Aspects of Intercultural Communication in Teaching and Learning English Language - Assignment Example

 Aspects of Intercultural Communication in Teaching and Learning English Language Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 3 The Impact of Multiculturalism on Communities and Schools ........................................ 4 The Student in a New Cultural Environment ..................................................................... 6 Mindsets and Strategies ........................................................................................................ 9 Changing Schools and Communities ....................................................................... 9 Changing Teacher Mindsets .................................................................................... 10 Developing Teachers’ Skills and Practices ............................................................. 15 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 22 References ............................................................................................................................. 24 Introduction The movement of people – migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, victims of trafficking – from one country to another is greater today than at any other time in world history. By 2000, 175 million people lived outside their place of birth: 158 million of these were urban migrants; 16 million were refugees and 900 000 were asylum seekers (Boyle, 2004). In 2005, the United Nations reported that about 3% of the world’s population (190 million people) were international migrants (UNHCR website, 2011). Not only are people leaving their countries of birth in greater numbers, but religious, ethnic, cultural and even gender identities form international communities, not tied to single countries (Anderson, 2004). Migrants – and people who leave their home countries for other reasons – are accepted for the most part, in Western states, with democratic systems, in which the hope of a better life is perceived to be possible (UNHCR website, 2011). This means that the teaching and learning of English as a Second Language (ESL) has become a priority focus within education in many countries around the world. It is also in the English classroom that an awareness of the nature of cultural variation among students must be foremost in the teacher’s mind, and where inclusivity has to be a priority. Indeed, in many English-speaking countries, legal policy determines that inclusivity and mutual respect of cultures is essential. As a representative example, the Multicultural Victoria Act of 2011, legislated in the State of Victoria, Australia, commits Principals, school councils, employees and students to “mutual respect and understanding regardless of their cultural, racial and linguistic backgrounds” and to the promotion, preservation and encouragement of “diversity and cultural heritage within the context of shared laws, values, aspirations and responsibilities” (DoE, Victoria website, 2011). It is evident that national awareness of and aspirations toward the benefits and values of multiculturalism are recognized by the governments of many English-speaking countries around the world, and that such thought has definite impact on the learning of English in these societies. This essay will examine the effect of increasingly multicultural classrooms on the school community as a whole, and on the policies and strategies required to accommodate and adapt. Particularly the effects on students who complete English as a Second Language are considered, but the focus will be on teachers both of ESL, and of other subjects, and their approaches, skills and strategies to communicate and teach effectively in an intercultural environment, within and without their own classrooms. As a premise, it is suggested that the teaching of English to Second Language English speakers, is dependent on an holistic approach, more reliant on the attitudes and strategies of the teacher in relation to acceptance and encouragement of multiculturalism and inclusivity in the classroom. The Impact of Multiculturalism on Communities and Schools In English-speaking communities, the student who does not have English as a First Language is immediately identified as being out of the mainstream within the school. This is an identification which has impact on not only the English classroom, but also in the wider context of other subjects and the school community as a whole. Whole communities, school management, some teachers and some students may find it very difficult to provide the requirements to accommodate such learners. Yet, it is necessary that the serious consequences resulting from not enabling learning among diverse students be recognised. The rights of the child can be violated according to protocols and advisories issued both by national governments and by international humanitarian and legal organisations (see: Australian law referred to in the Introduction and UNESCO, 2001, pp. 1-7). Graduates of national education systems can cease to be marketable on a world stage, with effects on both local and international economies (Nguyen: p 342). Also, in more extreme cases, public education systems can become less creditable in specific countries (see: UNESCO, 2001, pp.1-7) and even oppressive (Kumashiro, 1984, p. 33). Therefore the philosophical and theoretical adaptations which are required in the minds of the teacher, the students and indeed the community must be acknowledged. Additionally, the practical mechanisms within the classroom and the practice of the teacher which would be best suited to allow for effective learning in ESL classrooms, and indeed in the school as a whole, must carefully be evaluated. To a greater or a lesser extent, immigrants embrace the new norms, practices and values of their adopted country. Homeland traditions are generally maintained to as great a degree as possible, however. Certainly, language is maintained in the home – for example, over 2.5 million people living in Australia speak languages other than English as their home language (Ashman, 