Week 15

This week my group and I presented our article discussion.

:)

Week 14

This week's reading began with chapter 5 in McKay in which linguitic diversity of English use. Throughout the chapter I began to realize that learners of English are using both their TL and their NL when communicating. I was wondering to myself if this would an example of interlanguage, since they're not just necessarily creating a system but also speaking with it. When we really stop and think about it, our world is becoming more bilingual everyday. English learning is present in countries all over the world, and this in hand creates different variations and dialects of English itself. Throughout the outer circle countries and expanding circle countries, the standardized varieties of English are growing in number. So, we have all of these immigrants coming to the United States, with their own standardized variety of English, but they're still put down and told to learn OUR standard English? What is even our standard, or "correct" English? You can't expect to have an immigrant come, having learned some English outside of the country, and being a native to ANOTHER country come without speaking differently, or with a dialect, or an accent.
It's been stated that a standard language is what is to be considered the "norm". Again, what does this even mean? What is considered the norm of English? Is it English in the south? In the midwest? The east? Is it English from the U.K? How can we as educators be expected to encourage our students to speak in their dialects, etc, but also expect us to tell them to use the "standard"? I believe that this concept is a hard one to really figure out because English learning has become so prominent in countries and the circles are expanding, changes are being made constantly, and this then leads to changes being made to this so-called standard.

I was surprised (but at the same time... not so much) when I read in Lippie-Green about the Hawaiin man who was turned down for his job because of his accent. His Hawaiin accent classified his speech as not standard English, even though he speaks English fine. Where and when will the line be drawn? It can't expected to have people come to this country without accents. You can't expect standard English to have a non-accent status. How does that even make sense?

Week 13

When I started reading chapter 4 in McKay and Bokhorst-Heng, the first thing that caught my attention was the word "politicking". The term language politicking refers to the worldliness of language in the context of language planning and policy activity. With this language planning, it has intensified with globalization as a strong organizing force in human interaction and has added a new layer to previously largely nationalist-driven agenda with language planning. I found it interesting that Singapore of all countries that teach English is one that spends a lot of time in English education. "Small in size, big on language", Singapore has a densely multilingual population, and bilingualism is very big, where about 50% of the class time is dedicated to language learning. I believe that American schools should look at Singapore as a good example to follow. We should encourage our students to learn and speak other language aside from their mother tongue, or the nation's main language of English. If we don't encourage this kind of language education, our world will indeed become a monolinguistic place. The death of language needs to be prevented because with the loss and death of languages comes the loss of cultures and identities, each of which belong to people all around the world. This is what worries me the most.

Week 12

For week 12, our reading came from McKay and Bokhorst-Heng. We were to read both chapters two and three. What stood out the most to me when going through and reading, were the different social contexts in which English is learned as an international language. English learning can be viewed as concentric circles, in which there is the Inner Circle; English is the primary language of the country, the Outer Circle; in which English is a second language in a multilingual country, and the Expanding Circle; in which English is studied as a foreign language. I find the concept of these circles very intriguing as well as a great way to really capture and describe the way English is viewed as when spread about the world and is constantly changing. This constant changing makes the differences between these circles more permeable, which I think is a good thing because when it comes to EIL learning, change is always a good thing.

Another point that was made in this chapter was the idea of examining identity of second language learners and how it aids in second language acquisition. I believe that in order for a student to successfully acquire a second language, we as future teachers must understand once again the importance of the identity of the language learner. Where they come from, who they are and what they're ideologies are will all play an important part in their acquisition of a second language. If we sit there and criticize our students for not understand a particular concept in the English language, how are we allowed to expect them to be encouraged to continue or put forth their best effort. If we put down English language learners and put down their own personal cultures how can we expect them to want to learn the language and more about the culture they've moved into? As stated in the book, "classrooms are becoming increasingly heterogenous in language and culture, it is important to know that dynamics, the potential, and the implication of popular culture in such classrooms, not only for the students' language and subject matter learning, but for their identities as individuals in societies which are new to many of them" (page38).

From Chapter 3, the concept of diglossia caught my attention the most. Diglossic multilingualism  is when a many L2 speakers of English of bilingual or multilingual contexts won't use English as the dominant language in all situations of communication. An example of these would be my mom. My mom's NL or L1 is Spanish and she doesn't always speak English even though she can speak it a proficiency level.  She speaks a lot of Spanish and even when she knows that someone she comes in contact with does indeed speak Spanish as well, she will communicate with them in Spanish over English. Diglossia is when speakers have two or more languages in their repertoire and choice of which language to use is dependent on their linguistic norms, values, and practices. This applies to the use of H-language over L-language and vice versa because this is dependent on the formality of the situation. I think this is a very important concept to remember as a future educator.

