Principles and Practices of Teaching English as an International Language

Introduction

Teaching English as an

International Language

Aya Matsuda

English: An International Language

English is now widely recognized as an – if not the –international language both in and out of the field of TESOL. The ambiguity in the definition of ‘English users’ and the lack of statistical information across countries make it difficult to arrive at the exact number of English users, but Crystal (2003: 61) estimated it to be somewhere between 1.1 billion and 1.8 billion, 320 million to 380 million of which are the native speakers of the language.

Of course, the number of users alone does not give us a sense of how globally spread the language is. Crystal (2003) argues that ‘a language achieves a genuinely global status’ (p. 3) when its special role is recognized not only in the countries where it is spoken by a large number of people as their mother tongue, but also beyond. English certainly meets these criteria. The concentric circle model proposed by Braj Kachru (1985) provides a convenient way to capture the various functions that English performs in different parts of the world. The model divides countries into three groups, or circles, according to the types of spread, patterns of acquisition and the function of English found in each country.

In the Inner Circle, which includes such countries as Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States, English is used as the dominant language of the society. The majority of people who are born and educated in these countries learn English as their first language. Even when they speak another language at home, English is likely to become their strongest language because of their extended exposure to the language outside the home and the numerous functions the language performs in the society. In other words, even if it is not legally designated as an official language, it is the language one must know in order to function in the society.

English plays an important role also in the Outer Circle, former colonies of the Inner Circle countries such as India, Singapore, Hong Kong and Nigeria. In these countries, the majority of people acquire English as an additional language either simultaneously with or after acquiring their first language, although there is an emerging generation that is acquiring a nativized variety of English as their first language (Kachru, 1998). English in the Outer Circle often has an official status in the country and is used for important functions in the society (e.g. language of law, medium of education). Unlike the Inner Circle countries, where most transactions are conducted in English, however, English in the Outer Circle co-exists with other languages, usually indigenous languages, which still maintain important functions.

In the Expanding Circle, including such countries as Brazil, China, Germany and Japan, English does not have the extended functions it has in the Inner or Outer Circle. It is, however, often taught as the most popular foreign language, and widely is used for its symbolic effect in such areas as ads, store and brand names and pop culture.

In addition to these important roles in individual countries, English has an important status in international contexts – contexts where people from diverse linguistic, cultural and national backgrounds interact and communicate with each other. For instance, there has been an international agreement to use a specialized variety of English for air traffic and mariners (e.g. English for Aviation, 2011; International Maritime Organization, 2011; Strevens & Johnson, 1983), and international agencies such as the United Nations and ASEAN (the Association of Southeast Asian Nations) use English for their communication, either as an official language or a working language. It is the language of international academic and professional conferences. Furthermore, the development of the internet and online communication in recent years has created more opportunities to use English for international communication.

In addition to the actual use of EIL, we cannot ignore the fact that the status of EIL is also discursively and ideologically constructed and reinforced. As Kubota and McKay (2009) pointed out, there are many multilingual situations where languages other than English are used for international communication. But yet even in those circumstances, the assumption that English is the language to be used for international communication is still pervasive. Similarly, English learners in the Expanding Circle often believe that English is an important language to learn because it provides them with new international opportunities that are not available to them otherwise, even when they cannot think of any specific ways they might be using the language in future (Matsuda, 2003, 2011). In other words, people’s beliefs that English is the international lingual franca sometimes override reality and gives even more power to English in the global context.

The status of English as the default international language – both actual and imagined – makes it popular in foreign language programs around the world. The national curriculum in Japan, for instance, specifies that English be taught as the required foreign language in middle schools because it is an international language (Monbusho, 1999). Hong Kong’s Education Bureau promotes the use of English as an instructional medium by arguing that ‘[b]y enhancing students’ ability to learn in English, [Education] can prepare them to embrace new challenges and enhance Hong Kong’s status as an international city’ (Education Bureau, 2009). Nunan’s study (2003) also illustrated how the status of English as a global language impacted educational policies and practices in Asian-Pacific countries in various ways, including the lowering of the age at which the instruction is made available to students. In Qatar, a key component of the nationwide education reform called ‘Education for a New Era’ is an internationally benchmarked curriculum in four core subject areas, with English being one of them (Supreme Education Council, 2011). In Turkey, too, English is the most widely taught and preferred foreign language (Genç, 2004, cited in Bayyurt, 2006) because of its ‘special status… as an international language of communication, science and technology’ (Bayyurt, 2006: 237).

