14653435, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.12537 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [28/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 152 | ALCÁNTARA et al. Europe, there are currently 24 official languages and 60 more that form part of the European Union's (EU) heri- tage. However, many other languages are present in Europe, as a result of migration (Bianco & Cobo, 2019). More and more families and children are arriving in Europe and must assume the challenge of schooling and immersion in a language they do not know (Corona et al., 2013). That being said, languages of origin go unnoticed despite being very widespread throughout the territory (Cuconato, 2016). Although linguistic diversity very much forms a part of reality in schools nowadays (Llompart, 2016), it is often made invisible behind the priority of protecting the national language. This encourages artificial monolingual interactions that reinforce processes of linguistic decapitalisation (Reyes & Carrasco, 2018). In this vein, education institutions in Europe have tended to cultivate linguistic hegemony and preserve cultural uniformity (Hélot, 2012; Thioune, 2020), which has hindered the incorporation of other languages and the acceptance of different cultural backgrounds in schools (Aguirre, 2016). The school plays a fundamental role in this multilingual context (Reyes, 2021; Sáez, 2007), because it not only reproduces the linguistic configuration of an entire state, but also acts as its representative through certain policies and a specific ideology (Rojo & Mijares, 2007). The education language policies promoted in Europe to date are based on the ideal of learning the official language (Presas, 2011) with the aim of integrating immigrant children into the host country (Vila, 2000). However, diverse student languages and cultures are not represented in such a political framework (Piller, 2001), and student identities are eroded as a consequence of assimilation processes (Gámez, 2017). Various authors (Mijares, 2006; Reyes & Carrasco, 2018; Vila, 2000) provide conclusive results of how languages go hand in hand with culture and the construction of identities. Denying languages of or- igin also means denying the contribution of knowledge from other cultures and encouraging children to renounce the construction of flexible and multiple identities. Years ago, Thomas and Collier (1997) stated that, since education policies based on linguistic and cultural homogeneity do not take into account the cultural and linguistic background of the students, they move schools away from promoting access to knowledge and sharing diverse cultures and identities. According to Álvarez de Sotomayor and Martínez-­Cousinou (2016), this contributes to a greater distance between migrant and native students. Also, Cummins (2001) found that developing linguistic skills in the native language helps with acqui- sition of new skills in the second language (García & Lin, 2017). Thus, immigrant students can quickly acquire considerable fluency in the dominant language of a society when exposed to it in the family environment and at school (Vila, 2006). In the same vein, other studies have concluded (Hakuta et al., 2000; Huguet & Navarro, 2005) that partial schooling in the mother tongue allows students to extrapolate knowledge from their own language to learning other languages. This is especially relevant when it comes to learning the language of the host country and integrating within the community. Hence, from the perspective of which language is used at school, it is not a question of organisationally addressing linguistic diversity at origin. Rather, it is about addressing the diver- sity of students' knowledge of the school language in educational practices and school organisation (Palacios-­ Hidalgo, 2019; Vila, 2006). The aim of the review on which this article reports was to investigate the treatment and educational response that languages of origin have received in Europe, from a socio-­critical perspective. The main research question explored the role granted in the scientific literature and political frameworks to languages of origin in the field of education in Europe. We use the expression languages of origin as defined by Mijares (2005) to refer to “different linguistic realities related to the presence in schools of children who in their homes may use a different language or lan- guages, to the official language of the State and, therefore, of the school” (Mijares, 2005, p. 112) considering them as the result of migratory processes. In this article, the distinction between a language of origin and a second language is important, second language refers to the acquisition of an additional language that is not spoken by the family nucleus. The official status of languages, and languages of origin, varies by country. The language of origin concept is here used, as in research literature otherwise, as a synonym for a minority language or mother tongue. This article reports on a systematic review of research articles published during the period 2010–­2020. Some of the approaches highlighted relate to the debates on the use and scope of languages of origin in education 14653435, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.12537 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [28/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License ALCÁNTARA et al. | 153 systems in Europe; the importance of linguistic capital in society; and revising normative principles for treating languages of origin in Europe. The article concludes with a consideration of responses in schools in Europe in relation to languages of origin. 2 | M E TH O D This article is based on a systematic bibliographic analysis of the Dialnet, Science Direct and Eric databases. This systematic review was conducted for examining the normative and historical framework in use in education sys- tems where language of origin learning takes place in Europe. These databases were selected for the following reasons: Dialnet is the largest online archive of Hispanic scientific papers; Science Direct provides online access to the full texts of one of the world's leading sources for scientific research; finally, Eric is the world's most widely used index for literature in the field of education. The keywords that guided our search were: ‘linguistic diversity’, ‘language of origin’, ‘minority languages’, ‘education’, ‘language policies’ and ‘mother tongue’. The lack of consensus regarding the meaning attributed to ‘language of origin’ forced us to initially use multiple keywords, to which we later added ‘immigration’, ‘linguistic diversity’, ‘cultural diversity’, ‘foreign language’, ‘multilingualism’ and ‘acquisi- tion of a language’. The systematic review was constructed following the recommendations of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-­Analyses, incorporating the Network meta-­analysis (PRISMA-­NMA) extension (Hutton et al., 2016) (Figure 1). The included articles were from the period comprising January 2010 to January 2020 and written in either Spanish or English. The search yielded 6,777 articles. We excluded articles that appeared in more than one search engine and those that did not meet our selection criteria. The selection criteria were: for Dialnet, full journal articles from EU countries after 2010, in Spanish or English; for ERIC, full journal articles from EU countries, in English since 2016 and in Spanish since 2019; and for Science Direct, full journal articles from EU countries in English since 2016, from education and language journals. This left us with a total of 4,671 articles (Figure 2). EXCLUSION CRITERIA 6777 studies were identified as relevant through keywords - 743 duplicates - 237 written in other languages - 503 UE journals - 623 not full journal articles 4671 studies selected for secondary assessment - 1894 English/French second language acquisition - 1659 ELE, CLIL,… - 979 articles addressing a language with official minority language status 139 studies for final consideration - 6 articles recommended by experts added 145 studies included in meta-analysis F I G U R E 1 Four-­level flow chart. CLIL, Content Language Integrated Learning; ELE, Spanish as a Foreign Language Teachers. Source: Authors. 