English Language Teaching For use with chapter nine of: Insert cover photo of book here Galloway, N. & Rose, H. (2015). Introducing Global Englishes. Routledge. © Dr. Heath Rose & Dr. Nicola Galloway Review of Lecture Eight • Attitudes are complex. • Attitudes are influenced by many factors: culture, familiarity, vitality and prestige, pedagogical context, race, proficiency and motivation. • Language attitudes are subject to change. • There is a need for both short-term and long-term studies. • Research into the attitudes of learners can provide teachers with an awareness of their learners’ beliefs, help inform curriculum development, increase self-awareness among the learners, foster autonomous learning and encourage them to think critically about the language. • Studies reveal that NE is highly valued and many in the education context prefer to follow a NES model. • However, many have limitations regarding methodology and very few investigate the possible reasons for attitudes. • Can they be used to justify the dominance of the NE model? • Do learners need more choice? • More studies are needed. • Lecture 6 looks at influence of GE instruction on attitudes and attitudes towards English teachers. Overview The ‘Native’ English speaker Global Englishes Language Teaching Barriers to innovations in ELT Relevant research studies Introductory activities LOOK AT THE JOB ADVERTISEMENTS (Figure 9.1) IN THE INTRODUCTION TO CHAPTER NINE, AND DISCUSS THE QUESTIONS BELOW: 1. What is your reaction to the job advertisement in Figure 9.1? – – 2. Think of English language teachers in a context you are familiar with. What qualifications are needed to teach in this context? Is there a divide between Native English Speaking Teachers (NESTs) and Non-Native English Speaking Teachers (NNESTs)? – 3. If so, why does this divide exist? Why are some ‘native’ varieties of English preferred over others, from an English teaching standpoint? – 4. Is this typical of job advertisements for English teachers in your home country? Why do some institutions value the nativeness of a teacher’s English over formal qualifications? Why do you think these varieties are preferred? In Chapter 2, it was shown that English speakers in NES countries tend to adhere to a ‘standard’ English ideology for written English, but attach identity and pride in the diversity of spoken Englishes. Why, then, does the English language teaching profession in NNES countries promote a standard language ideology that speakers should aim to emulate the certain types of native English speakers (namely standard American and British RP)? Part One THE NATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKER The Native English Speaker in ELT • positive attitudes towards NE in relation to ELT (Lecture 5). • “the uncrowned king of linguistics” (Mey, 1981, p. 73). Traditionally, theories about language learning have typically posited the NES as the goal: - Chomsky’s (1965) use of the expression “native speaker” as the “ideal speaker-listener” - Even when the focus shifted from the Chomsky-inspired idea of “linguistic competence” to the Hymesian notion of “communicative competence”, the NES continued to serve as the yardstick for comparison, even if it was not the original intention. Current hiring practices perpetuate stereotypes that NE is correct and that English should be learned from a NEST “Native English speaker and university degree required (Education preferred)” (Japan, ohayosensei.com). “Native Speaker of English with a neutral accent” (Poland, transitionsabroad). “On a global level, the ELT profession is perhaps the world’s only occupation in which the majority faces discrimination” (Ali, 2009, p. 37). English teachers from the Outer and Expanding Circles have never filled teaching positions in wellestablished private schools, colleges and universities in the GCC” (Ali, 2009, p. 36). “India's teachers face 'native-only' bar” (Guardian Weekly, 10th April, 2012). “Native English speakers with a neutral native dialect” (China Pearson Longman School). Figure 9.2: Job advertisements Apply in Canada Apply in U.S. Apply in U.K. Apply in Australia and New Zealand NE ownership is further perpetuated in ELT materials & examinations Has “error warning symbols”. Notes that, “You cannot say ‘discuss about something’”. Has a section called “Don’t say it” which outlines 130 common mistakes . ‘A Native English Speaker Would Say it This Way’ ( Williamson & Katsuki, 2005) ‘How your English sounds to Native Speakers’ (Thayne & Koike, 2008) Are things changing? Despite their dominance, the idealistic notion of the NES prevalent in the 1960s has been called into question in recent years: Are new goals required? Is a native accent more intelligible? Why is a native accent no longer relevant? What exactly is a ‘native’ accent and who is a ‘native’ speaker?’ There is a need to explore attitudes and stereotypes in depth (Lecture 5) • Cook (1999, p. 196) “this acceptance of the native speaker model does not mean these attitudes are right”. • Holliday (2008) - how far would students’ preferences would be provided for if, for instance, they requested male or white teachers? The prevalence of NES norms are evidently complex, yet this complexity should not act as a deterrent for a critical examination of current ELT practice. A possible decline in importance is evident in the following 3 areas: Figure 9.3: The demise of the native English speaker Teaching competence Movements away from the native speaker Unrepresentative Growing awareness of Global Englishes Terminology: Legitimacy problems Problematic definitions 1. Terminology problems a. Problematic definitions • A substantial body of literature exists on what defines a NS and many scholars have attempted to provide a workable and rational distinction between a NES and a NNES. - • • Paikeday (1985) - the NS “exists only as a figment of a linguist’s imagination”, preferring the term “proficient user”. Rampton (1990, 1995) - in addition to language expertise, the concept of a NS includes language affiliation and language inheritance, although “expertise” is the main criterion. Davies (1991, 2003) - 5 defining features of a NS although these are neither necessary nor present in all average NESs. No exact definition of a NS to which everyone subscribes and distinctions are blurry (Lecture 1). Some studies also reveal that many self-ascribed NNESs can pass for NESs in certain situations (Inbar-Lourie, 2005) and that self-ascribed NESs can be taken for NNESs by their students (Moussu, 2006). If we cannot define a native speaker, then can we define a non-native speaker of English? b. Legitimacy problems • • • • ascribe power to NESTs, while presenting the NNESTs as “lacking” something (Holliday, 2005)? perpetuate stereotypes? A “life-long apprenticeship for the L2 speaker” (Tollefson, 1995) that has negative effects on SLA? Cook (1999) refers to Labov’s (1969) classic argument that one group should not be measured against the norm of another. c. Unrepresentative • imply homogeneity? (Seidlhofer, 2003b, p. 183) Lectures have shown that most NESs don’t speak a “standardized” version and monolingualism is no longer the norm. • “the concepts ‘native speaker’ and ‘mother tongue speaker’ make little sense in multilingual societies where it may be difficult to single out someone’s mother tongue” (Kirkpatrick, 2007, p. 9). • Can we label speakers based on their mother tongue? 2. Teaching competence • Phillipson’s (1992) “native speaker fallacy” - the belief that “the ideal teacher of English is a native speaker”. - • NS abilities could be instilled in NNS through teacher training. NNSs have undergone the process of learning a (second) language and are therefore better qualified to teach the language. Language teaching is no longer synonymous with the teaching of culture, and thus could be taught by teachers who did not share the same culture as the language they taught. As highlighted in lecture 5, Dorneyi has re-visited the notion of integrative motivation, and it is clear that the target English speaking community is now difficult to define. Research suggests that NE is not necessarily most intelligible (Jenkins, 2006a) e.g. BELF training for NESs (Lecture 4). - Kim and Elder’s (2009) study of air traffic controllers and NES/NNES pilot communications in Seoul – NNESs easier to understand and experience was found to be more important than English use or experience. Thus, while the NES episteme may still dominate, it is becoming increasingly clear that NESs may not necessarily provide the ‘best’ model. 3. Growing awareness of GE • Despite the spread of English, lectures have highlighted that NE still dominates and NNE continues to be seen as inferior and illegitimate by many. • As introduced in lectures 3 and 4, the issue of expecting near-native proficiency has also been heavily discussed in relation to the WE and ELF research paradigms. • • Are new competencies required to make English more relevant for ELF usage? Does the NES model fail to equip students for the real world uses of English, at least for those who do not require English for NES contexts? “The unquestioned assumption that the language norms and practices associated with native-speaker varieties should be regarded as automatically relevant and legitimate has been considerably lessened” (Leung and Street, 2012, p. 88). Although many students and teachers still cling to NES norms (Lecture 5), a