Luận văn tiếng Anh: Native and Non-Native approaches to teaching English as a Global Lingua Franca as perceived by teachers and students at the Faculty of English Language Teacher Education, ULIS - VNU = Quan điểm của giáo viên và sinh viên khoa Sư Phạm Tiếng Anh, ĐHNN – ĐHQGHN về định hướng bản ngữ và phi bản ngữ trong giảng dạy Tiếng Anh như một ngôn ngữ trung gian toàn cầu. M.A Thesis Linguistics: 60 14 10
Nhà xuất bản: University of Languages and International Studies
Ngày: 2012
Chủ đề: Phương pháp giảng dạy
Tiếng Anh
Bản ngữ
Phi bản ngữ
Miêu tả: 93 p. + CD-ROM
M.A. Thesis. English Language Teaching Methodology -- University of Languages and International Studies. Vietnam National University, Hanoi, 2012
The world’s current movement towards teaching and learning English as a default medium of international contacts has led to some revolutionary changes, first and foremost, in perceptions of the native model. Many recommendations have been made to move beyond the native speaker norms, and this trend is supported by not only native but also nonnative English-speaking researchers and educators all around the world. The conservative loyalty to the native speaker model, however, still survives, especially in outer and expanding circle countries, including Vietnam. With an attempt to contribute a classroom perspective to the issue, the researcher conducted a survey on 100 students and 25 teachers at the Faculty of English Language Teacher Education (ULIS – VNU) combined with focus group interviews so as to investigate their perceptions of native and non-native approaches to ELT. The findings show such divided opinions. At one extreme, a minority of FELTE teachers and learners hold a strong belief that the native model should be the benchmark of perfection. At the other end of the spectrum, a much larger number of respondents express flexible and tolerant attitudes towards the adoption of new varieties of English, especially in pronunciation and culture dimensions. Despite some encouraging results, a lingering aspiration to the achievement of native-like competence can be sensed via the students’ majority preference of native English-speaking teachers and Vietnamese teachers’ self-doubt and feelings of inferiority. This study’s results hopefully can develop a glimpse of Vietnamese current language education so that some measured pedagogical developments can be achieved
TABLEOFCONTENTS
DECLARATION..
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT...............
ABSTRACT...........
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES........................................
P A R T I - INTRODUCTION...........
.1 Rationale of the study. . .
2. Previous Studies........................................
.3 Scope of the study..
4. Research obiectives and research questions
.5 Significance of the Study........... 6. Designofthestudy...........
PART II - DEVELOPMENT............................
Chapter 1: Theoretical background..
1. 1. Key concepts in English as a Lingua Franca ......
.1 .1 .1 The worldwide spread of English in the era of globalization. .1 .1 2. Kachru's Three Circles Model and English varieties.
.... 3 7
7
.............. 10 ............ 1 0
.............. 10
10 .............. 1
1. 1. 3. World Englishes, Word Standard English and New Englishes.............. 14 1. 1. 4. International English and English as a Lingua Franca.
. 15
1. 2. Native Model versus Non-Native Model................................................... 18
1. 2. 1. Native Speaker- an ambiguous concept............
............................. 18 1. 2. 2. Native Speaker Model or Non-Native Speaker Mode: a controversy .... 21
.1 2. 3. Native English Speaking Teachers (NESTs) versus Non-native English
Speaking Teachers (NNESTs).
.1 2. .3 .1 Adiscussion oflanguage teaching competence ofNESTs and NNESTs.....
1. 2. 3. 2. Attitudes towards NESTs and NNESTs..
......29
.............. 29 ............... 36
Chapter 2: Research Methodology..... 2. .1 Participants ...
2. 2. Research approach
2. 3. Research method...
2. 3. 1. Data collection method.
2. .3 .1 .1 Open-ended questionnaire .......... 2. 3. 1. 2. Interviews.
2. 3. 2. Data analysis method.
Chapter 3: Findings Analysis and Discussion.
.................. 41 ... 41 ..... 42
.......... 43 4 3 .....43
...44
........ 45 .............. 46
3. .1 Perceptionsof Native and Non-Native English Speaking Teachers.......... 46 3. .1 .1 Preference over Native and Non- Native English Speaking Teachers . . . . 46
.3 .1 .1 .1 Discussion of the student results .
