Week 16: Re-visioning TESOL

The article by Lin et. al begins by explaining how even in applied linguists’ “objective” writing, there are ways that we can see Otherization. There seems to be unequal power relations between the research (Self) who is able to conduct meta-analysis and theorize about the subjective group or individual who is being researched (Other). I never actually thought about the ideologies underlying this type of writing that we are always analyzing. The authors then introduce Richardson’s “the collective story” genre that combines narrative writing with sociological analytic writing to evade this problem of Otherization. These collective stories demonstrate EFL learners working diligently to acquire English and have been successful, but may find themselves being Otherized in the process, yet continue to value their skills in the language. The autobiographies demonstrated learners who have used English as a cultural tool and have found themselves in a search for identity in the context of language learning.

The article then suggests that we use these narratives to redesign TESOL into TEGCOM, which is Teaching English for Glocalized Communication. Their rationale is that TESOL already implies Otherization by having an Anglo teacher as the Self and the learner as the Other, rather than focusing on the postmodern position of English learning in today’s world. TEGCOM would consider all learners to be monolingual “native English speakers” who need to be taught in ways that would promote cross-cultural communication in sociocultural contexts. Once again, we need to look at this field with a critical view and see how our perspectives of the world are influencing English learners and what we should do to prevent problems of power relations.

Chapter 7 by McKay and Bokhorts-Heng discussed how to use the sociolinguistic context of English to make new EIL pedagogical decisions. The first part of the chapter really related to what we have learned thus far about English in a globalized world with learners who have different motivations and access to learning the language. Two issues that are evident in current EIL pedagogy is glocal-local tensions and the discourse of Othering, which can lead to many problems. One thing we can do as teachers is critically analyze all of the materials that we are using and then have our students do the same, so that they can see the unequal power relations or stereotypes that may exist. After completing that ESL text analysis earlier in the semester, I love this idea and I think it would be a great way for students to view EFL/ESL with a critical perspective. The end of the chapter provided key points that a socially sensitive EIL pedagogy would include and some of them are:

-“EIL curricula should be relevant to the domains in which English is used in the particular learning contexts.”

-“EIL curricula should include examples of the diversity of English varieties used today.”

-“EIL curricula need to exemplify L2-L2 interactions.” ---I agree!

-“EIL should be taught in a way that respects the local culture of learning.”

Week 15

I really enjoyed the readings for this week because I think sociolinguistics and variations in English are interesting concepts that aren't always brought up. In Chapter 5 of McKay, we see how the spread of English has led to the development of varieties of English between countries and also varieties within countries. For example, Nigeria has four varieties of English that reflect different levels of social acceptance and international intelligibility. I thought it was surprising that very few Nigerians spoke the varieties that were closest to Standard British English, but that is what makes their form of the language unique. I like to think of all of the variations in English as being unique, rather than inadequate to the Standard English that we know. Kachru argues that English has "blended itself with the cultural and social complex", so we must look at these varieties as intertwined with the culture of the country, instead of inferior to the Standard form. The chapter also discussed those who support a monolithic model of language and argue that if we allow local spaces to modify the language for their environment, that soon English speakers could not understand one another. This idea really surprised me and I think that we need to realize that language is constantly changing and we cannot prevent variations in English. It will always be changing, but what matters is that speakers can work together to understand each other.

The article by Lippi-Green further brought up language variation, but specifically accents. It specified the difference between accent and dialects by saying that, "Two varieties of a single language are divided by accent when differences are restricted primarily to phonology." Dialects are when the language varies in morphological structures, syntax, lexicon, and semantics. Many people often think it is easy to change your accent and that if you cannot adapt to the "standard" accent, then you have not tried hard enough or are unintelligent. However, accents can be difficult to change and why should we have to change our accent? I never realized my "Chicagoan" accent until I went to Spain and everyone from the East and West Coast in the U.S. always commented on it. Just because we had a few differences in our English, it doesn't mean that theirs was better than mine or that mine was better. 