14653435, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.12537 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [28/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 154 | ALCÁNTARA et al. 100% 98% 96% 94% 92% 90% 88% DIALNET ERIC (SPAN) ERIC (ENG) SD Total Selected FIGURE 2 Percentage of selected papers. SD, Science Direct. Source: Authors. TA B L E 1 Combinations of keywords used Keyword 1 Boolean Keyword 2 Search results Selected articles Linguistic diversity AND Language of origin 100 12 Linguistic diversity AND Minority language 654 22 Linguistic diversity AND Education 532 39 Linguistic diversity AND Language policy 183 8 Linguistic diversity AND Mother tongue 50 2 Minority language AND Language policy 170 2 Minority language AND Education 268 24 Language policy AND Education 221 3 Language policy AND Mother tongue 49 2 Language policy AND Language of origin 2091 4 Education AND Mother tongue 206 5 Education AND Language of origin 147 22 4,671 145 Note: All searches were carried out with the keywords in English and Spanish. Source: Authors. Despite this large volume of work, one major challenge that we faced was closely related to the lack of results directly linked to the subject in question. Another was that we had to combine a long list of keywords at the begin- ning in order to finally narrow our search field and thus reduce the number of keywords to six (Table 1). After a first reading of the abstracts was added to the aforementioned filters, the analysis led to the selection of 145 articles. The reasons that led us to discard the other articles were: • The combination of the keywords ‘linguistic diversity’ and ‘education’ resulted in research articles on the ac- quisition of English and French language as a second language, a subject that is far from the focus of study in this article. Likewise, when using the keywords ‘education’ AND ‘language policy’, articles that appeared were related to Spanish as a Foreign Language Teachers (ELE) and Content Language Integrated Learning (CLIL), teacher training, topics that also depart from the analysis of this paper because such articles focus on the teaching and learning of second languages in general, not specifically languages of origin or mother tongues. Accordingly, those investigations were left out because languages such as English or French are considered 14653435, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.12537 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [28/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License ALCÁNTARA et al. | 155 within the school curriculum as a second language and not treated as the students' mother tongue. • It also was extremely difficult to find articles related to the keyword ‘minority language’ used as a synonym for ‘language of origin’. This is because the term ‘minority language’ is generally used to refer to official lan- guages, whether co-­official or not, which are indigenous languages of a region spoken by a minority (Nagore & Giralt, 2018). The table shows the combination of the different keywords; however, it should be added that the words ‘mi- nority language’, ‘language of origin’ and ‘mother tongue’ were not combined, since these are used interchangeably as synonyms in some articles. At the beginning, we also discarded ‘foreign language’ and ‘acquisition of a language’ because the articles that appeared as a result were mostly related to the second language acquisition of English or French, which was not our focus. Similarly, the use of words such as ‘immigration’ and ‘cultural diversity’ yielded articles that were far removed from the scope of this article. Other articles were discarded as they were closely linked to teacher training in linguistic matters and generally related to the acquisition of second languages such as English, French, Spanish or German. Once the selection of the 145 records was completed, these articles were thoroughly analysed—­87% were qualitative articles; 9% were quantitative articles and 4% were only systematic reviews. It should be noted that expert recommendations resulted in a further six articles being added to the analysis, in addition to legislative documents published by the EU over the past 20 years. The detailed reading of these documents allowed us to inductively identify the following four analytical meta-­categories: (1) definition and meaning attributed to lan- guages of origin; (2) language of origin as linguistic capital; (3) from subsidiarity to intercultural policies; and (4) education policies and responses to the treatment of languages of origin. The procedure employed to identify the meta-­categories was based on selecting article fragments, each fragment being associated with a code and the resulting codes then being grouped into categories (Figure 1). Once the emerging categories had been listed, they were grouped under the four meta-­categories based on characteristics associated with their meaning (Table 2). 3 | FI N D I N G S 3.1 | Definition and meaning attributed to the term languages of origin An analysis of the lexicon used to refer to what in this systematic review is called ‘languages of origin’ is clearly limited by the lack of a consensual definition of the term, due to the polysemic use of associated terminology. The results of our analysis show that the following terms are used indistinctively: ‘non-­territorial languages’ (Verdaguer, 1997), ‘language of origin’ (Mijares, 2006), ‘foreign language’, ‘L1 or L2’ (Moscoso García, 2013); ‘first language’ (Escarbajal et al., 2015), ‘mother tongue’ (Aiub & Rodrigues, 2019; García Parejo & Ambadiang, 2018), ‘language of immigrants’ (Akoglu & Yagmur, 2016) ‘people's language among immigrants’ (Berasategi et al., 2019; Casco, 2017) and ‘minority language’ (Bellón, 2019). In general terms, articles such as those compiled by Bellón (2019); Berasategi et al. (2019); Huguet et al. (2014); and Lukic (2019) call the co-­official languages of a country and regional languages ‘minority languages’, while in other articles we find the use of this same word as a synonym for ‘language of origin’ (Abchi & Calderón, 2016; Etxeberría et al., 2019; Lozares & Sala, 2011). A more in-­depth analysis reveals still further ways of identifying the same concept. Some researchers identify language of origin as mother tongue, considering that there are no classifications that make one language