English Language Teaching
For use with chapter nine of:
Insert cover photo
of book here
Galloway, N. & Rose, H. (2015). Introducing
Global Englishes. Routledge.
© Dr. Heath Rose & Dr. Nicola Galloway
Review of Lecture Eight
• Attitudes are complex.
• Attitudes are influenced by many factors: culture, familiarity, vitality and
prestige, pedagogical context, race, proficiency and motivation.
• Language attitudes are subject to change.
• There is a need for both short-term and long-term studies.
• Research into the attitudes of learners can provide teachers with an
awareness of their learners’ beliefs, help inform curriculum development,
increase self-awareness among the learners, foster autonomous learning
and encourage them to think critically about the language.
• Studies reveal that NE is highly valued and many in the education context
prefer to follow a NES model.
• However, many have limitations regarding methodology and very few
investigate the possible reasons for attitudes.
• Can they be used to justify the dominance of the NE model?
• Do learners need more choice?
• More studies are needed.
• Lecture 6 looks at influence of GE instruction on attitudes and attitudes
towards English teachers.
Overview
The ‘Native’ English speaker
Global Englishes Language Teaching
Barriers to innovations in ELT
Relevant research studies
Introductory activities
LOOK AT THE JOB ADVERTISEMENTS (Figure 9.1) IN THE INTRODUCTION TO CHAPTER NINE, AND
DISCUSS THE QUESTIONS BELOW:
1.
What is your reaction to the job advertisement in Figure 9.1?
–
–
2.
Think of English language teachers in a context you are familiar with. What qualifications are
needed to teach in this context? Is there a divide between Native English Speaking Teachers
(NESTs) and Non-Native English Speaking Teachers (NNESTs)?
–
3.
If so, why does this divide exist?
Why are some ‘native’ varieties of English preferred over others, from an English teaching
standpoint?
–
4.
Is this typical of job advertisements for English teachers in your home country?
Why do some institutions value the nativeness of a teacher’s English over formal qualifications?
Why do you think these varieties are preferred?
In Chapter 2, it was shown that English speakers in NES countries tend to adhere to a ‘standard’
English ideology for written English, but attach identity and pride in the diversity of spoken
Englishes. Why, then, does the English language teaching profession in NNES countries promote a
standard language ideology that speakers should aim to emulate the certain types of native
English speakers (namely standard American and British RP)?
Part One
THE NATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKER
The Native English Speaker in ELT
• positive attitudes towards NE in relation to ELT (Lecture
5).
• “the uncrowned king of linguistics” (Mey, 1981, p. 73).
Traditionally, theories about language learning have
typically posited the NES as the goal:
- Chomsky’s (1965) use of the expression “native speaker”
as the “ideal speaker-listener”
- Even when the focus shifted from the Chomsky-inspired
idea of “linguistic competence” to the Hymesian notion of
“communicative competence”, the NES continued to serve
as the yardstick for comparison, even if it was not the
original intention.
Current hiring practices perpetuate stereotypes that NE is correct and
that English should be learned from a NEST
“Native English
speaker and university
degree required
(Education preferred)”
(Japan,
ohayosensei.com).
“Native Speaker of
English with a
neutral accent”
(Poland,
transitionsabroad).
“On a global level, the ELT profession is perhaps the world’s only
occupation in which the majority faces discrimination” (Ali, 2009, p. 37).
English teachers from the Outer
and Expanding Circles have never
filled teaching positions in wellestablished private schools, colleges
and universities in the GCC” (Ali,
2009, p. 36).
“India's teachers
face 'native-only'
bar” (Guardian
Weekly, 10th April,
2012).
“Native English
speakers with a
neutral native
dialect” (China Pearson Longman
School).
Figure 9.2: Job advertisements
Apply in Canada
Apply in U.S.
Apply in U.K.
Apply in Australia and New Zealand
NE ownership is further perpetuated
in ELT materials & examinations
Has “error warning
symbols”.
Notes that, “You
cannot say ‘discuss
about something’”.
Has a section called
“Don’t say it” which
outlines 130 common
mistakes
.
‘A Native
English
Speaker
Would Say it
This Way’
( Williamson & Katsuki,
2005)
‘How your
English sounds
to Native
Speakers’
(Thayne & Koike, 2008)
Are things changing?
Despite their dominance, the idealistic notion of the NES prevalent in the
1960s has been called into question in recent years:
Are new goals required?
