Critical Perspectives on Global Englishes in Asia

Language Policy, Curriculum, Pedagogy and Assessment

Fan Fang, Handoyo Puji Widodo, Fan Fang, Handoyo Puji Widodo

• Publisher: Multilingual Matters
• Year: 2019
• ISBN:
  9781788924115
• Topic: Sprachen & Linguistik
• Subtopic: Sprachwissenschaft

Although the notion of Global Englishes (GE) has been widely discussed in the literature, few books consider how GE can be translated into educational practice. This book addresses the incorporation of GE into language policy and curriculum, pedagogy and assessment practices, and focuses on a wide range of geographical and language contexts. Incorporating GE into language curriculum, pedagogy and assessment practices calls for a reframing of our pedagogical practices that take into account the use of Englishes in intercultural and multicultural encounters where people have different first languages and cultural backgrounds. This book will be of interest to policymakers, curriculum developers and practitioner-researchers in the area of English language education.

1Critical Perspectives on Global Englishes in English Language Education

Fan (Gabriel) Fang and Handoyo Puji Widodo

In the areas of applied linguistics and English language teaching (ELT), recent years have witnessed the unprecedented growth of English as a global language in both educational and non-educational domains (Widodo et al., 2017). For example, in language education, English has been included in school and university curricula in order to prepare learners to become competent users of the language outside the classroom (Widodo, 2016). In order to meet this educational goal, there have been many attempts (e.g. English-only policy, bilingual programs) to help learners enhance their English skills. As English is used by people from both English speaking and non-English speaking countries, the issue of how the English language should be perceived and taught in different contexts has become a hotly debated topic, particularly in the field of applied linguistics.

On the methodological surface, ELT seems to be a simple process in which language educators train language learners to listen, speak, read and write English. In this endeavor, language learners are supposed to reach a native speaker’s level of English competence. In particular, so-called Standard British English and American English are viewed as providing the golden rules for English language instruction. However, when delving deeper and further, the traditional English as a foreign language (EFL) perspective is not akin to the current linguistic landscape of English as a global language and neglects the fact that the use of English does not exist in a vacuum. The spread and use of English in different contexts is in fact more complicated than what we have seen. For instance, in China and Indonesia (where the editors are currently based in) people use different languages and dialects, and such languages and dialects affect the use of English. To some degree, local accents may flavor the way people speak English. The question as to whether local dialect and language should be tolerated when speaking English has been debatable. From a multilingual perspective, however, a local language can be a resource for learning another language, such as English. With this in mind, English has been so differently adopted and adapted in various contexts that it is no longer viewed from a monolithic and unified perspective, and it is no longer owned merely by its native speakers (Widdowson, 1994).

This volume reflects the significance of moving beyond the traditional perspective of viewing English as a global language and therefore applies a critical perspective in negotiating the use of such a language. Particularly in the ELT industry, the increasingly multilingual and multicultural reality of today’s English use in global communicative settings has also called for veering away from the native-speaker (NS) ideology to a more pluralistic view which acknowledges the diversity of English usage in different geographic contexts (Rose & Montakantiwong, 2018). From a critical perspective, Holliday (2006) and Kubota (this volume) contend that the standard NS ideology is a myth or a native speakerism fallacy and also prescriptive because this ideology does not recognize the creativity of English use from a user perspective.

