Latin American Perspectives on Second Language Writing Pedagogy

Abstract

The perspectives of Latin Americans concerning second language writing pedagogy are based on social, historical, political, geographical, and cultural aspects as well as linguistic diversity and recent globalization. All have influenced the progression of how second language writing has been viewed and approached throughout the years. A traditional approach to second language writing has been based mostly on linguistic structures, and there is a need for rethinking how second language writing should be taught. Within this rethinking, first language literacy and its relationship to second language writing should be addressed across the curriculum at all levels and sectors of education in Latin America.

Research on “native” and “non-native” English-speaking teachers: Past developments, current status, and future directions

“…Discrimination based on speakerhood (i.e., [non-]nativeness) is not limited to recruitment policies and practices but also traverses into the workplace and manifests itself in various ways. These other forms of discrimination include, inter alia, widespread division of labor and legitimacy (NNESTs for receptive skills and NESTs for productive skills) (Choi & Lee, 2016) and approaches to authenticity (Lowe & Pinner, 2016), institutionalized dehumanizing impositions stripping teachers of their personal/professional identity by assigning them Anglicized names and forcing them to lie about their backgrounds (Tezgiden Cakcak, 2019), microaggressions as institutionalized regimes of inequality and marginalization faced by ELT professionals of color (Lee & Jang, 2022; Ramjattan, 2019c), and being subject to less payment, more teaching loads, and professional qualifications (Lengeling & Mora-Pablo, 2012; Wong et al, 2016). Discrimination based on speakerhood is not the only axis characterizing the undemocratic and unethical employment landscape in the ELT profession.…”

“…For example, Menard-Warwick et al (2019) utilized an ethnographic case study to examine how English language teachers “appropriate historically-available discourses about English and ELT for their own identity development” in urban Guatemala, rural Nicaragua, and a Tibetan refugee community in India (p. 367). Moreover, another line of qualitative research uses content analysis or (multimodal) critical discourse analysis in the studies that examine job advertisements and recruitment documents (e.g., Ahn, 2019; Alshammari, 2021; Daoud & Kasztalska, 2022; Lengeling & Mora-Pablo, 2012; Mahboob & Golden, 2013; Rivers, 2016; Ruecker & Ives, 2015; Selvi, 2010). In addition to the exponential increase in qualitative studies, researchers used quantitative research methods (mostly via questionnaires) to reach out to broader populations of participants who are teachers, students, parents, and school administrators (e.g., Aslan & Thompson, 2017; Azian et al, 2013; Buckingham, 2014; Clark & Paran, 2007; Moussu, 2010; Shibata, 2010).…”

“…Reviewing policies and institutional structures undergirding these schemes exhibits a considerable variation across these programs (Copland et al, 2016a, 2016b), but they have received criticism for imposing structures that perpetuate the perennial chasm between NESTs and NNESTs. Most of these schemes require NESTs to have less experience and fewer qualifications (Chen & Cheng, 2010; Kim, 2007; Yanase, 2016) and, in return, offer a reduced workload and more work benefits (see Lengeling and Mora-Pablo [2012] for Mexico, Jeon [2009] for South Korea). On the other hand, the portrayal of NESTs as inexperienced, unqualified, and monolingual/monocultural individuals lacking intercultural sensitivity, whose professional status has been reduced to being “assistants,” “foreigners,” “guests,” and “outsiders” (Bunce, 2016; Keaney, 2016; Yim & Ahn, 2018) and who act as “human tape recorders” (Tanabe, 1990) or “performing monkeys” (Jeon, 2009) with communicative entertainment value (Lowe & Kiczkowiak, 2016), often leads to marginalization and “feeling devalued as teachers, social exclusion, and resistance from local teachers” (Jeon, 2020, p. 10).…”

A Chinese Study of Foreign English Teachers Employment in Online Recruitment Advertisements

“…While many researchers (Clark & Paran, 2007; Lengeling & Pablo [16] , 2012; Mahboob et.al. [20] , 2004; Ruecker [24] , 2011)have looked into hiring practices major cities in America, the UK and some Asian countries, the criteria used by administrators in hiring English language teachers in the context of the second or third tier cities in China remain largely unexplored.…”

Constructing a Professional Identity: Nonnative English-Speaking Teachers in First-Year Writing Courses

“…For instance, in Mahboob's studies (2003 and, the majority of Intensive English Program administrators in the US considered NES status to be an important factor in hiring ESL teachers. In EFL contexts, it has not been uncommon for many countries to hire ESL teachers on condition of holding an "inner circle" country citizenship or directly requiring native speaker status or native-like proficiency in teacher job ads (Lengeling & Pablo, 2012;Ruecker & Ives, 2014;. Thanks to advocacy by NNESTs within TESOL, TESOL released the "Position Statement Against Discrimination of Nonnative Speakers of English in the Field of TESOL" in 2006, Introduction which has led to a number of practices by the organization, including prohibiting native speaker requirements in hiring practices on its jobs listings and at its national convention.…”