Teaching World Englishes and English as a Lingua Franca - Literature review Example

Literature Review Teaching Spoken Language Student Name Instructor Name Course Code and Name University Date of Submission Summaries Summary of the article Current Perspectives on Teaching World Englishes and English as a Lingua Franca by Jennifer Jenkins World englishes (WEs) have been explored more in recent years compared to previous decades. The most outstanding researches that pertain to the exploration of WEs have been constituent of issues that pertain to the challenges of interlanguage theories and challenges in resisting and exposing linguistic imperialism. The division that occurs between ELF and WES has been attributed to the geographical orientation of the two manifestations of the English language. As the English language spreads to different parts of the world, the adoption of the language does not always fit to interlanguage theories. Outer circle speakers of English make no attempts to develop norms grounded in exonormative English varieties. In addition, they also make no attempt to identify with the inner circle English speakers. Summary of the article English as a Lingua Franca from the classroom to the classroom by Jennifer Jenkins English as a lingua franca (ELF) is a means of people from varying first language backgrounds communicate using a common language which is English. Even though ELF is not necessarily a language variety, it is not similar to ENL (English as a Native Language) or EFL (English as a Foreign Language) making it necessary for even L1 speakers of English to acquire it. Following this line of thought, users of L1 do not determine the agenda of ELF. Students learning ELF tend to use it in a somewhat unique manner. Even though they know what the rules are, they do not use them within their natural environment. Their use of their other forms of English did not affect their understanding of each other even though different students were using different versions of English. Summary of the chapter Language and Culture by Gabriele Kasper and Makoto Omori The nexus between culture and language plays a critical role in education, including the teaching of the spoken English language. Classrooms are now filled with teachers and students of different cultural backgrounds. Language and culture play complementary roles in that culture and language organize teaching and learning. The interrelation between culture and language is anchored institutionally. Hence, they manifest differently in different settings. Language and social action are determined by internalized social norms, as well as macrostructural forces that constrain the agency of social groups and individuals. Context is a configuration of discourse-external and static social variables. The relation between discourse internal choices and discourse external choices is based on a correlational or causal model. In this model, context is the independent variable while language is the dependent variable. Summary of the article constituents and categories of methods by Kumaravadivelu The method of instruction in any language is essential in its teaching. However, like in many changing contexts, the method used by the teacher is not always strictly adhered to in the classroom. The method refers to the guidelines developed by those in the field while methodology is what the teacher actually does in the classroom. The Anthony framework was among the first developed to distinguish between the different methods of instruction within an English classroom. There are different categories of methods of teaching language, including language centered methods, learner centered and learning centered methods. Language centered methods focus on linguistic forms, learner centered methods are concerned with the situations, needs and wants of the learner while learning centered methods are concerned with the cognitive procedures in learning language. Summary of the article Analyzing by Kumaravadivelu In order for teachers of L2 to carry out their duties responsibly and effectively, they must develop and skills and knowledge necessary to understand and analyze learner autonomy, learner needs and learner motivation. These skills and knowledge, as well as the analysis, are heavily challenged because learner motivation, autonomy and needs, are determined by a variety of complexly interacting societal, governmental, institutional and individual demands. Since these demands compete with each other, they change in different situations and from time to time, as well. By analyzing these elements of learners, macro level educational and socioeconomic factors will be addressed in teaching spoken English language. Some of the developments in teaching and learning L2 are responsive to the changing global world. Critical review Jenkins (2006, p. 157-181) explores the issue of WES from the perspective of interlanguage theories in that the competence of the second language speaker is dependent on the existence of an interlanguage continuum between the L1 and L2. However, this leads to the labeling of the learners which may limit their possibilities because the somewhat stereotypical labels ignore the socio-cultural context and the social-historical development of the local Englishes are ignored. Unlike Jenkins, Kasper and Omori (2010, p. 455-491) view competence from the perspective of the relationship between culture and language is explored extensively, including the definitions and meanings of language. Language is explored in two ways including its connotative manifestation which includes rules that govern how one speaks and why (Kasper & Omori 2010, p. 455-491). Culture is seen as the main vehicle on which language is created and evolves. The interlanguage continuum suggested by Jenkins (2006, p. 157-181) is facilitated by culture since Kasper and Omori (2010, p. 455-491) show how culture and language have a mutually beneficial relationship where culture is created by language, and it creates language and vice versa. Through their articles, Jenkins (2006, p. 157-181) and Kaper and Omori (2010, p. 455-491) imply that methodology in instruction of English as being customizable. This ideal forms the basis of the article by Kumaravadivelu’s (2006) article as he discusses that the possibility of instructors developing their own methodologies from these methods. The approach that one employs to teaching, informs method and these methods inform the techniques used. Like the authors in previous