Vol.28,No.3,September2008,305–316
ReflectingonWesternTESOLtrainingandcommunicativelanguageteaching:Bangladeshiteachers’voices
RaqibChowdhuryandPhanLeHa*
FacultyofEducation,MonashUniversity,Victoria,Australia(Received1November2007;finalversionreceived29January2008)
TheincreasingdemandforcompetentusersofEnglishintheeraofglobalisationhashadasignificantimpactonEnglishLanguageTeaching(ELT)inBangladesh.AmonganumberofchangestoimprovethequalityofELT,teachersofEnglishhavebeenencouraged,evenrequired,toadoptacommunicativelanguageteaching(CLT)approach.Tofacilitatethesuccessfulimplementationofthesechanges,besidesintroducinglocaltrainingprogrammestofamiliariseteacherswithCLT,teachersofEnglishfromBangladeshhavealsobeensentoverseas,especiallytotheEnglish-speakingWest,forfurthertraining.Drawingonaqualitativeresearchstudy,thispaperdiscussesthepedagogicalconcernsofBangladeshiEnglishteachers,includingthosewhoareWestern-trained,inrelationtotheirteachingofEnglish.ItalsoinvestigatestheirperceptionsofthepoliticsoftheWesternTeachersofEnglishtoSpeakersofOtherLanguages(TESOL)industryassociatedwithproblemsofpedagogicalethicsandappropriacy.Basedonthefindingsanddiscussions,recommendationsareofferedforenhancingthequalityofELTinBangladeshandstrategicallyrespondingtothecommercialisedhegemonicbutnecessary“evil”ofTESOLtraining.
Keywords:TESOL;ELT;communicativelanguageteaching;teachertraining
Introduction
TheincreasingdemandforcompetentusersofEnglishintheeraofglobalisationhashadasignificantimpactonEnglishLanguageTeaching(ELT)inBangladesh.AmonganumberofchangesaimedatimprovingthequalityofELT,teachersofEnglishhavebeenencouraged,evenrequiredtoadoptacommunicativelanguageteaching(CLT)approach.Attheriskofover-generalising,itmaybesaidthatCLThasbecomethedominanttheoreticalmodelinELTallovertheworldsincethe1980s.Inpracticalterms,theapproachinvolvesprovidingteacherswithcommunicativeactivitiesaspartoftheirrepertoireofteachingskillsandgivinglearnersampleopportunitytopractisetheirlanguageskillsinclass.EventhoughCLTclaimstocreateademocraticclassroomthatisresponsivetostudents’needs,itisofteninappropriateandincompatible,neithersophisticatednorresponsiveenoughforthecomplexeducationalneedsandculturesofstudentsincertainsettings.ThispaperexaminesthevariousfacetsoftheapplicationofCLTinBangladeshandthepoliticisationprocessesthatareinextricablylinkedtoitsimplementationinsettingswhereamoreteacher-centredapproachistheculturallysanctionednorm.
TofacilitatetheimplementationofCLTinBangladesh,alongwiththeintroductionoflocaltrainingprogrammes,teachersofEnglishhavealsobeensentoverseas–almostexclusively
*Correspondingauthor.Email:ha.phan@education.monash.edu.au
ISSN0218-8791print/ISSN1742-6855onlineq2008NationalInstituteofEducation,SingaporeDOI:10.1080/02188790802236006http://www.informaworld.com
306R.ChowdhuryandPhanL.H.
totheEnglish-speakingWest–forfurthertraining.ThispaperspecificallydiscussestheperceptionsthatBangladeshiTeachersofEnglishtoSpeakersofOtherLanguages(TESOL)teachers,includingWestern-trainedones,haveinrelationtothepoliticsoftheWesternTESOLindustry,whichisassociatedwithproblemsofpedagogicalethicsandappropriacy(Holliday,2005;Pennycook,1994,1998).
AnoverviewofEnglishandELTinBangladesh
Bangladeshdoesnotenjoytheethnolinguisticdiversitythatothercountriesintheregionhave(Chowdhury&Farooqui,inpress),with98%ofitspopulationspeakingBanglaorBengali(BangladeshBureauofStatistics,2007).Aforeign(ratherthansecond)languageinBangladesh,EnglishistaughtasacompulsorycoresubjectfromYears1–12.Thoughfewpeopleuseitintheirpersonallives,thecountrydependsonitforbothinternalandinternationalbusiness,andthereisnodoubtaboutitsimportanceinjobmarkets,business,industryandgovernment,withworkersincreasinglyexpectedtodevelopskillsinEnglish.ProficiencyinEnglishiswidelyseenasapreconditionleadingtoeconomic,socialandeducationalopportunities,andprovidingaccesstomaterialresources.BecauseoftheimportanceaccordedtoEnglishandtheconsistentlyescalatingdemandsforEnglishproficiency,in2000,thegovernmentintroducedmajorchangestothecurriculum,textandteachertraining(seeChowdhury&Farooqui,inpress,fordetails).Inspiteofthesechanges,classroomteachingseemstohavereturnedtotheold“chalk-and-talkdrillmethod”(Pandian,2004,ascitedinLittlewood,2007,p.246).
Atalllevelsofeducation,thegrammar-translationmethodisstillthenormofELTinBangladeshandconsiderablefrictionbetweenpolicy-levelexpectationsandactualpracticecanbefeltbypractitioners,suchastheEnglishteacherswhotookpartinthisstudy.Suchpracticeinvolvesaheavyemphasisongrammaticalrules,vocabularymemorisationandtranslationof(mostlydecontextualised)sentences.EnglishlessonsareconductedsolelyinBanglaorBengali,withlittleuseofEnglish.Untilrecently,thesecondaryEnglishtextbookwasmainlyacollectionof“prose”and“poetry”,withasupplementarygrammarbookinwhichgrammaritemswerepresentedstructurallywithalmostnointeractiveexercises.Theonlyactivitiesinvolvedwritingparagraphs,essays,personallettersandjobapplications.AsHasan(2004)reports,theemphasiswasongrammar,encouragingstudentstolearnthelanguagebutnothowtouseitinagivencontext.Whileexaminationsassessedgrammaticalknowledge,alongwithwritingskills,speakingandlisteningskillswereneitherafocusofclassroomteaching,norweretheytestedintheexam.