Week 11

This week's reading took an in depth look at globalization and how it effects the world of languages. I found this reading particularly interesting because I was never really aware of what globalization does in regards to internationalization, liberalization, modernization and deterritorialization. As far as these terms go, they have been around for years and years and the most recent and popular one is deterritorialization. What does this have to do with English? There is a strong relation between globalization and the English language in that there is a wide global spread of the language and its influences on teaching it. With this aspect of globalization, we're presented with this idea of homogenization. People see this as a negative aspect of globalization which leads to the loss of languages. I agree with this to the point that languages are dying more and more with the wide spread of English in the world of culture, but it's also the decision of the members of a particular language or culture to fight this from happening. If people cared so much about losing their language or culture, you'd think they'd fight harder to preserve and save them.

Braj Kachru brings up the perspective of heterogeny. With this the features of World Englishes is described as "a sign of the pluricentricism that has been brought about by globalization". This paradigm offers the idea that with the way that English has been localized, varieties of English around the world exist. I agree with Pennycook when he says that the globalization of the use of the English language is a mix between the homogeny and heterogeny perspectives. There isn't so much a loss of various cultures and traditions, but a mixture of them, a change and crossing borders.

The reading then took an even deeper look into the different factors that have contributed to the wide spread and popularity of the English language. The necessity to know the English language in terms of economic and academic status, along with media incentives. While these seem to good aspects of the spread of English throughout the world, it also poses a threat of leading to monolingualism. I believe that monolingualism is something that we as future educators of English need to help fight. As future TESOL educators, it is important that we don't let the popular and widespread use/need of English engulf the other languages and cultures out there. It is important that we emphasize the importance to our students of keeping their cultural and linguistic identities close to them.

What can we as future educators do to help supplement the positive aspects of globalization of English while not negatively affecting the other languages and cultures of the world?

Week 8

This weeks reading really caught my attention in regards to what images are used in Bilingual textbooks. When looking back on the reading, the article by Taylor specifically got me interested. I never really thought about how certain stereotypes, cultures, or people were portrayed in the texts in which ELL and EFL students are reading. Cosette Taylor-Mendes provided us with the article, "Construction of Racial Stereotypes in English as a Foreign Language" in which the researcher was particularly interested in how the EFL from Sao Paolo, Brazil look at race and culture.

I was really caught off guard when I read about how there were certain books that portrayed white Americans as rich and well off, while African Americans or other minority types were portrayed as poor or uneducated. Because I, personally, have never learned English as a foreign language in a foreign country, I have no idea nor any experience with the textbooks used in this particular area of study. I have never really thought about what kinds of misconceptions foreigners may already have of Americans and America, mostly due to what they are portrayed as in the textbooks they are using on a daily basis to study from. This really interests me in maybe including a question regarding EFL textbooks and asking my dad when doing the interview for our cultural analysis. I am interested to see what kind of portrayals were made in his textbooks when studying English, or in any textbook for that matter. I am interested to know what his outlook of American was before coming to the States, and how it can relate to other English Language learners we may come across in our lives or our classrooms. From what I can remember my father telling me regarding other races, it's always been a negative outlook and it really upsets me knowing this. This is something I want to change.

Week 7

After doing this week's reading, my eyes were opened to how important it is to consider the sociolinguistic aspect of interaction between speakers. Like the example provided in the McKay reading, the way someone says something and the way it is interpreted is very important. In the reading, when the teacher asked the student, James, a question in which he answered with "i don't know" she took it as him not really caring about what she was asking. In reality, within the African-American community, James's response was telling the teacher to help motivate and help him answer the question. In hand, the reason why the teacher took it differently is because of the fact that she isn't from this community. When it comes down to teachers dealing with students from very different and a diverse spectrum of communities, it is important that we are knowledgeable on the different ways things are viewed and stated within these different communities and cultures.

Before reading, I didn't know what "lingua franca" meant, or had even heard of it. After reading Baker's article, I had a clearer idea. It's a word used to describe a "working" or "bridge" language. Baker examines the different forms of English as a lingua franca. We often look at English as being an essential language to know when it comes to several realms of education, business, and international interactions. But the basis of just knowing the English language doesn't mean that one truly understand where another one comes from culturally or linguistically. While a teacher can communicate with their student, and they get the idea that they mutually understand each other on a language basis, are they truly understanding one another on a deeper level? As Baker states in his article, "learners of English are not learning to join a single language community, but are 'shuttling between communities' between the local and global, in which variety of norms and repertoire of codes are to be expected" (572), it goes to show how L2 English language learners may feel when learning and adjusting to this new culture. It's important for us to be aware of how these learners may be viewing these codes on their local and global levels, and it's important for us to let them keep their cultures, codes and ideas.

As far as Marra's study, I find studies done in the workplace very interesting because second language learners as adults and in the workplace may have a particularly difficult time adjusting. I know my dad went through a similar difficult experience because the English he learned was different than that of the "standard" English here in the US.

Thoughts: Do you think there is a "standard" English that second language learners should be learning in order to interact "correctly" with their peers whether in an academic or work setting?

Week 6

                “Cultural Assimilation and it’s Delusions” got me to think from the beginning when he was explaining what the Ford company did with the immigrant workers they hired “helping them assimilate American cultural beliefs and practices, including ‘table manners’ and ‘the care of their teeth’ (65). I was a little bit offended that the Ford Company thought that their new employees did not know how to do those simple things just because they were immigrants. I think that they indeed do know how to care for their hygiene and they have their own table manners, but the company thought the employee’s way was incorrect simply because it was not the “American Way”.  The rest of the reading talked about the concept of assimilation and how different people view it when it comes to assimilating to the American culture. When Kuma talked about the way Peter Salins views assimilation to the American society I was shocked by the three things he wanted people to do to become truly assimilated, “As per this contract, immigrants "would be welcome as full members of the American family" if and only if they (a) accept English as the primary language, (b) take pride in their American identity, and (c) live by the Protestant ethic” (67).  I do not think anyone needs to give up their first language to live in America, I do believe that they should make an effort to learn English because it will make life easier in the long run. I also think people need to take pride in America, but they do not need to lose or lower the pride they have for their homeland in order to live in this country. The Protestant ethic does not coincide with everyone’s beliefs and therefore I do not believe that in order to be a true American that one needs to have the same beliefs as everyone else. I think one of the things that makes our country so great is all the diversity it has to offer and if everyone assimilated to the way Salins thinks we should, then America would not be what it is today and the culture would be completely different.  

 In “Problematizing Cultural Stereotypes in TESOL” he talked about how even though the TESOL community is supposed to be away from stereotyping the students and learners there are still some stereotyping going on particularly in the Asian community.  The stereotypes that are given to Asians are not just in the TESOL classroom, but in the academic setting in general. People think they are anti-social with class interactions, are very obedient to authority figures and they do have good critical thinking skills. Those generalizations can be very offensive to anyone and we need to learn to step away from them and look at every person as an individual. 

Week 5

Week 4

In this week’s readings, more about identity was discussed and looked at. We had three different readings, one was from Holliday’s book, the other from Hall’s “Language and Identity” and Norton’s “Social Identity, investment and language learning”. These were all very interesting texts in different ways. There were two particular things from what I read this week that really stood out and caught my attention. One was the different factors that Holliday discussed in his book. The other was in the Hall’s reading when talking about second language acquisition.

Starting with what caught my attention in Holliday’s part of our assigned readings is the different factors that play in the identity of people and much they play a role through our communication by talking and writing. As stated in Holliday, “Our sense of self is achieved through our capacity to conceive of our own lives as a unity and this in turn is a result of our capacity to tell the story of our lives.” This type of language is through narratives and storytelling, and this kind of realization of identity will be shown about us through our own trajectory projects. When we write a personal narrative, we are releasing information to the world about what makes us who we are. What shape us are our experiences and views of world and these help shape what we see as “acceptable” and “normal” and everyone’s interpretation of this is different. With this, there are different “discourses” in which an individual will choose which discourse to use depending on their environment, and sometimes this may also be misinterpreted by who is surrounded by the speaker and their thoughts.

There’s more to identity than just this though. In Norton’s article, there was a particular situation that caught my attention. The situation involved an immigrant, Eva and her discussion with The Simpsons.  As states above, part of our identity has to do with our language and speaking it. She was judged right away and classified by her classmates just because she didn’t know about Bart Simpson. Because she didn’t recognize who this cartoon character was right away, she was looked at as a poor language learner. In my opinion, knowing and not knowing a particular cartoon character shouldn’t be a basis of deciding whether someone is a good or poor language learner. Another quote that was referenced in Norton’s article that I found very intriguing was, “’Language is the place where actual and possible forms of social organization and their likely social and political consequences are defined and contested. yet it is also the place where our sense of ourselves, our subjectivity, is constructed’” (21).  I agree with this in part but I also believe that there is more that factors into it. 

Week 3

This week’s readings mainly focused on identity, both Pavlenko’s The Making of an American and Holliday discuss quite a bit about identity, cultural identity. How do we construct our identities and how do we choose how we want to be represented to others? As Pavlenko’s states in his article, identity is the dynamic and shifting nexus of multiple subject positions, or identity options. Meaning someone is acknowledged as a mother, an accountant, heterosexual or Latina. These are done by narrative identity construction. A large portion of the article looks at these narratives by immigrants that came to America in the early 1900s. The narrative identity construction is done though both fiction and non-fiction roots and in this case we have non-fiction; autobiographies.

When it comes to immigration, it then leads to assimilation. This assimilation of immigrants in the United States then creates an identity for each one, but these identities are considered imaginable or negotiable because society back in the day gave its members identity options. This is surprising to me because it makes it seem like is society didn’t “approve” of someone’s particular identity, they were then rejected until they were accepted. The whole heterosexual vs. homosexual has always been a debate in our society and even though it is becoming a more “acceptable” identity, people who possess this particular identity still don’t feel as though they belong.

This is often the case with immigrants. The people who come to the United States to pursue the “American Dream” are often assimilating in a way that they love their own personal and cultural identity. I took a Latino Studies class my first year at the university and we learned about Mexican-American students whose parents are native Spanish speakers who teach their kids Spanish in the home but when they come to school they are speaking English and possibly Spanish with other Spanish speakers. Why should we shut down these kids from keeping their one identity from interacting with another one. It’s important to encourage students to keep their identities. I believe that cultural identities help make this country as diverse as it is.

It’s not possible to narrow down the nation to one identity and culture. We are all made up of different identities. I come from a Greek and Hispanic background. Those are two identities I already possess along with the very traditional culture of both worlds. My parents still feel as though they are considered foreigners because of their heavy accents when speaking the English language even though they’ve basically assimilated very well to American culture. I can say that even though they have assimilated, they still keep their cultural traditions close to heart and have passed it on to their kin.

Cultural identity is a very important thing when it comes to teaching students. We as teachers need to understand that every student comes from their own set of ideas, likes, dislikes, and philosophies and we are in no position as a society to damper anyone’s identity just because it’s taboo or looked at from a different light in our society. As stated before, it’s impossible for there to be one accepted identity or culture because of the amount of diversity within just one person.

Week 2

            To start off my blog for ENG343, there seems to be a reoccurring theme, which clearly has a lot to do with what will be discussed throughout the semester in this class. This theme is culture. What is culture? How do we define it? How do people feel about it? In the field of TESOL, we as future educators need to understand that culture comes in hand with the learners and speakers of the other languages. These individuals have a culture that they belong to and they are learning a whole new language with its own set of cultures. This can be very hard for a language learner, because it’s so much more than just learning a language. In Atkinson’s article, it was said that educators and others believe that “culture” has no place in education. Is this even possible? I believe that culture exists in all fields, and there’s virtually no avoiding it. How can a teacher say that there is no place for culture in their classroom? The overall definition of culture in TESOL could definitely be revised, but how do we do this without trying to intentionally get rid of it?

            Culture is a very touchy subject in many areas of our society. I took a class my freshman year here at ISU and it was about Latin/Hispanic studies and mainly focused on immigration of Latin Americans to the United States and how they had to deal with several issues. Assimilation is part of this, and I was reading in my text how students were punished and frowned upon for using their native language in the classroom with other native speakers. Punishing a student for this kind of thing presents a certain image of the culture to the student when they are trying to accommodate themselves to a whole new one.

            When reading Holliday’s essentialist vs. non-essentialist, I found it very interesting. It seems to me that the essentialist is very confined and a bit more narrow-minded. The culture is smaller and they’re not very open to change while the non-essentialist is the opposite. It’s not based on location, and it’s more interchangeable. I agree and indentify myself more with the non-essentialist point of view because I myself am always open to change, learning new things, learning about new cultures, people and languages and personally possess a background of diversity.

            Overall, I believe the readings were very important and very interesting. These topics on culture, individualism vs. collectivism and the principles of culture were the topics with the most impact to me. These all helped me piece together the different parts and definitions of the term “culture” and help me view it as more than just a word. Knowing the differences will help all future educators of multicultural and multilingual classrooms better their practice.