The role of culture learning and teaching in foeign language education - Literature review Example

?2 Introduction As a teacher of the Spanish language, research on the role that teaching culture in learning the language is crucial to teaching the students in an optimal way. There has been a historical dichotomy on whether or not this is necessary. One school of thought states that the only necessary education that new learners of a language need is semantics and how to string together sentences. For them, culture is not necessary to learn. The other school of thought says that cultural education regarding the target country is crucial, as it puts the language in context and helps the new learner know the different subtleties that are necessary to be a competent speaker. The position that this paper will take would be the latter one, which is that culture is a necessary aspect of learning a new language. Moreover, there are two types of culture – cultural awareness and cultural knowledge. While both are crucial for new learners to know, arguably cultural awareness is the most important aspect of culture for a student to know, for this aspect of culture will help the student negotiate the complex social roles that are inherent in any country. Cultural knowledge, which consists of knowing the facile facts about a country, such as the country’s music, religion, art, etc., is a much easier concept to grasp. Cultural awareness would be more difficult to discern, therefore will be more challenging to teach. That said, giving the students a sense of cultural awareness will help motivate them to become integrative learners of the language, for this is what studies have shown. It will also help them overcome any anxiety they might feel about learning a new language. The first part of this literature review will be a review of the literature regarding the importance of teaching culture to students of a foreign language. This will consist of articles that are specific about why culture is so important to foreign language teaching. The next section will deal with the basics of culture, for this is necessary to know so that the idea of teaching culture will be put into context. The following section will explain the differences between cultural awareness and cultural knowledge. The section after that will explain the relationship between attitudes about the target culture and target language and the motivation of new learners to become integrative learners of the language, and how positive attitudes towards the target culture help these new learners overcome anxiety about learning the language. The final section is a conclusion, in which the concepts that are put forth are put into context in the situation at hand. 2.2 The Role of Culture in Foreign Language Education According to Pica (1994), there is a question as to how necessary cultural integration is to learning a foreign language, and that this is question that troubles foreign language teachers, whether the foreign language teacher is teaching students that are far removed from the target language or is teaching in an area where the students have a chance to be immersed in the language (Pica, 1994). There are two camps when it comes to teaching foreign languages - one camp believes that foreign language teaching should emphasize only communication competence, while the other camp believes that foreign language teaching should incorporate the culture of the target language, which would include the literature of the target language (Shanahan, 1997, p. 164). The first camp is only concerned with semantics – for them, learning a language is nothing but drills, and language is nothing but rules, strings of sentences, and prepositions (Thanasoulas, 2001). The learner must see morphological or syntactical pattern, practice it and learn it without regard to culture or context (Waltz, 1989, p. 160). The second camp believes that language has an intuitive component that can only be acquired by learning the culture of the target country. Language is learned in context (Wendt, 2003, p. 92). On the one end are individuals who feel that students must communicate properly, and culture and literature have nothing to do with how well a student communicates. On the other end are individuals who believe that culture and literature are integral parts of learning a language, and without this understanding, students will never truly be able to communicate competently in the language (Shanahan, 1997, p. 165). This is because, in the foreign language classroom, culture is “often a part of the hidden agenda, a pervasive but unrecognized dimension, coloring expectations, perceptions, reactions, teaching and learning strategies, and is, more often than not, a contributing factor in the success or failure of second or foreign language learning and acquisition” (Damen, 1987, p. 4). Kaikkonen (1997) argues that most foreign language classrooms try to instill rote rules into their students, and these rules are associated with grammar and aspects of the spoken word, but this is not the optimal way for these students to learn. Kaikkonen believes that language is but one part of a country, and learning culture is vital to truly learning a language. It