.. .. . ................4 6 .3 .1 .1 2. Discussion of teacher results.
......................4 8 .3 .1 .1 3. Comparing the student results and the teacher results
.......... 52
3. .1 2. Perceptions of the strengths and weaknesses of NESTs and NESTs... 53 .3 .1 2. .1 Discussion of student results. ................. 53
.3 .1 2. 2. Discussion of teacher results.....
.55 .3 .1 2. .3 Comparing the student results and the teacher results
.........59 3. 2. Perceptions of Native Speaker Model in language teaching/ learning. 60
.3 2. .1 Teaching/ learning goal ....
................. 60 3. 2. 1. I. Discussion of student results......................... ...... ..... .............. ......... 6 0
.3 2. .1 2. Discussion of teacher results.
.................. 6 1
.3 2. .1 .3 Comparing the student results and theteacher results
6.2 .3 2. 2. Preferred varieties of English ......
............ 63 3. 2. 2. I. Discussion of student results.............
............... 63 3. 2. 2. 2. Discussion of teacher results......
............... 6 9 3. 2. 2. 3. Comparing the student results and the teacher results .................... 74
3. 2. 3. Teacher's view on the inclusion of different varieties of English in
language teaching.
. .76
PART III- CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS............ 78
1. Conclusion...
2. Recommendations ......
........... 78
...... 80
3. Limitations of the study .
.......... 83 4. Suggestions for further studies.....
...... 83 BIBLIOGRAPHY........................
1. Rationale of the study
The world, over the last five decades, has experienced a phenomenal, explosive growth of English on a global scale. The unprecedented worldwide spread of English beyond the boundary of what Kachru (1985) termed "Inner Circle" countries has substantially consolidated the position of English as a Lingua Franca (henceforth ELF, making ti the 'prestigious' language ni most international encounters (Crystal, 1997; Graddol, 1997; McKay, 2003). In other words, English has gained the elite global status, becoming the language used "by the world" and "for the world" (Ngo, 2012).
The globalization of English is not all merits in itself, though. One foreseeable effect is that English is being dragged drastically away from the hands of its originators, being modified and hybridized in various aspects. The puzzling questions of the ownership of English are thus emerging as a bothersome issue to researchers: Who actually owns English? Whose English should be adopted as the model for international communication? Do language learners need to rigidly adhere to the native speaker norms to guarantee their communicative competence?
Although recommendations have been made for teachers, learners, and all users of English to move beyond the native-speaker model as the sole target in
English language instruction (Jenkins, 2000, 2006; McKay, 2002: Brutt-Griffler, 2002; Seidlhofer, 2001), there exists a fact that the native-speaker model is still mythically "worshipped" in many countries, including Vietnam. Obsessed with the native-speaker language competence, learners rush en masse to English language centers which advertise opportunities to work with "native English teachers" and
promise the capability of "using English as a native speaker" in the shortest time. These catchy phrases are also repeatedly found in a wide range of recruitment
advertisements, "Native English Instructors wanted", "Native speakers, over 22, with university degree only", to name just a few (cited in Fukumura, 1993). Another
example on this issue is the recent recruitment of 100 Philippine teachers of English
by the Department of Education and Training (DOET) in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. This decision provoked two different waves of responses: one is from
parents who questioned the recruitment o f such teachers whose language competence was thought not to be any better than Vietnamese teachers of English; and the other
is from Vietnamese teachers who felt being discriminated against by their foreign counterparts?. In quoting these examples, the researcher has no intention of giving any "right-or-wrong" judgments apart from the desire to shift the focus to the following existing situations in Vietnam: (1) the dominant native-orientation
manifested in both recruiting strategies, and (2) the common discrimination against NNESTs.
Moreover, there is a contradiction that while we tend to be quite tolerant with foreigners learning Vietnamese, we do not have such an attitude towards Vietnamese learners learning English. We always assert that communicative success is the
priority, but we keep on ignoring, either unintentionally or intentionally, the fact that in the context when far more interactions are between non-native speakers, any
attempt to identify with Inner Circle speakers or to produce the variety of English grounded there is hardly necessary.