2009). It is largely agreed that as much as children with learning challenges are at risk of not progressing, or children from poorer families may be at risk in mainstream education, children from families in which racial or ethnic considerations are found, and families in which English is not a home language, are equally at risk of “delayed or impeded progress” (Ashman, 2009, p. 22) in schools. In the countries where it is recognised that the teaching of ESL is vital, and where it is a widespread phenomenon, teachers of English are usually supported by the school management in the strategies and support provided. But the issues of language in schools are often subordinate to the cultural background assumptions made about students from immigrant backgrounds. Furthermore, the delivery of language, and the cultural preconceptions prevalent in a school and community are likely to far more deeply affect ESL students’ learning than “English” does (Ashman, 2009, p. 22). Davis and Luce-Kapler (2008, p. 7) suggest the danger within schools and communities is that a discourse of “normality” occurs. This then excludes all who are perceived as “different” including ESL students, and by implication their families. The example is cited of the discourse of male power and privilege, which permeates all levels of society, from the personal to the cultural, to the pedagogical and the political. Hence, it is possible that a cultural bias within the mainstream community, toward a language group, or a nationality can occur. Certainly this perception needs to be addressed, and the effects of such attitudes would be detrimental to the effective learning of English (and learning generally) for a student (Ricento, 2005). The Student in a New Cultural Environment Culture can be described as the “norms, values, beliefs, languages, traditions, symbols, activities, achievements and possessions that characterise a group of people.” Culture also includes “the social relationships and interactions” that communicate the features of that group (Ashman, 2009, p. 18). When a student arrives in a new culture, and then in a new community and school, in which his/her culture, is not the dominant one, that very change has a great effect on performance. It follows that this adjustment is further complicated by the need to learn a new language. Ashman (2009, p. 20) proposes additionally that what people learn, and how they learn “is governed by the culture and society” in which they find themselves, and their responses to that culture and society. It must then be noted that education must have an important role to play in the socialisation of such students, and that their experiences are shaped by the new, dominant culture and its acceptance of their own home culture. And a further challenge is that the impact of culture and society on educational outcomes is profound – even more so in families that lack social acceptance, or political or economic power (Ashman, 2009). Again, this maxim can apply to the families of the ESL students and the students themselves. Racial or ethnic considerations exacerbate the situation: textbooks are difficult to read across all subjects; the demands of the curriculum and assessments are unfamiliar; at worst teachers are unhelpful; and the differences between their school environments and their home environments can be marked. So, while schools and teachers may consider language to be the most important factor in the education of the immigrant student, writers such as Ashman (2009) propose that language is subordinate to cultural backgrounds, and the assumptions that accompany these. Equally importantly, the conceptions of what education is, and how language is delivered, play a central role in contributing to the success or failure of the ESL student. Further, the identification of a student as different to the dominant culture of students may become a stimulus for intolerance and discrimination (see Ashman’s reference, p. 29, to the 2005 findings of Davido, Gaertner, Hudson, Houlette and Johnson). Or, an indigenous child – in a context such as Canada, Australia or South Africa – may see little of value in a British or North American curriculum, and the language that he/she is learning may represent a historical period in which a personal culture was dominated by European or Western culture. The possibilities for resentment are clear. On another level, the specific, colloquial ways of speaking and writing are culturally determined in specific locations – and ESL students have to learn far more than a standard version of English. They have also to assimilate idiomatic expressions, and symbolic language. Therefore they also face the language: it is filled with phrasing and words which are dependent on a complex understanding, or at least familiarity, with the particular society and thus not easily understood by ESL students. It is definitely and also a constantly present danger that the teacher does not value the language and cultural skills of these students, as they were acquired in a different context (see: Ashman, 2009, pp. 22-26). The ESL student’s perspective is different from the teacher’s in many instances. Beyond the day-to-day communication in the ESL classroom, there is also the subjectivity of the teacher’s assessment of the student’s work to be contended with. Writing conventions differ across cultures and the teacher’s grading of the work of the student is dependent on culture. In work completed by Hamp-Lyons and Zhang (2001), for example, it was found that assessors reached different conclusions about the quality of students’ writing, depending on whether the assessor was a native speaker or not. Familiarity with the ideological, rhetorical and cultural aspects of the students’ communication enabled assessors to be more accurate in their assessment. Another possible disadvantage facing the ESL student is the teacher’s supposition that certain aspects of communication errors in English may be characteristic of certain national, race or language groups. Tan (2008) conducted a study which revealed instances of error in written communication