is only through learning about the target country’s culture that a speaker can truly understand the intricacies of the target language, such as intentions and expectations of the speaker from the target country. Moreover, there is, in every language, elements that belong to the ritual, automatic and routine components of the native speaker, and it is only through truly understanding the culture of the speaker that the learner can learn these nuances (Kaikkonen, 1997, p. 48). Moreover, the learner must eventually learn how to express himself in the target language, including his own aspirations and intentions. Learning a foreign language, according to Kaikkonen, is a part of a “very complex learning process associated with social and communicative dimensions” (Kaikkonen, 1997, p. 48). This is in line with the Sapir-Wharfian hypothesis, which states that “language serves as a schema through which the world is understood and interpreted” (Koslow, 1994, p. 575). In other words, the use of language is a kind of filter through which one's experiences are processed. This hypothesis appeals to a broad range of disciplines, from anthropology, psychology and consumer research (Koslow, 1994, p. 575). This means that “perceived reality is relative to the language of the perceiver” (Robinson, 1985, p. 14). As proof of this, Sapir and Whorf point to the fact that different languages have different ways of deciding time – some languages do not distinguish between the past tense and the past progressive, which means that this speaker does not see these temporal distinctions. The way that different cultures characterize color shows that these cultures see color spectrums differently. If the culture does not have a word for the color blue, then that culture does not perceive the color blue (Robinson, 1985, p. 14). Therefore, language determines perception, and this is the reason why language is so integral to culture. Moreover, it is important that a competent speaker be aware of the language ideology of the target country, and it is only through truly understanding the culture of the target country can that new speaker become aware of the language ideology of that country. Language ideology has been defined as “sets of beliefs about language articulated by users as a rationalization or justification of perceived language structure and use with a greater social emphasis as self-evident ideas and objectives a group holds concerning roles of language in the social experiences of members as they contribute to the expression of the group and the cultural system of ideas about social and linguistic relationships, together with their loading or moral and political interests.”(Woolard & Schieffelin, 1994: 57). So, for instance, English language ideology is based upon prescriptivism, which entails judgments about the correct and incorrect use of language, rules which are imposed by authority. According to Milroy and Milroy, such rules are just as arbitrary as dinner table rules (1999:1). Nevertheless, standard language ideology fosters prescription in language. This prescriptivism – the rules that are in existence due to the forces of power in that target country – can only be learned by learning about the historical circumstance of the country, which is a part of learning the culture of that country. This is because languages are shaped by social and historical circumstances. For example, the dominant position of the English language today is seen by some as the result of British colonial power and the economic rise of the United States (Crystal 2004:59; Graddol 1997:9). This view underscores the influence of the past on how people may view language today. The importance of this historical dimension also surfaces in this definition of standard language ideology by L. Milroy – “a particular set of beliefs about language…[which] are typically held by populations of economically developed nations where processes of standardization have operated over a considerable time to produce an abstract set of norms…lexical, grammatical…and phonological popularly described as constituting a standard language.” (1999:173). According to Milroy, these ideologies are historically deep-rooted and thoroughly naturalized, hence their resistance to analysis or argument. (2004: 167). These historical processes have led to a standard language ideology that is enforced through codified handbooks on language, dictionaries, and other similar references, as well as through public channels such as the education system. However, all languages are variant, owing to the heterogeneous nature of the people who speak them. That said, “it is probably true of all language communities that there is a variant which members regard as the most neutral and the most suitable for purposes of wider, public communication. This variant is known as the standard variant, and this is also the variant that native speakers find the most suitable for foreigners, whether they themselves use it or not.” (Vestergaard, 1996: 114). Consequently, learners are fed certain ideologies that shape their perceptions of themselves and the world around them. For instance, studies in Japan show that the prevalence of English ideologies influences