McKay Chapter 7-Reading for April 29th

It is so rewarding to wrap up the semester and tie in a lot of key concepts we have looked at, specifically with how educators can implement effective and quality EIL pedagogy. Chapter 7 did a great job of this. One review was how diglossia often characterizes the linguistic situation in Outer Circle countries that have adopted English as another language. English is acquired through formal education and is used for very specific purposes. Pedagogy and curricula are often modeled on the monolingual and monocultural assumptions of the Inner Circle, resulting in marginalized indigenous languages and isolated English-language learning. In non-diglossic multilingual societies, there is no social or institutional support for bilingualism. An English-only stance is widely taken. Interestingly enough, most learners of English make it clear that monolingualism is not their preferred goal, but rather desire support for other languages as well. The realities between multilingualism and multiculturalism and the monolingualism and goals dominating English language pedagogy cause a tension.

We then must seek a socially sensitive EIL pedagogy that recognizes other languages used by EIL learners and accounts for specific ways English can be used in sociolinguistic contexts. I like to think of it as creating a "very middle circle." One area that requires special concentration is the official recognition of English. The distinction between English-medium instruction versus learning English as a subject often resulted in different standards of pedagogy, learning and proficiency for different sectors of society. The official recognition of English in Inner Circle multilingual societies has had the opposite effect of what is seen in diglossic societies. In Expanding Circle countries, the rising status of English is often tied to the particular ideological imperatives that underpin the country's development agenda. Why is this a problem? Because there is an uneasiness with giving an official status to English. English is, however, prominently present in educational classroom policy. Personally, I think that when too much excessive attention is focused on one single item, such as English, too many confronting heads bump in the middle and cause even more tension. The nativization of English only brings about the debate of being marginalized in favor of exonormative standards and pedagogy (182).

English bilingual speakers use English as well as their other language usually on a daily basis. This inevitably creates new varieties. These World Englishes need to be seen as languages in their own right. They are not errors, interlanguages, or fossilized forms of incomplete acquisition. After all, who is one speaker of a language to judge another? EIL pedagogy should encourage awareness of the variation that exists in English today. We should appreciate this!

EIL pedagogy should also pay attention to repair strategies and conversational 'gambits,' keeping in mind the purpose of the interaction and the proficiency level of the speakers. After all, there are a number of reasons that could account for why the speaker used that particular type of English. Also, codeswitching allows for speakers to portray their personal identities and their perceived relationship with their interlocutors. I have a friend from the US that I studied abroad with in Spain. She is bilingual in Spanish and English and I am always seeing her post things on facebook in both Spanish and English as she codeswitches. She also knows a little Portuguese, so when she is talking with someone else who knows Portuguese, it is common to see her use all three languages! Codeswitching does not necessarily portray a lack of linguistic knowledge but rather a richness and full use of all known languages. Teachers should promote student awareness of codeswitching and understand how local languages can be productively used in the classroom. I really enjoyed the video we watched from class with the teacher encouraging, yet teaching, both English and African American vernacular.

Globalization and Othering can have negative effects on pedagogy. Textbooks should discuss other cultures, forming a diverse and rich variety. Teachers should evaluate the appropriateness of the content (and images!) of textbooks before using them.

Another big question that has been raised is the role of culture in teaching a language. Should it be taught explicitly? Are textbooks portraying all of the cultures equally, or are they unknowingly reinforcing stereotypes? Some argue that culture should be taught in the classroom while others argue this wouldn’t be motivating or beneficial to the students. Moroccan educators believe that including information about Western culture contributes to students’ discontent with their own culture. I found this interesting because I stayed in Morocco for a week and was able to spend a lot of time with people my own age. Although there are a number of factors (age, gender, etc.) that play in, I found that they were all extremely knowledgeable on the latest Western culture. Even more than me! They knew all the singers, songs, etc. Perhaps by trying not to explicitly teach the Western culture, people will investigate it even more than they otherwise would have! There are those who reject Western culture in EIL teaching materials because they think it would be more beneficial to relate content to lives as young adults, not in the context of an English-speaking country. I think this depends primarily on the learner. Some may be overwhelmed if they are learning English AND in an English-country context. It may be too much. Others may thrive on this and find it more interesting. Teachers must adapt to the needs of the students. Auto-colonization is a term that may describe how some accept and imitate another’s way of thinking, acting, values, and habits upon first contact. This in itself could be one reason why Western culture is rejected in other countries. A country wants to remain strong in itself and keep culturally unified. That is not to say they aren’t open to other influences, but many worry that the more Western culture that trickles in their country, the less of the home culture will remain.

Interestingly enough, while some educational leaders explicitly reject the inclusion of Western culture in English teaching, others promote it. In Japanese text, often the Japanese speakers produce far fewer words than Inner Circle country speakers. This perhaps suggests that Inner Circle native speakers are the ones with the right to use English. The book gave an example  in the text where gender roles are depicted but also opens up discussion on whether the woman should be criticized for not playing a traditional female role. Yet another example of dialogue between someone from Japan and someone representing Western culture shows how the Japanese boy begins to imitate and try to relate to what the Western culture character sets as the “norm” or “acceptable activity” for his dad to be doing. Rye, the Japanese character, perhaps lies at the end and says his dad is good at cooking when in reality he may never have even cooked. He only says this because the other character said his dad cooks.