Is a native accent more
intelligible?
Why is a native accent no
longer relevant?
What exactly is a ‘native’ accent and who is a ‘native’
speaker?’
There is a need to explore attitudes and stereotypes in depth (Lecture 5)
• Cook (1999, p. 196) “this acceptance of the native speaker model does
not mean these attitudes are right”.
• Holliday (2008) - how far would students’ preferences would be
provided for if, for instance, they requested male or white teachers?
The prevalence of NES norms are evidently complex, yet this complexity
should not act as a deterrent for a critical examination of current ELT
practice.
A possible decline in importance is evident in the following 3 areas:
Figure 9.3: The demise of the native English speaker
Teaching
competence
Movements
away from
the native
speaker
Unrepresentative
Growing
awareness of
Global
Englishes
Terminology:
Legitimacy
problems
Problematic
definitions
1. Terminology problems
a. Problematic definitions
•
A substantial body of literature exists on what defines a NS and many scholars have
attempted to provide a workable and rational distinction between a NES and a NNES.
-
•
•
Paikeday (1985) - the NS “exists only as a figment of a linguist’s imagination”, preferring
the term “proficient user”.
Rampton (1990, 1995) - in addition to language expertise, the concept of a NS includes
language affiliation and language inheritance, although “expertise” is the main criterion.
Davies (1991, 2003) - 5 defining features of a NS although these are neither necessary
nor present in all average NESs.
No exact definition of a NS to which everyone subscribes and distinctions are blurry (Lecture
1).
Some studies also reveal that many self-ascribed NNESs can pass for NESs in certain
situations (Inbar-Lourie, 2005) and that self-ascribed NESs can be taken for NNESs by their
students (Moussu, 2006).
If we cannot define a native speaker, then can we define a non-native
speaker of English?
b. Legitimacy problems
•
•
•
•
ascribe power to NESTs, while presenting the NNESTs as “lacking” something (Holliday,
2005)?
perpetuate stereotypes?
A “life-long apprenticeship for the L2 speaker” (Tollefson, 1995) that has negative
effects on SLA?
Cook (1999) refers to Labov’s (1969) classic argument that one group should not be
measured against the norm of another.
c. Unrepresentative
• imply homogeneity? (Seidlhofer, 2003b, p. 183)
Lectures have shown that most NESs don’t speak a “standardized” version and
monolingualism is no longer the norm.
• “the concepts ‘native speaker’ and ‘mother tongue speaker’ make little sense in
multilingual societies where it may be difficult to single out someone’s mother tongue”
(Kirkpatrick, 2007, p. 9).
• Can we label speakers based on their mother tongue?
2. Teaching competence
•
Phillipson’s (1992) “native speaker fallacy” - the belief that “the ideal teacher of
English is a native speaker”.
-
•
NS abilities could be instilled in NNS through teacher training.
NNSs have undergone the process of learning a (second) language and are therefore better
qualified to teach the language.
Language teaching is no longer synonymous with the teaching of culture, and thus could be
taught by teachers who did not share the same culture as the language they taught.
As highlighted in lecture 5, Dorneyi has re-visited the notion of integrative motivation, and it is
clear that the target English speaking community is now difficult to define.
Research suggests that NE is not necessarily most intelligible (Jenkins, 2006a) e.g. BELF training for NESs (Lecture 4).
-
Kim and Elder’s (2009) study of air traffic controllers and NES/NNES pilot communications in
Seoul – NNESs easier to understand and experience was found to be more important than
English use or experience.
Thus, while the NES episteme may still dominate, it is becoming increasingly clear that NESs may
not necessarily provide the ‘best’ model.
3. Growing awareness of GE
•
Despite the spread of English, lectures have highlighted that NE still dominates and
NNE continues to be seen as inferior and illegitimate by many.
•
As introduced in lectures 3 and 4, the issue of expecting near-native proficiency
has also been heavily discussed in relation to the WE and ELF research paradigms.
•
•
Are new competencies required to make English more relevant for ELF usage?
Does the NES model fail to equip students for the real world uses of English, at
least for those who do not require English for NES contexts?
“The unquestioned assumption that the language norms and practices associated with
native-speaker varieties should be regarded as automatically relevant and legitimate
has been considerably lessened” (Leung and Street, 2012, p. 88).
Although many students and teachers still cling to NES norms (Lecture 5), a number of
proposals have been put forward for change and it is a popular topic.