In Vietnamese context, the teaching and learning of English has been
immensely influenced by Inner Circle countries. This influence, under the form of funding and training programs, makes English nearly impossible to be "a neutral
medium unlinked with Western cultural and ideological values," (Pham, 2011). As a result, almost all pedagogical activities in Vietnam are quite native speaker-oriented
(e.g. learning materials are stubbornly Anglo-centrically designed; other varieties of English are marginally reflected in ELT curricula and teaching materials; assessment tends to focus on how closely learners conform to the native norms, mostly
American and British, and so on). Fortunately, due to the country's endeavor to further its integration into international and regional communities, a part of Vietnamese people are becoming more aware of the necessity of a linguistic repertoire which can cater to the communicative needs with not only Americans or Britons or Australians, but also with people from neighboring countries such as Singapore and the Philippines. In this way, the pluralistic standard approach, albeit
still dim and weak, has started to make inroads into the ELT stream.
All the aforementioned features reflect the intersection between two main
approaches to Vietnamese language education, that can be termed shortly Native Approach and Non-native Approach. While the former clings to the traditional loyalty to Inner Circle countries' norms, the latter presents an effort to curtail the native- speaker dominance and to encourage the incorporation of more varieties, or New Englishes, into practice. The issue of accepting and adapting New Englishes has been raised in Vietnam, but whether this proposal can offer a plausible alternative to the traditional phiên bản still generates a heated debate. What we need now is serious research on both theoretical and practical feasibility of each approach within the
Vietnamese current context. Nevertheless, seemingly up to date not much has been done except for quite few related studies like Do's research (2010), Pham's review
(2001), and Ton & Pham's investigation (2010). This research gap sparks the researcher's special interest and serves as the first and foremost impetus for the
implementation of this research on "Native and Non-native approaches to teaching
English as a global lingua franca as perceived by teachers and students at FELTE, ULIS, VNU." Hopefully, this attempt can narrow the gap and bring new perspectives to the field.
2. Previous Studies
There is a growing body of publications and research concerning the global status of English. Back in the late 19th century and the early 20 century, World Englishes (WEs) and English as an International Language (EIL) were topics notable for their absence in most of linguistic forums and conferences. Up to present, many
Do Drive thay đổi chính sách, nên một số link cũ yêu cầu duyệt download.
Password giải nén nếu cần: ket-noi.com | Bấm vào Link, đợi vài giây sau đó bấm Get Website để tải:
Nhà xuất bản: University of Languages and International Studies
Ngày: 2012
Chủ đề: Phương pháp giảng dạy
Tiếng Anh
Bản ngữ
Phi bản ngữ
Miêu tả: 93 p. + CD-ROM
M.A. Thesis. English Language Teaching Methodology -- University of Languages and International Studies. Vietnam National University, Hanoi, 2012
The world’s current movement towards teaching and learning English as a default medium of international contacts has led to some revolutionary changes, first and foremost, in perceptions of the native model. Many recommendations have been made to move beyond the native speaker norms, and this trend is supported by not only native but also nonnative English-speaking researchers and educators all around the world. The conservative loyalty to the native speaker model, however, still survives, especially in outer and expanding circle countries, including Vietnam. With an attempt to contribute a classroom perspective to the issue, the researcher conducted a survey on 100 students and 25 teachers at the Faculty of English Language Teacher Education (ULIS – VNU) combined with focus group interviews so as to investigate their perceptions of native and non-native approaches to ELT. The findings show such divided opinions. At one extreme, a minority of FELTE teachers and learners hold a strong belief that the native model should be the benchmark of perfection. At the other end of the spectrum, a much larger number of respondents express flexible and tolerant attitudes towards the adoption of new varieties of English, especially in pronunciation and culture dimensions. Despite some encouraging results, a lingering aspiration to the achievement of native-like competence can be sensed via the students’ majority preference of native English-speaking teachers and Vietnamese teachers’ self-doubt and feelings of inferiority. This study’s results hopefully can develop a glimpse of Vietnamese current language education so that some measured pedagogical developments can be achieved
TABLEOFCONTENTS
DECLARATION..
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT...............
ABSTRACT...........
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES........................................
P A R T I - INTRODUCTION...........
.1 Rationale of the study. . .
2. Previous Studies........................................
.3 Scope of the study..