number of proposals have been put forward for change and it is a popular topic. Examples of a growing literature “Debate surrounding the global presence of English has gradually become more commonplace at ELT conferences and publications” (Jenkins et al, 2001, p. 305). WE, GE and ELF book sections and chapters on ELT • Jenkins, 2009; Kirkpatrick 2007, 2010a; 2010b; Kachru and Nelson, 2006; Melchers and Shaw, 2011; Seidlhofer, 2011. Entire books • Alsagoff et al (Ed), 2012; Dogancay-Aktuna and Hardman (Eds.), 2008; McKay, 2002; Matsuda (Ed.), 2012; Sharifian, 2009; Walker, 2010. ELF-related articles in language teaching journals • Jenkins, 2012; Alptekin, 2012; Baker, 2012; Cogo, 2012; Sowden, 2012; Suzuki, 2012; Jenkins et al, 2011; Kirkpatrick, 2010; Risager, 2012. Part Two GLOBAL ENGLISHES LANGUAGE TEACHING (GELT) Global Englishes Language Teaching The pedagogical implications of the global spread of English is clearly becoming an increasingly important area. Several proposals have also been put forward for a change in ELT, and Galloway and Rose (2015) group these into six key themes: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Increasing WE and ELF exposure in language curricula Emphasizing respect for multilingualism in ELT Raising awareness of Global Englishes in ELT Raising awareness of ELF strategies in language curricula Emphasizing respect for diverse culture and identity in ELT Changing English teacher hiring practices in the ELT industry 1. Increasing WE and ELF exposure in language curricula •Exposure to WE; legitimacy; endormative nativised models. •Exposing students “to as many varieties of English as possible would do more to ensure intelligibility than trying to impose a single standard on everyone” (D’souza, 1999, p. 273). •To be able to communicate successfully with people all over the globe, students need to comprehend different varieties “so that they are better prepared to deal with English interactions in international contexts” (McKay, 2012, p. 73). •NEEDS ANALYSIS 2. Emphasizing respect for multilingualism in ELT • Diversity; multilingualism; usefulness of L1. • “It is important that we, as language educators, recognize this fact and work to preserve and promote all languages that an individual has access to” (McKay, 2012, p. 36). • Kirkpatrick (2012) – ‘norms’ of successful Asian multilinguals and adapt the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR). • Friedrich (2012, p. 50) - “If the only constant in lingua franca situations is diversity, then we should anchor our practices in that assumption and educate students to encounter such diversity with respect, curiosity and wisdom”. 3. Raising awareness of Global Englishes in ELT • Direct teaching of issues surrounding GE. • (Galloway, 2011, 2013) - raise awareness of use and increase confidence. • Whole course or elements (Galloway and Rose, 2013, 2014). 4. Raising awareness of ELF strategies in language curricula • Community of Practice. • Strategies to “shuttle between communities” (Canagarajah, 2005, p. xxv). • Focus on multi-lingual and multi-cultural communicative practices, and on negotiation and communicative strategies. • Interaction strategies (McKay, 2002); awareness of ELF usage (House, 2012). 5. Emphasizing respect for diverse culture and identity in ELT • Culture as a fluid concept . • Move from monocultural/ monolingual norms to “look at the communicative practices of multilingual and multicultural speakers to understand ELF communication” (Baker, 2012, p. 46). • Inter-cultural competence. • Pragmatics orientated approach (House, 2012, p. 200). 6. Changing English teacher hiring practices in the ELT industry •More NNESTs or Multilingual English Teachers (METs) (Kirkpatrick, 2009, 2012). •Re-examine the concept of qualified teachers (McKay, 2012). •Large talent pool –80% of the English teachers worldwide are NNESTs (Braine, 2010, p. x). Differences between ELT and GELT Table 9.1: Differences between ELT and GELT are summarised in the table below (Galloway and Rose, 2014) Target interlocutor Owners Target culture Teachers Norms Role-model Materials First language and own culture Ideology Traditional ELT Native English speakers GELT Native English speakers & non-native English speakers Native English speakers Native English speakers & non-native English speakers Fixed native English culture Fluid cultures Non-native English speaking Non-native English speaking teachers (same L1) and teachers (same L1 and native English speaking different L1), native English teachers speaking teachers Native English and concept Diversity, flexibility & of Standard English multiple forms of competence Native English speakers Successful ELF users Native English and native