Examples of a growing literature
“Debate surrounding the global presence of English has gradually become more
commonplace at ELT conferences and publications” (Jenkins et al, 2001, p. 305).
WE, GE and ELF book sections and chapters on ELT
• Jenkins, 2009; Kirkpatrick 2007, 2010a; 2010b; Kachru and Nelson, 2006;
Melchers and Shaw, 2011; Seidlhofer, 2011.
Entire books
• Alsagoff et al (Ed), 2012; Dogancay-Aktuna and Hardman (Eds.), 2008;
McKay, 2002; Matsuda (Ed.), 2012; Sharifian, 2009; Walker, 2010.
ELF-related articles in language teaching journals
• Jenkins, 2012; Alptekin, 2012; Baker, 2012; Cogo, 2012; Sowden, 2012;
Suzuki, 2012; Jenkins et al, 2011; Kirkpatrick, 2010; Risager, 2012.
Part Two
GLOBAL ENGLISHES LANGUAGE
TEACHING (GELT)
Global Englishes Language
Teaching
The pedagogical implications of the global spread of English is clearly
becoming an increasingly important area. Several proposals have also
been put forward for a change in ELT, and Galloway and Rose (2015)
group these into six key themes:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Increasing WE and ELF exposure in language curricula
Emphasizing respect for multilingualism in ELT
Raising awareness of Global Englishes in ELT
Raising awareness of ELF strategies in language curricula
Emphasizing respect for diverse culture and identity in ELT
Changing English teacher hiring practices in the ELT industry
1. Increasing WE and ELF exposure in language curricula
•Exposure to WE; legitimacy; endormative nativised models.
•Exposing students “to as many varieties of English as possible would do more to ensure
intelligibility than trying to impose a single standard on everyone” (D’souza, 1999, p. 273).
•To be able to communicate successfully with people all over the globe, students need to
comprehend different varieties “so that they are better prepared to deal with English
interactions in international contexts” (McKay, 2012, p. 73).
•NEEDS ANALYSIS
2. Emphasizing respect for multilingualism in ELT
• Diversity; multilingualism; usefulness of L1.
• “It is important that we, as language educators, recognize this fact and work to preserve
and promote all languages that an individual has access to” (McKay, 2012, p. 36).
• Kirkpatrick (2012) – ‘norms’ of successful Asian multilinguals and adapt the Common
European Framework of Reference (CEFR).
• Friedrich (2012, p. 50) - “If the only constant in lingua franca situations is diversity, then
we should anchor our practices in that assumption and educate students to encounter
such diversity with respect, curiosity and wisdom”.
3. Raising awareness of Global Englishes in ELT
• Direct teaching of issues surrounding GE.
• (Galloway, 2011, 2013) - raise awareness of use and increase confidence.
• Whole course or elements (Galloway and Rose, 2013, 2014).
4. Raising awareness of ELF strategies in language curricula
• Community of Practice.
• Strategies to “shuttle between communities” (Canagarajah, 2005, p. xxv).
• Focus on multi-lingual and multi-cultural communicative practices, and on negotiation
and communicative strategies.
• Interaction strategies (McKay, 2002); awareness of ELF usage (House, 2012).
5. Emphasizing respect for diverse culture and identity in ELT
• Culture as a fluid concept .
• Move from monocultural/ monolingual norms to “look at the communicative practices of
multilingual and multicultural speakers to understand ELF communication” (Baker, 2012,
p. 46).
• Inter-cultural competence.
• Pragmatics orientated approach (House, 2012, p. 200).
6. Changing English teacher hiring practices in the ELT industry
•More NNESTs or Multilingual English Teachers (METs) (Kirkpatrick, 2009, 2012).
•Re-examine the concept of qualified teachers (McKay, 2012).
•Large talent pool –80% of the English teachers worldwide are NNESTs (Braine, 2010, p. x).
