The impact of school on EFL learning motivation: An Indonesian case study

QUARTERLY CONTENTS ARTICLES Complexities of Identity Formation: A Narrative Inquiry of an EFL Teacher 657 Amy B. M. Tsui English Language Teachers Reflecting on Reflections: A Malaysian Experience 681 Muhammad Kamarul Kabilan Preparing Teachers of Second Language Reading Joy Janzen 707 How Are Nonnative-English-Speaking Teachers Perceived by Young Learners? 731 Yuko Goto Butler The Impact of School on EFL Learning Motivation: An Indonesian Case Study 757 Martin Lamb BRIEF REPORTS AND SUMMARIES Conceptions of a Good Tertiary EFL Teacher in China Qunying Zhang and David Watkins 781 Mitigating Difficult Requests in the Workplace: What Learners and Teachers Need to Know 791 Gillian Wigglesworth and Lynda Yates RESEARCH ISSUES The Future of Research Synthesis in Applied Linguistics: Beyond Art or Science 805 John M. Norris and Lourdes Ortega RESEARCH DIGEST: TESOL TOPICS IN OTHER JOURNALS 817 REVIEWS Inner Speech—L2: Thinking Words in a Second Language María C. M. de Guerrero Reviewed by Andrew D. Cohen Second Language Learning Theories (2nd Ed.) Rosamond Mitchell and Florence Myles Reviewed by Myrna Goldstein 823 821 Volume 41, Number 4 䊐 December 2007 826 Understanding Language Teaching: From Method to Postmethod B. Kumaravadivelu Reviewed by Duff Johnston Crossing the Curriculum: Multilingual Learners in College Classrooms Vivian Zamel and Ruth Spack (Eds.) Reviewed by Rebecca Williams Mlynarczyk Postcolonial Identity of Sri Lankan English Manique Gunesekera Reviewed by Kaushalya Perera 828 831 A Practical Guide to Using Computers in Language Teaching John de Szendeffy Reviewed by Diane Potts 833 Mastering ESL and Bilingual Methods: Differentiated Instruction for Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CLD) Students 835 Socorro G. Herrera and Kevin G. Murry Reviewed by John M. Spartz Complexities of Identity Formation: A Narrative Inquiry of an EFL Teacher AMY B. M. TSUI The University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR, China This article explores teachers’ identity formation through a narrative inquiry of the professional identity of an EFL teacher, Minfang, in the People’s Republic of China. Drawing on Wenger’s (1998) social theory of identity formation as a dual process of identification and negotiation of meanings, it examines the lived experience of Minfang as an EFL learner and EFL teacher throughout his 6 years of teaching, the processes that were involved as he struggled with multiple identities, the interplay between reification and negotiation of meanings, and the institutional construction and his personal reconstruction of identities. The stories of Minfang highlighted the complex relationships between membership, competence, and legitimacy of access to practice; between the appropriation and ownership of meanings, the centrality of participation, and the mediating role of power relationships in the processes of identity formation. T eachers’ professional identity is considered a critical component in the sociocultural and sociopolitical landscape of the classroom and in teachers’ professional development (Varghese, Morgan, Johnston, & Johnson, 2005). In the field of TESOL, although research on teacher cognition, teacher knowledge, teacher learning, and teacher development has burgeoned in the last two decades, only a very small number of studies have focused on teacher identity (see, e.g., Duff & Uchida, 1997; Morgan, 2004; and Pavlenko, 2003). A review of the literature in this area suggests that relevant studies converge on three major issues. The first issue is the multidimensionality or multifaceted nature of professional identity and the relationships between these dimensions or facets. Although researchers seem to agree that professional identities are multidimensional or multifaceted, they hold opposing views with regard to whether the “sub-identities” (Mishler, 1999, p. 8) should or could be “harmonized” and “well balanced” (Beijaard, Meijer, & Verloop, 2004, p. 122) or whether the construction of identity is a “continuing site of struggle” between conflicting identities (MacLure, 1993, p. 313; see also Lampert, 1985; Samuel & Stephens, 2000). TESOL QUARTERLY Vol. 41, No. 4, December 2007 657 The second issue is the relationship between the personal and social dimensions of identity formation. Most studies emphasize the personal dimensions, focusing on self-reflection on who one is, what one wants to become, and teachers’ personal practical knowledge (Antonek, McCormick & Donato, 1997). However, a number of researchers have pointed out the importance of the professional context, which is part of the broader sociocultural and political context, in shaping teacher identity (Duff & Uchida, 1997; He, 2002a, 2002b, 2002c; Reynolds, 1996). The third issue, which is closely related to the second, is the relationship between agency and structure in identity formation. Coldron and Smith (1999) stress the importance of agency over social structure and argue that the choices that teachers make constitute their professional identities. On the other hand, Moore, Edwards, Halpin, & George (2002) argue that teachers’ active location in social space can be undermined by policies or institutions that require conformity, which could marginalize their positionings in that space. Relatively little attention, however, has been given to understanding the processes of identity formation, the interplay between these processes and the identities constituted as teachers position themselves. In this article, I explore the complex processes of teacher identity formation through a narrative inquiry of the professional identity of an EFL teacher, Minfang,1 in the People’s Republic of China. Drawing on Wenger’s (1998) social theory of identity formation, I examine Minfang’s lived experience of Minfang as an EFL learner and teacher throughout his 6-year teaching career, the processes that were involved as he struggled with multiple identities, the interplay between reification and negotiation of meanings, and the institutional construction and his personal reconstruction of identities. METHODOLOGY: NARRATIVE INQUIRY OF IDENTITY FORMATION The investigation of Minfang’s identity formation as a teacher was conducted through a narrative inquiry. Connelly and Clandinin (1999) refer to teachers’ professional identity in terms of “stories to live by” (p. 4). According to them, stories provide a narrative thread that teachers draw on to make sense of their experience and themselves. As Beijaard et al. 1 658 To protect the real identity of the EFL teacher, Minfang, all personal names, and names of institutions are fictitious. The place of origin of Minfang was also deliberately vague. This does not in any way affect the authenticity of the stories, however. The author wishes to thank Minfang for sharing his moving stories with her. TESOL QUARTERLY (2004) point out, “Through storytelling, teachers engage in narrative ‘theorizing’ and, based on that, teachers may further discover and shape their professional identity resulting in new or different stories” (p. 121). Minfang’s narrative was constructed and reconstructed over a period of 6 months. It started with face-to-face storytelling when we met at a conference and was continued and reshaped through Minfang’s reflective diaries which he wrote for himself and shared with me. These reflections were further reshaped and enriched as I responded to his diaries by sharing my own experiences and probing for more information. Finally, we had intensive face-to-face conversations over a period of one week during which Minfang relived the stories that he had told. During this period, we met four times for about 4 hours each time. The analysis of the data were conducted in the following manner. First, the data were sorted chronologically from his childhood learning experience to his last year of teaching before he left for further studies. Second, the data were sorted according to the identity conflicts that Minfang experienced. For example, the conflicts he experienced as an EFL learner and as an EFL teacher were sorted and the relationships between these conflicts were analysed. This process involved reorganizing the flashbacks that he used as he explained the psychological struggles he experienced when he was a learner and a teacher. Finally, the data were analyzed according to the framework of the dual process of identity formation proposed by Wenger (1998), that is, identification and negotiability of meanings. In particular, the following aspects are examined: forms and sources of reification, participation and nonparticipation in reification, negotiability and nonnegotiability of meanings, and participation and nonparticipation in the negotiation of meanings. Again, the relationship between the processes was examined. In the rest of this article, I present Wenger’s framework and a brief outline of the ELT landscape in China in which Minfang’s stories were situated and interpreted. Next, I analyse and then discuss the stories.2 This article concludes by showing how the interplay of identification and negotiation of meanings shapes teacher identity and highlighting the centrality of participation in both processes. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: THE DUAL PROCESS OF IDENTITY FORMATION One of the most powerful theories of identity formation, which illuminates the three major issues of teacher identity research outlined 2 The excerpts from the written narratives by Minfang will be presented verbatim so as to retain the original flavor. The conversations were conducted in Cantonese and every effort was made to keep the English translation as close to Cantonese as possible. COMPLEXITIES OF IDENTITY FORMATION 659 earlier, is that proposed by Wenger (1998). In Wenger’s framework, one’s identity does not lie only in the way one talks or thinks about oneself, or only in the way others talk or think about one, but in the way one’s identity is lived day-to-day. Wenger proposes that identities are formed amid the “tension between our investment in the various forms of belonging and our ability to negotiate the meanings that matter in those contexts” (p. 188). Therefore, identity formation is a dual process of identification and negotiation of meanings. By identification, he means the investment of self in building associations and differentiations. Identification is reificative: We identify, or are being identified, as belonging to socially organized categories, roles, and so on.3 It is also participative: It is the lived experience of belonging that constitutes who we are. Therefore, identification is both relational and experiential. Identification Wenger (1998) proposes three modes of belonging as the sources of identification: engagement, imagination, and alignment. Engagement in practice is a powerful source of identification in that it involves investing ourselves in what we do as well as in our relations with other members of the community. It is through relating ourselves to other people that we get a sense of who we are; it is through engaging in practice that we find out how we can participate in activities and the competence required. Another source of identification is imagination. Imagination is a process of relating ourselves to the world beyond the community of practice in which we are engaged and seeing our experience as located in the broader context and as reflective of the broader connections. Imagination is “the production of images of the self and images of the world that transcend engagement” (Wenger, 1998, p. 177). However, imagination, Wenger observes, can also lead to stereotyping when practice is not fully understood and when overgeneralizations are made on the basis of specific practices. The third source of identification is alignment. It is a process in which 3 660 Wenger’s concept of reification refers to giving concrete form to something which is abstract. For example, the blindfolded woman holding a scale is a reification of justice; the award of a certificate to an individual at the end of a course is a reification of the learning experience that this particular individual has gone through. As Wenger points out, reification is a process in which “aspects of human experience and practice are congealed into fixed forms and given the status of object” (p. 59). In other words, through reification the meanings produced by our experience are projected and concretized into an independent existence. (For a detailed exposition of the concept of reification, see Wenger, 1998, pp. 58–62, 287.) TESOL QUARTERLY participants in a community become connected by bringing their actions and practices in line with a broader enterprise. It is through alignment that the identity of a large group such as an institution becomes the identity of its participants. Alignment allows us to see the effectiveness of our actions beyond our own engagement. It involves power and, as such, it is often achieved through a complex interplay of compliance and allegiance. Wenger (1998) points out that alignment achieved purely through coercion and oppression not only affects our identities but also leads to dissociation and alienation. Negotiation of Meanings The other process of identity formation is the negotiation of meanings that are defined in the processes of identification. The negotiability of meanings, according to Wenger (1998), determines the extent to which one is able to contribute to and shape the meanings in which one is invested; it is therefore fundamental to identity formation. Meanings are produced in the process of participation and they compete for the definition of events, actions, and so forth. Some meanings have more currency than others because of the different relations of power between those who produced them (see also Freeman & Johnson, 1998). Their relative values, however, are subject to negotiation. People claim ownership over the meanings produced in the sense of being able to use, modify, and appropriate them as their own. Ownership of meanings is increased if many people participate in the negotiation process. Wenger refers to the processes in which the value of meanings is determined as the “economies of meanings” (p. 197). Wenger points out that the inability to negotiate and claim ownership of meanings, often because of asymmetrical power relations, can create an identity of nonparticipation and marginality. The appropriation of meanings can alienate those who produced the original meanings when they find themselves unable to reclaim the meanings they produced. In a community of practice, engagement in the negotiation of meanings involves the production and adoption of meanings: The two must go together. Members whose meanings are consistently rejected and whose experiences are considered irrelevant, and hence not accepted as a form of competence, will develop an identity of marginality. Wenger’s theory of identity formation just outlined provides a powerful framework for exploring the major issues delineated at the beginning of this article and for making sense of the lived complexity of teachers’ professional identity formation. In the following section, I present a narrative inquiry of Minfang’s professional identity formation. COMPLEXITIES OF IDENTITY FORMATION 661 A NARRATIVE INQUIRY OF MINFANG’S IDENTITY FORMATION EFL Landscape in China: Deaf-and-dumb English and Communicative Language Teaching Since China adopted an open door economic policy in 1978, the dramatic increase in the need to use English in face-to-face interactions with foreigners threw into question the prevalent EFL teaching methodologies at the time. These methodologies consisted of a combination of Chinese traditions of learning, such as intensive study and recitation of texts, and western influences, including grammar-translation, extensive and intensive reading, linguistic analysis, and the study of literary texts (Burnaby & Sun, 1989). University graduates were found to be highly competent in writing and grammar, but poor in speaking and listening. In 1986, the then-State Education Commission (now the Ministry of Education) conducted a national survey in 15 provinces and cities, and the findings revealed that most middle-school graduates found it hard to converse in simple English even after 900 hours of learning (Liu, 1995). The term deaf-and-dumb English [lungya yingyu] has been used to describe the English taught in schools and universities in China. To address the problem, a large number of native speakers of English have been recruited since the eighties from the West to teach English, mainly in universities, and they have been referred to as foreign experts. Communicative language teaching (CLT) was introduced to China in this context and taken on board initially by a small team of professors who produced a textbook series based on this approach, called Communicative English for Chinese Learners. In 1980, the series became part of the State Education Commission’s (later the Ministry of Education) 5-year plan for producing higher education foreign language curriculum materials, and the textbook series was further developed jointly with the British Council and a number of ELT specialists from the West acting as advisors. In 1985, the Ministry of Education recommended it for nationwide adoption. This series has won numerous awards at national and provincial levels. The adoption of CLT in China was highly controversial at the time. Questions were raised about the appropriateness of a methodology rooted in Western cultures for Chinese learners with different cultural backgrounds. In some universities, CLT was vigorously promoted and the prevailing methodologies were lumped under the term traditional method (TM), as opposed to CLT which was considered a new method and approach. It was in the ELT context just described that Minfang’s lived experience of EFL learning and teaching was situated. 662 TESOL QUARTERLY Minfang’s EFL Learner Identities: Social and Educational Minfang was born in a poor village in a minority region on the eve of China’s open door economic policy in the midseventies. His family was originally from Guangdong but his father, a medical professor, was posted to this region during the Cultural Revolution (1966–1976) for re-education by peasants. Like most people in China, the family went through a great deal of hardship; resources for living and education were scarce. Minfang’s father was very strict with his two children. From a very young age, Minfang and his sister had to finish tasks such as practicing Chinese calligraphy, reciting classical Chinese poems, doing their multiplication tables, and copying the English alphabet before they were allowed to have their meals. They worked very hard, and they were both top students in the province’s best school. In Minfang’s parents’ eyes, going to university was the only way to escape poverty. Learning English was highly valued because it offered the possibility of going overseas, which was generally referred to as getting gold-plated.4 Therefore, his parents were delighted when Minfang was admitted to Nanda, a prestigious university in the Guangdong province that has a strong reputation for its English language teaching. Minfang’s first year at Nanda was a “painful” experience. First of all, he spoke a dialect that, although mutually intelligible with standard Cantonese, made him feel as though he sounded like a country bumpkin to the city folks in Guangzhou. His peers nicknamed him Brother Fang after a TV character who was a caricature of an immigrant from a poor inner region living off his relatives in an affluent city. His classmates made fun of him by mimicking the way he spoke and acted. He felt that not only was his English poor, but his communication style was also different. He wrote in his narrative, “Most of the students from Guangzhou were very talkative and communicative, using ‘sandwiched English’ in their daily conversation, that is, code-switching between Cantonese and English in class. Compared with them, I was an inert and quiet country bumpkin who was ignorant of this cosmopolitan fad.” He was scared of going to class because he could not follow the teacher’s instructions. For the first 3 months, the teachers constantly reminded him that he was on the wrong page. He was sent to evening classes in the language laboratory tailored for students with poor listening and speaking skills. Despite his good knowledge of English grammar and good written English, he was stigmatized as the “deaf-and-dumb English 4 Getting gold-plated (dujin) is a Chinese expression commonly used to refer to people getting qualifications overseas and thereby adding value to themselves. COMPLEXITIES OF IDENTITY FORMATION 663 learner” with “special needs.” Nevertheless, he embraced the opportunity because he had never been in a language laboratory before, and he considered it a golden opportunity to improve his English. Reconstructing Learner Identity Minfang worked hard to be accepted by the learner community at Nanda. He started socializing in the local Cantonese community and learning to speak standard Cantonese, code-mixing and picking up Cantonese slang, which took about a year. After settling into the Cantonese culture, I found myself mingling very well with the community; my roommates lending me English magazines and my classmates helping me with my pronunciation. The communicative English teacher (that is, the teacher responsible for teaching CLT) even sent a bag of crackers to my dormitory hearing that I did not know the English word ‘crackers.’ While enjoying the crackers with me, my roommates urged me to tell the teacher that I did not know the word ‘watermelon’ next time. Although they did it jokingly, I was happy that they talked to me like an insider, which made me feel affiliated and assured. In the rest of the year, therefore, I could completely concentrate on my studies and I even won the first prize in the pronunciation and intonation contest at the end of the year. (Emphasis added) Appropriating and Reclaiming Meanings of EFL Learning Investing his self in his relations with his peers constituted one aspect of Minfang’s identity. The other equally important aspect was investing his self in what he did as an EFL learner. Nanda offered two parallel courses in the first year, Intensive English, which was intended to help students master vocabulary, grammar and syntax, and CLT, which aimed to develop students’ communicative abilities. However, the CLT course took up seven lessons a week, whereas Intensive English took up only four lessons. Although Minfang did very well in English, he was not able to identify his learning with the CLT approach much celebrated in his university. He described the teaching style as “soft and unrealistic” and was skeptical about the basic assumptions of CLT. It was “soft” because the linguistic points were not made entirely explicit in the communicative activities. Students could finish a host of activities without knowing how these activities were related to the language system and what was learned. It was “unrealistic” because it required the teacher to have pragmatic competence. Minfang pointed out that most of his teachers had never interacted with native speakers of English, had never gone overseas, and had never found themselves in a situation where they had to use English for 664 TESOL QUARTERLY daily interaction. It was therefore unrealistic to expect them to evaluate the appropriateness of utterances and communication strategies. Moreover, he felt that these activities carried underlying cultural assumptions which required students to assume different personae if they were to participate fully. For example, instantaneous oral participation in class required students to express opinions spontaneously without careful thinking. For Minfang, this activity went against the Chinese culture, which attaches a great deal of importance to making thoughtful remarks and not babbling before one has thought things through. Neither Minfang nor his classmates felt that they had learned much in the CLT lessons. Minfang defined learning as being able to understand what he was reading and doing and to clarify what he did not understand. He liked Intensive English which required rigorous text and grammatical analyses and learning new vocabulary. These learning tasks made him feel that he had learned something solid. He wrote, I loathed the communicative activities with loud students huddling together and performing mini-dramas. The teacher told us that the activities were designed to help us develop communicative competence, but I just could not understand why we should stay together [sitting in groups] and call out loudly to learn. For him, the CLT classroom was “a battlefield” in which the teacher fired questions at the students and the students had to shield themselves with answers. He added, “I like to learn individually and enjoy the autonomy of being myself. On the surface I did not defy CLT and [was] actively engaged in the activities, but I knew what I liked and disliked” (emphasis added). CLT as “Cruel Language Teaching” Minfang had a clear idea of how he would learn best, but he also knew that he needed to cope with the demands of the CLT teacher. His coping strategy was to distinguish between what he called the “regular” and the “peripheral” time slots. “Regular” time slots were periods of time when he was able to concentrate on his work, such as between 8 and 10 o’clock in the evening, and he spent most of this time on Intensive English assignments and reading English novels. “Peripheral” time slots were times before meals and going to bed when he worked on his CLT assignments. In the second year of his university studies, the examination pressure began to mount. Minfang and his classmates felt that CLT tasks got in the way of preparing for the examination. They started skipping CLT assignments and cutting corners. The teacher reprimanded them and, as a penalty, gave them more assignments. For 3 months before the examination, they had to finish their homework in the bathrooms because the COMPLEXITIES OF IDENTITY FORMATION 665 lights in their dormitories went out at 11 o’clock in the evening. Minfang wrote in his diary, “Huddling in the stinking place, we cursed CLT and called it Cruel Language Teaching because it intensified our pain and sufferings.” In-Class and Out-of-Class Learning: Intensive English Versus CLT Minfang also made a clear distinction between learning inside and outside the classroom. According to him, EFL learning during class time should focus on understanding the building blocks of a sentence and how they are configured to sound logical and meaningful. This understanding laid the foundation for a student’s self-learning outside the classroom. He also believed strongly that he could develop communicative competence through daily interaction with his friends. He felt that too much valuable class time was spent on the CLT textbook and that students could have learned more using other resources outside the classroom. He wrote, Although I did not understand the term ‘communicative competence’ and what it implied at the time, I knew that only hard work and serious learning mattered, and the so-called interpersonal [communication] skills were developed from my integration into a community of culture and practice. (Emphasis added) Minfang and his classmates actively sought opportunities for learning in the social space in which they were located. Minfang used the analogy of looking for food and feeding. He said, If I had the space, I would be able to look for food. They kept feeding me, and did not allow any freedom for me to choose what I wanted to learn . . . . In fact, those classmates who were able to learn very well were the ones who did not take the CLT course seriously; they looked for alternative ways of learning. For example, the more well-off students read magazines and watched English TV programs from Hong Kong. Poorer students, like Minfang, listened to the radio. Every evening at 6 o’clock, Minfang and his classmates would run to the classroom to catch the BBC news because the wireless reception there was better. Minfang always made sure he was fully prepared for the listening task. He read all the Chinese news articles and listened to the international news on the Central People’s Broadcasting Station in China so that he had an idea of the most important international news stories and could therefore follow the news in English. After the 6 o’clock news, he and his classmates would stay in the classroom and listen to the same news broadcast again at 7 o’clock. They also paired up with each other for campus walks every evening during which they had conversations in English for about an hour. 666 TESOL QUARTERLY When Minfang’s English improved, he was most unhappy that his teachers ascribed his improvement to CLT. He wrote, The teachers always boasted how much Communicative English had helped us improve our linguistic competence, as well as pragmatic competence and affective competence,5 but I knew that linguistic competence was achieved through hard work after class rather than [through] the communicative buzz in class. . . . My excellent academic achievement . . . reinforced my belief that TM [Traditional Method] is no worse than CLT. Minfang’s EFL Teacher Identities: A Genuine Product of CLT After obtaining his first degree at Nanda, Minfang was offered a teaching post there. The appointment, however, was highly controversial. Minfang did not make the highest grade, though he had received an outstanding graduate of the year medal. He did not have a master’s degree, which was a new university requirement for teaching. He was told that there had been heated debate about his eligibility for the position. He felt that the stigma of a “deaf-and-dumb student with special needs” from a minority region was still attached to him. Many senior teachers told him that he should be grateful for the appointment and that “he must behave himself.” He was also told that he was a “genuine product of CLT” and there was a strong expectation that he would be a good CLT teacher. Ashamed of his “disgraceful” past and grateful to his teachers, he tried to live up to their expectations. He wrote, From then on, I stuck the label ‘a genuine CLT product’ on myself to conceal my disgraceful identity . . . and to sound as though I ‘fit’ very well into the culture of the department. . . . However, I still had an implicit belief that TM worked better. The “Deaf-and-Dumb Student” and the Marginal EFL Teacher At Nanda, the CLT component was considered the core and was taught by the best teachers. All the other areas, such as grammar, vo5 In the Foreword to the Communicative English for Chinese Learners textbook series, the author of the series proposed that communicative competence in English consists of three component parts: linguistic competence, pragmatic competence, and cognitive and affective capacity (which Minfang referred to as “pragmatic competence”). The author argued for the inclusion of this component on the ground that language is best learned when it is a medium for learning some other subject or an exchange for affective or humanistic purposes. Therefore, she argued, acquiring a language and increasing and refining one’s cognitive and affective capacity are intrinsically concurrent and contribute to each other’s development. Minfang explained his interpretation of affective competence as “the ability to show your feeling, be it joy or sorrow, appreciation or criticism, praise or complaint.” In his teaching, he tried to create opportunities for the students to express their feelings because he felt that the emotional aspect of student learning was very important. COMPLEXITIES OF IDENTITY FORMATION 667 cabulary, intensive reading, and listening, were considered auxiliary. Among them, listening was ranked least important and usually given to new teachers. Even the pay of the listening teacher was the lowest. In his first year of teaching, Minfang was assigned to teach listening skills. “It was made very clear that I had to improve my English proficiency, my teaching skills, everything. That’s why I was given the teaching of listening. I had to practice [my skills], and when I proved to be okay, I could be promoted,” Minfang recalled in his written narrative. Therefore, when he was teaching, he cautiously monitored his utterances and made sure that he did not make any grammatical mistakes so that his students would not consider him to be professionally incompetent. Minfang found that the listening activities in the textbooks were structurally oriented, and he thought that in the spirit of CLT, he should add many interactive activities, such as morning reports, song dictations, and so on. He was also concerned that if his students had poor examination results, he would not only lose face but also his position. However, his students did not respond well to what he thought would be “interesting communicative activities.” They described his listening lessons as “concentration camps,” which required them to do listening tasks for 90 minutes with no breathing space. Eventually they complained to his division head. Minfang received a report from the head of his department which stated that he should adjust the workload given to students and improve on his teaching techniques. He recalled, “I was desperate and I blamed it on CLT.” On getting such feedback, he decided to revert to what he referred to as the TM of teaching, with plenty of exercises on studying and reciting texts, and listening to and transcribing news excerpts and audio novels. He said, “My behavior matched my beliefs for the first time since I began teaching.” At the end of the year, two of the three classes he taught ranked first and second respectively in the examination among all the first-year classes. Although he was told that the differences in scores among the classes were statistically not significant, he still felt very proud of himself. This further reinforced his belief in his approach to language learning, which he described as the “hard learning approach.” A Personal Struggle to Construct EFL Teacher Identity Reflecting on his first year of teaching, Minfang wrote, It was a personal struggle to construct my identity as a teacher in a well-regarded English department in China . . . . I consciously and probably tactically buried my former identity as a crippling student.6 My age, 6 668 By “crippling,” Minfang meant the stigma of being “deaf and dumb.” TESOL QUARTERLY experience, educational background, and family situation all came into play in my first year, blurring the boundary of being an authoritative teacher and a humble student. He did not know how to deal with the intimate relationship with his friends, 1 year or 2 years his junior, who had now become his students. They made fun of him and greeted him cheekily as Lin Laoshi (Teacher Lin) in his dialect and called him by his nickname, Brother Fang. Senior teachers criticized him for being too friendly with the students and reminded him that he was no longer a student but a teacher. To avoid being criticized as gao guanxi (building relationships) which, in this context, means playing a popularity game with the students, he tried to put on a stern face even when his students smiled at him, because he thought that smiling too much would undermine his authority. He stopped asking his students to call him by his English name, Matthew. Despite his attempts to distance himself from his students, at the end of his first year of teaching, he became known as the popular listening teacher. However, Minfang got no personal satisfaction from this positive reference. He did not want to encourage any discussion in case his “disgraceful past” was inadvertently revealed in the course of the discussion. Nor did he want to be a popular teacher, because in Chinese culture, a teacher who is popular with students is perceived as a teacher of little substance and one who has nothing but guanxi (relationships) to win the students’ hearts. He found working in a hierarchical institution oppressive with so many powerful people above him. During his first 2 years of teaching, Minfang never once felt that he was a member of the English Department. The CLT Teacher and the Demolition of the TM Approach In his third year of teaching, Minfang was assigned to teach the CLT course. Because CLT was considered the core course in the English program, this assignment played a critical role in Minfang’s identity formation. For the first time, he felt that he was fully accepted as a member of the Nanda staff. This identification, however, did not entail a change in his beliefs about TM and CLT. When he was using the CLT textbook, he incorporated what he thought was good for the students. For example, after teaching skimming and scanning skills in reading comprehension, he would use the same piece of text as a springboard for teaching linguistic structures and vocabulary. The students welcomed this approach. However, after an unannounced visit by an internal inspector, his TM approach was completely demolished. As a quality assurance mechanism, the university appointed senior professors from different departments to act as internal inspectors and COMPLEXITIES OF IDENTITY FORMATION 669 conduct lesson observations. Minfang was under the impression that the inspectors would give him advance notice before visiting his class. He was traumatized when one of them appeared at the back of his classroom one day. He had not been feeling well the day before and was ill prepared. He initially planned to ask his students to do some silent reading in class. However, he could not possibly do that in the presence of an inspector, nor could he ask the inspector to come back another day. His mind went blank. All he could see was the inspector, crossing his arms, putting on a stern face and sizing him up. The class that he was teaching was quiet, and he had not had much success in getting them to participate in class. He thought it would be disastrous if he used oral activities and the students did not respond. He said, “At the time, my understanding was that if the class was not active, if nobody responded to you, how could you call it communicative language teaching?” So he decided to adopt an avoidance strategy. He started with reading comprehension instead and hoped that by the time he had finished the part on reading for gist, the inspector would have gone. But when he had finished that part of the lesson, the inspector showed no sign of leaving. To avoid oral activities, he used the same reading passage for intensive reading comprehension and explained the linguistic structures and vocabulary in detail. He stumbled and sweated. At the end of the lesson, the inspector gave him a piece of paper full of comments and said sternly, “Young man, CLT should not be taught like this. You have to work hard on this. Don’t ruin the reputation of the CLT course.” Minfang was horrified. He read the inspector’s comments but he could not understand a word. After the round of inspections was completed, the head of the department said at a departmental meeting that if teachers did not teach CLT properly when they were inspected, the reputation of the department would be ruined. He cited an example of how CLT was taught, and Minfang knew that he was talking about his lesson. He could not look the head of the department in the eye and he was convinced that he would be fired. After this traumatic experience, Minfang decided to stick to CLT and follow the textbook doggedly. He was afraid that an inspector might show up at any time. The burden of ruining the reputation of CLT and bringing shame to the department was too great for him to shoulder. Yet, in his heart of hearts, Minfang believed that something was missing. He recalled his learning experience as a student and how frustrated he was when the teacher did not make explicit the linguistic objectives of the activities and he was left groping in the dark. He knew that his students would feel the same way. Minfang was caught between his allegiance to his institution and his moral responsibility to his students, both being part of what it meant to 670 TESOL QUARTERLY him to be a teacher at Nanda. He felt that he was pulled one way or the other depending on where the pressure came from. After the inspections were finished, he felt that he had more space to explore methodologies suited to the needs and wishes of his students. When his division head monitored his teaching and pointed out that he focused too much on linguistic structures, he would lean more toward the communicative activities. The “Model CLT Teacher” and the Custodian of CLT In his fourth year of teaching, Minfang was selected as the “model teacher of CLT” because of his high student evaluation scores. Colleagues from his department as well as from other departments thronged to observe his teaching with or without advance notice. To live up to this award, he abandoned his eclectic approach and stuck firmly to CLT. In the same year, Minfang was given the responsibility for new staff induction. As part of the induction, he talked about the success of his department in CLT teaching. He pointed out the importance of using the CLT textbook series, highlighting that it was developed with the help of the British Council and a number of big names in the field of English language teaching, and that it had won numerous awards. This enhanced his identification as a member of the department. He drew an analogy between his role and the role of the eldest son of a traditional Chinese family who explained the family’s traditions and secret skills that were passed on from generation to generation,7 and how all members of the family had to strive to preserve the reputation, the tradition, and the skills of the family. In his fifth year, he became the deputy director of the Teaching Research Office (jiaoyanzhi) and was made the director the following year. He was also appointed the course leader of CLT and the coordinator of a project. Engagement of this nature was a source of identification with the institution for Minfang. He invested his self in building up the institution’s reputation and inducting new teachers into the pedagogical practices that the institution advocated. He also invested in his relations with colleagues such that he saw himself and was seen as the custodian of CLT pedagogy. He said, I was responsible for an office; even if I did not believe in what I was doing, I could not say so. I was representing the Office. . . . [What I said] would influence my audience, which could be . . . a hundred people if I was 7 According to the Chinese martial art legends, each family had developed a set of expert skills which would not be revealed to outsiders. COMPLEXITIES OF IDENTITY FORMATION 671 talking to the public. Your own beliefs are something personal, so is your psychological struggle. You have to behave responsibly. Therefore, I was very cautious about what I said. He also felt that it would not have been possible for him to provide leadership if he did not embrace CLT as the official methodology. His identification with the institution, which was both reificative and participative, did not entail a change in beliefs, however. Because of his official positions, Minfang became very cautious about disclosing his views about CLT. He was worried that he might be considered an outlaw by the authorities. He spelled out the following criteria when deciding on how frank he could be with his colleagues: social distance, professional relationship, formality of context, age, and experience. He would not disclose his views to his former teacher or to teachers who were older or more experienced than he was. Nor would he discuss his views if the conversation was less than informal, for example, a sit-down conversation in which his views were solicited. However, if the teacher was of his age or younger, less experienced, and he knew that he/she was simply venting his/her frustrations and that his words would not get back to the powers that be, he would empathize and disclose that he was not entirely in agreement with some of the pedagogical suggestions in CLT. Theorizing Practical Knowledge and Reclaiming Meanings of EFL Teaching As soon as Minfang settled into his teaching job after the first 3 years, he enrolled in a master’s degree program in EFL teaching at Nanda to obtain the missing qualification for his appointment and completed it in his fourth year of teaching. The exposure to theories and models of English language teaching provided a different perspective on the conflicts that he had experienced during his 4 years of teaching. In particular, he found discussions of the misconceptions of CLT very useful. He realized that accuracy and fluency should not be seen as dichotomous, and that one was not supposed to be achieved at the expense of the other. Similarly, student-centeredness was not to be understood as the absence of teacher guidance. He was relieved to see that he could actually defend some of his pedagogies that were based on his own learning experience rooted in Confucian learning culture. He also felt that he was able to see intuitive classroom practices in a theoretically principled way. For example, an understanding of the principles behind information gap activities enabled him to understand how inappropriate modifications of the activities might destroy their communicative purpose. An understanding of the difference between intensive and extensive reading enabled him to 672 TESOL QUARTERLY use reading texts appropriately. He provided room for students to explore the linguistic structures for themselves without relinquishing his responsibility as a teacher to provide explicit explanations of these structures after the students had completed the task. He felt “more comfortable” about the eclectic approach that he had adopted. The theoretical input from the master’s program enabled Minfang to theorize his personal practical knowledge, which empowered him to reclaim the meanings of EFL teaching. However, it did not empower him to do that in public. He said, “I was only a teacher with a Master’s degree. How could I assert my views in the midst of all the professors and teachers with PhDs?” With coercion being the dominant mode of alignment, Minfang taught according to what he felt “comfortable with” and what students responded well to only if he felt no external pressure to conform. He narrated an episode in his sixth year of teaching that epitomized the conflict he had experienced. He was put in charge of preparing for the Ministry of Education’s quality assurance inspection of CLT and was appointed by the university to conduct a demonstration lesson to illustrate the principles of CLT. The pressure on him was enormous. He started to prepare the most detailed lesson he had ever planned according to the officially sanctioned methodology. The lesson was recorded in a studio and televised live in the department. The demonstration lesson, in Minfang’s eyes, was a disaster. The students, highly excited under the spotlight, were over-responsive. He described the lesson as “unreal” and the experience as “traumatic.” He was disgusted by his “dual identity as a faked CLT practitioner and a real self [that] believed in eclecticism.” He felt that CLT had been elevated as “a religion” in his institution rather than an approach to learning. At the end of his sixth year of teaching, he took leave to pursue a doctoral degree in the United Kingdom. Reflecting on his emotional journey, Minfang wrote, The conflicts were not resolved until after I left the institution. Now that I am pursuing my doctoral degree in the U.K., and with two years of research study [behind me], I feel that I am more solid and I know what I am doing. He began to question whether there was such a thing as the most suitable methodology, be it CLT, task-based learning, or some other methodology. He felt that the teacher’s lived experience in the classroom was the best guide for pedagogical decision-making. He remarked, “My understanding now is that no matter what methodology you use, you have to be humanistic. The essence of CLT is humanism. I do believe teaching is an integrated skill developed through experience, inspiration and passion.” COMPLEXITIES OF IDENTITY FORMATION 673 DISCUSSION Minfang’s stories show that identities are constituted by identification and negotiation of meanings, as Wenger (1998) points out. Identification is both reificative and participative. Reification involves inclusion as well as exclusion from membership in various communities. Membership is inseparable from competence. Central to the process of identification is participation as well as nonparticipation. As Freeman and Johnson (1998) point out, participation in the social practices and the sociocultural environments associated with teaching and learning is essential to learning how to teach. Participation is contingent on legitimacy of access to practice. Negotiation of meanings involves being able to shape and hence claim ownership of meanings that matter in the community. In other words, participation as well as nonparticipation in the negotiation of meanings is central to identity formation. Membership, Competence, and Legitimacy of Access to Practice Membership in a community consists of not just the reified markers of membership but more important, the competence that membership entails. As Wenger (1998) notes, the recognition of one’s competence as valued by the community is an important source of identity formation. This competence encompasses knowing how to engage with other members, understanding the enterprise in which members are engaged, and sharing the mediating resources. When Minfang first joined Nanda, although his membership as a student of Nanda was reified through formal admission procedures, he was not fully accepted as a member of the learner community by his peers. Instead, the othering (Said, 1978) of Minfang through reifications such as a “deaf-and-dumb student with a special need” and “Brother Fang” indicated his marginality in the learner community. The marginality of membership was the result of an unequal power relationship, which was socioeconomic as well as symbolic. Because of the asymmetrical relationship between the economic powers of the inner and coastal regions in China (Hu, 2005), Minfang’s previous learning experiences, despite his outstanding achievements in English, were rendered irrelevant; so was his mother tongue, a dialect of an inner region. The marginalization had a profound effect on Minfang’s sense of self-worth and identity, which, as we have seen, kept surfacing throughout his teaching career. To be fully recognized as a member of the community, he acquired the competence that defined this learner community through engaging 674 TESOL QUARTERLY in the social discourse and activities, and aligning himself with the norms and expectations of its members. This included, among other things, being able to speak standard Cantonese, to code-mix, to use Cantonese slang, and most important of all, being proficient in English, particularly in spoken English. Minfang’s outstanding achievement in English, the core competency on which the reputation of his department rested, was crucial to his recognition as a member of the learner community. Similarly, the recognition of Minfang’s competence in EFL teaching was a major source of identity formation. In his first 2 years of teaching, Minfang’s identity of marginality in the EFL teaching community was largely shaped by the fact that the teaching community did not fully recognize his EFL teaching competence, as evidenced by his being assigned to teach listening skills, which were least valued, being reminded of his “disgraceful history” as a “deaf-and-dumb student,” and being told that he was recruited as an exception to the rule and that he should be “grateful” for the appointment. It was not until he was given the responsibility to teach CLT, which was a recognition that he possessed core competence, that he began to identify himself, and felt that he was identified by others, as a full member of the department. Closely linked with the concept of competence as a source of identity formation is the concept of legitimate access to practice. Lave and Wenger (1991) propose the concept of legitimate peripheral participation as an important form of learning in which learners are given access to practice without assuming full responsibility. Wenger (1998) further distinguishes between peripherality and marginality according to the trajectory of participation: Peripherality leads to full participation whereas marginality does not. Minfang’s stories show that apart from the trajectory of participation, legitimacy of access to practice was critical in reshaping his identity as an EFL teacher. It encompasses not just being given legitimate access to participation but also legitimating access to practice. For example, in his third year of teaching, even though Minfang was given legitimate access to Nanda’s core practice, that is, the teaching of CLT, he tried to legitimate this access as well as his reification as a CLT teacher because of his identity as a former student in Nanda who did not make it to the top of his class. He tried to demonstrate that he possessed the necessary professional competence by aligning his practice with that sanctioned by the institution despite his reservations about it, and by obtaining a master’s degree in TEFL, which was the required qualification. Minfang’s lived experience shows that there are two important sources of identity formation: The individual recognizes that he or she possesses competence that his or her community values, and the individual is given legitimacy of access to practice. These two sources are dialectically related. Recognition of competence valued by a community and legitimacy of access to practice are mutually constitutive. COMPLEXITIES OF IDENTITY FORMATION 675 Appropriating and Reclaiming Ownership of Meanings of EFL Learning The ability to participate in the construction and negotiation of meanings, and to claim ownership of meanings is another crucial aspect of identity formation. Minfang’s identity as an EFL learner was deeply rooted in his lived experience of learning at a time when resources were scarce and education was highly competitive. He had to grab every possible opportunity for learning. The learning strategies that he developed and his allocation of time and place for different types of learning tasks were all part of the education landscape, which is inseparable from the socioeconomic landscape at the time. The identity conflicts that Minfang experienced as a learner could be attributed to the fact that the students and the teachers, or rather, the authorities at Nanda, defined the meanings of the learners’ enterprise differently. For Minfang, developing a high level of English proficiency meant gaining a good understanding of the English language system through the intensive study of language structures, texts, and vocabulary. According to him, the learner should achieve this understanding under the teacher’s guidance, which he believed was the most efficient and effective use of class time. The development of communication skills should take place outside of class time and could be managed perfectly well by the students on their own. Minfang defined the meaning of EFL learning as “hard work and serious learning,” and he and his peers defined the meaning of CLT as “fun activities,” which included oral participation, moving around in the classroom, and shouting at each other. However, their CLT teachers appropriated their experiences of learning EFL outside the classroom as the experiences of learning CLT in the classroom. This rendered Minfang’s learning experiences and learning strategies irrelevant. The reification of Minfang as a CLT product by his teachers was an appropriation of Minfang’s meanings of EFL learning. As Wenger (1998) observes, appropriation of meanings often leads to the alienation of the original producers of those meanings. In Minfang’s stories, the alienation took the form of his, as well as his peers’, nonparticipation in the CLT approach to learning. Similarly, Minfang’s participation in the act of teaching shaped his understanding that an EFL teacher does more than simply adopt officially sanctioned pedagogical approaches. He was constantly coerced, however, to relinquish this ownership and to align with the meanings defined by the institution. Even when he was given legitimate access to CLT, he played a minimal role in the negotiation of its meanings. The institution’s appropriation of Minfang’s meanings of EFL teaching through reifying him as a model CLT teacher led him to resist the CLT 676 TESOL QUARTERLY approach. Minfang resisted alignment by coercion and reclaimed ownership of meanings by integrating TM into CLT when he was not under external pressure and being cautious about deciding to disclose his views on the institution’s version of CLT. Power and Economies of Meaning The complex interplay of appropriating and reclaiming ownership of meanings between Minfang and his teachers could be explained by Wenger’s (1998) concept of power and economies of meaning. CLT has higher currency than other ELT methods in China because the government has recognized it as the most valued approach to EFL learning. More important, such recognition, shaped by Western-dominated ELT discourse, has been supported by authoritative voices in the field of ELT. Minfang’s resistance to appropriation took the form of othering CLT. Instead of trying to understand the theoretical assumptions underpinning CLT, Minfang reified his own approach as the TM, and he reified CLT as cruel language teaching. Hence, Minfang’s identity as a CLT product never took root although he had won prizes in English. Neither did his identity as a CLT teacher despite his leadership positions in ELT. In fact, the more responsibilities he was given, the more he was under pressure to align with the goals of the institution and the less ownership he had of the meanings of what he was doing. Studying for a master’s degree provided Minfang the opportunity to understand the theoretical underpinnings of CLT and enabled him to theorize his personal practical knowledge. This blurred the imagined boundaries that he had previous drawn between his own pedagogical approaches, reified as TM and CLT, and broke down the imagined dichotomy. By imagined boundaries I mean boundaries that are brought into being through imagination as a mode of belonging (Wenger, 1998). Only when the imagined boundaries were broken down did Minfang begin to gain confidence in his own pedagogical strategies and feel empowered to adopt an eclectic approach. At the same time, he began to see the inadequacies of some of his pedagogical strategies and started to modify them. The sources of Minfang’s empowerment were the possession of knowledge and a master’s degree, both of which were valued by the EFL community. However, such empowerment, as we have seen, was not sufficient for Minfang to negotiate the meanings of EFL teaching and learning with the powers that be. In an institution with a clearly delineated hierarchy of power, the asymmetrical power relationship, which led to the nonnegotiability of the meanings of CLT, was a major reason why Minfang’s identity as a CLT teacher never took root. COMPLEXITIES OF IDENTITY FORMATION 677 CONCLUSION: IDENTITY FORMATION AS PARTICIPATION The narrative inquiry of Minfang’s experiences as an EFL learner and teacher shows that teacher’s identity formation is highly complex. Wenger’s (1998) social theory of identity formation provided a powerful framework for making sense of the processes involved. Minfang’s stories show that identity is relational as well as experiential, reificative as well as participative, and individual as well as social. The lived experiences of reifying oneself and having oneself reified as a member of a community constitute an important aspect of identification. The legitimate access to practice and the competence so developed constitute another crucial dimension of identity formation. This study further shows that identification involves not just being given legitimate access to practice but also legitimating one’s access to practice as well as legitimating reifications, no matter whether these reifications are given by oneself or others. Both processes could be captured under the broader concept legitimacy of access to practice. The process of identification interacts with the participation in negotiating meanings, that is, participation in negotiating meanings and sharing the ownership of meanings. Participation as well as nonparticipation in negotiating meanings is shaped by power relationships among members of a community. Being able to participate in the construction of meanings that matter in a community is just as important as being given legitimate access to practice through reification. In other words, participation is central to identity formation. The interplay of identification and the negotiability of meanings could generate identity conflicts. These conflicts could lead to new forms of engagement in practice, new relations with members of the community, and new ownership of meanings. Or they could lead to identities of marginality, disengagement, and nonparticipation, as Minfang’s stories showed. Teacher educators and teacher mentors must understand that the processes of identify formation are complex and that participation plays a central role in those processes so that teachers, especially new teachers, are afforded legitimacy of access to practice and opportunities for developing professional competence and having their competence recognized. Equally important, they must also understand that legitimacy of access to participation is often shaped by power relations in communities’ social structures, which are inseparable from the broader sociopolitical contexts (see also Freeman & Johnson, 1998). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author thanks the two anonymous reviewers for their useful comments on the manuscript. 678 TESOL QUARTERLY THE AUTHOR Amy B. M. Tsui is chair professor of language and education at the University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China. She has published in a range of areas, including teacher education, classroom discourse, and language policy. Her most recent book, co-edited with James Tollefson, is Language Policy, Culture and Identity in Asian Contexts. REFERENCES Antonek, J. L., McCormick, D. E., & Donato, R. (1997). The student teacher portfolio as autobiography: Developing a professional identity. Modern Language Journal, 81, 15–27. Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’ professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2), 107–128. Burnaby, B., & Sun, Y. L. (1989). Chinese teachers’ views of Western language teaching: Context informs paradigms. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 219–238. Coldron, J., & Smith, R. (1999). Active location in teachers’ construction of their professional identities. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31, 711–726. Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1999). Shaping a professional identity: Stories of education practice. London, Ontario, Canada: Althouse Press. Duff, P., & Uchida, Y. (1997). The negotiation of teachers’ sociocultural identities and practices in postsecondary EFL classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 451–486. Freeman, D., & Johnson, K. (1998). Reconceptualizing the knowledge-base of language teacher education. TESOL Quarterly, 32, 397–417. He, M. F. (2002a). A narrative inquiry of cross-cultural lives: Lives in China. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34, 301–321. He, M. F. (2002b). A narrative inquiry of cross-cultural lives: Lives in Canada. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34, 323–342. He, M. F. (2002c). A narrative inquiry of cross-cultural lives: Lives in the North American academy. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34, 513–533. Hu, G. (2005). Contextual influences on instructional practices: A Chinese case for an ecological approach to ELT. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 635–660. Lampert, M. (1985). How do teachers manage to teach? Perspectives on problems in practice. Harvard Educational Review, 55(2), 178–194. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Liu, D. Y. (1995). An overview: English language teaching in schools in China. Lecture delivered at the University of Hong Kong, China. Retrieved October 29, 2006, from http://www.davekees.com/content/view/17/26/ MacLure, M. (1993). Arguing for yourself: Identity as an organizing principle in teachers’ jobs and lives. British Educational Research Journal, 19, 311–322. Mishler, E. G. (1999). Storylines: Craft artists’ narratives of identity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Moore, A., Edwards, G., Halpin, D., & George, R. (2002). Compliance, resistance and pragmatism: The (re)construction of schoolteacher identities in a period of intensive educational reform. British Educational Research Journal, 28, 551–565. Morgan, B. (2004).Teacher identity as pedagogy: Towards a field-internal conceptualization in bilingual and second language education. In J. Brutt-Griffler & M. Varghese (Eds.), Re-writing bilingualism and the bilingual educator’s knowledge base (pp. 80–96). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. COMPLEXITIES OF IDENTITY FORMATION 679 Pavlenko, A. (2003). “I never knew I was bilingual”: Re-imagining teacher identities in TESOL. Journal of Language, Identity and Education, 2, 251–268. Reynolds, C. (1996). Cultural scripts for teachers: Identities and their relation to workplace landscapes. In M. Kompf, W. R. Bond, D. Dworet, & R. T. Boak (Eds.), Changing research and practice: Teachers’ professionalism, identities and knowledge (pp. 69–77). London: Falmer Press. Said, E. W. (1978). Orientalism. New York: Vintage. Samuel, M., & Stephens, D. (2000). Critical dialogues with self: Developing teacher identities and roles—a case study of South African student teachers. International Journal of Educational Research, 33, 475–491. Varghese, M., Morgan, B., Johnston, B., & Johnson, K. (2005). Theorizing language teacher identity: Three perspectives and beyond. Journal of Language, Identity and Education, 4, 21–44. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 680 TESOL QUARTERLY English Language Teachers Reflecting on Reflections: A Malaysian Experience MUHAMMAD KAMARUL KABILAN Universiti Sains Malaysia Penang, Malaysia Key characteristics of an efficient and effective English language teacher are fundamental pedagogical knowledge and understanding, awareness of meaningful classroom practices, linguistic capabilities, and positive attitudes and skills. Nurturing these traits among preservice teachers is difficult, especially when preservice teachers are working in a nonnative English language learning and teaching environment and when they have insufficient pedagogical and linguistic knowledge. One way of overcoming these difficulties is by facilitating activities that enable these future teachers to develop a critical and reflective awareness of their classroom practices. This article reports the practice of reflecting on reflections by future English language teachers in the Malaysian context. In the first phase, they (a) self-examine their practices (by writing their own reflections and reading others’ critiques of their practices) and (b) examine others’ practices (by critiquing others’ practices and providing suggestions). These activities have inspired among future teachers an awareness of their own development and of current professional knowledge. Also, participants were able to identify the changes they need to make to become more effective teachers. In the next phase, reflecting on their reflections, the teachers were able to internalize pedagogical knowledge and practices that were useful to them. I n a nonnative English language teaching and learning environment, the teacher is responsible for espousing effective teaching practices. But when the teacher’s own linguistic competency and proficiency are limited, it undermines the teacher’s efforts to improve learners’ achievement in English language learning. In Malaysia, for example, the teacher may be the only source of English language speaking, especially in rural and remote areas. In a country where the emphases on English as an academic subject and as a tool for economic attainment are so strong, Malaysian teachers’ proficiency in the language are constantly and closely monitored. Occasionally, they are even debated in the parliament. In his 2001 Malaysian budget speech, Finance Minister of Malaysia Tun Daim Zainuddin called for Malaysian students to be more proficient TESOL QUARTERLY Vol. 41, No. 4, December 2007 681 in English so that the demands of a knowledge-based society (the keconomy) can be met (Daim, 2000). Though the English language is seen as an overarching element in Malaysia’s ambition as the third world’s economic vanguard, several major problems affect the teaching and learning of English. Immediate and concrete solutions for those problems are seemingly unavailable. One problem that needs to be stressed is the inadequate supply of quality English language teachers. Not many Malaysians are interested in becoming English language teachers. Furthermore, students with excellent English capabilities and achievements tend to move into other, higher paying professions. Some of them go abroad to further their education in other fields of study. The shortage of qualified English language teachers has become so acute at some schools that teachers have been “forced” to teach English (Kabilan, 2001, p. 57). According to my observation and direct interaction with a cohort of future teachers, they seem to lack certain important qualities, identified by many researchers as indispensable factors in becoming an efficient and effective English language teacher. Some of the identified factors are fundamental pedagogical knowledge and understanding (Clarridge, 1990), awareness of meaningful classroom practices (Schoenbach & Greenleaf, 2000), linguistic capabilities (Haja Mohideen, 1995), positive attitudes (Protherough & Atkinson, 1992; White, 1995), and relevant skills (Lee, 1996). The absence of these crucial qualities also explains some of my own students’ uncritical ideas and uninspiring suggestions offered during tutorial discussions. More worrying, they seem to be content with their existing knowledge rather than validating the ideas or generating new knowledge. Such tendencies might be identified among beginning teachers as well. Afonso (2001) and Shannon and Crawford (1998) discovered that the beginning teachers they studied preferred to fall back on preconceived understandings of how they and their pupils should conduct themselves rather than reflect critically and constructively on their teaching practices. The beginning teachers felt this way even though they appreciated the value of reflective practices. Therefore, merely instilling in teachers the value of reflective practices does not guarantee that they will change in positive ways. These observations motivated me to examine how teaching my students to engage in more rigorous reflective practice might contribute to their professionalization. I found from Moore and Ash’s (2002) study that students were able to “reflect on their reflection” (p. 21). From such a practice, the students saw a value in reflecting on practice in both ‘structured’ and ‘unstructured’, ‘timetabled’ and ‘ad hoc’ ways, and were enthusiastic about de682 TESOL QUARTERLY veloping this aspect of their professionalism in future years. They were aware of the impact of previous and on-going life experiences on the manner and effectiveness of reflection in the professional context. (p. 21) Hence, I experimented with a pedagogical tool of reflecting on reflections that consisted of two levels of reflection process (explained thoroughly in the Method section). The first level is reflecting on practices, and the second level is reflecting on the first level of reflections. The second level would help my students view and understand their own and others’ abilities, classroom practices, knowledge, limitations, perceptions, and beliefs regarding their development as future English language teachers. These new understandings may stimulate the students to develop more meaningful learning and teaching practices. This article’s main objective is to evaluate the outcomes of reflecting on reflections and, subsequently, ascertain if the pedagogical tool can (a) enhance the student teachers’ fundamental pedagogical knowledge and understanding, (b) heighten their awareness of meaningful and effective classroom practices, (c) improve their linguistic capabilities, (d) elevate their readiness to practice positive attitudes toward teaching and learning, and (e) provide them with relevant skills. REFLECTIVE PRACTICES AND REFLECTING ON REFLECTIONS It is generally accepted that the practice of reflection is deeply rooted in critical thinking and is connected to external realities, enfolded with the practitioner’s inner feelings. Bullock and Muschamp’s (2004) model of teachers’ reflection mirrors “the practice of thinking analytically about an experience or an activity” (p. 32). This model is shaped by feelings and understandings that may be tacit. Davis (2005) concurs by specifying that reflection is not “merely recognizing the linear step” that presents itself but a conscious practice to open teachers’ “thinking to all possibilities” (p. 9) and to move teachers so that they “step outside of their own definitions of the world and see new perspectives” (p. 18). According to Newell (1996), “the essence of reflection is the interaction of experiences with analysis of beliefs about those experiences” that occurs in a “collegial environment encouraging social responsibility, flexibility, consciousness, and efficacy” (p. 568). How do teachers reflect on their practices? Quoting Van Manen (1995), whose approach is influenced by Dewey (1933), Labercane, Last, Nichols, & Johnson (1998), identified three steps of reflecting: 1. Perplexity, confusion, doubt due to the nature of the situation in which one finds oneself. ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHERS REFLECTING ON REFLECTIONS 683 2. Conjectural anticipation and tentative interpretation of given elements or meanings of the situation and their possible consequences. 3. Deciding on a plan of action or doing something about a desired result. (p. 192) The teachers must learn to practice these steps naturally and successfully but within a well-planned framework in an educational system that is not “culturally resistant to educational change” (Leonard & Gleeson, 1999, p. 63). More specifically, the system must not be antithetical to the idea that teachers’ professional growth is an important aspect of effective educational change. It is also imperative that novice and student teachers understand the significance of this process. As underscored by Penso, Shoham, and Shiloah (2001), reflective practice would subject them “to their own critical analysis in order to improve their work and make it professional” (p. 323). Critical analysis should focus on practical experience, learning from colleagues, practicing teaching skills, and adopting useful work habits. Ellis (1993) experimented with a similar procedure involving in-service English language teachers in Poland. As a result, the Polish teachers became not only more “‘aware of what they do, but also why they do it” (p. 112). The teachers benefited from a framework for reflective practice that was firmly in place and widely used. Reflection is a subjective yet structured intellectual practice that can engage teachers’ self-examination and enhance their understanding of teaching and learning in ways that are fresh, stimulating, and challenging. Schön (1983) mentions of the need for the process of reflection to endure a vigorous testing protocol in a socially supportive environment. The process is upheld through “a dialogue of words or actions with other participants in the teaching-learning context” (Corcoran & Leahy, 2003, p. 32). The term dialogue here is not limited to the literal meaning of conversation or the action of speaking and listening; it connotes communication between two individuals (e.g., a teacher–learner relationship in a classroom) using words, emotions, and actions in a genuine two-way relationship in which both parties learn from each other (Freire, 1973). To draw from Ellis’s (1993) findings, the dialogue must encourage individuals not only to be aware of what they do but also to be aware of why they do it. If reflection is a subjective yet structured intellectual practice, what does the process of reflecting on reflections entail? Literature indicates that the practice of reflecting on reflections is very much the same as the notion of reflection, but it is different in the sense that it gives some additional insights into the success (or failure), clarity (or uncertainties), and difficulties, issues, and challenges that are foreseen for future endeavors (or faced in the initial reflecting process). Reflecting on reflections allows the practitioner to internalize the ideas and knowledge that were 684 TESOL QUARTERLY conceived and constructed in the reflecting process and thus critically think about its functions for future applications. Ramasamy (2002), for instance, engages the postsecondary students in his English communication and academic writing course in reflective dialogues. His reflections reveal some challenges that are bound to be of paramount concern to students as well as educators in that course, creating more uncertainties than concrete solutions: Such reflective dialogue often takes a back seat when the overriding concern is to complete the task or assignment, regardless of whether it entailed reflective thinking and learning. This challenge or dilemma is further compounded when lecturers deal with learners who are low performing ESL students. . . . When lecturers have to struggle with learners’ language inadequacy and at the same time face the pressure of completing course content, how does one engage learners in reflective thinking and learning? Should we be less content driven and go by the dictum that “less is more”? (p. 3) Such self-questioning scrutinizes new lines of thought, creating possibilities for constructing new knowledge and reconstructing existing knowledge. Ramasamy undoubtedly intends his reflections on reflective practices to necessitate further critical thoughts and actions, which aim at isolating the identified struggles and simultaneously encouraging the proliferation of new ideas to revitalize the unproductive and unrewarding practices. Hammersley-Fletcher and Orsmond (2005) extend their reflections on reflective practices within peer observation to include re-examination of existing teaching and learning practices so that the quality and meaningfulness of the learning environment can be enhanced, specifically by the means of widening academic debate and allowing academics to consider their roles as professional educators. Likewise, Hunt, Edwards, McKay, and Taylor’s (1994) examination of self-reflections on establishing a reflective practice tutor group prompted more confusion than resolution of the issues at hand for the researchers who were directly involved. Nevertheless, their reflective practice did help clarify their process of sharing ideas when they became enmeshed in our own mess of ideas and experiences, and of sometimes meeting up with others with whom we temporarily became entangled. . . . At the time of writing we have not resolved this issue but it has made us sensitive to the differences in our own backgrounds and the impact of these on the requirements we make of students. We sense, too, that reflective practices undertaken at individual basis may merely reinforce habits and prejudices. (p. 5) Clegg’s (1996) study of using journals as a reflective tool in collaboration with colleagues is another instance where reflecting on reflections asks more questions than it provides straightforward answers. She becomes ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHERS REFLECTING ON REFLECTIONS 685 “acutely aware that there is a dilemma” (p. 9) in adopting reflective practice as a model to improve student supervision because no mechanism is available to assess whether reflective practice affects the educational outcomes. Though the studies just discussed question the usefulness of reflecting on reflective practices, Macpherson’s (2005) study of students reflecting on their reflective writing and their writing process showed that students achieved definite improvement. In her analysis, she sought to decide objectively which ideas to adopt in future classes by distinguishing “what works—and why” (p. 3). In addition, it allowed her to see where perhaps she needed “to ensure more guidance, or more clearly explain reasons behind particular tasks” (p. 3). Brown and McCartney (1995) investigated master’s level business administration students’ reflections on their reflections about articles the students had written during the previous term. Brown and McCartney identify three theoretical strands that emerged out of reflecting on reflections: reflecting as an act of meditation, reflecting as mirroring self, and reflecting as a form of assessment or self-evaluation. They conclude that such explicit practice of reflection has pedagogical value because it helps “students to get self-knowledge of themselves and of their practices, and to take an informed position on knowledge and action” (p. 18). The literature suggests that sharing is a key element in reflecting on reflections. According to Irvin (2002), sharing reflections may stir the persons involved to “reconstitute a more complex and synthetic understanding” (p. 9). Pope (1999) calls this process refraction, which describes a movement beyond reflection where “the same activity is seen but from a different angle,” and suggests that it is “an added way of seeing” (p. 180). Pope uses the metaphor of multiple mirrors to describe this process. Sharing, in Pope’s sense, is also an integral feature of this investigation. METHOD The 18 participants in this study were students in the bachelor of education (TESOL) degree program. The group consisted of preservice teachers and in-service teachers who were pursuing their first degree. In the first semester of the 2004–2005 academic year, they were enrolled in a compulsory course called English Language Teaching Methods I (PPG 215). Focusing on the “range of procedures for planning and executing classroom instruction,” the PPG 215 course aimed at helping the students understand the fundamental concepts of English language teaching and be familiar with the principles of teaching English to speakers of other 686 TESOL QUARTERLY languages (TESOL) . . . [and] to equip teachers with knowledge and skills for teaching English to Malaysian students to meet the demands of English in the local and global context. (School of Educational Studies, 2004, p. 1) The study was carried out during the tutorials, which ran for 11 weeks. In the first tutorial, I presented ideas relating to critical reflective practices and what the concept meant in terms of enhancing one’s awareness. Based on Duke (1990), I realized that to increase the students’ awareness, the concept of critical reflective practices had to be scaffolded by the following activities: breaking routines, changing perspectives, and examining assumptions. In the tutorial, I introduced the writing and reading of reflective forms as routine-breaking activities, and the students’ perspectives were changed with their fresh understanding of the critical reflective practice (explicated later). As for examining assumptions, the students were reminded of the need to be critical of their own and others’ classroom practices. The students were asked to embrace Richards and Lockhart’s (1994) suggestion that “the process of reflecting upon one’s own teaching is . . . an essential component in developing knowledge and theories of teaching and hence is a key element in one’s professional development” (p. 202). They understood that to be reflective and critical, they need to monitor, critique, and defend their actions in planning, implementing, and evaluating the microteaching session (Nunan & Lamb, 1996). The students were also encouraged to be reflective and critical in examining the microteaching session as a basis for evaluation and decision making and as a source of change (Bartlett, 1990; Wallace, 1991). During each tutorial, a pair of students presented a mock teaching session, or microteaching, for about 40 minutes. One week prior to their actual presentations, they met with me to give a summary of their presentation, particularly their content, teaching strategies adopted, and their understanding of the requirements of their topic. As a tutor, I facilitated their understanding and encouraged creativity and critical thinking but did not interfere with their planned presentation, as long as their direction was clear and in line with the topic. The topics of presentation included incorporating listening and speaking, incorporating speaking and reading, incorporating writing and grammar, incorporating literature and writing, and incorporating literature and speaking. Each pair was asked to provide complete notes of their microteaching to other students. The notes included the microteaching lesson plan, teaching aids and materials used (e.g., handouts, worksheets, etc.), and references or citations. The presentations were followed by a 20-minute question-and-answer session, during which other students asked questions and commented on the presentation. This session was structured in a way so that the preENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHERS REFLECTING ON REFLECTIONS 687 senters would not feel threatened, intimidated, or overwhelmed. I facilitated and managed the session by starting with questions regarding aspects of the presentations that were not clear to me. Subsequently, I explicitly encouraged the students to ask similar questions. By this time, the presenters are at ease and the tension and adrenaline rush of presenting has subsided considerably. Only then were the other students given the opportunity to critique and give comments, opinions, and suggestions concerning the presentation and its content. The role of the tutor was crucial at this stage. Sometimes the discussions were charged, and when the parties disagreed, I defused the situations by outlining all the key points made. I wanted to ensure that the students saw all perspectives so that they could make an informed decision. At the same time, I kept my distance by not giving away my own beliefs but encouraged the students to formulate their own opinions. When the discussions began to show signs of saturation, I highlighted key points of the presentation that the students had not discussed to bring out new issues that were worth exploring. The question-and-answer session was ended by, again, highlighting key points that had been discussed and agreed on and, at the same time, giving credit to the presenters on facets of the presentations that had contributed to new knowledge and learning experiences for the whole group.1 At the end of each tutorial, students were given a form to encourage them to use critical reflective practices to think about each microteaching presentation (see Appendix). Using the form, the students were asked to answer two questions: 1. What interesting concepts or ideas of teaching, learning, or education in general have you learnt and internalized? Elaborate why. 2. If you were to present on the same topic as today, would you have done it similarly or differently? Why? These two questions helped guide the students, who did not have much experience in reflective practice and did not fully understand how to proceed (Corcoran & Leahy, 2003). To give them more time to make meaningful, critical reflections, the students were asked to reflect on the presentations as individual assignments outside the tutorial hours. The forms were then photocopied, compiled, and distributed in the following tutorial to all the students, who were then encouraged to read what others had written and consider whether what they had written corroborated or contradicted what others had written. At the same time, they 1 688 Note, this 20-minute session touched on a wide range of matters like body language, eye contact, class control, language abilities or mistakes, pedagogical implications, time management, content of the lesson, and even dress code. TESOL QUARTERLY were also expected to be critical in comprehending, accepting, and adopting ideas suggested by others. At the end of the semester, an open-ended questionnaire was distributed to all the students, requiring them to reflect on the writing of reflections and reading of others’ reflections. The questionnaire was designed to elicit the students’ perceptions and beliefs about the effectiveness of reflecting on reflections in terms of their overall awareness, pedagogical growth, and positive changes in their professional practice. Figure 1 depicts the entire process of reflecting on reflections. FIGURE 1 Process of Reflecting on Reflections ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHERS REFLECTING ON REFLECTIONS 689 In the final phase of reflecting on reflections, three open-ended questions were used to develop insights into the students’ process of reflecting on reflections: 1. What effects did the reflections have on you as a teacher trainee? 2. Has writing the reflections been helpful to you as a future teacher? How? 3. Has reading the reflections of others helped you in any way as a future teacher? How? All the students were coded S1–S18, respectively, and the qualitative data obtained were coded to enable sorting by topic. For the purpose of this study, the data were assigned situation codes and activity codes. The situation codes were assigned to units of data that described how the student defined and perceived the act of writing and reading reflections and how he or she connected the reflections to his or her practices as a future English language teacher. The situation codes were used to identify the situations of professional practice in which the act of writing and reading reflections would be important and meaningful for the teachers. The activity codes were assigned to units of data that described the students’ regularly occurring behavior, such as professional practices and projected changes, that occurred as a consequence of writing and reading reflections (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992). Table 1 shows the schema used to code and organize the data. Five themes emerged from the data analysis: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Fundamental pedagogical knowledge and understanding Awareness of meaningful and effective classroom practices Teachers’ linguistic capabilities Positive attitudes toward teaching and learning Relevant skills FINDINGS The findings are presented in the students’ own voices. The outcomes of the students’ reflections are categorized according to the five themes (when applicable). Nevertheless, the richness of the data means that some excerpts may indicate more than one theme or may contain themes that are intertwined with one another. Fundamental Pedagogical Knowledge and Understanding Writing critical reflections of their own practices and reading others’ reflections formed the preservice teachers’ fundamental pedagogical 690 TESOL QUARTERLY TABLE 1 Sample Schema to Code and Organize Data According to the Themes Example excerpts (student) Analyses (Note/comment) Themes To do the reflective paper, I referred quite a lot of books, journals. When read through the articles, I learned a lot of knowledge I can’t get if I don’t read those materials. Through reflective article, it helps me think critically and able to learn more to become a good teacher. (S18) [Activity Code] Students’ awareness and self-realization for the need to acquire fundamental pedagogical knowledge and understanding in order to become a good teacher is elevated Fundamental Pedagogical Knowledge and Understanding: A prerequisite to become good teacher. . . . make me more careful and alert on what we must and must not do. Writing the reflection also make me remember all the rules in teaching and try to be a good teacher and student in proper and appropriate way as a teacher should be. (S12) [Situation Code] The practice of reflecting on reflections made immediate and ongoing influence in reinforcing and reaffirming effective classroom practices and the general rule of thumb of becoming a good teacher. Awareness of Meaningful and Effectual Classroom Practices: Reinforce and reaffirm effective classroom practices. . . . the process of writing (the reflections) helps me to improve and ‘upgrade’ my vocabulary as I have to ‘search’ for appropriate words to convey my message. (S8) [Activity Code] By identifying and understanding their strengths and weaknesses, the students can improve themselves as teachers in terms of their linguistic capabilities. Linguistic Capabilities: Enhance vocabulary It was a meaningful moment for me because I realized that all the ideas which I had I can share with the others. . . . . (S11) [Situation Code] Sharing trait as one of the key elements of a successful and meaningful procedure of reflecting on reflections as it aided them in exploring new ideas and how those ideas can be helpful and meaningful to others too. Embrace and Practice Positive Attitudes toward Teaching and Learning: Sharing trait I also learnt new techniques and methods that will be very helpful and useful in future. Even so, some reflections made by peers make no sense. I do have to adapt and adjust peer comment . . . (S17) [Activity Code]. The activity of adopting ideas by the students is not rampant and senseless, but is systematic with appropriate and logical reasoning and judging. Relevant skills: Creative and critical thinking ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHERS REFLECTING ON REFLECTIONS 691 knowledge and understanding, which is necessary to “learn the appropriate way to teach in future” (S1), particularly in aspects of which they have little or no knowledge. For instance, S1’s experience with reflecting on reflections facilitates the gaining of knowledge and ideas from others: For example, the topic of assessing writing, as I do not have any experiences in testing before, therefore, I do not know the appropriate way to assess the students’ essay. When I write the reflections, it will encourage me to think back what it is done and what did I learn from the presentations.2 (S1) Similarly, S2 points out that by reflecting and reading others’ reflections, she has “learnt a lot of ways that will help me in expanding my knowledge of teaching.” Also, she has gained “some useful ideas that will help in my future teaching in school” (S2). S5 discusses how such practice equips her with pedagogical knowledge and ideas, Yes, for example, from today’s group presentation, I learned how to assess writing. There are criteria what we can follow when grading an essay. Sometimes, I will rethink of what others have written on reflection forms. This is because they might think of some concepts of ideas that I’ve never thought of. It’s fun when seeing all comments using different methods in teaching. I’ll have to learn from them, equipping myself with various kinds of methods . . . . at least I can think of other ways that can be done if I’m given the chance to perform the same task. (S5) It’s clear that some of the students see fundamental pedagogical knowledge and understanding as a prerequisite to becoming a good teacher. S18 confirms this view: To do the reflective paper, I referred quite a lot of books, journals. When read through the articles, I learned a lot of knowledge I can’t get if I don’t read those materials. Through reflective paper, it helps me think critically and able to learn more to become a good teacher. (S18) The act of reflecting on reflections triggered some of the students’ creativity—they believe they are now capable of generating new teaching methods and ideas (S11) based on the pedagogical knowledge they gained from their own and others’ presentations. The presentations stimulated their creativity because “all of us have different views about teaching and learning process” (S11). These new ideas and methods will be “better and proper” (S16) and “effective” (S2). It is interesting to note that the students are actively, creatively, and critically thinking about what others have presented (topics) and thought (in the guise of written 2 692 All excerpts in this article are quoted as they were written by the students. The data may feature occasional grammatical errors and/or incomplete sentences because of the informal nature of expression. TESOL QUARTERLY reflections). According to S3, the writing of reflections stimulates her “to think critically about the teaching methods used” by her peers. Such thinking processes lead the teacher to continuously question the issues and thereby acquire or reconstruct his or her knowledge and practices, leading to the reification of new knowledge on teaching practice: After reading [the reflections of others], I would compare with my own reflection. I would gain some idea from the reflections about the different way to teach the different topics. (S1) Awareness of Meaningful and Effective Classroom Practices Excerpts dealing with the previous theme show that the teachers have gained a knowledge of the fundamentals. When they critically think about the knowledge, scrutinize how they can use that knowledge, and critically and constantly examine their classroom practices, the students also attain a critical knowledge: If I need to write the reflections, it means that I will have to pay attention thoroughly to every single point that presenters present: the way they present their particular topics, their presentation contents, the time management, their English pronunciation, their emotion state, attitude when they are doing their presentation and so on. If I can notice their strategies and weaknesses, I will be able to notice mine too. (S13) I will try to learn the strengths of other presenter. When I find weaknesses of other presenter, I will take it as an experience, and not repeat the same mistake. (S6) I won’t make the same mistakes made by my peers. So it is an advantage to learn from others’ mistakes. (S17) Before this, I do not know where are my mistakes when I presenting any topics. But after my friends gave comments on me, now I know what are my mistakes. I think same might goes on with my friends (other teacher trainees). (S15) This self-examination, as evident in the preceding excerpts, helps students improve themselves and encourages them to learn from others. As another student narrates, it also has immediate and ongoing influence on her practices, particularly in reaffirming her existing knowledge and beliefs about good teaching: [The processes] make me more careful and alert on what we must and must not do. Writing the reflection also make me remember all the rules in teaching and try to be a good teacher and student in proper and appropriate way as a teacher should be. (S12) ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHERS REFLECTING ON REFLECTIONS 693 S1’s, S12’s, and S14’s elaborations are further evidence that the students have become very much aware of meaningful and effective classroom practices as a result of reflecting on reflections. I did learn the techniques that can be used in the teaching, which will make the teaching more interesting and more effectively. (S1) It makes me remember on how to be a good teacher, a good way to teach and control class. Why? Because as a teacher we sometimes forget that our students are not the of the same levels in a classroom. (S12) The reflections given would serve as a guideline in future presentations or in carrying out activities in the classroom. (S14). The self-examination, which stems from reflecting on reflections, also helps the students identify meaningful and effective classroom practices: Well from my view, reading the reflections of others helped much. As I had mentioned earlier, we need to share and work as a team. It is not wrong to hear or read others’ reflections. It is our responsibility to decide which one should be brought into practice. (S10) It helps me to identify effective ways and methods for teaching later on. Besides that, it is useful for me to learn how to assess students appropriately as there are several ways and activities being suggested by the presenters. (S2) Eventually, the students’ confidence increases as they progress from one stage to another. They progress from noticing their weaknesses and strengths to learning from others, and from improving their teaching to becoming “confident in classroom environment” and “confident in teaching” (S7). Teachers’ Linguistic Capabilities Reflecting on reflections made some of the students realize that they have greatly enhanced their linguistic capabilities and their skills related to language learning: As a teacher trainee, the process of writing helps me to improve and ‘upgrade’ my vocabulary as I have to ‘search’ for appropriate words to convey my message. (S8) Writing reflections not only helps the students to respond in writing which would therefore improve one’s writing skills but also would make it easier for people who are reluctant to speak openly in the class to voice their opinions. (S14) 694 TESOL QUARTERLY Along with improvements in vocabulary and writing skills, students also mentioned improvement in pronunciation (S13) and assessing and evaluating writing (S1). Positive Attitudes Toward Teaching and Learning Some students identified sharing as one of the key elements of reflecting on reflections because it helped them in exploring new ideas. As for me, writing the reflections really help me to get more ideas which I can use when I am in school in future. It was a meaningful moment for me because I realized that all the ideas which I had I can share with the others. (S11) Whatever we think relevant should be shared to others. Good thinking and good learning are linked through our experiences of what we are doing. Through the reflections we could adjust ourselves. We need to increase our own knowledge before we increase our students’ knowledge . . . . It is not wrong to hear or read others’ reflections. It is our responsibility to decide which one should be brought into practice. . . . [We ought to] share because teachers are the sole model of the future generations. To adjust teaching to students’, teacher first needs to increase their knowledge of learners. (S10) Though S10 implies that sharing reflections is vital, what to share and with whom to share is equally important so as to ensure that the reflections can be transferred meaningfully into classroom practice. S10’s argument that fundamental pedagogical knowledge is not limited to the actual process of teaching, but that teachers “first need to increase their knowledge of learners, that is knowledge of students,” demonstrates that she has developed deep yet fundamental pedagogical understanding of what constitutes a good teacher. Such a response also shows that she has embraced a very constructive and positive approach to teaching and learning. It is evident that reflecting on reflections actually strengthens the students’ positive feelings and attitudes toward improving their teaching and learning. It clarifies their mistakes, which in turn allows them to rectify the mistakes and improve their practices. The following excerpts highlight the concepts of learning from strengths and weaknesses, and learning from one’s own and from others’ mistakes: When I get comments from the group I would know where I have gone wrong. The reflections given would serve as a guideline in future presentations or in carrying out activities in the classroom. . . . Reflections writing is also a way to solve problems in a sense that we take note of our strengths & weaknesses from time to time. Therefore, this will surely help everyone to improve oneself. (S14) ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHERS REFLECTING ON REFLECTIONS 695 Reading the reflections of others helped me to realize my mistakes. I also can learn from mistakes being made by others. Thus, I will not repeat that particular mistakes again. The most important thing is it let me think carefully why that mistakes happened and how to solve it. (S3) By reading through the reflections of others, it helps me always to improve myself in presentation. Always remind myself not to repeat the same mistakes. Sometimes, it is very interesting to look through others’ might think about us. Therefore, through reading the reflections of others, it helps us to improve ourselves and learn from mistakes. (S18) The reading of reflections spurs S8 to improve herself because it gives her ideas of “what is expected by others in teaching and learning process.” S3’s and S8’s responses indicate an integral element of reflecting on reflections, that is, thinking about the content and context of the reflection. S9 explains: By reading, other people’s weaknesses and strengths indirectly helped me in choosing which method to use, what kind of mistakes need to be avoided and also how to bring myself in front of older audience. (S9) Relevant Skills Most of the students said that they would improve themselves as teachers by acquiring new skills. The improvements that are highlighted by the students are “teaching approach” (S7), “teaching skills” (S15), “teaching technique” (S17), and “presentation” (S18). Some of the improvements mentioned have immediate impact on vocabulary, writing skills, and presentation, while others provide more long-term benefits that will contribute to the students’ future undertaking as teachers. One skill that is obvious and profitable from reflecting on reflections is thinking. Generally, writing and reading reflections enable students to obtain immediate “feedback from the audience” and simultaneously “improve or increase [their] strength while [they] correct their weaknesses” (S4). They believe that by reflecting, they “can try to correct it & do it in another or different way” (S4). Changing their behavior certainly requires the students to creatively and critically think of their practices. S5 and S9 concur and note how the writing of reflections actually gives them the space and time to carefully analyze others’ practices and relate them to their own development. Most of the time, I’ll be “drowning” into their presentation till I don’t being critical thinking as their activities are all interesting. Somehow, writing reflections can let me see clearer the weaknesses and strengths of each presentation and I can learn from them as I’m not experienced in teaching. (S5) 696 TESOL QUARTERLY Yes, definitely it helps a lot, especially in detecting my weaknesses and strengths . . . by reading, other people’s weaknesses and strengths indirectly helped me in choosing which method to use, what kind of mistakes need to be avoided. (S9) S5’s and S9’s comments denote that adapting and adopting ideas are not random and unsubstantiated acts but are systematic, with appropriate logical reasoning and the very precise aim of solving problems. Critical thinking is evident in the following comments: I also learnt new techniques and methods that will be very helpful and useful in future. Even so, some reflections made by peers make no sense. I do have to adapt and adjust peer comment. (S17) I can really learn strengths and weaknesses from [teaching methods used by my friends] after thinking carefully . . . The most important thing is it let me think carefully why that mistake happened and how to solve it. (S1) This is regarding to the ideas of writing comments which helps me in critical thinking as I have to be very ‘fair’ in judging. (S8) All these statements indicate that reflecting on writing and reading reflections contributes to the teachers’ ability to think critically when they are faced with significant issues pertinent to selecting, comprehending, and reconstructing knowledge for very specific uses—in this case, new ideas and methods of teaching. The reflective practice permits the students to identify their weaknesses and overcome them. Reflecting on her writing of reflections, S16 notes her ability “to detect, understand and overcome my weaknesses,” whereas S17, by reflecting on his reading of reflections, manages “to discover my weaknesses and overcome it.” DISCUSSION The students in this study reflect as they write and read about their reflections. The entire procedure has aroused the students’ awareness of their own development, of what is happening around them in terms of specific pedagogical activities, and of the changes the process reveals as necessary. These changes, they believe, would further strengthen their abilities as teachers. The students’ analyses confirm that reflecting on reflections enhances the students’ awareness of fundamental pedagogical knowledge and their understanding of the knowledge. It also heightens their awareness of meaningful and effective classroom practices and eventually contributes to their confidence as future teachers. Through reflecting on reflections, the students demonstrate their readiness to embrace positive attitudes toward teaching and learning. In addition, ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHERS REFLECTING ON REFLECTIONS 697 they display creative and critical thinking skills in terms of the content and context of the reflections. However, in terms of improving linguistic capabilities, the students did not make great progress, though some did acknowledge the enrichment of their vocabulary. The findings imply that observing the strengths and weaknesses of others and reflecting on them via writing and reading allow the students to be aware of their own practices, avoid possible mistakes, and, thus, develop a set of strategies to implant positive classroom changes or practices. Such learning by observation, as Estebaranz, Mingorance and Marcelo (2000) have noted, would enable students to “generate and regulate patterns of behavior, and thus has a great effect in the practice of teaching” (p. 135). For reflective practice to have any meaningful impact on the students, it must occur in a learning community and not be carried out as an individual endeavor. Though reflecting is basically a personal and individual procedure, when shared with other members of a learning community, the individual’s thoughts and experiences are collaboratively maximized. According to Putnam and Borko (2000), this sort of sharing that takes place in a learning community can assist both the educators and students to “engage in rich discourse about important ideas” (p. 11). In essence, the students regard the writing and reading of reflections as tools to discover, understand, and overcome pedagogical and educational weaknesses and, eventually, solve related problems. These acts define what critically reflecting teachers do: examine frames and attempt to solve the dilemmas of classroom practice, and question the assumptions and values that they bring to teaching (Zeichner & Liston, 1996). This study also suggests that sharing of critical reflective practices, which in this study occurred via the reading of others’ reflections, serves as a vital link between the students’ theoretical knowledge and their ability to translate that knowledge into meaningful classroom engagements. In a study of peer coaching, Swafford (2000) found that reflective support provided to teachers enabled them to focus on the strengths of their colleagues’ choices of materials and questioning strategies. The teachers also thought critically of future lessons and the changes they would make. The current study’s findings, however, add a new dimension to Swafford’s conclusion. The students explicitly point to the fact that critical reflective practices not only made them think critically of their and others’ classroom practices, but also led them to the realization that such practices are meaningful and, therefore, ought to be shared with others (as indicated by S10 and S11). This deep insight, if nurtured appropriately, could lead them to treat critical reflective practice as an enduring force of amelioration in their development as teachers. Sharing of knowledge is the key element to becoming a practicing reflective teacher. Sharing permits teachers to venture into a peer-cum698 TESOL QUARTERLY collaborative initiative to reflect on the knowledge and thus further elevate the credibility of the knowledge through a rigorous process of evaluating and reflecting. This process paves the way for the reconstruction of knowledge, which subsequently reifies itself into a new shared knowledge (see Figure 2). This whole process, considered as a profound engagement of reflective practices, may contribute to the enrichment and divergence of existing knowledge, if conducted in a climate of honesty (see Kabilan, 2004). In addition to honesty, a reflective teacher should possess open-mindedness, responsibility, and wholeheartedness (Dewey, 1933; Zeichner & Liston, 1996). IMPLICATIONS This study has three implications for the way we train and educate future English language teachers. First, critical reflective practices ought to be integrated into the curriculum, especially in courses that seriously demand student teachers to observe, inquire, acquire, construct and reconstruct, and practice critical pedagogical awareness and knowledge. This recommendation is neither new nor innovative; many researchers have adopted and recommended it (see Allen & Casbergue, 1997; Brownlee, Dart, Boulton-Lewis, & McCrindle, 1998; Freese, 1999; Hatton FIGURE 2 Sharing Practices of a Critical Teacher (Adapted from Kabilan, 2004) ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHERS REFLECTING ON REFLECTIONS 699 & Smith, 1995; Mills & Satterthwait, 2000). But, as Swartz (2004) suggests, a conscious focus on critical thinking is necessary to facilitate such integration. She goes on to identify teacher educators’ effective modeling of critical thinking as a powerful and effective method. When teachers have the opportunity to think critically about any pedagogical knowledge, they can develop awareness of meaningful and effective classroom practices, which eventually leads to innovative ideas that can be beneficial to the learners. So, Swartz contends, the prevalence and incorporation of critical reflection into teacher education programs ought to be accompanied by the teacher educators’ competent modeling of creative and critical thinking to encourage their students to relinquish the “traditional role of receiving and reiterating the knowledge of others” and develop into “self-reflective thinkers able to produce knowledge that is more critical” (p. 59). Inherently, this suggestion implies that teacher educators should critically question and reflect on whether the programs offered are 1. based on knowledge and materials that emphasize and facilitate critical inquiry. 2. practiced and observed in a critical manner. 