English: Diverse and Complicated

However, a closer look at the current sociolinguistic landscape of the world presents a picture of English that is linguistically and culturally diverse, and the recognition of such diversity complicates the way we approach ELT, which traditionally constructed English as a more static and monolithic entity.

One well-known implication of the global spread of English, for example, is the emergence of multiple varieties of English (see Chapter 6 for more details). While British and American Englishes still dominate the field of ELT, descriptive studies from various parts of the world illustrate the existence and vibrant use of localized forms of English, especially from the Inner and Outer Circles. When English – or any language for that matter – is transplanted to a new sociolinguistic and sociocultural environment, it goes through a process of nativization – adaptations and changes that allow the language to be more appropriate in the new context (Kachru, 1992). Nativization can be found not only in pronunciation (phonology), but also in morphology, lexicons, syntax, semantics and pragmatics (i.e. discourse) (e.g. Alsagoff & Lick, 1998; Arua, 1998; Bamgbose, 1992; Bao & Wee, 1999; Bokamba, 1992; Cheng, 1992; Kachru, 1999, 2001). Nativized Englishes differ from their original varieties, but linguistically they are no less. The recognition of numerous ‘new’ varieties of English leads to a realization that any of these Englishes could be potentially used for international communication.

The form of English is not the only thing that has expanded and diversified as a result of the global spread of English. The demographics of the English-speaking population have also changed. While there is still a strong belief among English learners that the language belongs to its native speakers (Matsuda, 2003), it is not used only among native English speakers or between native and non-native English speakers anymore. Especially in the context of international communication, interaction often takes place exclusively among non-native speakers of English (Graddol, 1997; Smith, 1983; Widdowson, 1994). In other words, the assumption that non-native English speakers learn English in order to communicate with native English speakers and learn about their culture does not always hold true anymore. Furthermore, if the majority of English users come from the Outer and Expanding Circles – where other languages play dominant roles in the society – it implies that the majority of English users are also multilingual, whose linguistic proficiency cannot be reasonably measured solely against that of monolingual English speakers (Canagarajah, 2007; Cook, 2008).

Implications for English Language Teaching

When one tries to capture such a wide range of linguistic forms, functions, and profiles of English users today in the context of English language teaching (ELT), there are a number of questions that need to be addressed: Which variety of English should be selected as the instructional model in an English classroom? What functions should students learn to perform using English? Who should be presented as ‘model’ English speakers? Whose culture should be presented as an English-speaking culture? How can we teach our students to respect other languages and protect the language rights of speakers of other languages while teaching English? Are we, as English teachers, contributing to the wider spread of English and linguistic imperialism (Phillipson, 1992)? Should we be teaching English in the first place? These questions force us to re-examine various pedagogical decisions that we take for granted.

A number of scholars have pointed out the limitations of the traditional approach to ELT, which tends to conceptualize English as a static language of native English speakers from the Inner Circle, in the context where English is learned as an international language. In World Englishes (WE) studies, language pedagogy was one of the well-explored foci since the conceptualization of the notion of World Englishes in 1960s until around the mid-1980s. Through active participations in ELT conferences and publications in language-pedagogy journals, WE scholars used the socio-linguistic reality of the Outer Circle to challenge the status quo and assumptions of ELT (e.g. Kachru, 1976, 1984) and also contributed perspectives from new Englishes that broadened the understanding of SLA and other related fields (e.g. Sridhar, 1994; Sridhar & Sridhar, 1992) (see Matsuda, forthcoming, for a more detailed discussion of the history of World Englishes and the field of ELT).

In the field of ELT, in the past decade or so, there has been an increased interest in exploring the use of English as an International Language (EIL) specifically and its implications for teaching in the field of ELT. TESOL Quarterly, for example, now regularly publishes articles that explore the intersection of EIL and TESOL (e.g. Matsuda, 2003; Bruthiaux, 2010), although they may still ‘be the exception rather than the rule’ (Jenkins, 2006: 158). The TESOL board of directors approved the position statement on English as a Global Language in March 2008 (Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, 2008). At conferences, sessions and workshops dedicated to the discussion of teaching EIL have a strong presence. In fact, there have been conferences entirely dedicated to this theme: the First Conference on World Englishes in the Classroom, held at Chukyo University in 2003, and the eighth Asia TEFL conference in 2010, just to name two.

One strong message found in the collective voice of these scholars and teachers is that ‘the teaching and learning of an international language must be based on an entirely different set of assumptions than the teaching and learning of any other second or foreign language’ (McKay, 2002: 1). As mentioned above, the assumption that English learners learn English to communicate with native English speakers is only partially true, and thus pedagogy that introduces students only to the English varieties, people and culture of the Inner Circle countries is simply inadequate. In order to prepare effective users of EIL, some significant changes must occur in both teachers’ and learners’ mindsets as well as the specific classroom practices (e.g. Matsuda, 2002, 2006; Matsuda & Friedrich, 2011; McKay & Bokhosrt-Heng, 2008; Sharifian, 2009).

There is also increasing awareness and sensitivity toward the social and political aspects of ELT in general that is particularly relevant to its teaching for international communication. Phillipson’s work on linguistic imperialism (1992), for instance, has encouraged teachers to be mindful of their own power and influence on the spread of English and its consequences, and has prompted teachers to raise students’ awareness about the language so that they are empowered to fight for social justice and equity (e.g. Birch, 2009; Canagarajah, 1999; Friedrich, 2007). Whether or not one wishes to directly address such issues may vary, but it seems that the current use of English in the world demands a pedagogic response that is informed by such knowledge. There is also growing interest and awareness about the issues related to non-native English-speaking teachers (e.g. Braine, 1999, 2010; Kamhi-Stein, 2004; Mahboob, 2010), who, not surprisingly, have a strong presence in the profession, reflecting the make-up of English users overall. Some of these works specifically juxtapose this subgroup of teachers against the use and teaching of EIL (e.g. Holliday, 2005; Phan, 2008).

Unfortunately, much of the critical examination of ELT vis-à-vis the use of English as an international language so far has remained at the abstract level. Even at conferences that are attended by many teachers, we have not really engaged in exploring pedagogical ideas that are theoretically sound, informed by research and at the same time specific enough to be useful in the classroom. There may be legitimate reasons for these scholars – including myself – to refrain from making specific pedagogical suggestions. First, it may be that the kind of changes we are calling for in fact are quite radical, and there is still much to be described, explained and argued to justify such changes. In other words, the discussion simply has not gotten practical enough – and useful enough for practicing teachers who must make day-to-day pedagogical decisions often on the spot. Second, researchers may hesitate to propose very specific pedagogical ideas because teaching is such a contextualized practice. The definition of good teaching differs from one context to another, and what works in one classroom with a particular group of students may be a disaster in another. The needs of students, goals of the program and resources for teachers, which play a crucial role in designing lesson plans that work, also vary. This situational nature of teaching makes it difficult for scholars and experienced teachers to provide examples of pedagogical ideas for teachers in contexts they are not familiar with.

However, the current state of the discussion of teaching EIL poses a great challenge and frustration for teachers. On one hand, they receive a strong message that their current practices are inadequate in preparing learners for the use of English as an international language, and they need to be changed. On the other hand, they are not given any set of ideas or suggestions regarding where to start implementing necessary changes. This leaves many teachers with no choice but to continue doing what they have been doing, only now feeling less confident about what they deliver to their students.

This is the gap this book attempts to address. The purpose of this book is to build upon the existing literature on teaching English for international communication and to bridge the gap between the theoretical and conceptual discussion and the practical aspects of teaching EIL. The goal is not to propose a one-size-fits-all curriculum that will work in every context – rather, it is to illustrate diverse approaches to teaching English that recognize the linguistic and functional complexity of the language and its important role as an international lingua franca. Each author brings in his or her unique perspective to the issues in hand, but our work collectively has been informed by existing literature on the global spread and use of English from such areas of scholarly inquiry as World Englishes, English as an International Language and English as a Lingua Franca.

By ‘teaching EIL’, we are not advocating for teaching one specific variety of international English. The term ‘EIL’ is used to describe a function that English performs in international, multilingual contexts (Friedrich & Matsuda, 2010). This book is based on the assumption that, in most communicative exchanges in English that involve language users from different linguistic and cultural backgrounds, which variety of English is used depends on the speakers in a specific context and is thus unpredictable. There is no one variety that is or can be expected to be used successfully in all situations of international communication. It is also likely that more than one variety of English is represented in such situations because each speaker brings a variety that he or she is most familiar with, and speakers employ various strategies to negotiate linguistic and other differences to make themselves mutually intelligible and to communicate effectively.

Based on this definition of EIL, teaching EIL in this book is conceptualized as preparing English learners to become competent users of English in international contexts. It is not a course that teaches a linguistic variety of English called EIL because, as briefly discussed above, we do not believe such a linguistic concept is compatible with how the language is used in reality. We also believe that there are concepts other than linguistic knowledge itself, such as the competent use of communication strategies and socio-political awareness of the language, that are critical for using EIL effectively; consequently, such non-linguistic issues hold legitimate space in the discussion of TEIL.

Overview of the Book

This book is divided into two sections. The first part of the book, which is titled ‘Principles of Teaching English as an International Language’, critically examines how the linguistic and functional varieties of English today complicate different aspects of ELT, and suggests ways to address them effectively in English language classrooms. Topics addressed in this section include the varieties of English (i.e. instructional model, increased exposure to and awareness of varieties), communicative competence in the context of EIL and political aspects of EIL, as well as implications for teaching materials, assessment and teacher education. The second part of the book, ‘Showcase of EIL courses and programs’, addresses more practical questions related to teaching EIL. Each chapter introduces an English language course or program that was created specifically based on the perspective of EIL. The showcase illustrates not only ‘how-to’s’, but also how the issues addressed in the first part of the book interact with each other in a real context, providing multiple examples of how different pieces can be put together to make a complete package. While individual cases give a blueprint that readers can adapt to their own contexts, they collectively identify a common thread as well as the potential for variation and creativity.

Part 1 (‘Principles of Teaching English as an International Language’) begins with two chapters that explore the question ‘Which variety of English is taught’? This, by no means, is not the only important question in TEIL, but one of the most fundamental ones because it has implications for many other aspects of EIL pedagogy, including teaching materials and assessment. Also, this is often the first question asked by teachers interested in incorporating the EIL perspective into their classrooms because the linguistic diversity of English is in direct contradiction with a mono-model view of English that tends to dominate the ELT practices (especially in the Expanding Circle, where actual exposure to English dialects is limited). In Chapter 1, Matsuda and Friedrich explore three options that are available to EIL teachers regarding the selection of an instructional variety/varieties: International English (an English variety specifically developed for the international use), a learner’s own variety and an ‘established’ variety of World Englishes (from the Inner and Outer Circles). The strengths and limitations of each option are examined from both ideological and practical perspectives. Chapter 2, written by Hino, explores the possibility of establishing and using a model that is indigenous to the Expanding Circle contexts. He problematizes the positioning of the Expanding Circle as ‘norm-dependent’ (Kachru, 1985) as opposed to the ‘norm-developing’ Outer Circle, and urges us to go beyond this dichotomy by pointing out that the need for original models of English as a means of communication is no less strong in the Expanding Circle than in the Outer Circle.

The next two chapters explore two aspects of English language and use that have been part of English classrooms to some extent, but are especially crucial when we consider English as a tool for international communication. In Chapter 3, Friedrich argues that given the linguistic and cultural diversity found in the use of English as an international lingua franca, English users today must ‘be quite resourceful and flexible’ and ‘able to accommodate a wide range of variation at all levels’. She specifically explores the notions of intercultural sensitivity and communicative competence as they apply to EIL communication and suggests ways to promote strategic competence in the EIL classroom. The sociopolitical aspect of English and its use as an international language is the focus of Chapter 4. Kubota critically examines the discourse of EIL and problematizes the fact that the discussion often romanticizes English’s role as an international language, while neglecting multilingualism in local communities where English does not serve as a link language. She offers a pedagogical vision for fostering a critical awareness of the unequal relations of power in language, race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status, and for facilitating attitudes and skills that lead to an affirmation and acceptance of differences in communication across differences in English and beyond.

Chapters 5 through 7 each focus on an aspect of ELT that is relevant in any English classroom and explore how our understanding of EIL influences – and often complicates – the practices in it. In Chapter 5, McKay explores the ramifications of teaching EIL for the development of teaching materials, including published textbooks and classroom materials designed by local teachers, institutions or ministries of education. It discusses the importance of materials development for language learning in general and specifically in learning EIL and presents principles for developing materials that prepare learners to use English effectively in international contexts. Assessment is the focus of Chapter 6. With examples from different varieties of English, Lowenberg challenges the notion of standards used in standardized testing and urges us to focus on the local norm that is relevant to users. He also explores how to re-envision classroom assessment in light of the use of EIL, which involves multiple varieties of English and various non-linguistic factors addressed in earlier chapters of the book. Chapter 7 focuses on teacher education and qualification. While not all readers are involved in teacher education, they may be in the future, and this chapter provides a roadmap that can be used when the opportunity arises. In fact, all the changes suggested in the first six chapters of the book can be implemented successfully only if teachers are ready to do so, and thus innovation in teacher education is equally needed in order to turn the suggested practices in this book into reality. In Chapter 7, Dogancay-Aktuna and Hardman expand on the themes that emerged from their book Global English Teaching and Teacher Education: Praxis and Possibility (TESOL International, 2008) to examine how approaches to ELT teacher education can be revised from the perspective of EIL.

Part 2, as mentioned above, showcases courses and programs that are based on the principles of EIL. It begins with two units in higher education that offer both undergraduate and graduate (post-undergraduate) curricula. In Chapter 8, D’Angelo outlines the theoretical underpinnings of the Department of World Englishes at Chukyo University in Japan, while Sharifian and Marlina (Chapter 9) present an overview of the Department of English as an International Language at Monash University in Australia. Both chapters outline the program requirements as well as providing sample learning materials and pedagogical activities in order to illustrate how each program equips students with the necessary knowledge, mindset and skills to use the language comfortably and effectively in a wide range of functional situations internationally.

The next three chapters focus on efforts to bring the EIL perspective to ELT at the course level. Chapter 10 describes an attempt to offer an EIL oral communication class at Chukyo High School in Japan. Primary and secondary education curricula tend to be more tightly controlled by the government than in higher education, which makes it difficult to create and offer a new course in those contexts. Lee outlines the efforts and the challenges she and her colleagues have encountered in this process. In Chapter 11, an example of a course from a university in Turkey is described. Bayyurt and Altinmakas outline the English language course they have created and offered as part of a traditional, literature-based curriculum in an English department. In addition to the detailed description of the course itself, the chapter also provides insights for negotiating larger institutional and policy changes that may affect the success of course implementation. Chapter 12 presents a case from Osaka University in Japan, where Hino encourages students to participate in the real world (Lave & Wenger, 1991) of an EIL community in his English reading class. Through reading newspaper articles from various parts of the world, students are exposed not only to different varieties of English, but also to different perspectives, which leads to a critical awareness of a diverse world and the development of critical literacy skills in general.

The final chapter of this section, Chapter 13, introduces 13 EIL classroom activities that can be incorporated into a traditional ELT classroom. While simply adding an activity or two on English varieties would not turn a traditional curriculum into an EIL curriculum, many teachers who are interested in incorporating the notion of EIL are not in the position to create an entirely new course or program from scratch. This chapter, compiled by Matsuda and Duran, introduces a selection of practical lessons and activities that can be adopted in traditional English classrooms, which have been developed and field tested by teachers across the world. The volume ends with an epilogue by Cecil L. Nelson.

Concluding Remarks

In short, this volume illustrates what we, as language teachers and program administrators, need to consider if our goal is to revise our teaching so that we can more effectively prepare our students for the future use of EIL. Specifically, it presents some key issues we must address and how our decisions on those issues have ripple effects on other areas of language teaching. Furthermore, it provides some specific examples of how changes can be implemented and what a resulting curriculum might look like. While it is impossible to suggest a curricular model that will work in all contexts, a discussion of different courses and programs helps us identify some common themes that are likely to emerge in other contexts. It also illuminates a wide range of creative solutions to address challenges and achieve the curricular goals that are specific to each instructional reality. It is my hope that this volume serves as the starting point for curricular innovation across the world, resulting in the preparation of EIL teachers and users who are effective communicators and