Differences between ELT and GELT
Table 9.1: Differences between ELT and GELT are summarised in the table below
(Galloway and Rose, 2014)
Target interlocutor
Owners
Target culture
Teachers
Norms
Role-model
Materials
First language and own
culture
Ideology
Traditional ELT
Native English speakers
GELT
Native English speakers &
non-native English speakers
Native English speakers
Native English speakers &
non-native English speakers
Fixed native English culture Fluid cultures
Non-native English speaking Non-native English speaking
teachers (same L1) and
teachers (same L1 and
native English speaking
different L1), native English
teachers
speaking teachers
Native English and concept Diversity, flexibility &
of Standard English
multiple forms of
competence
Native English speakers
Successful ELF users
Native English and native
Native English, non-native
English speakers
English, ELF and ELF
communities & contexts
Seen as a hindrance and
Seen as a resource
source of interference
Underpinned by an
Underpinned by an inclusive
exclusive and ethnocentric
Global Englishes perspective
view of English
ELT > GELT
•
epistemic break (Kumaradavelu, 2012), defined as a “thorough re-conceptualization and a
thorough re-organization of knowledge systems” (ibid, 2012, p. 14).
the native-speaker episteme has not loosened its grip over theoretical principles, classroom
practices, the publication industry, or the job market. What is surely and sorely needed is a
meaningful break from this epistemic dependency if we are serious about sanitizing our
discipline from its corrosive effect and sensitizing the field to the demands of globalism and
its impact on identity formation. How and where do we start? (ibid, p. 15).
•
“This epistemic break then, requires a shift in materials design, views on ownership, cultures,
norms and role models, as well as a change in those who teach it. However, this approach
does not necessarily mean that teaching methods have to be changed, but that the
assumptions about the English language are changed, which permeate into ELT materials,
language assessment, cultural ideology, language ideology, and recruitment practices. In
addition, such proposals are not suggesting “that we abolish all teaching discrete linguistic
items nor that we ignore the pull that nativeness still has over learners and users” (Friedrich,
2012, p. 50). Instead, it simply involves a re-examination of current ELT practices in light of
the changes in the use of English” (Galloway and Rose, 2015).
Part Three
BARRIERS TO CHANGE
What are teachers to do?
http://blogs.thenews.com.pk/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/confused_l.jpg
Theory/practice divide
“the volume of such academic attention does not seem to have had a tangible
impact on actual classroom reality” (Saraceni, 2009, p. 177).
5 possible barriers to innovation in ELT that have caused this theory/practice divide
(Galloway and Rose, 2015):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
A lack of materials
Language assessment
Teacher education
Attachment to ‘standard’ English
Teacher recruitment practices
1. A lack of materials
• few teachers “have a rich enough knowledge of and personal experience with all of the varieties and
functions of Englishes that exist today, and thus they need to rely on teaching materials in order to
introduce students to the linguistic and cultural diversity of English” (Matsuda, 2012b, p. 168).
• Dominance of NE in materials.
• Some GE-related books (slide ), but limited coverage of ELF, limited audio, aimed at a relatively
advanced audience and few include practical activities.
2. Language assessment
•Focus on NES norms.
• Pearson (www.pearsonpte.com) note that “the ability to communicate effectively in English is crucial
to international success”, yet in their scoring guide, the Pearsons Test of English General scores are
related to the CEFR.
•Proposals: communicative strategies (Canagarajah, 2007), accommodation skills (Jenkins, 2007),
define achievement (McNamara, 2012) .
•BUT, far more difficult (and expensive).
•“The consequences are likely to be as revolutionary as the advent of communicative language
teaching some forty years ago” (McNamara, 2012, p. 202).
3. Teacher Education
• MSc TESOL/App Ling
• Jenkins (2012, p. 492) doesn’t believe “it is our place to tell
teachers what to do” (p. 492).
• Dewey (2012) - change must come from working with teachers
themselves, but much of what is taught in teacher training
programs is at odds with ELF research.
• Dewey (2012) and Widdowson (2012) - need for teachers to
reconceptualise the notion of language, the very subject they
teach.
4. Attachment to ‘standard’ English
• Teachers have often spent time on NES goal.
• Quirk (1990) teaching NNE is a “cheat” (p. 6).
5. Teacher recruitment practices
• socially ingrained ideology of NES recruitment.
• NESs attract business.