different from another (Piller, 2001; Presas, 2011). Another point of view is the one adopted by Aiub and Rodrigues (2019), who theorised on the subject's identification process in relation to other languages: people have their own mother tongue and any other language they learn through life is a second, or non-­native language. Thus, it would seem that in the scientific community there is no consensus as to how to name them, let alone a clear definition. Along 14653435, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.12537 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [28/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 156 | ALCÁNTARA et al. TA B L E 2 Meta-­categories, categories and subcategories Meta-­categories Categories Codes Definition and meaning Language of origin (23.45%) –­ attributed to Mother language (2.75%) First language (0.04%) language of origin Mother tongue (2.03%) Family language (0.68%) Minority language (17.93%) Territory (12.71%) Regional (5.22%) Foreign language (1.40%) Language of immigrants (0.21%) L1 (1.03%) L2 (0.16%) Language of origin as Multilingualism (61.64%) Linguistic tolerance (0.20%) linguistic capital Diversity (57.43%) Respect (3.01%) Linguistic benefits (32.42%) Cognitive processes (12.03%) Linguistic competence (8.21%) Acquisition of second language (2.07%) Transferring L1-­L 2 (10.11%) Cultural identity (47.59%) Access to culture (12.31%) Identity stability (21.05%) Approach to another world (14.23%) Principles and regulatory European political treatment of Number of speakers (0.03%) framework for language of origin (2.07%) Political position (1.02%) languages of origin in Institutional support (1.02%) education in Europe Territorial political treatment of Regional language (8.01%) language of origin (11.73%) Indigenous language (0.22%) Non-­territorial language (10.50%) Social treatment of language of Social identification (16.01%) origin (exclusion/inclusion) National belonging (5.10%) (26.21%) Conception of citizen (5.10%) Political position (17.24%) Subsidiary vision (10.92%) Intercultural vision (6.32%) Linguistic programmes (8.28%) European Commission (6.16%) European Parliament (0.78%) Council of Europe (0.78%) Education in language of Education programmes (4.82%) Interpreters (1.81%) origin Orientation staffing (3.01%) Education policies (12.41%) Types (5.36%) Limitations (7.05%) System of Education (17.93%) Curricula (6.71%) Practice at schools (8.03%) Learners' perspective (2.19%) Note: The percentages refer to the number of articles that each category contains with respect to the selected articles. View in a diagram: http://go.bubbl.us/b05fb​4/5a28?/CATEG​ORIES. Source: Authors. these lines, Weiner (2014) pointed out that the lexicon used inhibits the social and cultural acceptance of non-­ European immigrants, who continue to be perceived as ‘foreigners’, even if they are second or third generation immigrants. 14653435, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.12537 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [28/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License ALCÁNTARA et al. | 157 Another element that must be considered is the vocabulary used by different international organisations in re- lation to ‘languages of origin’, since there does not appear to be a consensus here either. By way of example, the European Parliament uses in official documents the term ‘immigrant languages’ and ‘regional or minority languages’ to refer to “languages other than the official language of the State (…) does not include dialects of the official language of the State”. These documents delimit the concept of a minority language and the rights to which the speakers of that language are subjected, moreover it excludes and does not mention which languages are considered languages of immigrants. For its part, UNESCO has produced reports and projects—­e.g., the Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity (2010)—­with the aim of promoting awareness of linguistic heritage. It makes a clear distinction between ‘minority language’ (spoken in a territory by a minority), ‘mother tongue’ (which each individual has acquired from their family), and minoritized language (which is in danger of extinction). In addition, the way in which these bodies use the term “languages of origin” contributes to preserving the leading role played by the languages of the dominant cultures (Bastardas, 2014). According to Kraler et al. (2015), host societies develop advanced statistical procedures to classify society into ethnic, national and linguistic groups. The International Index of the Importance of Languages was cre- ated in this vein to recognise languages, although this in itself has generated controversy. While some authors have defended it as a mechanism for recording the development of different languages (Otero, 1995, cited in Moreno, 2015), others have argued that it generates unpleasant attitudes towards certain languages (Pié Jahn, 2018). In general terms, we observe that the terminology used in some articles from middle-­income countries to identify languages of origin has a strong pejorative load. This reflects dominance of some groups over others. This kind of language use contributes to hierarchies in public and official discourses on ethnic minorities, not only in Europe, but throughout the world (Conde, 2019). We can therefore identify a semantic load in the language used to refer to languages spoken by ethnic minorities. This entails certain underlying attitudes towards these groups that can culminate in behaviours that cultivate social exclusion (Escarbajal et al., 2015). 3.2 | Language of origin as linguistic capital Another inductive category identified in our findings relates to learning a language. There is a high degree of agreement in the research carried out on the importance of learning languages of origin (Bertelli, 2016; García & Otheguy, 2020; Lagos, 2015; Lozares & Sala, 2011; Piller & Takahashi, 2011). However, it is also pointed out that people who live in a country where their first language is not the official language of the country face very complex circumstances when it comes to learning their first language (Muñoz-­C omet & Miyar-­B usto, 2018; Nina-­E strella, 2018; Presas, 2011; Rodríguez, 2018). Despite efforts of governments in Europe, to put forth education policies for regional and official languages of the different member states and to support multilingualism, languages of origin have lagged behind for various reasons. These are mainly economical (Casco, 2017), but also include the stigmatised position they occupy at the bottom of the hierarchy of social prestige (Schalk-­S oekar, Van de Vijver, & Hoogsteder, 2004, cited in Akoglu & Yagmur, 2016). Many other authors have complemented the research done by Bourdieu and Passeron (1977), who under- stood languages of origin as linguistic and cultural capital, variously conceiving them as an underlying mechanism and powerful tool in the acquisition of second languages (Leung & Williams, 2014); a tool for transferring learn- ing from a first language (L1) to a second language (L2) and vice versa; also favouring multilingualism (Abchi & Calderón, 2016); and serving as a basis for learning other languages and offering the necessary support for this learning to take place (Gregory et