This qualitative inquiry into lived experiences of multiculturalism among students of English as a foreign language (EFL) is based on an ecological perspective by Bronfenbrenner, which incorporates a person-process-context model along with a development-in-context conception. Conducted through semi-structured interviews with 40 Iranian EFL learners, this research highlights the complexities of navigating cultural diversity in a context where local cultural values are deeply rooted. Participants reported a predominantly positive view of multiculturalism, emphasizing its role in enhancing intercultural competence, motivation, and language learning. However, they also articulated concerns regarding the challenges of multiculturalism, revealing a critical tension between embracing multicultural elements and the disturbance of the cultural ecosystem. This study introduces the concept of ‘transitional ecology’, reflecting how learners’ interactions with the ecosystem are shaped by their shifting positions within the ecosystem, reflecting the younger generation’s detachment from the macrosystem over the passage of time. The findings advocate an ‘eco-multiculturalism’ approach to language pedagogy, which values the transitional nature of learners’ perceptions of multiculturalism. Through eco-multiculturalism, this research contributes to the understanding of inclusive language education practices in foreign language classes, specifically in a context where English language policies are framed within a discourse of tolerance rather than one of embrace.
AtkinsonD. (2002). Toward a sociocognitive approach to second language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 86, 525–545. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00159
2.
BakerW. (2015). Culture and identity through English as a lingua franca: Rethinking concepts and goals in intercultural communication. De Gruyter Mouton.
3.
BakerW.FangF. (2019). From English language learners to intercultural citizens: Chinese student sojourns’ development of intercultural citizenship in ELT and EPI programs. British Council.
BorreroN.E.YehC.J. (2010). Ecological perspectives on language learning: Interactions between personal and environmental factors. The Urban Review, 42, 571–592.
BronfenbrennerU. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press.
9.
BronfenbrennerU. (2005). The developing ecology of human development: Paradigm lost or paradigm regained. In BronfenbrennerU. (Ed.), Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human development (pp. 94–105). Sage.
10.
ByramM. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Multilingual Matters.
11.
CanagarajahA.S. (1993). American textbooks and Tamil students: Discerning ideological tensions in the ESL classroom. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 6, 143–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/07908319309525145
12.
CaoY. (2011). Investigating situational willingness to communicate within second language classrooms from an ecological perspective. System, 39, 468–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.10.016
13.
CardosoS. (2023). A critical analysis of multicultural representations in Portuguese English as a Foreign Language textbooks. An E-Journal of Teacher Education and Applied Languages Studies, 15, 63–89. https://doi.org/10.34619/vmqa-r0hu
14.
ChongS.W.IsaacsT.McKinleyJ. (2023). Ecological systems theory and second language research. Language Teaching, 56, 333–348. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444822000283
15.
CreeseA.MartinP. (2008). Introduction to volume 9: Ecology of language. In HornbergerN.H. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and education (pp. xiii–xviii). Springer.
16.
DarlingN. (2007). Ecological systems theory: The person in the center of the circles. Research in Human Development, 4, 203–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427600701663023
17.
DarvinR.NortonB. (2015). Identity and a model of investment in applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 35, 36–56. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190514000191
18.
DarvinR.NortonB. (2023). Investment and motivation in language learning: What’s the difference?Language Teaching, 56, 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444821000057
DongJ.HanY. (2025). ‘We feel excluded and isolated’: Multilingual international students’ emotions and agency in an EMI program. Linguistics and Education, 85, Article 101361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2024.101361
21.
Elahi ShirvanM.E.TaherianT. (2015). An ecological exploration of the culture of English as an international language among Iranian English language teachers in light of Vygotsky’s genotypic approach. Sino–US English Teaching, 12, 608–625. https://doi.org/10.17265/1539-8072/2015.08.009
22.
ErenÖ. (2024). Towards multilingual turn in language classes: Plurilingual awareness as an indicator of intercultural communicative competence. International Journal of Multilingualism, 21, 783–801. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2022.2090568
23.
FantiniA.E. (2009). Assessing intercultural competence. In FantiniA.J.ByramM.L. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of intercultural competence (pp. 456–476). Sage.
24.
GarnerM.BorgE. (2005). An ecological perspective on content-based instruction. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4, 119–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2004.08.002
25.
GuoX.LeeJ.S. (2023). A systematic review of informal digital learning of English: An ecological systems theory perspective. System, 117, Article 103097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2023.103097
26.
HaghighatE. (2014). Iran’s changing gender dynamics in light of demographic, political, and technological transformations. Middle East Critique, 23, 313–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/19436149.2014.949936
27.
HaugenE. (1972). The ecology of language. Stanford University Press.
28.
HofstadlerN.BabicS.LämmererA.MercerS.OberdorferP. (2021). The ecology of CLIL teachers in Austria – an ecological perspective on CLIL teachers’ wellbeing. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 15, 218–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2020.1739050
29.
HongJ.S.EspelageD.L. (2012). A review of research on bullying and peer victimization in school: An ecological system analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17, 311–322. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/j.avb.2012.03.003
30.
HuG. (2005). Contextual influences on instructional practices: A Chinese case for an ecological approach to ELT. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 635–660. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588525
31.
KalajaP.MäntyläK. (2025). The role of multilingualism and multiculturalism in English classes as envisioned by student teachers in Finland. In KalajaP.Melo-PfeiferS. (Eds.), Visualising language students and teachers as multilinguals: Advancing social justice in education (pp. 241–261). Multilingual Matters.
32.
KamaliJ. (2025). A cross-cultural investigation of effective language pedagogy in teachers’ personal practical knowledge narratives: A cultural-ecological perspective. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 33, 1089–1109.