their world-view and has caused them to adopt the Anglo-Saxon world view. (Kubota, 1998: 298). These same ideologies have caused them to view NNS of English as “uncivilized and inferior to the Anglo speaker of English.” (Kubota, 1998: 298). Other stereotypes that are perpetuated in foreign textbooks regarding the United States are that the United States is an idealized nation, and the “negative side of American society including poverty, crime, illiteracy, racism and so forth is rarely touched upon.” (Kubota, 1998: 298); (Lummis: 2). While there is a debate amongst academics, it is still clear that teaching culture is vital to helping the students learn the Spanish language. It will give the students a context to the language, and it will help them with their competency with the language, as they will be better able to ascertain the intention of the target audience. Moreover, it will help them master the ideologies that are behind the Spanish language, as these ideologies are only understood by the mediation of culture. Therefore, in my practice of teaching the Spanish language to adults, it will be vital to teach the culture of Spain along with teaching the students the mechanics of the language. 2.3 The Concept of Culture Culture is a general term for how an individual finds meaning and collectively make sense of their world (Cushman, 1996, p. 7). It is how participants interpret events and communication to understand the modern world. Culture is the outcome of concrete experiences of the individual social actors in their social world. People make culture, and culture makes them. Through making culture, individual and collective identities are formed (Cushman, 1996, p. 7). The construction of cultural institutions reflect “commonsense beliefs about human behavior” (Bruner, 1990, p. 38) Culture has its roots in man's relationship to other men and to nature. Culture refers to the form that social existences assume under historical conditions. This is contrasted with the word social, which refers to the content of relationships between men within any social formation, and culture is the form of these relationships. Culture, then, is the "objectivated design to human existence when 'definite men under definite condition appropriate nature's productions in a form adapted to his own wants and stamps that labour as exclusively human.'" (Hall, 1964, p. 318). Culture thus refers to man's capacity to mold nature to his own use. The way that culture shapes the human life and mind is by imposing the inherent patterns of culture’s symbolic systems – the logical and narrative forms, the patterns that are formed by communal life, and the discourse and language modes. The self’s growth is not independent of the social world, but is dependent upon social constructs, such as images, social bonds and meanings for growth (Bruner, 1990, p. 42). Culture externalizes internal feelings, states of consciousness and thoughts into concrete forms that are shared by individuals. (Cushman, 1996, p. 90). An individual’s experiences and acts are shaped by his intentional states, and these states are ”realized only through participation in the symbolic systems of culture” (Bruner, 1990, p. 33). There can never be a self that is independent of culture, as the ”self rises out of our capacity to reflect upon our own acts, by the operation of ’metacognition.’” (Bruner, 1986, p. 67). It is only through cultural interpretations of one’s personal autobiography that this story becomes understandable. Through this cultural mediation, meaning becomes communal and public, as opposed to private. The difference between culture and biological inheritance is that the latter does not necessarily shape human experience and action, but, rather, constrains action in a modifiable way. Culture shapes the human mind and life by giving “meaning to action by situating its underlying intentional states in an interpretive system.” (Bruner, 1990, p. 34). There are different levels of culture. At the broadest level, culture mean's one's society, such as a nation or an ethnicity. Within this definition, there are sub-categories that delineate one society from another. One of these categories is that of individualism verses collectivism. In some cultures, the needs, goals and values of the individual take precedence over those of the group; in other cultures, this is just the opposite. The former would be considered to be an individualistic culture, the latter a collective culture (Seufert). The next level would be organizational culture, and this refers to the culture of the organization where the learning takes place (Seufert). Group culture is next, and this refers to the values, attitudes and norms of a particular group. The group could be a study, work, peer, local, or multicultural group or community. An individual also has a culture, and this is influenced by the broader society. The individual's personal characteristics determines one's preferred teaching style at this level of culture. Lastly, is a discipline/domain culture, which means that the culture is subject-related (Seufert). Ackerman (2004) sees culture, and the differences between cultures, in terms of cultural distance. For Ackerman, there are four dimensions