What specifically can educators do to combat othering? First, make certain that students know diversity exists within all cultures. Next, have students reflect on their own position and culture (sphere of interculturality). Show that gender roles can differ within Western culture. They aren’t unchangeable and stuck in place. Lastly, take up classroom-based social research. These are collaborative projects carried out by language learners in their local community under the guidance and support of the teacher. Students will likely gain confidence as they interact with others in real-life settings. They will discover how they can use English for communication across international borders, often with other L2 speakers. Teachers should audio-tape L2-L2 interactions. Too often, students are only aware of L1-L2 interactions but they need an awareness that English is an international language that can be used not only with native speakers but also with L2 speakers in a wider variety of cultural and social contexts.

Weak CLT involves students communicating with the teacher and other students while the strong version involves communicating with a text. The weak version is associated with globalization and modernization but is promoted. The strong version, according to Holliday, does involve meaningful communication. Shamin argues against the implementation of the weak version when she says that learners do not always passively accept an innovation. Planners and outside change agents often view the teacher as the key to implementing change and the role of the learner is largely ignored.

As I said before, there really is no better way to wrap up the semester than identifying important components of EIL pedagogy! As a future educator, I am confident I can make a difference in my students' lives and how they perceive languages, particularly English.

Therefore, the principles for a socially sensitive EIL pedagogy are:

·         EIL curricula should be relevant to the domains in which English is used in the particular learning contexts.

·         EIL professionals should strive to alter language policies that serve to promote English learning only among the elite of the country.

·         EIL curricula should include examples of the diversity of English varieties used today.

·         EIL curricula need to exemplify L2-L2 interactions.

·         Full recognition needs to be given to the other languages spoken by English speakers.

·         EIL should be taught in a way that respects the local culture of learning.

April 22nd Readings

     These readings were extremely engaging. I liked the idea of a Sound House, as well as how we are constantly analyzing and "sizing up" ourselves and those with whom we speak, especially when they have an accent. I found it reassuring to read that it is very rare to find someone who learned English as second language and that has no traceable accent. It is encouraging to know that I may never have a perfect Spanish accent, and that is okay! Competence is not a synonym to accent.
     Chapter 5 of McKay's book argues that language EIL pedagogy should encourage awareness of the variation that exists in English today and recognize the validity of different varieties of English. To me, the key word here is validity. Students should not only recognize that their dialect or accent isn't the only one out there, but they must come to a sort of appreciation for others. Other dialects should not be looked upon as inferior, but rather accepted. I cringe when I hear stories of how native English speakers are rude to others who may have heavy accents. I feel that those with heavier accents should be applauded for their efforts and confidence to learn another language. If we were all given text in Swahili and told to read it, I think this would humble us and help us appreciate the linguistic efforts of others.
     Macroacquisition is the process of second language acquisition by speech communities in their own local context. We are seeing a growing number of standardized varieties of English in both Kachru's Outer AND Expanding Circles! I find the hybridization of languages very interesting. I also find the idea of a post-creole continuum interesting. This is where creole speakers shift towards the source language, resulting in a range of intermediate varieties. Through hybridity, then, there is "something different, something new and unrecognizable, a new area of negotiation of meaning and representation" (Bhabha, 1990, p. 211).
     Standard language refers to that variety of language that is considered the norm. It is the variety with educational purposes and language standards refer to the language rules that inform the standard and are taught in school. This, however, does not mean we should ignore the non-standard versions of English! I strongly believe that students will develop a higher understanding and comprehension of standard English by exploring other varieties of Englishes. The definition of standard English and all it entails is very controversial and very debatable.
     World Englishes present a challenge to the Standard English ideology. That challenge is plurality- there should be different standards for different contexts of use. The Standard English should be determined locally (endonormative) instead of determined outside its context of use (exonormative).
     Quirk argued that tolerance for variation in language use was educationally damaging in Anglophone countries. In other words, a common standard of use was warranted in all contexts of English language use. This just screams ethnocentrism to me! Kachru, on the other hand, said that allowing for a variety of linguistic norms would not lead to a lack of intelligibility among varieties of English but rather an educated variety of English would emerge from this situation. I would have to agree with Kachru. Personally, I think that one must have high intelligibility to be able to discern and recognize, as well as appreciate different varieties of English. It takes an open mind- one that is thirsty for new knowledge, not close-minded. The argument of the monolithic  model states that if localized standards are allowed to develop, English speakers will no longer be able to understand one another. I think this is a little outrageous. It would take a very, very long time to ever reach this point. Even if we did reach this point, so what? Language, like technology, is always evolving and adapting to the new times. We can look at how much change technology has brought about. Many would argue it is good change.
     "A man with one watch knows what time it is. A man with two watches is unsure." I suppose someone who supports the monolithic model would especially like this quote. If we start allowing multiple varieties of English to come about, we will be uncertain and miscommunication will become more and more of a problem.
     Smith suggests three categories of interaction in his continuum: intelligibility, comprehensibility, and interpretability.
     Another question that arises is when an innovation can be considered a standard or norm. When, if ever, will LOL become the substitute for actually laughing? A mistake is not the result of the productive processes used in an institutionalized nonnative variety of English. A deviation, however, is the result of a productive process that marks the typical variety-specific features.