3. facilitated and navigated by critical personnel. These criteria would enable preservice teachers to reflect critically on their own and others’ classroom beliefs, understandings, perceptions, and practices so that, as future teachers, they would be better prepared to respond to “unexpected questions, to students’ errors, [and] to learning opportunities that arise” (Bailey, Curtis, & Nunan, 2001, p. 37). Second, students ought to have opportunities to share their critical reflections with other students to help them dissect perceived and existing knowledge, challenge and question their assumptions about teaching and classroom practices, and reflect on how their thinking about pedagogy could influence their future classrooms practices. To further exploit the idea of sharing and move to the stage of peer collaboration, the initiatives proposed by Kabilan (2004) are complex and would require collegial participation at every level of the faculty, but the rewards would be worthwhile. Such initiatives may include interclass or tutorial peer observation and reflections on microteaching sessions as well as peer review of teaching journals, and others. These initiatives are part of the first level of reflecting, which, when reflections are shared, as Morgan (2005) advocates, may later evolve into a process of reflecting on reflections. Third, a higher level of reflecting, which is reflecting on the entire initial reflection program or process, should also be incorporated into teacher education programs. The second round of reflecting essentially 700 TESOL QUARTERLY strengthens and improves whatever concepts, opinions, and ideas were conceived at the first level. Self-realization and self-awareness may also occur, as two participants in this study recognized and noted that sharing was also a vital component to their successful and meaningful reflection procedures. Although sharing was not discussed explicitly during the first phase of reflection, most participants were literally sharing their thoughts, views, and ideas with others. Self-realization and self-awareness of their sharing mannerisms were not palpable until they reflected on their earlier reflections. These senses of self-realization and selfawareness contribute more to teachers’ critically refined pedagogical awareness and knowledge than any other aspects. CONCLUSION From my observations and students’ statements, it is clear that my students have grasped some of the fundamental pedagogical knowledge and understanding that are required of them as future English language teachers. Their awareness of some of the important pedagogical concepts and effective classroom practices are also heightened. What impressed me the most, however, was their readiness to embrace and practice positive attitudes toward teaching and learning, and their keenness to learn new skills as well as to practice the skills they already have. Unfortunately, they were unable to expand their linguistic capabilities in the very limited amount of time we had available. Their responses in the findings suggest that they need to work harder to improve their linguistic capabilities. Nevertheless, they are more receptive to ideas and suggestions that would elevate their confidence and motivation in becoming effective English language teachers. Perhaps this energy and focus can be channeled toward improving their language competency and proficiency. Walker and Cheng (1996) stress that before any professional development can lead to educational change, the professional development must “be broad based, more completely understood and conceptualized, properly supported and be seen as an integral part of the change process” (p. 199). Therefore, to further develop this approach, I strongly feel that other studies are needed to explore its broader applicability, not limited to a few specific students, courses, conditions, and other determinants. Perhaps the next concentration should be on a comparative study, which might examine English teachers from different cultural contexts and backgrounds, and discern where and when they have indistinct or distinct practices on reflecting on reflections. Also important is a study looking into how the students learn to cope with these changes ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHERS REFLECTING ON REFLECTIONS 701 and how they perceive those changes in light of their own development as teachers, functioning in a larger community of practicing teachers. In addition, the question of the sustainability of those inherent changes should also be addressed. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My sincere gratitude goes to my friend and mentor, Lucy Pickering, for her invaluable comments, guidance, and strong encouragement in completing this article. THE AUTHOR Muhammad Kamarul Kabilan trains English language teachers at the School of Educational Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang. His research interests include the use of Internet for English language teaching (ELT), professional development of English language teachers, and creative and critical thinking in ELT. REFERENCES Afonso, C. (2001). Understanding student teachers’ perceptions of the teaching and learning of English as a foreign language through their analysis of computer-generated materials. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, King’s College, University of London. Allen, R., & Casbergue, R. (1997). Evolution of novice expert teachers’ recall: Implications for effective reflection on practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13, 741–755. Bailey, K., Curtis, A., & Nunan, D. (2001). Pursuing professional development. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Bartlett, L. (1990). Teacher development through reflective teaching. In J. Richards & D. Nunan (Eds.), Second language teacher education (pp. 202–214). New York: Cambridge University Press. Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. (1992). Qualitative research for education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Brown, R., & McCartney, S. (1995, November 21). Multiple mirrors: Reflecting on reflections. Paper presented at the Higher Education for Capability conference, Beyond Competence to Capability and the Learning Society, University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology, Manchester, England. Brownlee, J., Dart, B., Boulton-Lewis, G., & McCrindle, A. (1998). The integration of preservice teachers’ naïve and informed beliefs about learning and teaching. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 26, 107–120. Bullock, K., & Muschamp, Y. (2004). Reflecting on pedagogy: Outcomes from a Beacon School Network. Teacher Development, 8, 29–44. Clarridge, P. (1990). Multiple perspectives on the classroom performance of certified and uncertified teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(4), 15–25. Clegg, S. (1996, September). Reflecting on reflective practices: The experience of using journals with research awards supervisors. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association annual conference, Lancaster University, Lancaster, England. 702 TESOL QUARTERLY Corcoran, C., & Leahy, R. (2003). Growing professionally through reflective practice. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 40(1), 30–33. Daim, Z. (2000). The 2001 budget speech. Minister of finance Malaysia introducing the Supply Bill (2001) at the Dewan Rakyat on October 27, 2000. Retrieved October 16, 2007, from http://www.treasury.gov.my/view.php?ch=12&pg=149&ac= 177&fname=attachment&dbIndex=0 Davis, S. (2005). Developing reflective practice in pre-service student teachers: What does art have to do with it? Teacher Development, 9, 9–19. Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Chicago: Henry Regnery. Duke, D. (1990). Setting goals for professional development. Educational Leadership, 47(8), 71–75. Ellis, M. (1993). Introducing reflective practice: An experimental project in Silesia, Poland. In J. Edge & K. Richards (Eds.), Teachers develop teacher research (pp. 102– 112). Oxford: Heinemann International. Estebaranz, A., Mingorance, P., & Marcelo, C. (2000). Teachers’ work groups as professional development: What do the teachers learn? In B. Moon, J. Butcher, & E. Bird (Eds.), Leading professional development in education (pp. 124–140). New York: RoutledgeFalmer. Freese, A. (1999). The role of reflection on preservice teachers’ development in the context of a professional development school. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 895–909. Freire, P. (1973). Education for critical consciousness. New York: The Seabury Press. Haja Mohideen, M. (1995). Becoming professionally competent language teachers: Some suggestions. The English Teacher, 24, 13–21. Hammersley-Fletcher, L., & Orsmond, P. (2005). Reflecting on reflective practices within peer observation. Studies in Higher Education, 30, 213–224. Hatton, N., & Smith, D. (1995). Reflection in teacher education: Towards definition and implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11, 33–49. Hunt, C., Edwards, C., McKay, A., & Taylor, W. (1994, July 12–14). The dance of the tumbleweed: Reflections on establishing a reflective practice tutor group. In P. Armstrong, B. Bright, & M. Zukas (Eds.), Reflecting on changing practices, contexts and identities. Proceedings of the annual meeting of the Standing Conference on University Teaching and Research in the Education of Adults—SCUTREA (pp. 53–55). Leeds, England: Department of Adult Continuing Education, University of Leeds. Irvin, L. (2002, May). Reflecting on reflections—the central role reflection plays in teaching writing in a computer networked environment. Paper presented at the 2002 Computers & Writing Conference, Normal, Illinois. Kabilan, M. K. (2001). Professional interest of Malaysian English language teachers. ViRTEC Journal, 1(1), 52–60. Kabilan, M. K. (2004, December 16–18). Creative language classrooms: The need for critical teachers. Paper presented at the 1st International Language Learning Conference, Penang, Malaysia. Labercane, G., Last, S., Nichols, S., & Johnson, W. (1998). Critical moments and the art of teaching. Teacher Development, 2, 191–205. Lee, I. (1996). Hong Kong primary teachers’ perspectives of ELT. RELC Journal, 27(2), 100–117. Leonard, D., & Gleeson, J. (1999). Context and coherence in initial teacher education in Ireland: The place of reflective inquiry. Teacher Development, 3, 49–65. Macpherson, H. (2005). Reflecting on reflective practices: Creative writing in the classroom. Unpublished manuscript. Retrieved November 3, 2005, from www.uclan.ac.uk/ ldu/resources/assessment/ReflectivePractice.doc. Mills, M., & Satterthwait, D. (2000). The disciplining of pre-service teachers: ReflecENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHERS REFLECTING ON REFLECTIONS 703 tions on the teaching of reflective teaching. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 28, 29–38. Moore, A., & Ash, A. (2002, September 12–14). Reflective practices in beginning teachers: Helps, hindrances and the role of the critical other. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the British Educational Research Association, University of Exeter, England. Morgan, J. (2005, May 26). From classroom to Web: Learner and teacher experiences of using a VLE to facilitate online reflecting learning. Paper presented at the Evidence-Based Policy & Practice: Educational Research Seminar Series, Southampton University, England. Newell, S. (1996). Practical inquiry: Collaboration and reflection in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12, 567–576. Nunan, D., & Lamb, C. (1996). The self-directed teacher: Managing the learning process. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Penso, S., Shoham, E., & Shiloah, N. (2001). First steps in novice teachers’ reflective activity. Teacher Development, 5, 323–338. Pope, C. (1999). Reflection and refraction: A reflexive look at an evolving model for methods instruction. English Education, 31, 177–200. Protherough, R., & Atkinson, J. (1992). How English language teachers see English teaching. Research in the Teaching of English, 26, 384–407. Putnam, R., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? In B. Moon, J. Butcher, & E. Bird (Eds.), Leading professional development in education (pp. 11–29). New York: RoutledgeFalmer. Ramasamy, K. K. (2002, February 5–6). Promoting reflective practice in higher education: A dilemma. In Focusing on the student. Proceedings of the 11th Annual Teaching Learning Forum. Perth: Edith Cowan University. Retrieved October 16, 2007, from http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2002/ramasamy.html Richards, J., & Lockhart, C. (1994). Reflective teaching in second language classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schoenbach, R., & Greenleaf, C. (2000, March 2–5). Tapping teachers’ reading expertise: Generative professional development with middle and high school content-area teachers. Paper presented at the National Center on Education and Economy Secondary Reading Symposium, Washington, DC. Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books. School of Educational Studies. (2004). Course outline: English Language Teaching Methods I (PPG 215). Penang: Universiti Sains Malaysia. Shannon, P., & Crawford, P. (1998). Summers off: Representations of teachers’ work and other discontents. Language Arts, 74(4), 255–264. Swafford, J. (2000). Teachers supporting teachers through peer coaching. In B. Moon, J. Butcher, & E. Bird (Eds.), Leading professional development in education (pp. 105–115). New York: RoutledgeFalmer. Swartz, E. (2004). Casing the self: A study of pedagogy and critical thinking. Teacher Development, 8, 45–65. Van Manen, M. (1995). On epistemology of reflective practice. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 1, 33–50. Walker, A., & Cheng, Y. C. (1996). Professional development in Hong Kong primary schools: Beliefs, practices and change. Journal of Education for Teaching, 22, 197– 212. Wallace, M. (1991). Training foreign language teachers: A reflective approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 704 TESOL QUARTERLY White, W. (1995). The search for the truth about good teaching. Education, 116, 70–73. Wong, S. C., & Chang, K. S. (2004). School-based experience in the KPLI/TESL programme: A new perspective in teacher training. Proceedings of the National Seminar on English Language Teaching 2004 (pp. 1–9). Bangi: Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Faculty of Education. Zeichner, K., & Liston, D. (1996). Reflective teaching: An introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. APPENDIX A SAMPLE OF REFLECTION (S2) STUDENT DATE TOPIC PRESENTERS 2 3 September 2004 Incorporating Literature and Speaking 1. Alita* 2. Kohila* Based on today’s presentation of micro teaching: 1. What interesting concepts or ideas of teaching or learning or education in general have you learnt and internalized? Elaborate why. It is good to get students involved in the discussion. Students are able to give opinions about the subject matter. In fact, students should be given the opportunities to participate in the process of teaching and learning. In other words, the learning should be student-centred. Thus I think I have learnt to try to get students involved more in activity class. 2. If you were to present on the same topic as today, would you have done it similarly or differently? Why? I think I will use more methods to carry out the lesson. Besides asking students to give their opinions, I think I will provide more visuals such as picture for students to have better understanding of the subject matter. It is because literature is the study of language beyond linguistic aspect. Thus, it has to be taught by providing students more concrete and clear pictures of what they have to learn. * Pseudonyms ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHERS REFLECTING ON REFLECTIONS 705 Preparing Teachers of Second Language Reading JOY JANZEN Stony Brook University Stony Brook, New York, United States In preparing teachers of English language learners (ELLs), teacher educators face a formidable challenge in the area of reading. Reading is a complex skill that is critical to ELLs’ academic achievement. Given the complexity and importance of reading and reading instruction, what topics should be addressed by teacher educators in methods courses? This article reports on a study designed to answer this question. The ESOL faculty in a small urban school district were interviewed about reading and observed in their classrooms over the course of 2 years. Six issues were identified as important to these teachers. They were (a) working with a range of learner proficiencies; (b) the use of materials; (c) instructional practices in the areas of decoding skills, vocabulary, writing, and thematic teaching; (d) developing students’ love of reading; (e) coping with mainstream teachers and school demands; and (f) working with students who have limited proficiency or schooling in their first languages. The article compares issues raised by the practicing teachers in interviews and observations with the research literature and methods textbooks and outlines considerations for a methods curriculum. E nglish language learners (ELLs) are a rapidly growing population in U.S. schools (Capps et al., 2005), and the demand for trained teachers to work with these students is also growing. Most states currently require teachers to have a license or certificate in teaching English to speakers of other languages (TESOL), though the type of preparation entailed varies widely. An increasing demand for professionalization in K–12 teachers necessitates corresponding expertise on the part of the faculty who prepare them to work with ELLs. However, just as models for ESOL teacher education vary, so do ESOL teacher educators’ backgrounds. English language teacher educators’ training allows them to be housed in various university departments, such as education, English, and linguistics. Teacher educators also come to the job with diverse résumés. Some are experienced in K–12 education and possess knowlTESOL QUARTERLY Vol. 41, No. 4, December 2007 707 edge about child development but may be less conversant with issues particular to ELLs. Others may have extensive practice in teaching ELLs but at postsecondary levels, and thus they may not be familiar with the challenges found in public schools or in working with beginning learners. Potential gaps in teacher educators’ professional experience or knowledge may be particularly critical in the area of reading. Academic success in the public schools is closely bound up with the ability to read proficiently, particularly as students move out of the elementary years (Teale, 1995). Research has indicated that the attainment of academic literacy for ELLs can take anywhere from 4 to 7 years (Cummins, 2000; Hakuta, Butler, & Witt, 2000). A recent study with ELLs in U.S. public schools suggests that many programs do not bring ELLs to grade level in reading or keep them at grade level once it is reached (Thomas & Collier, 2002). Research surveys have identified a range of important issues for developing L2 reading proficiency (Au, 2000; Bernhardt, 2000, 2003; Fitzgerald, 1995a, 1995b; Garcia, 2000; Hudelson, Poynor, & Wolfe, 2003). These issues include reader variables such as the learner’s first language (L1), L1 reading proficiency, and strategy use; textual variables including structure, syntactic features, and cultural content; and contextual variables such as instructional approaches or connections between literacy practices at home and at school. Although a few topics (e.g., vocabulary knowledge) are covered in the majority of studies, researchers focusing on K–12 ELLs place more emphasis on contextual factors (Au, 2000; Garcia, 2000; Hudelson, Poynor, & Wolfe, 2003). In contrast, researchers focusing on learners who are literate in their L1 emphasize textual, linguistic, and processing concerns to a greater extent (Bernhardt, 2000, 2003; Fitzgerald, 1995a). These different ways of approaching L2 reading proficiency may reflect the variety of backgrounds that readers or researchers possess; they may also reflect the differences between fields of study (e.g., bilingualism or early childhood development) connected to L2 reading (Fitzgerald & Cummins, 1999). In an ideal world, ESL teachers and teacher educators would be familiar with all the challenges that affect L2 reading proficiency and would have developed instructional practices that incorporate this knowledge. However, a more realistic question might be where or how teacher educators can most effectively focus the pre- or in-service training of ESOL teachers. No single book on L2 reading covers the field, and many of the texts published that address reading methods fall on one side or another of the divide between already literate readers and students in public school settings. Books addressed to literate readers frequently assume that students are beyond the beginning level, and the authors then devote little time to topics that are critical to K–12 learners, such as developing decoding skills (see, e.g., Aebersold & Field, 1997; 708 TESOL QUARTERLY Grellet, 1981; Silberstein, 1994). Books concerned with teaching public school students often include a range of skill areas and thus may not cover reading in detail (see, e.g., Echevarria & Graves, 2003; Ovando & Collier, 1998). Other texts that focus on reading or literacy may provide a range of teaching techniques, but they are not intended to be comprehensive (Birch, 2002; Day & Bamford, 1998; Freeman & Freeman, 2000). Insofar as this range of texts reflects the demands of course work in teacher preparation programs, teacher educators may not regularly assemble all the pieces of teaching L2 reading to ELLs in the K–12 setting. Methods course instructors must negotiate which topics to cover or resources to use, which can be tricky. Identifying available materials, and considering what texts are most up-to-date or what practices are supported by research is generally only the beginning of the decisionmaking process. External factors such as institutional requirements or guidelines determined by state licensure procedures can also play a role in deciding what is covered in methods classes or how it is done. The instructors’ overarching concern in methods classes is how to best prepare future teachers to face the challenges they will actually encounter, and these challenges may not be reflected in any one text or even adequately addressed in the research and pedagogical literature. Given these concerns, this research is an effort to answer the following questions: 1. What issues do practicing teachers see as vital in their work teaching reading to ELLs, and how do these issues compare with topics identified in the research literature and in methods textbooks? 2. What approaches to reading instruction are teachers taking in their classrooms? 3. How can the answers to the first two questions be usefully incorporated into methods courses? METHOD Data and Participants This article describes a 2-year study of a small urban school district in the midwestern United States. This district represents one common configuration of a nationwide demographic shift. In this configuration, increasing numbers of ELLs are entering a community in which native English speakers predominate. The cultural backgrounds of some of the arrivals are new within the community, that is, the ELLs and their famiPREPARING TEACHERS OF SECOND LANGUAGE READING 709 lies are not joining pre-established subgroups. At the time of the study, the school district served more than 5,000 students; approximately 360 were identified as ELLs. The ELLs spoke at least 13 different L1s, with Spanish being the most common and Kurdish the second most. In this study, six of the seven teachers in the school district who worked solely with ELLs were interviewed and observed in their classrooms.1 The interview questions (see Appendix) were designed to investigate several areas: teacher background, student background, and teacher practices and beliefs about reading instruction for ELLs. The interviews were taped and then transcribed; most were approximately one hour in length. The six teachers’ classrooms were also observed and field notes were taken; 36 visits were made for the purposes of research, and additional visits were made to observe student teachers. Observations for any purpose lasted from 45 minutes to one hour. The author also acted as an outside consultant for the school district’s study of its own ESOL program, an experience that provided further opportunities to interact with the faculty. All the teachers in this study had an ESL licensure from their state, and two teachers also had master’s degrees in curriculum and instruction. The teachers were experienced, having worked with ELLs for a minimum of 4 years at the time of the interviews. One of the teachers was a nonnative English speaker, and the rest had varying degrees of L2 proficiency. Each teacher was responsible for a different number of students, ranging from just under 40 to more than 50. Teachers worked with ELLs in a pullout format with small groups that could have as few as one or as many as 12 students. The time ESOL teachers met with the students depended on scheduling and student need; the minimum period was half an hour. The type of work the teachers did with ELLs also varied, depending on school and grade level, but the emphasis was on literacy skills. The ESOL teachers’ roles in their schools were not uniform across the district; however, all of them saw preparing students to succeed in mainstream contexts as the goal of instruction. They were not responsible for assigning students content grades or for completing the performance-based assessment packages that were required of all students in the school district at the time of the research. 1 710 Seven teachers in the school district worked exclusively with ELL. Six of these teachers were full time, and the seventh was three-quarters time. I interviewed six of these seven teachers. It proved to be impossible to interview the high school teacher, who was full time, though I talked with this teacher informally and observed student teachers working in this teacher’s classroom. I did not interview those teachers, such as reading specialists, who interacted regularly with ELLs but worked with other students as well. The description of the teachers provided is based on the interviews that I completed; information about the high school teacher is not included. TESOL QUARTERLY Analysis of Data To identify the issues teachers saw as critical in reading, I initially considered responses to the interview questions. However, as I transcribed the interview tapes and observed in the classroom, different categories of analysis emerged. This shift in categories happened in part because the teachers did not share some of my assumptions in asking questions, for example, the importance of specific techniques. Also, the interviews were intended to be open ended, so that the teachers could expand on topics that they saw as important. For example, I asked participants to describe their students’ L1 proficiency, but I didn’t ask how this proficiency affected L2 reading; however, the teachers themselves raised this point. In several rounds of reading and analyzing the interview transcripts, I put each comment2 into a general topic area, such as school administration or use of materials. When a comment addressed more than one topic, I placed the comment into both areas. Occasionally, in reviewing the transcripts, I would note a point that seemed particularly compelling, for example, the teacher who stated that “the biggest problem with my students at this school is that many of them are not literate in their first language” (Interview, October 8, 2001). I then looked for that thread in other transcripts and added to or relabeled a topic area accordingly. To choose the categories, I considered topics that teachers explicitly described as vital, as well as salient topics that the teachers did not explicitly describe as vital but that they all mentioned. For example, none of the teachers overtly stated that knowledge of materials was an essential aspect of being an effective teacher; however, in the interviews, all the teachers discussed their use of materials extensively. The process of determining critical issues was recursive; I worked through the transcripts, wrote initial drafts of the article, and then returned again to the data to check that I had accurately represented teacher concerns. The final six categories that emerged from analysis were addressed by at least five of the six teachers; other issues that were mentioned in the transcripts were considered by a minority of the teachers, did not closely connect to the research questions for this study, or were of primarily local interest. The categories overlapped with each other, but I have broken them down as follows: 1. Dealing with a wide range of learner proficiencies in the classroom 2. Use of materials 2 Here comment refers to a phrase, sentence, or group of sentences connected to one topic. In coding the transcripts, I included all general statements about teaching; specific examples were not always coded. PREPARING TEACHERS OF SECOND LANGUAGE READING 711 3. Instructional practices in the areas of decoding skills, vocabulary, writing, and thematic teaching 4. Developing a love of reading 5. Cooperating and coping with mainstream teachers and with school demands 6. Working with students who have limited or no schooling in their L1 and/or with students who have limited proficiency in their L1 After identifying these six topics through analysis of the interviews, I looked for information related to each topic in the research and pedagogical literature. The texts on methods and reading I cite are all in print and published by major houses, most of them in multiple editions or printings. The methods texts are intended for teachers of English as a second or foreign language; some texts focus on K–12 settings and others are intended for all teachers. I have excluded texts in which teaching methodology is only one of several topics addressed; I have also excluded texts in which methods is the focus but the audience is language teachers in general, rather than ESOL teachers in particular. To analyze the classroom observations, I identified approaches, techniques, or situations common to all six classrooms. I then looked for correspondences or disjunctions among the three pieces of data: the transcripts of the interviews, my review of published material, and my field notes from the observations. RESULTS Issues Identified in the Interviews Compared with the Research Literature and Methods Texts Working With Students at Varying Proficiency Levels All the teachers in this study had learners of varying English proficiency in their classes. For example, one elementary school teacher reported working with kindergarten students who were speaking English for the first time in school; these children met others in her class who were orally fluent in English. In the higher grades, the intermediate school teacher not only had groups with mixed proficiency levels but was also responsible for a newly arrived student who had an extremely limited command of English. The junior high school teacher stated that her learners ranged from those who could not read in English to those who were fluent. 712 TESOL QUARTERLY Although all teachers faced the challenge of teaching students at widely ranging levels, institutional demands exacerbated the challenge for ESOL faculty. Four of the teachers noted that school scheduling either made it difficult to group learners by level or gave them no choice about when students came to their classrooms. This issue proved to be most difficult for the teachers of older learners, whose students were facing increasing academic demands. In the junior high, scheduling meant that the teacher was sometimes unable to work with her groups on a common task. Teachers coped with this challenge through the assistance of classroom aides or tutors; the junior high school teacher also regularly set aside her own curriculum to assist her students with homework from their mainstream classes. Literature specifically examining the issue of working simultaneously with learners of different proficiency is sparse, perhaps because proficiency for ELLs is multidimensional. Students can possess varying levels of knowledge in language, content, and school expectations, and each of these areas, in turn, has subdivisions. Cooperative learning has been proposed as a form of reading instruction for students at different academic levels, and types of cooperative learning have been used successfully with ELLs (Slavin & Cheung, 2003). Other recommended pedagogical techniques include literature circles, structured interactions in which students in small groups take on particular roles (Heydon, 2003). The presence of a range of English language proficiencies may be taken for granted in the classroom, but this topic does not receive a great deal of attention in methods textbooks. Materials Materials choice was closely linked with the teachers’ desire to work effectively with students at different proficiency levels. In several schools, all students were assessed, either periodically or continuously, to chart their progress in reading and determine their placement into proficiency-based reading groups. ESOL teachers used these assessments to identify texts such as leveled readers that would be challenging but not frustrating for the learners. Beyond proficiency, the faculty were concerned with other issues in materials choice, including connections to mainstream classes, background knowledge, and curricular balance. The majority of the teachers described using texts that would support students in or prepare them for work in their mainstream classes. To this end, they chose materials on topics such as farms or aviation that were part of the wider school curriculum. Most teachers also consciously chose texts that would connect to the students’ backgrounds or had illustrations that would either evoke the students’ prior knowledge or, at least, clearly support the text’s conPREPARING TEACHERS OF SECOND LANGUAGE READING 713 tent. One elementary teacher also referred to the need for balance, noting that schools may require ESOL faculty to use certain materials. If, for example, a school’s curriculum was oriented toward either end of the phonics or whole-language continuum, she believed teachers needed to balance that focus with their own materials and activities. As a result of all these considerations, none of the teachers relied on a single series of texts. One elementary teacher spoke feelingly about leaping from one textbook to another, modifying and “stealing” along the way; she stated that there was no magical text that would fit the requirements of all her students. Another elementary teacher noted that “there is not one perfect program out there. You have to pick and choose and create, and it’s different every year” (Interview, October 15, 2002). Discussions of materials in the ESOL field has perhaps most strongly emphasized the use of culturally relevant texts (see, e.g., Allen, 1994; Au, 1998; Barrera & Jimenez, 2000; Freeman & Freeman, 2003; Meier, 2003). Genre, another issue directly relevant to materials choice, has also gained prominence; the use of a variety of genres for reading and writing practice is frequently recommended as an important means of developing literacy, as is a related topic, explicit teaching about text structure (Derewianka, 1990; Macken-Horarik, 2002; Reppen, 1994/1995). When describing the use of many texts in the classroom, the participants in this study only briefly addressed genre issues.3 For example, one elementary teacher used different versions of the same story to draw her students’ attention to story elements, including plot contour, characters, and setting; another elementary teacher explained the importance to students of understanding the organizational structure of their textbooks. Development of Decoding Skills The importance of teaching decoding skills was taken as a given by all four elementary school teachers. However, the approaches these teachers used and the time they spent on decoding in the classroom depended on their institution and on their past experiences with ELLs. Two teachers worked with a school-wide reading program that focused on developing proficiency in bottom-up processes. One of these teachers spent a significant part of each class period on student decoding of graphemes, words, and sentences, and she saw these activities as beneficial. Most of the other teachers spent less time or worked in a less structured fashion with decoding skills, choosing, for example, to highlight topics as they arose in reading or to use materials that contained many examples of high-frequency words students needed to recognize by sight. 3 714 It should be noted that teachers were asked about materials choice only in general terms. TESOL QUARTERLY The importance of developing decoding skills was also underlined by the middle-school teacher. Her teacher preparation program had emphasized a pure whole-language approach, but, like the elementary teacher mentioned earlier, her experience in the classroom had led her to “see that kids don’t learn indirectly. And a lot of our kids are really lacking in the phonics area. So I really see that as a need” (Interview, March 10, 2003). As a result of her experiences, she had added explicit coverage of phonics rules as well as decoding exercises to her classroom activities. In contrast, the junior high school teacher did not work on decoding with her students, but she did ask them to read aloud on a regular basis while their pronunciation was corrected. Overall, she saw her students as generally having mastered decoding but lacking in comprehension ability. The relationship of decoding ability to overall reading proficiency has been widely studied in the L2 field, as has the connection between decoding in one language and another. Researchers tend to agree on at least two general points: the importance of bottom-up processing skills in L2 reading and the existence of skills transfer across languages (Comeau, Cormier, Grandmaison, & Lacroix, 1999; Droop & Verhoeven, 2003; Gottardo, Yan, Siegel, & Wade-Woolley, 2001; Lindsey, Manis, & Bailey, 2003; Rosowsky, 2001). Several studies have also addressed the efficacy of phonics instruction for ELLs, where phonics teaching is defined as “any approach in which the teacher does/says something to help children learn how to decode words” (cited in Stahl, 2001, p. 335). For example, in two longitudinal investigations in North America, phonics instruction in the early grades had a positive effect on ELLs’ reading proficiency, where proficiency was examined through several measures of decoding and reading comprehension (Gunn, Biglan, Smolkowski, & Ary, 2000; Lesaux & Siegel, 2003). In their meta-analysis of research on successful instructional practices, Slavin and Cheung (2003) cite several programs, such as Success for All and Jolly Phonics, that emphasize the development of decoding skills. With some exceptions (e.g., Birch, 2002; Peregoy & Boyle, 2005), methods textbooks do not provide extensive information on teaching bottom-up reading skills, perhaps under the assumption that ELLs will acquire them from mainstream teachers or that most teachers will work with learners who have already cracked the code. However, given the variety of students that future teachers may face, including older learners who are not literate in any language, this assumption may be inaccurate. As one teacher in this study noted, middle, junior high, and high school faculty may believe that only elementary school teachers actually teach reading, but this assumption is not the case with ELLs. PREPARING TEACHERS OF SECOND LANGUAGE READING 715 Writing Skills In the interviews, the teachers did not explicitly articulate theories of literacy, except for one elementary teacher who described her beliefs about the interconnection of reading and writing abilities, the importance of beginning writing instruction early, and not delaying until speaking abilities have been developed. All the teachers, however, volunteered reading-oriented reasons for using writing activities: a means of activating prior knowledge before reading, teaching story structure, and demonstrating understanding of texts read. To accomplish these ends, teachers used graphic organizers, story retelling, reading logs, prereading journals, process writing techniques, and creative writing that focused on elements of story structure, such as characters and setting. The complex ways in which writing and reading interact for ELLs are beyond the scope of this study. However, the current literature advocates many of the activities and techniques the teachers used, for example, journaling and graphic organizers. In L2 methods textbooks, the varied connections between reading and writing development are not always teased out explicitly or in detail, a deficiency that is particularly notable in discussions of the beginning stages of literacy acquisition. Vocabulary Skills Vocabulary development, along with overall comprehension, was one of the two goals in reading instruction that all six teachers mentioned (the other goal was reading comprehension). Teachers considered vocabulary knowledge as important for students’ achieving overall academic success as well as for their understanding of individual texts. Elementary teachers often viewed vocabulary knowledge or lack of it in very broad terms. One teacher noted that the sooner students received language support, including vocabulary work, and the more they received, the less likely it would be that they would lag behind at the junior high and high school levels. Another teacher compared the extensive vocabulary knowledge some native-English-speaking children brought to school to the limited knowledge she believed her own students had. A third elementary teacher wanted her students to be able to make connections between vocabulary in English and vocabulary in their L1s. A fourth elementary teacher regretted that, because of the school-wide requirements for reading instruction, she had insufficient time to focus on the development of the academic vocabulary that she saw as crucial for her students. All the teachers listed a variety of ways in which they worked with vocabulary in class. For the most part, instruction was done in the con716 TESOL QUARTERLY text of stories or other texts students were reading. For example, the junior high school teacher stated that her students devoted a great deal of time to “talking about what words mean, stopping when we read sentences and pulling out those words and saying, you know, what does this mean” (Interview, October 29, 2001). One of the elementary teachers also attempted to develop students’ self-monitoring by helping students identify words unknown to them in new texts. The importance of vocabulary knowledge in the L2 reading proficiency of K–12 learners and the utility of vocabulary instruction has been frequently addressed (Au, 2000; Bernhardt, 2003; Droop & Verhoeven, 2003; Garcia, 2000; Gersten & Geva, 2003). Two recent studies suggest that focused vocabulary instruction can have a positive effect on the vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension of language-minority students in public school settings (Appel & Vermeer, 1998; Carlo et al., 2004). Vocabulary instruction is regularly discussed in those methods textbooks that focus on sheltered instruction (Chamot & O’Malley, 1994; Echevarria & Graves, 2003; Echevarria, Vogt, & Short, 2004) or are designed for international as well as North American settings (Brown, 2001; Celce-Murcia, 2001). The topic receives limited attention in texts addressed exclusively to K–12 teachers (Freeman & Freeman, 2000; Peregoy & Boyle, 2005). Thematic Teaching Although the interview questions did not directly refer to thematic teaching, every teacher addressed the topic in their responses to different questions. To a greater or lesser degree, all the teachers used thematic units or materials in their classrooms. They gave a number of reasons for this approach, the most frequent of which was the goal of supporting students’ work in mainstream classes. Thematic teaching was most explicitly tied to reading development in the area of vocabulary. Teachers described the struggles students had with understanding words in required texts and attempted to use materials that would reinforce the language that learners were encountering outside the ESOL classroom. Thematic teaching, variously defined, has been widely discussed in the pedagogical literature as the most effective means of teaching ELLs in the public schools (Barrera & Jimenez, 2000; Chamot & O’Malley, 1994; Echevarria & Graves, 2003; Echevarria, Vogt & Short, 2004; Freeman & Freeman, 2003; Freeman, Freeman, & Kerman, 2001; Peregoy & Boyle, 2005). Reasons frequently cited for using it agree with those listed earlier: increased vocabulary learning and greater mainstream academic success because learning is contextualized. Additional reasons relevant to reading are that thematic instruction can further acquisition of learnPREPARING TEACHERS OF SECOND LANGUAGE READING 717 ing or reading strategies and develop critical understanding of a variety of written genres, issues not raised in the interviews. Love of Reading Five of the six teachers referred, in different ways, to motivating students to find reading enjoyable. They saw enjoyment or interest as deriving from several factors in particular: materials, specific activities done with reading, explicit explanation of the value of reading, and the use of extrinsic motivation. As noted earlier, most of the teachers tried to use texts that would connect explicitly to the students’ cultural backgrounds or life experiences, believing that these materials would motivate the students. In terms of specific activities, reading aloud, in various permutations, was the technique most frequently mentioned as being both enjoyable and valuable. Two elementary teachers described how much students enjoyed being read to; they also saw the process as useful in that learners were able to concentrate on understanding or enjoying the story rather than on bottom-up skills. Alternatively, when reading chorally, students could be supported by other voices. The junior high teacher believed reading aloud was enjoyable partly because it gave all the students a chance to play the teacher role and correct their classmates. Several teachers explained how they explicitly helped their students understand the value of reading. The intermediate school teacher talked to her classes about the importance of reading out loud, and she encouraged this practice by lending picture books to her students. She also explained to her students her belief in the importance of reading in one’s L1 and used contests to encourage individual reading. One elementary teacher demonstrated the value she placed on reading by giving students presents of books several times a year and talking to classes about the importance of looking after books. Another elementary teacher observed that children went to the school library but received no instruction in choosing books, so she made a practice of borrowing appropriate books to stimulate their interest in both reading and going to the library. In L2 research, success in reading is most often measured in terms of advancing learner proficiency levels, as measured by tests of comprehension or recall. In methods textbooks, inculcating a love of reading is generally addressed in the form of materials choice. Motivation is also connected to instructional techniques, such as extensive reading, providing a flood of books that are both of interest to students and on their levels (Day & Bamford, 1998; Kim & Krashen, 1997), and sustained silent reading or free voluntary reading (McGlinn & Parrish, 2002; Peregoy & Boyle, 2005). Some of the teachers in this study used free voluntary reading, but all of the teachers faced an additional challenge in using 718 TESOL QUARTERLY individualized reading during class; that is, they had to figure out how to productively allocate limited time with students. Coping With Mainstream Teachers and School Requirements Although most of the teachers considered that they had good cooperation within their schools, they also felt strongly that all the faculty needed a greater knowledge of ELLs and the challenges they face to ensure that all faculty, and not just the ESOL specialists, were seen as responsible for educating these students. The teachers believed that their principal job was to prepare students to succeed in mainstream classes and on mandated assessments. However, they also expressed frustration at the specific responsibilities they were expected to shoulder. For example, two teachers reported that the ESOL classroom was used as an arena for students who had behavioral problems in other venues. Several teachers noted that schools saw them primarily as reading instructors. Four of the six participants said that, as a result, they didn’t have sufficient time in their classes to cover all the academic topics their students needed, including vocabulary, sustained silent reading, and critical thinking skills. However, even as reading instructors, the teachers weren’t always given sufficient time with their students. In general, the teachers viewed reading instruction for ELLs and native English speakers as being the same, but noted that ELLs often needed more time and assistance. One teacher remarked that reading instruction with ELLs takes longer because “you have to spend more time with little things and not rush” (Interview, date unavailable). A number of the questions that the teachers raised have appeared in the literature, albeit in somewhat different form. For example, the issue of time spent teaching reading has generally been seen as a question of how long ELLs take to achieve grade-level proficiency. However, at least one recent article suggests that students with limited L2 oral proficiency require more intensive initial reading instruction, especially if they also lack familiarity with the types of literacy valued by the school (Foorman & Torgesen, 2001). The question of how schools serve ELLs is growing in importance as the number of ELLs in the classroom increase; interest in this question has been reflected in the increasing number of articles relating to L2 issues that have appeared in journals aimed at teachers outside the field of English language teaching (see Eakle, 2003) or articles giving advice on how to teach reading to ELLs (Gersten & Geva, 2003; Meier, 2003). Nevertheless, the perception of the teachers in this survey that mainstream teachers are not aware of how best to serve ELLs is amply supported by a recent survey by the U.S. Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics (Gruber, Wiley, Broughman, Strizek, & Burian-Fitzgerald, 2002), in which 45.5% of teachers in PREPARING TEACHERS OF SECOND LANGUAGE READING 719 the state where this research took place reported teaching ELLs but only 6.2% reported that they had had 8 or more hours of training in the last 3 years on how to teach ELLs. The similarity of L1 and L2 reading instruction has also been frequently discussed in the research literature. Fitzgerald (2000) states that “there is little evidence to support the need for a special vision of secondlanguage reading instruction” (p. 520), a conclusion supported by others (Au, 2000; Gersten & Geva, 2003; Lesaux & Siegel, 2003; Slavin & Cheung, 2003). However, not everyone agrees with this point of view. For example, Gutierrez et al. (2002) describe the deleterious effects on ELLs who are taught through highly scripted phonics programs that are intended for use with learners of any background. Students’ Literacy and Oral Proficiency in their L1s Teachers saw their students’ L1 knowledge as critical for their success in language learning. As one elementary teacher noted, “the biggest problem with my students at this school is that many of them are not literate in their first language” (Interview, October 8, 2001). Teachers believed that learners who had L1 skills could transfer them to L2 reading and to other academic tasks. However, they also felt that transfer generally did not occur simply because the students had limited L1 knowledge in the first place. Teachers referred to several aspects of students’ L1 abilities: literacy, extent of schooling, and oral proficiency. The school district did not formally measure students L1 skills; the language surveys students were required to complete asked only about what languages were used at home. However, the teachers estimated that anywhere from 10–50% of the students had some degree of L1 literacy. The higher percentage came from the junior high school teacher; all the faculty who worked with younger learners believed that only a very small minority of their students was literate in their L1. In addition to having limited literacy skills, students seemed to several teachers to have limited oral proficiency; that is, they could comprehend their L1s but could not speak them. The teachers measured the oral proficiency of their students in approximate ways, for example, by making judgments based on their knowledge of the students’ background, by asking whether students could read or knew vocabulary words in their L1, or, with Spanish-speaking students and teachers, by speaking to them in Spanish. Suggestions about effective practices for reading instruction for ELLs frequently assume that they student is proficient in the L1. For example, Jimenez (1997) and Jimenez and Gamez (1996) have proposed the use of explicit instruction in cross-linguistic reading strategies, and Bernhardt (2003) advocates the development of linguistic materials that will 720 TESOL QUARTERLY enable teachers to “assess and diagnose literacy difficulties” (p. 115) experienced by students whose L1 is different from that of the classroom. However, finding effective approaches for teaching learners who come to school with limited L1 proficiency is a topic in desperate need of further research, and the situation is particularly critical for older learners who come to school with few literacy skills either in their L1 or in English (August & Hakuta, 1997; Chamot, 2000; Freeman, Freeman, & Kerman, 2001). Observation in ESOL classrooms Literacy instruction varied among the six classrooms depending on the age and proficiency levels of the students, the individual school’s expectations, and the emphasis teachers placed on activities such as group or independent reading, decoding, vocabulary, spelling, and writing. Individual teachers spent an average of 14–50% of their class time on reading or discussing texts; for all teachers, the majority of this time was spent in group reading. One common thread across the classrooms was a generally positive atmosphere; some discipline problems were noticeable, but students were usually engaged, and teachers seemed to have supportive relationships with their students. Another thread was a focus on local comprehension of the text being read, that is, understanding or decoding individual words or reviewing information that had been explicitly stated in the material. When written work was produced, classroom activities stressed spelling, grammar, or following traditional rules such as beginning paragraphs with a topic sentence. Although on several occasions teachers explained or modeled strategies that could assist students in developing academic skills or learning decoding rules, more typically classroom interaction would, for example, cover the meaning of specific words but not consider how word knowledge in general could be acquired or retained. In various ways, the ESOL classrooms were subordinate to goals set out of their purview. There was no district-wide ESOL curriculum, and some of the topics covered by the teachers, such as homophones or aviation, were chosen because they were being used in mainstream classes. In the upper grades, teachers regularly set aside their classroom activities to prepare students for tests or to allow students to finish homework that was due in other classes. In all the classrooms, students’ L1s or prior experiences were occasionally acknowledged, but, for example, on only one occasion was a text used that appeared to have a connection to students’ cultures of origin. Overwhelmingly, instructional time was devoted to the school’s expectations of the students, that is, for speakers of English who could pass mandated exams, be knowledgeable about PREPARING TEACHERS OF SECOND LANGUAGE READING 721 American culture, and fulfill academic requirements that were the same for all students in a particular grade or class. DISCUSSION The differing perspectives provided by teachers’ beliefs, their practices, and the information in research literature or methods texts contribute to a complex picture of issues to be addressed in teacher education courses. From the teacher interviews, a clear vision of L2 reading instruction emerges: It uses themes; it emphasizes vocabulary, writing, decoding, and enjoyment of reading; and the materials used are flexible, depending on the students’ backgrounds and abilities. The goal of instruction is for students to succeed in mainstream classes. Ideally, learners are grouped by proficiency level, and ESOL teachers have sufficient time to help their students develop a range of academic skills. This vision of instruction is generally supported by the research and instructional literatures in thematic teaching, materials choice, writing, and decoding, although published material emphasized research on decoding rather than pedagogical practices. However, the field has not addressed some issues that teachers identified as being very important, particularly working with learners of differing proficiency levels in the same classroom and teaching learners with limited L1 knowledge. The areas in which teacher concerns and published research on reading instruction overlap are undoubtedly topics that methods course should address because they have relevance to teachers in any context. Those issues that receive less attention in the field, such as approaches for developing decoding skills and for working with learners who are diverse in terms of language proficiency and L1 literacy, cannot easily be dismissed as areas of interest only to this particular group of teachers. ESOL licensures usually cover all grade levels, and students of any level can be beginners in English or first-time school attendees. Given the rapidly changing demographics of U.S. public schools across the nation (see Capps et al., 2005), ESOL teachers are likely to be confronted with a range of learners in the classroom. The third data source, classroom observations, raise other issues relative to teacher education. It should be noted here that the observations did not necessarily represent individual teachers’ usual behavior; apparent contradictions between interview statements and classroom behaviors, such as those relating to the use of culturally relevant materials, could be an artifact of the timing of the observations. However, it seems probable that the teachers were not fully exploiting the possibilities of their instructional practices, especially in thematic teaching, which is 722 TESOL QUARTERLY espoused in the TESOL field in part because of its multifunctionality. Thematic teaching can provide a platform for interconnected approaches, such as cooperative learning or student choice in tasks and materials, that address the needs of learners from diverse backgrounds. Another vital component of thematic instruction is explicit training in strategy use; this type of training can enable students to develop as self-aware, engaged learners, readers, and writers. Thematic instruction also provides a natural environment for exploring the linguistic demands of academic genres and for giving students explicit instruction about the language of schooling (see, e.g., Schleppegrell, 2004). In the case of the classrooms observed for this project, the teachers’ focus on student understanding of vocabulary and grammar in individual texts left limited space for the development of other types of knowledge. A comparison of the concerns and practices of teachers with the state of the art in research and pedagogy indicates that teacher educators must simultaneously address three challenges: practice, goals, and context. Specific techniques for teaching reading undoubtedly play a central role in a methods course, though which techniques are covered should not be dictated only by what is readily available in a textbook or even in a research article. Methods courses must also encourage teachers to explore the goals of instruction, unpacking the meaning of such phrases as success in mainstream classes. Teachers may then move beyond a narrow focus on vocabulary or content to student mastery of the linguistic demands of academic genres and the cognitive behaviors exhibited by proficient readers and writers. Methods courses must also find a central place for the role of context in teaching, that is, consideration of how ELLs are socialized into language use and positioned in classroom environments in which only L2 instruction is available. In the interviews, the participants stated that they saw no fundamental differences between teaching reading to ELLs and teaching reading to native English speakers, although they believed that teaching reading to ELLs required more time; this perspective was supported by their classroom practice. As noted earlier, this viewpoint has also received support in the field of L2 reading, but it remains controversial, and teachers should be aware that it is so. When the same techniques are used for different learners, considering the wider context is crucial; academic achievement in a monolingual classroom makes demands on ELLs that are not made on monolingual speakers (Toohey, 2000; Valdés, 2001). Direct adaptations of L1 instructional techniques can lead uncritical teachers to view L2 students as unmotivated or lazy when those techniques do not succeed. An ongoing examination of context in methods classes may also enable teachers to add a critical edge to the caring and concern for their students that the participants in this study exhibited. Considering how PREPARING TEACHERS OF SECOND LANGUAGE READING 723 factors such as the discourse of the school and community, the attitudes of classmates, and the teacher’s training affect ELLs’ success may lead ESOL teachers to adopt a more combative stance. This stance, in turn, could provide ESOL professionals with the ammunition they need to act as advocates for ELLs, who receive the majority of their schooling from faculty not trained to teach them. CONCLUSION As with any small-scale study, the participants’ opinions and behavior reflect their training and the demands of the institutions in which they work and may not be generalizable to a wider audience. Nevertheless, a study like this one can serve several useful functions, such as identifying gaps in the research literature and encapsulating the diversity of challenges faced by experienced classroom teachers and by teacher educators. In a sense, this study can also represent the journey that future teachers should take in a methods class. I began my investigation with an individual perspective, albeit one based in experience and past research, about what issues are critical in L2 reading instruction. Through the process of investigation, I have come to see the concerns I started with as insufficient because they emphasize the characteristics of individual learners and teachers and of specific classroom techniques rather than framing those learners, teachers, and techniques in a wider setting. A methods class that adopts the same tack I began with, that is, closing the classroom door and relying on other courses to provide context, will not give teachers the opportunity to deepen their understanding of reading instruction. Certainly, covering all the topics listed earlier while also constantly considering goals and context is a formidable challenge but no more formidable than the challenge of becoming a proficient L2 reader. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am very grateful to the teachers who participated in this research, welcoming me into their classrooms and patiently answering all my questions. I would also like to thank the editor and the anonymous reviewers of this article for their helpful suggestions. THE AUTHOR Joy Janzen teaches at Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York, United States. Her research interests include L2 literacies, teacher education, and teaching practices for ELLs in mainstream classrooms. 724 TESOL QUARTERLY REFERENCES Aebersold, J., & Field, M. L. (1997). From reader to reading teacher. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Allen, V. G. (1994). Selecting materials for the reading instruction of ESL children. In K. Spangenberg-Urbschat & R. Pritchard (Eds.), Kids come in all languages: Reading instruction for ESL students (pp. 108–131). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Appel, R., & Vermeer, R. (1998). Speeding up second language vocabulary acquisition of minority children. Language and Education, 12(3), 159–173. Au, K. H. (1998). Social constructivism and the school literacy learning of students of diverse backgrounds. Journal of Literacy Research, 30, 297–319. Au, K. H. (2000). A multicultural perspective on policies for improving literacy achievement: Equity and excellence. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Vol. 3 (pp. 835–851). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. August, D., & Hakuta, K. (1997). (Eds.). Improving schooling for language-minority children: A research agenda. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Barrera, R. B., & Jimenez, R. T. (2000). Literacy instruction for bilingual Latino students: Teachers’ experiences and knowledge. In Proceedings of a research symposium on high standards in reading for students from diverse language groups: Research, practice & policy (pp. 144–159). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Languages Affairs. Retrieved November 2, 2007, from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/pubs/symposia/reading/ literacy7.html Bernhardt, E. (2000). Second-language reading as a case study of reading scholarship in the 20th century. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Vol. 3 (pp. 791–811). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Bernhardt, E. (2003). Challenges to reading research from a multilingual world. Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 112–117. Birch, B. (2002). English L2 reading: Getting to the bottom. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Brown, H. (2001). Teaching by principles (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Addison Wesley Longman. Capps, R., Fix, M., Murray, J., Ost, J., Passel, J. S., & Herwantoro, S. (2005). The new demography of America’s schools. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute. Carlo, M., August, D., McLaughlin, B., Snow, C., Dressler, C., Lippman, D., et al. (2004). Closing the gap: Addressing the vocabulary needs of English-language learners in bilingual and mainstream classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 188–215. Celce-Murcia, M. (Ed.). (2001). Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed.). Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Chamot, A. U. (2000). Literacy characteristics of Hispanic adolescent immigrants with limited prior education. In Proceedings of a research symposium on high standards in reading for students from diverse language groups: Research, practice & policy (pp. 188–202). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Languages Affairs. Retrieved November 2, 2007, from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/pubs/symposia/reading/literacy9.html. Chamot, A., & O’Malley, M. (1994). The CALLA handbook. Reading, MA: AddisonWesley. Comeau, L., Cormier, P., Grandmaison, E., & Lacroix, D. (1999). A longitudinal PREPARING TEACHERS OF SECOND LANGUAGE READING 725 study of phonological processing skills in children learning to read in a second language. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 29–43. Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy. Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. Day, R. R., & Bamford, J. (1998). Extensive reading in the second language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Derewianka, B. (1990). Exploring how texts work. Newtown, Australia: Primary English Teaching Association. Droop, M., & Verhoeven, L. (2003). Language proficiency and reading ability in firstand second-language learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 78–103. Eakle, A. J. (2003). A content analysis of second-language research in The Reading Teacher and Language Arts 1990–2001. The Reading Teacher, 56, 828–836. Echevarria, J., & Graves, A. (2003). Sheltered content instruction (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., & Short, D. J. (2004). Making content comprehensible for English learners. The SIOP model (2nd ed.). Boston: Pearson. Fitzgerald, J. (1995a). English-as-a-second-language learners’ cognitive reading processes: A review of research in the United States. Review of Educational Research, 65(2), 145–190. Fitzgerald, J. (1995b). English-as-a-second-language reading instruction in the United States: A research review. Journal of Reading Behavior, 27(2), 115–152. Fitzgerald, J. (2000). How will bilingual/ESL programs in literacy change in the next millennium? Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 520–523. Fitzgerald, J., & Cummins, J. (1999). Bridging disciplines to critique a national research agenda for language-minority children’s schooling. Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 378–390. Foorman, B., & Torgesen, J. (2001). Critical elements of classroom and small-group instruction promote reading success in all children. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 16, 203–212. Freeman, Y., & Freeman, D. (2000). Teaching reading in multilingual classrooms. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Freeman, Y., & Freeman, D. (2003). Struggling English language learners: Keys for academic success. TESOL Journal, 12(3), 5–10. Freeman, Y., Freeman, D., & Kerman, S. M. (2001). Keys to success for bilingual students with limited formal schooling. Bilingual Research Journal, 25 (1 & 2). Retrieved November 2, 2007, from http://brj.asu.edu/v2512/articles/art10.html Garcia, G. E. (2000). Bilingual children’s reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Vol. 3 (pp. 813–834). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Gersten, R., & Geva, E. (2003). Teaching reading to early language learners. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 44–49. Gottardo, A., Yan, B., Siegel, L. S., & Wade-Woolley, L. (2001). Factors related to English reading performance in children with Chinese as a first language: More evidence of cross-language transfer of phonological processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 530–542. Grellet, F. (1981). Developing reading skills. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gruber, K. J., Wiley, S. D., Broughman, S. P., Strizek, G. A., & Burian-Fitzgerald, M. (2002). Schools and staffing survey, 1999–2000: Overview of the data for public, private, public charter, and Bureau of Indian Affairs elementary and secondary schools. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved November 2, 2007, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2002/2002313_1.pdf Gunn, B., Biglan, A., Smolkowski, K., & Ary, D. (2000). The efficacy of supplemental 726 TESOL QUARTERLY instruction in decoding skills for Hispanic and non-Hispanic students in early elementary school. The Journal of Special Education, 34(2), 90–103. Gutierrez, K. D., Asato, J., Pacheco, M., Moll, L. C., Olson, K. I., Horn, E. L., et al. (2002). “Sounding American”: The consequences of new reforms on English language learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 37, 328–343. Hakuta, K., Butler, Y. G., & Witt, D. (2000). How long does it take English learners to attain proficiency? [Policy Report 2000–1]. Santa Barbara: University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute. Retrieved November 2, 2007, from http:// repositories.cdlib.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=lmri Heydon, R. (2003). Literature circles as a differentiated instructional strategy for including ESL students in mainstream classrooms. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 59, 463–475. Hudelson, S., Poynor, L., & Wolfe, P. (2003). Teaching bilingual and ESL children and adolescents. In J. Flood, D. Lapp, J. R. Squire, & J. M. Jensen (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts (2nd ed.; pp. 421–434). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Jimenez, R. T. (1997). The strategic reading abilities and potential of five low-literacy Latina/o readers in middle school. Reading Research Quarterly, 32, 224–243. Jimenez, R. T., & Gamez, A. (1996). Literature-based cognitive strategy instruction for middle school Latina/o students. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 40(2), 84–91. Kim, H., & Krashen, S. (1997). Why don’t language acquirers take advantage of the power of reading? TESOL Journal, 6(3), 26–29. Lesaux, N. K., & Siegel, L. S. (2003). The development of reading in children who speak English as a second language. Developmental Psychology, 39, 1005–1019. Lindsey, K. A., Manis, F. R., & Bailey, C. E. (2003). Prediction of first-grade reading in Spanish-speaking English-language learners. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 482–494. Macken-Horarik, M. (2002). “Something to shoot for”: A systemic functional approach to teaching genre in secondary school science. In A. Johns (Ed.), Genre in the classroom (pp. 17–42). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. McGlinn, J., & Parrish, A. (2002). Accelerating ESL students’ reading progress with Accelerated Reader. Reading Horizons, 42(3), 175–189. Meier, T. (2003). “Why can’t she remember that?” The importance of storybook reading in multilingual, multicultural classrooms. The Reading Teacher, 57, 242– 252. Ovando, C., & Collier, V. (1998). Bilingual and ESL classrooms. (2nd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill. Peregoy, S. F., & Boyle, O. F. (2005). Reading, writing, and learning in ESL (4th ed.). New York: Pearson Education. Reppen, R. (1994/1995). A genre-based approach to content writing instruction. TESOL Journal, 4(2), 32–35. Rosowsky, A. (2001). Decoding as a cultural practice and its effects on the reading process of bilingual pupils. Language and Education, 15(1), 56–70. Schleppegrell, M. (2004). The language of schooling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Silberstein, S. (1994). Techniques and resources in teaching reading. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Slavin, R. E., & Cheung, A. (2003). Effective reading programs for English language learners: A best-evidence synthesis (CRESPAR Report No. 66). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed At Risk. Retrieved November 2, 2007, from http://www.csos.jhu.edu/crespar/ techReports/Report66.pdf PREPARING TEACHERS OF SECOND LANGUAGE READING 727 Stahl, S. A. (2001). Teaching phonics and phonological awareness. In S. Neuman & D. Dickson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 333–347). New York: Guildford Press. Teale, W. H. (1995). Young children and reading: Trends across the twentieth century. Journal of Education, 177(3), 95–127. Thomas, W., & Collier, V. (2002). A national study of school effectiveness for language minority students’ long-term academic achievement Final Report: Project 1.1. Berkeley: University of California, Center for Research on Education, Diversity, and Excellence. Retrieved November 2, 2007, from http://crede.berkeley.edu/research/ llaa/1.1_final.html. Toohey, K. (2000). Learning English at school. Identity, social relations and classroom practice. Cleveland, England: Multilingual Matters. Valdés, G. (2001). Learning and not learning English. New York: Teachers College Press. APPENDIX Teacher’s Background Information 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. How many years have you been working as a teacher overall? With ESL students in particular? What educational degrees (or other qualifications) do you have? Have you learned to read in a language other than English? What is your general teaching philosophy? Information About Students 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. How many students do you have? What grades? What proficiency levels? What are their first languages? Do you know if they can read in their first languages? Information About the Teaching of Reading 11. What are your overall objectives when you teach reading? What do you want the students to achieve? 12. What do you think are the best ways to teach reading to English language learners? 13. Are you able to implement your beliefs about the teaching of reading? (Do you, for instance, have particular materials/techniques/approaches you are required to use by your school?) 14. What specific activities do you use with ELLs? 15. What time do you spend on ● decoding work ● follow-up work to reading (drawing pictures, for example) ● writing ● vocabulary ● Language Experience Approach (whole language) ● reading to children ● asking learners to read aloud ● reading strategies such as predicting, previewing, thinking about what you already know 728 TESOL QUARTERLY 16. What kinds of materials do you use? 17. How do you think the teaching of reading should differ for first and second language learners? 18. Do you think there should be differences between the ways children of different first languages are taught? 19. Do you have a general feeling about how much time you think students need in ESL reading instruction (as opposed to mainstream instruction)? 20. Do you think your students are generally prepared for mainstream instruction by the time they leave your school? 21. How are children evaluated in terms of entering and exiting your program? 22. What topics do you think preparation programs for ESL teachers should cover relative to the teaching of reading? PREPARING TEACHERS OF SECOND LANGUAGE READING 729 How Are Nonnative-English-Speaking Teachers Perceived by Young Learners? YUKO GOTO BUTLER University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States The current study examined the effects of Korean elementary school teachers’ accents on their students’ listening comprehension. It also examined students’ attitudes toward teachers with American-accented English (a native speaker model) and Korean-accented English (a nonnative speaker model). A matched-guised technique was used. A Korean American individual recorded texts in both American-accented English and Korean-accented English. The study randomly assigned 312 Grade 6 Korean students to listen to one of these two recorded oral texts and their comprehension was examined. Next, all of the students listened to both accented-English tapes and their attitudes toward the two speakers (which were in fact the same speaker) were examined. Although the popular belief appears to assume that nonnative accented English would produce a negative effect on students’ oral skills, the results failed to find any differences in student performance in terms of comprehension. However, the Korean children thought that the Americanaccented English guise had better pronunciation, was relatively more confident in her use of English, would focus more on fluency than on accuracy, and would use less Korean in the English class. The students also expressed a preference to have the American-accented English guise as their English teacher. R ecently, the goals of English education in East Asia have gone through a number of major reforms as nations in the region continue to adjust to globalization and the spread of information technology. Many East Asian countries, including China, Taiwan, Korea, and Japan, which have been classified as members in the expanding circle (Kachru, 1992), have started introducing English language instruction at the elementary school level in various forms. The traditional approach of teaching English as a foreign language (EFL) in East Asia has been criticized for putting too much emphasis on grammar, reading, and writing (e.g., Butler & Iino, 2005; Choi, 2007; Silver, Hu, & Iino, 2002). East Asian governments have thus set the acquisition of good oral communication skills as one of the primary goals of their elementary English TESOL QUARTERLY Vol. 41, No. 4, December 2007 731 language education. It is not surprising that local teachers’ oral communication skills in English (including pronunciation) have become a major concern (Butler, 2004; Lee, 2002; Nunan, 2003). How important is it that nonnative-English-speaking teachers (NNES teachers) speak “good” English when they are trying to teach elementary school children? More precisely, what effect do the oral abilities of NNES teachers have on the performance of such young English learners? And what attitudes do such young learners hold toward their teachers’ English? These questions have taken on increasing significance in Asia in recent years as English language education has been expanded to the elementary school level. This study tries to answer these questions in the case of South Korea, where teachers who typically lack good communicative competencies are now charged with introducing English language education (Lee, 2002). NATIVE AND NONNATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKERS IN ENGLISH TEACHING In examining elementary school teachers’ English proficiencies, it is important to note that the Korean government is planning to increase the number of native-English-speaking (NES) teachers in their English classes (Yang, 2002). Although the number of NES teachers working in public elementary schools in Korea remains limited, an influx of NES teachers has been hired to work at various private language institutes. Though official statistics are not available, it is believed that many elementary school students take English private lessons from NES teachers after school (Sang-Jae Kim, Ministry of Education & Human Resources Development, personal communication, November 12, 2003). Moreover, a report recently released by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) indicated that Korean students were least confident among students in OECD countries in their local school teachers’ teaching (note, however, that this survey included students at all grade levels and focused on students’ attitudes on all subjects, rather than singling out English education at the elementary school level; OECD, 2003). The qualifications of NNES and NES teachers have been a heated topic of discussion in the TESOL literature (e.g., Arva & Medgyes, 2000; Braine, 1999; Brutt-Griffler & Samimy, 2001; Canagarajah, 1999; Cook, 1999; Davies, 2003; Kamhi-Stein, 2004; Liu, 1999; Llurda, 2005; Medgyes, 1992, 1994; Sheorey, 1986; Widdowson, 1994). Phillipson (1992) has called the belief that NES teachers are the ideal language teachers (i.e., better qualified as language teachers) the native speaker fallacy; indeed, a 732 TESOL QUARTERLY number of reports (e.g., Braine, 1999) have indicated that this belief appears to have exerted an undue influence on English teaching in different parts of the world. For example, NNES teachers in Hong Kong appear to believe that NESs are superior to NNESs, particularly in oral communicative abilities, and the teachers’ authority and confidence may be threatened by such beliefs (Tang, 1997). NNES teachers in Japan face another type of challenge in teaching English; parents doubt the ability of NNES teachers to teach English and want their children to be taught by NES teachers (Takada, 2000). Second language acquisition theory, for its part, has widely used the notion of native speakers and nonnative speakers, with native speakers being considered as the ultimate model of language acquisition. However, this dichotomous notion of native versus nonnative speakers has drawn some criticism (e.g., Davies, 2003; Edge, 1988; Kachru & Nelson, 1996). Defining nativeness itself appears to be complicated both psycholinguistically and socioculturally. At the individual level, what factors account for the primary elements of nativeness are still not clear; such elements may include the age of first exposure to the language, linguistic competence, identity, or various other attributes (e.g., Cook, 1999; Davies, 2003). At the societal level, drawing a boundary between native and nonnative varieties of English remains highly controversial. Some researchers have argued that the construct of nativeness itself is “a non-elective socially constructed identity rather than a linguistic category” (Brutt-Griffler & Samimy, 2001, p. 100). If this interpretation is correct, it is possible that those same qualifications that appear to favor NES teachers may simply represent a construct of one’s perceptions or attitudes toward NNES versus NES teachers and might not bear a direct influence on students’ language learning. Although a number of studies have investigated NNES teachers’ perceptions regarding NES and NNES teachers’ qualifications (e.g., Liu, 1999; Medgyes, 1994), much less is known about learners’ perceptions of NES versus NNES teachers’ qualifications (Braine, 2005). Moreover, we know very little about the relationship between learners’ perceptions and attitudes regarding NES and NNES teachers’ qualifications and learner performance. This is especially true with respect to young learners who have just started learning English. This lack of data is somewhat surprising given the fact that a growing number of countries have begun introducing English at younger and younger ages and are planning to hire large numbers of NES teachers. Among various types of qualifications needed for language teachers, the current study focuses on NNES teachers’ oral proficiencies in general and pronunciation in particular. (NNES teachers are often considered to have a low proficiency in pronunciation or accentuation; see PERCEPTIONS OF NONNATIVE TEACHERS 733 Medgyes, 1994; Tang, 1997.) Certain varieties of English spoken by native speakers in countries in the centre (Phillipson, 1992), such as general American and received pronunciation, are usually considered to be the model in EFL contexts (Tanabe, 2003). If an instructor’s speech does not match this native model, students and their parents, as well as teachers themselves, often express concern over the possible effects of the instructor’s accent on his or her students’ acquisition of the language. In the following discussion, accent refers to “the pronunciation features of any spoken variety” (Finegan, 1999, p. 585) including pitch, duration, loudness, and other auditory features of a person’s speech. ATTITUDES TOWARD ACCENTS A number of studies have found that accents and dialects do indeed influence listeners’ perceptions of speakers (e.g., Fishman, 1977; Giles & Sassoon, 1983; Giles, Williams, Mackie, & Rosselli, 1995; McKirnan & Hamayan, 1984; Oller, Baca, & Vigil, 1978). The matched-guise technique, which was developed by Lambert, Hodgson, Gardner, and Fillenbaum (1960), has often been used to measure attitudes toward languages, dialects, and accents. In this technique, the participants listen to various tape-recorded speeches and are asked to judge a number of social and psychological traits of the speakers (such as their perceived level of intelligence). The participants are not told that the speech samples actually come from the same speaker. The basic assumption of this technique is that listeners construct speakers’ social and psychological traits based on linguistic features of speech such as accents and the rate of speech delivery. The construction of such traits is based on the listeners’ perceptions or dispositions toward certain groups of people and certain variations of languages, or what one may call their attitudes. Although researchers have not agreed on the definitions and factors that underlie attitudes (Baker, 1992), the matched-guise technique has been widely used as a methodological tool in studies examining listeners’ attitudes toward a variety of languages in various contexts. Studies have shown that attitudes toward speakers and their accents can differ depending on context (Cargile, 1997; Gallois & Callan, 1985). A growing number of studies on language attitudes have examined students’ attitudes toward the nonnative accents of foreign-born teachers and instructors in light of the increasing number of such instructors at American universities (Nyquist, Abbott, Wulff, & Sprague, 1991). These studies have shown that teachers with foreign accents are perceived by parents and students to be less intelligent compared with teachers without foreign accents (Nelson, 1991; Solomon, 1991). Rubin (1992) used 734 TESOL QUARTERLY a version of the matched-guise technique and prepared two sets of videotaped lectures; one was delivered by an Asian lecturer and the other was delivered by a Caucasian lecturer. Using a voiceover, the lectures were, in fact, delivered by a speaker of standard English. In other words, the students were presented with two different visual stimuli (two instructors from different racial backgrounds) but only one audio stimulus (recorded by the same person). Rubin found that even though instructors spoke the same English, undergraduates perceived their instructors’ accents differently and, most important, this perception influenced the students’ comprehension of their lectures. Edwards (1982) also found that students’ evaluations of their teachers’ teaching performance were influenced by their accents. Even after controlling for the effects of visual perception (i.e., using photographs to introduce the speakers of recorded lectures) and work performance, the effects of the teachers’ accents did not disappear. Although much of the empirical research on language attitudes has been focused on NESs’ attitudes toward varieties of English, some researchers have investigated the relationship between teachers’ accents and NNES students’ evaluation of such accents. Three studies conducted in EFL contexts in particular serve to illustrate the degree to which this concern is common across various geographies. In Chiba, Matsuura, & Yamamoto (1995), a group of Japanese college students were asked to listen to six speech samples created by speakers with a variety of accents (namely, with Japanese, Hong Kong Cantonese, Sri Lankan, Malaysian, British, and American English accents). The authors found that the students showed more positive responses toward American- and Britishaccented English, followed by Japanese-accented English, and other accented varieties of English. They also found a weak positive correlation between the students’ instrumental motivation and acceptance of nonnative accents. In Dalton-Puffer, Kaltenboeck, and Smit (1997), a group of Austrian college students were found to have negative attitudes toward Austrian-accented English (which they perceived to be a foreign accent) and showed a distinct preference for so-called native accents. Among native accents, they most favored the accent with which they were the most familiar, namely, British English. Ladegaard (1998) examined the relationship among high school students’ attitudes toward different countries and the varieties of English spoken in those countries. High school students in Denmark considered British English as their language learning model, but they also showed positive attitudes toward American English because of their interest in American culture. The attitudes that elementary school children form toward English accents in EFL contexts have rarely been studied. This lack of attention from researchers has occurred despite the fact that teachers’ foreign PERCEPTIONS OF NONNATIVE TEACHERS 735 accents appear to be of particular concern among elementary school teachers as well as among students at the elementary school level in EFL contexts and their parents. Forde (1995) examined Hong Kong students’ attitudes toward variations of English and found that British and American English were evaluated favorably when compared with Hong Kong English. This was true even when the students were asked a question concerning their teachers’ abilities to teach. (Note, however that the situation in Hong Kong, a former British colony, may differ from that in countries in the expanding circle such as Korea.) Okumura (2005) compared students’ attitudes toward various types of English (touching on such factors as the perceived coolness, smartness, honesty, and sincerity of the speakers) among elementary school children and college students in Japan. He found that both groups showed more positive attitudes toward American English than toward Indian English. This result suggests that learners’ attitudes may indeed develop at an early age. It is thus important to understand how learners feel about teachers who do not speak with a certain NES accent as well as how this affects the perceived quality of their teaching. Medgyes (1994) proposed a list of “self-reported” classroom behavioral differences between NES teachers and NNES teachers in his survey of English teachers at different grade levels in 11 countries (p. 58). The differences in behavior between NES and NNES teachers were classified into four categories: individual use of English; general attitudes toward teaching; attitudes toward teaching the language; and attitudes toward teaching culture. This list includes the quality of their pronunciation, their degree of confidence in using English, their casualness, the degree to which they show empathy toward students’ problems with learning English, and so on. Medgyes’ list is based on teachers’ perceptions, and it does not show whether elementary school students perceive the qualifications of NES and NNES teachers in a way that is similar to the way in which teachers perceive such attributes. Effects of Teachers’ Accents on Students’ Oral Skills In addition to understanding children’s attitudes toward their teachers’ accents in English, in light of the fact that the curricula in many countries where English is not the dominant language strongly emphasize the acquisition of oral communicative skills (especially at the elementary school level), it is also important to examine the effects of teachers’ accents on children’s oral skills. However, very few studies have focused on the effects of teachers’ accents on children’s oral skills in EFL contexts. 736 TESOL QUARTERLY With respect to listening comprehension of accented speech, the majority of previous studies have examined native listeners’ success in comprehending accented speech (i.e., the intelligibility of speech), and have almost exclusively focused on adult listeners. The results of the relatively limited number of studies focusing on learners’ comprehension appear to be inconclusive; it is not clear whether learners can more easily comprehend certain types of accented speech. Eisenstein and Berkowitz (1981) found that adult ESL learners could comprehend standard native speakers’ English better than nonstandard English, including foreign-accented English. Among foreign-accented varieties of English, a number of studies have indicated that familiar accents of English are easier for learners to comprehend than unfamiliar accents of English (Tauroza & Luk, 1997; Wilcox, 1978). However, it is still unclear whether listeners more easily comprehend speech delivered by speakers who share their native language. Smith and Bisazza (1982) found that although their Japanese students comprehended Japaneseaccented English better than U.S. speakers’ English, their Indian students comprehended U.S. speakers’ English better than Indian-accented English. A more recent study conducted by Major, Fitzmaurice, Bunta, and Balasubramanian (2002) yielded mixed results. By examining adult listeners with different native language backgrounds (Chinese, Japanese, Spanish, and standard American English), they found that Spanish speakers did better when listening to Spanish-accented English speech (even better than when listening to standard American English), whereas Chinese listeners did worse when listening to Chinese-accented English speech. A similarly inconsistent result was also reported by Munro, Derwing, and Morton (2006). The reasons for the inconsistent results among different language groups are not yet clear. Research Questions The current study examined the effect of teachers’ accents on Korean elementary school students’ listening comprehension skills. It also examined these young learners’ attitudes toward teachers with standard American English (a preferred NES model in many EFL contexts, referred to herein as American-accented English) and Korean-accented English. The participants in this study were still beginning to learn English, unlike many of the adult learners who have been the primary participants in studies on this topic to date. The specific research questions examined in the current study are as follows: 1. How do teachers’ accents in their English affect elementary school students’ English listening comprehension performance in a given PERCEPTIONS OF NONNATIVE TEACHERS 737 EFL context? As is often the concern, does the foreign-accented English of such teachers negatively affect student performance? 2. Do elementary school students hold different attitudes regarding the perceived quality of a given teacher’s English teaching capabilities based on the two accented-English conditions (i.e., Americanaccented English and Korean-accented English)? If so, do their responses differ based on their (a) listening comprehension level, (b) experience of having direct contact with native speakers of English, or (c) region (namely, do their responses differ between students studying in the capital city versus those studying in a regional city)? 3. Which attitudinal responses regarding the perceived quality of a given teacher have high associations with the students’ preference to have one of the two accented-English speakers as their English teacher? METHODOLOGY Participants The participants in the current study were 312 Grade 6 students in Korea. The students were enrolled in two public schools: one in Seoul (the capital) and the other in Daegu, an industrial city that has a reputation for being politically and socially conservative. In contrast to Seoul, one sees few foreigners or English signage in the city. The students were recruited from these two schools to address the possibility that students’ attitudes might differ between those who live in the capital city and those who live in regional cities. Both schools were located in a middle-class area in their respective cities. Out of the 312 participants, 173 students were enrolled in the school in Seoul and 139 students were enrolled in the school in Daegu. Approximately half of the students were female and the other half were male. In Korea, English is currently taught as a foreign language to all elementary school students in Grades 3–6 by native Korean teachers, and oral communication is a major focus in the curriculum. Although some teachers have specialized in teaching English, including some who have previously obtained certification to teach English at the secondary school level, many of them are regular classroom teachers. In 1997, to prepare Korean teachers to teach English in their classrooms, the government required all elementary school teachers to participate in a minimum of 120 hours of an in-service teachers’ training program wherein teachers take a uniform series of courses on English conversation and English language pedagogy. Currently, there is only one textbook for each grade 738 TESOL QUARTERLY level used in elementary schools across the nation. The vocabulary and grammatical items that should be introduced at each grade level are also specified based on a uniform national curriculum. For example, the students are expected to acquire 450 words by the end of the Grade 6 (Ministry of Education, Korea, 1997). In sum, the preparations for English language education at public elementary schools in Korea has been uniform across the country and one could assume that the students in the current study had received similar types of English language education (at least as far as their formal schooling is concerned). It is important to note, however, that many students receive some form of additional English instruction outside of school. Thus, background questionnaires were distributed as one part of the instruments used in the current study as described below. Materials and Procedures The students in the current study were asked to complete the following three tasks: Comprehension Test: The students were asked to listen to tape-recorded oral materials that had been recorded in either American-accented English or Korean-accented English and then answer a series of comprehension questions related to the oral materials. Attitudinal Questionnaire: The students were asked to listen a second time to the same oral materials used in the comprehension test, but this time in both American-accented English and Korean-accented English. The students were then asked to respond to attitudinal questions regarding various qualities of the “two speakers” or guises (e.g., how “good” their pronunciation was). Background Questionnaire: The students were asked questions regarding their experiences (if any) with native English speakers. The procedural instructions were given entirely in Korean at the beginning of each task to ensure that all of the students fully understood what to do. The listening comprehension test developed for this study consisted of three sections that roughly correspond to the three different grade levels regulated in the 7th Korean National Curriculum for English. The vocabulary, syntactic complexity, and length of sentences used in the oral materials and test items were designed to be appropriate for 5th graders (and younger) in Section 1 of the listening comprehension test, for 6th graders in Section 2 of the test, and for 7th graders (and up) in Section 3 of the test. As such, Section 1 was intended to be easy for our particiPERCEPTIONS OF NONNATIVE TEACHERS 739 pants (6th graders), Section 2 was intended to be at their grade level, and Section 3 was intended to be difficult for them. Many in Korea are significantly concerned regarding the wide gaps in English proficiency levels among elementary school students, particularly at the upper grade levels. The decision to incorporate three sections in the test was thus made to account for the assumed diversity of proficiency levels among the participants. Section 1 asked students to answer a series of short questions about pictures and oral materials. The questions themselves included 1–3 short sentences. Both Sections 2 and 3 were composed of an oral text followed by comprehension questions about the text. To prevent the comprehension test from becoming a de-facto memory test for Sections 2 and 3, the texts were first read in their entirety and then the texts were read paragraph by paragraph, with one or two comprehension questions between paragraphs. The comprehension questions were designed simply to check whether the students could capture the main information from the oral materials and did not include any questions involving higher order thinking skills. The comprehension questions for all three sections were in the format of a multiple-choice test, which was presented entirely in English. The comprehension test contained 20 items. The current study used a matched-guised technique (Lambert, et al., 1960). A Korean-American female with teaching experience recorded all three sections of the listening comprehension test. Studies using the matched-guise technique often use recordings of different languages and dialects by the same speaker (or speakers) because factors other than the targeted linguistics features, such as voice quality (e.g., softness of voice, pitch, etc.) might affect listeners’ attitudes toward such speakers. In the present case, one may consider the recorder a bidialectal speaker; although she spoke North American accented English in most daily contexts, she could also speak Korean-accented English in certain contexts. A bidialectal speaker has similarly been used in previous studies employing the matched-guised technique such as in Doss and Gross (1992) and Seggia, Fulmizi, and Stewart (1982). The bidialectal speaker used in this study recorded the oral materials and test questions in both American-accented English and Koreanaccented English. According to Kwon (1999), the primary characteristics of English spoken by Korean speakers include (a) replacement of certain phonemes (e.g., replacements of /f/ with /p/, /v/ with /b/, /␪/ with /d/, and /z/ with /j/); (b) influence from Korean assimilation (e.g., consonants before a nasal phoneme become nasalized as in “stop now” to “stom now”); and (c) changes in stress patterns due to English loan words used in Korean (e.g., stressing the [e] in “Neìw York” as opposed to stressing the [o] as in “New Yoìrk”) (p. 30–32). Therefore, two research740 TESOL QUARTERLY ers trained in linguistics went over the recordings to ensure that the recorded Korean-accented English had notable and consistent deviations in certain phonemes and stress patterns. Moreover, four native speakers of North-American English (all of whom were trained in linguistics) were then asked to judge holistically the degree to which the recorded stories were accented in both sets of recordings. These judges scored the degree of foreign accentuation using a 5-point scale (where 1 indicates no perceivable foreign accent and 5 indicates a heavy foreign accent). The mean scores for the Korean-accented version and the American-accented version were 3.5 and 1, respectively.1 As such, the degree of accentuation was clearly different enough to be perceived by the judges. The speed of speech delivery and voice quality were controlled for in producing the recordings. About half of the students in each school were randomly assigned to take the comprehension test based on the American-accented English recording (NAE = 159), and the other half were assigned to take the test based on the Korean-accented English recording (NKE = 153). After the listening comprehension test, all of the students listened to the same oral materials used in the comprehension test one more time. The second time, however, the students listened to both the American-accented English recording and the Korean-accented English recording. The students were asked to listen to both accented English materials because it was assumed to be easier for young learners to make judgments about various attitudinal questions if they had a chance to compare the two types of accented English. The order of the two accented-English recordings was counterbalanced. After listening to both versions, the students were then asked to judge various traits (qualities) of the two teachers (i.e., guises) on the tape. The current study focused on seven specific measures to assess the students’ perceptions of the two teachers (two guises) they heard in the recordings. These aspects were chosen based on the self-reported behavioral differences between NES teachers and NNES teachers cited in Medgyes (1994) as described earlier. Seven items were chosen from among the various behaviors listed in Medgyes because it was hypothesized that they could serve as indicators of some of the leading in-class behavioral differences between NES teachers and NNES teachers. The items were adopted to suit the specific context of the Korean elementary school students in the current study. These traits were also assumed to be relatively easy to judge for elementary school students, based on the results of a pilot study that focused on a small number of Korean elementary school students. 1 In addition to the two accented versions of the oral texts prepared for this study, the judges also listened to two more recordings created using different speakers as distracters. PERCEPTIONS OF NONNATIVE TEACHERS 741 Out of the seven items, two items were related to the teacher’s ability to use English (ability to use English, corresponding to attitudes towards individual use of English in Medgyes, 1994), three items were related to the teacher’s pedagogical strategies to teach English (English teaching strategies, corresponding to attitudes towards teaching the language in Medgyes), and two items were related to strategies for teaching in general (general teaching strategies, corresponding to the teachers’ general attitudes towards teaching in Medgyes). Ability to Use English 1. The perceived “goodness” of their pronunciation. 2. The teachers’ (guises’) degree of confidence in their use of English. English Teaching Strategies 3. The degree of focus on accuracy versus fluency in their teaching. 4. The degree to which they were expected to use Korean in their classrooms. 5. Their ability to explain the similarities and differences between the English and Korean languages. General Teaching Strategies 6. The strictness/casualness of the teachers. 7. Their degree of empathy toward the problems that Korean students have in learning English. In addition to these seven items, the students were asked to judge the extent to which they wished to have these “teachers” (guises) as their English teachers (teacher preference). Thus, the students were asked to judge eight attitudinal questions in total using a 7-point scale for each question. Based on previous studies such as Medgyes (1994), the scales were created in such a way that higher numbers reflect stronger expected traits of NS teachers. For example, Medgyes found that NNES teachers perceived NES teachers as more casual and less strict than NNES teachers are in their teaching style. To reflect such traits, 1 indicates strictness and 7 indicates casualness in the present scale. This attitudinal judgment was conducted in Korean. For their final task, the students were asked to fill out a brief questionnaire. This questionnaire covered two basic areas: (a) whether the students had any experience of traveling to or staying in an Englishspeaking country; and (b) whether the students had ever learned English directly from a native-English-speaking teacher inside or outside of their school. This questionnaire was given in Korean. 742 TESOL QUARTERLY All three tasks took the students approximately 40 minutes, including time spent instructing the students on how to complete the procedures. RESULTS Listening Comprehension I first examined whether the accents in English affected the young learners’ performance on the listening comprehension test. The analysis failed to find any significant differences in the students’ performance between the two accented English conditions. Before examining mean performance, I calculated the coefficient-alpha reliability of the 20 items in the comprehension test so as to ensure that the test items were reasonably reliable. The coefficient-alpha reliability was 0.70 and thus the test items were judged to have a reasonably high degree of reliability. The means and the standard deviations for American-accented English and Korean-accented English were as follows: American-accented English (M = 10.75, SD = 3.46) and Korean-accented English (M = 11.05, SD = 3.40). After employing a series of diagnostic examinations to ensure that the independency, normality, and homogeneity of variance assumptions were met, a one-way ANOVA was used to compare the mean scores of the two accented conditions. The result indicated that the ANOVA failed to find differences in mean scores between the two accented English conditions (F(1, 311) = 0.56, p = 0.45). Students’ Attitudes Toward American-Accented English and Korean-Accented English An examination of the students’ attitudes toward the two accentedEnglish guises revealed that there were indeed some significant differences in attitudes. Table 1 summarizes the results of this analysis. As mentioned in the methodology section, all of the students listened to both the Korean-accented and American-accented English in this part of the study. Thus, repeated measures of analysis of variance (with two within-subject factors: accents and attitudes) were used to examine whether participants showed a difference in attitudes toward the two types of English overall.2 The results indicated that there was a within2 Before employing the ANOVA with repeated measures, the sphericity assumption was tested for the attitude factor. (Since the accent factor has only two levels, the sphericity assumption for this factor is always met.) Epsilon was examined to test the assumption (Baguley, 2003). Epsilon (Greenhouse-Geisser) was .55; the sphericity was violated. As such, the Greenhouse-Geisser correction was employed in the subsequent analyses (the degrees of freedom were adjusted in the ANOVA analyses). PERCEPTIONS OF NONNATIVE TEACHERS 743 TABLE 1 Means and Standard Deviations for Eight Traits of Speakers of American-Accented English And Korean-Accented English (Based on a 7-Point Scale) 2 Items for Ability to use English (1) Goodness of pronunciation (1 = poor, 7 = excellent) (2) Confidence in their use of English (1 = unconfident, 7 = confident) 3 Items for English teaching strategies (3) Focus on fluency vs. accuracy (1 = accuracy, 7 = fluency) (4) Use of Korean in classrooms (1 = Korean dominant, 7 = English dominant) (5) Ability to explain the differences between English and Korean (1= excellent, 7 = poor) 2 Items for General teaching strategies (6) Strictness (1 = strict, 7 = casual) (7) Empathy towards students’ problems (1 = empathetic, 7 = not empathetic) 1 Item for Teacher preference (8) Wish to have them as their English teacher (1 = not wish, 7 = strongly wish) American English Korean English Mean (SD) Mean (SD) 4.99 (1.88) 5.10 (1.70) ANOVAs with repeated measures F(1, 296) ␩2 4.36 (1.82) 4.51 (1.76) 23.01** .07 22.43** .07 4.28 (1.68) 4.85 (1.59) 3.83 (1.78) 4.36 (1.62) 9.74* .03 17.43** .06 3.81 (1.68) 3.77 (1.71) .08 3.69 (1.55) 4.00 (1.70) 3.75 (1.55) 3.85 (1.72) .08 4.33 (2.07) 3.76 (1.97) 1.63 14.02** .05 Note. *p < .005. **p < .0001. subject interaction effect (F(4.46, 1216.8) = 3.48, p < 0.01, ␩2 = 0.01). The results further indicated that there were within-subject main effects for both accents (F(1, 273) = 46.31, p < 0.0001, ␩2 = 0.15) and attitudes (F(3.86, 1054.5) = 25.74, p < 0.0001, ␩2 = 0.10).3 The students’ attitudes significantly differed between the two accented English conditions. Finally, a series of ANOVAs with repeated measures were used to examine the differences in attitudes toward both the American-accented English speaker and the Korean-accented English speaker for each of the eight attitudinal variables. Significant differences were found with regard to the following attitudinal variables: both of the test items addressing perceived ability to use English (i.e., quality of the teacher’s pronunciation and their perceived confidence in the use of English), two of the three items addressing English teaching strategies (i.e., their perceived focus on 3 744 The eta-squared values were small here. However, Cohen (1988) sated that classical etasquared values typically range from .01 to .09 in the social sciences, so the results of the present study may not be untypical. TESOL QUARTERLY fluency versus accuracy and use of Korean in classrooms), and finally, the degree to which the students wished to have the guises as their English teachers.4 Neither of the items regarding general teaching strategies was found to generate significant differences in student attitudes toward the two guises. The Korean elementary school children thought that the American-accented English speaker (compared with the Koreanaccented English speaker) had better pronunciation, was more confident in her use of English, would focus more on fluency, and would use less Korean in the English class. The students also expressed a stronger preference to have the American-accented English speaker as their English teacher than the Korean-accented English speaker. Because differences were found in the students’ attitudes, a series of analyses were conducted to answer the follow-on set of questions pertaining to the second research question addressed in this study. Namely, the analyses were focused on whether the students’ responses to attitudinal items differed based on their (a) listening comprehension level, (b) experience of having direct contact with native speakers of English, and (c) geographical region. The results revealed that the students’ attitudes in response to certain items (specifically, the two items regarding perceived ability to use English) differed only between high and low comprehension groups; no differences in attitude were found based on the other two variables (i.e., experience of direct contact and regions). The students’ standardized scores (z scores) on the comprehension test were used to divide the students into two groups: a low comprehension group (NL = 155) and a high comprehension group (NH = 157). To examine the effect of the students’ experience with direct contact with native English speakers, based on the students’ responses to the second question in the questionnaire the students were again classified into two groups: those who had experienced learning English directly from native speakers of English (N1 = 171) and those who had not (N0 = 116). Although this is clearly a gross classification (given that the questionnaires did not address either the quality or quantity of English instruction from native English speakers), the effect of this variable could be worth examining given the fact that a growing number of parents are sending their children to private English institutes to provide them with instruction from native speakers. The descriptive statistics for the students’ responses related to the three variables tested (i.e., comprehension level, direct contact, and region) 4 The alpha level was adjusted based on the Bonferroni multiple comparison method (a set alpha level was .05). An adjusted alpha (␣ = .006) was employed in order to reduce the risk of getting false positives. The same adjusted alpha levels were used in each of the analyses that follow. PERCEPTIONS OF NONNATIVE TEACHERS 745 are summarized in Tables 2–4. In examining the effect of these three variables on the students’ attitudinal responses, a MANOVA was used. Among the eight attitudinal items originally prepared, only those attitudinal items that were found to be significant (five items in total) were used as dependent variables for the subsequent analysis. Three betweensubject variables were found: comprehension level, direct contact, and region. The accent was used as a repeated measure. The results revealed a between-subject interaction effect between direct contact and region (F(1, 254) = 8.18, p < 0.01, ␩2 = 0.03) and a between-subject main effect for comprehension level (F(1, 254) = 9.10, p < 0.005, ␩2 = 0.04). I ran additional posthoc analyses and found that only one item, confidence, was significantly related to comprehension level (F(1, 295) = 7.86, p < 0.005, ␩2 = 0.03). The students’ scores for the guises’ confidence were different depending on their listening comprehension performance. The students with higher comprehension performance gave higher confidence scores for both accented-English guises than the students with lower comprehension performance. TABLE 2 Students’ Attitudes Toward the Two Teachers (Guises) by Comprehension Level 2 Items for Ability to use English (1) Goodness of pronunciation (1 = poor, 7 = excellent) (2) Confidence in their use of English (1 = unconfident, 7 = confident) 3 Items for English teaching strategies (3) Focus on fluency vs. accuracy (1 = accuracy, 7 = fluency) (4) Use of Korean in classrooms (1 = Korean dominant, 7 = English dominant) (5) Ability to explain the differences between English and Korean (1 = excellent, 7 = poor) 2 Items for General teaching strategies (6) Strictness (1 = strict, 7 = casual) (7) Empathy towards students’ problems (1 = empathetic, 7 = not empathetic) 1 Item for Teacher preference (8) Wish to have them as their English teacher (1 = not wish, 7 = strongly wish) Comprehension low (n = 155) Comprehension high (n = 157) American English Korean English American English Korean English 4.67 (1.87) 4.68 (1.81) 4.14 (1.78) 4.33 (1.77) 5.22 (1.89) 5.39 (1.60) 4.56 (1.92) 4.66 (1.80) 4.02 (1.53) 4.80 (1.68) 4.08 (1.70) 4.21 (1.67) 4.51 (1.80) 4.94 (1.51) 3.57 (1.89) 4.49 (1.61) 4.13 (1.75) 3.95 (1.77) 3.57 (1.60) 3.61 (1.69) 3.74 (1.51) 4.36 (1.73) 3.68 (1.56) 4.19 (1.79) 3.66 (1.57) 3.72 (1.66) 3.73 (1.59) 3.57 (1.71) 3.95 (2.10) 3.70 (1.92) 4.61 (2.02) 3.77 (2.07) Note. For each cell, the first value indicates students’ mean responses and the value enclosed in parentheses indicates the standard deviation. 