Slippery paths towards unknown destinations? More questions than answers for EFL teachers in Southeast Asia today.

1. Slippery paths towards unknown destinations? More questions than answers for EFL teachers in Southeast Asia today. William Littlewood Hong Kong Institute of Education

2. Introduction 1 • The ‘postmodern’ world has led to widespread questioning of accepted views and sustaining assumptions that we have grown up with. • In many domains there are no longer universally accepted truths; all truths are regarded as situated and relative. • ‘Actual minds, possible worlds’ (Bruner, 1986)

3. Introduction 2 • The global flows of ideas and forms meanings are seen less and less as one-way from ‘centre to periphery’ • … and occur increasingly as part of ‘a cosmopolitan conversation of humankind’ (Schuerkens, 2004, p. 15).

4. The Present Paper This paper focuses on three domains in which the sustaining assumptions of the EFL teacher in Southeast Asia have undergone processes of questioning: 1. The goals of teaching (unknown destinations?) 2. Methods of teaching (slippery paths?) 3. Assessment of learning (will we know when we arrive?) --- and considers some implications for the role and identity of the EFL teacher.

5. Part 1 The Goals of Teaching

6. The Goals of Teaching • The goals of teaching and learning have become less easily definable. • Not only are we still coming to terms with the shift of attention from linguistic products to communicative processes. • … even in a product-oriented approach, notions of English as a lingua franca have raised doubts about desirable models.

7. What Model of English? 1 • Until recently, native speaker models have been seen as transmitted along a ‘one-way street’ from the ‘centre(s)’ to the ‘peripheries’. • Though the range of centres has widened to include more varieties of English, the dominant assumption has been that EFL and ESL speakers should follow native-speaker norms, so that local forms are errors to be rectified.

8. What Model of English? 2 • There is now a growing belief that ‘English as a lingua franca’ need not obey the norms of any particular native speaker version. • Each country can develop its own local forms of English, constrained only by the requirements of transnational communication. • ‘In the teaching of English …the goals set and the models adopted should be appropriate and relevant to the norms and needs of the learners and users of English’ (Kirkpatrick, 2007, p. 197).

9. The Grammar of English as a Lingua Franca According to Seidlhofer (2004), these features are ‘non-core’ in ELF i.e. they do not hinder communication and need not be corrected: • Dropping the third person present tense –s • Confusing the relative pronouns who and which • Omitting definite and indefinite articles where they are obligatory in ENL, and inserting them where the do not occur in ENL • Failing to use correct forms in tag questions (e.g., isn't it? or no? instead of shouldn't they?) • Inserting redundant prepositions, as in We have to study about…) • Overusing certain verbs of high semantic generality, such as do, have, make, put, take • Replacing infinitive-constructions with that-clauses, as in I want that • Overdoing explicitness (e.g.black color rather than just black)

10. The Pronunciation of English as a Lingua Franca According to Jenkins (2003), these features are ‘non-core’ in ELF i.e. they do not hinder communication and need not be corrected: • The sounds for ‘th’ and dark ‘l’ • Vowel quality • Weak forms • Other features of connected speech such as assimilation • Pitch direction to signal attitude or grammatical meaning • Placement of word stress • Stress-timed rhythm

11. English as a Lingua Franca in the Classroom 1 • ‘Teachers can ignore [non-core features] with a clear conscience and spend classroom time on more useful issues’. (Kirkpatrick, 2006, p. 79) • If a Japanese speaker substitutes /l/ for /r/ in ‘red’, this can be classed as an ‘error’. • “I’ll go now. I want to go and pray with my boyfriend.” (Good girl!!!) (???)

12. English as a Lingua Franca in the Classroom 2 • But vowel addition as in ‘Macudonaludo’ is non-core and therefore not an error. (Jenkins, 2006, p. 37)

13. English as a Lingua Franca in the Classroom 3 • Ask any of our team member for assistance. • If I raise one angle and they do not come back with the other three angles, I will not repeat myself.

14. Some Questions about ELF • Can the intelligibility of features be judged independently of contexts? (Compare ‘give me an answer’ with ‘give me the answer.) • The contribution of ‘top-down’ processes (schemata) to comprehension is always variable. • Can ELF speakers really be sure of readiness to accommodate in real life situations? (c.f. Norton’s studies) • Is it feasible for teachers to make such fine decisions in the flow of classroom interaction?

15. Part 2 Methods of Teaching

16. Methods of Teaching 1 • There are so many individual differences amongst learners, situations and teachers, that they cannot be served by one single method. • Teachers need to explore how they can base teaching on a flexible framework of principles and procedures, less prescriptive than a fixed method and adaptable to their own situations.

17. Methods of Teaching 2 • In East Asia, teachers seek ‘an extensive cross-breeding of elements drawn from different ELT techniques, methods and approaches • … to form a localized methodology that supports the effective teaching and learning of English’ (Wong & Ho, 2004, p. 464)

18. Ten Macrostrategies (Kumaravadivelu, 2006) • (a) maximize learning opportunities • (b) facilitate negotiated interaction • (c) minimize perceptual mismatches • (d) activate intuitive heuristics • (e) foster language awareness • (f) contextualize linguistic input • (g) integrate language skills • (h) promote learner autonomy • (i) ensure social relevance • ( j) raise cultural consciousness

