“Why can’t we speak in Latvian sometimes?”: learner agency in the language classroom in Latvian diaspora schools

TL;DR

This paper explores how Latvian heritage language learners in diaspora schools actively participate in their language learning process.

Contribution

The study introduces a new focus on learner agency in LAT-HL classrooms, highlighting students' roles in shaping their learning.

Findings

Student agency manifests through language management and engagement in LAT-HL lessons.

Teacher methodology and classroom roles significantly influence student involvement.

Freedom of choice, either teacher-suggested or circumstance-driven, affects learner agency.

Abstract

The Latvian language is the state language of Latvia. There are about 1.5 million native speakers of Latvian. Of these, 1.38 million live in Latvia, while the rest live across the world. Latvian as a heritage language, or LAT-HL, is taught in about 100 Latvian diaspora weekend schools—hosted by Latvian communities around the world. Although, there is a noticeable increase of research in LAT-HL, they focus on family language policy and practices and the socio-emotional dimension of LAT-HL maintenance in diaspora or, conversely, reimmigration. Considering this gap in LAT-HL research, this article focuses specifically on the perspective of LAT-HL learners and their agency in the Latvian-language lessons. It is based on data obtained from fieldwork at four Latvian diaspora schools (one school each in Europe, the US, Canada, and Australia) in 2025: student electronic questionnaires, interviews with students and Latvian-language teachers, texts created by students, and Latvian-language lesson observation checklists. As a result of data analysis, two thematic groups suggesting student agency were created: language management in the LAT-HL lessons and student involvement/engagement in the creation of the learning process and space. In both cases, the manifestation of learner agency is closely related to (1) the teaching methodology chosen by the teacher, which students accepted or not; (2) the roles of the teacher and students in the classroom; (3) the freedom of choice of students, which was suggested by the teacher or circumstances.