Reformmovements
Inthefaceofthelong-feltinadequacyofEnglishcourses,whichfailedtoimprovethelearners’skills,reforminELTstartedtakingplacefromthelate1990s.Imamreportsthatthegovernmentmadeitclearthat“beingnationallycompetentinEnglishisonenecessaryconditionifBangladeshistomoveupthelongcurveofeconomicgrowthfromitslowstartingpoint”(Imam,2005,ascitedinFarooqui,2006).Thegovernment,throughanumberofoverseasdevelopmentprojects,soughttointroducemajorchangesinEnglishlanguageeducationinthesecondaryeducationsector.In2000,theEnglishLanguageTeachingImprovementProject(ELTIP),forexample,co-fundedbytheBangladeshigovernmentandbytheUnitedKingdom’sDepartmentforInternationalDevelopment(DFID),introducedcommunicativetextbooksuptotheHigherSecondaryCertificate(HSC)level.ChowdhuryandFarooqui(inpress)discusshowtheELTIP,whichwasjointlyrunbytheBritishCouncilDhakaandtheNationalCurriculumandTextbookBoard,attemptedtoimprovethequalityofELTinsecondaryandhighersecondaryeducation
AsiaPacificJournalofEducation307
acrossthecountry.Thenewcurriculumwasaconspicuousdeparturefrompreviousteachingmethods,withamarkedtransferoffocusfromateacher-centredtoamorestudent-centredapproach.ThismethodwasexplicitlyaimedattheteachingandlearningofEnglish,facilitatingstudents’acquisitionofcommunicativecompetenceinEnglishthroughinteractionandpracticeofskillsintheclassroom.Textbooksincluded,forthefirsttime,materialthatwasnotonlylocallyproducedbutalsoculturallyfamiliar.Theconceptualisation,creationandproductionofmaterialswerealldonebylocalteachers.
Alongwiththesechanges,theELTIPalsoconductedteachertrainingthroughoutthecountry,redesignedthecurriculumforsecondaryschools,andproducedteachingmaterials.Teacherswerenowexpectedtofostercommunicativecompetenceinstudents.Althoughthesereformstookplaceinsecondaryeducation,itseffectsweresoontobefeltintheuniversity,withtheemergenceofnewcoursessuchastheUniversityofDhaka’sFoundationCourse(FC)inEnglish.Theparticipantsofthisstudywereallteachersinthiscourse.(Foranelaborationofthisstudy,pleaserefertoChowdhury&Farooqui,inpress.)TheculturalpoliticsoftheTESOLindustry
ThecontinuedglobaldemandforEnglishlanguagecourseshasseentheenterpriseofTESOLgrowintoasuccessfulglobalindustry(Pennycook,1994,1998;Phillipson,1992).AuerbachclaimsthatTESOLprogrammesare“oftencontrollednotbythestructureorobjectiveoftheprogrambutbythespecificandsometimesincidentalinterestofthefaculty”(1995,p.86),whileauthorssuchasWalker(2001)haveclaimedthatTESOLinstitutions,thoughinherentlyeducationalincharacter,areessentially“serviceoperations”wherecommercialsuccessmaydependontheword-of-mouthrecommendationsofsatisfiedclients.
TESOLcoursesinNorthAmerica,BritainandAustralia(NABA)havealsobeencriticisedfortheirethnocentrism.Liuclaimsthatthesecoursesneglectthe“needsofinternationalTESOLstudents”(1998,p.3).Suchneglecthasbeenseen,forexample,in“L2acquisitiontheoriesandTESOLmethodologies”(p.4),wheretherehasbeenlittleconsiderationofothernon-NABAcontexts,whichmayresultin“impracticalorineffective”(p.4)adaptationsofteachingmethodologiesinnon-NABAcountries.Likewise,BrownexploresELTteachertrainingandrevealssomeconflictsbetweencontemporaryELT,“particularlybutnotexclusivelyinthe‘importing’ofnewtechniquesassociatedwithcommunicativelanguageteaching”,andtherealityofimplementingsuchtechniquesindevelopingcountries.Hearguesthat“culturalcontinuity”andgradualchangesshouldbe“respected,bynotlosingcontactwithcurrent[local]practice”(2000,p.227).
Lin,Wang,Akamatsu,andRiaziarguethatthenameTESOLitself“alreadyassignsafixedstatustotheEnglishlearner,positioningthelearnerinalifetrajectoryofforeverbeingthe‘Other’,andcontinuingthecolonialstorylineofFriday–the‘slaveboy’learningthe‘master’slanguage’”(2001,p.22).ItisalwaystheOtherwhohastoworkhardandadjusttomeettherequirementssetbytheSelf–thestandardalwaysbelongstotheSelfandtheOtherremainsasecond-classpractitioner.Thesecolonialtraits,asdiscussedbyPennycook(1998),canstillbefoundincontemporaryTESOL.IfSaid’spositionisthatthestrategiclocationoftheOrientalistislockedupinthediscourseheusesinhiswriting,andthathisunacknowledged“positionalsuperiority”(1978,p.7)becomestheprerequisiteforhiswriting,thenKachruseemstoassertthesamenotionbysayingthatwhenEnglishisacquiredbynon-nativespeakers,theynotonlygainpowerbutareenslavedbytheknowledgethatEnglishbringswithit(1986).Thisalsomeansthat,paradoxically,thelearningofEnglishisasilentandunacknowledgedprocessoforientalisationforthenon-nativespeaker.Thiskindofeducationcanresultinthemakingofagroupoflearnersindoctrinatedinthediscourseofthenativespeakerwho,inturn,reflexively
308R.ChowdhuryandPhanL.H.
contributetotheconsolidationofthesamediscourse.However,fromthedatacollectedaspartofthisstudy,itappearsthatteachersinBangladeshwereabletoresistthishegemonythroughidiosyncraticwaysofinterpretingandtranslatingtheWesternteachingmethodologyofCLTinpractice.