746 TESOL QUARTERLY TABLE 3 Students’ Attitudes Toward the Two Teachers (Guises) Based on Their Experience of Learning English From Native English Speakers Students who had not been taught by native English speakers (n = 116) 2 Items for Ability to use English (1) Goodness of pronunciation (1 = poor, 7 = excellent) (2) Confidence in their use of English (1 = unconfident, 7 = confident) 3 Items for English teaching strategies (3) Focus on fluency vs. accuracy (1 = accuracy, 7 = fluency) (4) Use of Korean in classrooms (1 = Korean dominant, 7 = English dominant) (5) Ability to explain the differences between English and Korean (1 = excellent, 7 = poor) 2 Items for General teaching strategies (6) Strictness (1 = strict, 7 = casual) (7) Empathy toward students’ problems (1 = empathetic, 7 = not empathetic) 1 Item for Teacher preference (8) Wish to have them as their English teacher (1 = not wish, 7 = strongly wish) Students who had been taught by native English speakers (n = 171) American English Korean English American English Korean English 4.93 (1.80) 4.98 (1.73) 4.48 (1.73) 4.59 (1.81) 4.97 (1.98) 5.15 (1.73) 4.28 (1.96) 4.50 (1.80) 4.08 (1.63) 5.04 (1.44) 3.71 (1.80) 4.44 (1.60) 4.41 (1.72) 4.82 (1.70) 3.92 (1.85) 4.32 (1.68) 4.05 (1.61) 3.87 (1.82) 3.72 (1.73) 3.71 (1.68) 3.70 (1.66) 4.24 (1.61) 3.63 (1.54) 3.91 (1.71) 3.75 (1.49) 3.87 (1.78) 3.75 (1.61) 3.81 (1.81) 4.16 (1.89) 3.81 (2.01) 4.46 (2.17) 3.73 (2.02) Attitudinal Responses Related to the Students’ Wish to Have Either Guise as Their Teacher Pearson correlation coefficients were used to examine which attitudinal responses were related to the students’ wish to have either guise as their English teacher (teacher preference). As Table 5 shows, the two attitudinal items regarding the ability to use English (i.e., pronunciation and confidence) had relatively high positive correlations with teacher preference for both accented guises. Among the three items for English teaching strategies, fluency was moderately related to teacher preference only for the American-accented English guise. It is interesting that the ability to explain the difference between English and Korean was relatively highly correlated with teacher preference (note that the scale was reversed for this item, with lower numbers indicating a superior ability to explain the differences between the two languages). This result indicates that the students prefer teachers who are better able to explain the differences PERCEPTIONS OF NONNATIVE TEACHERS 747 TABLE 4 Students’ Attitudes Toward the Two English Teachers (Guises) by Region Seoul (n = 173) 2 Items for Ability to use English (1) Goodness of pronunciation (1 = poor, 7 = excellent) (2) Confidence in their use of English (1 = unconfident, 7 = confident) 3 Items for English teaching strategies (3) Focus on fluency vs. accuracy (1 = accuracy, 7 = fluency) (4) Use of Korean in classrooms (1 = Korean dominant, 7 = English dominant) (5) Ability to explain the differences between English and Korean (1 = excellent, 7 = poor) 2 Items for General teaching strategies (6) Strictness (1 = strict, 7 = casual) (7) Empathy towards students’ problems (1 = empathetic, 7 = not empathetic) 1 Item for Teacher preference (8) Wish to have them as their English teacher (1 = not wish, 7 = strongly wish) Daegu (n = 139) American English Korean English American English Korean English 4.82 (1.96) 5.03 (1.70) 4.37 (1.95) 4.51 (1.82) 5.15 (1.81) 5.09 (1.77) 4.36 (1.75) 4.50 (1.75) 4.34 (1.70) 4.74 (1.61) 3.81 (1.85) 4.47 (1.71) 4.21 (1.69) 5.04 (1.55) 3.81 (1.79) 4.22 (1.55) 3.81 (1.80) 3.87 (1.82) 3.87 (1.55) 3.64 (1.62) 3.49 (1.56) 3.88 (1.78) 3.82 (1.62) 3.86 (1.80) 3.96 (1.49) 4.19 (1.63) 3.55 (1.49) 3.85 (1.74) 4.39 (2.15) 3.72 (2.10) 4.19 (2.00) 3.77 (1.86) between English and Korean. Regarding the two items for general teaching strategies, empathy was highly correlated with teacher preference for both accented conditions (note that this item also had a reverse scale), and perceived strictness had relatively lower correlations with teacher preferences for both accented guises. DISCUSSION The current study investigated the effect of elementary school teachers’ accents on students’ listening comprehension in English as well as students’ attitudes toward American-accented English (a preferred native model) and Korean-accented English (a nonnative model). The study also investigated how the students’ attitudinal responses toward selected qualities of teachers related to the students’ desire to have them as their English teachers. Many commentators and policymakers in East Asia have expressed concern that local teachers’ accents might have a negative effect on students’ oral English performance. However, as far as listening comprehension is concerned, the analysis of the test used in 748 TESOL QUARTERLY TABLE 5 Correlations of Attitudinal Factors With Students’ Preferences for Having One or the Other Teacher as Their English Teacher (Pearson Correlation Coefficients) (8) Wish to have them as their English teacher 2 Items for Ability to use English (1) Goodness of pronunciation (1 = poor, 7 = excellent) (2) Confidence in their use of English (1 = unconfident, 7 = confident) 3 Items for English teaching strategies (3) Focus on fluency vs. accuracy (1 = accuracy, 7 = fluency) (4) Use of Korean in classrooms (1 = Korean dominant, 7 = English dominant) (5) Ability to explain the differences between English and Korean (1 = excellent, 7 = poor) 2 Items for General teaching strategies (6) Strictness (1 = strict, 7 = casual) (7) Empathy towards students’ problems (1 = empathetic, 7 = not empathetic) American English Korean English .45** .50** .40** .39** .28** .07 .12* .02 −.51** −.57** .14* .19** −.44** −.37** Note. *p < .05. **p < .01. this study failed to find any significant differences in students’ performance between the American-accented English and Korean-accented English conditions. The study did find significant differences in the students’ attitudes toward the teachers (guises) with American-accented English and Korean-accented English regarding their goodness of pronunciation, confidence in their use of English, focus on fluency versus accuracy, and use of Korean in the classroom. The students’ responses regarding the two teachers’ (guises’) confidence were also significantly different between the low and high performers on the comprehension test. Regional differences and direct experience with native speakers did not make any significant attitudinal difference. The study also found that regardless of the teachers’ (guises’) accents, the students’ desire to have them as their teachers was highly related to the students’ responses regarding the following teacher qualities: pronunciation, confidence, empathy, and ability to explain the differences between English and Korean. Previous studies have indicated some of the factors that influence listeners’ abilities to comprehend foreign-accented speech (i.e., intelligibility of speech). Bearing in mind that most of these findings have been based on native listeners’ success in comprehending accented speech, such factors include grammar and pronunciation (Varonis & Gass, 1982) as well as each listener’s familiarity with a particular accent, PERCEPTIONS OF NONNATIVE TEACHERS 749 a particular speaker, the topic of the speech, and familiarity with nonnative speakers’ speech in general (Gass & Varonis, 1984). Specific elements of speech, such as prosodic features of pronunciation, have been identified as also having some influence (e.g., Anderson-Hsieh, Johnson, & Koehler, 1992). It is important to note, however, that it is still unclear which features have the most influence on intelligibility (Munro & Derwing, 1995). There is some evidence that native and nonnative listeners show similar responses to certain prosodic features of accented speech (see, e.g., Field, 2005, for the case of lexical stress). However, we still have only limited knowledge regarding whether or not such factors are equally detrimental to nonnative speakers’ ability to comprehend various types of accented speech. Efforts were made to include the major features of Korean speakers’ English in the Korean-accented English used in this study. However, more systematic research is necessary to understand which elements of NNES teachers’ speech may affect student comprehension skills and the underlying mechanism of how this occurs. Moreover, the NNES teachers in Korea presumably have varying degrees of foreign accents in their English, and thus the degree to which their English was accented can be expected to differ from the level of accent used in the current study. It is possible that the Korean-accented stimuli used in this study, although recognized as having a distinct foreign accent by experts in linguistics, simply may not reach a threshold level at which it begins to affect student comprehension. Although one can assume that such a threshold may be influenced by a number of factors, including the nature of the tasks being performed, the student–teacher relationship, and other contextual factors, identifying the level of accentuation at which teachers become intelligible by their students would be useful for both teacher training and teacher certification exams. Even though the analysis failed to find differences in student comprehension under the American-accented and Korean-accented English conditions, the students’ attitudinal responses toward the two accented English guises used in this study were found to be small but significantly different. It is interesting to note that although differences were found on the two items regarding teachers’ ability to use English (i.e., pronunciation and confidence) and selected items regarding teachers’ English teaching strategies (i.e., focus on fluency and use of Korean in class), no significant differences were found on items regarding the teachers’ general teaching strategies. The study’s last analysis also suggests that students may perceive that certain qualifications are more important to NES teachers while a different set (or subset) of qualities are more important for NNES teachers. Various other qualifications may be perceived to be important regardless of NES versus NNES status. These findings are still suggestive, however, given the inherent unre750 TESOL QUARTERLY liability of the small number of items and small effect sizes obtained from the statistical analyses. It is important to increase the number of items and develop instruments with better reliability for future research on the questions addressed in this study. The participants’ background information also needs to be further evaluated. For instance, it is widely acknowledged that socioeconomic status is associated with both attitudes and academic performance. Previous studies investigating adult learners’ perceptions of NES versus NNES teacher qualifications also suggested that learners’ individual tastes, experiences, and personal backgrounds (including gender) influence their perceptions of teachers in complicated ways (Benke & Medgyes, 2005; Mahboob, 2004; Pacek, 2005). The current study recruited middle-class students only, and it does not explore the effects of other variables such as gender, learning style, personality factors, teacher qualifications, prior achievement, and other contextual factors that are likely to affect attitudes toward native and nonnative speakers. Performing these types of analyses would require more extensive background measures and multilevel modeling techniques that would allow researchers to simultaneously examine individual-level influences (e.g., individual-child-level socioeconomic status), teacher-level influences (e.g., the effect of current teacher qualifications), and school-level influences (e.g., school resources) on attitudes and comprehension level. It would also require researchers to obtain larger sample sizes and measure significantly more items. To the extent possible, future studies should incorporate more comprehensive measures that would allow for multilevel modeling analyses. These measures may then allow researchers to create more nuanced profiles of which students are more likely to show a preference for certain accentedEnglish-speaking teachers. The current study is one of the first to investigate the effect of teachers’ accented English on students’ oral performance at the elementary school level as well as of students’ attitudes toward accented-English speakers from a pedagogical point of view. Given the fact that currently the majority of English learners in the world are taught by NNES teachers (Brutt-Griffler, 2002) and that English is being introduced at younger and younger grade levels as a foreign language in many parts of the world, more research is called for on this topic. Such research would be particularly useful for teaching younger populations of students and would be of substantial practical and theoretical value. In this regard, I believe that the current study represents a promising start toward understanding the ways in which English teaching can be improved. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A preliminary analysis of part of the data discussed herein was reported in Working Papers in Educational Linguistics at the University of Pennsylvania. I am grateful for the PERCEPTIONS OF NONNATIVE TEACHERS 751 assistance of both Sung Hwi Choo and Vi-Nhuan Le, who assisted me with the collection and analysis of the data in this study. THE AUTHOR Yuko Goto Butler is an associate professor in the Language and Literacy in Education Division of the Graduate School of Education at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States. Her research interests include assessment and the role of awareness in learning and teaching, especially in English and foreign language education at the elementary school level. REFERENCES Anderson-Hsieh, J., Johnson, R., & Koehler, K. (1992). Native speaker reactions to learners’ spoken interlanguage. Language Learning, 30, 365–396. Arva, V., & Medgyes, P. (2000). Native and non-native teachers in the classroom. System, 28, 355–372. Baguley, T. (2003). An introduction to sphericity. Retrieved November 7, 2007, from http://homepages.gold.ac.uk/aphome/spheric.html Baker, C. (1992). Attitudes and language. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. Benke, E., & Medgyes, P. (2005). Differences in teaching behavior between native and non-native speaker teachers: As seen by the learners. In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-native language teachers: Perceptions, challenges, and contributions to the profession (pp. 195–215). New York: Springer. Braine, G. (1999). (Ed.). Non-native educators in English language teaching. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Braine, G. (2005). A history of research on non-native speaker English teachers. In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-native language teachers: Perceptions, challenges, and contributions to the profession (pp. 13–23). New York: Springer. Brutt-Griffler, J. (2002). World English: A study of its development. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. Brutt-Griffler, J., & Samimy, K. K. (2001). Transcending the nativeness paradigm. World Englishes, 20, 99–106. Butler, Y. G. (2004). What level of English proficiency do elementary school teachers need to attain in order to teach EFL? Case studies from Korea, Taiwan, and Japan. TESOL Quarterly, 38, 245–278. Butler, Y. G., & Iino, M. (2005). Current Japanese reforms in English language education: The 2003 “Action Plan.” Language Policy, 4, 25–45. Canagarajah, A. S. (1999). Interrogating the “native speaker fallacy”: Non-linguistic roots, non-pedagogical results. In G. Braine (Ed.), Non-native educators in English language teaching (pp. 77–92). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Cargile, A. C. (1997). Attitudes towards Chinese-accented speech. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 16, 434–443. Chiba, R., Matsuura, H., & Yamamoto, A. (1995). Japanese attitudes towards English accents. World Englishes, 14, 77–86. Choi, Y. H. (2007). The history and policy of English language education in Korea. In Y. H. Choi & B. Spolsky (Eds.), English education in Asia: History and policies (pp. 33–66). Seoul, Korea: Asia TEFL. 752 TESOL QUARTERLY Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavior sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Cook, V. (1999). Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 33, 185–210. Dalton-Puffer, C., Kaltenboeck, G., & Smit, U. (1997). Learner attitudes and L2 pronunciation in Austria. World Englishes, 16, 115–128. Davies, A. (2003). The native speaker: Myth and reality. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. Doss, R. C., & Gross, A. M. (1992). The effects of Black English on stereotyping in intraracial perceptions. The Journal of Black Psychology, 18(2), 47–58. Edge, J. (1988). Native, speakers and models. JALT Journal, 9, 153–157. Edwards, J. R. (1982). Language attitudes and their implications among English speakers. In E. B. Ryan & H. Giles (Eds.), Attitudes toward language variation (pp. 20–33). London: Edward Arnold. Eisenstein, M. R., & Berkowitz, D. (1981). The effect of phonological variation on adult learner comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 4, 75–80. Field, J. (2005). Intelligibility and the listener: the role of lexical stress. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 399–423. Finegan, E. (1999). Language: Its structure and use. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace. Fishman, J. A. (1977). Language and ethnicity. In H. Giles (Ed.), Language, ethnicity, and intergroup relations (pp. 15–57). London: Academic Press. Forde, K. (1995). A study of learner attitudes towards accents of English. Hong-Kong Polytechnic University Working Papers in ELT & Applied Linguistics, 1, 59–76. Gallois, C., & Callan, V. J. (1985). Situational influences on perceptions of accented speech. In J. Forgas (Ed.), Language and social situations (pp. 159–173). New York: Spinger-Verlag. Gass, S., & Varonis, F. M. (1984). The effect of familiarity on the comprehensibility of nonnative speech. Language Learning, 34, 65–89. Giles, H., & Sassoon, C. (1983). The effects of speakers’ accent, social class background and message style on British listener’s social judgments. Language & Communication, 3, 305–313. Giles, H., Williams, A., Mackie, D. M., & Rosselli, F. (1995). Reactions to Anglo- and Hispanic-American accented speakers: Affect, identity, persuasion, and the English-only controversy. Language & Communication, 15, 107–120. Kachru, B. B. (1992). Teaching World Englishes. In B. B. Kachru (Ed.), The other tongue: English across cultures (pp. 355–365). Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Kachru, B. B., & Nelson, C. L. (1996). World Englishes. In S. L. McKay & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language teaching (pp. 71–102). New York: Cambridge University Press. Kamhi-Stein, L. (Ed.). (2004). Learning and teaching from experience: Perspectives on nonnative English-speaking professionals. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Kwon, O. (1999). Kankoku-no eigokyoiku-to kankokushiki-eigo [English education in Korea and Korean English]. In N. Honma (Ed.), Ajia-no eigo [Varieties of English in Asia] (pp. 23–41). Tokyo: Kuroshio Publishing. Ladegaard, H. J. (1998). National stereotypes and language attitudes: The perception of British, American, and Australian language and culture in Denmark. Language & Communication, 18, 251–274. Lambert, W. E., Hodgson, R. C., Gardner, R. C., & Fillenbaum, S. (1960). Evaluative reactions to spoken languages. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 60, 44–51. Lee, K. (2002). Investigation into teacher proficiency for communicative English teaching in elementary schools. Primary English Education, 8, 235–264. PERCEPTIONS OF NONNATIVE TEACHERS 753 Liu, J. (1999). Nonnative-English-speaking professionals in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 33, 85–102. Llurda, E. (Ed.). (2005). Non-native language teachers: Perceptions, challenges, and contributions to the profession. New York: Springer. Mahboob, A. (2004). Native or nonnative: What do students enrolled in an intensive English program think? In L. D. Kamhi-Stein (Ed.), Learning and teaching from experience: Perspectives on nonnative English-speaking professionals (pp. 121–147). Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press. Major, R. C., Fitzmaurice, S. F., Bunta, F., & Balasubramanian, C. (2002). The effects of nonnative accents on listening comprehension: Implications for ESL assessment. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 173–190. McKirnan, D. J., & Hamayan, E. V. (1984). Speech norms and attitudes toward outgroup members: A test of a model in bicultural context. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 3, 21–38. Medgyes, P. (1992). Native or non-native: Who’s worth more? ELT Journal, 46, 340– 349. Medgyes, P. (1994). The non-native teacher. London: Macmillan. Ministry of Education, Korea. (1997). Chojungdeung hakgyo gyoyuk gwajeung: Gukmin gongtong gibon gyoyuk gwajeung [The elementary and middle school curriculum— National common basic curriculum]. Seoul, Korea: Author. Munro, M. J., & Derwing, T. M. (1995). Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. Language Learning, 45, 73–97. Munro, M. J., Derwing, T. M., & Morton, S. L. (2006). The mutual intelligibility of L2 speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 111–131. Nelson, G. L. (1991). Effective teaching behavior for international teaching assistants. In J. D. Nyquist, R. D. Abbott, D. H. Wulff, & J. Sprague (Eds.), Preparing the professorate of tomorrow to teach (pp. 427–434). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt. Nunan, D. (2003). The impact of English as a global language on educational policies and practices in the Asia-Pacific region. TESOL Quarterly, 37, 589–613. Nyquist, J. D., Abbott, R. D., Wulff, D. H., & Sprague, J. (Eds.). (1991). Preparing the professorate of tomorrow to teach. Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt. Okumura, S. (2005). Eigo akusento-ni taisuru nihonjin jido-no taido [Japanese elementary school students’ attitudes toward varieties of English accents]. JAFLE Bulletin, 1, 57–74. Oller, J. W., Baca, L., & Vigil, F. (1978). Attitudes and attained proficiency in ESL: A sociolinguistic study of Mexican Americans in the Southwest. TESOL Quarterly, 11, 173–183. Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development. (2003). Education statistics and indicators. Retrieved March 15, 2004, from http://www.oecd.org/ department/0,2688,en_2649_34515_1_1_1_1_1,00.html Pacek, D. (2005). “Personality not nationality”: Foreign students’ perceptions of a non-native speaker lecturer of English at a British university. In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-native language teachers: Perceptions, challenges, and contributions to the profession (pp. 243–262). New York: Springer. Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rubin, D. L. (1992). Nonlanguage factors affecting undergraduates’ judgments of nonnative English-speaking teaching assistants. Research in Higher Education, 33, 511–531. Seggia, I., Fulmizi, C., & Stewart, J. (1982). Evaluations of personality traits and employment suitability based on various Australian accents. Australian Journal of Psychology, 34, 345–357. 754 TESOL QUARTERLY Sheorey, R. (1986). Error perceptions of native-speaking and non-native-speaking teachers of ESL. ELT Journal, 40, 306–312. Silver, R. E., Hu, G., & Iino, M. (2002). English language education in China, Japan, and Singapore. Singapore: National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University. Smith, L. E., & Bisazza, J. A. (1982). The comprehensibility of three varieties of English for college students in seven countries. Language Learning, 32, 259–269. Solomon, B. B. (1991). Teaching an increasingly diverse undergraduate population. In J. D. Nyquist, R. D. Abbott, D. H. Wulff, & J. Sprague (Eds.), Preparing the professorate of tomorrow to teach (pp. 55–64). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt. Takada, T. (2000, August/ September). The social status of L1 Japanese EFL teachers. TESOL Matters, 10(3). Retrieved November 7, 2007, from http:// www.tesol.org/s_tesol/sec_document.asp?CID=195&DID=854 Tanabe, Y. (2003). Korekara-no gakko eigo [School English from now]. Tokyo: Waseda University Press. Tang, C. (1997). On the power and status of nonnative ESL teachers. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 577–580. Tauroza, S., & Luk, J. (1997). Accent and second language listening comprehension. RELC Journal, 28, 54–71. Varonis, E., & Gass, S. (1982). The comprehensibility of non-native speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 4, 114–136. Widdowson, H. G. (1994). The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 377–389. Wilcox, G. K. (1978). The effect of accent on listening comprehension: A Singapore study. English Language Teaching Journal, 32, 118–127. Yang, G.-M. (2002, June 23). Ministries to hire 5,000 foreign language teachers. The Chosun Ilbo. Retrieved March 15, 2004, from http://srch.chosun.com/cgi-bin/ english PERCEPTIONS OF NONNATIVE TEACHERS 755 The Impact of School on EFL Learning Motivation: An Indonesian Case Study MARTIN LAMB University of Leeds Leeds, England There is much evidence that, in general, learners’ motivation to study declines as they move through school and that the causes are both developmental and environmental. By contrast, the attitudinal basis of language learning motivation has been regarded as relatively stable, though recent empirical studies in various countries have also pointed toward a fall-off in interest and enthusiasm for foreign languages among pupils. This article reports on research into the motivation of Indonesian adolescents toward learning English over the first 20 months of junior high school. Using a mixed-method design, the study aimed to track changes in their reported motivation and learning activity and to identify internal and external factors which might be associated with the changes. It was found that the learners’ initially very positive attitudes toward the language and expectations of success were maintained over the period, whereas their attitudes toward the experience of formal learning tended to deteriorate. Explanations for these outcomes are sought in the social context and, in particular, in how individuals view English as pertaining to their futures. M ost teachers recognise that motivation ebbs and flows, in classes as well as in individuals. Normally studious students may not apply themselves so well when they have just had physical education. A lowachieving learner may be inspired by a new subject area or a new method of study. Yet at the same time teachers also refer to classes and individuals as motivated or unmotivated, as if these were relatively fixed qualities which outlast the temporary effects of good or bad teaching. This bipolar view of motivation has been recognised in general educational psychology for some time. The main thrust of research efforts has been to identify psychological traits of individuals, such as their valuing and expectation of success and their orientation to their goals, and to try to quantify the relationship of these identified traits to academic achievement. But there is also growing empirical evidence from the United States and western Europe about changes in motivation and especially about developmental trends as pupils move through school. As TESOL QUARTERLY Vol. 41, No. 4, December 2007 757 Pintrich (2003) makes clear, the overall direction is downward: “Over the course of the school years, student motivation on the average declines or becomes less adaptive, with a large drop as students enter the junior high school or middle school years” (p. 680). Wigfield, Eccles, and Rodriguez (1998) summarize these identified changes, including a tendency for learners to become less intrinsically motivated to study, to view intelligence and ability as immutable, and to have lower expectations of success. There is also increasing consensus that these changes result from the interaction between developmental processes and institutional contexts, for example, the way that larger classes and fewer individual taskbased lessons in junior high school conflict with young adolescents’ felt need for more control over their lives, with negative consequences for their postelementary academic motivation (Anderman & Maehr, 1994; Eccles, Wigfield, & Schiefele, 1998; McCallum, 2001). Second language acquisition theory has been slower to recognise the temporal dimension of motivation. Although Gardner (1985) stressed that his socioeducational model of second language acquisition was a dynamic one, with a reciprocal relationship between motivation and achievement, the proposal that attitudes—toward the L2, toward the speakers and culture of the L2, and toward the learning situation—are the main determinants of motivation was very influential and, along with other social-psychological theories (e.g., Giles & Byrne, 1982; Schumann, 1978), contributed to a belief that motivation to learn L2 was a stable variable, relatively impervious to instructional practices. Consequently, Dörnyei (2001) wrote, “hardly any research has been done on analysing the dynamics of L2 motivational change and identifying typical sequential patterns and developmental aspects” (p. 82). This is now beginning to change. Recent theoretical models of L2 motivation have proposed that different motivational constructs may be relevant at different stages of the long language learning process (Dörnyei & Ottó, 1998; Williams & Burden, 1997). For example, attitudes toward the L2 community may arguably be important in deciding which language to study but less important once the study has been initiated; by contrast, intrinsic motivation may be more important in sustaining effort over the long term. As in general education, new approaches to researching motivation have also emphasised its fluctuating, highly context-sensitive nature. Ushioda (1996), for instance, showed how an introspective approach to the motivation of Irish undergraduates learning French uncovered a range of subtle transformations, such as the fact that “goal-orientation may be more appropriately conceived as a potential evolving aspect of language learning motivation, rather than a basic defining attribute as conceptualized in the social-psychological research tradition” (p. 243), whereas Norton’s (2000) longitudinal case study of immigrant women in Canada also demonstrates well the inher758 TESOL QUARTERLY ent variability of motivation (or investment, as she prefers to call it), as her subjects’ desire to learn English waxes and wanes in response to the demands and opportunities of their new environment. The general trends reported in L2 motivational change during the school years tend to mirror those in the education field as a whole. In a study involving over one thousand 13–15 year olds in the United Kingdom and Germany, Chambers (1999) found significant decreases in enthusiasm to learn languages particularly among the English learners of German, whereas Williams, Burden, and Lanvers (2002), investigating the learning of French among over two hundred 11–13 year olds, uncovered “a clear negative trend with age in terms of the students’ integrative orientation, their feelings about the competence of their teachers, as well as the perceived importance of learning a foreign language” (p. 522). In Canada, Gardner and colleagues have recently begun to examine the potential for change in the variables emphasised in the socioeducational model of second language acquisition (Gardner, Masgoret, Tennant, & Mihic, 2004). In a study of a 1-year intermediate-level university French course, they also found “a general tendency for the scores on the measures of language attitudes, motivation, and anxiety to decrease” (p. 29), concluding that although “the possibility of change is not great . . . . it is far larger for variables directly associated with the classroom environment than for more general variables,” such as integrative or instrumental orientations (p. 28). Recent studies of motivation among learners of English in Asia have emphasised structural differences with the motivation of European and North American language learners. Chen, Warden, and Chang (2005), for example, working with Taiwanese university students proposed a new motivational construct called the Chinese imperative to learn English. Other studies in East Asia have foregrounded the role of instrumental orientations and downplayed the possible importance of integrativeness (e.g., Lai, 1999; Warden & Lin, 2000). Despite these apparent differences, however, studies of change in motivation in the high school years indicate a fall in enthusiasm for language learning as in western studies (e.g., Koizumi & Matsuo, 1993; Tachibana, Matsukawa, & Zhong, 1996). In the particular context studied here—junior high school students in provincial Indonesia—a previous report by the writer characterized the predominant motivational disposition among school entrants as a potent combination of integrative and instrumental orientations (Lamb, 2004a). This gained its strength and character from identification processes not with native speakers of the language but with a future self whose competence in English provided access to academic and professional opportunities as well as to diverse forms of entertainment, to state-of-the-art technology and high-status international social networks, for example. Other researchers have also posited a similar construct in THE IMPACT OF SCHOOL ON EFL LEARNING MOTIVATION 759 other contexts—Yashima’s (2002) international posture among Japanese university students, Norton and Kamal’s (2003) imagined communities of Pakistani school children, Csizér and Dörnyei’s (2005) latent factor integrativeness in Hungarian school learners—and Dörnyei (2005) has recently elaborated a model of L2 motivation in which the learners’ conceptions of their future selves, both the ideal L2 self and the ought-to L2 self, play an important role in structuring their motivation toward the language, alongside a third element, the L2 learning experience. For theoretical purposes, there is a need to investigate further the subtle ways in which motivation evolves, the aspects which are permeable and those which are not, and its complex interrelationship with contextual factors. For practical purposes, though, it is imperative that more research is carried out into the apparent general decline in foreign language learners’ motivation during the school years, to find out how universal it is, to seek out its causes, and to explore ways of preventing it. AN INDONESIAN CASE STUDY From August 2002 to March 2004 I conducted a longitudinal study tracking the motivation to learn English of a single cohort of students beginning formal study of the language at junior high school in a provincial Indonesian city. The main purposes of the research were to characterize learners’ motivation to learn English on entry to the school; to describe how this changes over the first 20 months of formal study in school; and to identify psychological, social, or institutional factors which may be associated with such changes. As a case study, the research hoped to link existing theory with a quasi-ethnographic methodology to build a detailed picture of motivational change during the initial experience of formal learning, in a specific context hitherto little researched. Likewise it was hoped that the results would both illuminate theory and provide insights which might be relevant to researchers and practitioners in contexts similar to the one described. The research site was a school which the researcher had originally visited while living and working in the city, and to which he had access through local colleagues with the agreement of the local government education office. It was considered locally to be one of the three best junior high schools and was situated in a relatively prosperous emergentmiddle-class area, though by western standards the learning facilities were rudimentary (e.g., fixed desks and chairs, no supporting technology, no air conditioning). English was studied twice a week for a total of 3 hours in traditional teacher-fronted classes of approximately 40 pupils each. 760 TESOL QUARTERLY As noted earlier, entrants to the school in August 2002 were found to have high levels of motivation to learn English (Lamb, 2004a), and the most strongly motivated displayed high levels of autonomous language learning (Lamb, 2004b). This article presents data from the later phases of the research and compares them to the initial data, in order to examine how far this optimistic scenario was sustained over the first 20 months of formal school study. In particular, the article attempts to assess the impact of formal school learning on their motivation and to suggest factors which may moderate that impact. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY An equal-status mixed-method strategy was adopted (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998). The whole cohort was surveyed by questionnaire shortly after the beginning of their first semester, and then again after 20 months of study in March 2004. A group of 121 focal learners was selected on the basis of the first survey, and interviews were conducted at three points in time—at the beginning, after 8 months of study, and then 1 year later at the endpoint of the study. I also observed each of these learners in English classes at least twice, on the first and second field visits. The survey and initial learner interviews were all conducted in Indonesian; later, some of the learners chose to speak in English or to mix the codes. Once potential focal group learners were identified, a letter was sent to their parents explaining the purpose of the research and asking permission for their son or daughter to participate over the 20-month period. Signed consent forms were received from all 12 families. The rationale for employing mixed methods was that “a combination of qualitative and quantitative designs might bring out the best of both approaches while neutralizing the shortcomings and biases inherent in each paradigm” (Dörnyei, 2001, p. 242). Using questionnaires with the year cohort allowed testing for specific motivational constructs which I could predict to be relevant on the basis of existing theory and my own prior experience of the context. Open questionnaire items and semistructured interviews with the focal learners enabled me to identify and follow up issues and concepts which I had not anticipated in the survey, but which were clearly salient in this particular context. Meanwhile, meeting learners regularly (including once outside of school) and observing them in class would allow me not only to develop a more trusting 1 One learner moved to the capital with her family between the second and third field visit, and her data have been excluded from this report. THE IMPACT OF SCHOOL ON EFL LEARNING MOTIVATION 761 relationship with the learners but also ultimately to develop richer and more complex portraits of individuals (Bempechat & Boulay, 2001). Beyond these strategic advantages, collecting different types of data concurrently meant they could be integrated at different stages in the research process (Creswell, 2003). Learners, for example, could be asked to explain puzzling events in my classroom observation data; data from the first- and second-phase interviews could be used to inform the design of the final survey instrument. In view of the young age of my respondents and their lack of any experience of survey instruments, I decided the questionnaire should be short enough to complete in 20–25 minutes of class time, with easily processed single items representing each construct (cf. Masgoret, Bernaus, & Gardner, 2001). A number of items elicited background information, including gender, father’s job, English proficiency of other family members, and prior experience of learning English. The rest of the instrument was a mix of closed and open items eliciting students’ attitudes toward school English lessons, satisfaction with progress, expectations of success, degree of importance, reasons for studying it, level and type of English learning and use outside of school, and future ambitions. In most cases the same single items were used twice, at the beginning and end of the research period, allowing for direct comparison of means between the two administrations. The focal learners were selected on the basis of questionnaire responses (both closed and open items) and teachers’ informal comments. The group were not intended to be representative of the whole population; instead I chose a majority (7) of apparently highly motivated learners—that is, they expressed a strong desire to learn the language and reported high levels of activity outside of class in their survey responses, whereas their class teacher stated that they had a positive attitude inside the class—because I hoped over the course of the research to gain a much more nuanced picture of their motives and compare the way each responded to the school experience. Two learners (G & J) were selected because they were apparently examples of less motivated learners. One learner (H) seemed to be highly motivated but received negative comments from teachers about his classroom behaviour, whereas a further learner (M) was selected because he came from a rural background and was unique in the cohort for never having studied English at all. Appendix A presents a breakdown of participants’ backgrounds and basic motivational profiles at the beginning of the research period, along with a general assessment of their progress in English, based on their speech during interviews and later teacher reports. Interviews were conducted in private and with assurances of confidentiality, using a topic guide to structure the discussion at each of the three points (see Appendix B). On three occasions, girls opted to be inter762 TESOL QUARTERLY viewed in pairs rather than singly. I also had the opportunity to meet eight of these learners outside the school—four at home and four at their private language school—and took notes on these meetings. FINDINGS In this section I compare the questionnaire data at the beginning and end of the 20-month research period and report on qualitative changes evident in the focal learner interview data over the three field visits. Closed Questionnaire Items Table 1 presents responses to the closed questionnaire items at the beginning and end of the research period on a Likert scale of 1–3, along with a comparison of means. Paired sample t-tests were carried out to check for significance, and Cohen’s d calculated to measure effect size. Only those respondents who completed both questionnaires are included (one class of approximately 40 pupils was omitted from the first administration, whereas a few pupils left or joined the school in the intervening period). As the table shows, there were a number of significant differences in the attitudes of the year cohort between the start of their studies and after 20 months. Most remain satisfied with their current level of achievement in English, but the highly significant drop (difference in means = −0.27) may be an indication that frustration is growing about the pace of progress. Their expectations of ultimate success in English remained constant over these 20 months, with almost all pupils reasonably confident or confident that their goals will be achieved. Almost all pupils had had some experience of learning English at primary school before they entered the junior high school, though usually this was no more than an hour per week. About half had also taken a private course in English at some point. The table shows that on entry (August 2002) they had very positive attitudes toward their learning experience (2.83 on a scale of 1–3). After 20 months of study in the junior high school, however, there was a significant deterioration in their attitudes (-0.36). At the same time, there was a slight rise (+0.10) in the general importance attached to English. All of the five possible reasons for its importance offered in the questionnaire were ranked highly, but some changes in their orientation are evident: Most significantly, its status as an important assessed school subject is more widely recognised (+0.28), but English is also perceived as having more instrumental value THE IMPACT OF SCHOOL ON EFL LEARNING MOTIVATION 763 764 TABLE 1 Changes in Reported Levels of Motivation From August 2002 to March 2004 Mean standard deviation Satisfaction with progress in English so far (1 = not satisfied; 2 = satisfied; 3 = very satisfied) Expectation of ultimate success in English (1 = not confident; 2 = reasonably confident; 3 = confident) Attitude toward experience of learning English (1 = not happy; 2 = OK; 3 = happy) Perceived importance of English (1 = not important; 2 = important; 3 = very important) Significance Cohen’s d for effect size N Aug 02 Mar 04 t-value Difference in means 192 2.58 0.56 2.39 0.52 2.83 0.38 2.61 0.52 2.31 0.62 2.37 0.56 2.47 0.59 2.71 0.47 −4.734 −0.27 .000* −0.46 −0.346 −0.02 .730 −0.04 −7.766 −0.36 .000* −0.74 2.248 +0.10 .026 0.20 190 195 188 Reasons for importance (1 = not important; 2 = important; 3 = very important) Because I need English for my career in the future (instrumental) Because I enjoy learning English (intrinsic) TESOL QUARTERLY Because I want to meet foreigners & learn about other countries (integrative) Because my parents encourage me to learn English (extrinsic—parental) Because English is an assessed school subject (extrinsic—academic) Perceived importance of English compared with other school subjects (1, less important; 2, same; 3, more important) Note. * Significant after Bonferroni correction. 189 186 190 186 186 188 2.69 0.52 2.27 0.50 2.49 0.62 2.46 0.60 2.25 0.69 2.26 0.44 2.84 0.39 2.12 0.50 2.35 0.69 2.54 0.58 2.53 0.62 2.29 0.47 3.610 +0.15 .000* 0.33 −3.307 −0.16 .001* −0.32 −2.270 −0.14 .024 −0.21 1.735 +0.09 .084 0.15 4.745 +0.28 .000* 0.43 0.842 +0.04 .401 0.09 (+0.15), whereas its intrinsic interest and value for getting to know foreigners and other countries are less prioritized now (−0.16 and −0.14, respectively). A finding from the first phase of data collection and analysis in August 2002 (reported in Lamb, 2004b) was that pupils’ learning and use of English were not confined to formal school. At the end of the research period, pupils were again asked to report how often they used English in out-of-school activities. Results indicated that all forms of this activity had increased over this period, with the largest increases appearing in computer usage involving English (+0.41 on a scale of 0–3) and watching English language TV programmes or videos (+0.38), though listening to English language songs remained the single most popular activity, engaged in daily by over a third of all pupils. Speaking English was still quite a rare event, with few doing it more than once a month, and according to interview comments, their conversants were almost always other Indonesians (e.g., older siblings or parents) rather than native speakers or other foreigners, of whom there are very few in the city. In addition to these informal activities, 54% of pupils had taken a private English course over the last 20 months, usually at a local language school (25 different institutions were mentioned) but sometimes at home with a tutor. Open Questionnaire Items The responses to open items in the questionnaire were categorized and then counted as a proportion of all the pupils’ comments. Table 2 shows the responses of pupils when asked to explain their attitude toward the experience of learning English at the beginning and end of the research period. After 20 months of school study, their comments were more concerned now with the experience of classroom learning than with the value or importance of English. For pupils who were ambivalent about English (i.e., who think that it is just OK) or who disliked it, the majority of complaints about English lessons concerned either the lack of intrinsically motivating activities (e.g., “the lessons just follow the curriculum and don’t fulfil the desires or interests of the pupils”; “Because it is not fun. Nothing that can make me interested about English lesson in [this] junior high school. I learn English only for my career”—original in English2) or teachers failing to make the lessons comprehensible (e.g., “In school we just get given exercises, whereas at home it’s explained 2 Quotations are translated except where stated. THE IMPACT OF SCHOOL ON EFL LEARNING MOTIVATION 765 TABLE 2 Reasons Given for Attitude Toward Experience of Learning English August 2002 March 2004 Happy pupils 54% English is valuable or important 21% Satisfaction with lessons 16% I’m making progress in English 2% Effective teaching 7% Other (226 comments) 43% Satisfaction with lessons 14% English is valuable or important 12% English is easy 12% I’m making progress in English 12% I like the teacher 7% Other (138 comments) OK pupils 25% English is no different from other subjects 19% English is just OK 12% English is not important in Indonesia 10% English is not enjoyable 9% Other (36 comments) 43% Complaints about lessons 18% English is difficult 12% English lessons similar to others 12% English is just OK 6% I don’t like the teacher 9% Other (125 comments) Unhappy pupils None 40% Complaints about lessons 30% I don’t like the teacher 30% English is difficult (10 comments) clearly”). Among those who said they were happy, the most frequent comments also related to the teacher’s style or methods and praised different aspects of lessons (e.g., “Here the teacher explains carefully, not just using English but with Indonesian too”; “the lessons are enjoyable and not too tense”; “The teachers here don’t just stick to the material but also give practice, like speaking, listening and the rest”). A similar shift in learners’ thinking is evident in responses to the final item on both questionnaires, which invited pupils to make any further comments or put questions to the researcher. At the beginning of the research period, the most frequent comments (34%) were statements about the importance of English; at the end, the most frequent comments (30%) were questions about how to learn it well (e.g., “I want to ask, is there an easier way to learn to become fluent in English besides learning by heart and looking words up in the dictionary?”). During their second year of study, pupils were placed in eight different classes, with three different teachers. An analysis of variance (Tukey post hoc test) was carried out to find out if there were significant differences in the responses of classes taught by different teachers. The only item where a clear difference was found (significant at the 0.05 level) was on attitudes toward the experience of learning English, where one teacher was found to generate much higher ratings than the other two. 766 TESOL QUARTERLY Interview Data The interviews were recorded, transcribed in note form, and then analysed through multiple listenings, coding, and the construction of a matrix to facilitate direct comparison of learners’ comments to each other and to themselves at the three different points in time. In this way, I was able to build individual portraits of some depth and colour, to complement the broad picture deriving from the survey data. In this section I focus on some specific trends observable in the interview data over the three field visits. The first identified trend is common to all learners; in the other trends, a contrast is apparent between the seven learners initially identified as being motivated and active and the other four learners. Increasing Complaints About English in Junior High School At each phase, focal learners made more strident complaints against aspects of English teaching in their school. In line with survey data, criticisms increasingly targeted the teacher and his/her classroom procedures. For example, Learner A compared her current teacher unfavourably with her former teacher: “Mr X always gave us lots of practice in English, with songs, games and with . . . speeches, but with Ms Y only study with book and practice is very little . . . . and we are in the class very . . . . bored” (original English). More often teachers were criticized not for their methodology, however, but for aspects of personality or teaching style. Learner E complained that her teacher is “an irritable person” and added, “If you don’t like your teacher you can’t understand English”; whereas Learner D tried hard to avoid direct criticism but could not help complaining about the teacher’s English and her intimidating attitude: I: How do you feel about studying English in this junior high school, now you’re in your fourth semester? D: I feel senang apa? [happy or what?] but now I don’t like er cara mengajar guru saya [the teacher’s way of teaching] because maybe I can’t understand what does he say . . . . I: . . . . . . . . . . Have you talked to the teacher about this? D: Never, because I am afraid (original English) All three learners admitted that their motivation to participate in class had declined during their second year because of their feelings toward their teacher, yet their desire to learn the language had not wavered. As in the complaints about school English lessons in the open questionnaire responses, focal learners’ complaints seemed to express a sense of exclusion, of not being part of a harmonious social group, either THE IMPACT OF SCHOOL ON EFL LEARNING MOTIVATION 767 because they could not understand what was going on in class or because the teacher’s behaviour was alienating. Learner G, for instance, complained in his final interview that he no longer enjoyed English lessons because “in year 1 I could understand but in this class I can’t.” Learner F explained that her classmates “don’t like English because they don’t like the teacher, because Mrs. V never explain about the lesson” (original English). Conversely, Learner H was more positive in his third interview than his second, explaining that he preferred his current teacher because she always came to the class, did not get angry, and enjoyed a joke or two. Increasing Use of English At the beginning of each interview, I offered the focal learners the choice of speaking in Indonesian or English. In the first research phase, all used mainly Indonesian, though Learners A, C, D, E, F, and K showed a willingness to try using some English words and phrases. The same pattern repeated itself at the second interviews, though learner C was now able to speak mainly in English, and learner L also now opted to use English where he could. By the final interviews, all seven of the learners who I had originally selected as examples of motivated and active pupils were using English for most of the interviews, reverting back to Indonesian when communicatively challenged or when the conversation became very animated. One of the pair of girls actually chose to speak to each other in English during the interview. By contrast, Learners G, J, and M did not use any English in any of their interviews. Perhaps more significant than their lack of performance, though, was their reaction to the suggestion—each of them smiled in amusement at the thought of speaking English with me as if it were inconceivable and clearly much preferred to hold the conversation in Indonesian. In short, there appeared to be a striking divergence in the oral performances of these learners over the 20 months, as some began to feel comfortable using the language (even if they were unable to continue for long periods) and others remained estranged from the language. Goals Become More Focussed Mirroring the survey results, all the focal learners, whether apparently active learners or not, appeared to recognise the potential importance of English for their futures. As one less motivated learner (J) put it in his first interview, when asked what his ambitions were: “To be good at English, because in the future, according to my parents, globalization is going to happen . . . . Western people are going to come to Indonesia, 768 TESOL QUARTERLY and will get involved in every country.” In his final interview (and in his second questionnaire response), this learner still did not state any specific ambitions; asked where he will be in 10 years time, he replied, “I don’t know.” The other less motivated learner was similarly vague throughout, whereas the learner from a rural background was undecided between becoming a businessman or a professional soccer player. By contrast, all the motivated learners appeared to develop more specific goals over these 20 months and knew how English may relate to them. For example, one learner (F) said in her first interview that she wanted to become a doctor, but her comments about English referred to globalization and were similarly general to J’s above. In her second interview, she responded to the same question about her ambitions thus: “I want to