I found Lippie-Green's chapters extremely intriguing! It began by saying that standard language and non-accent can be seen both as an abstract (only exists in idea, something visionary) or myth (motivates social behaviors and actions). Every native speaker of US English has L1 accent, which is a structure variation in language, no matter how unmarked their language may seem to be.

"A dialect is perhaps nothing more than a language that gets no respect." This quote really caught my attention, sadly perhaps because I believe some people hold to it. Imagine this: two people walk into a fancy jewelry store. Who is more likely to be tended to, one who speaks "proper, standard English" or one who has a "strange" and "unusual" and "unstandard" dialect? Often times the proper one. I think this type of situation is more common than we would like to believe.

Are accents different? However, to contradict this, when I studied abroad in Spain, my Spanish mom told me my American accent was "precious." She built my confidence, while it could have been easily demolished. Also, I remember that the other students from the United States that were studying in Spain all had different regional varieties in their language. Many people became frustrated with those people from California because of how they talked. The term was "valley girl." It's interesting how dialects and accents can carry such strong baggage and connotations.

The question then arises- what does it mean to lose an accent? Is it to replace one way of speaking with another? Perhaps to add new phonology to an existing inventory? There is a long list of people who speak English as a second language but never built an "English Sound House" to fool others into thinking they're Native speakers. However, their abilities to use English are clear. Is this because they don't work hard enough or aren't smart enough? Personally, I would be scared if we measured intelligibility by someone's accent. Maybe the speaker refuses to give up the Texas in them, or the African American, for something less socially marked? Or are they just incapable?

Interestingly enough, actors don't have permanent Sound Houses. In fact, they have fake storefronts that won't stand up to strong, persistent breezes. Some people are better than others at putting together more than one Sound House. They aren't perfect, but they are good at imitating. This has nothing to do with intelligibility, but rather application. It is a matter of cognition and an 'ear for language.' Focused training and drawing attention to processes that otherwise wouldn't be noticed are ways to build another Sound House. One can adjust, but not substitute for the First Sound House. The true ability to build more Sound Houses past the language acquisition stage is undocumented. Rumors do exist of this, however. What a neat thing this would be to study.

It seems as though Kubota's idea of underlying power (and politics!) is prominent in almost all of the concepts and readings we have covered this semester. The ordering of social groups has authority over determining how a language is best used.

Lippie-Green's chapter goes on to show an emerging picture. Standard US English is the language spoken and written by those with no regional accent, who reside in the Midwest, and have average/superior education. So far I feel those all fit me, except for a little Chicago accent I have with some words. They often tend to be educators, which I am studying. They pay attention to speech. My friends have teased me because I am so in tune with grammar. For example, when I write Happy Birthday to someone on facebook, I put a comma after Birthday and before their name. It takes me an extra second, but it is grammatically correct and I realize that! Besides, my friends who seemingly don't care about grammar as much noticed it, too, if they are teasing me about it! Perhaps because they fit most of the other descriptions of Standard US English speakers...? Lastly, they are easily understood by all.

I liked reading about the individual role in the communicative process. The social space between two speakers is not neutral. The people communicating are constantly analyzing the situation...is there a need to be formal? Is respect due? Who owes who, and what is owed? In a similar boat, when confronted with an accent that is foreign, people must decide if they are going to accept responsibility in the act of communication. Members of the dominant language feel empowered to reject the role and demand that the person with the accent carry the majority of responsibility in the communicative act. Listeners and speakers will work harder to find communicative middle ground and foster mutual intelligibility when they are motivated socially and psychologically to do so, according to Lippie-Green. When the speaker perceives the act of accommodation or assimilation linguistically may bring more disadvantages than advantages (in in-group terms), they may diverge even farther from the listener's language.

We are constantly making social evaluations based on external cues (language and accent) when we communicate with others. These sociolinguistic cues are traced back to homeland, race & ethnicity, and social self of the person. Our personal histories and backgrounds, as well as social selves form our filters through which we hear the person speak to us and allow us to take a communicative stance. Usually, we share the burden. We may even accept a disproportionate amount of the burden if we are especially positive about the social characteristics we see in the person or if we are especially interested or benefit from the purposes of communication in that situation.

The degree of accentedness is something everyone should analyze and think through themselves. Whether it is from L1 interference or socially or geographically marked language variety, one can't predict the level of the individual's competency in target language based solely on accent. This is just not fair and is a harsh form of judgment. A high degree of competence is often attained by those who have strong second language accents. That is not to say that the accent is never an impediment to communication, because it definitely  can be even if all parties in the communicative act are willing to understand. The breakdown of communication is done not so much due to the accent as it is to a negative social evaluation of the accent in question and the rejection of the communicative burden. The accents we hear go through our language ideology filters. We can even feel completely justified in rejecting the communicative burden, or even the person talking with us.

Perhaps the most disturbing thing is that people who think they are free of prejudice often hold to the standard language ideology which attempts to justify the restriction of individuality and the rejection of the other. Educators and researchers must work to confront this issue, especially before it gets out of control.

I decided to copy a snippit of the summary of the Great Gatsby from http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/gatsby/summary.html. I think it is interesting that Gatsby, a man of great status and prestige, is described by many things, but one being his English accent. That just shows how accent and social class/power are so interconnected.

"As the summer progresses, Nick eventually garners an invitation to one of Gatsby’s legendary parties. He encounters Jordan Baker at the party, and they meet Gatsby himself, a surprisingly young man who affects an English accent, has a remarkable smile, and calls everyone “old sport.” "

April 15th Readings

     As a future bilingual/dual language educator, this research study really intrigued me. I have talked with multiple families who have decided to enroll their children in dual language (Spanish-English) programs in order to have them become bilingual and biliterate. I personally feel this is a very popular topic right now and dual language programs continue to develop throughout the country. As the demand for such programs increases, so must our attention to why parents are electing for their students to enroll. What is their justification for doing so? After all, many parents who don't even know Spanish have decided to have their students learn Spanish.
     The research stated that children will be English-dominant if not English monolingual by middle to late childhood. Possible reasons for this are the high status of English, how language policies don't support non-English languages, the lack of high quality bilingual education, and the role of peers and siblings. Unfortunately, the quest for 'perfectly balanced' bilingual children leads may times to parental disappointment and a sense of failure. It is easy to image adding a foreign language into the curriculum, just like math or music, but I personally believe the United States is just not used to, or fully open to, this idea. Parents may assume that since their children are enrolled in dual language programs, they will have no difficulties in speaking in two languages. Their expectations may be set too high, especially if the parents themselves have never acquired a second language nor tried to.
      The United States is ranked #25 in education world-wide. Coincidence or not, the US also fails to give many students the opportunity to grasp a second language at an early age. High school requirements consist of a foreign language component, but as we learned earlier, by then the critical age period has elapsed.
     Overall, family language policies encompass beliefs and ideas about languages. This reminds me of Kubota and the idea of underlying power. In this case, the underlying power (and perhaps status) of knowing two languages is what drives many parents to have their children be bilingual. Many parents rely on parenting books, self-help resources, and the conviction of "being a good mother" to consider dual language programs/additive bilingualism for their children. Private sources such as family and friends also factored into decisions. The idea of "good parenting" through pushing bilingualism is a concept I will address later.
     Throughout the parent interviews in the study, the focus was on goals for the child's language development, strategies to meet those goals, children's language exposure and proficiencies, and the parent's beliefs about language learning. The parents that participated in the study were on a continuum from both being native English-speakers to both being fluent in Spanish and using Spanish at home. I wish this study would have included single parent homes as well. Perhaps there is  a stronger push for children of those homes to learn a second language so they have a "better chance at economic success" than their single parents might have. The research also didn't address children's preferences or competencies and parental strategies. These are important components to consider, though.
     Not everyone would agree with the statement that "good parents" push for their children to be bilingual and that those parents who don't are less quality. In fact, some may think the very opposite depending on their backgrounds, context, and where they live/what their country thinks. The parents who did see benefits in being bilingual and had their children enrolled saw the importance of cultural ties and economic opportunities associated with knowing two languages. They recognized the risks perhaps involved in being bilingual, such as language delay, confusion, and effective teaching practices, but they chose to continue pursuing bilingual education for their students. I feel that there will always be a source that either defends or contradicts what you believe and choose to do. Therefore, there must be some strong influences and reasoning as to why parents have chosen to stick with bilingual education.
     The three sources that parents with students in bilingual programs seemed to use to defend their decisions were popular press and parenting advice literature, other bilingual families (particularly extended), and personal experience with language learning. If I were to examine these three areas in my life (and if I had children now!), here is what I would say: As a bilingual educator, I am currently learning all about research regarding the bilingual education field and why additive bilingualism and dual language programs are so beneficial. I would have plenty of research and books to support why my children should enter 2-way bilingual education programs. Secondly, I know many other families who are raising their children to be bilingual. None of them are in my extended family, but I have a close support group of parents who are like-minded in me with seeing the benefits of being bilingual. Lastly, my personal experience with language learning would play an important role in my decision to have my students be bilingual at an early age. I didn't begin learning Spanish until high school, and feel it was much more difficult than it would have been if I had been learning Spanish since kindergarten.
     I found it very interesting that many parents couldn't cite specific research articles, authors, or books to back up their reasoning. Rather, they just knew "general research" and had "vague openers." Many parents also relied on family comparisons to justify their decisions. For example, Krista's family member stopped teaching her child a second language because she thought it was affecting her L1. Krista didn't want to accept the same fate as this "negative example" so she is following through with bilingualism with her child. I personally agree with Krista. If you judge whether or not the child is being negatively affected by bilingualism at the earliest stages, chances are the results will appear negative because the child is in the beginning part of language acquisition! It does the child very few benefits to begin teaching him or her a second language and then abruptly stop!
    Overall, parents contrasted their own 'good parenting' against an unsuccessful example to construct their own parenting processes as 'better' than others. These parents rejected the fears of language delay and confusion, enforced Spanish language use, and rejected stigmatized Spanish statuses. The most pervasive justification for parents' decisions, however, stemmed from personal language experiences. Carol wants her child's second language to be natural, not the process of thinking through each word he wants to say before translating it. Therefore, her child must have the second language introduced and taught to him at an early age and through specific methods.
     From this research study, it is evident that personal decisions are influenced by one's own experiences. When directly challenged by families regarding their decisions, parents sought research that confirmed their beliefs. However, I can also look at the flip side of the coin and say that these families that confront the parents may have their won research backing up what they say. It is a matter of looking at the child and seeing what his or her specific needs are. How do they perform academically? Are they motivated? Would they be invested in learning another language? I think research should be done on the factors involved in student reception to second languages. Research studies likely vary in results because each child is so different, especially in learning abilities. Parents accept AND reject expert advice, depending on what they want to believe. Amy rejected the idea of 'one person one language on her own evaluation of the situation and in what was practical for HER family. In other words, she went against research in this case because it just wasn't feasible for her family (only one language spoken at home). In the end, parents must be confident with the decision they have made and stand behind their child to support him or her the entire academic career. Parents must also remain critical consumers of advice. They can't just openly accept and believe everything they hear, but rather learn to discern the facts.
     Another question I thought of while reading the study was how the students would acquire their second language. I was reading elsewhere about classroom settings vs. natural settings for SLA. With naturalistic settings, students seemed to develop better fluency. With classroom settings, students were more accurate in their second language. Perhaps parents should read more into this when deciding on their child's academic concerns. Dual language classrooms are very beneficial in this sense because students can interact with native speakers of the second language AND have access to more formal instruction in the classroom.
      A final thought worth mentioning is viewing the embrace of additive bilingualism for children as a movement towards hyper-parenting (the management of children's lives in pursuit of child success as a measure of parental achievement). Promoting additive bilingualism, just like promoting early math or early science, is becoming a part of mainstream parenting. Overall, this research study was very interesting. However, I want more research and input from parents who maybe chose NOT to support their children in additive bilingualism, or those who changed their positions and thoughts.
     I was speaking with a parent of two young boys. She had initially enrolled them in a dual language program (Spanish and English) but pulled them out just two years in. She pulled them out because they weren't getting the social component of school. It was very hard for them to interact with others because of the language barrier and also because their Spanish-speaking peers couldn't socialize with them after school fro various reasons (lived far away, parents struggled to communicate with other parents, etc.) If we look back at "good parents" vs. "bad parents," shouldn't social skills be something parents consider when they consider bilingualism for their children? This parent decided to hire private tutors to teach Spanish to her children, and they are able to now read Spanish chapter books by age 8! Not everyone can afford Spanish tutors, but the point here is that this parent considered both academic and social skills when deciding on bilingualism. Often the mother is the one who must carry the weight for the decision, and this was the case.
    
     The research study really ties into the McKay Chapter 4 reading, which deals with language planning and policy. What designates an official language? There are three ways that the designation of an official language has consequences for language learning and teaching. They are, "the insight the designation provides into prevalent social attitudes towards particular languages, the effect of approved language policies on the stated language-in-education policy, and the setting of linguistic standards, particularly in relation to nativized varieties of English."
     It is important to understand the difference between language planning and language policy. Language policy is the more general linguist, political, and social goals that underlie the actual language planning process. Language process, on the other hand, refers to al conscious efforts that aim at changing the linguistic behavior of a speech community. We can think back to the research study and how parents looked at language policy to plan their children's linguistic development. Language planning can be distinctive in status (position and function of a language in the country) and language corpus (script, grammar, spelling, etc.) In regards to status, many parents see a need for their students to be bilingual because of the large increase in the Spanish-speaking population and more job availability. Those who are learning English in the United States need to be able to communicate freely. Globalization has also impacted parents- the majority of other countries have speakers of multiple languages. That is just the way the world is. Parents don't want their children to be "linguistically behind" so there is a push fro additive bilingualism at a young age.
     Language education is compartmentalized through the bilingual policy. English is the medium of instruction, besides the mother tongue classroom. In fact, in many classrooms, the use of other languages is banned or strongly discouraged. This makes me very upset, because there is such richness of knowledge that can come from other languages.
     In the United States, there are two debates on language: English as an official language and bilingual education. Previously, there was reluctance in the US to have an official language policy. However, a momentum began in the early 1980s to make English the official language. As with any change, there is  sure to be controversy and debate to follow. Those who wanted English as the official language stated the a common language benefits a country and its people because it serves as a bond, especially in a country with such rich diversity. This seems contradicting to me. If we value such rich diversity, why do we have to make one common language?
     The Bilingual Education Act of 1968 began as a legislative movement to address the education needs of children who spoke languages other than English as their L1. Children are educated through two languages, one being their L1. The controversy comes in to play because a policy that makes the status of English official would make the use of other languages problematic. I personally see many benefits to bilingual education. Students have the opportunity to interact with peers who are learning another language as well. They are excellent resources for each other and everyone can build confidence because everyone is learning.
     To summarize McKay's chapter, we see a few prominent themes. First, there is a relationship between language and social class. In our research, though, we found that not just the elite were pushing for additive bilingualism. Also, there seem to be benefits to knowing English all throughout the world. The spread of international English is a way to increase economic opportunity in many cases. English is seen as being neutral and without ethnic identity. We must also consciously and critically consider the marginalization of those who speak only linguistic forms other than the Standard.
  It was very interesting to read about the research on parents and their decisions regarding raising their children to be bilingual. There were also important themes in McKay's chapter. English seems to hold a lot of power, but perhaps there is true power to being bilingual, and perhaps this power will help shatter the "superior status" English holds internationally. After all, I believe all languages are truly rich and powerful.

April 8th Readings

As a future bilingual educator, I found this week's readings very interesting and applicable. Researchers view language ideologies as central to language policies. Language policies contain both explicit and implicit ideas about language. Farr & Song pointed out that beliefs about language are inseparable from education. Therefore, we must really understand language ideologies. Language policy is often carried out through mass education and education is conducted through language. We must raise awareness of conflict between language ideologies as they inform policies and pragmatic sociolinguistic realities. This helps teachers understand learner's multilingual practices and develop a crucial perspective toward language policies and norms that deem these practices deficient.

There are two language ideologies relevant for education- the belief in language standardization and in monolingualism. Educating multilingual students is a challenge in a society where English is the medium of schooling and wider communication. Many students may not see the benefits of maintaining their native language. My friend worked with a bilingual population of teenagers and when asked if they liked being bilingual, they said no. Top-down language policies can be overbearing as well. Language ideologies in common sense beliefs motivate language policies.

Globalization also plays a role. It has spread and intensified multilingual practices. The global spread of English is regarded partly as the promotion of monolingualism in English. It continues to amaze me how connected the world is. This is very beneficial in spreading ideas, but perhaps detrimental to the true development of languages other than English.

In Kubota's article, he addresses linguistic diversity through World Englishes. According to Kubota, it is crucial that students develop an awareness of different varieties of English, positive attitudes toward diversity, and a willingness to engage in intercultural communication. Students must see beyond themselves and their own languages. There is an increased demand for multicultural education in our diversified society. Reading the phone conversation in this article made me very sad. I agree that this is far more common than we want to believe. We can't assume that others have made no attempt to learn our language. It is very difficult to fully pick up a language, and we can't verbally attack someone because they can't say their 'v's! People cannot and do not deserve to be judged based on the form of language they speak! I remember being in Morocco, Africa and everyone thought that because I was American I would be rich! When bartering, they always raised the price extra high to begin. I had to walk away a lot.

It amazes me how English continues to replace many lexical items from other languages. Even without speaking English, speakers of other languages must be familiar with many words in the English vocabulary. Words like facebook, car names, etc. are all so common to people of all languages.

The article gives a sample lesson on World Englishes. Here is the breakdown according to days and their categories: Introduction to the Unity, Explore American Tongues Through a Video, Explore World Englishes through Videos, Discuss the Importance of Learning about WE, Discover the Development and Spread of English, Interact with Guest Speakers, and Understand Communicative Responsibilities in Intercultural Communication.

Chapter 3 in McKay and Bokhorst-Heng's book really interested me. Many people learn English for specific purposes and may never become fully proficient in it. They often develop a level of competence only to the extent needed to fulfill a certain function. The overriding incentive for learning English in diglossic multilingual societies is the status of English as the H-language and its use in H-domains.

I personally think there is great worth in maintaining one's native language. However, in South Africa, English is taught in a monolingual model. It undermines the productive use of the mother tongue in learning English. As a future educator, I want to draw upon the rich knowledge and ideas that one's native language offers. This is why I am so excited to be a bilingual educator- I can teach my students English while still showing them the importance of keeping their native language and all it has to offer!

April 1st Readings

I really found chapter 1 of McKay & Heng to be interesting. Globalization can seem to be such a broad concept, but I liked how the chapter categorized it as internationalization (growth of international exchange), liberalization (removal of government imposed restrictions), universalization (spreading of common objects and experiences to everyone), westernization (modernization), and deterrioritalization (change of social space so it is no longer mapped in terms of territorial places, distances, or borders).

Personally, before reading this chapter, I thought globalization was a way of 'unifying' the world and connecting people from all over. Technology, to me, is a great way to show the affects of globalization. It blows my mind that I am able to skype my Spanish host family from when I studied abroad at any time! (except for the time difference). This allows me to maintain close communication from them, constantly learning and practicing the Spanish language.

I also liked how the hegemony argument was brought up in regards to globalization. However, it tends to ignore the broader political context of the spread of English (p.8). We often ignore power and struggle in language by focusing on the standardization of local versions of English.

Colonialism is also central to the spread of English. Teaching English was always a major component of early settling and many associated English with power, thus more job access.

Phillipson offered five tenets, and while they were popular, they were also challenged by some. One that I think could be considered very controversial is number five- "if other languages are used much, standards of English will drop." I am a bilingual education major and I have seen research studies that show that students who are bilingual are able to transfer skills between languages, thus being very knowledgeable in both languages.

Overall, there are many incentives for learning English- media, academic, economic, social, and more. Globalization requires a common language, which is English presently. To explain its international status, we must trace back to colonialism and other historical roots. We must recognize the POWER that colonizers have exerted to impose English and the learner's motivation/investment (as Norton distinguished). The chapter also questioned how wide-spread English acquisition has affected other languages.

Chapter 2 particularly interested me because it discussed bilingual programs. One of the first challenges to the English-only policies of schools was in 1939. Jorge Bocobo suggested local languages could be used for support in the primary grades. Eventually, this led to the Revised Philippine Education Program, which used vernacular languages as the medium of instruction in the first two grades with a shift to English as the medium from third grade through college. The question raised was just how successful the program was in developing nationalism and promoting academic achievement. One finding said that students who achieved well in English also achieved well in Pilipino, but the reverse was not true. Also, many people in the Philippines accept Pilipino as a linguistic symbol of national identity but also accept the need for keeping up or maintaining English for economic reasons. Personally, I see worth in maintaining the native language to keep cultural ties and heritage. For this type of program to be successful, teachers must be very competent.

To conclude this chapter, we found that in inner circle countries, language diversity is often viewed as a problem. Therefore, programs are designed to encourage the acquisition of English with little emphasis on developing students' first language. How do we avoid social segregation in doing so? Many language minority students are seen as outsiders and their cognitive academic abilities are often questioned. In outer circle countries, English proficiency is necessary for tertiary education. How can we provide equal access to English education so less advantaged students have success in higher education? While some outer circle countries support multilingualism, there are practical problems in implementing both the native language and English in the classroom. Lastly, in expanding circle countries, educators must motivate learners, especially those who don't see a need to learn English. This reminds me of Bonny Norton's article on investment v. motivation. I observed in a dual language (Spanish/English) classroom and saw that many of the English-speaking children did not want to learn Spanish. They weren't investing, and it made me question whether the lottery (random choice) was the best way to pick the students who would participate in the dual language program. What if the teachers lack confidence in speaking English?


According to the Kubota 2002 article, globalization implies increased local diversity influenced by human contact across cultural boundaries as well as speedy exchange of commonalities and information. This is more like the definition I had in my head before reading.

"While globalization projects the image of diversity, it also implies cultural
homogenization influenced by global standardization of economic activities and a flow of cultural goods from the center to the periphery" (1).

English is seen as a synonym to foreign language in Japanese schools. While there has been an increased aim to other languages, there is an intensified emphasis on English especially. This is shown through foreign language offerings in high school, new initiatives at elementary schools, and in assistant language teachers. It reminds me of the push I am feeling for English-speaking people in the United States to learn Spanish. Now there are more and more bilingual, dual language program classrooms.

The Native Speaker Myth is the idealization of a native speaker as someone who has perfect, innate knowledge of a language and culture and is the 'best teacher of English' therefore.

There is symbolic power attached to English as the international language, and this reinforces perceived superiority of English over other languages represented in the world. English is the international language that bridges multiple cultures and enables them to understand the world and cultural diversity.

Language learning and teaching in Japan in the age of globalization has been influenced by Kokusaika that blends Anglicization and nationalism. Anglicization is the development of international understanding and intercultural commonalitites is heavily focused on the white middle class. English and the essentialized Anglo culture are the priority rather than focusing on other languages and cultures in the world. Nationalism, on the other hand, emphasizes national identity and essentializes images of Japanese language and culture versus that of the United States.

Overall, I found this week's readings very intriguing and insightful in regards to the term globalization and its effects on the world, particularly in viewing English as the international language.

March 25th Readings

After reading through these articles, I feel I gained a lot of new insight. I will begin with Kubota’s article. I especially liked a quote from this article.

“Human beings possess a far larger proportion of genes in common than they do genes that are supposed to differentiate them racially. Not surprisingly, we are much more like each other than we are different. It has been estimated that, genetically speaking, the difference in difference - the percentage of our genes that determines our purportedly racial or primarily morphological difference - is 0.5 percent, (p. 67) RACE AND TESOL: INTRODUCTION TO CONCEPTS AND THEORIES”

I think it is easy to focus on differences between people, but we must be careful. Is race really just a biological concept, or is there a deeper, more hidden meaning behind how we identify others? If race is a social construction, then this changes things. Some say race can strategically mobilize groups to create resistance. This reminds me of essentialism, and how focusing so much on differences can actually empower certain groups, as well as cause a dichotomy.  

Racialization, or categorizing people, has roots even in colonialism. Judgments against others usually have underlying reasons. Perhaps there is pride or the sense of superiority in the one doing the judging, which can then affect how they treat or view the others.

As future educators, we have an important role. We must approach education through critical pedagogies and critical multicultural education. The word ‘critical’ is crucial here because we learned from Kubota’s article on Barbara that not thinking or discussing critically can be detrimental. Educational visions should target social justice and equity through examining power and politics and often reinforce domination and subordination in society. Students and teachers must discuss relations of power in terms of race, gender, class, and other categories to fully understand the reality in which we live.

I took away an important message from Ibrahim’s article. I like how it described rap as a voice for voicelessness. It explores the hopes and the human and cultural experience of the Black Atlantic. Black Americans created rap to express themselves. If we could integrate ourselves into it, we could better understand their problems. These can include human degradation, police brutality, and everyday racism. If educators consider learning to be engaging one’s identity and fulfillment of needs and deisres, then ESL pedagogy must find a way to draw in youths such as those in this article. Identity decides what ESL learners acquire and how they acquire it. Linguistic content learned should not be separate from political, social, and cultural context. Learning means investing. As teachers, we must find how our students invest in their identities and then develop materials accordingly, taking into account the race, class, sex, and identity of our students.

I became upset upon reading Kuma’s article, especially when it discussed Aptekin’s view of Asians. He stated that Asians were not capable of thinking critically and later the article downplays any and all of their inventions. However, basic scientific conventions such as the compass, gunpowder, and printing are complex and couldn’t have just been “stumbled upon.” This article also made a really good point in saying that to understand how Asian students communicate in the classroom, we must consider more than just cultural beliefs. Anxiety, motivation to participate, speaking abilities, communicative competence, how the instructor presents material, and many other factors influence an Asian child’s input and output in the classroom. IT is not fair for others to make assumptions about them without looking at the situation holistically.