4. Research obiectives and research questions
.5 Significance of the Study........... 6. Designofthestudy...........
PART II - DEVELOPMENT............................
Chapter 1: Theoretical background..
1. 1. Key concepts in English as a Lingua Franca ......
.1 .1 .1 The worldwide spread of English in the era of globalization. .1 .1 2. Kachru's Three Circles Model and English varieties.
.... 3 7
7
.............. 10 ............ 1 0
.............. 10
10 .............. 1
1. 1. 3. World Englishes, Word Standard English and New Englishes.............. 14 1. 1. 4. International English and English as a Lingua Franca.
. 15
1. 2. Native Model versus Non-Native Model................................................... 18
1. 2. 1. Native Speaker- an ambiguous concept............
............................. 18 1. 2. 2. Native Speaker Model or Non-Native Speaker Mode: a controversy .... 21
.1 2. 3. Native English Speaking Teachers (NESTs) versus Non-native English
Speaking Teachers (NNESTs).
.1 2. .3 .1 Adiscussion oflanguage teaching competence ofNESTs and NNESTs.....
1. 2. 3. 2. Attitudes towards NESTs and NNESTs..
......29
.............. 29 ............... 36
Chapter 2: Research Methodology..... 2. .1 Participants ...
2. 2. Research approach
2. 3. Research method...
2. 3. 1. Data collection method.
2. .3 .1 .1 Open-ended questionnaire .......... 2. 3. 1. 2. Interviews.
2. 3. 2. Data analysis method.
Chapter 3: Findings Analysis and Discussion.
.................. 41 ... 41 ..... 42
.......... 43 4 3 .....43
...44
........ 45 .............. 46
3. .1 Perceptionsof Native and Non-Native English Speaking Teachers.......... 46 3. .1 .1 Preference over Native and Non- Native English Speaking Teachers . . . . 46
.3 .1 .1 .1 Discussion of the student results .
.. .. . ................4 6 .3 .1 .1 2. Discussion of teacher results.
......................4 8 .3 .1 .1 3. Comparing the student results and the teacher results
.......... 52
3. .1 2. Perceptions of the strengths and weaknesses of NESTs and NESTs... 53 .3 .1 2. .1 Discussion of student results. ................. 53
.3 .1 2. 2. Discussion of teacher results.....
.55 .3 .1 2. .3 Comparing the student results and the teacher results
.........59 3. 2. Perceptions of Native Speaker Model in language teaching/ learning. 60
.3 2. .1 Teaching/ learning goal ....
................. 60 3. 2. 1. I. Discussion of student results......................... ...... ..... .............. ......... 6 0
.3 2. .1 2. Discussion of teacher results.
.................. 6 1
.3 2. .1 .3 Comparing the student results and theteacher results
6.2 .3 2. 2. Preferred varieties of English ......
............ 63 3. 2. 2. I. Discussion of student results.............
............... 63 3. 2. 2. 2. Discussion of teacher results......
............... 6 9 3. 2. 2. 3. Comparing the student results and the teacher results .................... 74
3. 2. 3. Teacher's view on the inclusion of different varieties of English in
language teaching.
. .76
PART III- CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS............ 78
1. Conclusion...
2. Recommendations ......
........... 78
...... 80
3. Limitations of the study .
.......... 83 4. Suggestions for further studies.....
...... 83 BIBLIOGRAPHY........................
1. Rationale of the study
The world, over the last five decades, has experienced a phenomenal, explosive growth of English on a global scale. The unprecedented worldwide spread of English beyond the boundary of what Kachru (1985) termed "Inner Circle" countries has substantially consolidated the position of English as a Lingua Franca (henceforth ELF, making ti the 'prestigious' language ni most international encounters (Crystal, 1997; Graddol, 1997; McKay, 2003). In other words, English has gained the elite global status, becoming the language used "by the world" and "for the world" (Ngo, 2012).
The globalization of English is not all merits in itself, though. One foreseeable effect is that English is being dragged drastically away from the hands of its originators, being modified and hybridized in various aspects. The puzzling questions of the ownership of English are thus emerging as a bothersome issue to researchers: Who actually owns English? Whose English should be adopted as the model for international communication? Do language learners need to rigidly adhere to the native speaker norms to guarantee their communicative competence?