to cultural distance: power distance – how unequal are people of different statuses treated, and how much is the hierarchy of power valued; uncertainty avoidance – to what degree are the people of the culture threatened by uncertain or unknown situations; individualism – are the ties of the people loose or tight; masculinity – how distinct are gender roles. Cultural distance is determined by calculating the square root of all the dimensions for each country, then comparing the results (Ackerman, 2004, p. 5). Holme (2003) sees culture in four different ways, that have to do with language. In the communicative view, a student is given language that can be put to use in a specific context. This approach does not view language as inherently valuable. The classical-curriculum view, sees language as a way to give the student access to the intellectual value of the language. The third view is that there is an instrumental or culture free language way of viewing culture. This is where the belief is that spreading language, such as spreading English through the individuals in the Persian Gulf region will not only spread the language, but will spread the values and knowledge implicit in the countries that have English as their language. The fourth view is the competence view, which means that one must know a language’s culture before that person can become fully competent in the language and know the nuances of meaning (Holme, 2003, pp. 18-20). 2.4 Cultural Awareness verses Cultural Knowledge There are two aspects of culture that are relevant in this analysis – cultural awareness and cultural knowledge. Cultural knowledge refers to the knowledge of the cultural characteristics, beliefs, values and behaviors of the given culture (Adams, 1995). This is an aspect that can be learned through a book, or by doing research on the Internet or watching a movie about the target country. Cultural awareness, on the other hand, is a grasp of the nuances of the target culture. This is something that can really only be learned by immersing oneself in the target country. It envelopes recognizing biases, prejudices, social roles, assumptions, and how individuals reason in the target culture and other subtleties that can only be learned with time in the given country (Campinha-Bacote, 2002, p. 181). Byram et al. (2002) see cultural awareness as integral in learning a language. They posit that, when two people communicate, they are not just communicating with each other in a vacuum. Rather, the speakers see each other as individuals who belong to a certain social group, and this dictates how they address one another. For instance, how one speaks to a teacher will be very different from how one speaks to a peer (Byram et al., 2002, p. 5). These are the social identities of the speaker and the listener, and the knowledge of this is essential in communication competence. Therefore, it is important that individuals have knowledge of the culture of the person to whom they are speaking, for culture dictates social identities. For them, it is essential when, say, learning Chinese, what it means to be Chinese and, specifically, if communicating with a Chinese teacher, it is essential to have some background as to what it means to be a Chinese teacher (Byram et al., 2002, p. 6). Moran (2001) describes what can happen when the learner of new language is not familiar with the culture of the target country. He was at a dinner party in France with some native high school teachers, and was confused about the use of vous versus tu. Vous is typically used formally, tu used informally. During the course of the dinner party, while all the individuals were getting to know one another, they all started addressing one another as “tu,” and Moran, the foreigner, decided to go with the flow and start addressing his dinner companions as “tu” as well. Then, the next day, Moran met one of his dinner companions, quite by chance, on the street. He addressed her as “tu,” while “coolly, she responded with vous. The color rushed to my face; I had made another mistake. Obviously, the “now-we-know-each-other-so-we-can-use-tu­-theory did not apply here” (Moran, 2001, p. 35). This is obviously an example of making a mistake in the language because of ignorance of the culture. Apparently, the cultural rules are that colleagues must address each other as vous in some situations, and as tu in other situations, and it is only through knowing the culture that the speaker can negotiate this tricky situation and save him or herself considerable embarrassment. As another example of the importance of learning social roles, there are two types of cultures in the world, collectivistic and individualistic. These cultures differ is their approach to losing or gaining face (Ardchivilli et al., 2006, p. 97). Members of individualistic cultures lean towards gaining face, with means that they are likely to show to other members of the culture their depth of knowledge. In traditional classroom communities, this would mean that members of an individualistic culture would be more likely to raise their hand in response to a question. On the hand, members of a collectivist culture are more likely to use informal means of displaying knowledge, such