This backdrop leads to a question for people who are involved in the field of applied linguistics and ELT in terms of what types of English should be taught and how English should be taught to cater for the various needs and goals of language learners in different geographic contexts (D’Angelo, this volume; Matsuda, 2012, 2016; Xu, this volume). In global communicative contexts, each user of English engages in a negotiation of meaning with other English users who may come from linguistically and culturally different backgrounds. This reality encourages English learners to learn how to communicate in such an environment (Rose & Montakantiwong, 2018). Along with this global use of English, Asia has been a strategic territory where there are a large number of people who use English for instrumental purposes, such as education, business and tourism (Widodo et al., 2017). In response to this reality, this volume focuses on the Asian context where rich linguistic and cultural resources are mutually interwoven. The linguistic and cultural diversity of Asia as a multilingual and multicultural landscape has driven the socially fluid use of English where ‘the use of English in Asian contexts has specific historical, social, and political particularities’ (Fang, 2018: 16). English has been used in many Asian contexts for a long time with different purposes. From the paradigm of Global Englishes (GE), English is regarded as a postcolonial language in some Asian contexts where nativized varieties have been formed. From a broader range of the use of English, the paradigm of English as a lingua franca (ELF) moves beyond the description and codification of the varieties of English, but envisages the fluid and hybrid nature of English across borders (Jenkins, 2015; Seidlhofer, 2011).

Emboldened by a volume of proposals for the use of English as a global lingua franca, this edited book deals with language policy, curriculum, pedagogy and assessment from the paradigm of GE. The term ‘Global Englishes’ is adopted in this volume as the metamorphosis and fluid nature of the English language not within but transcending borders worldwide (Jenkins, 2015). We treat GE as a more inclusive term recognizing the varieties of English from the World Englishes (WE) paradigm as well as the diversity and fluidity of English use from the ELF paradigm (Galloway & Rose, 2018; Jenkins, 2015). In this respect, GE-driven policy, curriculum, pedagogy and assessment place greater emphasis on providing teachers and learners with more exposure and engagement with the diversity of English as a global lingua franca in authentic social interactions. This educational endeavor places more value on learners’ multilingualism and orients learners towards reappropriating NS norms (McKay, 2012).

Overall, this volume includes several chapters that deal with debates and discussions about language policy, curriculum, pedagogy and assessment from the perspective of GE (see Brown, this volume; Kubota, this volume). It also features the contribution of GE to teacher training (Selvi, this volume), with some chapters discussing the English language ideologies and ELT in certain contexts where English is ‘nativized’, including the Philippines (Canilao, this volume), Brunei (Gardiner & Deterding, this volume) and Hong Kong (Chan, this volume). It also includes traditional contexts where English is regarded as a foreign language (EFL) and even as a native language (ENL). Two chapters focus on the context of Mainland China (Chen & Zhang, this volume; Zhang & Zheng, this volume) where more than 400 million English learners exist (Wei & Su, 2015), where one chapter introduces a GE-oriented course in Australia (Xu, this volume) and one focuses on a WE-informed curriculum in Japan (D’Angelo, this volume).

This Volume

This volume highlights the role of GE in language policy, curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. In Chapter 2, A Critical Examination of Common Beliefs about Language Teaching: From Research Insights to Professional Engagement, Kubota explores 10 common misperceived beliefs about language and language education, including the superiority of the native speaker, whiteness and the monolingual approach to pedagogy. Some taken-for-granted language ideologies and perceptions have been challenged, while a critical examination is important to ‘engender an anti-racist, anti-essentialist, anti-Euro- and US-centric and anti-reductionist worldview’. Kubota has elaborated an overarching topic in relation to GE from a thorough perspective. These common misperceived beliefs are further explored and challenged by other contributions in this volume. Kubota’s contribution to this volume provides language policy makers and curriculum developers with insights into national and institutional policy making which goes beyond native speakerism standards. This policy making may exert influence upon language pedagogy and assessment, which are addressed in the rest of the chapters in this volume.

In Chapter 3, English is the Default Language? A Study of International Students’ Language Needs in the Chinese Higher Education Context, Zhang and Zheng reported a study on English as a medium of instruction (EMI) in a high-ranked Chinese university. Zhang and Zheng interviewed international students so as to examine their experiences of and attitudes towards EMI classrooms and their language needs when studying at a university in Mainland China. The findings challenge the assumption of English as the sole language used in EMI programs offered by international universities. As the participants reported, due to the varying language abilities of students, local languages in EMI classrooms are regarded as a key resource to facilitate content learning and classroom interaction. Therefore, Zhang and Zheng contend that it is important to recognize the multilingual needs of international students attending EMI programs or courses.