Native English, non-native English speakers English, ELF and ELF communities & contexts Seen as a hindrance and Seen as a resource source of interference Underpinned by an Underpinned by an inclusive exclusive and ethnocentric Global Englishes perspective view of English ELT > GELT • epistemic break (Kumaradavelu, 2012), defined as a “thorough re-conceptualization and a thorough re-organization of knowledge systems” (ibid, 2012, p. 14). the native-speaker episteme has not loosened its grip over theoretical principles, classroom practices, the publication industry, or the job market. What is surely and sorely needed is a meaningful break from this epistemic dependency if we are serious about sanitizing our discipline from its corrosive effect and sensitizing the field to the demands of globalism and its impact on identity formation. How and where do we start? (ibid, p. 15). • “This epistemic break then, requires a shift in materials design, views on ownership, cultures, norms and role models, as well as a change in those who teach it. However, this approach does not necessarily mean that teaching methods have to be changed, but that the assumptions about the English language are changed, which permeate into ELT materials, language assessment, cultural ideology, language ideology, and recruitment practices. In addition, such proposals are not suggesting “that we abolish all teaching discrete linguistic items nor that we ignore the pull that nativeness still has over learners and users” (Friedrich, 2012, p. 50). Instead, it simply involves a re-examination of current ELT practices in light of the changes in the use of English” (Galloway and Rose, 2015). Part Three BARRIERS TO CHANGE What are teachers to do? http://blogs.thenews.com.pk/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/confused_l.jpg Theory/practice divide “the volume of such academic attention does not seem to have had a tangible impact on actual classroom reality” (Saraceni, 2009, p. 177). 5 possible barriers to innovation in ELT that have caused this theory/practice divide (Galloway and Rose, 2015): 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. A lack of materials Language assessment Teacher education Attachment to ‘standard’ English Teacher recruitment practices 1. A lack of materials • few teachers “have a rich enough knowledge of and personal experience with all of the varieties and functions of Englishes that exist today, and thus they need to rely on teaching materials in order to introduce students to the linguistic and cultural diversity of English” (Matsuda, 2012b, p. 168). • Dominance of NE in materials. • Some GE-related books (slide ), but limited coverage of ELF, limited audio, aimed at a relatively advanced audience and few include practical activities. 2. Language assessment •Focus on NES norms. • Pearson (www.pearsonpte.com) note that “the ability to communicate effectively in English is crucial to international success”, yet in their scoring guide, the Pearsons Test of English General scores are related to the CEFR. •Proposals: communicative strategies (Canagarajah, 2007), accommodation skills (Jenkins, 2007), define achievement (McNamara, 2012) . •BUT, far more difficult (and expensive). •“The consequences are likely to be as revolutionary as the advent of communicative language teaching some forty years ago” (McNamara, 2012, p. 202). 3. Teacher Education • MSc TESOL/App Ling • Jenkins (2012, p. 492) doesn’t believe “it is our place to tell teachers what to do” (p. 492). • Dewey (2012) - change must come from working with teachers themselves, but much of what is taught in teacher training programs is at odds with ELF research. • Dewey (2012) and Widdowson (2012) - need for teachers to reconceptualise the notion of language, the very subject they teach. 4. Attachment to ‘standard’ English • Teachers have often spent time on NES goal. • Quirk (1990) teaching NNE is a “cheat” (p. 6). 5. Teacher recruitment practices • socially ingrained ideology of NES recruitment. • NESs attract business. Part Four RELEVANT RESEARCH STUDIES: ATTITUDES TOWARDS ENGLISH TEACHERS Table 9.2: Research studies related to GELT Studies that involve attitudes toward nonnative English speaking teachers with a first language Studies that involve attitudes when non-native English speaking teachers share the same first language Topic Study Country Barrat and Kontra (2000) Hungary and China Benke and Medgyes (2005) Lasagabaste r and Sierra (2005) Cook (2005) Hungary The Basque country 76 university students Questionnaires (open and closed) Six countries Young L2 students (aged 14 on average) and adults (sample size unspecified) Questionnaire 20 ESL students Audio recordings of six ESL teachers (five non-native English speakers from different language backgrounds and one native English speaker) 32 students from diverse language backgrounds Opinion essays 2 groups of university students Questionnaires and interviews Kirsty Liang USA (2002) (cited in Braine, 2005, 2010) Mahboob (2004) USA The ideal English teacher Pacek (2005) UK The influence on language attitudes of Global Englishes instruction Research design Hungary (116 students and 58 teachers) China (100 students and 54 teachers) Free-writing 422 students Questionnaires Cheung (2002, cited in Braine, 2005, 2010) Hong Kong Galloway and Rose (2013) Japan Shim (2002) Korea Derwing and Canada Munro (2002) Kubota America (2001) Galloway (2011) Japan Galloway (2013) Japan Questionnaires (420), interviews (10) with students and classroom observations. 22 teachers were also used, 60% of whom were native English-speaking teachers Questionnaires (71 students in the first questionnaire 236 in the second). Focus groups (one with 4 student assistants (one native English speaker and three non-native English speakers) and one with 4 teachers (three native English speakers and one non-native English speaker). 24 TESOL masters students and 57 students Tape recordings of five different female native English speaking teachers and non-native English speaking teachers. Questionnaires conducted with full-time first year Canadian social work students Questionnaires (17 high school native English speaking students). Questionnaires (116 students), interviews (20 students) and focus groups (24 students). Questionnaires (52 students) and interviews (4 students) NNESTs’ Self Perceptions Medgyes’s (1992, 1994) was one of the first to explore this issue, and in 1998 the Non-Native English Speakers in TESOL (NNEST) Caucus was established, which is now an Interest Section of the TESOL organisation. Studies include: • Medgyes (1992) in various countries • Reves and Medgyes (1994) worldwide • Tang (1997) in Hong Kong • Samimy and Brutt-Griffler (1999) in a US university • Seidlhofer (1996) in Austria • Liu (1999) in the US • Arva and Medgyes (2000) in Hungary • Inbar (2001) in Israel • Llurda (2005) in the US and Canada Conclusion of studies • varied results • students do not focus on the nativeness of their teachers as much as literature and societal beliefs may suggest. • students rank personal and professional qualities of a teacher over the nativeness of their English language proficiency – helpful for GELT proposals. The influence on language attitudes of Global Englishes instruction Study Country N Size Method Results Shim (2002) Korea 27 TESOL masters students (own students) tape recordings of 5 different female NESTs and NNESTs. • • • • • Derwing et al (2002) Canada 64 first year Canadian uni students Survey (pre and post) on response to foreignaccented Vietnamese English • • • 3rd study in 1998, after World Englishes exposure through TV (a programme called ‘Crossroads Café’), 23 wanted an internationally accepted model (although this is not explained) as a teaching model 27 felt there is a need to understand NNESs 27 would be willing to participate in an ELT programme that introduced NNESs. Change in attitudes, but influence as teacher/researcher not discussed, little info on course, and little info on students – e.g. motivation and experience. 3 groups - both types of instruction (cross-cultural awareness and explicit linguistic instruction); only cross-cultural training, and no instruction. 8 weeks Instruction led to improvement in confidence that they could interact with NNESs. Study Country N Size Method Results Kubota (2001) America 17 American high school NESs Survey about 6 speech samples (Australia, China, India, Ecuador, Nigeria & France) Observ; Int • • 52 uni students Survey (pre&post) Int Quasiexperimental • • Galloway (2013) Japan • • Galloway & Rose (2013) Japan 120 uni students; 5 NNES assistants; 4 lecturers Survey Focus Groups • • • WE course only some showed positive reactions, and some biased views towards NNES were reinforced. indicates a need for starting early. GE course (13 weeks) Influential - motivation for learning English, attitudes towards NNE and NNESTs, question notions of ‘standard’ English, helpful for future ELF communication and raised confidence. empirical basis for GELT 4 week module on GE, NNES guest speakers and classroom assistants The curriculum, and the existence of expert ELF users as role models in the program played a large role in shaping the opinions of the students in the program. students displayed a more ELF-oriented view of English use than language and business-content teachers. Summary of Lecture Nine • Traditionally ELT has posited NE as the main goal of English