19. A Methodological Framework: From Focus on Form to Focus On Meaning (Littlewood, 2004)

20. Task Involvement in Communication-Oriented Language Learning

21. Processes in the Foreign Language Classroom

22. Part 3 Assessment for Learning – and Accountability!

23. Process-orientation in Language Teaching

24. The Process-as-Outcome Perspective 1 The Singapore English Language Syllabus 2001 lists intended outcomes from all levels of processes. For example, by the end of Primary 2, ‘pupils will’: • Enjoy the creative use of language in e.g. similes, poems and jokes (affective level) • Infer and draw conclusions about characters, sequence of events (cognitive level) • Follow agreed-upon rules for group work (social level) • Speak to convey meaning using intonation (communication level)

25. The Process-as-Outcome Perspective 2 The English Language Curriculum Guide (Primary 1 – 6) for Hong Kong states that by the end of Primary 6, students should learn to: • be confident of their own judgement, performance and capabilities (affective level) • question obvious bias, propaganda, omissions, and less obvious fallacies (cognitive level) • work and negotiate with others to develop ideas and achieve goals (social level) • present information, ideas and feelings clearly and coherently (communication level)

26. Outcome-based Planning and Assessment 1 • Its first motive is to ensure that learning has clear directions. Teachers and course-developers decide what they would like students to learn and determine to what extent these have been achieved. • This information can be gathered not only at the end of a course but also during the course. Thus the second motive is to facilitate formative ‘assessment for learning’.

27. Outcome-based Planning and Assessment 2 • The wider system can transform information gathered to support learning into information used for reporting and grading, as a basis for gatekeeping and accountability. (Brindley, 2001) • When the system itself (a) specifies expected learning outcomes, (b) measures whether they have been achieved, and (c) makes student progression and institutional funding contingent upon the results, tools are in place for the centre to exercise control over the goals and implementation of the educational process.

28. Yes, but what does it all mean? 1 Speaking: Level 3 (Excerpts) • Pronunciation / Delivery techniques • Pronunciation of familiar words can usually be understood; less familiar words, if used, can sometimes be understood within the overall context. • Intonation, volume and pacing are generally appropriate enough to be understood. • Some features of body language are appropriate, e.g. occasional eye contact. • Accuracy and appropriacy of vocabulary and language patterns • Simple familiar vocabulary is usually used appropriately. • Simple language patterns are used, sometimes accurately and appropriately. Errors do not usually impede communication when topics are familiar.

29. Yes, but what does it all mean? 2 Vague terms in the HKCEE English ‘Component Grade Descriptors’ TermNumber of occurrences some / sometimes 76 familiar 56 appropriate / appropriately 51 may 41 more 29 (more complex: 22) generally 24 accurate / accurately 23 most 22 usually 14 mainly 13 occasional / occasionally 12 range 12 (a range: 6; small range: 4; limited range 1; good range: 1)

30. Teachers Beware! We need to avoid what Alexander (2004) sees in the UK National Curriculum: • a ‘highly centralized and interventive education system’ in which • ‘those who have the greatest power to prescribe pedagogy’ may be those who have ‘the poorest understanding of it’, leading to • a ‘culture of compliance’ in which teachers are merely ‘technicians who implement the educational ideas and procedures of others’ and • attention to outcomes deflects attention from the classroom pedagogy that should produce them.

31. Implications for English Language Teaching • These developments ask teachers to assume high degrees of autonomy in their decision-making. • At the same time they have to accept high degrees of accountability for the outcomes of these decisions. • They have far-reaching implications for the role, responsibilities and identity of the EFL teacher.

32. What other implications? Thanks for your attention! (I hope)

33. References 1 • Alexander, Robin (2004). Still no pedagogy? Principle, pragmatism and compliance in primary education. Cambridge Journal of Education 34/1, 7 – 33. • Brindley, Geoff (2001). Outcome-based assessment in practice: Some examples and emerging insights’. Language Testing 18/4, 393-407. • Bruner, Jerome (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. • English Language Curriculum Guide (Primary 1 – 6) (2004). Hong Kong: Education Bureau. Available at: http://www.edb.gov.hk/index.aspx?langno=1&nodeID=2770 • English Language Syllabus 2001 for Primary and Secondary Schools. (2001). Singapore: Ministry of Education. Available at:http://www.moe.gov.sg/cpdd/syllabuses.htm • Grade Descriptors for HKCEE English. Hong Kong: HKEAA. Available at: http://www.hkeaa.edu.hk/doc/sd/grade_descriptors_ec.pdf • Jenkins, Jennifer (2003). World Englishes: A resource book for students. London: Routledge. • Jenkins, Jennifer (2006). Global intelligibility and local diversity: Possibility or paradox? In Rubdy & Saraceni (eds.), pp. 32-39. • Kirkpatrick, Andy (2006). Which model of English: Native speaker, nativized or lingua franca? In Rubdy & Saraceni (eds.), pp. 71-83.

34. References 2 • Kirkpatrick, Andy (2007). World Englishes: Implications for international communication and English language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. • Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006). Understanding language teaching: From method to post-method. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. • Littlewood, William (2004). The task-based approach: Some questions and suggestions. ELT Journal 58.4, 319–326. • Littlewood, William (2007). Communicative and task-based language teaching in East Asian classrooms. Language Teaching 40/3, 243-249. • Rubdy, Rani & Saraceni, Mario (2006). English in the world: Global rules, global roles. London: Continuum. • Schuerkens, Ulrike (2004). The sociological and anthropological study of globalization and localization. In U. Schuerkens (ed.) Global forces and local life-worlds: Social transformations (pp. 14-26). London: Sage. • Seidlhofer, Barbara (2004). Research perspectives on teaching English as a lingua franca. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 24, 209-239. • Wong, Ruth Y. L. & Ho Wah Kam (2004). The future of English language teaching in East Asia. In W.K. Ho & R. Y. L. Wong (eds.) English language teaching in East Asia today (pp. 455-465).Singapore: Eastern Universities Press.