al., 2012). In this respect, Reyes (2017) related the concept of linguistic capital more closely to languages of origin, defining them as an 14653435, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.12537 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [28/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 158 | ALCÁNTARA et al. […] invisible cultural capital of [people from another country] which is an example of how students' cultural capital operates according to their social origin through the symbolic violence that estab- lishes which knowledge is legitimate and which is not. (Reyes, 2017, p. 722) Consequently, the learning and mastery of a language not only result in that language being valued, but also facili- tate the acquisition of other languages. Learning a language therefore has many distinct advantages, some of the most well-­known and widely-­mentioned in numerous investigations being cognitive ones, e.g., greater cognitive flexibility and an increase in processing functions (Barac et al., 2014). Others that have been proposed (Bialystok, 2010) include a greater development of executive functions; interrelated processes of inhibition, working memory and attention control—­since speaking more than one language requires speakers to switch between two language systems with different interlocutors and in different contexts. Valuing languages of origin also provides a basis for linguistic tolerance: speakers' awareness of pluralism can lead them to accord the same value to each of the language varieties that they and other speakers use (García & Otheguy, 2020). In other words, their learning makes it possible to unite cultural identity features of differ- ent invisible communities (Abchi & Calderón, 2016). Therefore, language learning goes beyond linguistic compe- tence, since it fosters access to culture, promotes the stability of one's identity and enhances mutual knowledge (Bertelli, 2016), while giving rise to socialisation processes and attitudes of mutual respect, peaceful coexis- tence and improves understanding of others (Lozares & Sala, 2011). Many authors emphasise this social vision (Lagos, 2015; Piller & Takahashi, 2011), proposing that the cultural identity of a person who lives in a given cultural context thinks, acts and conceives the world in a concrete way due to the sociocultural impact in which he or she is immersed. In line with this, Bertelli noted that […] if we assume that a language expresses a discourse and that a discourse is articulated within one's own experience in the world, the possibility of approaching ‘other worlds’ through the mother tongue constitutes an added value for a more articulated understanding of diversity. (Bertelli, 2016, p. 56) 3.3 | Languages of origin: From subsidiarity to intercultural policies Languages of origin have received unequal treatment in Europe (Escoriza, 2019). All national languages of member states in Europe are equal at the legislative level. Despite this fact, the results of our research show that some languages have greater social prestige than others due to the number of speakers, political position or institutional support, among other aspects. Beyond official linguistic minorities, the languages spoken by immigrants are not nationally recognised (Etxeberría & Elosegui, 2010). It is common practice to refer to their languages as non-­territorial, non-­regional, non-­indigenous or non-­European languages (Yagmur, 2019). This conceptual exclusion from the public discourse in Europe derives from a restrictive interpretation of the no- tions of citizenship and nationality. Thus, language is in Europe often used as the main element of identification for the citizenship of a nation (Piller, 2001), making it a key element in the processes of social exclusion and inclusion. Initial attempts to devise language policies for supporting languages of origin in the 1970s saw practi- cally all governments in Europe advocating for teaching students their languages of origin. This was in part intended to support families to return to their countries of origin. However, new forms of multilingualism management were imposed over time (Mijares, 2005). It was not until 2002, following the publication of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment, Teaching and Assessment (Council of Europe, 2002), that intercultural and multilingual competences were integrated within 14653435, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.12537 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [28/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License ALCÁNTARA et al. | 159 the education framework for the first time, emphasising the relevance of the mother tongue as a very powerful resource for the transfer of learning a new language (Council of Europe, 2002). Clearly, an evolution in the political position on the management of languages of origin in the European Union took place. The emphasis shifted to multilingualism and cultural and linguistic diversity, proposing programmes and actions in this line. This initial subsidiary vision came to be replaced by other perspectives based on intercultural educational policies (Bertelli, 2016; Mijares, 2005). Table 3 shows the main normative lines of action for languages of origin in the European Union over the past 20 years. It includes documents where the words ‘languages of origin’ or ‘mother tongue’ appear verbatim, ignor- ing all material that, despite emphasising multilingualism or linguistic diversity in general terms, does not make specific mention of languages of origin or mother tongue. 3.4 | Policies and education responses to managing languages of origin At the request of the European Parliament (2018), some Member States have drawn up agreements with govern- ments from other continents and promoted programmes to encourage people to learn their mother tongue and even obtain degrees that accredit the mastery of these languages (Extra, 2016). According to Eurydice (2005), there are two main types of educational policies related to managing languages of origin in education. The first type corresponds to bilateral agreements between host countries and recipient countries. The second type are specific initiatives that each of the governments take following the guidelines of the European Commission (Mijares, 2005). In the former, the agreement usually establishes that the responsibil- ity for allocating resources and making decisions is shared by the two countries signing the agreement (Table 4). However, the infrastructure is provided by the host country, while teachers are usually hired by the country of origin (Eurydice, 2005; Gámez, 2017). There are two types of programmes promoted by the EU but developed by each of the member states that implement them: (1) the use of interpreters in educational centres to guarantee family-­centred communication, in which countries participate at government level; (2) specific staffing for the reception and orientation of immigrant students. According to Eurydice (2005), these programmes are usually implemented by teachers from the same sys- tem, who offer classes in schools, implying that there is no solid structure to guarantee their continuity in schools (Casco, 2017). Despite attempts by international organisations to devise policies aimed at enhancing the learning of languages of