among students of a particular national learning culture. Chinese students at a Taiwan university tended toward consistently similar errors in their Taiwanese writing. Studies such as this, and anecdotal experience in the ESL classroom, may lead to cultural stereotyping by the teacher, when in fact, errors made by identifiable groups of students, in the English communication, may be due to first language interference, or previous educational systems instead (Kumaravadivelu, 2003). The ESL student is challenged, not only by his/her English ability, but also by misguided cultural preconceptions in the community, at the school, and even among teachers. It is, however, encouraging to read policy documents being distributed by some education authorities around the world. For example the Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (acasa) distributes a pamphlet acknowledging that Australian students have “multiple, diverse and changing needs” affected by their individual “learning histories ... abilities ... cultural, language backgrounds and socio-economic factors.” Because Second Language learners of English enter Australian schools at “different stages of English language learning and have various educational backgrounds in their first languages, it is recognised by icasa that school may be the only place some of these students use English. While the objectives and aims for all Australian students are the same, these students are learning a new language, and at the same time, having to learn new knowledge, understanding and skills of the Australian curriculum through that new language. The advisory given in this pamphlet is to give more time and support, “informed teaching to explicitly address” language needs, and assessments to allow for “developing language proficiency” (acasa, 2011). Initiatives such as this reflected above, while theoretical and advisory at least indicate that there is an awareness among educational authorities of the changing world, and that support systems are being formulated to enable the ESL student to progress successfully in his/her new cultural context. Mindsets and Strategies Changing Schools and Communities Fundamental to the question of improving education offered to immigrant children in English-speaking communities is the need to enable these children to feel included and part of the mainstream. It would be ideal if inclusive, diversity embracing educational systems were established countrywide, and that this ideal was filtered down to individual schools. By implication, the attitudes inculcated in schools would become the model for community thinking and wider support for non-First language English learners would be possible. While this may seem an almost unachievable ideal, an example of a progressive and effective educational model can be found in Finland. In Finland today all students work together in heterogeneous groups, and support for all students – those with special needs; those from disadvantaged backgrounds; those from immigrant families – are provided with support systems within the classroom. All students, of varying abilities, are integrated in regular classes. While heterogeneous groups seem to favour the lower-achieving students, Finland has still managed to maintain high levels of achievement among students: indeed, the achievements of Finnish students rank among the best within the top performing countries of the world (Kim, 2008: pp1-4). Already by the 1990s, Finnish education was able to become geared toward decentralisation, individuality and freedom of choice. Schools write their own syllabi based on a national curriculum framework, but adapted to local requirements, and in consultation with the teachers, parents and students within the community. Therefore the possibilities are open to change thinking within communities, and create inclusivity and pro-diversity mindsets within communities, and society at large, if the system in Finland is taken as an example. Changing Teacher Mindsets Kroll et al (2000) suggest that teaching needs to be staffed by people who are experts in their subjects, but also collaborative, caring and enquiring, reflective thinkers. This is particularly so for the ESL teacher. The pitfalls for the teacher in a multicultural environment were alluded to in the previous section of this essay, but these comments merely hinted at the changes which must take place in the minds, thought processes and attitudes of teachers, if they are to be successful ESL teachers, or generally successful teachers in a global, increasingly multicultural educational environment. Current classrooms may very well have students who bring different learning styles to the educational process, based on their cultural backgrounds, and former education systems. Students will have their own cultural norms, influencing how they deal with texts, or perceive the authority of the teacher and school authorities. Indeed, they may even have different understandings of how the world works, according to their backgrounds. Simultaneously, they have to acquire a Standard English, and a localised version of English, as well as the western style of looking at texts and situations critically, where power relationships are questioned, cultural preconceptions are exposed, and current issues relate only to the experience of the English-speaking western democracies (Ashman, 2009). The changes required in teachers’ approaches, thoughts and beliefs from the more traditional ways of thinking within homogeneous classrooms must be considered. Practical measures required to address the needs of ESL students are a priority, and it will be presumed that the same requirements apply to students with diverse backgrounds and abilities (see: UNESCO, 2001). A significant feeling among researchers and writers in the field of ESL teaching and learning is reflected in the suggestion that the teacher has to become a reflective, critical and innovative individual (see, for example, Larsen-Freeman, 1991). The realisation that there are not “good” or “bad” methodologies which can be applied to all learners is necessary. Larsen-Freeman