become a doctor. What’s more, my father says if I want to become a doctor English is really important because all the learning materials and books are in English. So I have to study English really hard and mustn’t stop going to the private courses.” By the time of her third interview, when asked where she will be in 10 years time, she apparently had quite a clear vision of her future: “I hope by then I’ll already be a graduate, hopefully in medicine . . . . I’ll be living in Yogya, that’s where I’ll study, they say that’s where there’s the best high education.” Increasing Awareness and Self-Regulation of Motivation In the last two interview phases there was evidence of learners becoming more aware of their own motivation and trying to regulate it. Learner D had portrayed herself in the first two interviews as a highly motivated learner who believed she was making progress in her English. In her last interview, however, she made the critical comments above about the teacher and when asked whether English was more or less important to her, she replied “sure, more important, but now I feel so-so . . .” (original English). She seemed able to make a distinction between the objective importance of English to her future and her feelings, which she knew were temporary and related to her class teacher. One of the more motivated boys (K) acknowledged that, whereas his motivation had not changed, he hadn’t been making the necessary efforts to learn outside of class: “I think I’m becoming lazy . . . . because my friends always calling me to bermain [play]” (original English), and he went on to say he must study harder for a state exam in 2 months time. Another learner (F) explained at the start of her last interview that she did not like her current teacher because she got angry quickly. Asked whether her peers thought the same, she said “Maybe just me, because they don’t like English . . . . they think English is very difficult.” In other words, it was because she cared about English so much that she felt so negatively about the teacher. For now, she put her energies into her private English THE IMPACT OF SCHOOL ON EFL LEARNING MOTIVATION 769 course, because “I don’t want to leave English, if I leave it for a while, then I’ll start to forget it, after all I don’t get any practice at home.” Whereas these motivated learners seemed able to suffer the inevitable frustrations of school language learning, the other four showed signs of succumbing to various difficulties. Learner H, beset by family problems and apparently unable to concentrate in class, had been forced to repeat the first year; his phrase books were lost, and he admitted to a fall in enthusiasm for English. Learner G was similarly disaffected, because he could not understand the teacher in class, though teachers and peers told me he also had problems at home. Learners J and M by contrast presented a relaxed and contented demeanour throughout and retained good intentions toward the language—Learner J said he needed to improve his class scores in English, whereas Learner M knew that “everywhere you go nowadays, including school, English is assessed, it’s important.” But neither was able to put these good intentions into effect; both admitted to being distracted by friends in and out of class. DISCUSSION Over this 20-month period of junior high school, aspects of the learners’ motivation to learn English seem to have been relatively constant, whereas others changed. Throughout the interviews with the focal learners and the comments in the questionnaires, there was a consistent strong recognition of the long-term value of English for their own and indeed for their country’s future. There was a small rise, in fact, in their instrumental orientation, whereas their integrative orientation fell slightly. However, as the learners spent more time in classrooms, the process of learning assumed greater weight in their motivational thinking. There was a significant increase in the number who felt that they were not making enough progress and a significant drop in the numbers of learners who were happy with their school English lessons. At the same time, though, the general expectation of ultimate success in English remained constant, perhaps reflecting a sense that school was only one of many possible venues for learning the language. Although caution must be shown in interpreting results from singleitem instruments, it appears that general variables such as instrumental and integrative orientations are less susceptible to change than classroom-related variables, a finding in line with results obtained by Gardner et al. (2004). These results were confirmed by interview data, in which the more motivated learners could be surprisingly forthright in their criticism of English lessons while continuing to assert their belief in the importance of the language and their personal desire to learn it. 770 TESOL QUARTERLY There is evidence that this fall in enthusiasm for school English is related to the class teacher. My own observations of over 30 lessons showed the majority of classes to consist of a series of teacher-directed oral or written exercises closely based on the textbook, with little variety of format and virtually no communicative use of language. However, certain teachers used different techniques, encouraged the use of oral English inside and outside the classroom, and generated a warm and enthusiastic atmosphere. These differences are reflected in both survey and interview data, for example, in the different satisfaction levels reported by classes with different teachers, and in the comments by focal learners praising or criticising specific teachers. Turning to their actual learning behaviour, all the focal learners who I originally identified as having a positive motivational profile showed signs of making genuine progress in English and an increasing willingness to use it in conversation with me. Whereas they reported fluctuations in their feelings and attitudes, they appeared to maintain a level of independent learning activity, including attendance at private language courses, which complemented their school lessons and contributed to gains in proficiency. Indeed the survey showed the whole cohort to have a higher frequency of English-learning or -using activity at the end of the research period compared with the beginning, and the general expectation of success remained high. The data reveal, therefore, two contrasting patterns: on the one hand, a general fall in enthusiasm for the process of formal learning in school, and on the other hand, a sustaining of very positive attitudes toward the language and of actual learning activity in informal contexts. As indicated earlier, one factor which may help to explain such a dichotomy is experience with particular teachers—some learners were lucky enough only to have positive experiences in school. The remainder of this discussion draws on recent L2 motivation literature, further interview data, and the writer’s own knowledge of the context to consider other possible factors which may help explain why learners who did suffer negative experiences in school nevertheless remained motivated to learn English. FUTURE SELVES AND SOCIAL CONTEXT The study provides tentative support for the distinction proposed in Dörnyei’s (2005) L2 motivational self-system between the motivation generated by self-identification processes—that generated by aspiring toward an imagined L2-using future self, and that generated by the L2 learning experience. Further, following Higgins’s (1987) selfdiscrepancy theory, Dörnyei (2005) suggests that “aspirations will only be THE IMPACT OF SCHOOL ON EFL LEARNING MOTIVATION 771 effective in motivating behaviour if they have been elaborated into a specific possible self in the working self-concept” (p. 101, original italics). There is some evidence of this elaboration process in the tendency for more successful learners’ personal goals to become more focussed, as if their future L2 self is becoming more sharply defined and vivid. This is in line with Ushioda’s (2001) observation that goals evolve in interaction with learning experience and also connects with the findings of researchers working within the framework of future time perspective that even long-term goals, if personally valued enough, can promote a learner’s engagement in what might otherwise be considered very dull classroom tasks (Miller & Brickman, 2004). As this study has shown, this sharpening vision of a future English-speaking self coincided with a tendency for learners to self-regulate their motivation, enabling them to overcome some of the challenges thrown up by the formal L2 learning experience (such as an unfriendly teacher or a low mark in a class quiz), and sustain their efforts to learn in the long run. Social background factors and, in particular, the cultural, social, and economic capital (Bourdieu, 1991) they bring to school, may help explain why individuals come to identify (or not) with a future-Englishspeaking self and act to realize their vision. As children of the emerging middle class in a provincial capital, many of the learners studied here have been exposed throughout their short lives to powerful discourses promoting the English language. Authority figures like teachers and parents make it clear to them that they ought to learn English and have helped scaffold the essential literacy skills through early educational experiences; exposure to English language cartoons on TV and western songs on cassette sensitize them to the sounds and significance of the language from an early age. Later on, magazines, films, and other popular media present them with images of cosmopolitan English-speaking Asians enjoying the material benefits and social prestige of fluency, helping to conjure ideal future scenarios for themselves which appear authentic and possible. By contrast, to the majority of Indonesian youngsters in poorer urban or rural areas, such scenarios may seem vague and remote. One specific way in which this cultural capital is acquired is through interactions with significant others in their lives. Every one of the initially motivated focal learners refers to people who helped shape and sustain their motivation to learn: For example, the father of Learner L who (as he told me when I visited his house) has sorely felt the lack of English himself in his career as a civil servant and is determined that his son should gain the benefits; the English-speaking aunt who first inspired Learner H when he was 6 years old; the older brother who studies at an elite school in central Java and urges Learner C to study hard to join him; 772 TESOL QUARTERLY and the academic parents of Learner D and the stories they tell of Fayatteville, her American birthplace. If they were completely reliant on what the state is able to offer in the way of learning resources, it is doubtful whether even these motivated learners would make progress. But many of the students attending this school have economic capital too, giving access to key resources. All the motivated learners in the focal groups have parents able and willing to pay for private tuition, which in turn, provides new learning materials to supplement the state textbook, and new relatively English-proficient friends to practise with. Some parents provide other types of resources: Learner E was regularly bought EFL tapes by her mother; Learner A demonstrated the language practice she regularly gained from a Play Station unit when I visited her home; Learner L was able to show me a desk full of English language textbooks, donated by his father and an older sister now at the University of Indonesia. These extra resources and opportunities for practice are not just useful learning tools in themselves; they also reinforce the individual’s sense of being a legitimate English user, in their own eyes and those of their peers and teachers. The plight of Learner M, who had just arrived in the city from a rural area, and who was included in the focal group because he had not studied English anywhere before, presents a vivid example of someone who lacks such economic and cultural capital. In his first interview he expressed genuine affection for his new school because it was safe and well-ordered compared with his previous one, and claimed that he never got bored in the lessons because “I’m happy, I need to learn, need to understand what the teacher says” to catch up with his peers who had studied English before. There is no mention of English use at home in any of his interviews. In his second and third interviews, he admits he has not made the hoped-for progress in English. He says he “feels the difference” from most of his classmates and confesses that his classroom behaviour has deteriorated too, something which I observed myself in several lessons. M: Sometimes I get a bit bored, but only occasionally, not all the time. You know in B____ [his place of origin], over there we didn’t have any English lessons but in J____ [site of school] we need English, if you don’t have English, it’s difficult. Wherever we go here we need English. I: When do you need English? M: What I mean is, if we’ve already progressed, got success, started working, we’re tested in English, everywhere we need English. Blaming classmates for his disruptive behaviour, he still insists that English is important to his future, but he has not apparently taken any action to learn it outside of attending school lessons. At the time of my final visit, he was attending a private exam-tutoring course on the insisTHE IMPACT OF SCHOOL ON EFL LEARNING MOTIVATION 773 tence of his parents, but not one that specialized in English. His vision appears to be motivated more by fear of what might happen if he does not learn English, than by aspiring toward a positive goal. In terms of Dörnyei’s (2005) L2 motivational self-system, M is motivated by his ought-to L2 self but not his ideal L2 self, and this has less power to positively influence his learning behaviour. Further evidence of a lack of any clearly imagined ideal L2 self comes when M is asked what advice he would give a new pupil at the school to learn English. Unlike all the other focal learners, who gave suggestions of various learning strategies, M said he could not give any advice because they would think him arrogant, as if he was a “know-all.” The remark echoes that of a teacher at a rural school in the same province who told me that the learners readily mocked anyone who tried to speak English in public, and that her pupils’ main problem was that they were afraid of using the language. Learner M, it seems, lacks the cultural capital necessary to envision an ideal English-speaking self, though he has been sufficiently exposed to discourses telling him that he ought to become English speaking and fears the consequences if he does not. It should not come as a surprise, perhaps, to find that socioeconomic context plays an important role in shaping individual motivation. As Mathews (2000) wrote in his study of individual identity in a global culture, “one’s social world . . . . acts as a censor and gatekeeper, selecting from the range of possible cultural ideas one might appropriate only those that seem plausible and acceptable within it” (p. 22). Ushioda (2006) has argued persuasively that motivation has a political dimension, with individual agency always subject to complex social pressures in the environment. Researchers working within a poststructuralist perspective (e.g., Norton, 2000; Toohey, 2000) have shown how learners’ investment in a school or community language, and their opportunities to engage with it, are promoted or constrained by myriad social and economic factors. This study suggests that there can be a similar sociopolitical dimension to language learning in an EFL setting too; that is, young Indonesians invest in English as a form of symbolic capital in the hope of acquiring cultural and economic capital in the future, yet they need to already have a certain level of social, cultural, and economic capital to have a good chance of success. CONCLUSION The study has found that during their first 20 months in junior high school, pupils’ attitudes toward English, particularly their view of its personal and societal relevance, were relatively stable, whereas attitudes 774 TESOL QUARTERLY toward the learning situation fluctuated, with an overall downward trajectory. Despite this growing disenchantment with school English lessons, some learners with positive attitudes appeared to sustain their efforts to learn and developed an ability to regulate their motivation in the face of threats and challenges. It is suggested that the stability of their motivation may be partly the product of self-identification processes encouraged by their relatively advantaged sociocultural background and economic circumstances, and that these processes appear to correspond to the ideal L2 self posited by Dörnyei (2005) in his recent L2 motivation self-system model. Those who lack this background still have a strong ought-to L2 self but appear to be more easily discouraged by negative L2 learning experiences and reluctant to take advantage of opportunities to use the language, for example, in conversation with me. It is important to recognize the limitations of this research in terms of scale and context. Whereas the mixed method strategy allowed for patterns emerging in the survey data to be confirmed by, and explored further through, individual learner portraits emerging through interview and observation data, it also restricted the size of both the quantitative and qualitative data sets. Moreover, the school researched was serving a relatively advantaged urban population; in the majority rural areas, less exposed to forces of globalization, one would expect to find weaker identification processes with English and negative L2 learning experiences in school having a more profound impact on L2 learning motivation, but this needs to be investigated empirically. In particular, more focussed research is needed to investigate the validity of the distinction between ideal L2 self and ought-to L2 self, how it may be constructed socially, and how it may influence learner behaviour and activity. For schools in similar socioeconomic settings to the research site, there are practical implications to consider. Pavlenko (2002) suggests that “seeing L2 learning as a problem is a uniquely western phenomenon” whereas in many multilingual situations the continuous acquisition of new languages (to whatever degree of competence is required for communicative purposes) is seen as “completely unproblematic” (p. 298). Unfortunately, even in relatively privileged multilingual nonwestern contexts such as this one, there is one arena where language learning is considered highly problematic—school. No one should underestimate the challenges facing teachers working in this context, not least their own struggle to master English, but they are implicated in the main problems reported by learners, namely, monotonous classroom procedures, incomprehensible lessons, and the fear of reprimand. Such experiences lead to a sense of exclusion, when inclusion—in that elite community of cosmopolitan English speakers—is precisely what motivated learners are aspiring to. Although they are using English themselves as much as possible, THE IMPACT OF SCHOOL ON EFL LEARNING MOTIVATION 775 teachers need to protect the fragile self-confidence of weaker pupils by providing simple explanations and supportive feedback and advising on independent ways to learn, for instance, by exploiting the ever-increasing number of oral and written texts in English available in the local environment. It would also help to have textbook characters with whom the learners can truly identify, rather than the native speakers which predominate. Further ideas may be gleaned from Lin (1999), who observed Hong Kong English teachers successfully supporting “students from backgrounds that do not give them the right kind of cultural capital” (p. 410), for example, through strategic use of the L1 and creative responses to otherwise dull textbook reading passages. By these means, English teachers can help learners form vivid images of themselves as authentic users of the language and so ensure their motivation survives the rocky passage of school. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Lynne Cameron, Gary Chambers, Mike Baynham, and four anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments on earlier versions of this article, and Hywel Coleman for many stimulating discussions of the context. THE AUTHOR Martin Lamb is a lecturer in TESOL in the School of Education, University of Leeds, England. Before joining the University of Leeds, he spent 17 years teaching English and working on various TESOL projects in Indonesia, Bulgaria, and Sweden. His research interests include learner motivation and language education and assessment in social context. REFERENCES Anderman, E. M., & Maehr, M. L. (1994). Motivation and schooling in the middle grades. Review of Educational Research, 64, 287–309. Bempechat, J., & Boulay, B. A. (2001). Beyond dichotomous characterizations of student learning. In D. McInerney & S. Van Etten (Eds.), Research on sociocultural influences on motivation and learning. Volume 1 (pp. 15–36). Greenwich, CT: Information Age. Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power (G. Raymond & M. Adamson, Trans.). Cambridge: Polity Press. Chambers, G. (1999). Motivating language learners. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. Chen, J. F., Warden, C. A., & Chang, H.-T. (2005). Motivators that do not motivate: The case of Chinese EFL learners and the influence of culture on motivation. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 609–633. 776 TESOL QUARTERLY Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Csizér, K., & Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The internal structure of language learning motivation and its relationship to language choice and learning effort. The Modern Language Journal, 89, 19–36. Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Teaching and researching motivation. Harlow, England: Longman. Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Dörnyei, Z., & Ottó, I. (1998). Motivation in action: A process model of L2 motivation. In C. Roberts (Ed.), Working papers in applied linguistics 4 (pp. 43–69). London: Thames Valley University. Available from http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/ archive/00000039/00/Motivation_in_action.pdf Eccles, J., Wigfield, A., & Schiefele, U. (1998). Motivation to succeed. In W. Damon & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Volume 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (pp. 1017–1095). New York: Wiley. Gardner, R. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitude and motivation. London: Edward Arnold. Gardner, R., Masgoret, A. M., Tennant, J., & Mihic, L. (2004). Integrative motivation: Changes during a year-long intermediate-level language course. Language Learning, 54, 1–34. Giles, H., & Byrne, J. (1982). An intergroup approach to second language acquisition. Journal of Multicultural and Multilingual Development, 3, 17–40. Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94, 319–340. Koizumi, R., & Matsuo, K. (1993). A longitudinal study of attitudes and motivation in learning English among Japanese seventh-grade students. Japanese Psychological Research, 35(1), 1–11. Lai, E. F. (1999). Motivation to learn English in Hong Kong. Language, Culture, and Curriculum, 12, 280–285. Lamb, M. (2004a). Integrative motivation in a globalizing world. System, 32, 3–19. Lamb, M. (2004b). “It depends on the students themselves”: Independent language learning at an Indonesian state school. Language, Culture, and Curriculum, 17, 229–245. Lin, A. M. Y. (1999). Doing-English-lessons in the reproduction or transformation of social worlds? TESOL Quarterly, 33, 393–412. Masgoret, A. M., Bernaus, M., & Gardner, R. (2001). Examining the role of attitudes and motivation outside the formal classroom: A test of the mini-amtb for children. In Z. Dörnyei & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (pp. 281–295). Honolulu: University of Hawai’i. Mathews, G. (2000). Global culture/individual identity. London: Routledge. McCallum, J. (2001). The contexts of individual motivational change. In D. McInerney & S. Van Etten (Eds.), Research on sociocultural influences on motivation and learning. Volume 1 (pp. 61–98). Greenwich, CT: Information Age. Miller, R. B., & Brickman, S. J. (2004). A model of future-oriented motivation and self-regulation. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 9–33. Norton, B. (2000). Identity and language learning: Social processes and educational practice. London: Longman. Norton, B., & Kamal, F. (2003). The imagined communities of English language learners in a Pakistani school. Journal of Language, Identity and Education, 2(4), 301–317. Pavlenko, A. (2002). Poststructuralist approaches to the study of social factors in L2. THE IMPACT OF SCHOOL ON EFL LEARNING MOTIVATION 777 In V. Cook (Ed.), Portraits of the L2 user (pp. 277–302). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 667–686. Schumann, J. (1978). The acculturation model for second language acquisition. In R. Gingras (Ed.), Second language acquisition and foreign language teaching (pp. 27–50). Arlington, VA: Center for Applied Linguistics. Tachibana, Y., Matsukawa, R., & Zhong, Q. X. (1996). Attitudes and motivation for learning English: A cross-national comparison of Japanese and Chinese high school students. Psychological Reports, 79, 691–700. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Toohey, K. (2000). Learning English at school: Identity, social relations and classroom practice. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. Ushioda, E. (1996). Developing a dynamic concept of L2 motivation. In T. Hickey & J. Williams (Eds.), Language, education and society in a changing world (pp. 239–245). Dublin, Ireland: IRAAL/Multilingual Matters. Ushioda, E. (2001). Language learning at university: Exploring the role of motivational thinking. In Z. Dörnyei & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and SLA (pp. 93–125). Honolulu: University of Hawai’i, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center. Ushioda, E. (2006). Language motivation in a reconfigured Europe: Access, identity, autonomy. Journal of Multicultural and Multilingual Development, 27, 148–161. Warden, C. A., & Lin, H. J. (2000). Existence of integrative motivation in an Asian EFL setting. Foreign Language Annals, 33, 535–547. Wigfield, A., Eccles, J., & Rodriguez, D. (1998). The development of children’s motivation in school contexts. Review of Research in Education, 23, 73–118. Williams, M., & Burden, R. L. (1997). Psychology for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Williams, M., Burden, R., & Lanvers, U. (2002). “French is the language of love and stuff”: Student perceptions of issues related to motivation in learning a foreign language. British Educational Research Journal, 28, 504–528. Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context. The Modern Language Journal, 86, 54–66. 778 TESOL QUARTERLY THE IMPACT OF SCHOOL ON EFL LEARNING MOTIVATION APPENDIX A FOCAL GROUP LEARNERS Code M/F Father’s job Class Previous study, owned dictionary A C D E F K L H G J M F F F F F M M M M M M Senior civil servant Senior civil servant University lecturer Private business Civil servant Private business Civil servant Civil servant Army University lecturer Private business Regular/Elite II Elite 1 Regular/ Elite II Regular Regular Elite I Elite I Regular Regular Regular Regular Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Family English Initial motivation level Initial activity level Initial teacher comments Progress in English over 20 months Father, sibling Cousin Parents Whole family Aunt Whole family Sibling Aunt & uncle, siblings Sibling Sibling Father high high high high high high high high low low high high high high high high high high high low low low positive positive positive positive positive positive positive negative negative negative negative moderate good good moderate moderate moderate moderate poor poor poor poor Note: In this context, father’s job is still a better index of socioeconomic status than mother’s job, though this is beginning to change. The Elite II class was formed midway through the first academic year; Learners A and D were originally in regular classes. Family English is as reported in the initial questionnaire—the degree of competence was not specified. 779 APPENDIX B Interview Guide • Choice of language to use in interview • Explanation of research purpose, assurance of confidentiality and anonymity • Feelings about the school in general • Perceptions of competence and/or progress in English • Impressions of English classes/teacher in the school • Peers’ motivation to study English • Attitudes toward English and English-speaking countries, own and family • Learning and use of English outside of school, including at private course, at home, with friends, in city • Plans for the future (Interviews #2 & 3 only) • My future research plans 780 TESOL QUARTERLY BRIEF REPORTS AND SUMMARIES TESOL Quarterly invites readers to submit short reports and updates on their work. These summaries may address any areas of interest to Quarterly readers. Edited by JOHN FLOWERDEW University of Leeds JOHN LEVIS Iowa State University Conceptions of a Good Tertiary EFL Teacher in China QUNYING ZHANG and DAVID WATKINS University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR, China 䡲 Over the past 30 years, foreign language competence has gained increasing importance in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and reached an all-time high after China entered the World Trade Organization in 2001 and won the opportunity to hold the 2008 Olympic Games. In particular, university graduates with high proficiency in English are in greater demand than ever. The effectiveness of Chinese teachers of English has accordingly become a focus of attention. At the same time, there has been a steadily increasing number of Western teachers coming to China to join the ranks of teachers of tertiary English as a foreign language (EFL). The mutual understanding and cooperation among the three parties—Chinese students, Chinese teachers, and Western teachers—is therefore a great concern for EFL teaching and learning in China. This study aims to explore the essential qualities that make a good tertiary EFL teacher in the PRC by examining and comparing the views of these parties. Because so few empirical studies on such a topic have been conducted in a Chinese context, we hope that this research can stimulate Chinese academics to pay close attention to the qualities of a good EFL teacher. We also hope that the results of this research can help facilitate mutual understanding among the three parties so that both foreign and Chinese teachers’ teaching performance can be improved and Chinese students’ learning outcomes can be enTESOL QUARTERLY Vol. 41, No. 4, December 2007 781 hanced. In addition, the research may provide some insights for EFL teaching and learning in other non-Western cultures where a large number of Westerners are teaching English as a foreign language. CONCEPTIONS OF A GOOD TEACHER Although characteristics of a good teacher have long been studied, conceptions of a good teacher in non-Western contexts have been much less frequently explored. Previous studies in this area (e.g., Beishuizen, Hof, Van Putten, Bouwmeester, & Asscher, 2001; Hay McBer, 2000; Kottler & Zehm, 2000; Kutnick & Jules, 1993) have been conducted at primary and secondary levels in Western contexts and are mainly about characteristics of a good teacher in general, without taking disciplinary factors into consideration. According to Gao and Watkins (2001), conceptions of teaching-related activities are context dependent and culture bound. Disparity in people’s conceptions may exist in terms of different levels of schooling, curriculum, gender, major area, and cultural background. Thus, the findings of previous studies concluded at the primary and secondary levels in Western countries may not be applicable to tertiary institutions in a Chinese context. Indeed, we should look more seriously at the validity and relevance of a number of Western educational concepts before adopting them because the contextual differences and cultural influences on the teaching and learning process can be complex (Watkins, 2000). It is not surprising that conceptions of good teachers reported in the literature combine both personal and teaching characteristics. Thus when Kottler and Zehm (2000) contended that the essential qualities of the best teachers are sound subject knowledge, proper methods of instruction, and other related skills, they argued at the same time that the Western literature has often overlooked the fact that “it is the human dimension that gives all teachers, whether in the classroom, the sports arena, or the home, their power as effective influencers” (p. 2). These authors emphasized human characteristics like charisma, compassion, egalitarianism, sense of humor, creativity, and honesty as essential qualities of the best teachers. After investigating the characteristics of effective teachers using interviews, questionnaires, observations, and focus-group discussions, the management consulting company Hay McBer (2000) reported a model of teacher effectiveness in the United Kingdom which consists of three complementary and interactive factors: professional characteristics, teaching skills, and classroom climate. Jointly, these three factors, which were believed to be within teachers’ control, could significantly influ782 TESOL QUARTERLY ence pupils’ progress. In other words, pupils’ progress is most significantly influenced by a good teacher who displays both high levels of professional characteristics and excellent teaching skills, which create a superior classroom climate. Few studies have compared teachers’ and students’ conceptions of a good teacher. Hativa (2000), for example, conducted a study at a university law school that revealed striking differences between the law faculty’s and the students’ conceptions of a good teacher. The teachers conceived of themselves as good teachers who had sound pedagogical knowledge which they can put into practice, whereas the students described their teachers as being very poor at teaching and covering only the surface level of knowledge without facilitating students’ understanding and intellectual development. Hativa (2000) suggested that such a gap between faculty and student conceptions may also exist in other higher educational contexts. These findings reinforced Beishuizen et al.’s (2001) assertion that researchers should take both teacher and student views into account when they intend to study the characteristics of a good teacher because “misunderstandings about mutual views of teachers and students may harm the efficacy and efficiency of teaching and learning”(p. 186). Although the attributes that make a good teacher have long been voiced formally or informally in China, empirical studies are lacking. However, some traditional educational beliefs that have influenced Chinese teaching and learning for many centuries are worthy of review. Confucius, one of the greatest thinkers and educationists in ancient China, contended that a good teacher should teach with endless zeal (Hui Ren Bu Juan) and should teach students in accordance with their aptitude (Yin Cai Shi Jiao). Han Yu, one of the most celebrated litterateurs and educationists in the Tang Dynasty, wrote in his book Shi Shuo (On Teachers): “What is a teacher? A teacher is the one who shows you the way of being human, teaches you knowledge and enlightens you while you are confused” (Liu, 1973, cited in Gao & Watkins, 2001, p. 461). Good teachers in China should not only promote students’ intellectual or academic development, but also enhance their conduct or moral behavior. Some other relevant influential Chinese sayings are as follows: Teach by personal example as well as verbal instruction (Yan Chuan Shen Jiao), Teaching as well as cultivating good persons (Jiao Shu Yu Ren), and Profound knowledge makes teachers, upright behavior makes models (Xue Gao Wei Shi, Shen Zheng Wei Fan; all translated by Zhang). The latter is the accepted doctrine of many normal universities and teacher-training institutes in China. Teachers in Hong Kong, which is one of the Confucian-Heritage cultures, like Mainland China (Ho, 1991), have been shown to support such traditional views (Watkins & Zhang, 2006). 783 Cortazzi and Jin are among the few researchers to explore the modern Chinese conceptions of a good teacher. They sought the views of 135 Chinese university students by asking them to write essays on this topic. Most thought that a good teacher has deep knowledge and many also used phrases such as is patient, humorous, friendly, and a good moral example (Cortazzi & Jin, 1996). Based on these findings, Jin and Cortazzi (1998) developed a questionnaire which was administered to 129 Chinese and 205 British university students. The results showed significantly different emphases between Chinese and British students in indicators of a good teacher. Good Chinese teachers are generally believed to have deep knowledge, have an answer to students’ questions, and be good moral examples. In contrast, good British teachers are held to arouse students’ interest, explain clearly, use effective teaching methods, and organize a variety of classroom activities. Research in Hong Kong has shown that Chinese teachers and students there hold views of the good teacher very similar to their Mainland counterparts (Watkins & Zhang, 2006), although the British influences on Hong Kong’s (once a British colony) educational system can be strong. Research in the United Kingdom and America has identified attributes of a good foreign language teacher, such as creating a good foreign language environment, engaging the students in practice and use of the foreign language, using appropriate foreign language materials, and organizing language activities (Brisley, Dellaccio, Funke, Hamlin, & Leamon, 1961; Riddell, 2001; Sanderson, 1983). This set of attributes shows the importance of studying conceptions of a good foreign language teacher because in addition to the general teaching skills that teachers of any subject are supposed to possess, such teachers need to be equipped with specific characteristics and skills. The Western notion of a good foreign language teacher indicates that such a teacher should be prepared to take on different roles at different stages of teaching. Harmer (1983) summarized these roles as controller, assessor, organizer, prompter, participant, and resource; most of these roles focus on the language teaching process within the classroom context. Although the Western literature mentions other qualities, such as an attractive personality and a good understanding of students, professional skills and teaching strategies are much more emphasized and seem to play a more important role in identifying a good teacher. Although empirical evidence is lacking, generally speaking, good tertiary EFL instructors in China are supposed to help learners by providing adequate language knowledge, efficient teaching skills, and a supportive, caring environment, which suggests qualified EFL teachers should be equipped with high language proficiency, solid knowledge about foreign language teaching, and the ability to facilitate positive personality development (Zhang & Li, 1999). Moreover, they must have the ability to 784 TESOL QUARTERLY observe, summarize, and reason from what they see and hear, and to organize and facilitate classroom and campus-wide English learning activities (Liao, 2001). Such high expectations and the emphasis on being a good model imply that good tertiary EFL teachers in the Chinese context should excel in almost every aspect, including academic competence, subject knowledge, personal qualities, and morality. This research seeks to provide further empirical evidence of the views of good EFL teachers in the Chinese tertiary context. METHOD Participants Participants in this study were 100 Chinese students from two universities, 50 of whom were English majors and 50 of whom were non-English majors (25 first-year students and 25 final-year students for each group); 20 Chinese tertiary English teachers; and 20 Western teachers who were teaching English in tertiary institutions in China. Although Western teachers in China are mostly American or British, the researchers tried to include teachers from other English-speaking countries. Of those sampled, eight came from the United States, seven from Britain, two from Australia, two from South Africa, and one from Canada. Compared with the Chinese teachers sampled, the Western teachers typically had less EFL teaching experience and fewer qualifications. This situation reflects the reality of most foreign EFL teachers in China (see, e.g., Chen, 2002; Liu & Wu, 2003). Data Collection Each participant was asked to write a short essay in his or her mother tongue on the topic, what makes a good English teacher at the tertiary level? Chinese responses were translated into English after the conceptual items contained in each essay were identified. No word limit was specified. The students were also invited to provide their institute, grade, and major, and the teachers were invited to provide their institute, department, and nationality. The students wrote their essays during normal class time. Twelve Chinese teachers and 10 Western teachers were approached in person and returned their finished essays several days later. The other teacher participants submitted essays via e-mail. 785 Data Analysis We performed a content analysis on the combined sample of students and teachers. The first author and a consultant who had worked as a tertiary English teacher in the PRC for 7 years identified the essays’ conceptual items. Each independently developed a list of conceptual items through close examination of all the essays, and then they met to discuss the lists. Those items noted by both were kept on the list, whereas those items noted by only one were discussed until agreement was reached. A final list of 49 conceptual items was used as a coding scheme. Two other coders, also previously EFL teachers in China, assigned a score of 0 or 1 to each essay according to whether the item was absent or present, respectively, in the coding list. Last, all the assigned values were analyzed by exploratory factor analysis to identify underlying dimensions, and by multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) to identify group differences. RESULTS Cohen’s kappa was used to assess the intercoder reliability at item level. Forty-six (94%) of the coefficients were 0.80 or above, and only three (6%) were below 0.80 but well above 0.70. Because coefficients of 0.80 or greater are acceptable in most situations, and 0.70 may be appropriate in some exploratory studies for some conservative indices such as Cohen’s kappa (Lombard, Snyder-Duch, & Bracken, 2002), all the coefficients here were considered acceptable. We conducted exploratory factor analysis of the short essays using principal axis factoring extraction and Oblimin rotation with Kaiser normalization. Visual inspection of eigenvalues with the scree plot (Cattell, 1966) suggested that the best factor solution was a seven-factor model which explained 35.55% of the total variance. We discarded 12 items, which had loadings less than 0.25 on any of the factors. We labeled the seven factors as follows by examining the items loading highest on each: (1) be highly disciplined, (2) have team spirit and cope with diversity, (3) display high standards of behavior and responsibility, (4) have sound pedagogical content knowledge, (5) be practical in teaching, (6) be interactive with students, and (7) focus students’ overall development. We used MANOVA to examine the mean differences in the seven dimensions among the three groups—Chinese students, Chinese teachers, and Western teachers (see Table 1 for the means involved). From the analysis, we found that, on the second dimension (have team spirit and cope with diversity), Western teachers scored significantly differ786 TESOL QUARTERLY TABLE 1 Means of Factor Scores of the Seven Dimensions of Conceptions of a Good Tertiary EFL Teacher Group Western teachers Chinese teachers Chinese students Disciplined Team spirit and diversity Behavior and responsibility Pedagogical Practical Interactive Overall development 0.05 0.36 0.03 0.16 0.24 0.13 0.12 0.05 0.05 0.07 0.38 0.12 0.10 0.19 0.04 0.02 0.11 0.10 0.16 0.14 0.14 ent from Chinese teachers (M = 0.36 versus M = 0.05, p < .01) and students (M = 0.36 versus M = 0.02, p < .01). They were also significantly different from Chinese teachers (M = 0.24 versus M = 0.12, p < .01) and students (M = 0.24 versus M = 0.16, p < .05) on the fifth dimension (be practical in teaching). Chinese teachers showed significant differences from the Western teachers (M = 0.38 versus M = 0.16, p < .01) and Chinese students (M = 0.38 versus M = 0.10, p < .01) on the fourth dimension (sound pedagogical content knowledge). The results exhibit striking differences between Chinese teachers and students in their views toward pedagogical content knowledge. The Chinese teachers placed much greater importance on their personal knowledge base and subject knowledge as EFL teachers. The students, however, were also concerned about their teachers’ appearance, manners, personality, and attitudes toward students in addition to teachers’ knowledge base and instructional competence. As some students wrote in their essays, they wished their teacher to be a perfect person: A good English teacher should not only do well in his/her subject area, in classroom instruction, but also be a good model in other many aspects such as manners and behaviors, outlook on life, the way he/she is dressed, personality and so forth. (Student 86) A good college English teacher should have charisma over the students through his/her expertise in English language, respectable conducts, deep love to students, and attractive personality. (Student 143) Thus, the Chinese students echoed the view that, as discussed earlier, a good teacher in China should be good at many aspects of life, but the Chinese teachers did not share that view. This result suggests that the Chinese students still appreciate the traditional cultural values, expecting teachers to be both intellectually and morally unchallengeable (Boyle, 2000). As for cross-cultural comparisons, a noticeable disparity emerged be787 tween Western teachers and Chinese teachers and students on the second dimension (have team spirit and cope with diversity) and the fifth dimension (be practical in teaching). Western teachers put much more emphasis on many items contained in these two dimensions, such as be a good team worker, get along well with colleagues, be adaptable to different environments/cultures, be able to cope with large class size, and provide practical knowledge. Western teachers’ emphasis on these qualities is quite understandable because they are trying to adapt to a new culture and working environment when they come to China to teach English. Though they teach with enormous enthusiasm, Western teachers are faced with many difficulties in communicating and cooperating with local teachers and students. The following essay extracts illustrate these concerns: [Chinese colleagues] all had read from those Chinese/English cultural texts that there is a large range of subjects that foreigners don’t like talking about. So for the first 18 months (till I heard about this idea) they just didn’t know what we could talk about, so some didn’t talk to me at all. (Western Teacher 2) Chinese students come to class with Confucian values, and if we were more prepared for those before taking on a job in China we would perhaps be better equipped from the beginning. . . . I don’t know how to teach large classes in China, and the communicative Western methods are not always workable in large classrooms . . . Adapting what we conceived of/how we approached language teaching to Chinese settings is very important. (Western Teacher 10) DISCUSSION The research approach adopted in this study allowed the participants rather than the researcher to identify the important issues by explaining their views in their own words. Unlike a pure qualitative approach, this approach allowed wider sampling and more objective analysis of the data to identify underlying dimensions. The analyses identified significant differences between the three groups and highlighted aspects of teaching in the Chinese context not previously reported in the literature. Each group was significantly different from the other two groups on at least one dimension. Overall, the Chinese teachers considered sound pedagogical content knowledge as the most important quality of a good tertiary EFL teacher, whereas the Chinese students held the traditional belief that a good teacher should display excellence in many other aspects. Western teachers attached importance to the qualities of being adaptable and a good team worker. One possible reason for their valuing these 788 TESOL QUARTERLY qualities may be that they needed such qualities to adjust to the new Chinese educational context. They may also expect their Chinese colleagues to display these qualities because when Westerners first come to China to teach Chinese students, they are likely to get confused or even lost because they lack knowledge of Chinese education and Chinese students. They need support from Chinese teachers and effective communication with both Chinese teachers and students. Many Western teachers complained that they received little voluntary support from the local teachers and had little chance to communicate with them, and at the same time they expressed their wishes for a good relationship with Chinese colleagues. Thus it is very important for local teachers to offer support and help so that their foreign peers can adapt to the Chinese context quickly and effectively. Effective communication between Chinese teachers and students and Western teachers is also necessary in daily life to achieve better mutual understanding. The differences in the three groups’ conceptions of a good tertiary EFL teacher show that they must improve their understanding of each other’s conceptions so as to facilitate cooperation in teaching and learning. The findings will help Western teachers who are teaching or who will teach EFL in China understand Chinese teachers and students and adjust to the Chinese educational environment more effectively. THE AUTHORS Qunying Zhang is currently a doctoral candidate in the Faculty of Education at the University of Hong Kong, China. Her research interests include EFL teaching and learning, Chinese teachers and learners, and teaching conceptions. David Watkins has been a professor at the University of Hong Kong, China, for 17 years. His research interests are primarily cross-cultural studies of learning processes, teaching conceptions, motivation, self-concept, and forgiveness. REFERENCES Beishuizen, J. J., Hof, E., Van Putten, C. M., Bouwmeester, S., & Asscher, J. J. (2001). Students’ and teachers’ cognitions about good teachers. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 185–201. Boyle, J. (2000). Education for teachers of English in China. Journal of Education for Teaching, 26(2), 147–156. Brisley, L., Dellaccio, C., Funke, F. J., Hamlin, D. J., & Leamon, M. P. (1961). Good teaching practices: A survey of high-school foreign-language classes. Reports of surveys and studies in the teaching of modern foreign languages (pp. 219–243). New York: Modern Language Association of America. Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245–276. 789 Chen, Z. (2002). Yinjin he shiyong waiji jiaoshi ying zhuyi de wenti (Problems to be noticed while introducing and employing foreign teachers). Liaoning Nongye Zhiye Jishu Xueyuan Xuebao (Journal of Liaoning Agricultural Vocation-Technical College), 4(3), 46–47. Cortazzi, M., & Jin, L. (1996). Cultures of learning: Language classrooms in China. In H. Coleman (Ed.), Society and the language classroom (pp. 169–206). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gao, L., & Watkins, D. A. (2001). Identifying and assessing the conceptions of teaching of secondary school physics teachers in China. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 443–469. Harmer, J. (1983). The practice of English language teaching. New York: Longman. Hativa, N. (2000). Teaching for effective learning in higher education. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press. Hay McBer. (2000). Research into teacher effectiveness: A model of teacher effectiveness. Report by Hay McBer to the Department for Education and Employment, June 2000. Retrieved March 13, 2005, from http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/docbank/index.cfm?id=1487 Ho, D. Y. F. (1991, June 29–July 2). Cognitive socialization in Confucian heritage cultures. Paper presented at the Workshop on Continuities and Discontinuities in the Cognitive Socialization of Minority Children, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC. Jin, L., & Cortazzi, M. (1998). Dimensions of dialogue: Large classes in China. International Journal of Educational Research, 29, 739–761. Kottler, J. A., & Zehm, S. J. (2000). On being a teacher (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Kutnick, P., & Jules, V. (1993). Pupils’ perceptions of a good teacher: A developmental perspective from Trinidad and Tobago. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 400–413. Liao, H. (2001). TEFL in China must be further improved. Teaching English in China, 24(4), 6–9. Liu, L., & Wu, Y. (2003). Yingyu waijiao zhi wo jian (On English teachers from foreign countries). Henan Jiaoyu (Henan Education), 11, 33–34. Liu, Z. (1973). Shi Dao (The way of teachers). Taipei, Taiwan: Chung Hwa Book Co. Lombard, M., Snyder-Duch, J., & Bracken, C. C. (2002). Content analysis in mass communication: Assessment and reporting of intercoder reliability. Human Communication Research, 28, 587–604. Riddell, D. (2001). Teaching English as a foreign/second language. London: Cox & Wyman. Sanderson, D. (1983). Modern language teachers in action: A report on classroom practice. York, England: University of York, Language Materials Development Unit. Watkins, D. A. (2000). Learning and teaching: A cross-cultural perspective. School Leadership & Management, 20(2), 161–173. Watkins, D. A., & Zhang, Q. (2006). The good teacher: A cross-cultural perspective. In D. M. McInerney, M. Dowson, & S. Van Etten (Eds.), Effective schools (pp. 185–204). Greenwich, CT: Information Age. Zhang, Y., & Li, M. (1999). A discussion on foreign language teaching reforms in China. Journal of Foreign Languages, 6, 31–37. 