origin, some researchers (Alarcón, 2002; Bellón, 2019) have pointed out that the practice is restrictive and the limitations visible, since the necessary conditions for this to occur are not in place. One such limitation worth noting is that international tests such as PISA only measure mastery of linguistic skills—­reading comprehension, oral communication and written expression—­in the language of the host country rather than all linguistic skills, which may be better in an individual's first language. Thus, these results are interpreted as deficits and used to place the children of immigrant families in reinforcement classes (Akoglu & Yagmur, 2016; Álvarez de Sotomayor & Martínez-­Cousinou, 2016). Furthermore, multilingualism and the variety of registers that the learner already knows are often perceived as a problem rather than a starting point for learning (Nussbaum & Masats, 2012, cited in Llompart, 2016). In this scenario, research has revealed that school practice should extend to valuing linguistic and cultural wealth and be accompanied by curricular designs that represent this approach (Aguirre, 2016; Quiroz & Rojas, 2011). In this ap- proach, students are not segregated within schools and compensatory education is replaced by practices focused on translanguaging (García & Lin, 2017). In other words, the focus should not be only on the linguistic aspects of the speaker, but on practices that allow the speaker's competence to be developed to use different linguistic repertoires, and in doing so create meaning and be able to communicate better. 14653435, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.12537 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [28/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 160 | ALCÁNTARA et al. TA B L E 3 Regulatory framework for the management of first languages in education Year Institution Actions Contributions to language policies 2005 European Communication from the Ensures that all citizens have practical Commission Commission to the European skills in at least two languages in Parliament and the Council: addition to their mother tongue the European indicator of language competence 2006 European Recommendation of the Admits the fact that the mother tongue Parliament European Parliament and of may not always refer to an official the Council, 18 December 18, member state language 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning 2004–­2007 Council of Europe Valeur project Analyses the provision of different languages (including origin languages) in different contexts at school level to identify good practices for sharing 2007 European The High-­Level Group on Offers strategies based on EU Commission Multilingualism: Final Report multilingualism, including languages of origin, minority languages and sign language 2001 European Eurobarometer: language skills of Includes analysis of language learning and Commission European citizens and their teaching in the EU, as well as analysis attitudes towards languages of the language of origin of immigrant 2009 Eurydice: Integration of students immigrant children in schools in Europe 2009 European Communication 24 March, 2009, Support for EU policies in the field of Parliament on Multilingualism: an asset multilingualism is reiterated and for Europe and a shared the Commission is asked to develop commitment measures to promote linguistic diversity, including mother tongues 2011 Council of Europe The Council's conclusions 28–­29 Promotes measures aimed at helping November, 2011, on language people with a migratory background skills to improve mobility to learn the official language, considering the possibilities of allowing children from different backgrounds to maintain and develop their mother tongues 2009–­2012 Agreement Project on Europe's linguistic Proposes cultural and linguistic exchange between wealth with other countries, for supporting the British languages of origin Council and the European Commission 2013 European Report on endangered languages Points out that if children are taught their Parliament in Europe and linguistic mother tongue from the beginning, diversity in the European they will have an easier time learning Union the official language 2019 European Recommendation 22 May, Invites member states to promote Parliament 2019, for a global approach language learning at the end of to language teaching and compulsory education (including learning mother tongue instruction) Source: Authors. 14653435, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.12537 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [28/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License ALCÁNTARA et al. | 161 TA B L E 4 Agreements to support languages of origin between governments of host and country of origin Host country Country of origin Germany Croatia, Spain, Greece, Italy, Morocco, Portugal and Turkey Flemish Community of Belgium Greece, Spain, Italy, Morocco and Turkey French Community of Belgium Greece, Italy, Morocco, Portugal and Turkey Slovenia Germany, Austria, Bosnia-­Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro, Russia and Serbia Spain Morocco, Romania and Portugal France Algeria, Croatia, Spain, Italy, Morocco, Portugal, Serbia, Tunisia and Turkey Luxembourg Portugal Source: Table constructed by authors using data from Eurydice (2005). 4 | D I S CU S S I O N Carrying out a systematic review of languages of origin in Europe has been challenging. There is a scarcity of scientific literature on the topic. Although there has been progress in the elaboration of documents issued by the EU to promulgate and protect languages of origin, even today they are not included in the school curricula. Based on our analysis of the materials that are available, we observe the following pressing debates associated with the management of languages of origin in educational contexts. First, finding consensus on a definition for languages of origin in the scientific literature is no easy task. However, it has been shown that behind the terminology used to refer to language of origin, there are attributions and meanings that impact on the attached stigma and social and cultural acceptance of immigrants (Weiner, 2014). Moving beyond the links established between language and identity (Piller & Takahashi, 2011), it is easy to run the risk of attacking the individual and collective identities of people whose mother tongue is different from the official languages of the country in which they reside. For this reason, the conception posited by Abchi and Calderón (2016) is in line with what we understand by languages of origin, since it does not seem to connote prej- udice or stereotypes, nor does it build on territorial linguistic dominance. However, this definition does not offer a solution for second and third generation immigrants with respect to their languages of origin. The aforementioned authors define languages of origin as […] a language different from the majority, with which children are in contact at home from an early age. It is a language spoken in the child's country of origin—­in the case of first-­generation immigrants. (Abchi & Calderón, 2016, p. 80) We agree with other authors such as Barrera (2013) on the need to highlight the importance that future research commits to developing an epistemological frame of reference for languages of origin to address all these questions. Thus, one of the most widely used terms, in the articles reviewed, to refer to a language of origin is minoritized lan- guages, which has a certain pejorative connotation to these languages. Therefore, one of the pressing challenges is to find another expression that does not to perpetuate stereotypes. On the other hand, the importance of languages of origin as linguistic capital (Mijares, 2006; Reyes, 2017) and the relevance of learning them in various contexts (Bastardas, 2014; Cuconato, 2016) is once again confirmed here. Given the present scenario, it is not surprising that, despite the many advantages of learning languages of origin, they remain largely invisible in schools. With regard to learning languages of origin, the discourse should go beyond the linguistic characteristics of students, and instead be situated on the level of the Right to Education and respect for the Rights of the Child (Piller & Takahashi, 2011). 