Towards a socially sensitive EIL pedagogy

I concur that global-local tensions and a discourse of Othering are evident in classroom materials. The choice of cultural content presented in classroom materials oftentimes promotes these tensions and the discourse of othering. In order to avoid marginalization of the local culture and achieve a balance between global and local concerns as well as reduce Othering, it is necessary to present diversity that exists within all cultures. Moreover, by encouraging students to see "cultural diversity as part of the cultural flow that exists today" and as part of the globalization process, it would be an honest approach to treat both local and global concerns as equally important and not to give preference to Western cultures and values but rather introduce "a sphere of interculturality" (McKay 188). The latter implies that while learning about another culture, students acquire aspects of their own culture as well. In addition, such methods as open text, representation of more diversity in the uses and users of English in the materials, presentation of L2-L2 interactions, and classroom-based social research (CBSR) are good ways to encourage a discussion of cultural values and raise an awareness that English is an international language that can be used in a wide variety of cultural and social contexts.
As for the CLT method which is widely used in Russia today, I have experienced this method when I studied at the faculty of foreign languages. As a student, I considered it as a waste of my time as I was expecting a teacher-fronted grammar lesson with a linguistic component. I tolerated group work as I felt that I was not ready to engage in verbal interactions from top of my head  and that I was supposed to have a  a ready opinion on different aspect of life. I felt comfortable and in a non-threatening and relaxed atmosphere when a teacher was assuming authority in the class. What I think would be more suitble, however, is a so-called hybrid class. I think it would work best for both a teacher and a student because this way "the method match with local practical constraints and classroom expectations" (195). I see positive sides in both methods but the impementation of any of them should be with accordance with the English demands of the students and with respect to the local culture of learning.
I started to study English in the 9th grade as a private tutoring class. A lot of people in Russia have to take tutoring classes of English as teaching English in public schools is not sufficient enough. My teacher gave me a lot of  memorization tasks. I had to learn texts by heart as she believed this is the only way to start learning English. Also, there was a lot of grammar theory and exercises on articles, tenses, mood, comparatives, and everything else. Every aspect of grammar was covered by a huge amount of exercises which i had to write down. Translation was certainly part of her program.
In six months I acquired the program of the mainstream school curriculum. I started with the ABC and by the end of the sixth month I could speak, write, and read as an advanced learner. I successfully entered a linguistic gymnasium, one of the prestigious schools in my home town, Ulan-Ude, in the 10th grade. After her intensive teaching, I realized that I was more advanced in English than my classmates who studied at that school since the first grade. I was not accepted to the most advanced group of the 10th grade students as the teacher was too ambitious to accept me in her group. The backstage play is that my tutor is very well-known in my hometown and certain teachers consider her as a challenge as her students always win different competitions in English. This is just a little story of how ambitions can serve as obstacles to sharing knowledge, methods of teaching and learning from each other. However, back to the main aim of writing about my learning experience. i think that my example can serve as one more narrative that proves the importance of the local knowledge to the discipline. Different learners are situated in different sociocultural contexts and, thus, any relevant pedagogical knowledge has to be locally produced  and  negotiated.

Globalization

 I liked this definition of globalization - "a borderless society in the age of the global economy and information technology" (Kubota 16). I agree about the borderless society more than ever. Globalization has brought me here, to the U.S. and my whole life changed. I had to negotiate my identity, my daughter is a native speaker of English and her culture is so different from mine. Have I not studied English, I would not have come to the U.S. It was that period in Russia in the 1990s when English suddenly recieved all the attention and studying at a faculty of foreign languages became prestigious and promising. However, even though it is desirable to master English in Russia, the politics keeps it as a foreign language. It is easy to see the implication of it. I do not think Russian polititians will ever decide to make English as a second language. I would say there is otherization of the West in my country.
I find some similarity with a case with Japan in terms of dichotomization between Japanese and Anglophone cultures. Learning English in Japan does not mean cosmopolitan pluralism or critical multiculturalism. "While the discourse of kokusaika promotes Anglicalization, it also reinforces cultural nationalism through constructing a rigid cultural boundary between Us and Them" (Kubota 23). In addition, regardless the varieties of English today, the 'correct' English in Japan seems to be the English language of mainly USA and UK. The same situation is in Russia. The fact that there is an increased number of secodary schools in Japan that offer languages other than English gives hope that the ethnic and linguistic diversity starts to recieve the proper attention.
The bottom line is that English as an international language should serve the function of bridging multiple cultures and promoting cultural understanding instead of narrowing views of world cultures. This is an important moment for TESOLers as we as English language educators are responsible for promoting international understanding, non-biased attitudes, and understanding of world cultures, and, mainly, that the English model is not the Inner Circle only but the Outer and even Expanding Circle.
  

The Standard Language Myth

   It is obvious that standardization represents power and authority. Standard English is an abstraction, a tool for those in power to isolate from any other varieties. Standard English has a gate-keeping function which excludes the inferior non-Standard English, is prestige and exclusive. However, as Lippi-Green showed it in her article, when we try to analyze the definitions of Standard English, there are quite a few discrepancies. For example, who are the opposite of the uneducated, why the educated population's pronunciation is "more informed, more genuine, and more authoritative" (Lippi-Green, 55), and why those who live in the south of the U.S.A. lack correct English, the latter according to Preston's empirical studies. These discrepnacies prove the standard language myth and present standard/non-standard dichotomy as educated/literate and non-educated/non-literate.