as asking questions to the professor outside of class or using informal discussion groups. This is both because the members of collectivist cultures do not want to come off as bragging, and because members of collectivist cultures do not want to risk losing face (Ardchivilli et al., 2006, p. 97). Collectivist cultures are typically more modest than individualistic cultures, which is why bragging is an issue. Therefore, it is important for an individual who is learning a foreign language to know whether the target country is collectivist or individualistic, because this will influence how words will be received. If the target country is a collectivist country, the new foreign language learner must be careful not to brag or boast, for these are words that might offend. If the target country is individualistic, then it is just the opposite. It is just these types of nuances that a new speaker must learn in order to communicate effectively. As another example is the way that individuals from different countries reason. Research has shown that the Chinese reason in a holistic and relational way, whereas Western cultures reason in an analytical way (Ji et al., 2004, p. 57). So, in a study conducted, Chinese individuals, when presented with pictures of a man, woman and child stated that the woman and the child go together, because the woman and child have a functional relationship – mother and daughter. However, in Western cultures, they grouped the man and woman together because they were both adults, when showed a preference for a taxonomic grouping (Ji et al., 2004, p. 58). It is important for the individual learning the language to know whether the culture of the target country is holistic and relational or analytical, because this will affect communication and communication competence, for it dictates what is important and paramount to communicate. Without this understanding, there would be barriers between the speaker, as each speaker will emphasize something different that the other speaker might find irrelevant, and this will lead to misunderstandings. The danger of such cultural teaching, however, is that these cultural labels and so forth presume a stereotype, and belies the notion that culture is heterogenous (Kramsch, 2007, p. 6). For instance, even within a collectivist country, there are members who are individualistic, and vice-versa (Blanchard & Frasson, 2005). Another criticism is that the cultural analysis theories are outdated, and do not take into account the global nature of culture, which presumes that cultures are fluid and amorphous (Wurtz, 2005, p. 4). However, Blanchard & Frasson state that these cultural theories are useful, as they indicate a cultural tendency, not necessarily that every member of the given culture will behave in the same way (Blanchard & Frasson, 2005). Likewise, Wurtz (2005) believes that these cultural theories are useful because prevailing norms are still present throughout cultures, therefore the parameters of the cultural theories should not be abandoned (Wurtz, 2005, p. 4). In teaching Spanish to foreign learners, it is important that both cultural awareness and knowledge be taught. Cultural knowledge would be relatively easy to teach by bringing in DVDs about Spanish subjects that are in the Spanish language, such as dramas and documentaries, sampling the food, teaching about the values and beliefs of the country of Spain, giving historical lessons, having guest speakers, etc. This would give the students a feel for the culture of Spain. Cultural awareness, however, would be a more difficult matter, although arguably more important to the students’ learning than cultural knowledge. The students must be aware of the ambiguities and subtleties of the Spanish culture, including how to interpret social roles, how individuals of the Spanish culture reason, the social identity of the individuals, etc. While immersion in cultural knowledge will give the students a basic idea of the culture of Spain, in that viewing enough DVDs that deal with Spanish people, such as dramas, comedies and documentaries, the students can get a feel for the subtleties of Spanish culture, teaching this will still be a challenge. 2.5 Attitudes Toward the Target Language and Culture As stated above, the Sapir-Wharfian hypothesis states that “language serves as a schema through which the world is understood and interpreted” (Koslow, 1994, p. 575). In other words, the use of language is a kind of filter through which one's experiences are processed. This hypothesis appeals to a broad range of disciplines, from anthropology, psychology and consumer research (Koslow, 1994, p. 575). This hypothesis can be used to explain how attitudes toward the target language and culture can affect the learning of the students of a Spanish class. For instance, Day and Bamford (1998), hypothesize that attitude plays a large part in learning to read in the L2 language. This attitude is formulated in four factors – 1) the attitude that the learner has towards reading in the L1 language; 2) the extent that learner has experienced reading in other L2s, if any; 3) the attitudes towards the L2, people and culture; and 4) the L2 classroom environment (Yamashita, 2007, p. 