advises that teachers should implement different, varied and innovative practices – and that the external factors such as environment, background, culture and societal attitudes need to be considered, perhaps even more than methodology if the Second Language student is to succeed in an unfamiliar classroom. This implies that the teacher of ESL must be in touch with many facets of the students’ lives, not only their burgeoning, or stagnating, knowledge of English. On a school-wide scale, one possibility is the training and informing of teachers about the values of inclusive learning environments. It is accepted that all children are different but have an equal right to education and learning, no matter their backgrounds or abilities (UNESCO, 2001). It is vital that teachers, and by implication, students, school management, and the community at large learn to embrace diversity. The focus, though, should be on teachers to initiate the processes which can lead to Inclusive Learner-Friendly Environments (IFLE) – a principle established by UNESCO in 2001. It is possible for the teacher to involve the community in the creation of IFLEs and to draw on the resources available throughout the community to enable an effective learning environment. UNESCO advises that families are included in the learning experience and that the community and its resources are even used to contribute within the classroom (UNESCO, 2001). Additionally, the teacher can ensure that within the classroom, the environment is one which accepts, places value on and encourages diversity both in learning materials and through classroom practice. Even the most simple of measures – classroom routines, creating opportunities for children to take responsibility, peer-learning and teaching, co-operative learning strategies – can provide the impetus for changed attitudes among groups of learners (UNESCO, 2001 see: pp 134-218). But it is necessary that teachers develop their approaches to be inclusive, throughout the school, and that they are supported in this by school management. Emphasis should be placed on the teacher’s ability to understand the students’ characteristics, and on developing personal strategies to make classroom interaction meaningful and effective for the student and the teacher. Inclusiveness in diversity in schooling, are essential to the teaching of English Second Language (ESL) students. And the role of the teacher in the classroom cannot be overemphasised. He/she has a critical role to play – certainly through knowledge and skills – but also through attitudes and approaches to teaching, which will ensure or hamper the progress of the ESL student. The teacher is pivotal in the classroom and a consequent focus on the teacher is essential. According to Hattie, in a paper delivered in 2003, at the University of Auckland, a study within the New Zealand education system showed that up to 30% variance in the achievement of students can be due to good teachers (p. 4). This is a larger single contributor to student performance than anything else in schools. In fact, the differentiation must be made: expert teachers have the greatest influence on improved performance of students. Hattie (see: pp. 4-18) identifies certain characteristics of excellent teachers which directly complement an approach in the classroom which would embrace diversity. Perhaps most importantly, teachers should be able to anticipate, plan and improvise according to the context within the classroom. They approach teaching from a problem-solving perspective, with their students’ needs as a priority. The high respect they then develop for their students, means that they see the need to monitor their students’ learning constantly and provide effective feedback (the question of “feedback” will be dealt with more fully later in this essay), and students’ learning paths are individually evaluated, with the appropriate support provided for students who are progressing at different rates. All these characteristics, added to the intention to create ILFEs in the classroom, create teachers, not only of ESL, who will become excellent. ESL teachers must consider that their students have different learning styles – more appropriate to their own cultures and educational backgrounds. Their ways of perceiving the world are also determined by their own traditions and norms. Frequently, they have different ideas about critical thinking and analysis, and the teacher has to introduce them to a more critical approach to their environment and the content of subjects. Indeed, the advice given by Ashman (2009) that effective teachers are able to accommodate social and cultural differences and therefore achieve proportionally higher numbers of students who are “favourably placed to learn and to achieve vocational and career success” (p. 26) should be the driving force behind the teacher of ESL’s classroom practice. There are, nonetheless, writers and theorists questioning the ethics of global movements towards inclusivity and multiculturalism in education (see the writings of Nguyen at Montreal University in Canada.) These theorists argue that educational theory, as represented by the UNESCO declaration “Education for All” is indicative of the Western world expanding its influence in a form of cultural imperialism to ensure the continuation of a new capitalism across the globe. Indeed, he proposes that relations of power on a global, national, local and even classroom scale are embedded in the regulations and discussions presented by the UNESCO statement. It is dangerous when the globalisation of knowledge and western culture is used only to reaffirm the west’s “view of itself as the centre of legitimate knowledge” which is called “universal” and “not really owned by anyone ... until non-western scholars make claims to it” (Nguyen, 2010, 342). It is, however, the contention here that Nguyen’s (and similar thinkers’) fears could be laid to rest to some degree by the teacher’s recognition that each student needs a theoretically-based practice of teaching, informed by the student’s background, and a variety of learning styles. The