articles (Jenkins 2006, p. 157-181; Kaper & Omori 2010, p. 455-491), he acknowledges that there is no specific designer method that satisfies the needs of the rapidly changing student population. Kumaravadivelu (2011) carried on this theme in his other article where he highlights the importance of analyzing learners needs in order to develop the best methodologies. The author specifies that the analysis is essential in the development of pedagogical strategies applicable in different contexts (Kumaravadivelu, 2011). The exploration of learner autonomy, learner motivation and learner needs sheds light on the particular aspects within these areas that should be analyzed as they are instrumental in informing teaching practice (Kumaravadivelu 2011). Jenkins (2013, p. 484-494) on the other hand aims to help people understand the instruction of English not through methodology like Kumaravadivelu (2006; 2011) but using a chronological understanding of the manifestation of ELF within classrooms and amongst classrooms. The author highlights the fact that ELF was not a popular field of research in the past, but it has become a force to reckon within in the last two decades (Jenkins 2013, p. 484-494). Hence, the reader understands how the social environment has influenced the necessity and attitude toward ELF that is possessed by learners and instructors. Both Kumaravadivelu (2011) and Jenkins (2013, p. 484-494) underline the effect of globalization in developing and teaching English. Jenkins (2013, p. 484-494) highlights that globalization has resulted in a variety of users of English being within one classroom necessitating ELF. However, she does not mention actual evidence based ideas on the best practices for instruction of ELF. Kumaravadivelu (2011) looks at the impact of globalization in terms of the complicated role that learners play and the even bigger one played by teachers. The learner’s role in this case is as a source of information while the instructor has the biggest role to play in that they find out the information, analyze it and use it appropriately within their classroom (Kumaravadivelu, 2011). They are in the best position to learn the most about their students. This points to challenges that will be faced by both the learners and instructors as explained by Jenkins (2006, 157-181). The presentation of these two points of view (ELF and WES) helps the reader understand the challenges that will be faced by the learners and instructors in the process of learning English Jenkins (2006, 157-181). It shows that the learners face a particularly difficult task in learning spoken English if they do not at least understand the context of the inner circle. The views presented within the paper are all supported by evidence; in that, the source of the idea and the challenges are both mentioned. Similar views are presented by Kaper and Omori (2010, p. 455-491) as they acknowledge how culture changes the manifestation of English. However, the article fails to give evidence on how culture affects learner attitudes toward English Kaper and Omori (2010, p. 455-491). This is an essential point in understating the relationship between culture and language because people are a sum of their experiences and culture is a major part of these experiences. Kumaravadivelu (2006) suggests that these experiences are essential in the development of effective methodology. The distinction between method and methodology is essential as it guides the understanding of the rest of the article since the author mentions the different teaching methods in that the method refers to the guidelines developed by those in the field while methodology is what the teacher actually does in the classroom (Kumaravadivelu, 2006). Implications Based on the theories presented by Jenkins (2006, p. 157-181) The cultural, social and historical context of learners of English as an L2 have to be considered if the language is to be applicable to those learning and teaching spoken English. Unlike writing, speaking involves the additional parameter of having contextual concerns. Differences in the manifestation of spoken language have more to do with the context of learning and the influence of L1, as opposed to teaching methods. Rules in spoken language have to contain information that is specific to the learner’s context if it is to make sense, such that the learner understands why the rules apply. In her other article Jenkins (2013, p. 484-494) continues to underline the importance of learner’s and instructor’s contexts in teaching and instruction. The instructor plays a major role in deciding whether or not their classrooms need to be taught EFL. When the first language is English, it plays a role in informing the nature of instruction. It is easier to instruct a student when their first language is English. This implies that a classroom of students learning English may or may not need additional ELF instruction. It is likely that if there is a greater English language variety within the classroom, then the instructor is likely to add ELF to the curriculum since it will be relevant to their context (Burns & Joyce 1997). Current approaches include ELF researchers not being too involved in telling teachers what to do. However, research is meant to inform practice. Kasper and Omori (2010, p. 455-491) continuously highlight the major challenges bound to be faced by instructors today. Being that classrooms are culturally diverse from the instructor to the students, giving high quality education and teaching spoken language poses a great challenge. There is the need to develop policies and guidelines for the practice of multicultural education. This will ensure that teachers pay attention of social-cultural aspects of teaching which will increase success rates of teaching spoken English language. Culturally responsive teaching pedagogies are the future of the world since a greater percentage of classrooms are now multicultural (Kaper & Omori 2010, p. 455-491). Student motivation will likely be increased with the validation of their cultures. Hence, multicultural classroom whose pedagogical strategies acknowledge cultural diversity is likely to be the most successful in the instruction of spoken English language Owing to this multiculturally complex environment, methods and methodologies will differ for effectiveness. The different methods presented in the article by Kumaravadivelu (2006) highlight the fact that there are different issues that are addressed in classroom. Hence, the teacher and student will have different roles to play in each of the methods suggested. First language has a major role to play if the teacher is to decide which approach to use (Burns & Joyce 1997). If the L1 is English and the student wants to learn ELF, then the instruction method should be learning centered. Within a multicultural context, then a learner centered approach should be used as it will ensure that requirements like the student’s culture and experiences are considered in their instruction. The availability of a variety of methods means that they can be customized for particular situations. For instance, when a teacher is instructing a classroom of L1 learners then he gets additional students who are learning English as their L2, he will have to change his method of instruction. Teachers are not just meant to teach students L2 but also support their psychological and social needs as they arise in their use of English as an L2 (Kumaravadivelu, 2011). Classroom activities and exercises should be conducive in order to support autonomy because they help the students develop confidence through intrinsic motivation. Consequently, students will be more receptive towards their learning processes, and this will manifest in greater creativity. Intrinsic motivation often results in greater motivation and inspiration on the part of the students (Burns & Joyce 1997). Teachers play a major role in building or destroying intrinsic motivation, in their students. They can thwart the processes of intrinsic motivation in students, or they can help it flourish. This depends on whether the teachers develop effective pedagogical methods or not. Current methods include a movement from fixed curriculum to developing customized teaching methods. Reflections Based on the challenges presented in by Jenkins (2006, p. 157-181), there are various changes that need to be made in teaching spoken English as an L2. This is because the learners are likely to make stakes that the instructor may not know how to correct because of their nature. For instance, unilateral idiomaticity occurs in most cases, and it is important for the instructor to understand these problems. Instructors should, therefore, be aware of these idiomatic expressions if they are to teach effectively. The implication of this is that some of the instructors need to be local (Edge 2011). This knowledge of sociocultural contexts is common in countries with numerous ethnic groups such as Kenya. Leaving ELF as the choice of the instructor is better than the norm of leaving it as the choice of the student (Leung & Street 2012, p. 1-21). This is because this choice is not always available in most EFL classes. Being that the decision is the teacher’s, it is also their duty to present the students with the reality regarding the spread of English all over the world, including its uses and the advantages of being able to communicate using ELF. The teacher has a duty which they can only fulfill if they have been effectively trained (Edge 2011). Hence, effective ELF instruction begins with teacher education. Another important aspect of ELF is ensuring that the students are motivated enough to pursue ELF. When it comes to the complex nexus between culture and language, the theoretical perspectives employed are mostly those that pertain to the interaction (Burns & Joyce 1997, p. 39-54). This includes theories of politeness and the concept of face. The English language is beyond the actual learning and practicing of the language to its manifestation in cultural and social contexts. The selection of particular speech patterns is dependent on the nature of the relationship between the users of the language (Edge 2011). The nature of communication between friends will be different from the way a teacher and student communicate. The student also has a role to know all the cultures within their classroom context. The development of ELF has to adhere to the cultural realities of its context. From the ideas by Kumaravadivelu (2006) it can be deduced that there is no one method that can guide the teacher and fulfill the needs of the teacher each time and in different locations (Edge 2011, p. 49-62). This means that methodologies will change within the classroom as teaching progresses as well as from one classroom to another. L1 should always be considered as it will tell the teacher what type of approach they need to use in teaching and by extension: the methodology. Socio-historical and social cultural aspects of the method should also be considered, especially since they will be making the learner more comfortable within the classroom (Edge 2011). Exploring new teaching methods is essential in this era of globalization where learning methods are changing as well to include cyberspace learning methods. Hence, there is a new demand for other ways of understanding and analyzing learner needs. Once these have been understood, instruction of L2 and other forms of English will be more effective and delivered with greater success and ease (Kumaravadivelu 2003, p. 23-44). There seems to be a general trend toward teaching ELF in schools. List of References Burns, A & Joyce, H 1997, Theoretical perspectives, focus on speaking, ch 3, NCELTR: Macquaire University: Sydney. Edge, J 2011, The reflexive teacher educator, Routledge, TESOL. Jenkins, J 2006, “Current perspectives on teaching World Englishes and English as a lingua franca,” TESOL quarterly, vol. 40, no. 1, p. 157-181. Jenkins, J 2013, “English as a lingua franca from the classroom to the classroom,” ELT journal, vol. 66, no. 4, p. 484-494. Kasper, G & Omori, M 2010, ‘language and culture,’ In Hornberger, NH & McKay, SL 2010, Sociolinguistics and language education, Multilingual matters, Bristol. P. 455-491. Kumaravadivelu, B 2011, Analyzing in Language Teacher Education for a global society, ch 3, Routledge, New York. Kumaravadivelu, B 2006, Constituents and categories of methods in understanding language teaching, ch 4, LEA, New Jersey. Kumaravadivelu, B 2003, ‘Understanding postmethod pedagogy, ch 2’ In beyond methods macrostrategies for language teaching, Yale University Press: New Haven and London. P. 23-44. Leung, C & Street, BV 2012, “English in the curriculum-norms and practices,’ In C, Leeung & B, Street (eds), English: A changing medium for education, multilingual matters, Britstol. P. 1-21. Murray, N 2013, “English as a lingua franca and the development of pragmatic competence,” ELT Journal, vol. 66, no. 3, p. 319-324. Read More