85). Saito, Garza and Horwitz likewise found that attitudes towards the target culture affected the learner’s attitude toward learning to read in the target culture, finding that reading anxiety is related to the perceptions of the target language, which shows the interrelationship between perceptions and beliefs about the target language and culture and anxiety about reading in that language (Yamashita, 2007, p. 85). Other studies have found that a positive attitude towards the target language is essential in motivating the student to learn the language. One such study is by Kassabgy (1976), who studied Egyptians adult EFL learners and found that their positive attitude towards the language was instrumental in motivating them to learn the language. Moreover, the learners in this study also had a positive attitude towards the culture of the West, as they had the objective of moving to the West and this served as another source of motivation to learning the language (Schmidt, et al., 1996, p. 15). Moreover, research by Boekarts (1987, 1989) found that integrative motivation, has as its essential component attitude towards the target language. The more positive the individual sees the target language, the higher the integrative motivation (Schmidt, et al., 1996, p. 15). As an explanation of this study, there are two types of motivation that foreign languages learners possess. Motivation refers to what a learner will do, and is contrasted with ability, which refers to what a learner can do (Schmidt, et al., 1996, p. 11). These motivations relate to whether or not culture is relevant to their learning of the language – one type of motivation is foreign language learners who desire to immerse themselves in the culture of the target country, so that they may identify themselves with the people of the country (Ashworth, 1985, p. 14). . These are known as integrative motivation. The second type of motivation, known as instrumental motivation, is a learner who is motivated to learn the language because there is some kind of utilitarian purpose, such as securing a job. These learners are arguably not interested in the culture of the target country, nor are they interested in immersing themselves in the target country’s environment (Gardner & Lambert, 1972). For the integrative motivated learners, it is advisable to learn the foreign language in an immersive way, which would mean that the L2 is the medium of instruction, not the L1, while the curriculum taught parallels that of the L1 curriculum, while still supporting the L1, the teachers are bilingual, the students begin with the same limited levels of proficiency in the L2, and the goal is that the L2 will be proficient, if not quite native (Johnson & Swain, 1997, pp. 6-7). Moreover, as stated above, with the integrative motivator, the attitude towards the target language is central to increasing this kind of motivation. Therefore, these studies shows that attitude towards both the culture and language of the target country are integral towards learning the language and in reading the language. A positive attitude decreases anxiety in learning to read in the target language. It also increases integral motivation, which means that the learner is motivated to not only learn the target language, but immerse him or herself in the culture of the people, which would, in turn, enhance the learning of the language. Extrapolating this to the current situation, in my practice it would be essential to teach the students about the culture of Spanish-speaking countries in such a way that the students have a positive attitude towards the target culture, for this will not only increase motivation to immerse themselves in the language and culture, but will also reduce anxiety in learning the language and reading in that language. Conclusion Learning a foreign language cannot force the learner into a vacuum where context and culture do not matter. It is only through learning the nuances of speech can a speaker become a competent speaker, and it is only through knowing the culture of the target country can this occur. A good example is the individual who used the word tu when he should have used the word vous. This is only one example, but one can imagine how many mistakes a speaker will make if he is not aware of context and culture. Because culture is so important to learning Spanish, this is something that will be emphasized in the Spanish classroom that I teach. Teaching knowledge about the culture will be relatively easy. Cooking Spanish food, teaching about Spanish holidays, teaching about the religion of Spain, teaching the Spanish painter, writers and other cultural icons, teaching the history of Spain, etc., will all be integral to teaching about Spanish culture. This would also include showing television shows from Spain, showing movies, including dramas and comedies, will be important as well. Showing documentaries about Spanish subjects by Spanish directors will be another way to expose students to Spanish culture. These are all excellent ways to celebrate the Spanish culture. Teaching cultural awareness will be more difficult, however. For this, the students must know such intricacies as the way that the Spanish people