WhereCLTfallsshort
TheliteratureisfraughtwithdiscussionsontherelativemeritsandshortcomingsofCLT,whichhasoftenbeenassumedtobe“thebest”andmuchmoreadvancedandeffectivethanotherapproaches,suchasthegrammar-translationmethod(seePhanLeHa,2007).SuchassumptionsaboutthesuperiorityofCLT,ontheotherhand,havebeenchallengedbymanyauthorswhoarguethatCLT,inreality,hascauseddifficulties,problems,frustration,dissatisfaction,tensionsandconfusionformanylanguageteachersandlearnersaroundtheworld(Gupta,2004;Hu,2005;Le,2001;Li,1998;Liu,1998;McKay,2003;Rao,2002).TheapplicationofCLTinmanyglobalcontextsrequiresarevolutionatalllevels,fromthesuperficialtotheinstitutional,fromthemostfundamentaltothemostcomplex,suchasthesocietal,politicalandcultural.TheshortcomingsofCLT,focusingparticularlyoncultural,pedagogicalandideologicalissues,arediscussedbelow.CLTasaformofWesternsuperiority
TheassumptionthatCLTis“thebest”and“thewaytoteach”(Bax,2003)hasbeenassociatedwiththeculturalpoliticsofEnglishandELTandthediscoursesofcolonialism(Pennycook,1994,1998),themarketisationandcommercialisationofTESOLandELTworldwide(Anderson,2005;Chowdhury,2006;Pennycook,1994),“Anglocentricity”(Phillipson,1992),andthenativespeakerfallacy(Canagarajah,1999).ThesearetheveryfactorsthatpromoteCLTasamanifestationofWesternsuperiorityineverydomainoftheELTindustry.Moreoftenthannot,suchimpressionsofCLTembeddedincurrentTESOLaredueto“‘methodologicaldogmatism’ferventlypromoting‘new’NABAmethodologies,particularlythoseentitled‘communicative’,whilecondemningtriedandtested‘traditional’methodsstillpopularinmanyotherpartsoftheworld”(Liu,1998,p.4).
TranslatingCLT:culturalincompatibilityandtheconflictofvalues
WhenCLTisappliedinreality,itspedagogicalvaluesoftenconflictwithanumberofcultural,socialandprofessionalvaluesembeddedinthepracticeofteachingandlearninginglobalcontexts(Auerbach,1995;Chowdhury,2003;Edge,1996;Liu,1998;Pennycook,1994;Phillipson,1992).Ironically,asFuredinotes,TESOLeducationispromotedthroughpedagogicstyles,suchasCLT,designedtoflatterstudentswhoarenolongerexpectedtostudybuttolearn;andsincecomplexideasarenotlearnedbutstudied,theintellectualhorizonofthelearnerisrestrictedtotheassimilationofinformationandtheacquisitionofskills(Furedi,2002,ascitedinAnderson,2005).AccordingtoKubota(2001),oneofthemanywaysinwhichinstitutionalisedessentialismmanifestsitselfisinthetypeofpedagogythatispromotedasthenorm.Oblivioustotheculturallysituatedperson,CLTofferslearnersadviceandguidanceaboutwhatconstitutesadisciplineandwhatkindsofoutcomesareexpectedoftheircourses(Chowdhury,2006).Theacademicisencouragedtoplaytheroleoffacilitatorratherthanthatofageneratorofknowledge.Thiscontradictsthesociallyexpectedandfeltimageoftheprofessionalselfoftheteacherinmanycountries,suchasinVietnam(PhanLeHa,2008).
Theissueof“respectbetweenteacherandstudent”isanothersourceofconflictinimplementingCLT.InBangladesh,hierarchydeterminesthenatureofteacher–student
AsiaPacificJournalofEducation309
interactions,whichisfacilitatedbymutualrespect.Firstnamesandphysicalproximitycanresultinmutualdiscomfortandmisunderstanding.Theclassroommaybeparadoxicallyatoddswiththeworldoutside;Biggs(1997)referstothisas“theinside/outsiderules”ofclassparticipation–“Studenttalkis‘outside’(inappropriate)wheninsidetheclassroom,but‘inside’whenoutsidetheclassroom”(p.17).Primarily,theseculturalconstraintsinhibitthecommunicativecompetenceofstudentsandlimitthechoicestheycouldmakeoutsidetheclassroom.Also,inCLT,thestudentwiththebestcontrolofstructuresandvocabularyisnotnecessarilythebestcommunicator.Duetoaheavyemphasisontheteachingofgrammaratthepre-universitylevel(Chowdhury,2003),first-yearuniversitystudentsinBangladeshgenerallyhaveamodestgraspofthestructureandusageoftheEnglishlanguage.However,thedemandsoftheCLTclass,atwhichtheELTreforminBangladeshwasaimed,cannotbefulfilledwiththisknowledge.Edge(1996)claimsthatby“deliberatelymovingawayfromateacher-centredstyleofteaching”,theTESOLprofessionalshows“alackofproperrespectforteachersand,byextension,foreldersingeneral”(p.17).Thisisseenasthreateningtherespectassociatedwiththestatusofteachersinmanycountries.TollefsonsimilarlysuggeststhatELTpractices“mustbeexaminedfortheirimpactupontherelationshipbetweenstudentsandteachers,andfortheirideologicalassumptionsabouttherolesofteachersandstudentsinsociety”(1991,p.102).Holliday(1994)andEllis(1996)demonstratethattheCLTprincipleofequalteacher–studentstatuschallengestheculturallyendorsedhierarchicalteacher–studentrelationshipandtheneedtoshowrespecttoteachersinmanycountries,andthusfacesresistanceandunwelcomeattitudesinthosecountries.