14653435, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.12537 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [28/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 162 | ALCÁNTARA et al. We find the equation of language to nation in education discourses in Europe. This is based on models that alternate between assimilationism and multiculturalism, but are detrimental to the supposedly pursued objec- tive: the promotion of multilingualism. Such policies lead to reproducing difficulties encountered by children of immigrants in seeing their linguistic and cultural identities represented, since their languages of origin still do not receive the desired recognition (Bermúdez & Fandiño Parra, 2016; Martínez et al., 2012). It is therefore necessary to promote public policies for the management of linguistic diversity that promote equal treatment and respect for all languages. The education sector can undoubtedly offer a viable response to multilingualism in favour of this super-­diversity, where classrooms are de facto constructed as spaces for multilingual practices in accordance with social linguistic practices that already exist on many occasions and in informal contexts (Crul, 2016). However, in schools, the use of—­and consequently value attributed to—­students' first languages should go beyond identity links and become an instrument that favours the acquisition of first languages and the continuity of academic pathways. Authors such as Fidalgo (2016) and Reyes and Carrasco (2018) have pointed out that learning languages of origin is still segregated and relegated to non-­formal educational spaces such as community schools—­mosques or places of worship—­and weekend educational centres, among others. This is of great concern, and an issue that requires an urgent response from public policy in order to ensure learning of first languages in schools. Finally, as with any systematic bibliographic approach to a topic, the limitations of our study are related to the selection of keywords, Boolean terms and search engines used. Their modification would result in a different form of review, not different content as such. A further limitation is related to the selection of articles in English and Spanish. The condition of not considering other languages excluded articles that could be of interest to the present study and is an aspect to consider for future research. Possible further limitations may arise from having translated the categories from one language to another. All said, the systematic analysis carried out has helped us delve further into the corpus of works typical for this field. Our analysis highlights conclusive results and an urgency to reach consensus and promote determined public policies and educational practices that are respectful of linguistic diversity. The future of social cohesion in our multicultural societies depends on it. DATA AVAILAIBILITY STATEMENT The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions. ORCID Astrid Codana Alcántara https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9666-0390 Angelina Sánchez-­Martí https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4719-4688 Jordi Pàmies Rovira https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1707-4797 REFERENCES Abchi, V. S., & Calderón, R. (2016). La enseñanza del español como lengua de origen en el contexto suizo. Desafíos de los cursos LCO (Lengua y Cultura de Origen). Textos en Proceso, 2(1), 79–­93. https://doi.org/10.17710/​tep.2016.2.1.4sabc​ hical​deron Aguirre, F. M. (2016). El sistema educativo como factor que incide en la deformación de la identidad cultural. UCV-­ SCIENTIA, 8(2), 148–­154. https://doi.org/10.18050/​revuc​v-­scien​tia.v8n2a7 Aiub, G. F., & Rodrigues, C. Z. (2019). El sujeto en movimiento: Procedimientos de identificación, lengua materna y lengua extranjera. Linguagem em (Dis)curso, 19(1), 193–­208. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-­4 017-­19010​4-­do0419 Akoglu, G., & Yagmur, K. (2016). First-­language skills of bilingual Turkish immigrant children growing up in a Dutch submersion context. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 19(6), 706–­721. https://doi. org/10.1080/13670​050.2016.1181605 14653435, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.12537 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [28/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License ALCÁNTARA et al. | 163 Alarcón, L. J. (2002). Bilingüismo y adquisición de segundas lenguas: inmersión, sumersión y enseñanza de lenguas ex- tranjeras. In Simposio CONCYTEQ, La investigación y el desarrollo tecnológico en Querétaro (pp. 124–­133). Colección Pedagógica Universitaria. Álvarez de Sotomayor, A., & Martínez-­Cousinou, G. (2016). ¿Capital económico o cultural?: El efecto del origen social sobre las desventajas académicas de los hijos de inmigrantes en España. Papers: Revista de Sociología, 101(4), 527–­554. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/papers.2200 Barac, R., Bialystok, E., Castro, D. C., & Sánchez, M. (2014). The cognitive development of young dual language learners: A critical review. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 29(4), 699–­714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ecresq.2014.02.003 Barrera, R. (2013). El concepto de la Cultura: Definiciones, debates y usos sociales. Revista de Claseshistoria, 343(2), 2–­24. Bastardas, A. (2014). Ecología y sostenibilidad lingüísticas: una aproximación desde la (socio) complejidad. In M. Casas & R. Vela (Eds.), Eugenio Coseriu In Memoriam. XIV Jornadas de Lingüística (pp. 143–­163). Universidad de Cádiz. Bellón, I. B. (2019). Salvaguarda de la lengua francesa en el mundo y de las lenguas minoritarias en Francia: políti- cas e instituciones. Çédille: Revista de Estudios Franceses, 15(16), 205–­2 25. https://doi.org/10.25145/​j.cedil​ le.2019.17.16.15 Berasategi, N., Larrañaga, N., Garcia, I., & Azurmendi, M. J. (2019). Perceptions of knowledge and use of languages of indigenous and immigrant students in Basque schools/Percepción del conocimiento y uso de lenguas entre alum- nado autóctono e inmigrante en la escuela vasca. Cultura y Educación, 31(4), 716–­753. https://doi.org/10.1080/11356​ 405.2019.1656938 Bermúdez, J., & Fandiño Parra, Y. (2016). Bilingüismo: Definición, perspectivas y retos. Perspectivas Sobre la Enseñanza del Inglés, 16, 43–­50. Bertelli, A. (2016). Intercomprensión e identidad cultural: Consideraciones acerca de procesos interculturales en el aprendizaje receptivo plurilingüe. In C. Q. Mejía, A. Bertelli, B. Peña, M. I. Cárdenas, A. Merlo, G. Jassen, J. P. González, & S. A. Moreno (Eds.), Entre lenguas y culturas: Prácticas pedagógicas (Vol. 1, pp. 39–­6 6). Ediciones Unidandes. Bialystok, E. (2010). Bilingualism. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 1(4), 559–­572. https://doi.org/10.1002/ wcs.43 Bianco, R., & Cobo, M. O. (2019). Usos de las lenguas y preferencias lingüísticas entre inmigrantes y refugiados. In J. M. Maroto (Ed.), Migraciones y comunicación intercultural: Una mirada interdisciplinar (pp. 95–­110). Jose Manuel Moroto Bianco. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture. Sage. Casco, I. S. (2017). Las lenguas inmigrantes en el IES Eclipse: un análisis desde la política lingüística de la Comunidad de Madrid. Revista Complutense de Educacion, 28(2), 359–­374. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_rced.2017.v28.n2.49331 Conde, X. F. (2019). Dos cuestiones de sociolingüística: la estandarización y los neohablantes. Estudios de Lingüística, Literatura, Educación y Cultura, 25(2), 25–­4 0. Corona, V., Nussbaum, L., & Unamuno, V. (2013). The emergence of new linguistic repertoires among Barcelona's youth of Latin American origin. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16(2), 182–­194. https://doi. org/10.1080/13670​050.2012.720668 Council of Europe. (2002). Marco común europeo de referencia para las lenguas. Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte/ Instituto Cervantes. Crul, M. (2016). Super-­diversity vs. assimilation: How complex diversity in majority–­minority cities challenges the assumptions of assimilation. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 42(1), 54–­68. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691​83x.2015.1061425 Cuconato, M. (2016). Some reflections on the educational trajectories of migrant students in the European school sys- tems. Forum Sociológico, 28(2), 19–­25. https://doi.org/10.4000/socio​logico.1386 Cummins, J. . (1996;2001). Negotiating identities: Education for empowerment in a diverse society. California Assn for Bilingual Education. Escarbajal, A., Sánchez, M., & Guirao, I. (2015). Factores determinantes del rendimiento académico de alumnos hijos de inmigrantes y autóctonos de origen extranjero en contextos de exclusión social. Revista Sobre la Infancia y la Adolescencia, 9(1), 31–­46. https://doi.org/10.4995/reinad.2015.3772 Escoriza, L. M. (2019). Las lenguas oficiales del Estado español en los textos legales, ¿fomento o reconocimiento del plu- rilingüismo? Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas, 14(1), 81–­89. https://doi.org/10.4995/rlyla.2019.11033 Etxeberría, F., & Elosegui, K. (2010). Integración del alumnado inmigrante: obstáculos y propuestas. Revista Española de Educación Comparada, 16, 235–­263. Etxeberría, F., Garmendia, J., Murua, H., & Arrieta, E. (2019). Alumnado inmigrante y competencia plurilingüe en la escuela inclusiva. The LANGSCAPE Journal, 2, 102–­120. https://doi.org/10.18452/​20618 European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice. (2005). Integrating students from migrant backgrounds into schools in Europe. Ministery of Education. 14653435, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.12537 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [28/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 164 | ALCÁNTARA et al. European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice. (2019). The teaching of regional or minority languages in schools in Europe. Eurydice Report. Publications Office of the European Union. European Parliament. (2018). Report on language equality in the digital age. (2018/2028(INI)). https://www.europ​arl.eu- ropa.eu/doceo/​docum​ent/A-­8-­2018-­0228_ES.html Extra, G. (2016). Language policy and education in the New Europe. In T. McCarty & S. May (Eds.), Language policy and political issues in education. Encyclopedia of language and education (3rd ed., pp. 1–­17). Springer. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-­3-­319-­02320​-­5_26-­1 Fidalgo, M. (2016). L'ensenyament de llengua i cultura d'origen a Catalunya (Doctoral dissertation). Universitat de Barcelona. Departament de Lingüística i Comunicació. https://doi.org/10.5614/ejgta.2015.3.2.3 Gámez, R. A. J. (2017). Diversidad cultural y lingüística, identidad e inmigración: Algunas conclusiones y propuestas desde la investigación educativa. Revista de Educación Inclusiva, 5(1), 139–­156. García, O., & Lin, A. M. (2017). Translanguaging in bilingual education. In O. García, A. M. Y. Lin, & S. May (Eds.), Bilingual and multilingual education. Encyclopaedia of language and education (pp. 117–­130). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-­ 3-­319-­02258​-­1_9 García, O., & Otheguy, R. (2020). Plurilingualism and translanguaging: Commonalities and divergences. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 23(1), 17–­35. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670​050.2019.1598932 García Parejo, I., & Ambadiang, T. (2018). La enseñanza de lenguas no maternas en la era de las migraciones: la importancia de las biografías lingüísticas. Doblele: Revista de Lengua y Literatura, 4(1), 22–­40. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/doble​le.50 González, A., & Sevilla, A. B. (2016). La profecía de Darwin: una visión evolucionista del árbol de las lenguas. Pensando desde la evolución. Revista de la Sociedad Española de Biología, 2(1), 61–­69. Gregory, E., Lytra, V., Choudhury, H., IIankuberan, A., & Woodham, M. (2012). Syncretism as a creative act of mind: The narratives of children from four faith communities in London. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 13(3), 322–­3 47. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687​98412​453151 Hakuta, K., Butler, Y. G., & Witt, D. (2000). How long does it take English learners to attain proficiency? University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute. Hélot, C. (2012). Linguistic diversity and education. In M. Martin-­Jones, A. Blackledge, & A. Creese (Eds.), The Routedge handbook of multilingualism (pp. 214–­231). Taylor and Francis. Huguet, A., & Navarro, J. L. (2005). Inmigrantes en la escuela. Una revisión de estudios sobre las relaciones entre ren- dimiento escolar e inmigración. In D. Lasagabaster & J. M. Sierra (Eds.), Multilingüismo, competencia lingüística y nuevas tecnologies (Vol. 20, pp. 53–­74). Horsori. Huguet, A., Sansó, C., Días-­Torrent, T., & Navarro, J. L. (2014). Inmigración y escuela en contextos plurilingües. El caso de Cataluña y Andorra. Revista INFAD de Psicología, 7(1), 393–­4 05. Hutton, B., Catalá-­López, F., & Moher, D. (2016). La extensión de la declaración PRISMA para revisiones sistemáti- cas que incorporan metaanálisis en red: PRISMA-­NMA. Medicina Clínica (Barcelona), 147(6), 262–­266. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.medcli.2016.02.025 Kraler, A., Reichel, D., & Entzinger, H. (2015). Migration statistics in Europe: A core component of governance and popu- lation research. In P. Scholten, H. Entzinger, R. Penninx, & S. Verbeek (Eds.), Integrating immigrants in Europe: Research-­ policy dialogues (pp. 39–­58). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-­3-­319-­16256​- ­0_3 Lagos, C. (2015). El Programa de Educación Intercultural Bilingüe y sus resultados: ¿perpetuando la discriminación? The Intercultural Bilingual Education Program and its results: Perpetuating discrimination? Pensamiento Educativo, Revista de Investigación Educacional Latinoamericana, 52(1), 84–­94. https://doi.org/10.7764/pel.52.1.2015.7 Leung, J. H., & Williams, J. N. (2014). Crosslinguistic differences in implicit language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 36(4), 733–­755. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272​26311​4 000333 Llompart, J. (2016). Enseñar la lengua en la superdiversidad: de la realidad sociolingüística a las prácticas de aula. Signo y Seña, 29(1), 11–­32. Lozares, C., & Sala, M. (2011). Capital social, cohesión social y uso de la lengua. Redes: Revista Hispana Para el Análisis de Redes Sociales, 20(1), 204–­231. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/redes.413 Lukic, M. (2019). Juego de lengua(s) en los Balcanes. Serbocroata entre el recuerdo y el anhelo. Revista de Paz y Conflictos, 12(1), 183–­204. https://doi.org/10.30827/​revpaz.v12i1.6058 Martínez, M. J. B., Currás, M. P., & Naváridas, R. M. G. V. (2012). Los programas bilingües en la Región de Murcia: Situación y valoraciones de profesores de disciplinas no lingüísticas. Education Siglo XXI, 30(2), 255–­288. Mijares, L. (2005). Inmigración en la escuela española: programas de mantenimiento de las lenguas de origen. Anales de Historia Contemporánea, 21, 111–­124. Mijares, L. (2006). Aprendiendo a ser marroquíes: inmigración, diversidad lingüística y escuela. 3. Ediciones del Oriente y del Mediterráneo., 85, 241. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/paper​s/v85n0.2028 Moreno, F. (2015). La importancia internacional de las lenguas. In Observatorio de la lengua española y las culturas hispánicas de Estados Unidos. Instituto Cervantes de la FAS. Hardvard University. https://doi.org/10.15427/​o r010​ -­0 4/2015sp 14653435, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.12537 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [28/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License ALCÁNTARA et al. | 165 Moscoso García, F. (2013). El programa hispano-­marroquí de enseñanza de Lengua Árabe y Cultura Marroquí (LACM) sometido a revisión. Árabe marroquí y amazige, lenguas nativas (L1). Anaquel de Estudios Árabes, 24, 119–­135. https:// doi.org/10.5209/rev_anqe.2013.v24.42631 Muñoz-­Comet, J., & Miyar-­Busto, M. (2018). Limitations on the human capital transferability of adult migrants in Spain: Incentive or barrier for a new investment in education? European Journal of Education, 53(4), 586–­599. https://doi. org/10.1111/ejed.12308 Nagore, J., & Giralt, F. (2018). Lenguas minoritarias en Europa y Estandarización. Prensas de la Universidad de Zaragoza. https://doi.org/10.26754/​uz.2018.lengu​asmin​orita​rias Nina-­Estrella, R. V. (2018). Procesos Psicológicos de la Migración: Aculturación, Estrés y Resiliencia. Boletín Científico Sapiens Research, 8(2), 29–­37. Palacios-­Hidalgo, F. J. (2019). Lenguas extranjeras y bilingüismo en una Europa multilingüe: una comparativa entre los sistemas educativos español y finlandés. In Creando redes doctorales: Vol. VII: Investiga y comunica [Online Resource] (pp. 45–­48). UCO Press. Pié Jahn, G. (2018). Revisión crítica y análisis glotopolítico del índice de importancia internacional de las lenguas y otros «alegres guarismos» de la demolingüística hispánica (Doctoral dissertation). Universitat Rovira i Virgili. Piller, I. (2001). Naturalization language testing and its basis in ideologies of national identity and citizenship. International Journal of Bilingualism, 5(3), 259–­277. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670​06901​0 0500​3 0201 Piller, I., & Takahashi, K. (2011). Linguistic diversity and social inclusion. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 14(4), 371–­381. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670​050.2011.573062 Presas, C. E. N. (2011). Adquisición de la lengua materna como base de enseñanza y aprendizaje de segunda y suce- sivas plurilingüismo y aculturación. Papeles Salmantinos de Educación, 15, 241–­254. https://doi.org/10.36576/​ summa.30653 Quiroz, A., & Rojas, F. R. (2011). La dimensión cultural en la enseñanza de una lengua extranjera. Relingüística Aplicada, 9(6). Reyes, C. (2017). Etnografiando formas de aprendizaje, participación y agencia en la escuela y la mezquita. Revista Complutense de Educación, 28(3), 721–­735. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_rced.2017.v28.n3.49857 Reyes, C. (2021). Etnografiando formas de aprendizaje, participación y agencia en la escuela y la mezquita. Revista Complutense de Educación, 28(3), 721–­735. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_rced.2017.v28.n3.49857 Reyes, C., & Carrasco, S. (2018). Unintended effects of the language policy on the transition of immigrant students to upper secondary education in Catalonia. European Journal of Education, 53(4), 514–­527. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12304 Rodríguez, R. M. (2018). Políticas de Inclusión Lingüística en España Destinadas al Alumnado de Nacionalidad Extranjera de Reciente Incorporación al Sistema Educativo: Dilemas y Tensiones en Tiempos de Crisis. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 26(154), 123. https://doi.org/10.14507/​epaa.26.3461 Rojo, L. M., & Mijares, L. (2007). «Sólo en español»: una reflexión sobre la norma monolingüe y la realidad multilingüe en los centros escolares. Revista de Educación, 343(1), 93–­112. Sáez, F. T. (2007). Enseñar nuevas lenguas en la escuela: L1, L2, LE…, NL. Revista de Educación, 343(1), 71–­91. Thioune, M. (2020). Racismo y educación. Una mirada desde la inmigración africana en Europa. Quaderns d'Animació i Educació Social, 32(14), 1–­7. Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. (1997). School effectiveness for language minority students. National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. UNESCO. (2010). Declaración Universal de la UNESCO sobre la diversidad cultural. Revista PRAXIS, 65-­6 4, 279–­284. https://www.revis​t as.una.ac.cr/index.php/praxi​s/artic​le/view/4080 Verdaguer, S. P. (1997). Los principios reguladores de las lenguas en la Europa Contemporánea. Revista de Antropología Social, 6, 73–­87. Vila, I. (2000). Inmigración, educación y lengua propia. In La inmigración extranjera en España. Los retos educativos (pp. 145–­166). Aula Intercultural. Vila, I. (2006). Lengua, escuela e inmigración. Cultura y Educación, 18(2), 127–­142. Weiner, M. F. (2014). Whitening a diverse Dutch classroom: White cultural discourses in an Amsterdam primary school. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 38(2), 2–­16. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419​870.2014.894200 Yagmur, K. (2019). The concept of minority/minorities in the European national and supranational EU discourse. Multilingua, 38(2), 213–­229. https://doi.org/10.1515/multi​-­2018-­0 063 How to cite this article: Alcántara, A. C., Sánchez-­Martí, A., & Rovira, J. P. (2023). Languages of origin and education in Europe: A systematic review. European Journal of Education, 58, 151–165. https://doi. org/10.1111/ejed.12537