Matsuda and Kubota

I found this week’s reading a perfect way to close the semester, giving teachers implications. While I rejoiced over the article by Matsuda, the article by Kubota brought unwanted feelings. I will start with Matsuda’s World English. There were several teachers suggestions on how to accept and teach the different standards and varieties of Englishes. I agree with the suggestions, we as pre-service teachers/teachers must give the students all the information available to us so that they can make a language choice. For example, students need to understand both the dominant and the non-dominant language form, what works and what does not, and the risk associated with using a particular form. Giving students this type of information allows them to grow language wise and also gives them a choice to which form to use depending on the context. Although teaching the different forms or varieties is important, I believe the real work is manifested in how the teaching is carried out, the method one uses. We must teach them without “valorizing the privileged varieties” I believe this was a good point to be made. I believe we must try to instill a sense that all forms and varieties are the equal. We must teach without making one variety appear better than the other.  Reading this made me think about the video we watched in class of the teacher who taught his students about the different varieties through a game. I believe this is a great example of how the different forms can be taught without giving more power to one. I strongly agreed with the teachers implication that the author mentioned in the article, I believe we must present students with a wide variety of information so that they can have the option of which form to use.

The article by Kubota on the other hand brought some disturbing feelings.  It was shocking to me to find out the term “foreign language” essentially means English (at least in Japan). The world has been swallow by the power , and benefits ( whether true or not) that is associated with learning English that they go as far as dismissing other language and overtly publicize that English is better.  For example the article mentions the different treatments that two individual students receive base on the language they are learning, with the students learning English receiving more praises and attention while the other student is left alone.  There is also a false idea/plan that advertises that other languages are being offered when in reality it is false.  For example, in the Course of Study for high school that advertises foreign language as being different language but nevertheless there is only one foreign language offered, English. This just goes to support the idea that foreign language is English. Another issue that is brought up in this article is the discrimination that exits between the different English countries and ethnicities. Because English is so closely linked with American and British English other countries tend to suffer some discrimination or biases, this is another piece of information that I found to be discouraging especially for those are not white. ALTs from other countries are often giving a hard time although they speak native English just like the rest. For example the Australian ALT who is asked to speak with an American accent, as if that is effetely done, or the African American ATL is asked to speak Standard English. These bias ideas revolve around the idea of English having one correct form. Although the article states that we have grown in our school of thoughts, I believe we still have a great way to go. 

Mckay and Bokhorst chapter 4 and Farr and Song

As I was reading the book and the article I just had this recurring question of why are people in some way shape or form force to abandon their mother tongue in other to be proficiency in English. Or why it is that people are punish for speaking their mother tongue?  Throughout this week’s reading I felt like I was seeing people being force to do just that. Starting in Singapore with the annual speak mandarin campaign, which encouraged Chinese Singaporeans to replaces to use of dialect with Mandarin. And I just thought that this was outrageous, the campaign was not encouraging people to adopt or practice Mandarin it was asking them to completely replace their dialect language. And this same concept just about happens in other countries.  The other thing that also shocked me was the question of why people were getting penalized for using their mother language. For example the book mentioned the two nurses that were reprimanded for using Tagalog in the hospital. I just ask myself what sense does that make.  Why would someone not be able to communicate in their language of choice? The book continued with saying that the mayor of Monterey Park opposed gifts from the Chinese books store to the city library because “if people want foreign language (books) they can go (buy it) on their own (100). And in my head I am wondering what the logic behind refusing the gifts. To me, it seems like the issue on language has become such a big problem. We have gone as far as refusing students to communicate in their language in class, at work, and now in public domains. And I wonder what is so special about English that certain countries would go as far as forcing their citizens to abandon their dialects? Why is there a growing idea that English is the only acceptable language in the classroom? I feel like we are so preoccupied with certain things(such English only) that we do not have to chance to see how this impact children and their view on their language and culture. Telling someone that their language in not acceptable in the class or only using their language in “derision” circumstances only makes them feel as if they are not important. It encourages people to reject their own language to pursuit that which is more accepted in the community. The article by Farr and song just about took the words out of my mouth when it comes to language and the reason behind certain actions, “In order to deal most effectively with multiplicity of language ideologies in the classroom, we must first understand them” (651). I fell like too often teachers are too busy saying no that they don’t take the time to understand and pay attention to what is actually happening. This kind of behavior and attitude affect student. But all these issue stem from language policy and the impact it has on everyone.  Language policy not only affects those at the macro level on national language planning it also affect those at the micro level. Language policies go as far as impacting what kind of language people use in the community and at home.

McKay and Bokhorst

McKay and Bokhorst

·         EIL learning context

In this section, the author talked about the inner, outer, and expanding circle and the type of English that is use in each. This section of the book reminded me of where I am from. In Cameroon we have two official languages French and English. The author talked about the bottom cylinder of Yano’s model. This cylinder is for those who speak a variety of English, a local variety distinct from the bilingual of “real English”.  In Cameroon there is a language called “pidgin”.  It’s English but it’s very different from the regular English. The words sound nothing like English and I cannot see merging with the others just like Yano said “this variety is not permeable”.

·         British/English/Australia

So when I was reading this I was really surprised by the information that I found about how each country attacks or go about solving the problem of having nonnative English speakers in the classroom. The program designed in Australia I thought was great (at least the thought behind it). Having the students not only strive for English competence but also maintaining their native tongue and pushing for more by encouraging students to learn other languages.  The 1^st step is pretty common in all English countries but the 2^nd and 3^rd step are different. Often you see many people who are so focus on learning the main language and they forget about their native tongue. This happened to my younger siblings, my parents were strict on us to learn English. They slowly decreased the amount of French spoken in the house. So now 15 years later my siblings do not understand French let alone speak it. That is why I like the idea that the program also put an emphasis on maintaining the language. Now going the USA versus the British requirements whether to put those students in a regular class or to take them out, I side or I agree with the program that is offered here. When I first came here I was place in ESL, for about an hour a day. And I think this was very beneficial for me. I did not feel discriminated nor did I get comments from NES students. Also I think this good/healthy for the students because it gives them a chance to see other students that are just like them. Within this environment, I fell like students are more comfortable to learn and take risk because they know everyone here doesn’t know English that well. So I believe taking those students out of the regular class helps them.

·         While reading this I stumbled across comment made from teachers that just about shocked me.  Comparing a student who speaks two languages to someone “who’s very bright and has a stroke. And can’t express themselves”. My mouth just about dropped when I saw this. I could not believe that someone, let alone a teacher can say this. This is the kind of comment that puts kids down and makes them not even want to learn the language.

Overall I feel like we are always going to see English as a power language, we might/ the program might show that they want others to learn a language or maintain the one they have but ultimately we/society/ the media still give students to notion that English is the power language, forget about the other language, thus making some people to completely disregard their language and making others to be motivated to learn. I believe those outside of the English speaking countries who are motivated to learn English are those who know that someday they will immigrate to an English speaking country, those who put acronyms such as TENAR, TENOP, and TENOR, are students who do not see themselves leaving their countries. They do not see why or how this could be beneficial to them.