790 TESOL QUARTERLY Mitigating Difficult Requests in the Workplace: What Learners and Teachers Need to Know GILLIAN WIGGLESWORTH University of Melbourne Melbourne, Australia LYNDA YATES La Trobe University Melbourne, Australia 䡲 Immigrants to English-speaking countries, even those with advanced communicative skills in English, can experience misunderstanding in their workplace communication (Yates, 2005). Although such miscommunication is not restricted to those from other language backgrounds, users of English as a second or subsequent language who move to English-speaking countries as adults face particular challenges in correctly interpreting and conveying meaning. As Trosborg (2003, pp. 252–253) notes, for those from other language backgrounds, the workplace context may present challenges related not only to working in another language and culture, but also in a business culture which may well be different from the one with which they are familiar. Part of the onus for successful communication must, of course, rest with native English speakers (NESs), and increasing their awareness of cross-cultural communication is certainly crucial. However, the often lower status newcomers to a situation cannot always depend on interacting with sympathetic interlocutors but should and can be empowered to understand the intricacies of the communicative contexts in which they are now being called on to operate. There are few descriptions that are rich enough to furnish the specifics of how adults get other people to do things in workplace situations, and many teachers feel that they do not have enough information about how NESs undertake everyday speech acts to be able to teach their learners (Yates & Wigglesworth, 2005). In particular, mitigation skills—the use of linguistic and other means to soften the impact of an utterance— appear difficult to learn from exposure alone (Bardovi-Harlig & Hartford, 1996), but they have considerable impact on how a speaker is perceived by interlocutors (Holmes, 1984). Mitigation skills vary considerably not only across languages but also across different Englishspeaking cultures, so it is crucial to understand more about how such skills are managed in NES interactions in order to help teachers address these skills more specifically in the classroom. This article reports on a BRIEF REPORTS AND SUMMARIES 791 study designed to provide specific information to help teachers develop classroom activities on how NESs mitigate difficult requests in the workplace context in English-speaking countries. Although the study was conducted in Australia, and it refers specifically to Australian language norms, its principles can be adapted to any cross-cultural context. RATIONALE AND BACKGROUND Although previous studies of requests in English are numerous, they have provided little insight into the specifics of how complex requests are negotiated in workplace situations. Such negotiations are, however, not only commonplace but may be especially problematic, both linguistically and culturally, for adult ESL learners whose previous work experiences were in a different culture (Beal, 1994; Yates, 2005). Though miscommunication arising from difficulty with vocabulary or grammar can be clearly identified as such, pragmatic errors are less visible and more likely to be attributed to the personality of the speaker than to the speaker’s imperfect grasp of pragmatic norms (Thomas, 1983). That is, judgments are made not about speakers’ competence in English but rather about them as human beings, and these judgments can therefore contribute to the evolution and maintenance of racial stereotypes (Roberts, Davies, & Jupp, 1992), with both short-term and long-term consequences for workplace relations and career prospects. The distinction between pragmalinguistic (related to the mapping of force onto form) and sociopragmatic (related to social and communicative values) sources of misunderstanding (Thomas, 1983) can be a useful way of understanding the factors involved in making a context-appropriate request. Thus, for a complex request to be successful, a learner needs to understand the roles as well as the communicative values of the context (i.e., the sociopragmatic dimensions of the situation), and use the linguistic means appropriate to the situation (i.e., the pragmalinguistic resources of English). Requests may be mitigated using various pragmalinguistic means: through choice of lexis (e.g., the addition of please), the use of modality or syntax (such as using could rather than can), or the use of extra propositional support (e.g., by providing reasons). However, the appropriate use of these and other means crucially depends also on an understanding of sociopragmatic values. Adult learners of English who have already established pragmatic competence in their first language and culture may have difficulty acquiring the relevant pragmalinguistic means to soften requests appropriately and recognising the sociopragmatic values underpinning their use in another language and context. This difficulty may arise because such features are either lacking or not salient in the input they receive as 792 TESOL QUARTERLY learners, or because such features are not perceived as relevant to the roles that the learners enact. There is some evidence that sociopragmatic issues, in particular, may be difficult to acquire (Rose & Ng, 2001). In this study, we examined how NESs (in Australia) realised the same complex request role-play task for which we had nonnative-English speaker (NNES) data from a previous study (Wigglesworth, 2001). Using an analysis of these NNES performances as a guide to what learners might find problematic about the task, we analysed the NES data for pragmalinguistic devices and the sociopragmatic values that appeared to underpin their use to suggest priorities for teachers preparing learners for similar complex request situations in the workplace. METHODOLOGY The aim of this study was to provide a description of how NESs might conduct the complex request role-play task for which we already had the NNES data. The NNES data consisted of 16 loosely structured and openended role plays in which a teacher took the role of employer and the NNES took the role of employee. The NES data recorded for this study were collected in a similar manner and consisted of 54 role plays in which each of five ESL teachers (one male, four female) working in the Adult Migrant English Program took the role of employer. Fifty-four NESs (half males, half females) played the employee requesting leave at a busy time (see Appendix A for full task instructions). Both sets of role-plays were transcribed and coded, up to and including the principal request for four aspects of mitigation using categories adapted from Blum-Kulka and House (1989) and Yates (2005): the level of directness of the principal request, syntactic mitigation, lexical mitigation, and propositional (external) mitigation. Details of these categories are provided in Appendix B. THE FINDINGS Sociopragmatic Aspects: The Assumptions Underlying the Requests It was striking that, in general, the stance and tone that most NESs took toward the boss and the way that they constructed the request event asserted solidarity rather than acknowledged hierarchy; that is, NESs tended to negotiate with their bosses as apparent equals. They used more informal language, prepared their requests with greetings, let’s talk rouBRIEF REPORTS AND SUMMARIES 793 tines, disarmers, and other propositional support. Thus NESs addressed the solidarity dimension of mitigation more often than the NNESs. In contrast, the NNES data tended to mark hierarchy more overtly and construct the request more in terms of supplication to a higher authority. We should be cautious in making strong claims about stance, because in real life the NNESs were in a student–teacher relationship with their interlocutors whereas the NESs were not, and this relationship may have influenced their role-play performances. Nevertheless, the interactions indicated that the NESs followed a more apparently egalitarian communicative style. Half the NESs (27/54) used some sort of greeting, and almost all (24/27) included the boss’s first name, whereas only 6/16 of the NNESs used a greeting and only 1 addressed the boss by first name. Thus the NESs used first names to establish rapport with their interlocutor and assumed an apparently egalitarian position in relation to their boss. The use of first names this way in Australia is common, even in hierarchical institutions (Beal, 1992). However, 3/16 of the NNESs used a respectful term, whereas only 1/54 of the NESs did. The majority of NESs (30/54) also prepared for the principal request by making a prerequest invitation to talk. This let’s talk routine established solidarity with the boss before any controversial demands were made on the relationship. In the following examples, italics are used to highlight the feature in focus (I is the interlocutor). Example 1 (Let’s Talk Routine) NES: I: NES: oh hello (name) are you busy? um no, how can I help you (name)? um, I wanted to talk to you about my annual leave umm I’ve got 4 weeks I haven’t taken any this year and I would like to take 3 weeks starting in 10 days time Only 3/16 of the NNESs prepared the ground for their request in this way; more than a quarter (5/16) prepared their request by signalling that they had a problem, whereas only 1/54 of the NESs used this strategy. Example 2 (Request as Problem) I: Good morning, [name]. How can I help you? NNES: Oh, good morning /(name)/. Er, could you, could you help me about this er this problem. You know I have 4 weeks annual leave, available this year 794 TESOL QUARTERLY Even those NESs who did not use a greeting generally mitigated the request in other ways by using propositional moves such as disarmers, humour, personal references, or apologies. Overall, 77% (42/54) used some introductory activity as a prelude to the request. For example, 9/54 provided a context as support in advance of their request: Example 3 (Context) NES: Ah (name) I know that it’s ah a pretty busy time at the moment ah but ah if possible I’ve spoken with Fiona in accounts (context) and I’ve got 4 weeks annual leave coming to me (context) and ah I’d like to take 3 weeks now (request) In particular, disarmers were used extensively by 70% of NESs, perhaps because they allow the speaker to display an understanding of the problems that the request may cause their boss (see Example 4 and Appendix B) and thus establish a joint responsibility for the problem. This tactic has the effect of downplaying the hierarchical distance between requester and requestee and foregrounding the commonalities in the relationship. The use of verbs such as recognise, realise, and understand signal empathy with the interlocutor’s position, as shown in Example 4a–c, taken from different speakers. Example 4 4a: 4b: 4c: ahm and ah I recognise that you know at present it’s not a a particularly good time for any of us to take annual leave but . . . I know/I know we’re really busy and I really understand that but . . . Yeah look I realise um that we’re really busy but I’ve just got this situation that um As illustrated in Example 5, NES participants frequently used multiple propositional support moves to soften the impact of their requests: Example 5 NES: I: NES: Hi, Robyn, ahh I was just wondering if I could have a minute of your time to ask yeah yeah yeah sure come in sit down ahm I have a 4 weeks leave I know that they’re ahm not due as yet for me to take leave at this point but ahm we’ve got a situation overseas which we really need to attend to and I was wondering whether I could take some earlier ahm and sort of later if that would be a problem In this example, the speaker first establishes rapport with the boss through her greetings and let’s talk routine. She then prepares her reBRIEF REPORTS AND SUMMARIES 795 quest by introducing the context (I have a 4 weeks leave), acknowledging the difficulties with the upcoming requests with two disarmers (I know it’s busy and I know that they’re ahm not due / as yet for me to take leave at this point) and providing a reason for her request (we’ve got a situation overseas / which we really need to attend to) before she finally makes it. However, only 4/16 NNESs used any disarmers, using only one each (see Example 6), and these were constructed and delivered in ways that were more likely to have the opposite effect: Example 6 6a: 6b: 6c: 6d: Er, I know this is the busy time really, You know it is a very busy now And now I know this time is so busy So but it’s a very busy time These data therefore suggest that whereas NESs constructed their requests discursively as one between apparent equals who have to negotiate a problem, the NNESs tended to construct the event as a request for help and were less successful in their attempts to disarm potential objections by their boss. The Use of Pragmalinguistic Resources Examination of the ways in which all participants used the pragmalinguistic resources of English revealed that although both groups phrased their requests fairly directly, the NESs made much greater use of a range of syntactic and lexical devices to soften the impact of their requests. The Directness of the Request In contrast to what might be expected from a typical polite request (see, e.g., Blum-Kulka & House, 1989), most participants (30/54 of the NESs and 14/16 of the NNESs) used a direct strategy to formulate their principal request. However, the NESs used a wider range of request structures (see Table 1), and whereas no NESs used the bald realisation pattern I want to, 4/16 (25%) of NNESs did. Syntactic Mitigation However, NESs softened the directness of these requests through a variety of syntactic mitigating devices, particularly past tense, the continuous (with or without past marking), and embedding. The past tense 796 TESOL QUARTERLY TABLE 1 Request Structures Used by NESs N % 13 6 10 24.07 11.11 18.52 5 1 5 13 1 54 9.26 1.85 9.26 24.07 1.85 100 Direct strategy (apparently assertive) I’d like to . . . I/wanted/‘m wanting/‘m hoping/was thinking I need to . . . Indirect strategy (negotiable/advisory) Statement plus question Maybe I could Is it/ would it be possible/ would I be able I’m wondering if . . . If I could . . . Total was used in various ways to distance the requester from the impositive nature of their request, often in combination with the continuous or embedding, as in Examples 7 and 8. Example 7 I: NES: oh hi (name) what can I do for you? hi (name) um I was wondering if I could get some annual leave Example 8 NES: I actually wanted to take 3 weeks leave at the moment The continuous was used to soften their statements of wants, as in Example 9. Example 9 NES: ahm I’m still wanting to ask you if I could at this stage take 3 weeks leave Almost a quarter of the NESs used the structure I was wondering if . . . (i.e., embedding mitigated by the continuous) to introduce their request, and this tactic sometimes softened a request that might otherwise have appeared somewhat abrupt, as in Example 7. Although this request is very brief and lacks a preamble, the fact that the request is embedded in a more polite frame softens its force considerably. In contrast, none of the NNESs used either the continuous or embedding as mitigation devices. Moreover, though they used the past tense almost as frequently as NESs, they only used it formulaically in structures such as could you give me next month for this leave or could you help me about BRIEF REPORTS AND SUMMARIES 797 this er this problem, suggesting that they may not have been aware of its other mitigating functions. These findings suggest that syntactic mitigating devices may pose a particular challenge for learners. Lexical Mitigation Similarly, the NESs extensively used the four types of lexical mitigation coded for in this study (see Appendix B) to soften the impact of their requests, but the NNESs rarely used lexical mitigation. For example, the downtoner just was used frequently (16/54) by NESs as in the extracts from different speakers in Example 10. Example 10 10a: 10b: I’m just wondering if I can have 3 weeks off. and ahm I was just wondering if I could take you know 3 weeks as soon as possible because I have to go overseas Not one NNES used just, even though they would certainly know this word at their level of proficiency. We conjecture that they were not familiar with its mitigating function. The NESs also used understaters (19/54: Example 11) and hedges (15/54: Example 12) to soften the impact of a request. Example 11 11a: 11b: and I really would appreciate being able to take a couple weeks now in maybe 2 or 3 weeks I know it might put the company out a little but um would that be possible Example 12 12a: 12b: () what I was thinking is maybe I could take the 10 days take the extra week that I haven’t had yet I sort of want to take the leave at the moment However, only one NNES used an understater, and none used any hedges at all, suggesting a lack of familiarity with their mitigating functions. NESs also used hesitators (ahm, er, um) extensively to indicate a reluctance to make a difficult request. To summarise, although both groups used predominantly direct requests, the NESs softened their requests more frequently both by addressing solidarity dimensions of rapport and by using a range of pragmalinguistic devices. They constructed the request event as a negotiation between relative equals and established rapport through the use of greetings, preparatory sequences, disarmers, and other propositional support 798 TESOL QUARTERLY moves. This strategy, together with their frequent and flexible use of syntactic and lexical devices, meant that they were able to both express their request compellingly and reduce its threat. In contrast, the NNESs were much less successful in mitigating their impact. They used far fewer moves to prepare the request or establish rapport, tended to structure the request event as a problem to be fixed, and drew on a narrower range of lexical and syntactic devices which they also used less frequently than the NESs, even though many of the forms would have been known to them. It seems likely, therefore, that they are either unfamiliar with these forms’ mitigating function or of the necessity of using them in this type of workplace situation. These findings suggest that there are considerable and, from the point of view of teachers, disquieting differences between the way in which intermediate learners and NSs of Australian English make this kind of request in this context, and suggests that learners may need more explicit help with this important area of interaction. WHAT CAN LEARNERS AND TEACHERS DO? Personal choice plays a crucial role in the adoption of certain aspects of the communicative style appropriate to the culture of a target community (e.g., Bardovi-Harlig, 1999; Yates, 2005). The role of teachers is thus to help learners understand some of the cultural values underlying the choices that NESs make and the devices that they use to achieve their intentions. Once aware of these values, learners may resist their adoption for reasons of their own (see, e.g., Hinkel, 1996; Siegal, 1996); instruction in this area should therefore centre on raising awareness and understanding in the first instance and perhaps the provision of a safe place (the classroom) in which students may experiment. This study has provided some insights that may serve as the basis for developing a deeper understanding of some of the sociopragmatic and pragmalinguistic areas of interpersonal pragmatics which might be useful for learners preparing for workplace situations. Table 2 summarises these features. TABLE 2 Summary of Features of NES Request Performance in Workplace Situation Sociopragmatic features Pragmalinguistic devices Establishment of rapport Informality Apparent egalitarianism Propositional preparation for request High use of mitigation throughout Downtoner, just Hedges, e.g., maybe, perhaps, sort of Past tense in various forms, e.g., I just wanted . . . Continuous, e.g., I was hoping Embedding, e.g., I was wondering if . . . BRIEF REPORTS AND SUMMARIES 799 At the sociopragmatic level, it is important to help learners understand the communicative values underlying interaction, because understanding these values can help them understand why speakers, including them, approach particular speech events in the way that they do. In Australia, for example, it is common to downplay overt displays of hierarchy, even among status unequals (Wierzbicka, 1997), and this pervasive practice may present substantial challenges to learners from cultures where such displays are considered inappropriate. Because such aspects of language use are largely subconscious and relate to deeply held beliefs and values, they rarely receive explicit attention in the classroom, and teachers may be reluctant to tackle them. However, increasing evidence suggests that explicit attention to aspects of interpersonal pragmatics can be useful. For example, House (1996) found that explicit consciousness raising was overall more successful than was implicit consciousness raising, and that students reported that explicit consciousness raising “helped them understand how and when they transferred routines” (p. 247). Thus, model request dialogues from authentic sources could be used to focus on particular features and to discuss why they are used and whether the request might be performed in the same way in learners’ first languages and cultures. A sensitive focus on the way the event is structured—the role of pre-acts and formulae in let’s talk routines, disarmers, and greetings—could be a useful precursor to sheltered opportunities for practice. The mitigating function of relatively simple devices (such as hedges, just, or the continuous) can be made explicit to learners through specific, focussed activities (Rose & Kasper, 2001). Even those grammatically complex devices which may be beyond the current competence of the learners (e.g., the embedding clauses used by the NESs) could be introduced and practised as a chunk, rather than as a generative rule of grammar. Indeed, short unanalysed routines have been shown to be teachable and helpful even to beginners (Wildner-Bassett, 1994; Tateyama, 2001), because such islands of security can help reduce a learner’s cognitive load. As Bardovi-Harlig (2001) has shown, even advanced learners do not seem to acquire aspects of pragmatics from exposure alone, so the teaching of such chunks would seem to be beneficial for learners at all levels. Although the preceding analysis has illustrated some of the strategies and devices used by NESs that could be useful for learners in making informed decisions about how they conduct themselves in their new communities, we acknowledge that this contribution is a somewhat modest one to a particular area of communication. However, as Hall (1999) argues, it is from the sensitive discussion and analysis of communicative events such as the ones discussed in this article that learners can develop and hone the tools they need to make sense of the interactions they see 800 TESOL QUARTERLY outside the classroom. The fact that such aspects of interpersonal pragmatics may lack salience for learners or be particularly resistant to change should not deter, but rather should motivate researchers, materials developers, and teachers to further efforts in the bid to help learners become more aware of the potential consequences of the choices they make in interaction. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We acknowledge the financial support of the Australian Government, Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, through the Adult Migrant English Program Research Centre. Ethical considerations were overseen by the La Trobe University Ethics Committee. We are deeply indebted to the teachers who participated in this project: Jackie Springall, Shem Macdonald, Priti Mukherjee, Robyn Raleigh, and Clare Strack. We would also like to thank all those who gave up their time to be recorded for this project. THE AUTHORS Gillian Wigglesworth is Head of the School of Languages at the University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. Her research focuses on language acquisition, both first and second, and language testing and assessment, and she is widely published in these areas. She has worked for many years with ESL teachers through her involvement with the Adult Migrant English Program Research Centre. Lynda Yates is a senior lecturer in TESOL and applied linguistics at La Trobe University and a senior researcher with the Adult Migrant English Program Research Centre. She has taught in a wide range of settings in the United Kingdom, Egypt, France, Armenia, and Australia, and conducts research in areas related to adult language learning and teaching and the professional development of teachers. REFERENCES Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1999). Exploring the interlanguage of interlanguage pragmatics. Language Learning, 49, 677–713. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2001). Evaluating the empirical evidence: Grounds for instruction in pragmatics? In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 13–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Hartford, B.-S. (1996). Input in an institutional setting. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 171–188. Beal, C. (1992). Did you have a good weekend? Or why there is no such thing as a simple question in cross-cultural encounters. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 15, 23–52. Beal, C. (1994). Keeping the peace: A cross-cultural comparison of questions and requests in Australian English and French. Multilingua, 13(1–2), 35–58. Blum-Kulka, S., & House, J. (1989). Cross-cultural and situational variation in requesting behaviour. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp. 123–154). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. BRIEF REPORTS AND SUMMARIES 801 Hall, J. K. (1999). A prosaics of interaction: The development of interaction competence in another language. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Culture in second language teaching and learning (pp. 137–151). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hinkel, E. (1996). When in Rome: Evaluations of L2 pragmalinguistic behaviors. Journal of Pragmatics, 26, 51–70. Holmes, J. (1984). Modifying illocutionary force. Journal of Pragmatics, 8, 345–365. House, J. (1996). Developing pragmatic fluency in English as a foreign language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 225–252. Roberts, C., Davies, E., & Jupp, T. (1992). Language and discrimination. London: Longman. Rose, K. R., & Kasper, G. (2001). Pragmatics in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rose, K. R., & Ng, C. (2001). Inductive and deductive teaching of compliments and compliment responses. In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 145–170). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Siegal, M. (1996). The role of learner subjectivity in second language sociolinguistic competency: Western women learning Japanese. Applied Linguistics, 17, 356–382. Tateyama, Y. (2001). Explicit and implicit teaching of pragmatic routines: Japanese sumimasen. In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 200–222). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4, 91–109. Trosborg, A. (2003). The teaching of business pragmatics. In A. Martinez Flor, E.Usó Juan, & A. Fernandez Guerra (Eds.), Pragmatic competence and foreign language teaching (pp. 247–281). Castelló de la Plana, Spain: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I. Wierzbicka, A. (1997). Understanding cultures through their key words: English, Russian, Polish, German and Japanese. New York: Oxford University Press. Wigglesworth, G. (2001). Influences on performance in task-based oral assessments. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Task based learning (pp. 186–209). London: Addison Wesley Longman. Wildner-Bassett, M.-E. (1994). Intercultural pragmatics and proficiency: “Polite” noises for cultural appropriateness. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 32, 3–17. Yates, L. (2005). Negotiating an institutional identity: Individual differences in NS and NNS teacher directives. In K. Bardovi-Harlig. & S. Hartford (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics: Exploring institutional talk (pp. 67–98). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Yates, L., & Wigglesworth, G. (2005). Researching the effectiveness of professional development in pragmatics. In N. Bartels (Ed.), Applied linguistics and language teacher education (pp. 261–279). New York: Springer. APPENDIX A Role-Play Cards Employee Card You have 4 weeks’ annual leave available this year. You would like to take 3 weeks’ leave now, even though it is a busy time at your workplace. • Talk to your manager about this situation, explain why you want to take the leave now, and negotiate a solution 802 TESOL QUARTERLY Employer Card You are the manager of a workplace. One of your employees has applied to take 3 weeks of their 4 weeks’ annual leave now. • It is a particularly busy time at your workplace. Find out why he/she wants to take leave now. Explain that employees normally take leave at Christmas, when things are quieter. Ask the employee to suggest ways to resolve the situation. APPENDIX B Coding Framework Head act coding Indirect Nonexplicit negotiable Apparently negotiable Apparently advisory Direct Apparently assertive I really need to know what leave is available to me So could we sort of do something about my leave now Maybe I could take the extra week I haven’t had yet I’d like to take some annual leave Syntactic mitigation Device Example I just wanted to discuss taking annual leave . . . I’m just wondering . . . I was just wondering if it would be possible Past tense Continuous Embedding Lexical mitigation Device Example I just need these 3 weeks to finish that I really would appreciate being able to I sort of want to take the leave at the moment Would that be okay with you? Downtoner Understater Hedge Consultative device Propositional (external) mitigation Device Greeting/name Reason Preparator Rapport Disarmer BRIEF REPORTS AND SUMMARIES Example [Name] hi, have you got a moment ah well my wife at the moment she’s a bit ill I was wondering if I could have a minute of your time ooh I’ve got to do a bit of grovelling I know it’s not a good time of the year 803 RESEARCH ISSUES TESOL Quarterly publishes brief commentaries on aspects of qualitative and quantitative research. This issue features a discussion of research synthesis in applied linguistics. Edited by PATRICIA A. DUFF University of British Columbia The Future of Research Synthesis in Applied Linguistics: Beyond Art or Science JOHN M. NORRIS and LOURDES ORTEGA University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa Honolulu, Hawai‘i, United States 䡲 It is customary in every field of inquiry to engage in secondary research, that is, to review the accumulated evidence at important watershed points in the history of a research domain or before new research is planned and undertaken. Traditional reviewing approaches result in narrative accounts, sometimes accompanied by tables in which as many studies as possible are summarized and compared. Another traditional practice is the so-called vote-counting technique, where the reviewer counts how many studies report statistically significant results in support of or against a given claim. The literature review genre is familiar to every graduate student and dissertator. Every seasoned researcher, too, knows of the creative effort involved in undertaking a good review of the literature. Less widespread in applied linguistics is knowledge of contemporary methodologies for systematically reviewing the literature, rather than as a narrative or by significance vote count. Meta-analysis is only one of several possible forms of systematic review, although it certainly is the one that gets the most attention and has materialized into the best established set of rigorous methods for synthesizing quantitative findings. Synthesis is the more general term that covers any form of systematic review of quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods primary research, and the one that we prefer using because of its more inclusive meaning. TESOL QUARTERLY Vol. 41, No. 4, December 2007 805 In this Research Issues article, we discuss systematic research synthesis as a contemporary framework for reviewing. We offer a selective outline of its history and main characteristics, and we discuss its potential benefits for the field of applied linguistics. We also reflect on limitations, pitfalls, and future challenges that arise from engaging in systematic synthesis of extant research. TRADITIONAL REVIEWS AND SYNTHESES: FROM ART TO SCIENCE Despite the pervasiveness that reviewing plays in research activities, only a small subset of reviews sees the light of publication. Even fewer are the reviews of the literature that have found a place among the most cited works in our field. An example is the influential review on the effects of age on L2 learning by Krashen, Long, and Scarcella, published in TESOL Quarterly in 1979. Thanks to their careful examination of 23 studies published between 1962 and 1979, these researchers were able to establish what has come to be a widely accepted conclusion: that adults and adolescents can make faster progress in L2 learning in the shortterm but that children will eventually obtain better results than olderstarting learners, provided the evidence is gathered after a period of 3 to 5 years of learning. This early conclusion has never been overturned by new empirical evidence, although evidence from foreign language contexts has recently made it necessary to add the proviso that the claim applies to second language contexts only (Muñoz, 2006). Despite important and felicitous contributions, the traditional reviewing approach offers no specific set of methods or strategies for reviewing, making it more of a mysterious art than most other research genres. For example, Krashen et al.’s (1979) robust conclusion was enabled by a creative but topic-specific strategy: teasing out the reported findings separately for 18 studies that contributed short-term evidence and 5 studies that contributed longer-term evidence (i.e., gathered after 5 years or longer lengths of residence or learning). Clearly, the quality of any traditional review depends largely on the expert’s astute content knowledge of the research domain. However, authoritative expertise is always vested and hence vulnerable to the charge of bias. It is therefore no surprise that at times what the evidence says is a matter of intense dispute, with conclusions that vary from one authority to the next. Examples that come to mind are Truscott’s reviews against error correction in written (Truscott, 1996) and oral (Truscott, 1998) modes, and the opposing conclusions in favor of error correction offered in reviews by Ferris (2004) and Nicholas et al. (2001). How can both sets of authors be 806 TESOL QUARTERLY right in such conflicting cases? And how can reviewers—and readers— arbitrate an agreed-on interpretation of what the findings might mean? It was dissatisfaction with precisely the idiosyncratic and impenetrable quality of traditional reviews that moved social scientists during the 1970s to search for new methods that would lend more consistency and replicability to the art of reviewing primary research.1 It would be fair to say that during the 1970s and 1980s the art of reviewing gradually evolved into a science of its own, with an emphasis on practices that would be systematic, transparent, and replicable, just as other scientific methodologies strive to be. THREE DEFINING CHARACTERISTICS OF SYSTEMATIC RESEARCH SYNTHESES Norris and Ortega (2006b, pp. 6–7) identify three characteristics of any systematic research review. First, the motivation for the selection of studies is not left to the tacit good sense of the expert reviewer; instead, study selection is carefully rationalized and explicated at the outset of the review process. This is analogous to the concern in primary research with giving careful thought to the selection of participants: Will (should) sampling be complete, random, stratified, purposive, and so on? It is for this reason that syntheses typically have a methodology section on the library search and another on criteria for inclusion and exclusion of studies. Second, a synthesist looks directly at the data reported in each study. In other words, the analytical emphasis is not on understanding what individual researchers say they found or what they claim their findings mean; rather, close scrutiny is given to the evidence displayed in each 1 These early efforts built on a number of mathematical aggregation traditions that ran in work done by statisticians in the 19th and early 20th centuries (see Hunt, 1997). However, it was Gene Glass who coined the term meta-analysis (or an analysis of analyses) in his presidential address for the American Educational Research Association (Glass, 1976). He also published, with colleague Mary Lee Smith, the first official meta-analysis in history (Smith & Glass, 1977) and the first meta-analysis textbook (Glass, McGaw, & Smith, 1981). Since then, thousands of meta-analyses and other forms of systematic reviews have been published across fields as different as medicine, law, sociology, and education. Shanahan (2002) provides a clear overview of meta-analysis from an educational research perspective, and Hunt (1997) offers a lively and accessible chronicle of its history across disciplines. Consistent interest and development in this methodology have left a trail of useful textbooks in research synthesis (the unsurpassed classic being Light & Pillemer, 1984) and meta-analysis (particularly accessible and complete is Lipsey & Wilson, 2001; whereas an encyclopedic treatment is offered by Cooper & Hedges, 1994). In applied linguistics, an early call for meta-analysis was made by Chaudron (1988), but such studies began appearing only in the past 10 years, with the first collection exemplifying the methodology being published only recently (Norris & Ortega, 2006a). RESEARCH ISSUES 807 study. Furthermore, in the specific case of quantitative findings, most synthesists are not automatically swayed by statistical significance test results, because they are acutely aware that inferential statistics are more often than not misused (see Cohen, 1994). In fact, when synthesizing quantitative results, effect sizes and confidence intervals are key analytical tools that complement, and oftentimes completely replace, statistical significance (see Grissom & Kim, 2005). Accordingly, in systematic reviews we find little space devoted to summarizing individual studies, presenting claims put forth by selected primary researchers, or tallying statistically significant versus nonsignificant results, by contrast with these practices in traditional reviews. Instead, numerical, visual, and textual displays of aggregated and reanalyzed primary data across studies are frequent. Third, all synthesists develop and use some kind of coding book or protocol that determines what to look for, consistently and exhaustively, in each study and across all studies. This third characteristic simply reflects the synthetic will to find ways to distill individually reported evidence and integrate it into a cumulative whole that cuts across many studies, where the whole is more than the sum of the parts. Accordingly, in syntheses we typically find a table or an appendix where the reviewer’s coding categories are defined and exemplified. The application of these three characteristics and the relative importance that each is given in a systematic review will vary, depending on the purposes of synthesizing and the nature of the research domain to be synthesized. For example, study sampling strategies are typically congruent with participant sampling assumptions embodied in the primary studies to be synthesized. Thus, in quantitative research syntheses the selection of studies aims to be exhaustive (Norris & Ortega, 2000) or representative (Thomas, 2006), following assumptions of probability embedded in experimental or survey research. By contrast, study sampling is typically purposive and selective in syntheses of qualitative research, as in Téllez and Waxman’s (2006) meta-synthesis methodology and in other options for synthesizing qualitative research described in Norris and Ortega (2006b, pp. 12–14). Even within quantitative meta-analysis, which is arguably the most methodologically prescribed genre of systematic synthesis, diversity and variation is expected. In applied linguistics examples, readers will find clear differences in scope, purpose, and analytical procedures if they compare Goldschneider and DeKeyser (2001), Masgoret and Gardner (2003), and Norris and Ortega (2000). Nevertheless, anyone claiming to do any type of systematic review needs to explicitly tell readers how they addressed all three defining issues (sampling of studies, scrutiny of the displayed data regardless of the authorial interpretations, and coding across studies) as they set out systematically to synthesize a particular body of research literature. 808 TESOL QUARTERLY POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF RESEARCH SYNTHESIS Systematic research synthesis is particularly well equipped to generate knowledge that informs future research about problems of interest to applied linguists. An important strength is that it allows for the investigation of moderating variables that are known to be theoretically important but, as of yet, may not have been investigated in any single study. For example, Keck, Iberri-Shea, Tracy-Ventura, and Wa-Mbaleka (2006) were able to use synthesis to establish the importance of task essentialness, a quality of task design by which forms to be learned are made as necessary as possible for completion of a task. Task essentialness was proposed by Loschky and Bley-Vroman (1993) to facilitate grammar learning but had not been investigated by design in any of the 14 task-based interaction studies meta-analyzed by Keck et al. By coding for this feature across studies and later aggregating the individual results associated with it, these researchers found that gains associated with task-essential conditions not only were durable but also grew stronger over a lag period of up to a month. Similarly, syntheses have the potential to generate novel theoretical knowledge not found in any single primary study. For example, since the late 1970s, SLA researchers have known that certain English morphemes (-ing, plural -s, -ed, and so on) are mastered by L2 English learners in a specific sequence, but for several decades nobody was able to ascertain empirically why this sequence is observed. Goldschneider and DeKeyser (2001) investigated the extent to which data from 12 existing studies would provide a good fit, if five aspects of what they called salience were hypothesized to help explain the established findings. Their notion of salience turned out to account for a great deal of the variance observed in the data reported across individual studies, a finding that is consistent with emergentist and input-oriented theories of SLA (see Ellis, 2006). Synthesis in all its varieties can also help establish descriptive benchmarks that aid future interpretation of results. For example, Ortega (2003) applied rather simple synthetic techniques to a body of 25 studies of linguistic development in college-level L2 writing. This procedure yielded a few interpretive signposts that other researchers can use to design new studies and put new findings into a wider perspective: (a) typical T-units produced by L2 writers range from 5 to 18 words in length; (b) writers in second and foreign language contexts produce T-unit lengths that are statistically significantly different; (c) any given group difference in mean length of T-unit of about 2 words or higher is likely to be statistically significant; and (d) researchers pursuing the documentation of change in this domain ought to aim for longitudinal studies that span an academic year rather than just a semester. Systematic reviews also help uncover gaps, weaknesses, and needs in a RESEARCH ISSUES 809 given domain in ways that few narrative literature reviews can. For example, in Norris and Ortega (2000) we were able to make nine concrete recommendations for improving practices in research on effectiveness of instruction. All things considered, then, research synthesis is at its best when it helps add novel insights and improve future interpretations of findings and future research practices, making true the synthetic aspiration for the whole to be more than the sum of its parts. LIMITATIONS AND PITFALLS Research synthesis as a methodological approach offers many potential benefits, but it also entails certain limitations. For one, engaging in synthesis assumes that there are sufficient numbers of studies addressing the same research issue and that individual reports contain sufficient display of (raw and transformed) quantitative or qualitative data. In a young field like applied linguistics, reality may defeat synthesists on both accounts. When it does, abstaining from most forms of research synthesis may be a good idea, and particularly meta-analysis, given its stringent quantitative accumulation and reporting demands. Indeed, a synthesis can only be as good as the quality of the primary studies it is built on; furthermore, most synthesis findings are correlational (not causal) by definition, because the synthesist cannot choose what conditions individual studies have investigated and what designs and moderating variables they may have implemented. It is important to be aware of pitfalls hidden in the approach as well. Perhaps the most serious pitfall when doing meta-analysis and other forms of quantitatively oriented synthesis is technicism, or the overemphasis on manipulating data via novel meta-analytic techniques to the detriment of theoretical and conceptual depth. Many supporters of the approach are well aware of this danger and have referred to it with telling labels, such as high-tech statistication (Rosenthal & DiMatteo, 2001) and cookie-cutter technical style of reviewing (Grant & Grauer, 1999). Even Gene Glass, the founder of modern meta-analysis, has grown cautious over the years against this pitfall (Glass, 1999). Technical expertise in synthetic methods must be coupled with deep knowledge of the theoretical and conceptual issues at stake in the research domain being synthesized. Technically sound but theoretically impoverished research, whether primary or secondary, cannot contribute useful knowledge. A CHALLENGE FOR THE FUTURE: SYNTHESIS BEYOND ART OR SCIENCE? As readers have probably surmised from the discussion of synthesis offered in this brief article, as the activity of reviewing has moved from an 810 TESOL QUARTERLY art to a science, some synthesists have taken an epistemologically narrow (often positivist) stance in portraying the value of syntheses and metaanalyses as the distillation of “final answers” on a contentious topic. It is also possible, however, to adopt a pragmatic viewpoint (e.g., House & Howe, 1999; Patton, 1997) and envision such methodologies as advancing our ability to produce new knowledge that carefully builds on, expands, and transforms what has been accumulated painstakingly over time on a given topic of intense interest for the research community (the view we espoused in Norris & Ortega, 2006b). Given the limitations and pitfalls mentioned (and inherent limitations on human knowing), it is misguided to portray or imagine synthetic findings as definitive answers. Rather, syntheses can only offer provisional best-possible approximations to knowledge about our disciplinary questions. Synthetic findings, just as primary findings, are always contextually and historically bound, ever subject to revision and reconceptualization as research communities evolve and change. Synthesis offers the means for dealing systematically with such change. In some disciplines, systematic reviewing has been experiencing a broadening of scope and philosophical assumptions in order to handle increasingly diverse types of primary research. The changes are toward a dialectical synthesis, a hybrid act of reviewing and systematic reporting that can go beyond art or science (see, e.g., Dixon-Woods et al. 2006; Paterson et al. 2001). Applied linguistics empirical work, too, has diversified and complexified to degrees that will soon demand new and creative approaches for systematic review. During the past decade, many kinds of qualitative research have burgeoned, as evinced, for example, by the sizeable number of interpretive qualitative studies that has appeared in TESOL Quarterly since the publication of Davis and Lazaraton’s (1995) special issue. In addition, several research domains in our field are investigated through an increasing variety of quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Examples are language motivation (see Dörnyei & Schmidt, 2001), study abroad and language learning (compare Collentine & Freed, 2004, with DuFon & Churchill, 2006), and even interaction and language learning (e.g., Foster & Ohta, 2005), just to name some topics. These developments in applied linguistics are likely to be followed in the next few years by a rapid increase of interest in mixedmethods research, as has already happened in other social sciences (Tashakkori & Creswell, 2007). In the current landscape, epistemological diversity (Ortega, 2005) is a good compass to use in orienting ourselves toward new developments in primary and secondary research practices. And yet, in applied linguistics so far, the few researchers who practice systematic reviewing have concentrated on synthesizing quantitative research studies exclusively (to our knowledge, the only exception is Téllez & Waxman, 2006). Thus, RESEARCH ISSUES 811 arguably the most important future development for research synthesis in our field is the formidable challenge of forging a new generation of capable research synthesists who are willing to integrate epistemologically diverse bodies of research, including quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods studies of many kinds, all bearing on a common research question or problem of interest to applied linguistics research communities. CONCLUSION Systematic reviews hold great promise and entail some limitations, and it behooves researchers and others who wish to use such methodologies to be aware of both. What does the future hold for those interested in engaging in research synthesis in applied linguistics? A first prediction is that systematic reviewing methodologies will continue to thrive in our field and be applied to quantitative studies as they have until now. If that is the case, a synthetic mindset will help combat two myths dangerously entrenched in much quantitative research: (a) that a research question may be definitively answered by a single study (if the study can only attain methodological perfection), and (b) that the gold standard of proof resides in statistical significance. With synthesis, the myth of the single study is readily countered by the activity of painstakingly aggregating and integrating findings across many studies, without giving any single study priority or deferential treatment. The myth of statistical significance tests is far from specific to applied linguistics; it has been widely discussed by statisticians as well as others across fields that use statistics (see Klein, 2004). In applied linguistics, however, its gravity has yet to be understood and addressed by quantitatively minded researchers (see discussion in Norris & Ortega, 2000, pp. 492–495; see also Lazaraton, 2000). A strong meta-analytic orientation can help dispel such misunderstandings (see Shadish, Cook, & Campbell, 2002; Thompson, 2006).2 A second prediction is that in applied linguistics, as in other disciplines, systematic reviewers will eventually be compelled to go beyond art or science if they are to respond to the demands of making sense of the diverse bodies of knowledge being generated in our field. The discussion 2 812 Shadish, Cook, and Campbell (2002) and Thompson (2006) are two excellent general quantitative research methods textbooks written by statisticians who hold a strong metaanalytic orientation. They are highly recommended reading for applied linguists interested in understanding how a meta-analytical orientation could help our disciplinary quantitative practices and reconceptualize our understanding of statistical significance and other traditional statistical thinking. TESOL QUARTERLY regarding whether primary and secondary researchers can achieve epistemological diversity and overcome ontological and epistemological dualisms (ways of thinking about research as quantitative versus qualitative, positivist versus interpretivist, deficiency oriented versus transformation oriented) looms large in the social sciences. As yet unresolved tensions also await those applied linguists who venture into attempts at integrating not only quantitative but also qualitative and mixed methods research findings, particularly in the same synthesis. The tensions may make some synthesists wonder if it is desirable or even possible to do so; we need to foster explicit dialogue about such difficult issues. In the end we hope to encourage applied linguists to adopt “a research ethic to think and act synthetically,” “a commitment to intelligible and respectful communication: between past and present studies, across theory and research and practice divides, between research contexts or camps, and among members of each research community” (Norris & Ortega, 2006b, p. 36). For us, the strengths of reviewing systematically, and the rewards of doing so beyond art or science, are promising. We hope that they will make it worthwhile for applied linguists to grapple with the complexities and promises of conducting high quality and diverse systematic reviews in the future. THE AUTHORS John M. Norris is an assistant professor of Second Language Studies at the University of Hawai‘i. His research focuses on program evaluation, educational assessment, research methodology, and task-based instruction. Currently, he is principal investigator on a 3-year grant addressing program evaluation needs of college foreign language educators. Lourdes Ortega is an associate professor of Second Language Studies at the University of Hawai‘i. Her research focuses on the longitudinal study of instructed second language development, second language writing, the relationship between language minority education and foreign language education, and the use of research methods in applied linguistics. REFERENCES Chaudron, C. (1988). Second language classrooms: Research on teaching and learning. New York: Cambridge University Press. Cohen, J. (1994). The earth is round (p < .05). The American Psychologist, 49, 997– 1003. Collentine, J., & Freed, B. (Eds.). (2004). Learning context and its effects on second language acquisition [Special issue]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(2). Cooper, H., & Hedges, L. V. (Eds.). (1994). The handbook of research synthesis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. RESEARCH ISSUES 813 Davis, K. A., & Lazaraton, A. (Eds.). (1995). Qualitative research in ESOL [Special issue]. TESOL Quarterly, 29(3). Dixon-Woods, M., Bonas, S., Booth, A., Jones, D. R., Miller, T., Sutton, A. J., et al. (2006). How can systematic reviews incorporate qualitative research? A critical perspective. Qualitative Research, 6, 27–44. Dörnyei, Z., & Schmidt, R. (Eds.). (2001). Motivation and second language acquisition (Technical Report No. 23). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai‘i, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center. DuFon, M. A., & Churchill, E. (Eds.). (2006). Language learners in study abroad contexts. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. Ellis, N. C. (2006). The associative-cognitive CREED. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 77–95). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Ferris, D. R. (2004). The “grammar correction” debate in L2 writing: Where are we, and what do we go from here? (And what do we do in the meantime?). Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 49–62. Foster, P., & Ohta, A. S. (2005). Negotiation for meaning and peer assistance in second language classrooms. Applied Linguistics, 26, 402–430. Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 5(10), 3–8. Glass, G. V. (1999). Meta-analysis at 25. Paper presented at the Office of Special Education Programs Research Project Directors’ Conference, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved March 1, 2007, from http://glass.ed.asu.edu/gene/papers/ meta25.html Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Goldschneider, J., & DeKeyser, R. M. (2001). Explaining the “natural order of L2 morpheme acquisition” in English: A meta-analysis of multiple determinants. Language Learning, 51, 1–50. Grant, C. A., & Grauer, E. (1999). (Re)viewing a review: A case history of the Review of Educational Research. Review of Educational Research, 69, 384–396. Grissom, R. J., & Kim, J. J. (2005). Effect sizes for research: A broad practical approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. House, E. R., & Howe, K. R. (1999). Values in evaluation and social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hunt, M. (1997). How science takes stock: The story of meta-analysis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Keck, C. M., Iberri-Shea, G., Tracy-Ventura, N., & Wa-Mbaleka, S. (2006). Investigating the empirical link between task-based interaction and acquisition: A metaanalysis. In J. M. Norris & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 91–131). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Klein, R. B. (2004). Beyond significance testing: Reforming data analysis methods in behavioral research. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Krashen, S., Long, M. H., & Scarcella, R. (1979). Accounting for child–adult differences in second language rate and attainment. TESOL Quarterly, 13, 573–582. Lazaraton, A. (2000). Current trends in research methodology and statistics in applied linguistics. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 175–181. Light, R., & Pillemer, D. (1984). Summing up: The science of reviewing research. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Loschky, L., & Bley-Vroman, R. (1993). Grammar and task-based methodology. In G. 814 TESOL QUARTERLY Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 123–167). Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters. Masgoret, A.-M., & Gardner, R. C. (2003). Attitudes, motivation, and second language learning: A meta-analysis of studies conducted by Gardner and associates. Language Learning, 53, 123–163. Muñoz, C. (Ed.). (2006). Age and the rate of foreign language learning. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. Nicholas, H., Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2001). Recasts as feedback to language learners. Language Learning, 51, 719–758. Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528. Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (Eds.). (2006a). Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2006b). The value and practice of research synthesis for language learning and teaching. In J. M. Norris & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 3–50). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Ortega, L. (2003). Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A research synthesis of college-level L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 24, 492–518. Ortega, L. (2005). For what and for whom is our research? The ethical as transformative lens in instructed SLA. Modern Language Journal, 89, 427–443. Paterson, B. L., Thorne, S. E., Canam, C., & Jillings, C. (2001). Meta-study of qualitative health research: A practical guide to meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Patton, M. (1997). Utilization focused evaluation: The new century text (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Rosenthal, R., & DiMatteo, M. R. (2001). Meta-analysis: Recent developments in quantitative methods for literature reviews. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 59–82. Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasiexperimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Shanahan, T. (2002). Research synthesis: Making sense of the accumulation of knowledge in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Methods of literacy research: The methodology chapters from the handbook of reading research, volume III (pp. 133–150). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Smith, M. L., & Glass, G. V. (1977). Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies. The American Psychologist, 32, 752–760. Tashakkori, A., & Creswell, J. W. (2007). Editorial: The new era of mixed methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 3–7. Téllez, K., & Waxman, H. C. (2006). A meta-synthesis of qualitative research on effective teaching practices for English language learners. In J. M. Norris & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 245–277). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Thomas, M. (2006). Research synthesis and historiography: The case of assessment of second language proficiency. In J. M. Norris & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 279–298). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Thompson, B. (2006). Foundations of behavioral statistics: An insight-based approach. New York: Guilford. Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes [Review article]. Language Learning, 46, 327–369. Truscott, J. (1998). Noticing in second language acquisition: A critical review. Second Language Research, 14, 103–135. RESEARCH ISSUES 815 RESEARCH DIGEST: TESOL TOPICS IN OTHER JOURNALS This section presents brief synopses of empirical research and theoretical discussions in peerreviewed journals. The aim is to disseminate findings and perspectives in fields related to TESOL and to provide access to the diverse conversations among scholars in the field. Edited by SARA MICHAEL-LUNA Rutgers University Examining Teacher-Child Relationships and Achievement as Part of an Ecological Model of Development. American Educational Research Journal, 44, 340–369. Erin O’Connor and Kathleen McCartney, 2007. Do teacher–child relationships make a difference in children’s school achievement? O’Connor and McCartney examine the effects of 1,364 teacher–child relationships on the children’s academic achievement. Although many studies have documented the importance of mother–child relationships, O’Connor and McCartney’s longitudinal study uses hierarchical multiple regression models with variables representing the children’s multiple contextual systems (including factors relevant to the individual child, family, classroom, and culture) to isolate how teacher– child relationships influence the children’s achievement on a thirdgrade assessment. O’ Connor and McCartney found that (a) the quality of teacher–child relationships had a positive association with the third grade assessment, (b) negative effects of insecure mother–child relationships on achievement were assuaged by quality teacher–child relationships, and (c) “teacher attendance was negatively associated with achievement” (p. 362). In other words, children who were engaged in classroom activities did not need direction from teachers. Teachers spent more time with less engaged students. Additionally, the study suggests that the interaction and attention individual children received from teachers decreased slightly from preschool through third grade. O’Connor and McCartney speculate that as children become more socialized into schooling practice, teachers can turn their attention from the relational aspects of their practice toward content. Although O’Connor and McCartney’s study did not include children whose mothers did not speak English, their findings on the importance TESOL QUARTERLY Vol. 41, No. 4, December 2007 817 of teacher–child relationships for children’s academic achievement are significant. For TESOL, the changing focus of teachers from relational aspects to content might be significant because ELLs may need additional time for relational exchanges. O’Connor and McCartney’s study draws attention to the importance of teachers in young children’s school lives and opens a door for a study of ELL teacher–child relationships. The Complexities of Reading Capital in Two Puerto Rican Families. Reading Research Quarterly, 42, 72–98. Catherine Compton-Lilly, 2007. How do teachers value the literacy resources of immigrant families? Compton-Lilly sheds light on the tension between how teachers and families understand literacy and their role in creating a literate child. Her ethnographic case studies of two Puerto Rican families and their children suggest that the wealth of resources and abilities valued by families are not reflected in the practices of schooling. Compton-Lilly’s participants, two families in which the mothers were enrolled in a high school equivalency program and the children were enrolled in a kindergarten, are part of a larger ethnographic study of 10 families. ComptonLilly interviewed the children and mothers, reviewed writing samples, and videotaped parent–child interactions over a 1-year period. She also interviewed the children’s kindergarten teachers. Compton-Lilly states that the teachers’ perceptions of children’s literacy and learning abilities are woven into the “ways educators and schools position students relative to race, class and assumptions about the academic achievements of their parents” (p. 75). Compton-Lilly’s analysis is framed by Bourdieu’s notions of economic, social, and cultural capital, and she introduces the concept of reading capital in approachable language. Compton-Lilly identifies and operationalizes five types of reading capital. Economic reading capital includes an investment of money in objects or services that are believed to enhance reading ability, such as the Hooked on Phonics program. Social reading capital includes group memberships or networks that support or advantage reading. Embodied reading capital includes the physical and verbal mannerisms associated with school-based reading. Objectified reading capital includes participantcreated written or oral evidence of reading competence. Institutionalized reading capital includes “institution sanctioned benchmarks of reading proficiency” (p. 77) such as a report card or standardized test. Compton-Lilly challenges Bourdieu’s assumption that economic capital is the foundation for all other forms of capital. Her case studies show that social capital, a complex network of family and friends, is highly 818 TESOL QUARTERLY symbolic for the local Puerto Rican neighborhood and community. However, the teachers did not recognize or value this relational network as a form of reading capital, which negatively influenced their perceptions of the children’s academic abilities and families. Compton-Lilly calls for all teachers to work toward recognizing, understanding, and valuing the skills, social capital, and reading capital that young children bring to school. Accumulating Knowledge Across Self-Studies in Teacher Education. Journal of Teacher Education, 58, 36–46. Ken Zeichner, 2007. What role should teacher self-study play in educational research? Consonant with the current debate around pedagogical implications of research in TESOL Quarterly (June 2007, pp. 387–406) and in the larger educational community, Zeichner suggests a role for teacher self-study as a window into the local construction of classroom implications for empirical research. Zeichner specifically targets how self-studies have contributed to local knowledge on teacher education but suggests that the accumulation of knowledge across individual studies might also contribute to educational policy and global practice. However, as Zeichner notes, these connections have not yet been made. To date, “research efforts by teacher educators have not had much effect in influencing the policies in many countries” (p. 38). Zeichner suggests improving the quality of teacher self-study by systematically establishing and building on a research program in each area of inquiry. To contribute to established educational knowledge, as recognized in educational research, teacher self-study needs to create a network of interrelated research modeled on qualitative or experimental research. For a study to be recognized and valued, established research discourses require that it cite a network of previous interrelated research and theory that inform, confirm, and ground it—connecting and contributing to an established history. Although Zeichner’s argument is made for general teacher action research, it could be applied to TESOL teacher action research projects. The TESOL research community has cultivated research programs, such as those with an applied psycholinguistics or a sociolinguistic perspective. However, as more MATESOL programs offer action research courses and encourage self-study for master’s theses, Zeichner’s guidance in establishing defined self-study research programs and literatures comes at a crucial time. RESEARCH DIGEST 819 “The Caucasian Cloak”: Mexican Americans and the Politics of Whiteness in the 20th Century Southwest. Georgetown Law Journal, 95(2), 1–72. Ariela Gross, 2006. Does discrimination against language and cultural practice equal racism? Ariela Gross examines the history of Mexican Americans in the southwestern United States for the ways that historical legal decisions have used language and cultural practices as a proxy for race. One of her foci is school desegregation policy and its contribution to the Brown v. Board of Education (1957) decision. Given the recent TESOL Quarterly special issue on Race and TESOL (September 2006), as well as the current debates on English-Only laws and immigration, Gross’s in-depth look at the ways that Mexican Americans have been legally constructed as Caucasian is timely. Gross’s analysis of the effects of Jim Crow practices in the southwestern United States on Mexican Americans is salient for unpacking the ways that race, language, and ethnicity are constructed in curriculum and pedagogy. Gross examines the ways that many Mexican American U.S. citizens self-identified in the past as the mestizo race. The abutment of the U.S. legal system’s black–white binary and Mexican Americans’ more complex understanding of race eventually influenced how the U.S. census represented race. Although the historical laws “protected” Mexicans from segregation, racist practices kept Mexican Americans in a nonwhite role. Gross finally suggests that cultural and linguistic discrimination, specifically in Texas and California educational policy, was racial discrimination. Gross’s nuanced examination of the legal cases that informed her position (Rodriguez, Mendez, Salvatierra, and Hernandez) contribute to a fuller understanding of the ways that race, culture, and language intersect for Mexican Americans. Given the increasing number of Mexican American English language learners, Gross’s analysis creates an interesting framework to examine ESL curriculum and culturally relevant pedagogy. 820 TESOL QUARTERLY BOOK REVIEWS TESOL Quarterly welcomes evaluative reviews of publications relevant to TESOL professionals. Edited by MARGARET HAWKINS University of Wisconsin, Madison Inner Speech—L2: Thinking Words in a Second Language. María C. M. de Guerrero. New York: Springer, 2005. Pp. xvi + 251. 䡲 This book reviews the literature on first and second language (L1–L2) inner speech, providing a comprehensive account of the phenomenon. The book takes as its departure point Vygotskyan sociocultural theory as a source of insights into the nature of L2 inner speech and the processes that trigger it and that characterize its development. It represents a complex integration of a host of sometimes seemingly disparate themes into a workable and constructive whole. Inner speech is defined as a silent manifestation of speech directed to the self, entailing the cognitive process of transforming thoughts into words, or vice versa, often with extreme condensation in meaning and structure. The intended audience for the book is researchers, educators, and students in the fields of L2 and foreign language learning, applied linguistics, language and cognition, and psycholinguistics. The volume thoroughly covers the historical, theoretical, conceptual, methodological, and empirical bases of the study of inner speech, both from an L1 and an L2 perspective. Chapter 1 deals with the historical and theoretical foundations of inner speech. Guerrero notes that inner speech is a process originating as a human, social, practical, and communicative activity rather than as an inherent faculty of the mind, and she grounds it solidly within the principles of sociocultural theory. The chapter takes an unhurried look at what inner speech is and is not. Chapter 2 reviews the functions, formal features, and processes of inner speech from an L1 perspective, and reviews the work of Vygotsky, Luria, and Leontiev, among others. The chapter also mentions brain-imaging research, which enables brain functions to be examined by techniques such as positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) during inner speech activity. Chapter 3 deals with research on inner speech from an L2 perspective and ends with a discussion of neuroimaging research on L2 inner speech activity. Chapter 4 reviews in detail the various methodologies used to study inner speech. Guerrero starts by reviewing research on verbal report in TESOL QUARTERLY Vol. 41, No. 4, December 2007 821 its various manifestations, for which she includes questionnaires, Qmethodology (sorting cards with statements on topics), cued recall, interviews, diaries, first-person narration, think-aloud protocols, and thought sampling. The author notes that private speech (i.e., audible speech to oneself) is useful for getting at inner speech because it can be recorded. She gives a solid, technical description of blood-flow studies as a form of neuroimaging (pp. 112–116), using both PET and MRI approaches. Her conclusion is that researchers should use a multimethod approach to data collection. Chapter 5 describes the nature of L2 inner speech itself, drawing on what learners have said when providing verbal reports. The author primarily shares the findings from her own studies, starting with her doctoral dissertation (1990–1991), which involved 472 Spanish-speaking university ESL students in Puerto Rico responding to a questionnaire about their inner speech and mental rehearsal of the L2. She also conducted interviews with nine of these participants, and conducted a follow-up study with 16 low-proficiency Spanish-speaking university ESL learners. In summarizing across the studies, Guerrero found inner speech to serve the following functions: as a memory aid for L2 words, self-instructional (e.g., imitation of L2 models, applying grammar rules, attempting to formulate sentences in the L2), evaluative, preparatory (mental prep or planning of oral or written speech production), dialogic (imagining dialogues in the L2 with self or with others), play, and affective (to control or express emotions, reduce anxiety, and entertain oneself). The chapter ends with the pros and cons of applying verbal report methodology to this line of investigation. Chapter 6 deals with the origin, nature, and development of inner speech, and views inner voice as an internalization of the L2, with private speech as the transitional phase. She concurs with the view that much early inner speech consists of thinking about the L2 in the L1. In this chapter Guerrero deals with the forms and functions of inner speech and identifies traits that are common in L1 and L2 inner speech: “a tendency toward syntactic abbreviation, semantic condensation, and sonority in the mind” (p.189). Chapter 7 provides a pedagogical perspective on developing L2 inner speech. Guerrero mentions, for example, silent (inward or subvocal) repetition and eavesdropping as two strategies for internalizing the language, along with deliberately manipulating it and having imaginary conversations. Guerrero suggests ways that teachers can stimulate the internalization of the L2 through having learners engage in repetition, shadowing and summarizing, taking notes and paraphrasing, planning, and problem-solving tasks. According to the author, these activities draw on inner speech to shore up the learner’s conceptual foundation through integrating L2-related concepts, building L2 semantic networks, 822 TESOL QUARTERLY and connecting to L2 lexical and grammatical forms. Guerrero views raising awareness about inner speech as a key pedagogical goal, regardless of whether it takes place in the L1 or the L2. In fact, the chapter is especially aimed at increasing language educators’ awareness of how to relate teaching practices to the learner’s use of both L1 and L2 in classroom environments. The author suggests, for example, that teachers encourage L2 learners to keep a diary, both for the benefit of the learners and also applied linguistic researchers and educators, to help in understanding how L2 inner speech relates to learning styles. Chapter 8 summarizes the theoretical principals, the empirical outcomes, and the pedagogical implications of inner speech and then provides suggestions for pursuing further research on the nature, development, and use of L2 inner speech and the effects of pedagogical intervention. This book constitutes one of the most thorough treatments of inner speech available, methodically tracing its origins in the literature and bringing the discussion up to date with the latest applications in research and classroom practice. The book shows that language educators can enlist inner speech more often among L2 learners, both to better understand how they are learning and how such inner speech relates to their learning style preferences, and to help learners become more effective at learning. Although the book does not delve into multilingual processing, it does exhaustively consider issues of bilingual processing. And it is particularly appealing that this book is ultimately focused on learners and on how they can improve their language learning through enhanced use of inner speech. The book is by no means an easy read, given the rigorous way that the issues are treated. In fact, it may seem overwhelming, especially to the uninformed, when it turns to topics such as neuroimaging. Nonetheless, various kinds of readers will find much in the volume of interest, especially ESL/EFL researchers and educators who are curious about the nature of students’ use of inner speech in their effort to learn and use English. ANDREW D. COHEN University of Minnesota Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States BOOK REVIEWS 823 Second Language Learning Theories (2nd Ed.). Rosamond Mitchell and Florence Myles. London: Arnold, 2004. Pp. xiii + 303. 䡲 A second language (L2) acquisition research linguist (Myles) and an L2 teaching and learning action researcher and educator (Mitchell)— both from the University of Southampton—have collaborated on this BOOK REVIEWS 823 well-researched, well-organized, and well-written textbook to bring university undergraduate and graduate students, teachers, and anyone else with a passion for L2 pedagogy and research up to date on L2 language learning theories. The first edition, which came out in 1998, focused on the learner as a social being who constructs a new identity while interacting with the new L2. This second edition extends this viewpoint by using Vygotskian sociocultural theory as well as recent research in L2 communication ethnography and socialization. But that’s not all. The second edition also reflects on both the theoretical and applied linguistics milestones in a field that is constantly questioning itself and constantly becoming more pluralistic as new research emerges. It effectively summarizes the key benchmarks in the L2 learning and experimental literature as well as the varied influences from the noncompeting, crossfertilizing linguistic, psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic fields. Especially commendable is the way the authors make sense of how the various strands each form their own special contribution to the general L2 learning fabric. The authors have successfully synthesized and grasped the most significant theories and studies—sometimes presented in other textbooks as vague, confusing postulates—without losing sight of the field as a whole. For example, the chapter on universal grammar (UG) not only organizes the complex topic itself, but also explains its relevance to L2 learning as well as the debates and hypotheses about parameter resetting. In another example, the neat discussion of modularity in the first chapter traces an overall picture without falling into the trap of wordy, incomprehensible explanations, partly because each area is fully expanded later in separate, almost modular, chapters. The book contains something for everyone. Beginning students will find that they can easily understand and remember everything they need to know because the text is highly readable and the typographical layout is useful. Graduate students, classroom teachers, and action researchers will find that the authors fill a common void: They connect applied linguists to its theoretical roots, something that should have been done a long time ago. Therefore, the book deals with the diagram of Bernard Spolsky’s general second language learning model; the famed debates between Noam Chomsky and Jean Piaget; the influence of cognitive psychologist J. R. Anderson, whose theories on learning as information processing influenced the strategy research of J. Michael O’Malley and Anna Uhl Chamot; and the efforts of R. Towell and R. Hawkins to integrate UG and information processing to promote L2 fluency and knowledge. This is heady stuff for applied linguists. Tied into this is recent constructionist and corpus research by such pioneers as Michael Tomasello and Adele Goldberg, and John Sinclair, respectively. The reader will be happy to discover that the bulk of the book is forward looking; it is dedicated to a meaningful presentation and bal824 TESOL QUARTERLY anced critique of the pros and cons of current thought trends and research methodologies. L2 learning research between the 1950s and the 1980s occupies only 21 well-honed pages. The rest of the book discusses relevant research in L1 acquisition research, tackles in great detail UG, cognition and L2 learning, interlanguage, functionalist/pragmatic approaches, input (Krashen and beyond), and constructivism, and ties everything up with an all-encompassing sociocultural and sociolinguistic ribbon. Each theory is evaluated on the basis of five perspectives: the theoretical hypotheses, the view of language, the view of language learning, the view of the learner, and the empirical scaffolding evidence. The short, concluding ninth chapter succinctly evaluates recent L2 learning research, the accomplishments of the past, the varied trends, traditions, and preferences in research emphasis, as well as the future possibilities. It also pinpoints the exact intersection of L2 research and language education, chiefly learner grammar modeling, language processing, and L2 interaction. The textbook also signals research methodological tendencies: from UG-inspired laboratory-controlled grammaticality judgment tests to recording naturalistic observations of informal learning. The fact is, there is no one clear, dominant school of thought, no one theoretical glue unlike theoretical linguistics which for the past 55 years rallied around one main theory of language competence and acquisition, UG. And the research universe is quickly expanding to include connectionism and sociocultural theory without pushing aside UG and other established theories. For example, there is some thoughtful reflection on the role of chunking in L2 interlanguage as an extension of— rather than in opposition to—the creation of new utterances proposed by Chomsky and UG. The authors call for more study of chunking (not coincidentally researched by Myles). The book also provides some reflective writing on the changing views of learner errors from deviant behaviorist habits to a steady progression not without some recidivism toward the target L2, governed by interim rules as the learner gradually adjusts to the L2. The authors also point out some attempts to blaze linked trails within the expanding L2 learning road atlas, including connecting UG with information-processing theoretical models in the cognitive camp. Current thought about grammar learning is no longer blindly accepting the need to dwell on abstract rules. Instead, researchers are exploring the possibilities inherent in the human ability to create association networks as underpinnings of language learning and performance. An update of functionalism points to the major role played by pragmatics and the lexicon, especially in the early stages of interlanguage formation and communication. The authors have succeeded in organizing a wide range of complex developments and interrelated hypotheses into a coherent text that will stimulate students of L2 learning, researchers, and other professionals to BOOK REVIEWS 825 form their own connections and hypotheses. One thing is sure: Theoretical linguistics, cognitive psychology, and neural science will all continue to interact with L2 learning and applied linguistics research for years to come. And the authors transmit, in no uncertain terms, their open attitude to this exciting cross-fertilization. MYRNA GOLDSTEIN Are You in Your English File?® Second Language Learning Research Center Milan, Italy 826 TESOL QUARTERLY Understanding Language Teaching: From Method to Postmethod. B. Kumaravadivelu. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2006. Pp. xviii + 258. 䡲 In this book, a recent addition to Erlbaum’s ESL and Applied Linguistics Professional Series, Kumaravadivelu builds on his previous work describing and promoting the postmethod condition in second language (L2) teaching (Kumaravadivelu, 1994, 2001, 2003). To this end, the book incorporates a conceptual analysis of major L2 teaching methods as well as alternative postmethod guidelines for re-envisioning teaching and teacher education. The book’s first part presents an overview of significant developments in the conceptualization of language, learning, and teaching. Chapter 1 examines language as structure, discourse, and ideology, and argues that all three aspects must be addressed in language learning and teaching. This chapter also attempts to clarify ambiguities in descriptions of language competence versus language performance by presenting the alternative ideas of language and pragmatic knowledge and ability. Chapter 2 focuses on learning and the complex interrelationships among input, intake, and output factors. To capture the dynamics of language learning, Kumaravadivelu introduces an interactive framework of intake processes that attempts to account for all key variables. Chapter 3 addresses the impact of teaching through both input modifications focusing on form and meaning and interactional activities covering textual, interpersonal, and ideational aspects of language. The chapter also addresses the structuring role of the syllabus in language teaching. The second part of the book provides a discussion and evaluation of significant language teaching methods developed since the mid-20th century. Chapter 4 examines dominant tripartite analyses of method in the literature and argues for a simplified focus on language teaching principles and classroom procedures. Chapter 5 discusses language826 TESOL QUARTERLY centered methods exemplified in the audiolingual approach and argues that their emphasis on language form and a linear model of development often fails to produce communicative learners. Chapter 6 examines learner-centered methods typified by communicative language teaching (CLT). Despite attempting to place negotiated meaning and affect at the heart of learning, such methods also largely subscribe to problematic models of linear development and may be difficult to realize in the classroom setting. Chapter 7 discusses recent innovations in what Kumaravadivelu describes as learning-centered methods. These methods, exemplified by Krashen and Terrell’s natural approach and Prabhu’s communicational teaching project, view language learning as comprehension based and incidental in nature. Kumaravadivelu praises these methods’ moves away from presequenced activity structures but also points out key areas of potential difficulty, including issues of material development and learner assessment. The final part of the book turns to an examination of the postmethod condition as well as attempts to develop a postmethod pedagogy and teacher education framework. Chapter 8 explores the limitations of methods thinking and argues instead for pedagogic parameters that take account of local particularity, classroom practicality, and the possibility of connection to the social, political, and economic realities of a larger world. This postmethod condition envisions self-monitoring and selfdirecting language learners who are at once critical thinkers and engaged in the process of learning how to learn. Teachers are also reenvisioned as autonomous decision makers for whom prior knowledge and ongoing professional development evolve into personal and connected theories of practice. Teacher educators are encouraged to dialogue with their students and to engage them in an egalitarian research agenda. Chapter 9 examines recent attempts to operationalize a postmethod pedagogy that provides supportive guidelines for teachers and teacher educators without closing off classroom autonomy. Stern’s threedimensional framework presents teachers with choices along intralingual– crosslingual, analytic–experiential, and explicit–implicit continua. Allwright’s exploratory practice framework, developed in coordination with Brazilian language instructors, sets out an agenda that focuses teachers on quality of life and forming connections that link local research knowledge and experience with ever widening global circles. The chapter concludes with Kumaravadivelu’s macrostrategic framework, which offers educators a series of 10 strategies, each with a series of microstrategies for classroom focus, as conceptual guidelines. Chapter 10 briefly examines the potential barriers to postmethod pedagogies and examines signs that a variety of alternatives to method, including local and personal knowledge, are receiving more weight in the field of language teaching. Overall, Kumaravadivelu’s work provides a welcome, book-length criBOOK REVIEWS 827 tique of existing language teaching methods. Its reconceptualization of key topics in language learning and teaching (such as the interactions among input, intake, and output) should prove particularly relevant for research-oriented graduate students. The book will also be of interest to teacher educators and theory-oriented language teachers in search of ways to reframe their own roles. Because it explicitly lacks a systematic focus on practical teaching concerns, however, this book may be somewhat inaccessible to pre- or in-service teachers seeking immediate classroom relevance. To increase the book’s accessibility for such instructors, teacher educators should consider using it in tandem with both more thorough historical categorizations of method (Richards and Rodgers, 2001) and treatments of method in terms of teacher development and classroom practice (Larson-Freeman, 2000). REFERENCES Kumaravadivelu, B. (1994). The postmethod condition: (E)merging strategies for second/foreign language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 177–180. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2001). Toward a postmethod pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 537–560. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2003). A postmethod perspective on English language teaching. World Englishes, 22, 539–550. Larson-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DUFF JOHNSTON The Pennsylvania State University University Park, Pennsylvania, United States 828 TESOL QUARTERLY Crossing the Curriculum: Multilingual Learners in College Classrooms. Vivian Zamel and Ruth Spack (Eds.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2004. Pp. xiii + 231. 䡲 In recent years, the number of multilingual students enrolled in North American colleges and universities has reached record levels. Thus, it is understandable that professors and administrators need guidance about how to cope with the pedagogical challenges posed by these students not only in ESL or composition courses but also in other subject areas. This collection of essays is a valuable resource in meeting this need. The collection includes the voices and perspectives of those who are 828 TESOL QUARTERLY most concerned with the successful integration of multilingual learners into institutions of higher education. Part I, “Investigating Students’ Experiences Across the Curriculum: Through the Eyes of Classroom Researchers,” includes five thoughtfully researched and written analyses of the struggles and successes of multilingual college students outside the ESL classroom. In these chapters, Vivian Zamel, Ruth Spack, Marilyn S. Sternglass, Trudy Smoke, and Eleanor Kutz, all of whom are wellrespected researchers and scholars of composition, report the findings of longitudinal studies they conducted to learn about the experiences of faculty members and the multilingual students in their classes. The thick description resulting from these studies demonstrates that, despite occasional setbacks, motivated and resourceful students gradually acquire the special ways of reading, writing, and speaking that enable them to succeed in a variety of courses across the curriculum. In terms of what professors can do to help these students succeed, one theme runs through most of the chapters in this book: what ESOL students need— for example, encouraging open-ended class discussions, giving students a chance to explore subjects first in informal, ungraded writing before writing formal essays, and allowing students to revise their essays after receiving feedback—will improve instruction for all students. Part II, “Learning Across the Curriculum: Through Students’ Eyes,” deepens the analysis provided in the previous section with two autobiographical accounts by former ESOL students who have now graduated from the University of Massachusetts, Boston. In chapter 6, Martha Muñoz, originally from Colombia, describes her experiences in some of the courses she took while completing an undergraduate degree in biology. Reflecting on courses in freshman studies, chemistry, literature, general biology, and immunology, she illustrates how some professors made her feel welcomed into the conversations of the classroom and the discipline and others effectively shut her out. In chapter 7, Motoko Kainose, a student from Japan who majored in sociology, analyzes her struggles to succeed in classes in a variety of disciplines taught by professors with differing pedagogical styles. For a course in classical sociological theory, for example, she explains how, in desperation, she used the same method of disciplined memorization she had used in learning the Japanese tea ceremony and achieved success in the form of two As on her final exam essays. Both Muñoz and Kainose use metaphoric language to help readers understand their varied experiences in U.S. college classes, and both clearly communicate that when professors tap the competencies and welcome the contributions of all students, the students’ chances for success are greatly enhanced. Part III, “Engaging Students in Learning: Through the Eyes of Faculty Across the Curriculum,” rounds out the previous sections by documenting the experiences of faculty from a variety of subject areas who have BOOK REVIEWS 829 worked to make their pedagogical approaches more favorable for multilingual learners. The authors of these chapters, Tim Sieber (anthropology), Stephen M. Fishman (philosophy) coauthored with classroom researcher Lucille McCarthy, Kristine Beyerman Alster (nursing), Rajini Srikanth (English), Estelle Disch (sociology), and Peter Nien-chu Kiang (Asian American studies), are reflective practitioners who have examined their pedagogy, sought help from experts in English and ESOL, and experimented with new teaching techniques, particularly the use of informal, reflective writing. As a result, as the editors point out in their preface, “they enhance the learning not only of multilingual learners but of all students in the classroom” (p. xii). Crossing the Curriculum conveys the rich potential of the L2 students in higher education today. Rather than advocating a deficit model of instruction, the essays in this volume emphasize the need to require serious work of multilingual learners in every course as students and teachers work together to construct meaning. The book does not oversimplify the challenges of this approach but instead acknowledges that both students and professors will continually need to develop new strategies to deal with the ongoing problems they face. It is true that this volume focuses primarily on success stories—ESOL students who have managed to succeed in mainstream courses and professors who have at least begun the process of transforming their pedagogy to make their courses more readily accessible to multilingual students. It would be good to see the other side of the story—students who failed or dropped out after leaving the ESOL class or professors who at first resisted change but eventually came to modify their teaching in ways that were beneficial to multilingual students. As its title suggests, this book reaches out to various audiences, crossing the curriculum in valuable ways. Each chapter offers an abundance of contextualized examples in the form of classroom experiences and quotations from students and instructors. Because the book views the education of multilingual learners through the eyes of researchers, professors, and, most importantly, the students themselves, it would be a useful resource to assign in graduate programs in TESOL. It is also ideal for use in professional development programs for faculty and administrators, preferably working in interdisciplinary groups. It is an important volume for all ESOL educators who want to understand the problems and possibilities students encounter as they move beyond the ESL classroom. REBECCA WILLIAMS MLYNARCZYK The Graduate Center and Kingsborough Community College of the City University of New York Brooklyn, New York, United States 830 TESOL QUARTERLY Postcolonial Identity of Sri Lankan English. Manique Gunesekera. Colombo, Sri Lanka: Katha, 2005. Pp. 300. 䡲 This is the first book-length work to provide a description of English as it is used by Sri Lankans. English is a language imposed by the colonisers of Sri Lanka but now appropriated by the country. Prior to this study, Sri Lankan English (SLE) has been the focus of only a few Sri Lankan linguists, mostly those in departments of English in Sri Lankan universities. It has not been the subject of detailed linguistic analysis, though several essays have linked English to sociopolitical issues in Sri Lanka. Manique Gunesekera’s book takes an important step in providing what she says is a “descriptive” study of this variety of English (p. 112). In the initial chapters, “Sri Lankan English,” “Elitist English,” “Mixing Languages,” and “Language of Governance,” the author gives an overview of the development and use of English in the country. Englishmedium education, code-mixing, and linguistic identity are explained in relation to English in Sri Lanka. English is the “the sword which divides society between the privileged and downtrodden” (p. 33). Education and class are the main culprits in “spawning” two varieties of SLE—standard and nonstandard. The second and fourth chapters present data from a questionnaire survey done in four major Sri Lankan cities: Colombo, Gampaha, Matara, and Jaffna. The results show that most speakers of English have a bias toward standard British English (SBE), though they do not speak it. In their presentation of the study results, these chapters reveal a limitation: Although 350 questionnaires were completed, the author does not break down the data by city, and instead of numerical values, the author uses percentages in the data analysis tables. For example, 69% of the persons in Matara identify as native speakers of English (p. 40). But without information on the total number of questionnaires from Matara, the given percentage is not useful and may even be illusory in making conclusions about native English speakers or SLE speakers. Almost in anticipation of these questions, the author does point out logistical impediments to obtaining completed questionnaires. The class differences brought to light by the data are traced to their historical roots in the third chapter, which gives an overview of language mixing from the 19th century. Government glossaries and fiction in English by Sri Lankan writers are used to show language change and solidarity of the upper class that learning English brought about. The fourth chapter is an analysis of the relationship between English and governance. The questionnaire survey reveals that English is still very much a part of the higher administrative echelons of the country. In the first part of the book, the author refers to the teaching of English in Sri Lanka and mentions the education system’s failure to make English accessible to the majority of Sri Lankans (p. 83). The BOOK REVIEWS 831 author says that although the politicians she interviewed uniformly agreed that the majority of Sri Lankans want to learn English, the majority Sinhalese political party “refuse[s] to make English a medium of instruction in schools” (p. 83), ostensibly because of a shortage of teachers but also for political reasons. Gunesekera posits that refusing to instate English medium instruction will make the minority communities feel more marginalized (p. 80) and produce a shortage of English teachers competent to teach the language (p. 83). In the first part of the book, the author describes the problems in the Sri Lankan education and political systems and the linguistic issues that the students face, but she does not take a stand on the question that this discussion raises: How will a country that has a dearth of qualified English teachers produce the large numbers of teachers necessary for a change in medium? The rest of the book is an analysis of the linguistic components of Sri Lankan English: “Phonology of SLE,” “SLE syntax,” “Morphological Processes” (of SLE), and “SLE Morphology.” The chapter on phonology sets forth the differences between SBE and SLE, also presenting phonological features of nonstandard SLE. SLE syntax, the author points out, is different from SBE in speech more than in writing, probably due to “the diglossia found in the languages of Sri Lanka” (p. 130). “The distinctive features [of SLE morphology] . . . lie in the expressive terminology, borrowed mainly from Sinhala and Tamil” (p. 141). “SLE Morphology” documents nearly 600 words used by SLE speakers. It is uncertain whether these words are borrowings into SLE (and thus a part of SLE), or whether they are examples of code-mixing by proficient bilinguals. This book is a significant step for the ESL community for many reasons. For those who feel that Sri Lankan English, or any other variety of English, is a corruption, this book provides well-researched evidence of linguistic variation. According to Gunesekera, the teaching community in Sri Lanka has resisted SLE (p. 52). The book provides a foundation for attitudinal changes in teaching and in syllabus design. It is also of practical value for teachers in understanding student errors, and for the wider audience, it is useful in making a distinction between grammatical correctness and variant forms of the language. In wider academic discourse, it is yet another study of variation in English, shedding light on language change. As the title indicates, The Postcolonial Identity of Sri Lankan English falls within the larger theme of language and identity in its discussion of sociopolitical issues related to English. Such studies of how extralinguistic features affect language learning and teaching is an important part of language research at present, especially in ESL and second language acquisition. KAUSHALYA PERERA University of Kelaniya Kelaniya, Sri Lanka 832 TESOL QUARTERLY A Practical Guide to Using Computers in Language Teaching. John de Szendeffy. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 2005. Pp. xv + 254. 䡲 In this solid and down-to-earth book, de Szendeffy addresses a problem he has repeatedly encountered in his professional life, the absence of a book he could “recommend to the hundreds of teachers, graduate students, and administrators . . . trying to solve the mystery of how to integrate computers into their language teaching curriculum” (p. xii). In straightforward language, he walks the reader through word processing, digital audio and video, slideware (i.e., PowerPoint), and browsers and web content, providing a pedagogical rationale for their instructional use. Often detailing each click in the process, he describes the steps for preparing and conducting familiar activities, such as cloze exercises and sentence scrambles, as well as undertaking projects involving desktop publishing, authoring Web pages, and producing video. de Szendeffy begins by arguing for computer-assisted language learning (CALL), differentiating the capacities of digital technologies from their analog, tape-based predecessors. He draws on the metaphor of technology as tool, emphasizing that good language instruction depends on instructors and their pedagogical skills. To that end, he assists them in identifying CALL-relevant knowledge they already possess and provides 10 guidelines for implementing the activities that he is about to describe. Part 2 comprises the majority of the book and addresses the technological aspects of a substantial list of CALL activities. Each chapter is organized around a specific type of software and includes screen shots and additional information to support less experienced users. Activities include a description of the technical skills required of the instructor, the level of student for whom the activity is appropriate, the content objectives, and the necessary software or hardware. The headings may be somewhat confusing, as de Szendeffy uses content to refer to an activity’s technological dimensions or content rather than as the word is used in content-based language curricula. However, the reader quickly adapts to this alternative usage. In Chapter 4, the author assists readers in developing advanced wordprocessing skills, explaining how to create and use templates; how to save documents in a variety of file formats; how to effectively use spelling, grammar check, and thesauri tools; and how to use comments and editing functions. These instructions are among the most detailed provided in the book and are written to be equally applicable to Mac or PC users. Logically, the pedagogical focus is writing, and the document management tips will be particularly useful to instructors juggling large numbers of students. Writing is also emphasized in Chapter 5, when de Szendeffy BOOK REVIEWS 833 moves on to the Internet. In this chapter, he provides organizational as well as technical directions for interactive writing tasks such as keypal projects, chats, and MOOs. The list of resources for setting up and managing keypals enables instructors with little experience to organize authentic writing exchanges with a wide variety of potential correspondents. Similar annotated lists of resources are provided for media sites, which are the second focus of this chapter. This set of activities is more limited but provides a helpful introduction to using the Internet for student research. Digital audio and video open up possibilities formerly available only to instructors with access to expensive language laboratories. Chapter 6 discusses locating, digitalizing, and integrating multimedia into mainstream language classrooms, outlining simplified steps for traditional dictation and comprehension activities before demonstrating how more complex tasks involving assembling, extending, and/or authoring multimedia texts might be organized. Chapter 7, the longest in this section, builds on the previous chapters to describe Internet-based and desktop publishing projects that support language learning. Perhaps because it attempts to integrate earlier material, this chapter is somewhat less coherent than the previous ones. Necessary technical information is sometimes presented out of sequence and is not always cross-referenced effectively, at times making it difficult to follow the flow of a proposed activity. For example, information about hosting websites and/or uploading to a server is not included with activities involving authoring Web pages, and activities involving WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) HTML editors fail to identify how to locate such tools, frustrating even moderately proficient users. However, such limitations are offset by thoughtful commentary on designing visual layouts for books, Web pages, and slides that ignores the bells and whistles proffered by presentation software to focus on effective communication. Chapters 8 and 9 are narrower in scope. Chapter 8 introduces using concordancers and search engines in vocabulary, grammar, and punctuation instruction. As with other resource lists provided throughout the book, the references for additional reading and software provide valuable information for instructional design. Guidelines in Chapter 9 address integrating packaged content and language skills software into a classroom course. The chapter also provides sources for authoring software should the reader wish to design tasks for independent student work. The final section of the book is written for those faced with purchasing computers or systems and supports the layperson in choosing between PC, Mac, or Linux systems. Most of the language learning activities will be familiar to experienced instructors of English as an additional language (EAL). In this familiarity lies the greatest disappointment with the book: For all its strengths, it 834 TESOL QUARTERLY lacks a certain imaginative appeal. Although computers bring efficiencies to the design and execution of the activities described, these activities do not draw on the unique strengths afforded by digital environments. The author does not introduce the potential of online visuals as rich sources of information on culturally embedded concepts and practices, of deepening student comprehension of abstract concepts through authoring or representing ideas through complementing texts and images, or of drawing on authentic audio of Englishes to expand students’ listening skills and to raise issues associated with pronunciation, accent, and the use of this not-so-singular language. This limitation leads to the book’s second major weakness, its obvious focus on an American readership. Although the section on media resources includes a small assortment of non-American texts, the critical possibilities of drawing on multiple English texts from a wide range of international sources remains largely unexamined. It is a singular view of culture, whether American or home country, that permeates suggested activities for interviews, field trips, and examination of consumer texts. English in this book is English, not Englishes, and the computers are used to reinforce rather than expand more traditional notions of language. That said, the title says this is a practical book and language institutions are likely to find it a useful addition to their shelves. For small groups of teachers looking to expand their practice and for individuals in language centers seeking to improve their use of the institution’s computer facilities, this book offers much to support their learning. With activities that easily integrate into an instructor’s established practice, it guides the beginning of an instructor’s work with computers. DIANE POTTS The University of British Columbia Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada BOOK REVIEWS 835 Mastering ESL and Bilingual Methods: Differentiated Instruction for Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CLD) Students. Socorro G. Herrera and Kevin G. Murry. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 2005. Pp. vii + 432. 䡲 This book aims to provide preK–12 educators with the opportunity to (re)discover the value, potential, and adventure of student diversity while becoming capable of addressing the incongruent learning and transition needs of culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) students (p. xiii). It proposes new approaches, the latest tools, outstanding stratBOOK REVIEWS 835 egies, and new ways of knowing to enhance educators’ overall effectiveness with CLD students, irrespective of their native language. Herrera and Murray seek to provide teachers with the pedagogical understanding, theoretical foundations, self-awareness, instructional tools, and necessary support for success in the ESL and bilingual classroom. In these endeavors, Herrera and Murry’s text is remarkably successful. This book is quite comprehensive, comprising 10 chapters that are organized into three parts, an appendix, a glossary, a reference list, and two indices. To use the text’s methods, educators must understand accommodative instruction. Part 1, “Hallmarks of Accommodative Instruction,” lays the groundwork and describes the foundations, theories, and needs for ESL and bilingual accommodative instruction methods. In laying this groundwork to facilitate understanding, Part 1 provides contextual information about CLD students through four dimensions of the CLD student biography: the sociocultural, cognitive, academic, and linguistic. At its heart, the biography is designed to elucidate the place of the CLD student in today’s English classroom. Part 2, “Accommodation Readiness,” among other things, describes the accommodation readiness spiral, a tool with which educators can preassess their own readiness for ESL instruction vis-à-vis their understanding of the CLD student biography introduced in Part 1. Ultimately, this section provides educators with a heuristic to ensure that they are prepared to enter the classroom. The readiness spiral is broken into six sequential levels of readiness which are “increasingly indicative of an educator’s capacity for effective praxis with CLD students” (p. 127). These six levels consist of readiness for (a) critical reflection on practice, (b) CLD students and families, (c) environmental factors, (d) curricular issues, (e) programming and instructional factors, and (f) application and advocacy. Part 3, “Professionalism in Practice,” recommends an approach to the instructional accommodation of CLD students, which consists of three elements—i.e., planning and grounding, implementation, and evaluation. These elements provide instructors with the tools necessary for preparing appropriate classroom practices. Further, the authors include an overview of relevant ESL theory, while tracing and outlining the approaches and subsequent methods through history. This section also supplies educators with guidelines for implementing three “contemporary and robust methods of effective instruction” (p.165)—integrated content-based, sheltered, and CALLA methods—in the ESL and bilingual classroom. Part 3 concludes by discussing techniques for evaluating prior instructional planning and implementation; as a measure of evaluative comparison, the authors use nationally recognized standards of best practice for educators of CLD students. In addition to its overall organization, Mastering ESL and Bilingual 836 TESOL QUARTERLY Methods is packed with instructional, practical, and thought-provoking features that make this text an even more useful pedagogical tool. Beyond typical textbook traits, Herrera and Murry include some supplementary pedagogical gems. One of the most useful is “Standards of Best Practice,” which aligns chapter content with nationally recognized standards. “Are You Aware?”, interspersed throughout each chapter, provides additional information, alternative perspectives, and relevant examples to round out the chapter material. Another feature, “Theory into Practice,” is a well-formed tool which succinctly summarizes theory that is relevant to a particular section or chapter and then asks theory-related questions that teachers might use to reflect on their own practice; this is an invaluable element for ensuring that instructional methods have a strong theoretical underpinning. “Voices from the Field,” a section dedicated to giving a voice to professionals actively involved with CLD students, provides readers with poignant and personal anecdotes aimed at providing teachers with further classroom strategies. Taken together, these features accentuate the already solid foundation of this instructional resource. Yet another of this text’s strengths is its ability to make the content immediately relevant to working teachers through the “Critical Standards: Guiding Chapter Content” introduction box. This feature offers a variety of stakeholders a clear and usable tool for aligning the content of each chapter with national standards for CLD students, including TESOL Standards for P–12 Teacher Education Programs (Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, 2001), Guiding Principles for Best Practice (CEEE, 1996), and CREDE’s Pedagogy Matters: Standards for Effective Teaching Practice (Dalton, 1998). “Critical Standards” provides a matter-of-fact heuristic for modern-day educators who are concerned with providing students the best opportunity to satisfy requisite national standards. As a whole, Herrera and Murray’s book has, at least, one main attribute that allows it to stand out from the pack. As compared with other popular, contemporary ESL and bilingual texts—e.g., Pérez and TorresGuzmén (2001) and Peregoy and Boyle (2001)—Mastering ESL and Bilingual Methods contains an extremely strong, yet accessible theoretical foundation. Its historical synthesis, explication, discussion, and application span the range of the field from such theorists as Palmer and Palmer (1925) to Vygotsky (1978), through Cummins (2001). Their treatment illustrates the text’s (authors’) awareness of the field and the evolutions it has undergone. Further, it recognizes that theory has come to take classroom practice, the student, and the teacher into consideration. Ultimately, Herrera and Murry deftly introduce theoretical principles to the preK–12 educator and give them tools, strategies, and suggestions for implementing them in their language classrooms. If Mastering ESL and Bilingual Methods has any weaknesses, they would BOOK REVIEWS 837 be in its comprehensiveness. This 432-page text requires serious dedication from educators hoping to make use of all of its features. In order to successfully address the CLD student in the language classroom, educators need to become aware, assess their readiness, and then plan, ground, implement, and evaluate their instructional practice. This process could consume a vast amount of time of the characteristically overloaded ESL and bilingual teacher. In the end, Herrera and Murry have effectively compiled an invaluable resource for ESL and bilingual educators. Although it mandates a considerable investment, its scope and sequence, along with its supplemental features make this book a must own for anyone interested in ESL and bilingual praxis. REFERENCES Center for Equity and Excellence in Education. (1996). Promoting excellence: Ensuring academic success for limited English proficient students. Arlington, VA: Author. Cummins, J. (2001). Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters. Dalton, S.S. (1998). Pedagogy matters: Standards for effective teaching practice. (CREDE Research Reports, No. 4). Berkeley, CA: University of California, Center for Research on Education, Diversity & Excellence. Available from http:// repositories.cdlib.org/crede/rsrchrpts/rr04. Palmer, H. E., & Palmer, D. (1925). English through actions. London: Longman Green. Peregoy, S. F., & Boyle, O. F. (2001). Reading, writing, & learning in ESL: A resource for K-12 teachers. New York: Pearson and Longman. Pérez, B., & Torres-Guzmén, M. E. (2001). Learning in two worlds: An integrated Spanish/English biliteracy approach. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. (2001). TESOL ESL standards for P-12 teacher education programs. Retrieved February 18, 2003, from www.tesol.org/ pdfs/aboutassoc/ncatestds.pdf. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. JOHN M. SPARTZ Purdue University West Lafayette, Indiana, United States 838 TESOL QUARTERLY