learning style employed by the teacher needs to be individual, and use a variety of theoretical constructs to adapt teaching constantly (Rayner, 2007). If an approach related to critical pedagogy is employed, the teacher could be sharing a perspective with students to question the possibilities that all knowledge could contain elements designed for oppression of certain groups (Davis, Sumara and Luce-Kapler, 2008). If a critical, discerning approach is maintained, teachers will work against their own and their students’ blind acceptance of the status quo, and challenge the preconceptions of their students and themselves constantly. This represents perhaps the most fundamental shift in the thinking of the teacher of ESL – the development of the ability to be constantly and unfailingly self-critical, and aware of preconceptions and likely points of ideological differences with the student. In order for the teacher to be able to function in an environment in which changing personal mindsets is not threatening or uncomfortable, investment by governments must be intensive in ongoing teacher education. Continual professional development for teachers is sponsored, for example, by the Finnish government, so that a culture of learning is maintained among teachers (Kim, 2008). Teacher empowerment is also considered in this country, and teachers are given the responsibility and freedom to self-regulate within self-assessment systems, in all subjects, and base their measurements of their own performance on the educational objectives published in the national curriculum documents. In summary of teachers’ changing their own approaches to and preconceptions of their roles, perhaps the theories of Freire (1998) could be considered: he advocates the need to make students aware of the world around them, to include students’ backgrounds into a curriculum co-developed with them and their communities, and to respect and incorporate their own initiatives in extending their education. Developing Teachers’ Skills and Practices It is in part these theories of Paulo Freire, and the work which has been done based on his philosophies and practice in teaching that informs this section of the essay. Fundamental to these theories is the notion that method should not be too heavily emphasised, as this emphasis may lead only to the “borrowing” of method, and lack of critical thinking about methodology. Even his own methods were viewed as starting points for other teachers – they ought not to import and export methodology, but to recreate and rewrite ideas about teaching constantly. Perhaps most importantly for the teacher of ESL, the learners’ reality must be used as the starting point of learning literacy, and learning to “read the word” at the same time as “reading the world” (Freire, 2008, x) implies that the development of a critical way of thinking while assimilating a language is a fundamental prerequisite of all Second Language teaching. Teachers will need to accept that they have to encourage new methods of learning among ESL students, with perhaps a more autonomous learning style, as opposed to the more traditional hierarchical concepts of learning tied to some cultures. It is likely that the ESL teacher will have to develop a use of language specifically designed for academic learning, which has to apply well beyond the English classroom. Importantly also, students of ESL may want most to learn about the host culture, and its traditions, but they will also have to assimilate a more universal, western way of thinking, prevalent in English usage. Texts, particularly, are likely to lean toward the more universally Western tradition in English, and this must be considered by the teacher, within a local culture (Ashman, 2009). It is anecdotally true that teachers are aware of the necessity of working with individual differences among their students. Most often, the individual teacher believes that he/she does make accommodation for personal styles of working and learning in the classroom. Effective teaching inevitably means that the teacher is aware of the students’ personal styles of learning, and certainly almost all teachers will intuitively accommodate the students in his/her class (Rayner, 2007). Simultaneously, though, the teacher’s preferences do come into play. This may reflect in a regular return to a preferred teaching strategy, and the persuasion of the students to work within the bounds of this approach to learning. For example in the ESL classroom, a preferred method may be the vocal repetition of vocabulary and the teacher returns to this method for the assimilation of vocabulary frequently and repetitively. It is also true that teachers do stimulate the growth of new learning and working strategies in their students, and challenge learners to adapt to new knowledge in different ways (Rayner, 2007). A balanced mix of approaches is important, but Rayner refers to his own earlier findings (Riding, 1991, and Riding & Rayner, 1998 in Rayner 2007) to suggest that the most important aspect of learning is to exploit any opportunity to “work with the grain” of a student’s learning style. For the ESL teacher, this means that the culturally ingrained learning style of the student has to be considered when teaching English. If languages, in the student’s cultural experience, are learnt verbally, exploiting this aspect initially may be valuable – and likewise for other learning styles. A student’s learning performance is dependent on the interaction of personal psychology and the learning context (Rayner, 2007). Therefore, the complexity of experience faced by the ESL child is amplified – his/her personal psychology stems from a culture different to that of the host country; the learning context can be extremely unfamiliar in some instances. Teaching is thus a mix of the personal and the social, and learning is directly affected by two individuals’ emotive responses, thinking processes and behaviour – the teacher and the student. If the teacher is thus sensitive to the behaviour and performance of the student (as a reflection of his/her skills, attitudes, motivations