Week 14: Language planning and policy

The readings for this week required the understanding of the differences between language planning and policy, which I was unfamiliar with. In Chapter 4 by McKay and Heng, Deumert (2000, p. 384) states that language policy "refers to the more general linguistic, political, and social goals underlying the actual language planning process." Language planning involves making conscious decisions about a language status (official or national) or language corpus (the script, grammar, spelling, etc.) based on the previously mentioned goals and ideologies. These two concepts are undoubtedly linked, which we can see in the examples given in Singapore and the United States. Language is a concept that must be studied with a 'worldly' view and looked at in its social, cultural, historical, economic, or political contexts. This notion relates to language politicking, which concerns how language reflects the current society and the interplay of language and power, especially with the recent impact of globalization. This worldliness of language has certain implications for language planning, often causing conflicting viewpoints on the status of a language. This chapter also discussed English as an official language and how it is seen as a unifying bond for nations and believed to lead to economic success and international/inter-racial communication. Even though the goal is for English to be a neutral medium, this still underlies the idea that Standard English is the only appropriate form and it places English as superior to other languages. I was intrigued when reading about Ebonics in the United States and how it is a “ghettoizing” language rather than an “empowering” one, which is a perfect example of how our ideologies are reflected in the languages we value. I thought this quote on page 111 was something that all ESL/EFL teachers should keep in mind when embracing our student’s native languages; “the reality that Ebonics, the linguistic form a student brings to school, is intimately connected with their loved ones, community and personal identity.”

King and Fogle’s paper examines family language policies regarding additive bilingualism and how families’ beliefs shape their actual language planning. Bilingualism in the United States can be difficult due to the high status of English and policies that fail to support non-English languages. This is why the choices parents make in aiding their child’s bilingualism, whether it is for economic opportunities or maintaining cultural ties, are very significant. The findings of this study found that parents indeed are critical consumers of information that guides their decisions and they also rely on their own personal language learning experiences. Although these parents were very informed on why bilingualism is important, they were relatively unaware on the challenges that they may face in the process that may hinder their high expectations for their children.

Both of these readings stress the impact of language policy on language planning and what it demonstrates about a nation’s belief on a language, especially English.

Week 13: Multilingualism and World Englishes

The readings for this week related to the impact of globalization on English, resulting in multilingualism and World Englishes. Of course the spread of English across the globe has led to much more linguistic diversity, such as a variation in pronunciation, vocabulary, idioms, and rhetorical styles. This is not limited to the diversity in other countries, but also the linguistic variations within the United States. There are many different dialects within America (even spanning across Illinois) and it is important to be aware of the linguistic and cultural diversity of English speakers, rather then hold one type of English to a higher standard. This reminded me of my experience studying abroad in Spain and how it was not until those five months that I began to realize the different forms of English. My 13-year-old host sister was learning British English and there were times when I could not even help her with her homework because I was completely unfamiliar with the vocabulary. My host sister was shocked that I couldn't even help her with my own native language! The dialogue in her textbook was also very formal, so I tried to explain that the way I used English in America was actually different from what she was learning. I think this definitely sparked our awareness about the differences in English in other parts of the world. My classes in Spain were also with students from all around the United States and it was not until then that I realized how many "Englishes" there were in my own country. People from the West and East coast always commented on my Chicago accent, which I thought was the "standard" until I was being teased for it.  Kubota and Ward's article explained the implications for teachers to prepare the younger generations to be tolerating, respecting, and knowledgeable of this diversity that they will face in the community. I believe it is a great idea to incorporate teaching diversity into all content areas so that it is a concept that stays with students for their entire lives, rather than turning it into a one-unit lesson.

Chapter 3 by McKay and Bokhorst-Heng discussed multilingualism in societies with and without diglossia. In diglossic bilingual societies, the linguistic differences are functionally distinguished and one language (the H-language) is typically used in the formal domain while the other language (the L-language) is only used for more informal situations. In this type of multilingualism, the main incentive to learn English is its status as an H-language and the ability to communicate in these important domains, such as higher education or the government. Once again, English is seen as bringing power but this is not always true and it may actually keep the poor and disadvantaged students from ever fully learning the language. This chapter along with Farr and Song's article explained how language policy is a reflection of language ideology. The beliefs and values of a culture are always embedded in the approach to language learning, which is essential to remember if we will be teaching in a foreign country.