Inadditiontotheissueofrespect,CLToftenfacesresistancefromteachersandlearnersduetotheissueof“expectations”,asPhanLeHa(2008)hasnoted.Forexample,manynativeEnglishteachersinVietnamhavenoticedthattheirstudentstendtothinkthathavingfunwithcommunicativeactivitiesinthelanguageclassroommeansthattheyarenotlearninganything(Breach,2005).AccordingtoPhanLeHa,thecauseforthismismatchofexpectations
isthedifferencebetweenstudents’conceptoflearningandteachers’perceptionofteaching,inwhichstudentsseelearningasaseriousprocesswhensolidknowledgeisintroducedbyteachers,whilemanynativeEnglishteachersthinkthatcommunicativeactivitiesincludingfunandrelaxingonesarebest.(p.92)
Thestudy
ThisstudywasconductedwithsixBangladeshiuniversityteachers–fivefemaleandonemale.Fouroftheseteachershaddegreesfromabroad(onewithaPhDfromtheUKandaMaster’sinTESOLfromtheUS;onewithaMaster’sinTESOLfromtheUS;onewithapostgraduatediplomainELTfromtheUK;andonewithaMaster’sdegreeinTESOLfromAustralia).Theothertwoparticipantswerelocallytrained(withMaster’sdegreesinEnglishLiteratureandLinguisticsandELT).Theirteachingexperiencerangedfromthreeyearstoover15years.ThefirstgroupofteachershadbeenexposedtobothWesterncultureandtheWesternisedmodelsofCLTcurrentlyinpractice.
Theparticipantsweregivenpseudonyms–Rina,Tania,Neelima,Bithi,Farzin,andOsman(theonlymale).Aquestionnaire,interviews,emailsandonlineconversationswereemployedfordatacollection.
WhatareCLTprinciplesthatchallengeteachers’rolesintheclassroomandsociety?Student-centredteaching
TheparticipantsexpressedconcernaboutwhatCLTexpectedthemtobe,andtheconflictsofthatexpectedroleinrelationtothetraditionalwaysinwhichtheirstudentshadperceivedthem.
310R.ChowdhuryandPhanL.H.
Neelima,forexample,saidthatitwasalmostimpossibletoexpect“student-centredteaching”intheBangladeshicontext:
Iwasactuallythinkingwithinourcontextanditisnotpossibleforourclassestobetotallystudent-centred;becauseofthelimitationsthatwehaveitissimplynotpossibleand...eventheirlevelisnottothestandardwheretheycouldcontinuewithsimplystudent-centredlearning...There’sstillgottobesomekindofguidetoinstructthestudents.Student-centredteachingwasalotmorethanwhatwecoulddo,likestudentswouldbetheonestoselectthetexts,studentswouldbetheonestocorrectthetextsandteacherswouldjust...ItisnotpossibletobringintoactionCLTinitstrueform...initsoriginal.
Neelimaalsomentionedthatcultureisanimportantfactorindefiningthenatureofstudent–teacherinteractions.Oneofthereasonswhystudentsfeelinhibitedinstudent-centredinteractionsisthatteachersdonotadequatelyencouragestudentstoparticipateduetotheculturallysituatedroleoftheteacher.Thisview,albeittrue,isalsoparadoxicalbecause,asshementionedearlier,studentsseetheteacherasa“fatherfigure”–nurturingandauthoritativeatthesametime:
Yeahourcultureis[thereason]–it’sdefinitelythereifyouquestionit,becausestudentsaretheretoaccepteverythingtheteacherissaying.
Clearlydefiningthetraditionalapproachtoteachingasanythingbutcommunicative,anotherparticipant,Rina,expressed:
Iseemyselfasateacherwhotriestostrikeabalancebetweenthetraditionalapproachtoteachingandthecommunicativeone.Somewhereinbetween...butItrytobecommunicative.
Ademocraticclassroom
Fromtheparticipants’collectiveresponses,itwasalsoapparentthatwhiletheyallwantedto“breaktheice”betweenthestudentsandtheteachers,theywerenotentirelywillingtogiveuptheirauthoritativeandsomewhatdistancedroleofthetraditionalteacher.ThereasonforthiswaselaboratedbyOsmanwho,echoinganotherparticipant,saidthatitwasamatterofculture;hefeltthatitisbettertoallowstudentstopaytherespectandmaintainthedistancetheyarecomfortablewith.
Askedifhethoughtitwaspossibletosimultaneouslymaintaindisciplineandbecommunicativeintheclassroom,tostrikeabalancebetweentheteacherasfacilitatorandfriendagainstthemoreauthoritativerole,Osmanargued:
Idon’tthinkCLTisundisciplined...Whatweprobablyneedissomethinginbetweencommunicativeandourtraditionalwayofteachingthestudents.Forexample,wecan’torshouldn’tgivethemextremefreedomandatthesametimeweshouldnotaskthemtofollowour“school-master”typewayofdoingit.Thatmeansgivingthemtheimpressionthatyouaretheteacherguruandtheyshouldnotsayordoanythingthatdoesn’tfitinthescheme.I’msayingwecan’tbe100%communicative;thatis,Ishouldknowwhattheyshoulddo,notthem.
Thislastcommentisveryintriguingbecauseitseemstodenystudentsknowledgeoftheteacher’sorientationtoteachinganditsobjectives.While,ontheonehand,itisapracticaldecisionconsideringthatstudentsmaynotfeelcomfortablewiththemorelearner-centredcommunicativeapproachestolanguageteaching,ontheotherhand,ignoranceoflessonobjectivescouldresultinfurtherenhancingthedistancebetweenstudentandteacher.Commentingonthesamematter,Osmancontinued,
Inviteyourstudentstotaketheresponsibilityoftheirlearning,andyou’llseetheresult.Theytakeitasaweaknessonthepartoftheteacher.
Howdotheseteachersdealwithissuesofculturalappropriatenessinteachingmaterials?Sincealltheparticipantsinvariablyhintedatsomedegreeofcommunicativeeffortintheirclassrooms,itwasnecessarytofindouthowtheyhelpedtheirstudentsadjusttothecultural
AsiaPacificJournalofEducation311
content.Theywereaskedtoidentifytheirmostcommonstrategyfordealingwithculturally“inappropriate”material.Optionsincluded“censorship”,“explanation”,“adaptation”,“avoidance”,and“other”.Explanationappearedtobethemostcommonstrategyamongallsixparticipants.Otheranswersincludedadaptation(Neelima,Osman)andavoidance(Osman).Alltheparticipantsshowedenthusiasmandconcernabouttheoften-feltbutoften-neglecteddailypedagogicalexperience.Theyallrevealedthecontradictionsandparadoxesinherentintheirpedagogy,basedasitwasonthevaluesofdifferentculturaltraditions.