and knowledge) it is likely that an understanding of the psychology of personal style for each student will be achieved (Rayner, 2007). Consequently, personal learning preferences, orientation to study and learning strategies can be observed and accommodated in the ESL classroom. The teacher who develops a heightened awareness of the student, and therefore increases understanding of the aspects mentioned in the preceding paragraph, is likely, hence, to impact most positively on the performance of any student. Since such an approach would include an awareness and increasing understanding of the ESL student’s background, culture and motivations, performance in the ESL classroom will depend on more than just the transmission of English. Cottrell (2003) suggests that teachers should conduct “self-audits” (p. 56) to encourage a reflective approach, leading to a sense of self-awareness. Such self awareness would include a sense of the effect that a teacher’s teaching would have on students; it would also encourage the teacher to be more self-critical and realistic about personal attitudes and world-view. A further benefit of reflection is that it will “challenge concepts, beliefs, assumptions and values” (Carr & Kemmis, 1986, 162). Teachers should be able to challenge their existing knowledge, to presume that their present knowledge is always inadequate, and hence continually seek new strategies and methodologies to make the students’ learning experience richer. Another positive change teachers can make in their approach to ESL teaching, is to alter their beliefs about the potential to learn of students, if necessary, of course. Some teachers inevitably believe that each student has a “fixed, inherited intelligence” (Black & Dylan, 2001, 178) which implies that some students can learn quickly, easily and effectively, while others will always struggle to learn. This is particularly noticeable in attitudes to language – some people are seen as “good at language”; others are not. This approach is effectively replaced by the notion that all students have “untapped potential” (Black & Dylan, 2001, 180). This view assumes that all students have the capacity to learn the complex set of skills required to create success and that the teacher is able to remove all previous obstacles to learning in the student’s past. In the ESL context, the latter view is helpful: cultural differences; previous educational experiences; different learning styles – all can be addressed and overcome in the pursuit of effective learning of a new language. Another attitudinal adjustment may be called for: Kumashiro (1984) proposes that students’ prior knowledge and experience can in countless ways help or hinder new learning. Not acknowledging and addressing such earlier experience can lead to less effective learning and teaching. The same criteria can apply to the teacher’s prior learning as much as to the student’s. Unintentional lessons in classrooms do occur, and the teacher may at times display personal attitudes, or even stereotypes. Again, these occurrences must be addressed. Perhaps the strategy would be to use such unintentional behaviours in the classroom as a starting point for classroom activities – stereotypes and prejudices do exist, and open interaction with these in a language classroom can be accommodated, without being threatening to the teacher or the students. And teachers of ESL should be aware of the findings of researchers such as Black & Dylan (2001). Their research reveals that many students do not have a clear understanding of what is required of them, in terms of what they are expected to learn, and how their performance is to be measured. A student coming into a new cultural context is likely to be even further removed from an understanding of these aspects of learning. Students often appear to have experienced the classroom as a process which is made up of exercises with no real purpose or aim (Black & Dylan, 2001). They tend to fall into a pattern of passive reception. Teachers can overcome this thinking when they understand that learning occurs when new ideas are assimilated in relation to pre-existing ideas, according to these writers. In order, thus, for learning to take place, the new and the old have to be resolved through actions by the learner – and this can be assisted by the student’s understanding of what is required, both in terms of knowledge and skills, but also in terms of assessment criteria for measuring performance. It is in this area – assessment – that teachers can also make significant changes to their thinking, and thus positively affect the performance and progress of ESL students. The value of formative assessment in creating a culture where diversity is promoted and managed well cannot be overstated. Particularly for second-language English learners, the need to enable and empower the teacher to measure performance specifically for an individual student, and then to take action with the input of the student to remedy shortcomings can only be valuable. The opportunities for confidence-building and affirmation of the second-language student’s self-esteem and socio-cultural identity are extensive. Thus an interactive, cooperative assessment pattern can emerge which would certainly advantage the individual student (see: Black and Dylan, 2001). When students are encouraged verbally to communicate their personal perceptions of their progress, and mechanisms to do this in non-threatening ways are established in the classroom, a number of positive results are produced. The ESL student is given an area in which he/she and the teacher can communicate personally using language developed specifically for the purpose of discussion of progress. The student also is made aware that some personal responsibility for progress is required thus feeling empowered by taking this responsibility. The teacher is able to understand the student’s approaches to learning and attitudes more fully – this may inform future strategies for this individual student, and improve the teaching-learning experience in the classroom. Ability in verbal communication