Although recommendations have been made for teachers, learners, and all users of English to move beyond the native-speaker model as the sole target in
English language instruction (Jenkins, 2000, 2006; McKay, 2002: Brutt-Griffler, 2002; Seidlhofer, 2001), there exists a fact that the native-speaker model is still mythically "worshipped" in many countries, including Vietnam. Obsessed with the native-speaker language competence, learners rush en masse to English language centers which advertise opportunities to work with "native English teachers" and
promise the capability of "using English as a native speaker" in the shortest time. These catchy phrases are also repeatedly found in a wide range of recruitment
advertisements, "Native English Instructors wanted", "Native speakers, over 22, with university degree only", to name just a few (cited in Fukumura, 1993). Another
example on this issue is the recent recruitment of 100 Philippine teachers of English
by the Department of Education and Training (DOET) in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. This decision provoked two different waves of responses: one is from
parents who questioned the recruitment o f such teachers whose language competence was thought not to be any better than Vietnamese teachers of English; and the other
is from Vietnamese teachers who felt being discriminated against by their foreign counterparts?. In quoting these examples, the researcher has no intention of giving any "right-or-wrong" judgments apart from the desire to shift the focus to the following existing situations in Vietnam: (1) the dominant native-orientation
manifested in both recruiting strategies, and (2) the common discrimination against NNESTs.
Moreover, there is a contradiction that while we tend to be quite tolerant with foreigners learning Vietnamese, we do not have such an attitude towards Vietnamese learners learning English. We always assert that communicative success is the
priority, but we keep on ignoring, either unintentionally or intentionally, the fact that in the context when far more interactions are between non-native speakers, any
attempt to identify with Inner Circle speakers or to produce the variety of English grounded there is hardly necessary.
In Vietnamese context, the teaching and learning of English has been
immensely influenced by Inner Circle countries. This influence, under the form of funding and training programs, makes English nearly impossible to be "a neutral
medium unlinked with Western cultural and ideological values," (Pham, 2011). As a result, almost all pedagogical activities in Vietnam are quite native speaker-oriented
(e.g. learning materials are stubbornly Anglo-centrically designed; other varieties of English are marginally reflected in ELT curricula and teaching materials; assessment tends to focus on how closely learners conform to the native norms, mostly
American and British, and so on). Fortunately, due to the country's endeavor to further its integration into international and regional communities, a part of Vietnamese people are becoming more aware of the necessity of a linguistic repertoire which can cater to the communicative needs with not only Americans or Britons or Australians, but also with people from neighboring countries such as Singapore and the Philippines. In this way, the pluralistic standard approach, albeit
still dim and weak, has started to make inroads into the ELT stream.
All the aforementioned features reflect the intersection between two main
approaches to Vietnamese language education, that can be termed shortly Native Approach and Non-native Approach. While the former clings to the traditional loyalty to Inner Circle countries' norms, the latter presents an effort to curtail the native- speaker dominance and to encourage the incorporation of more varieties, or New Englishes, into practice. The issue of accepting and adapting New Englishes has been raised in Vietnam, but whether this proposal can offer a plausible alternative to the traditional phiên bản still generates a heated debate. What we need now is serious research on both theoretical and practical feasibility of each approach within the
Vietnamese current context. Nevertheless, seemingly up to date not much has been done except for quite few related studies like Do's research (2010), Pham's review
(2001), and Ton & Pham's investigation (2010). This research gap sparks the researcher's special interest and serves as the first and foremost impetus for the
implementation of this research on "Native and Non-native approaches to teaching
English as a global lingua franca as perceived by teachers and students at FELTE, ULIS, VNU." Hopefully, this attempt can narrow the gap and bring new perspectives to the field.
2. Previous Studies
There is a growing body of publications and research concerning the global status of English. Back in the late 19th century and the early 20 century, World Englishes (WEs) and English as an International Language (EIL) were topics notable for their absence in most of linguistic forums and conferences. Up to present, many
Do Drive thay đổi chính sách, nên một số link cũ yêu cầu duyệt download.
Password giải nén nếu cần: ket-noi.com | Bấm vào Link, đợi vài giây sau đó bấm Get Website để tải:
You must be registered for see links
Last edited by a moderator: