Double Standards: Teacher Education in the Expanding Circle

Abstract

This paper describes some of the dilemmas which non-native teachers of English worldwide face as they are exposed to the competing discourses of educational ideologies and market forces and have to somehow reconcile the contradictory demands of global claims and pressures with the local conditions in which they work. It is argued that it is vital to resist a simple transfer of teaching approaches and attitudes originating from the Inner Circle to the Expanding Circle, where quite different conditions obtain. The status and role of non-native speaker teachers is explored in this paper, drawing on an empirical study of the self-perception of Austrian teachers, and suggestions are made as to how teachers can take advantage of their non-native speaker status and develop it as an important resource for asserting the needs and preferences of their specific Expanding Circle settings. Teacher education plays a crucial role in making teachers aware of their non-native assets and in preparing them explicitly to exploit these assets in the development of an appropriate pedagogy.

Mother Tongue Use in Task-Based Language Teaching Model

“…In addition, when teachers and students have the same mother tongue and share a similar linguistic and cultural background, there are good reasons for using translation as it would be consistent with the general educational maxim of social constructivism that learning involves the construction of new knowledge based on the familiar one called the zone of proximal development proposed by Vygotsky (Seidlhofer, 1999;Cook, 2001). Seidlhofer (1999) further explains that…”

“…The use of student's mother tongue in ELT classrooms has continually been one of debatable issues when the ELT methodology underwent through a long history, from very traditional conventions to today practices (Gatenby, 1965;Auerbach, 1993;Seidlhofer, 1999;Richards, 1992;Crookes & Gass, 1993;Polio, 1994;Burden, 2000;Brown, 2001;Paradis, 2004). The confliction occurs in two opposite ways, that is, (1) If L1 is used in language teaching, learners will become dependent on L1, and not even try to understand meaning from context and explanation, or express what they want to say within their limited command of the target language (L2), (2) A non-threatening environment is essential for L2 learners to learn the target language effectively and so L1 can be used by the teacher to some extent.…”

“…Opponents, in an opposite thought, have supposed that the monolingual approach should be perceived in a more critical manner (Widdowson, 1974;Atkinson, 1987;Anton & DiCamila, 1998;Swain and Lapkin, 1998;Seidlhofer, 1999;Wells, 1999;Burden, 2000;Tang, 2002;Marian, Spivey, & Hirsch, 2003;Paradis, 2004). There have been lots of protests of monolingual approach (only L2 in English classrooms) in Asian context, and the prejudiced notion of mother tongue use in CLT classrooms in teaching context Asian countries should be revaluated since the application is much different from Western countries where these teaching methods originated (Pham, 2001;Canh, 2001;Phan, 2008).…”

“…TBLT, the teaching model of the English textbooks in Vietnam, is no exception in that context. According to Seidlhofer (1999) and Burden (2000), the reasons for ELT teachers from English-speaking countries and book designers from these countries want interactions in L2 classrooms to be in English may depend on the fact that native speaker teachers (L2) without the need of knowing their students' language (L1) and culture can be easier going all over the world to get jobs as English teachers. Another reason why the monolingual approach should be re-evaluated is the fact that research in second language acquisition (SLA) indicates that bilingualism is an advantage, not a hindrance, for language learners.…”

“…Storch and Wigglesworth (2003) argues that L1 can be a source of cognitive support for students' language analysis and performing higher level work. An explanation in the mother tongue with highlighted language items can provide useful reinforcement of structural, conceptual, and sociolinguistic differences between the native and the target languages (Atkinson, 1987;Auerbach, 1993;Seidlhofer, 1999). The mother tongue can be used to check students' understanding of the concept behind a structure, e.g.…”