Recasting:howteachersadaptratherthanadopt
Fromthedatacollected,itwasclearthatadaptationorreinterpretationisanaturalpartoftheinnovationprocess–“teachersmouldinnovationstotheirownabilities,beliefsandexperiences;theimmediateschoolcontext;andthewidersocioculturalenvironment”(Carless,2004,ascitedinLittlewood,2007,p.244).ThisissimilartoWiddowson’s(1989)observationthat“theinfluenceofideasdoesnotdependontheirbeingunderstoodintheirown[terms;usually],itdependsontheirbeingrecastindifferenttermstosuitotherconditionsofrelevance”(ascitedinLittlewood,2007,p.246).These“essentiallydefensivestrategies”(Littlewood,2007,p.246)arecounterbalancedbymanyreports,whichechoLi’s(1998)adviceforSouthKorea:nottoreject,butto“adaptratherthanadopt”(ascitedinChowdhury,2003,p.296).Ascentralagentsofpolicyimplementation,classroomteachersexerciseanumberofstrategieswhenitcomestopractice.Explanation
Neelimadescribeditasa“kindofaculturalshock”forstudentstoencounterunfamiliarculturalmaterial.SheprovidedananecdotalexperienceofhowshewasrequiredtoteachWilliamCarlosWilliams’TheWheelbarrow,asupposedly“easypoem”.Theexplanationofthepoemwasdifficultfromtheverystart,whensherealisedthatthestudentswerenotfamiliarwith“themeaningofthetitleworditself”.ShehadtoexplainitbyusingtheequivalentBanglawordthelagari.Osmangaveanotherexampleofwhathappenedwhenaculturallyunfamiliarconceptwasintroducedintheclass:atthestartofonesession,whenheaskedhisstudentswhattheydidonthe“weekend”,thestudentswereallsilent.Osmanexplainedthatthiswasnotsurprisingsince,unlikeintheWest,weekendsinBangladesharenotsetasideforoutingsandpartying.
Bithi,however,disagreedthattheculturalcontentintheFoundationCoursetextbookswasincompatible.Shearguedthatthough“culturalunfamiliarity...becomesamajorprobleminteachingEnglishliterature”,shehadnotencounteredtheprobleminELT:
Iuseexplanationasastrategyfordealingwithculturaldifference,becauseoftenwhattheyneedtocometotermswiththeirassignedreadingmaterialisafamiliaritywithliteraryandhistoricalbackgrounds,andthequickestwayofdealingwithistofillthemin.Thisenablesthemtograspthematerialbettersothattheacquisitionoflanguageskillsisnothampered.
Neelima,ontheotherhand,feltthatthiscultural“gap”posedasignificantprobleminthecourseshetaughtandrequiredaslowprocessoffamiliarisation:
Sinceyouarereadingdifferenttextsofadifferentculture,youalsohavetounderstandandgetacquaintedwiththeotherculture.It’seasierifstudentsgetthingsthatarefamiliarwiththeirownculture,sothattheycanunderstandandconnectthemselvesandgetengagedwiththetext.Wecoulddesignmaterialsusinglocaltexts,localarticlesandtheninsertcomponentsofthetargetcultureintoit.BeforeintroducingtothemtextsfromEnglandorAmerica,it’sbetterifweintroducethingsfromourpartoftheworldinordertogetstudentstobetterunderstandthem.
312R.ChowdhuryandPhanL.H.
Adaptation
Adaptationappearedtobeanothercommonstrategyindealingwithculturallyinappropriatematerialintexts.Thoughthisseemedtobepracticalandmanageableenoughfortheteachers,theproblemwasthateveryteacherhadtheirownwayofadaptingdiscussiontopics.Asaresult,studentsofdifferentgroupsdidnotappeartohavereceivedequaloruniformtreatmentofthediscussiontopic.Osman’sfavouritestrategyseemedtobecontext-changing:
[Adaptation]isnotalwaysdifficultbecausewearedealingwithadultlearners,afterall.IthinktheseareverycommonstrategieswhichlanguageteachersfrequentlyuseintheEFLcontext.Likemanyteachers,Itrytoexplainanysuchmatterfirstofall.SometimesIadaptit,whichmeansImaychangethecontextorsomething.
Avoidance
Avoidanceappearedtobeanotherstrategythatwaspractised.Twoparticipantsmentionedavoidanceasawayofdealingwithculturalelementsintexts.Whilebothteachersfelttherewerealternativewaysofapproachingthesubject,theythoughtitwasbesttoavoiditattimes,consideringthetimethatwouldneedtobespentexplainingoradapting.
ImayavoidthewholeissueifIfeelthatit’snotimportantatalloritdoesnothaveanypedagogicalvalue.Sometimesitisnotworththetime.(Farzin)
Farzingaveananecdotalexample,wheresheavoidedatime-consumingdiscussionofanunfamiliartopic:
Likewehadthischapteronthisstudentdrivingatruck/bustobeartheexpensesoftheireducation.Thissortofthingisalientothem.Theyaresousedtotheirfather’spayingthetuitionfeesinmostcasesandalsototutoringstudentsatbest,sotheycannotthinkofdrivingatruckorbusandstudying.Iactuallydroppedthatchapterbecauseofitbeingculturallyirrelevant.Andalsowhenweareteachingthemaboutwritingessays,whenwearepractisingtowritetopicsentenceswheretheychoosefromgivenones...Thereareacoupleofthingslike,theconditionsofworkinginanappleplant,consumer’sgroupetc...whichwedon’thaveinBangladeshasyet.
Avoidanceofculturallyinappropriatematerialdidnotappeartobeacommonpracticeamongtheseteachers,andthosewhouseditwerejudiciousaboutthesituationsinwhichtheydidso.
ThepoliticsofTESOL
WithregardtothepoliticalelementofTESOLtrainingintheWest,theparticipantsgavequitediverseopinions.WhilefourparticipantsshowedanawarenessofapowerrelationshipandacorrespondingneglectoftherealneedsofEnglishasaForeignLanguage(EFL)countriesintheinternationaltrainingofTESOLtoday,twoofthemwerequiteunsureabouthowtodescribeit.Itappearedthatthesetwoparticipantsdidfeelaninadequacy,butitwasmoreofavaguefeelingratherthanacriticallyfeltconviction.Someofthewordsthattheyusedtodescribethispoliticalplaywere“hiddenagenda”,“brainwashing”,“prescriptive”(Osman),“saleofEnglish”(Tania),and“attheirmercy”(Farzin).Noteworthy,too,isthefactthatthetwoparticipantswhodidnotbelieveinthepoliticisationofTESOL(Neelima,Rina)werebothtrainedintheWest,whilethetwolocallytrainedteachers(Bithi,Farzin)bothsensedsomesortofpowerplay.NotedOsman:
WhatImeanisperhapstheWesternersaretryingtobemoredescriptivethanprescriptive.That’swhytheyareshowinginteresttoseewhatactuallygoesonindifferentclassroomsandonthebasisofthesepracticalauthenticdata;theycansuggestmethodswhichcouldbemorepracticalandapplicable.
AsiaPacificJournalofEducation313
Farzinusedtheterm“richcountries”andlater,inheranswertoanotherquestion,shetalkedofthesocioeconomicfactorsthataffectlanguagelearning.ThisalsogivesrisetotheconsiderationofthekindofWesterntraining–whetheritistailoredtosuittheneedsofinternationalstudents,andtherelevanceofthetypeofcoursesoffered.
¨vehelplessnessechoedfromthewordsofBithi(whowaslocallytrained),whoAsenseofnaı
sawthepoliticalelementassomethingwecannotdoawaywith:
TheBC[BritishCouncil]DhakadoesnotofferaTESOLdegree.Toanextent,IdofeelthatlocalneedsareignoredinTESOLdegreesabroad,butatpresentthereisnoviablealternativeinBangladesh.
Osmansharedthesamesenseofhelplessness:
TherealneedsoftheEFLcountriesareneglectedintheprocesstoagreatextent...becausemoreoftenthannot,thetalksandproceedingsareprescriptive,notdescriptive...Hopefully,thesedaysthereisagrowinginterestintheWestininvestingwhatactuallygoesonintheclassroom...butyoucan’tblametheWestforthat...theyarenotgoingtotalkaboutyourrealneedsifitdoesnotbenefitthem...andwe,theEasternstudents,areyettoraiseourvoices.
Somecommentsappearedtobebasedontheparticipants’ownexperiencesintheWest,coupledwiththeirknowledgeandinterpretationoftheextensive,evenifsometimesconfusing,literature.Osmancommented:
Ithinkanysuchtraininghassomedefinitegoalsandmotiveswhichtheproceedingstrytoachieve...andtheseissuesmayreflectsomehiddenagendaswhichmaybecommunicatedtotheparticipants...Thereissomesortofbrainwashinggoingonimplicitly...TheideasandissuesthatareraisedandtalkedaboutinthetrainingareusuallyWestern,notEasternorwhatever.
TheparticipantswerealsoaskedtocommentonwhethertheythoughtthattherealneedsofthedevelopingEFLcountrieswereneglectedintheprocessofthispoliticisation.Osman,whowastrainedinAustralia,saidthatitcouldbesafelygeneralisedthatthetrainingwas“prescriptive,notdescriptive”.HewenttotheextentofsayingthatEnglishhadbeentakingtheformofneo-imperialismandneo-colonialism:
TESOLcanalsobeconsideredanindustry...aninternationalcompany...ThebooksthatarewrittenintheWesthavetheirmarketsinthedevelopingnations...ObviouslytheculturecontainedinthosebooksisWesternculture,whichveryofteninfluencesthereadersorlearners...AnytraininginELTorTESOLwilltrytoinfusethehiddenagendasoftheWest.
Farzinadded:
Definitelythereis[apoliticalelement]becausethey,theWest,willselecttheareatheyareinterestedinformetopursuemyhigherstudies,whichmaynotbenecessaryformyteachingconditionshere;ontheotherhand,theareawhichneedstobeworkedonheremayberejectedbythemsimplybecauseitcannotbeappliedto/usedinotherrichcountriesliketheirs;soweareattheirmercy,Iwouldsay.
ThedegreeofthissomewhatbitterrealisationofthepoliticisationofTESOLtrainingintheWest,however,appearedtobebalancedbyanewerretrospectiverealisationofhowpeoplegraduallygetusedtothethoughtprocessesthroughwhichWesternisationmanifestsitself.RecallinghisownexperienceinAustralia,Osmanmentionedthathehadbeen“conservative”whenhefirstwentthere;hehadneverseenanEnglishmoviepriortothat.These,alongwithothersimilarcomments,wereinterestinginpartbecausetheyappearedtoviewpoliticsasimbuedwithconsciousintentionsofpowerimpositionandasinteractionsdeterminedbydifferencesinvalues.
RinadidnotseepoliticsasanissueinWesternTESOLtraining,thoughsheacknowledgedthattheneedsofdevelopingcountrieswereneglected.ShearguedthattheelementofcriticalunderstandingisoftenneglectedwhentheWestisheldresponsibleforit,andthattheadoptionofWesterntechniquesisthekeytosuccessfullyutilisingWesternknowledge:
314R.ChowdhuryandPhanL.H.
Theneedsofthedevelopingcountriesarenotspecificallycatered.However,thereisawarenessthatwhatistaughtisnotabsoluteorfinal,andcanbetailoredtosuittheneedsoflocalcontexts.Coursecontentandmethodscanbeadjustedtoapplywhatisfeasibleandappropriateforaparticularsituation.