Part Four
RELEVANT RESEARCH STUDIES:
ATTITUDES TOWARDS ENGLISH
TEACHERS
Table 9.2: Research studies related to
GELT
Studies that involve
attitudes toward nonnative English speaking
teachers with a first
language
Studies that involve attitudes when
non-native English speaking teachers
share the same first language
Topic
Study
Country
Barrat and
Kontra
(2000)
Hungary and China
Benke and
Medgyes
(2005)
Lasagabaste
r and Sierra
(2005)
Cook (2005)
Hungary
The Basque country
76 university students
Questionnaires (open and closed)
Six countries
Young L2 students (aged 14 on
average) and adults (sample size
unspecified)
Questionnaire
20 ESL students
Audio recordings of six ESL
teachers (five non-native English
speakers from different language
backgrounds and one native
English speaker)
32 students from diverse
language backgrounds
Opinion essays
2 groups of university students
Questionnaires and interviews
Kirsty Liang USA
(2002) (cited
in Braine,
2005, 2010)
Mahboob
(2004)
USA
The ideal English teacher
Pacek (2005) UK
The influence on language attitudes of Global
Englishes instruction
Research design
Hungary (116 students and 58
teachers) China (100 students and
54 teachers)
Free-writing
422 students
Questionnaires
Cheung
(2002, cited
in Braine,
2005, 2010)
Hong Kong
Galloway
and Rose
(2013)
Japan
Shim (2002)
Korea
Derwing and Canada
Munro
(2002)
Kubota
America
(2001)
Galloway
(2011)
Japan
Galloway
(2013)
Japan
Questionnaires (420), interviews
(10) with students and classroom
observations. 22 teachers were
also used, 60% of whom were
native English-speaking teachers
Questionnaires (71 students in
the first questionnaire 236 in the
second).
Focus groups (one with 4 student
assistants (one native English
speaker and three non-native
English speakers) and one with 4
teachers (three native English
speakers and one non-native
English speaker).
24 TESOL masters students and 57
students
Tape recordings of five different
female native English speaking
teachers and non-native English
speaking teachers.
Questionnaires conducted with
full-time first year Canadian social
work students
Questionnaires (17 high school
native English speaking students).
Questionnaires (116 students),
interviews (20 students) and focus
groups (24 students).
Questionnaires (52 students) and
interviews (4 students)
NNESTs’ Self Perceptions
Medgyes’s (1992, 1994) was one of the first to explore this issue, and in
1998 the Non-Native English Speakers in TESOL (NNEST) Caucus was
established, which is now an Interest Section of the TESOL organisation.
Studies include:
• Medgyes (1992) in various countries
• Reves and Medgyes (1994) worldwide
• Tang (1997) in Hong Kong
• Samimy and Brutt-Griffler (1999) in a US university
• Seidlhofer (1996) in Austria
• Liu (1999) in the US
• Arva and Medgyes (2000) in Hungary
• Inbar (2001) in Israel
• Llurda (2005) in the US and Canada
Conclusion of studies
• varied results
• students do not focus on the nativeness of their teachers as much as
literature and societal beliefs may suggest.
• students rank personal and professional qualities of a teacher over the
nativeness of their English language proficiency – helpful for GELT
proposals.
The influence on language attitudes of
Global Englishes instruction
Study
Country
N Size
Method
Results
Shim
(2002)
Korea
27 TESOL
masters
students
(own
students)
tape recordings of
5 different female
NESTs and
NNESTs.
•
•
•
•
•
Derwing
et al
(2002)
Canada
64 first
year
Canadian
uni
students
Survey (pre and
post) on response
to foreignaccented
Vietnamese
English
•
•
•
3rd study in 1998, after World Englishes exposure
through TV (a programme called ‘Crossroads Café’),
23 wanted an internationally accepted model
(although this is not explained) as a teaching model
27 felt there is a need to understand NNESs
27 would be willing to participate in an ELT
programme that introduced NNESs.
Change in attitudes, but influence as
teacher/researcher not discussed, little info on
course, and little info on students – e.g. motivation
and experience.
3 groups - both types of instruction (cross-cultural
awareness and explicit linguistic instruction); only
cross-cultural training, and no instruction.
8 weeks
Instruction led to improvement in confidence that
they could interact with NNESs.
Study
Country
N Size
Method
Results
Kubota
(2001)
America
17
American
high school
NESs
Survey about 6
speech samples
(Australia, China,
India, Ecuador,
Nigeria & France)
Observ; Int
•
•
52 uni
students
Survey
(pre&post) Int
Quasiexperimental
•
•
Galloway
(2013)
Japan
•
•
Galloway
& Rose
(2013)
Japan
120 uni
students; 5
NNES
assistants; 4
lecturers
Survey
Focus Groups
•
•
•
WE course
only some showed positive reactions, and some
biased views towards NNES were reinforced.
indicates a need for starting early.
GE course (13 weeks)
Influential - motivation for learning English, attitudes
towards NNE and NNESTs, question notions of
‘standard’ English, helpful for future ELF
communication and raised confidence.
empirical basis for GELT
4 week module on GE, NNES guest speakers and
classroom assistants
The curriculum, and the existence of expert ELF users
as role models in the program played a large role in
shaping the opinions of the students in the program.
students displayed a more ELF-oriented view of
English use than language and business-content
teachers.
Summary of Lecture Nine
• Traditionally ELT has posited NE as the main goal of English
learning. Nevertheless, the importance attached to NESs is
declining.
• Studies show that students see NESTs and NNESTs as having
different skills, the former being preferred for their
perceived ‘fluency’ in the language.
• Recent years have seen many proposals for the way ELT is
approached.
• GELT is clearly very different from traditional ELT and the
NES and the NNES are placed on equal footing and the aim
is to emancipate the NNES from the norms of a minority
group of English users.
• However, a number of barriers exist, including an
attachment to ‘standard’ English, the prevalence of
standardised language tests and the continued recruitment
of NESTs.
Key terms
Language Ideology
Language standardization
yardstick
linguistic competence
communicative competence
prejudice
proficient user
Multicompetent language users
interlanguage
fossilisation
Expert ELF users
EIL-related matters
shuttling between communities
NEST
NNESTs
linguistic competence
communicative competence
native speaker fallacy
Norms
endormative
exonormative
Multilingual English User (MET)
Episteme
Epistemic break
Paradigm
Paradigm shift
strategic competence
inter-cultural competence
Further reading
On Native Speakerism in ELT
•
Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic Imperialism, Oxford University Press.
On Non-native English Speaking Teachers
•
Braine, G. (2010). Nonnative Speaker English Teachers. Research, Pedagogy, and professional
Growth. New York: Routledge.
On Global Englishes Language Teaching, and barriers to ELT innovation
•
•
•
McKay, S.L. (2002). Teaching English as an International Language: Rethinking Goals and
Approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2012). Individual identity, cultural globalization, and teaching English as
an international language: the case for an epistemic break. In L. Alsagoff, S. L. McKay, G. Hu, &
W. Renandya. (Eds.), Principles and practices for teaching English as an international
language (pp. 9-27). New York: Routledge.
Seidlhofer, B. (2011). Understanding English as a lingua franca. Oxford: Oxford University
Press. Chapter x
References
Ali, S. (2009). Teaching English as an international language (EIL) in the gulf corporation council (GCC) countries: the brown man’s burden. In F. Sharifian (Ed.),
English as an international language: perspectives and pedagogical issues (pp. 34–57). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Árva, V., & Medgyes, P. (2000). Native and non-native teachers in the classroom. System, 28(3), 355–372.
Baker, W. (2012). From cultural awareness to intercultural awareness: culture in ELT. ELT Journal , 66 (1 ), 62–70.
Barratt, L., & Kontra, E. H. (2000). Native-English-Speaking Teachers in Cultures Other Than Their Own. TESOL Journal, 9(3), 19–23.
Benke, E., & Medgyes, P. (2005). Differences in Teaching Behaviour between Native and Non-Native Speaker Teachers: As seen by the Learners. In E. Llurda (Ed.),
Non-Native Language Teachers SE - 11 (Vol. 5, pp. 195–215). Springer US.
Braine, G. (2005). A history of resarch on non-native speaker English teachers. In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-Native Language Teachers. Perceptions, Challenges and
Contributions to the Profession (pp. 13–23). New York: Springer.
Braine, G. (2010). Nonnative speaker English teachers: Research, pedagogy and professional growth. New York, NY: Routledge.
Canagarajah, A. S. (2005). Introduction. In A. S. Canagarajah (Ed.), Reclaiming the local in language policy and practice. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Canagarajah, A. S. (2007). Lingua Franca English, Multilingual Communities, and Language Acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 91, 923–939.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
Cogo, A. (2012). English as a Lingua Franca: concepts, use, and implications. ELT Journal , 66 (1 ), 97–105Cook, V. (1999). Going Beyond the Native Speaker in
Language Teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 33(2), 185–209.
Davies, A. (1991). The native speaker in applied linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Davies, A. (2003). The native speaker myth and reality. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Dewey, M. (2012). Towards a post-normative approach: learning the pedagogy of ELF.
Dogancay-Aktuna, S., & Hardman, J. (2008). Global English teaching and teacher education: Praxis & possibility. Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of
Other Languages.
Firth, A., & Wagner, J. (1997). On Discourse, Communication, and (Some) Fundamental Concepts in SLA Research. The Modern Language Journal, 81(3), 285–300.
Galloway, N. (2013). Global Englishes and English Language Teaching (ELT) – Bridging the gap between theory and practice in a Japanese context. System, 41 (3),
786-803.
Galloway, N. & Rose, H. (2013). “They envision going to New York, not Jakarta”: The differing attitudes toward ELF of students, teaching assistants, and instructors
in an English-medium business program in Japan. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 2(2).
Galloway, N. and Rose, H. (2015).Introducing Global Englishess. Routledge.
Holliday, A.R. (2008). Standards of English and politics of inclusion. Language Teaching,41(1), 115-126.
House, J. (2012). Teaching oral skills in English as a lingua franca. In L. Alsagoff, S. L. McKay, G. Hu, & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Principles and practices for teaching
English as an international language. New York: Routledge.
Hymes, D. H. (1972). On Communicative Competence. In Pride, J. B., & Holmes, J.(Eds.), Sociolinguistics, 269-293. Baltimore, USA: Penguin Education, Penguin
Books Ltd.
References
Inbar-Lourie, O. (2005). Mind the gap: Self and perceived native speaker identities of EFL teachers. In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-native language teachers:
Perceptions, challenges and contributions to the profession (pp. 265-281). New York, NY: Springer.
Friedrich, P. (2012). EFL, intercultural communication, and the strategic aspect of communicative competence. Teaching English as an International
Language. Multilingual Matters.
Jenkins, J. (2006a). Global intelligibility and local diversity: possibility or paradox? In R. Rubdy & M. Saraceni (Eds.), English in the World: Global Rules, Global
Roles (pp. 32-39). London: Continuum.
Jenkins, J. (2006). Points of view and blind spots: ELF and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16(2), 137–162.
Jenkins, J. (2007). English as a Lingua Franca: Attitude and identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jenkins, J. (2009). World Englishes: a resource book for students (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Jenkins, J. (2012). English as a Lingua Franca from the classroom to the classroom. ELT Journal , 66 (4 ), 486–494.
Jenkins, J., Cogo, A., & Dewey, M. (2011). Review of developments in research into English as a lingua franca. Language Teaching, 44(03), 281–315.
Kachru, Y., & Nelson, C. L. (2006). World Englishes in Asian Contexts. Hong Kong University Press.
Kim, H., & Elder, C. (2009). Understanding aviation English as a lingua franca. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 32(3), 23.1–23.17
Kirkpatrick, A. (2007). World Englishes: implications for international communication and English language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Kirkpatrick, A. (2011) English as an Asian Lingua Franca and the Multilingual Model of ELT. Language Teaching 44 (2): 212-224.
Kubota, R. (2001). Teaching world Englishes to native speakers of English in the USA. World Englishes, 20(1), 47–64.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2012). Individual identity, cultural globalization and teaching English as an international language: The case for an epistemic break. In L.
Alsagoff, S. L. McKay, G. Hu, & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Teaching English as an International Language: Principles and Practices (pp. 9–27). New York:
Routledge.
Labov, W. (1969). The logic of non-standard English. In J. Alatis (ed.), Georgetown Monograph on Languages and Linguistics 22. Pp. 1-44.
Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. (2005). What do Students Think about the Pros and Cons of Having a Native Speaker Teacher? In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-Native
Language Teachers SE - 12 (Vol. 5, pp. 217–241). New York: Springer.
Leung, C. and Street, B.V. (2012). Linking EIL and Literacy: theory and practice . Principles and practices for teaching English as an International Language.
Alsagoff, L., McKay, S. L., Hu, G. & Renandya, W. A. (eds.). New York: Routledge, p. 85-103
Llurda, E. (2005). Looking at the perceptions, challenges, and contributions… or the importance of being a non-native teacher. In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-Native
Language Teachers. Perceptions, Challenges and Contributions to the Profession (pp. 1–10). New York: Springer.
Lubna Alsagoff, Mckay, S. L., Hu, G., & Renandya, W. A. (2012). Principles and practices for teaching English as an international language. London:
Routledge.
Mahboob, A. (2004). Native or Nonnative: What Do Students Enrolled in an Intensive English Program Think? In L. D. Kamhi-Stein (Ed.), Learning and
teaching from experience: perspectives on nonnative English-speaking professionals (pp. 121–148). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Matsuda, A. (Ed.). (2012). Principles and practices of teaching English as an international language. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Matsuda, A. (2012). Teaching Materials in EIL. In L. Alsagoff, S. L. Mckay, G. Hu, & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Principles and Practices for Teaching English as an
International Language. Routledge.