learning. Nevertheless, the importance attached to NESs is declining. • Studies show that students see NESTs and NNESTs as having different skills, the former being preferred for their perceived ‘fluency’ in the language. • Recent years have seen many proposals for the way ELT is approached. • GELT is clearly very different from traditional ELT and the NES and the NNES are placed on equal footing and the aim is to emancipate the NNES from the norms of a minority group of English users. • However, a number of barriers exist, including an attachment to ‘standard’ English, the prevalence of standardised language tests and the continued recruitment of NESTs. Key terms Language Ideology Language standardization yardstick linguistic competence communicative competence prejudice proficient user Multicompetent language users interlanguage fossilisation Expert ELF users EIL-related matters shuttling between communities NEST NNESTs linguistic competence communicative competence native speaker fallacy Norms endormative exonormative Multilingual English User (MET) Episteme Epistemic break Paradigm Paradigm shift strategic competence inter-cultural competence Further reading On Native Speakerism in ELT • Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic Imperialism, Oxford University Press. On Non-native English Speaking Teachers • Braine, G. (2010). Nonnative Speaker English Teachers. Research, Pedagogy, and professional Growth. New York: Routledge. On Global Englishes Language Teaching, and barriers to ELT innovation • • • McKay, S.L. (2002). Teaching English as an International Language: Rethinking Goals and Approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2012). Individual identity, cultural globalization, and teaching English as an international language: the case for an epistemic break. In L. Alsagoff, S. L. McKay, G. Hu, & W. Renandya. (Eds.), Principles and practices for teaching English as an international language (pp. 9-27). New York: Routledge. Seidlhofer, B. (2011). Understanding English as a lingua franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Chapter x References Ali, S. (2009). Teaching English as an international language (EIL) in the gulf corporation council (GCC) countries: the brown man’s burden. In F. Sharifian (Ed.), English as an international language: perspectives and pedagogical issues (pp. 34–57). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Árva, V., & Medgyes, P. (2000). Native and non-native teachers in the classroom. System, 28(3), 355–372. Baker, W. (2012). From cultural awareness to intercultural awareness: culture in ELT. ELT Journal , 66 (1 ), 62–70. Barratt, L., & Kontra, E. H. (2000). Native-English-Speaking Teachers in Cultures Other Than Their Own. TESOL Journal, 9(3), 19–23. Benke, E., & Medgyes, P. (2005). Differences in Teaching Behaviour between Native and Non-Native Speaker Teachers: As seen by the Learners. In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-Native Language Teachers SE - 11 (Vol. 5, pp. 195–215). Springer US. Braine, G. (2005). A history of resarch on non-native speaker English teachers. In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-Native Language Teachers. Perceptions, Challenges and Contributions to the Profession (pp. 13–23). New York: Springer. Braine, G. (2010). Nonnative speaker English teachers: Research, pedagogy and professional growth. New York, NY: Routledge. Canagarajah, A. S. (2005). Introduction. In A. S. Canagarajah (Ed.), Reclaiming the local in language policy and practice. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. Canagarajah, A. S. (2007). Lingua Franca English, Multilingual Communities, and Language Acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 91, 923–939. Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. Cogo, A. (2012). English as a Lingua Franca: concepts, use, and implications. ELT Journal , 66 (1 ), 97–105Cook, V. (1999). Going Beyond the Native Speaker in Language Teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 33(2), 185–209. Davies, A. (1991). The native speaker in applied linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Davies, A. (2003). The native speaker myth and reality. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Dewey, M. (2012). Towards a post-normative approach: learning the pedagogy of ELF. Dogancay-Aktuna, S., & Hardman, J. (2008). Global English teaching and teacher education: Praxis & possibility. Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. Firth, A., & Wagner, J. (1997). On Discourse, Communication, and (Some) Fundamental Concepts in SLA Research. The Modern Language Journal, 81(3), 285–300. Galloway, N. (2013). Global Englishes and English Language Teaching (ELT) – Bridging the gap between theory and practice in a Japanese context. System, 41 (3), 786-803. Galloway, N. & Rose, H. (2013). “They envision going to New York, not Jakarta”: The differing attitudes toward ELF of students, teaching assistants, and instructors in an English-medium business program in Japan. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 2(2). Galloway, N. and Rose, H. (2015).Introducing Global Englishess. Routledge. Holliday, A.R. (2008). Standards of English and politics of inclusion. Language Teaching,41(1), 115-126. House, J. (2012). Teaching oral skills in English as a lingua franca. In L. Alsagoff, S. L. McKay, G. Hu, & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Principles and practices for teaching English as an international language. New York: Routledge. Hymes, D. H. (1972). On Communicative Competence. In Pride, J. B., & Holmes, J.(Eds.), Sociolinguistics, 269-293. Baltimore, USA: Penguin Education, Penguin Books Ltd. References Inbar-Lourie, O. (2005). Mind the gap: Self and perceived native speaker identities of EFL teachers. In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-native language teachers: Perceptions, challenges and contributions to the profession (pp. 265-281). New York, NY: Springer. Friedrich, P. (2012). EFL, intercultural communication, and the strategic aspect of communicative competence. Teaching English as an International Language. Multilingual Matters. Jenkins, J. (2006a). Global intelligibility and local diversity: possibility or paradox? In R. Rubdy & M. Saraceni (Eds.), English in the World: Global Rules, Global Roles (pp. 32-39). London: Continuum. Jenkins, J. (2006). Points of view and blind spots: ELF and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16(2), 137–162. Jenkins, J. (2007). English as a Lingua Franca: Attitude and identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jenkins, J. (2009). World Englishes: a resource book for students (2nd ed.). Routledge. Jenkins, J. (2012). English as a Lingua Franca from the classroom to the classroom. ELT Journal , 66 (4 ), 486–494. Jenkins, J., Cogo, A., & Dewey, M. (2011). Review of developments in research into English as a lingua franca. Language Teaching, 44(03), 281–315. Kachru, Y., & Nelson, C. L. (2006). World Englishes in Asian Contexts. Hong Kong University Press. Kim, H., & Elder, C. (2009). Understanding aviation English as a lingua franca. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 32(3), 23.1–23.17 Kirkpatrick, A. (2007). World Englishes: implications for international communication and English language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kirkpatrick, A. (2011) English as an Asian Lingua Franca and the Multilingual Model of ELT. Language Teaching 44 (2): 212-224. Kubota, R. (2001). Teaching world Englishes to native speakers of English in the USA. World Englishes, 20(1), 47–64. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2012). Individual identity, cultural globalization and teaching English as an international language: The case for an epistemic break. In L. Alsagoff, S. L. McKay, G. Hu, & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Teaching English as an International Language: Principles and Practices (pp. 9–27). New York: Routledge. Labov, W. (1969). The logic of non-standard English. In J. Alatis (ed.), Georgetown Monograph on Languages and Linguistics 22. Pp. 1-44. Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. (2005). What do Students Think about the Pros and Cons of Having a Native Speaker Teacher? In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-Native Language Teachers SE - 12 (Vol. 5, pp. 217–241). New York: Springer. Leung, C. and Street, B.V. (2012). Linking EIL and Literacy: theory and practice . Principles and practices for teaching English as an International Language. Alsagoff, L., McKay, S. L., Hu, G. & Renandya, W. A. (eds.). New York: Routledge, p. 85-103 Llurda, E. (2005). Looking at the perceptions, challenges, and contributions… or the importance of being a non-native teacher. In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-Native Language Teachers. Perceptions, Challenges and Contributions to the Profession (pp. 1–10). New York: Springer. Lubna Alsagoff, Mckay, S. L., Hu, G., & Renandya, W. A. (2012). Principles and practices for teaching English as an international language. London: Routledge. Mahboob, A. (2004). Native or Nonnative: What Do Students Enrolled in an Intensive English Program Think? In L. D. Kamhi-Stein (Ed.), Learning and teaching from experience: perspectives on nonnative English-speaking professionals (pp. 121–148). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Matsuda, A. (Ed.). (2012). Principles and practices of teaching English as an international language. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Matsuda, A. (2012). Teaching Materials in EIL. In L. Alsagoff, S. L. Mckay, G. Hu, & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Principles and Practices for Teaching English as an International Language. Routledge. McKay, S. L. (2002). Teaching English as an international language: Rethinking goals and approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press. McKay, S.L. (2012). Principles of Teaching English as an International Language. In Alsagoff, L., McKay, S.L., & Hu, G (Eds.), Principles and Practices for Teaching English as an International Language, 28-46. New York: Routledge. McNamara, T. (2012). English as a lingua franca: the challenge for language testing. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 1(1), 199–202. Medgyes, Péter. (1992). Native or non-native: who’s worth more? ELT Journal , 46 (4 ), 340–349. Medgyes, Peter. (1994). The non-native teacher. London: Macmillan. References Melchers, G., & Shaw, P. (2011). World Englishes. Hodder Education. Mey, J. (1981). ‘Right or wrong, my native speaker:’ Estant les r´egestes du noble souverain de l’empirie linguistic avec un renvoy au mesme roy. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), A festschrift for native speaker (pp. 69–84). The Hague, Netherlands: Mouton. Moussu, L. (2006) Native and Nonnative English speaking English as a Second Language Teachers: Student Attitudes, Teacher Self Perceptions, and Intensive English Program Administrator Beliefs and Practices. Dissertation, Purdue University. Pacek, D. (2005). “Personality Not Nationality”: Foreign Students’ Perceptions of a Non-Native Speaker Lecturer of English at a British University. In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-Native Language Teachers. Perceptions, Challenges and Contributions to the Profession (Vol. 5, pp. 243–262). Springer. doi:10.1007/0-387-245650_13 Paikeday, T. M. (1985). The native speaker is dead!: An informal discussion of a linguistic myth with Noam Chomsky and other linguists, philosophers, psychologists, and lexicographers. Toronto and New York: Paikeday Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.paikeday.net/speaker.pdf Phillipson, R. (1992). ELT: the native speaker’s burden? ELT Journal, 46(1), 12–18. doi:10.1093/elt/46.1.12 Rampton, M. B. H. (1990). Displacing the “native speaker”: expertise, affiliation, and inheritance. ELT Journal, 44(2), 97–101. doi:10.1093/elt/44.2.97 Samimy, K. K., & Brutt-Griffler, J. (1999). Perceptions of NNS students in a graduate TESOL program. In G. Braine (Ed.), Non-native educators in English language teaching (pp. 129–146). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. Saraceni, M. (2009). Relocating English: towards a new paradigm for English in the world. Language and Intercultural Communication, 9(3), 175–186. doi:10.1080/14708470902748830 Seidlhofer, B. (1996). “It is an undulating feeling...”: The importance of being a non-native teacher of English. Vienna English Working Papers, 5(1 & 2), 63– 80. Retrieved from http://anglistik.univie.ac.at/fileadmin/user_upload/dep_anglist/weitere_Uploads/Views/views96.pdf Seidlhofer, B. (2003b). Controversies in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Seidlhofer, B. (2011). Understanding English as a lingua franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sharifian, F. (ed.) (2009). English as an International Language: Perspectives and pedagogical issues. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. Shim, R. J. (2002). Changing attitudes toward TEWOL in Korea. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 12(1), 143–158. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/japc.12.1.09shi Sowden, C. (2012). ELF on a mushroom: the overnight growth in English as a Lingua Franca. ELT Journal , 66 (1 ), 89–96. doi:10.1093/elt/ccr024 Suzuki, A. (2011). Introducing diversity of English into ELT: student teachers’ responses. ELT Journal , 65 (2 ), 145–153. doi:10.1093/elt/ccq024 Thayne, D. A., & Koike, N. (2008). Sono Eigo, eitibu Niwa Kou Kikoemasu [How Your English Sounds to Native Speakers]. Tollefson, J.W. (1995). Power and inequality in language education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Walker, R. (2010). Teaching the pronunciation of English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Widdowson, H. G. (2012). ELF and the inconvenience of established concepts. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 1(1), 5–26. doi:10.1515/jelf-2012-0002 Williamson, N., & Katsuki, R. (2005). Sono eigo neitibu dattara ko hanasu [A native speaker would say it this way]. Tokyo: PHP Kenkyujo.