in English will be enhanced for the ESL student: the need to communicate about personal progress and issues will assist in developing and using a particular set of vocabulary and expression in this context. The teacher is also then able to share directly with the student an overview of the learning goals, the criteria for performance measurement, and the overall purpose of the learning taking place (Black & Dylan, 2001) with the individual student. it is proposed that learners become more committed and more effective as their own assessment becomes something about which they can communicate to teachers, parents and even their peers. Indeed, the student becomes a reflective learner, making decisions about his/her own learning; simultaneously, the reflective teacher adapts and adjusts teaching styles and methodologies based on the needs of individual students’ communication with him/her. It is essential though that students be trained in self-assessment so that they do understand the purposes of the learning, gain the language they need to communicate their perceptions of their progress and have clear vision of what it is they have to achieve (Black & Dylan, 2001). The comments above are, of course, to some degree an ideal. The student will also have to develop the ability to make use of this assessment-communication with the teacher to inform and direct future learning, and this is dependent on his/her ability to be autonomous in his/her learning progress (Knowles, 1975). But the teacher is able to create the context in which students are able to develop such autonomy in their learning. The management of assessment is thus a primary focus of the effective teacher, and three options are available to the teacher according researchers and academics. In an approach developed by Severino, in 1993, for example, three approaches to the language of the ESL student are possible: the “assimilationist” approach (where the teacher attempts to develop language in the student as close to that of a home language speaker as possible by considering errors in grammar, syntax and even idiomatic usage as deficiencies); the “accommmodationist” approach (the cultural identity of the ESL student is accommodated, and the intention is to add skills and knowledge of the English language to the ESL student’s repertoire); and a “separatist” approach (in which complete tolerance of the features of a student’s communication in English, which reflect cultural background, is attempted) (Mack, 2009). The teacher’s conscious decision to employ one of these approaches may be pivotal in developing the learner’s attitude to ESL, and also has ramifications for the learner’s future ability to progress in education in the adopted culture. It has also been shown that the process of peer review is effective in the ESL classroom, and the teacher may very well explore this technique in an attempt to improve the classroom experience for students. Writers such as Tang & Tithecott (1999), Mo (2005), Caulk (1994) and Rollinson (2005) advocate the value of peer review of students’ work. It is asserted that the feedback received from peers encourages discussion which is sometimes more comprehensible to the student than teacher feedback, which may be one-sided. It is also noted that the process of reviewing another student’s work may encourage a more critical approach to personal work, and that students are likely to have more time to engage with one another’s work critically than the teacher does. It is also true, however, that researchers dispute the effectiveness of peer-based feedback (see among others: Saito, 1994 as cited in Zhang, 1995), recording in their findings such aspects as mistrust of a fellow student’s judgement, or lack of perceived competence to make an assessment of a peer’s work. Much evidence and advice is available to inform the teaching of ESL, in current literature, and in tried and tested methods. The overarching prerequisite, however, remains the teacher’s willingness to adapt and change constantly. The needs of each individual student should be considered, and learning strategies can then take into account the background, the cultural heritage, the personal psychology, the current context in the host culture of the student, and the teacher’s own attitudes, self-awareness and approaches to methodologies. The value of the teaching-learning experience and the potential for excellence, in the ESL classroom must be considered to be almost limitless. Conclusion The Rose Review of education in the United Kingdom carried out in 2009, acknowledged that children’s brains “learn by interaction and analogy, and the acquisition of language boosts learning enormously. Metacognition is possible and the symbolic system represented by language increases efficiency of memory, reasoning and problem-solving” (Rose, 2009, at Chapter 3, Section 7). The importance of the learning of language can thus not be overemphasised. While the challenges for the ESL student are profound, the value of the teacher in enabling ESL students in host cultures to perform well throughout the curriculum, not only in English communication, is significant. The responsibility is therefore directly placed on the teacher. It must be recognised, though, that the systems which support the teacher – the school management, the community, educational policy-makers – notably contribute to the success of students in the ESL classroom. Simultaneously, the responsibility of the student must not be overlooked. ESL students are charged with learning not only English, but also a personal, critical, and autonomous approach to their own learning of English, and by implication to their learning of all other knowledge and skills in their host culture. While effective teaching methodologies and expert teachers, who know their subject and its strategies well, are certainly vital, the more generalised attitudes within the classroom, the school and the community do affect the performance of individual ESL students. The acknowledgement of all cultures, a commitment to inclusiveness, recognition of personal and social preconceptions and a willingness to adapt to the needs of each student will enable each teacher to create excellent learning experiences for all students. This is particularly so for the teachers tasked to develop and assist students of English Second Language. References Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (acara) Information Sheet on Diversity of Learners 2011 (pamphlet distributed to schools) Anderson, L. (2008). Antiquated before they can ossify: States that fail before they form. In Journal of International Affairs, Fall 2008, vol. 58, no. 1. (copyrighted to The Trustees of Columbia University in the City if New York) Ashman, A. (2009). Contemporary Cultures and Education (Section 1). In Education for Inclusion and Diversity Third Edition. Ashman, A. & Elkins, J.