TheparticipantsdiscussedpowerrelationshipsembeddedinEnglishandTESOLtraining,showingtheirawarenessofdiverseopinionsaboutthisissue.Interestingly,theirwordsexpressedtheirviewsofpowerasbothpositiveandnegative,reflectingtheculturalpoliticsaswellasthelinguisticpowerattributedtoEnglishandELT.SaidNeelima:
Itisapowerrelationship,definitely...Itinitiallystartedwithapoliticalideaattheverybeginningofourhistory–whenEnglishwasintroduced,itwasnottoeducatetheIndianpeoplebuttocolonisethem.Butwithglobalisation,andwithEnglishbeingamoreinternationallanguagenow,it’s...Iwouldn’tconsideritasthatmuchapoliticalthing,butmoreofanecessity.
WhenwearetaughtintheWesttobeEnglishteachers,thereisalsotheunderlyingunderstandingthatwewouldaccepttheirwayofdoingthings,learningthings;butthereisalsoontheotherhandthisideathatwearenotreallyacceptingeverythingthattheyareofferingfromtheirculture.They’realsogivingusourownunderstandingofwhatwedoofoursituationandourproblems.WearelearningEnglishfromEnglish-speakingpeople,butnevertheless,beingnon-nativespeakers,wearealsoprovidingourownexperiencestotheteachingcontext.SoELTorTESOLisnotjusttheteachingofEnglishandEnglishculture,butalsotheteachingofEnglishwithinothercultureswithinothercommunities.Sothisexiststodaythroughouttheworld–notjustwithinEnglishcommunities.Englishinoursocietyisaforeignlanguage,butstillitisanecessity,ithasitsglobalvalues.WithoutEnglish,wereallycan’tmakeitwiththeotherworld.
Rinaalsonoted:
Iamnotsureaboutthepoliticalelement,butmaybethereissometruthanditisreinforcedwhenyoureadauthorslikePennycookandPhillipson.IthinkseriousattentionisnotpaidtothespecificELTneedsofthedevelopingcountries.
Taniaadded:
IneverreallythoughtaboutthepoliticalelementintheinternationaltrainingofTESOLprofessionals.Definitelyitpromotesthe“SaleofEnglish”butundertheexistingpoliticalsituationoftheThirdWorldcountries.Canitbechanged?AslongasUSA,UK,Canadawillcontinuetogiveusaid,thescenariocan’tbechanged.IfyoutalkabouttherealneedsofEFLcountries,thentheythemselvesshouldidentifytheirneedsandactaccordingly,insteadofrelyingonothers.
Theparticipants’concernaboutthepoliticsandpowerunderlyingtheirTESOLtrainingsupportstheargumentsaboutEnglishandTESOLbeingusedascommodities,spreadingWesternvaluesthroughaidsprogrammes,neglectingtheneedsofdevelopingcountries,andcarryingoncolonialmissionsinnewforms(Liu,1998;Pennycook,1994,1998;Phillipson,1992).TheircommentspointtotheimportanceofhavingaccesstoWesternTESOLandEnglish.However,theyalsorevealthelinguistichegemonyofEnglish;it“canbeunderstoodasreferringtotheexplicitandimplicitvalues,beliefs,purposes,andactivitieswhichcharacterisetheELTprofessionandwhichcontributetothemaintenanceofEnglishasadominantlanguage”(Phillipson,1992,p.73).This“consciousnessoftheELTprofession”,asPhillipson(p.73)putsit,isconfirmedbytheseBangladeshiteachers’perceptions.As“Englishprovideslinguisticpower”(Kachru,1986,p.1),theseteachersseemedtohaveappropriateditpedagogicallyandlinguisticallytoservethemselvesandtheirstudents.
Conclusionandrecommendations
ThepaperhasdiscussedBangladeshiteachers’perceptionsofpedagogicalappropriacy,power,andthepoliticsassociatedwithCLTandWesternTESOLtraining.Inlightoftheirperceptions,thispaperoffersthefollowingrecommendationswithregardtoenhancingELTinBangladeshandstrategicallyrespondingtothecommercialisedhegemonicbutnecessary“evil”ofTESOLtraining.
AsiaPacificJournalofEducation315
First,adaptationcoursesforWestern-trainedteachersofEnglishontheirreturntoBangladeshneedtobeconductedtohelpthemclarifyandreadjusttheirprofessionalgoalsandidentifystudents’andtheirownexpectationsinalocalcontext,whichisalsochangingwhiletheseteachersareoverseas.ThesecoursescanalsoprovideopportunitiesfortheseWestern-trainedEnglishteacherstoacknowledgeandlegitimisetheknowledgeandskillsofstudentsandotherteachers,andtoexplicitlynegotiatewhattheyperceiveasmeaningfulandappropriatepedagogywithstudentsandotherauthorities.
Second,regularprofessionaldevelopmentcourses,notnecessarilyledbynativeEnglishspeakers,canbeconductedforteachersofEnglishinBangladesh.Inthesecourses,teachersareintroducedtonewtrendsinEnglishlanguageteaching.Theymayalsobeaskedtoshowcasepracticesthatareeffectiveintheirteachingcontextsandareencouragedtoexpresstheirconcernsabouttheirteachingandexchangeideasandsuggestsolutionstobettertheirteaching.Thesecoursesneedtobesupportedbytheauthoritiestoempowerteacherstocarryoutchangeswherenecessary.
Veryimportantly,inlightoftheculturalpoliticsaswellasthestatusofEnglishasaninternationallanguage,thesecoursesneedtoequipteacherswithknowledgeabouttheimportanceofmakingexplicittostudentsthepoliticsandpowerembeddedinEnglishwhileofferingthemoptimalaccesstoEnglishthroughteachingandextra-curricularactivities.Teachertrainingandprofessionaldevelopmentcoursesalreadyinexistence,suchastheELTIPandtheAustraliangovernment-fundedVIDA-ELTT(VolunteeringforInternationalDevelopmentfromAustralia–EnglishLanguageTeacherTraining),haveadequateresources,intheformofbothcoursecontentandpersonnel,toaddressthetrainingproposedbythisresearchstudy.
References
Anderson,C.(2005,September).Thecommodificationofeducation:ThecaseofTESOL.Paperpresentedat
theBritishAssociationforAppliedLinguisticsAnnualConference,BristolUniversity,UK.
Auerbach,E.R.(1995).ThepoliticsoftheESLclassroom:Issuesofpowerinpedagogicalchoices.
