Evaluation of institutionalized varieties of English and its implications for placement and pedagogy

Abstract

Traditionally, ESL programs in the United States have not distinguished between students coining from countries where.English has been institutionalized, such as Nigeria, and those from countries where it has not been, such as Japan. However, the legitimacy of these institutionalized or nativized varieties has become more and more accepted. In spite of this acceptance, scant attention has been focused on how ESL programs might adapt to the growing consensus. This paper outlines an application of theoretical understandings of nativized varieties to the very practical concerns of ESL programs; namely, testing, placement and pedagogy. First, through analysis of placement essays written by Nigerian and Sri Lankan students at an American university, we demonstrate that the non-recognition of the legitimacy of nativized varieties can have the very real effect of lowering a student's placement. We then suggest a two-tiered evaluation which discriminates between those students competent in English but significantly unfamiliar with the American variety and those whose competence in English is deficient. Finally, we advance a pedagogical approach and techniques which we believe appropriate for speakers who are competent in a non-native variety, but are unfamiliar with the American idiom and culture.

English placement testing: recognizing the sociolinguistic context

“…It is a great disservice to all students not to recognize this fact. Kenkel and Tucker (1989) have suggested some alternatives to placement in traditional ESL courses for these students, in order to prevent the institutionalized communication of the attitude that nativized varieties are inferior to standard native varieties. "Such an alternative course would not appear 'remedial' or 'corrective' .…”

“…Because of their frequent use of English, students from ESL contexts may be fluent in speaking and listening, while lacking a complete grammatical and written command of all registers of the language. Kenkel and Tucker (1989) also caution that often a student's placement is slightly lower than it would be if the norms of nativized varieties were acknowledged as legitimate.…”

Critical ELT Practices in Asia

“…In developing nations, teachers of English increasingly are drawn from local populations (Fishman, 1998(Fishman, -1999 and in Sri Lanka, although circumstances may have changed in recent years, Kenkel & Tucker (1989) cited literature that asserted that teachers are likely to speak and present the local educated variety, and that in more rural areas it is probable that the training of teachers and the language variety they use will differ from urban areas. discussion of the struggle for voice in academic discourse, although focused on writing in a higher education setting, foregrounds the value where language teachers critique their expectations of learners' reproductions of 'standard' conventions in English language written texts.…”

Second language errors and features of world Englishes

“…Consequently, error studies continue to use Inner Circle varieties as norms, while WE research, increasingly, focuses on innovative features of L2 Englishes together with their intelligibility and acceptability (Baumgardner ; Smith ), although many of these innovations are yet to be recognised as legitimate varieties in their own right. Consequently, an emerging critical question concerns distinguishing between errors in the SLA sense and features of L2 varieties in the WE sense (Kenkel and Tucker ; Bamgboṣe ; Davies et al ; Mollin ; Guzman 2009; Groves ; Li ; van Rooy ). As Bamgboṣe (: 1–2) explained:

The main question that arises with innovation is the need to decide when an observed feature of language use is indeed an innovation and when it is simply an error.

…”