perceive hierarchies and social roles, how they reason, whether their culture is collectivist or individualist, how Spanish people obtain their social identities and how their Spanish identity is formed. For this, there really should be an immersion of the students in the Spanish culture, like maybe living with a Spanish family for a time. Of course, these students being adults, it would be difficult, if not impossible to have them live with a Spanish family, so some other way will have to be found to immerse the students in Spanish cultural awareness. However, it would be beneficial to do so, as the studies have shown that the attitude towards culture helps in motivating new learners in learning the language in an integrative way. This means that this would help the students be interested in not just learning the language of the Spanish people, but to become, in essence honorary Spaniards. So, positive cultural lessons will foster the kind of motivation that these students will need to take the next step in their Spanish language education. Moreover, having positive cultural attitudes towards the Spanish culture and the Spanish language have also been shown to have a positive influence on whether or not the student has anxiety about learning the language. To this end, immersing the students in culture, so that they not only have cultural knowledge but cultural awareness, will hopefully have the end result of motivating the students to become integrative learners while reducing their anxiety about learning the language. Sources Used Altschuler, J. Re-remembering and re-imagining relational boundaries: Sibling narratives of migration. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 6: 26-44. Ardichvilli, A., Maurer, M., Wei, L., Wentling, T. & Stuedemann. 2006. “Cultural Influences on Knowledge Sharing Through On-Line Communities of Practice,” Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 10, no.1, pp. 94-107. Arnett, J. 1995. Broad and narrow socialization: The family in the context of a cultural theory. Journal of Marriage and Family, 57(3): 617-628. Ashworth, M. 1986. Beyond Methodology. London: Cambridge University Press. Brandes, T. (2009). Rethinking equality: National identity and language rights in the United States. Texas Hispanic Journal of Law and Policy, 15(7), 1-75. Blanchard, E., Razaki, R., & Frasson, C. 2005. “Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Learning Contents: A Methodology,” [On-Line]. Available at: citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.83.6269 Brown, A. & Voltz, B. 2005. “Elements of Effective Learning Design,” The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning,vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1-10. Bruner, J. 1986. Actual Minds, Possible Worlds. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bruner, J. 1990. Acts of Meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Byram, M. & Risager, K. 1999. Language teachers, politics and culture. Philadelphia, PA: Multilingual Matters Ltd. Byram, M. & Grundy, P. 2003. Context and culture in language teaching and learning. Tonawanda, NY: Multilingual Matters Ltd. Chase, S. 1995. Taking narrative seriously: Consequences for method and theory in interview studies. In R. Josselson and A. Lieblich, eds. Interpreting Experience: The Narrative Study of Lives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications: 1-26. Chavez, A. & Guido-DiBrito, F. 1999. Racial and ethnic identity and development. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education 94: 39-47. Citrin, J., Reingold, B., Walters, E. & Green, D. (1990). The “Official English” movement and the symbolic politics of language in the United States. The Western Political Quarterly, 43(3), 535-558. Cushman, T. 1995. Notes from Underground: Rock Music Counterculture in Russia. New York, NY: State University of New York Press. Damen, L. 1987. Culture Learning: The Fifth Dimension in the Language Classroom. New York: Addison Wesley Publishing Co. Donato, R. 1994. Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In Vygotskian approaches to second language research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp. Durkheim, E. 1972. Selected Writings. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Eisenhart, M. 1995. The fax, the jazz player, and the self-story teller: How do people organize culture? Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 26(1): 3-26. Gardner, Robert C., and Wallace Lambert. 1972. Attitudes and Motivation in Second Language Learning. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House. Hall, S. 1964. Popular Arts. London: Penguin Books. Halpern, D. 1994. Changing College Classrooms: New Teaching and Learning Strategies for an Increasingly Complex World. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Holme, R. 2003. Carrying a baby in the back. In Byram, M. & Grundy, P. 2003. Context and Culture in Language Teaching and Learning. Tonawanda, NY: Multilingual Matters Ltd. Ji, L., Zhang, Z. & Nisbett, R. 2004. Is it culture or is it language? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(1), 57-65. Johnson, R. & Swain, M. 1997. Immersion education: International perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press. Kaikkonen, P. 1997. Learning a culture and foreign language at school - aspects of intercultural learning. Language Learning Journal, 15, 47-51. Kiesling, S. 1997. Power and the language of men. In S. Johnson and U. Meinhof, eds. Language and Masculinity. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers: 65-85. Kramsch, C. 1996. The cultural component of language teaching. Accessed online. Available at: https://www.ned.univie.ac.at/Data/4/462/les03-tekst1z2.pdf Kubota, R. (1998). Ideologies of English in Japan. World Englishes, 17(3), 295-306. Laosa, L. 1980. Maternal teaching strategies in Chicano and Anglo-American families: The influence of culture and education on materal behavior. Child Development 51(3): 759-765. Liaw, M. 2006. “Learning and the Development of Intercultural Competence.” Language Learning & Technology 10(3): 49-64. Ludwig, J. & Mayer, S. 2006. “Culture” and the intergenerational transmission of poverty: The prevention paradox. The Future of Children 16(2): 175-196. Lummis, D. English conversation as ideology. Retrieved from: www1.gifu-u.ac.jp/~terasima/douglas0lummis1originalenglish.pdf Maynard, A. 2002. Cultural teaching: The development of teaching skills in Maya sibling interactions. Child Development, 73(3): 969-982. McCombs, B. & Vakili, D. 2005. “A Learner-Centered Framework for Learning,” Teachers College Record, vol. 107, no. 8, pp. 1582-1600. Milville, M., Constantine, M., Baysden, M. & Lloyd, G. 2005. Chameleon changes: An exploration of racial identity themes of multiracial people. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(4): 507-516. Milroy, J. & Milroy, L. 1999. Authority in Language: Investigating Standard English. London: Routledge. Moran, P. 2001. Teaching Culture: Perspectives in Practice. London: Heinle. Niemann, Y., Romero, A., Arrelando, J. & Rodriguez, V. 1999. What does it mean to be “Mexican”? Social construction of an ethnic identity. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 31(1): 47-60. Phinney, J., Romero, I., Nava, M. and Huang, D. 2000. The role of language, parents, and peers in ethnic identity among adolescents in immigrant families. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 30(2): 135-151. Pica, Teresa. 1994. Questions from the Language Classroom: Research Perspectives. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1): 49-79. Poston, W.S. 1990. The bi-racial identity development model: A needed addition. Journal of Counseling & Development, 69: 152-155. Robinson, G. 1986. Cross cultural understanding. New York: Prentice Hall. Rogerson-Revell, P. 2003. “Developing a Cultural Syllabus for Business Language Learning Materials,” ReCALL, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 155-168. Schmidt, R., Boraie, D. & Kassabgy, O. 1996. Foreign language motivation: Internal structure and external connections. Accessed online. Available at: http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/PDFs/SCHMIDT%20Foreign%20language%20motivation.pdf Shanahan, D. 1997. Articulating the relationship between language, literature and culture: Toward a new agenda for foreign language teaching and research. The Modern Language Journal, 81(2), 164-174. Seufert, S. “Cultural Perspectives.” [On-Line]. Available at: elearningreviews.org/seufert/docs/cultural-perspectives.pdf Small, M. & Newman, K. 2001. Urban poverty after The Truly Disadvantaged: The rediscovery of the family, the neighborhood and culture. Annual Review of Sociology, 27: 23-45. Smith, E. 1991. Ethnic identity development: Toward the development of a theory within the context of majority/minority status. Journal of Counseling & Development, 70: 181-188. Tracy, S.J. & Tretheway, A. 2005. Fracturing the real-self – fake-self dichotomy: Moving toward ”crystallized” organizational discourses and identities. Communication Theory, 15(2): 168-195. Varela, R., Vernberg, E., Sanchez-Sosa, J., Riveros, A., Mitchell, M. & Mashunkashey, J. 2004. Parenting style of Mexican, Mexican American, and Caucasian-Non-Hispanic families: Social context and cultural influences. Journal of Family Psychology, 18(4): 651-657. Vestergaard, T. (1996). Writing English grammars for Danes: Bridging the gap between prescriptivism and descriptivism. Journal of Linguistics, 17, 113-121. Walz, J. 1989. Context and contextualized language practice in foreign language teaching. The Modern Language Journal, 73(2), 160-168. Wendt, M. 2003. Context, culture & construction. In Byram, M. & Grundy, P. 2003. Context and Culture in Language Teaching and Learning. Tonawanda, NY: Multilingual Matters Ltd. White, C. & Burke, P. 1987. Ethnic role identity among black and white college students: An interactionist approach. Sociological Perspectives, 30(3): 310-331. Woolard, K. & Schieffelin, B. (1994) Language ideology. Annual Reviews Anthropology, 23, 55-82. Yeh, C. & Hwang, M. 2009. Interdependence in ethnic identity and self: Implications for theory and practice. Journal of Counseling and Development, 78: 420-427. Wurtz, E. 2005. “A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Websites from High-Context Cultures and Low-Context Cultures.” Journal of Computer-Medicated Communication, vol. 11, no. 13, pp. 1-37. Read More