If we dig a little deeper, we can see that Standard language which is "imposed and maintained by dominant bloc institutions" is the result of ideologies, or standard language ideology (Lippi-Green,65). 
If we look at the history of the development of Standard English, we would see that the development of modern Standard English was the only concern of linguists and language historians (Milroy, "The development of Standard English in 1300-1800").Standard varieties are viewed as idealizations, in a finite state, internally invariant, and reside in the writing system (Milroy, 11 ). He explains the occurence of standardization due to a promotion of a national language as a sign of national unity and national language. Thus, there was a strive to legitimize national standard language and present it as pure, unilinear, uniform, and as English of the elite class. This is how we fall into the "false consciousness" (67). It is so deeply rooted because the ideology's "web of common sense arguments" (for example, hearing Standard English in movies, reading Standard English in books, hearing it on the radio,  learning it at school) persuade us again and again that this is they way we should speak, write, and think. So, it is no wonder that it is hard to get rid of the feeling the Standard English is the model and the one that represents interests of those in power. Thus, on the basis of language, those in power make sure that they keep their favored place in the nation-state. (67).

As a TESOL educator, I believe it is very important to unmystify this ideology and strive to promote equality by accepting nonstandard languages and presenting them in school curriculum. Discussions on language ideologies, standardization of languages, recognizion of non-standard languages as legitimate linguistic codes are examples of how to raise awareness among ESL/EFL students concerning the standard language myth and help them not fall under this ideology.

Week 13. Language planning and policy

Language politicking outside the classroom has direct influence on the pedagogical practices inside the classroom. An example is Singapore where even though bilingualism is the mainstay of education policy, language policy has allowed English to remain dominat over the other languages.English is the only official medium of instruction at school except mother tongue classes. English is the language of commerce, international communication, and a sign of personal and national economic success. Furthermore, English served as a principal layer in social stratification.
As for bilingual education, i do not see it as divisive or that it fosters an elite. It may add additional costs for the public but it only benefits learners as it is proven, in adult learners' case, 'that strong l1 literacy are key factors in successful L2 acquisition.' (Mckay 102). Thus, l1 is a resource not an impediment to L2 successful acquisition.  The desire of English monolingualism perpetuatest the global dominance of English and gives ascendancy to English. Furthermore, Singlish or Ebonics will never become internationally intellible because language politicking is reluctant to raise the status of these languages to Standard languages and  their introduction into the classroom.
However, an example of the Standard English proficiency program in California gives an excellent example how children, instead of being otherized, learn that Ebonics is one linguistic code and not a deficient language. Such a bidialectal approach promotes equality for both kinds of speakers (I mean , Standard language speakers and non-standard speakers) and understanding of other varieties of languages as different, context-based varieties. I also support appreciation of dialect difference approach which recognizes the wordliness of language and a pedagogy of critical language awareness.
Thus, students learn that 'notions of facts' about language imply a bigger picture. They are elements of a larger narrative. social needs and political interests are involved here. I believe these two approaches are an effective and empowering form of language learning.

Week 12.

After having read about the issues in the Expanding Circle, I identified the same problems in my own teaching experience. When I taught English to students whose major was Economics and Law, I remember that I had to struggle with their disinterest to the subject as they did not see much use of English in their professions. Russia does not provide a social context for such students in order to engender instrumental motivation.  It does not mean, however, that other social factors such as social prestige, cultural capital, and access to an imagined community of English speakers, motivate students in Russia to study English. I think it is important for TESOL educators to be sensitive to the social factors that motivate their learners and use those incentives for English learning. It was present in my teaching experience as well and it considerably enlivens the atmosphere in the classroom.
Another issue is teacher competence. I think it is due to the lack of interaction with native speakers on a daily basis,  a lot of English language teachers feel that their knowledge is bookish and far fron native-like pronunciation. In addition, top-down ministry directives by Ministries of Education consider an English-only classroom as an ideal classroom. However, I think it is a big plus to be able to conduct a class bilingually. Another issue is the promotion of CLT (Communicative Language Teaching) in the Expanding Circle. I concur with the author that it relates to modernization theory. However, I noticed that there was a discrepancy between the study books that my director wanted us to use in teaching English and students' attitude and expectations towatds the teaching material. I had to additionally but a grammar book as my students were very confident in the idea that grammar comes first and everything is based on grammar. They were not satisfied with the prevailing communicative tasks in the study books. I felt the same way and practical experience proved that those study books with the communicative approach were good as an additional material to the language acquisition.
As for multilingual societies such as India and South Africa, it is certainly due to globalization of English that the latter is used in H domains as socio-politically and socio-economically English is far more hegemonic. The negative side is that it creates a stratifying effect between those who can afford English-medium education and those who can not and, thus, cannot participate in the domains where English is the dominant language, like education and business. In a way, we have a similar situation in Russia. It creates an economic divide in English language learning in Russia as well.