InJ.W.Tollefson(Ed.),Powerandinequalityinlanguageeducation(pp.9–33).Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Bax,S.(2003).TheendofCLT:Acontextapproachtolanguageteaching.ELTJournal,57,278–287.BangaldeshBureauofStatistics.(2007).StatisticsBangladesh2006.RetrievedAugust23,2007,from
http://www.bbs.gov.bd/dataindex/stat_bangladesh.pdf
Biggs,J.(1997).Teachingacrossandwithincultures:Theissueofinternationalstudent.Learningand
teachinginhighereducation:Advancinginternationalperspectives.ProceedingsoftheAnnualConferenceoftheHigherEducationResearchandDevelopmentSocietyofAustralasia,20,1–22.Breach,D.(2005).Whatmakesagoodteacher(PartII).Teacher’sEdition,17,28–35.
Brown,R.(2000).CulturalcontinuityandELTteachertraining.ELTJournal,54,227–233.
Canagarajah,S.A.(1999).ResistinglinguisticimperialisminEnglishteaching.Oxford,London:Oxford
UniversityPress.
Chowdhury,R.(2003).InternationalTESOLtrainingandEFLcontexts:Theculturaldisillusionment
factor.AustralianJournalofEducation,47,283–302.
Chowdhury,R.(2006,June).TESOLmarketing–Studentidentityasasiteofconflictingforces.Paper
presentedatthe16thBiennialConferenceoftheAsianStudiesAssociationofAustralia,Wollongong,NewSouthWales,Australia.
Chowdhury,R.,&Farooqui,S.(inpress).Teachertrainingandteachingpractice:Thechanginglandscape
ofELTinsecondaryeducationinBangladesh.InL.Farrell,U.N.Singh,&R.A.Giri(Eds.),EnglishlanguageeducationinSouthAsia:Frompolicytopedagogy.Delhi,India:CambridgeUniversityPress.Edge,J.(1996).Cross-culturalparadoxesinaprofessionofvalues.TESOLQuarterly,30,9–28.
Ellis,G.(1996).Howculturallyappropriateisthecommunicativeapproach?ELTJournal,50,213–218.Farooqui,S.(2006,August).CommunicativelanguageteachinginsecondaryeducationinBangladesh.
Paperpresentedatthe4thAsiaTEFLInternationalConference,Fukuoka,Japan.
Gupta,D.(2004).CLTinIndia:Contextandmethodologycometogether.ELTJournal,58,266–269.
316R.ChowdhuryandPhanL.H.
Hasan,M.K.(2004).AlinguisticstudyofEnglishlanguagecurriculumatthesecondarylevelin
Bangladesh:Acommunicativeapproachtocurriculumdevelopment.LanguageinIndia,4,RetrievedApril7,2006,fromhttp://www.languageinindia.com/aug2004/hasandissertation1.html
Holliday,A.(1994).Appropriatemethodologyandsocialcontexts.Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversity
Press.
Holliday,A.(2005).ThestruggletoteachEnglishasaninternationallanguage.Oxford,London:Oxford
UniversityPress.
Hu,G.(2005).“CLTisbestforChina”–Anuntenableabsolutistclaim.ELTJournal,59,65–68.
Kachru,B.B.(1986).ThealchemyofEnglish:Thespread,functions,andmodelsofnon-nativeEnglishes.
Oxford:PergamonPress.
Kubota,R.(2001).DiscursiveconstructionoftheimagesofUSclassrooms.TESOLQuarterly,35,9–38.Le,V.C.(2001).LanguageandVietnamesepedagogicalcontexts.Teacher’sEdition,7,34–40.
Li,D.(1998).“It’salwaysmoredifficultthanyouplanandimagine”:Teachers’perceiveddifficultiesin
introducingthecommunicativeapproachinSouthKorea.TESOLQuarterly,32,677–703.
Lin,A.M.Y.,Wang,W.,Akamatsu,A.,&Riazi,M.(2001,August).Absentvoices:Appropriated
language,expandedidentities,andre-imaginedstorylines.PaperpresentedattheInternationalConferenceonDisruptingPreconceptions:PostcolonialismandEducation,UniversityofQueensland,Brisbane,Australia.
Littlewood,W.(2007).Communicativeandtask-basedlanguageteachinginEastAsianclassrooms.
LanguageTeaching,40,243–249.
Liu,D.(1998).EthnocentrisminTESOL:Teachereducationandtheneglectedneedsofinternational
TESOLstudents.ELTJournal,52,3–9.
McKay,S.L.(2003).TowardanappropriateEILpedagogy:Re-examiningcommonELTassumptions.
InternationalJournalofAppliedLinguistics,13,1–22.
Pennycook,A.(1994).TheculturalpoliticsofEnglishasaninternationallanguage.London:Longman.Pennycook,A.(1998).Englishandthediscoursesofcolonialism.London:Routledge.
Phan,L.H.(2007).Questioningthevalidityandappropriacyofpresentingcommunicativelanguage
teachingas“thebest”teachingmethodinTESOLteachertrainingcourses.InJ.Mukundan,S.Menon,&A.A.Hussin(Eds.),ELTmatters3:DevelopmentsinEnglishlanguagelearningandteaching(pp.232–240).Selangor,Malaysia:UniversitiPutraMalaysiaPress.
Phan,L.H.(2008).TeachingEnglishasaninternationallanguage:Identity,resistanceandnegotiation.
Clevedon,UK:MultilingualMatters.
Phillipson,R.(1992).Linguisticimperialism.Oxford,London:OxfordUniversityPress.
Rao,Z.(2002).Chinesestudents’perceptionsofcommunicativeandnon-communicativeactivitiesinEFL
classroom.System,30,85–105.
Said,E.W.(1978).Orientalism.NewYork:PantheonBooks.
Tollefson,J.W.(1991).Planninglanguage,planninginequality:Languagepolicyinthecommunity.
Harlow,UK:Longman.
Walker,J.(2001).ClientviewsofTESOLservice:Expectationsandperceptions.InternationalJournalof
EducationalManagement,15,187–196.
因篇幅问题不能全部显示，请点此查看更多更全内容