McKay, S. L. (2002). Teaching English as an international language: Rethinking goals and approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McKay, S.L. (2012). Principles of Teaching English as an International Language. In Alsagoff, L., McKay, S.L., & Hu, G (Eds.), Principles and
Practices for Teaching English as an International Language, 28-46. New York: Routledge.
McNamara, T. (2012). English as a lingua franca: the challenge for language testing. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 1(1), 199–202.
Medgyes, Péter. (1992). Native or non-native: who’s worth more? ELT Journal , 46 (4 ), 340–349. Medgyes, Peter. (1994). The non-native
teacher. London: Macmillan.
References
Melchers, G., & Shaw, P. (2011). World Englishes. Hodder Education.
Mey, J. (1981). ‘Right or wrong, my native speaker:’ Estant les r´egestes du noble souverain de l’empirie linguistic avec un renvoy au mesme roy. In F.
Coulmas (Ed.), A festschrift for native speaker (pp. 69–84). The Hague, Netherlands: Mouton.
Moussu, L. (2006) Native and Nonnative English speaking English as a Second Language Teachers: Student Attitudes, Teacher Self Perceptions, and Intensive
English Program Administrator Beliefs and Practices. Dissertation, Purdue University.
Pacek, D. (2005). “Personality Not Nationality”: Foreign Students’ Perceptions of a Non-Native Speaker Lecturer of English at a British University. In E. Llurda
(Ed.), Non-Native Language Teachers. Perceptions, Challenges and Contributions to the Profession (Vol. 5, pp. 243–262). Springer. doi:10.1007/0-387-245650_13
Paikeday, T. M. (1985). The native speaker is dead!: An informal discussion of a linguistic myth with Noam Chomsky and other linguists, philosophers,
psychologists, and lexicographers. Toronto and New York: Paikeday Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.paikeday.net/speaker.pdf
Phillipson, R. (1992). ELT: the native speaker’s burden? ELT Journal, 46(1), 12–18. doi:10.1093/elt/46.1.12
Rampton, M. B. H. (1990). Displacing the “native speaker”: expertise, affiliation, and inheritance. ELT Journal, 44(2), 97–101. doi:10.1093/elt/44.2.97
Samimy, K. K., & Brutt-Griffler, J. (1999). Perceptions of NNS students in a graduate TESOL program. In G. Braine (Ed.), Non-native educators in English
language teaching (pp. 129–146). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Saraceni, M. (2009). Relocating English: towards a new paradigm for English in the world. Language and Intercultural Communication, 9(3), 175–186.
doi:10.1080/14708470902748830
Seidlhofer, B. (1996). “It is an undulating feeling...”: The importance of being a non-native teacher of English. Vienna English Working Papers, 5(1 & 2), 63–
80. Retrieved from http://anglistik.univie.ac.at/fileadmin/user_upload/dep_anglist/weitere_Uploads/Views/views96.pdf
Seidlhofer, B. (2003b). Controversies in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Seidlhofer, B. (2011). Understanding English as a lingua franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sharifian, F. (ed.) (2009). English as an International Language: Perspectives and pedagogical issues. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Shim, R. J. (2002). Changing attitudes toward TEWOL in Korea. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 12(1), 143–158.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/japc.12.1.09shi
Sowden, C. (2012). ELF on a mushroom: the overnight growth in English as a Lingua Franca. ELT Journal , 66 (1 ), 89–96. doi:10.1093/elt/ccr024
Suzuki, A. (2011). Introducing diversity of English into ELT: student teachers’ responses. ELT Journal , 65 (2 ), 145–153. doi:10.1093/elt/ccq024
Thayne, D. A., & Koike, N. (2008). Sono Eigo, eitibu Niwa Kou Kikoemasu [How Your English Sounds to Native Speakers].
Tollefson, J.W. (1995). Power and inequality in language education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Walker, R. (2010). Teaching the pronunciation of English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Widdowson, H. G. (2012). ELF and the inconvenience of established concepts. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 1(1), 5–26. doi:10.1515/jelf-2012-0002
Williamson, N., & Katsuki, R. (2005). Sono eigo neitibu dattara ko hanasu [A native speaker would say it this way]. Tokyo: PHP Kenkyujo.