Chapter 4, Language Selection and Assessment in Brunei Darussalam by Gardiner and Deterding, reported an investigation into language selection and assessment in Brunei Darussalam. Gardiner and Deterding discuss some language policies enacted in Brunei Darussalam. They also show NS models of English usage as a popular discourse. By showing conversational data concerning misunderstandings of international communication, Gardiner and Deterding maintain that ‘native-like patterns of pronunciation and lexical choices do not always ensure mutual intelligibility’. Hence, they emphasize that NS norms of pronunciation and lexis may not act as the only yardstick for assessment, and that ELF-based pedagogy should be promoted in the classroom. They lament, however, that ELF-based pedagogy is not widely accepted, and a native speakerism-oriented assessment model may continue to be dominant in English language assessment for some time.

The next chapter by Brown draws upon the issue of GE and international standardized tests. In Chapter 5, Global Englishes and the International Standardized English Language Proficiency Tests, Brown examines international standardized English language proficiency tests (ISELPT) such as TOEFL iBT, TOEIC and IELTS and their relationship with GE. Brown discusses five key questions: (1) What is English language proficiency (ELP) really? (2) Why is the so-called native-speaker standard a thing of the past? (3) What alternative models are there to the NS model for ELP? (4) Why is changing the ISELPT so difficult/slow? and (5) What strategies might prove useful for effecting change in the ISELPT? Brown suggests some alternative approaches to defining the ELP with strategies that EFL/ESL teachers can apply as key tools to revisit the LSELPT.

Canilao, in Chapter 6, Looking through the Eyes of Global Englishes: Enhancing English Language Teaching in Multicultural Classrooms, documented 10 PhD students’ experiences of adopting GE in their language classrooms situated in the Philippines. Canilao shared her own experiences of her English learning journey in which Standard English (SE) was to be followed. In her autoethnography at the beginning of the chapter, Canilao indicated that SE was her passport to academic success; however, she missed the wealth of her own mother tongue and local culture. The conflict between the use of SE and that of the forbidden use of mother tongue in class/school is ‘an issue that teachers in multicultural teaching contexts need to confront seriously’. With this in mind, Canilao started to adopt the theories of WE and ELF. She also employed translanguaging and translingual practices in applied linguistics and incorporated the theories into her own ELT classes. In her study with these students, Canilao used a qualitative focus group interview with her own PhD students whose professional backgrounds were as teachers. She found a gap between Englishes and the rejection of regional accents. In reality, teachers were reluctant to incorporate GE principles into their classrooms, but they promoted SE solely because GE in their lessons might be seen as ‘unacceptable’ or might even cause harm to their positions (as English language teachers). As Canilao argued, this phenomenon reflects the issue of unequal Englishes (Tupas, 2015). She therefore calls for the importance of incorporating GE principles into language materials development and language pedagogies so as to raise students’ awareness of GE.

In the Hong Kong context, in Chapter 7, Contextualizing Teaching English as a Local/Global Language: A Bottom-up Sociolinguistic Investigation, Chan addresses the possibility of a bottom-up approach to understanding local language needs and to formulating ELT goals. In his mixed-methods study, Chan explores three main issues in this chapter: (1) the use of spoken English in Hong Kong’s sociolinguistic environment; (2) major stakeholders’ attitudes towards English varieties and English learning; and (3) current practices in English language education. He found a mismatch between real-life language needs and current English language education. Therefore, he suggested the inclusion of local pronunciation features to better understand which features could enhance or impede intelligibility. The findings of Chan’s study also showed that the overemphasis of the NS pronunciation model might not help learners when dealing with international communication. In this respect, learners will not benefit from non-authentic ELT activities for their future use of English. By focusing solely on the NS standard, students will not learn to cope with real-life challenges when using English with speakers who are mainly from different linguistic backgrounds. In sum, Chan maintains that language curricula and assessment should be oriented towards communicative pr...