 

Hinkel Chapter 7

Hinkel Chapter 7

·         Competence required to interact with others in another language

o   Goals of interactive practice, roles of participants, topics/themes considered pertinent

o   Optional linguistic action patterns along which the practice may unfold, conventional meanings, expected participation structures

o   Amount of flexibility one has in rearranging expected uses of practice’s linguistic resources when exercising these options and likely consequences engendered by various uses

o   Skill to mindfully and efficiently recognize situations where patterns apply and know when to use them when participating in new experiences to help make sense of unknown

·         Elsewhere, it has been argued that competence development involves

o   Guided practice in significant practices considered significant by learners

o   Systematic study of L2 interactive practices (conventional resources and typical meanings, varied uses by participants, consequences ensued)

·         Interactional competence is a prosaic of interaction; engaging learners in another language helps develop L2 in ways that decrease chances of negative social reactions

·         We interact based on common knowledge of our practices

·         Predictable uses of resources provide us with the tools necessary for structuring and interacting with others in ways that are both socially and cognitively meaningful to us and to those around us… what about those who don’t share this knowledge? How is this knowledge developed?

·         Two general spheres of practices

o   Primary: acquired during childhood, important practices to families and significant social groups

o   Secondary: schooled, begin work, involved in communities in adulthood/adolescence

·         As we gain more experience in various practices, we become more interactively competent (build habits of uses and responses to uses of linguistic resource within those practices)

·         The more competent we become, the more we use our knowledge to better interpret and respond to ensuing talk, become creative in the ways we choose to participate, and become adept at realizing our individual goals within the larger practice-related goals

·         Engaging in social interaction with people who are more expert is important “cultural amplifier” necessary to development of cognitive processes

·         Consciousness needed to learn language and pragmatics/interactional competence

·         Guiding students to detect patterns used in interaction through the systematic study of interactive practices (development of prosaic of interaction) will facilitate the development of interactional competence in the second language.

o   Included in this competence are skills needed to:

§  Notice a particular linguistic resource and its function

§  Reflect on its interactional meaning (particular placement in sequence of speech, ex.)

§  Formulate and test hypothesis about conventional uses, etc.

§  Develop knowledge that is both domains (practice-specific and domain-general)

§  Develop alternative uses of resources that may lead to realization of learners’ individual goals within larger practice

·         Mikhail Bakhtin, developing prosaics of interaction       

o   Dialogue, transgredience, prosaics of the novel

o   Our individual participation is constrained by degree of sociocultural authority embedded in conventionality of practices’ linguistic resource; in some cases, room for our individual voices and in other cases our participation is restricted b social and other factors. (ex. Talking in social group vs in class)

o   IRE: teacher-initiated question, student response, teacher-produced evaluation of response

o   To develop an understanding to develop consciousness, we need to step outside practices and engage in analysis and reflection of our actions (transgredience, the ability to see an interaction as a dialogic event between resources and utterances from vantage point outside of event and not member of it)

·         Model for classroom practice   

o   Texts- pertinent by being recurring interactions, goal-directed talk among members on regular basis

o   Framework for Analysis: Extralinguistic elements and linguistic resources

§  Extralinguistic elements:

·         Setting: physical space conditions, time and duration, geographical consideration

·         Participants: Social identities (age, ethnicity, gender, origin, one plays role of teacher and others are students)

·         Expected goals or outcomes: expectations ( to solidify social bonds, to make a purchase, to tell a story), to know appropriateness of moves

§  Linguistic Resources

·         Topic: the recurring stories or themes with which the social actors concern themselves

·         Constitutive Speech acts and sequential development: pragmatic meaning each utterance plays (invitation, compliment, etc.)

o   1. What is considered to be a conventional linguistic display of certain act

o   2. Its placement in sequence of utterances

o   3. Intent of interactants (typical patterned arrangement of utterances included, too)

§  The more conventionalized the practice, the less flexible the arrangement is likely to be

·         Participation structures

o   Turn-taking patterns among participants

·         Formulaic openings, transitions, and closings: utterances used to open, move through, and close a practice

·         “ok” can signal movement from one activity to the next

·         “once  upon a time” is a story

o   Pedagogical considerations for study of practices

§  Choosing object of study, concerned with student interests and needs and accessibility of practice and feasibility of collecting data

§  Methods of data collection (video taping, audiotaping, interviews, etc.)

§  Help them with words, phrases and linguistic cues that will help them in target language

§  Prosaics of interaction isn’t focused on production of report that correctly describes a practice, but rather development of L2 interactional competence, the facilitation of which includes providing students with opportunities to take notice of significant interactional features and their situated meanings (make predictions, seek patterns, etc)

§  In learning about the various ways of meaning making within L2 groups, the students develop a critical awareness of language use, and thus, to a certain degree, are empowered to make choices about whether to participate in practices and how to use resources in ways that will enhance fulfilling their individual goals

§  Classroom provides safe environment for learning as students explore various use and consequences of talk in L2 in ways that are likely to have fewer negative social and other consequences for the learners

§  The skills needed to competently participate in face-to-face interactive practices are both practice-generic and practice-specific; how we learn to become a competent participant in a practice depends on opportunities we have to participate in and develop a familiarity with the practice

§  We are more confident and perform more competently in practices we have prior experience in

§  Whose texts from which cultures do we bring in our classrooms?