Abstract
This study examines the relationship between language policy and multilingual education in linguistically diverse societies through a comparative mixed-methods policy analysis of four anonymized policy contexts. The aim is to explain how policy recognition, institutional implementation, classroom practice, and stakeholder interpretation shape educational equity, academic participation, language maintenance, cultural inclusion, identity preservation, and perceived social cohesion. The empirical basis includes 72 language-in-education policy documents, curriculum guidelines, and school regulations; structured questionnaires completed by 642 teachers, students, and policy- or school-level actors; 44 semi-structured interviews; and 12 school-level observations from multilingual educational settings. The analysis combines systematic policy and content analysis, descriptive and inferential statistics, regression modeling, and thematic analysis. Within the four anonymized contexts, the findings indicate that inclusive multilingual policy was associated with stronger perceived learner participation and fairness when legal recognition was supported by teacher preparation, appropriate materials, assessment alignment, community participation, and flexible classroom language practices. A recurring implementation gap appears between policy commitments and school-level capacity: contexts with strong symbolic recognition but weak resourcing report lower teacher confidence and less consistent learner inclusion. Conversely, contexts that connect multilingual pedagogy with professional development and community engagement show more positive attitudes toward language and higher perceived fairness. The study contributes a multilingual policy-to-practice capacity model linking language ecology, linguistic human rights, sociolinguistic identity, educational policy, and classroom enactment. It argues that multilingual education is more likely to support academic participation, linguistic justice, and social cohesion when policy design is matched by implementation capacity.