(Eds.) Pearson Education Australia. Boyle, M.W. (2004). The Challenge of Worldwide Migration. In Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 57 No. 2. New York: Columbia University Black, P. & Dylan, W. (2001). Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards through Classroom Assessment. Bera Short Final Draft published at King’s College London School of Education. Carr, W. and Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming Critical. Education, knowledge and action research. Lewes: Falmer. Cottrell, S. (2003) The Study Skills Handbook, 2nd Edition. Hampshire, Palgrave Macmillan. Caulk, N. (1994). Comparing teacher and student responses to written work [Electronic version]. TESOL Quarterly , 28 (1), 181-188. Davis, B., Sumara, D. & Luce-Kapler, R. (2008). Engaging Minds: Changing Teaching in Complex Times – Second Edition. New York, London: Routledge. Daines J.C. & Daines G. B. (1994). Adult Learning and Teaching – Third Edition.  Nottingham: Publications Unit, Nottingham University.  Drew, S., & Bingham, R. (2001). The Student Skills Guide. London: Aldershot-Gower Publishing Limited. Department of Education, Victoria State, Australia (2011). Overview of the Multicultural Victoria Act 2011. Retrieved from the Victoria Government website, September 18, 2011 at http://www.education.vic.gov.au/hrweb/divequity/divmanSCH.htm Freire, P. (1998). Teachers as Cultural Workers: Letters to Those Who Dare to Teach. (Tr. Marcedo, Koike and Oliviera). Boulder, Oxford: Westview Press Hamp-Lyons, L., & Zhang, B. W. (2001). World Englishes: Issues in and from academic writing assessment. In Research perspectives on English for academic purposes Flowerdew, J. & Peacock, M. (Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge, 101-117. Hattie, J. (2003). Teachers Make a Difference: What is the Research Evidence? Paper delivered at the Australian Council for Education al Research Annual Conference on: Building Teacher Quality at the University of Auckland, October 2003. Kim, Y. (2008). Lessons from the educational information policy through the analysis of Finnish policy material. Seoul: Korean Education and Research Service Knowles, M. (1975). Self-directed learning: a guide for learners and teachers. Chicago: Follet. Kolb, D. (1984). Experimental Learning - Experience as a Source of Learning and Development. London: Prentice Hall. Kroll, L. R., Cossey, R., Donahue, D. M., Galuera, T., Kuhler LaBosky, V., Ersha Rickert, A. & Tucker, P. (2000). Teaching as a Principled Practice: Managing Complexity for Social Justice. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: Sage Publlications. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2003). Problematizing cultural stereotypes in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly , 37 (4), 709-719. Kumashiro, K. K. (1984). Against Common Sense: Teaching and Learning Toward Common Sense. New York, London: RoutledgeFalmer. Larsen-Freeman, D. (1991). Research on Language teaching Methodologies: A Review of the Past and an Agenda for the Future. In Foreign Language Research in Cross-Cultural Perspective, De Bol, K., Ginsberg, R. B., & Kramsch, C. (Eds.). New York: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Mack, L. (2009). Issues and Dilemmas: What conditions are necessary for effective teacher written feedback for ESL Learners? Polyglossia , 16, 33-39. Mo, J. (2005). An exploratory study of conducting peer review among Chinese college students [Electronic version]. CELEA Journal , 28 (6), 43-48. Nguyen, T. X. T. (2010). Deconstructing ‘Education for All’: discourse, power and the politics of inclusion. In International Journal of Inclusive Education (Vol. 4, No. 4, June 2010. Montreal: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group, 137-165. Rayner, S. (2007). A teaching elixir, learning chimera or just fool’s gold? Do learning styles matter? In Support for Learning (Vol. 22, No. 1, 2007) Birmingham: Blackwell Publishing. Ricento, T.(2005). Considerations of Identity in L2 Learning. In Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning Hinkel, E. (Ed.) [from the Chapter: Identity, Culture and Critical Pedagogy]. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Ass, Inc, Publishers. Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the writing class [Electronic version]. ELT Journal , 59 (1), 23-30. Rose, J. (CBE) (2009). Independent Review of the Primary Curriculum and Executive Summary and Recommendations. Retrieved from http://www.dcsf.gov.uk September 17, 2011. Severino, C. (1993). The sociopolitical implications of response to second language and second dialect writing. Journal of second language writing , 2 (3), 187-201. Swan, M., & Smith, B. (2001). Learner English (2ed). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tang, G., & Tithecott, J. (1999). Peer response in ESL writing. TESL Canada/La revue TESL du Canada , 16 (2), 20-38. The United Nations High Commission for Refugees website available at www.UNHRC.org accessed September 13, 2011. UNESCO Bangkok (2001) Embracing Diversity: Toolkit for Creating Inclusive, Learner-Friendly Environments New York: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation Zhang, S. (1995). Re-examining the affective advantage of peer feedback in the ESL writing class. Journal of second language writing , 4 (3), 209-222. Read More