Between advocacy and gatekeeping: primary and secondary teachers’ dilemmas towards multilingualism in Andalusia

While research has examined teachers' attitudes towards multilingualism, less attention has been paid to how teachers' orientations are shaped by language hierarchies and legitimized under institutional constraints. This study explores teachers' ideological orientations towards immigrant students' linguistic repertoires in Andalusian schools, employing a comparative, multi-round qualitative design. Drawing on raciolinguistic and Bourdieusian frameworks, findings reveal a persistent tension between symbolic endorsement of multilingualism and a practical Spanish-only mandate, with students’ home languages valued culturally but marginalised instructionally. These practices are justified through discourses of care, fairness, and academic efficiency, thereby subordinating home languages to Spanish and English. Differences emerge across educational levels: primary teachers tend to adopt more flexible, socially-oriented positions, whereas secondary teachers function as academic gatekeepers, construing students' home languages as instructional burdens within high-stakes educational systems. The study foregrounds teachers as policy mediators and advances a critical understanding of the systemic mechanisms that render multilingualism difficult to enact in practice. • Teachers value home languages symbolically but exclude them in practice. • Assimilationist practices restrict multilingual classroom use. • Racialised views of students shape how their languages are judged in school. • Higher prestige for European languages than immigrant ones, reinforcing linguistic hierarchies. • Primary vs. secondary teachers differ in rationales for Spanish.