33.
KamaliJ.NazariM. (2025). Transnational language teachers’ emotional vulnerability and professional identity construction: An ecological perspective. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 46, 1857–1871. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2023.2257659
34.
KordiaS. (2021). Large and small cultures in ELT. In CavalheiroL.GuerraL.PereiraR. (Eds.), The handbook to English as a lingua franca: Practices for inclusive multilingual classrooms (pp. 158–165). Humus.
KramschC.SteffensenS.V. (2008). Ecological perspectives on second language acquisition and socialization. Encyclopedia of Language and Education, 8, 17–28.
37.
LeatherJ.van DamJ. (Eds.). (2003). Ecology of language acquisition. Kluwer.
LiuQ.ChaoC.-C. (2018). CALL from an ecological perspective: How a teacher perceives affordance and fosters learner agency in a technology-mediated language classroom. ReCALL, 30, 68–87. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344017000222
40.
MercerS. (2020). The wellbeing of language teachers in the private sector: An ecological perspective. Language Teaching Research, 27, 1054–1077. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820973510
41.
Morady MoghaddamM.MurrayN. (2019). English language teaching in Iran: A case of shifting sands, ambiguity, and incoherent policy and practice. International Journal of Society, Culture and Language, 7, 96–105.
42.
MoranE.F. (2022). Human adaptability: An introduction to ecological anthropology. Routledge.
NealJ.W.NealZ.P. (2013). Nested or networked? Future directions for ecological systems theory. Social Development, 22, 722–737. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12018
45.
NgC. (2021). Japanese students’ emotional lived experiences in English language learning, learner identities, and their transformation. The Modern Language Journal, 105, 810–828. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12739
46.
NiuR. (2020). An ecological perspective on EFL learners’ oral communication. In JamshidnejadA. (Ed.), Speaking English as a second language (pp. 75–101). Springer.
47.
OnwuegbuzieA.J.CollinsK.M.T.FrelsR.K. (2013). Foreword. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 7, 2–8. https://doi.org/10.5172/mra.2013.7.1.2
48.
PaatY.F. (2013). Working with immigrant children and their families: An application of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 23, 954–966. https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2013.800007
49.
PeirceB.N. (1995). Social identity, investment, and language learning. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 9–31. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587803
50.
PortoM. (2015). Ecological and intercultural citizenship in the primary English as a foreign language (EFL) classroom: An online project in Argentina. Cambridge Journal of Education, 46, 395–415. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2015.1064094
51.
RahamanA. (2025). Identity, ideology, and capital in EFL learning: A narrative case study. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 10, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-024-00315-8
52.
RahimiM. (2023). Learning ecology perspective of instructors to enhance EFL students’ speaking skills: A microsystem perspective of Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model. Vision: Journal for Language and Foreign Language Learning, 12, 115–128. https://doi.org/10.21580/vjv13i118058
53.
SaghafiK.AdelS.M.R.ZareianG. (2017). An ecological study of foreign language writing anxiety in English as a Foreign Language classroom. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 46, 424–440.
54.
SamovarL.A.PorterR.E.McDanielE.R.RoyC.S. (2016). Communication between cultures (9th ed.). Cengage Learning.
55.
SouzaV.O. (2015). A case for an ecological approach and against language commodification in ELT. MA TESOL Collection, 705, 1–58.
56.
SpertiS. (2025). Multilingualism, multiculturalism and language teaching: Insights into teachers challenges and needs from continuous professional development. In KarpavaS. (Ed.), Multilingualism and multiculturalism in language education: Multilingual education (pp. 277–302). Springer.
SteffensenS.V.KramschC. (2017). The ecology of second language acquisition and socialization. In DuffP.MayS.(Eds.), Language socialization. Encyclopedia of Language and Education (pp. 17–32). Springer.
59.
TissingtonL.D. (2008). A Bronfenbrenner ecological perspective on the transition to teaching for alternative certification. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 35, 106–111.
60.
TitoneD.A.TivM. (2023). Rethinking multilingual experience through a Systems Framework of Bilingualism. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 26, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728921001127
61.
TongP.AnI.S. (2024). Review of studies applying Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory in international and intercultural education research. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1233925. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1233925
62.
TudorI. (2001). The dynamics of the language classroom. Cambridge University Press.
Van LierL. (1997). Observation from an ecological perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 783–787. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587762
65.
Van LierL. (2004). The ecology and semiotics of language learning: A sociocultural perspective. Springer.
66.
WallaD. (2025). Metalinguistic awareness in the multilingual EFL classroom: A study of grade 5–7 students in Norway. International Journal of Multilingualism, 22, 944–959. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2024.2340035
67.
WiertlewskaJ. (2012). Language planning and language policy in the ecological perspective. Glottodidactica: An International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 39, 117–126. https://doi.org/10.14746/gl.2012.39.1.11
68.
YanX. (2018). Multilingualism and language ecology: A framework for understanding language use in global contexts. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 39, 489–504.
69.
ZalliE. (2024). Globalization and education: Exploring the exchange of ideas, values, and traditions in promoting cultural understanding and global citizenship. Interdisciplinary Journal of Research and Development, 11, 55–55. https://doi.org/10.56345/ijrdv11n1s109
70.
ZhangX.LiJ.GuZ.GaoX. (2025). How does language learning contribute to individual growth in a multilingual world? A systematic review. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2025.2562096
71.
ZhaoP.HassanA.BurhanuddinN.A.N. (2024). A systematic review of factors influencing English language competency for ethnic minority students: An ecological systems theory perspective. Cogent Education, 11, Article 2415730. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2415730
