O brave new world That has such students in’t! CELALEI 2014 Carlos Lizárraga

O, wonder! How many goodly creatures are there here! How beauteous mankind is! O brave new world, That has such people in't!

O brave new world, That has such students in't!

Brave new ELT world

Brave new ELT world Brave new TESOL world Brave new EFL world Brave new ESL world Brave new EIL world ESP EAP ELF ???

Brave new ELT world Brave new TESOL world Brave new EFL world Brave new ESL world Brave new EIL world ESP EAP ELF TENOR!

World of English Language Learning  Diversity of people and communities  Purposes  Contexts  Globalization  Communication technologies  # of English speakers

Ownership of English  Kachru’s (1992) “Three Circle model”  INNER CIRCLE: Britain, the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand  OUTER CIRCLE: India, Philippines, Singapore  EXPANDING CIRCLE: English used in restricted contexts & for limited purposes

What about ownership for EIL and ELF speakers?

Macroacquisition (Brutt-Griffler, 2002) “English has gained a life beyond its land or origins, it has acquired an identity and currency in new geographical and social domains, and it gets localized for diverse settings and purposes.” (Canagarajah, 2005) Global Discourse communities  Registers  Occupations  Social interest groups  Common histories, affiliations, and goals

Consequences  English is denationalized / deterritorialized  It’s a local language too, evolving to suit local needs and identities  David Crystal

A ‘glocal’ perspective  EIL learners and “acts of identity” by use of semiotic means:  Code-switching  Styling  Making up words or expressions

Our identity construction  Dealing with what ENGLISH represents  TO PONDER:  How do we see ourselves in terms of our role in our students’ holistic education?  Why do I want to teach English?

Teaching English: a reflective approach grounded in the local cultures and identities of its speakers Identity and learning English: “While the cognitive paradigm saw language as an a priori system of symbols and rules, and language use as arising from an abstract idealized speaker competence, the sociocultural perspective conceptualized language as a “complex social practice in which the value and meaning ascribed to an utterance are determined in part by the value and meaning ascribed to the person who speaks.” (Alsagoff, p. 106 quoting Norton & Toohey, 2002, p. 587)

NAPs: Intercultural citizenship and identity construction Identity and intercultural citizenship (Norton, 1997): “How people understand their relationship to the world, how that relationship is constructed across time and space, and how people understand their possibilities for the future.”

Identity within four realities a)Global reality b)National reality c)Social reality d)Individual reality

Goals of EIL learners  Access to desired global discourse communities (work or education)  Interaction with people with similar social interests  Alsagoff: The comparative fallacy

The EIL learner: NOT an imperfect native speaker BUT a multilingual agent in control of complex linguistic repertoires that serve their identity needs

Self subordination and the colonized ‘other’ (Jenkins) Our duality: Do we want to project our own local identity in our English, & be part of a community of ELF speakers? Yes, probably, BUT we also want to sound “native”

Trend:  Moving away from native-speaker competence  Reconceptualizing communicative competence  From Hymes’ grammar + social conventions (CEFR)  To Kramsch’s SYMBOLIC COMPETENCE: a systematic reflexive component that encompasses subjective and aesthetic as well as historical and ideological dimensions.  Agency (more relevant than accuracy or fluency): the effort to make meaning with an interlocutor to reach common understanding.  OUR BRAVE NEW WORLD!

Dualities Born and raised in a different reality Our students

 They combine linguistic elements with other resources, e.g. images, spatial arrangement, sounds, color, typeface, animation, and video  Not just “incorporating” technology – it’s already in the way they learn

Communication and Language learning  Language teaching and learning is not concerned with just language per se, but with the interaction with other modes of expression: MULTIMODALITY  Communication: complicated and technologically mediated (Nelson & Kern, 2012)

Contextualization  “Making connections among words, texts, situations, culture, mentalities, and knowledge…  … a personal, dynamic amalgamation of meaningful elements (both abstract and material) produced or modified through actions and interactions.”

 Connection between MEANING, RELEVANCE, and SUBJECTIVITY  The values, needs, aspirations, and lived experiences of different learners are formative factors in explaining why, how, and how well they learn language.  Needed: an approach that is situated within larger meaning-design activities, e.g. spoken- linguistic, written-linguistic, visual, audio, gestural, spatial, and multimodal (New London Group, 1996)

Postmethod Pedagogy (Kumaravadivelu, 2003)  Particularity  Practicality  Possibility

Particularity  “…requires that any language pedagogy, to be relevant, must be sensitive to a particular group of teachers teaching a particular group of learners pursuing a particular set of goals within a particular institutional context embedded in a particular sociocultural milieu.”  Observation, reflection, and action  Contextualization

Practicality  “…entails a teacher-generated theory of practice” and “recognizes that no theory of practice can be fully useful and usable unless it is generated through practice”  Pedagogical thoughtfulness: action in thought and thought in action.

 “…teachers’ “sense-making” accounts for “how teachers’ intuitions and judgments become refined over time through synthesizing classroom experience with their own beliefs and values, their perceptions about institutional and societal constraints and learner expectations and other factors that influence how teachers understand their work”

Possibility  Derived from “critical pedagogists of Freirean persuasion”  Problem-posing, liberation-oriented pedagogy of Paulo Freire  Recognizes “learners’ and teachers’ subject positions, i.e. their class, race, gender and ethnicity” and calls for “sensitivity toward these factors’ impact on education.”  Attention should be paid to their sociocultural reality that influences identity formation in the classroom  Linguistic needs of learners should be related to their social needs.

Summing up

Investment (Norton, 1997)  “…the intricate ways in which learners’ desires are bound up with the energies and effort they put into learning the target language…  … the socially and historically constructed relationship of learners to the target language and their sometimes ambivalent desire to learn and practice it.”  Connectedness

O brave new world, That has such teachers in't!