Native and Nonnative Teachers of English - Essay Example

Native and Nonnative Teachers of English Student Name Instructor Name Course Code and Name University Date of Submission Native and Nonnative Teachers of English Introduction Nonnative teachers of English are common all over the world with their place being one of the most long standing controversy in the teaching of the English Language. Since the teaching of English went global, there has been increased scrutiny about the native teacher vs. the non-native teachers and whether one is more effective than the other. There is a general assumption that native speakers are stereotypically the best person to teach his/her language. This leaves little to no chance for non-native teachers to showcase their abilities (Llurda 2004, p. 314-323). Even though most English language teachers in the world are non-native, research into the topic has been minimal with most of it being conducted lately. English is, without a doubt, one of the languages that have undergone the most modifications in perceptions all over the world. The more global the world becomes, the more English spreads and the greater there is a need to learn the language (Kilpatrick 2008, p. 44-57). Most of the world today, is an arena dedicated to multilingualism highlighting issues such as preserving the variety and wealth of different languages and cultures in the world. Culture is directly linked to language and with the recent trends of globalization; a language like English is instrumental in transmitting different cultures, including those that are not traditionally linked to the English language. Consequently, instructors have one of the most important roles to play in teaching English (Medgyes 2000, p. 429-442). The nature of the world currently demands that, individuals with transnational elements in their life, such as studying abroad or working in different countries use English as the main medium of communication. This has in turn prompted criticism that English is being spread all over the world at the cost of other languages and it has, therefore, come to be referred to as a killer language. Educators have also had to deal with the fact that there are more people now speaking English as an L2 (Kilpatrick 2008, p. 44-57). Accordingly, English is no longer in the exclusive ownership of communities speaking the language and its ownership has evolved to include communities of non-native speakers, as well. The consequences of embracing this fact are still being witnessed with one of the most affected areas being in language testing and teaching. Another indicator of the rising interest into native and non-native teaching of English is the frequent use of the term World English. Researchers, such as Jenkins have explored the idea of ‘World Englishes’ where she suggests that English as a lingua Franca and World Englishes are separated by the geographical manifestation of the two (2006, p. 157-181). She makes the distinction that English as a lingua Franca (ELFs) is not the same as English as a native language (ENL) or English as a foreign language (EFL) (Jenkins 2013, p. 484-494). This paper will explore the idea of global English with a focus on non-native and native teachers of English. The different concerns of this recent discourse will be explored, and their effects on the classroom setting will be highlighted, as well. In addition, possible approaches to the issue will be highlighted, as well. Body Theoretical framework The behavioural difference between native and non-native teachers is dependent on the different identities that the two groups of teachers develop. Language development and acquisition are also instrumental in forming identities. For that reason, the theoretical perspective in this paper will look at identity as it affects the nature of English language teaching by both native and non-native teachers; from a sociolinguistic perspective, people’s languages are a result of who they already are (Pennycook 2004, p. 13). When approached from a sociocultural perspective, identity is understood as a concept that is multiply situated, contextually negotiated, dialogic, and dynamic (Pennycook 2004, p. 1-19). According to the sociocultural perspective, identity is neither predetermined nor fixed, but rather constructed within social contexts (Pennycook 2004, p. 6-7). The identity itself emerges in a dialogic struggle between the learner and the community. This is particularly relevant in the case of native and non-native teachers since the designations indicate that individual identities should be perceived in the light of what is negotiated and constructed within social contexts, and not just because of their birth nations, self-affiliations and backgrounds (Pennycook 2004, p. 1–19). The fact that identity is negotiated also implies that, identity is not rigid but fluid, and it evolves around space and time. For instance, an individual may be born in the United States, but move to another country at the age of 10. This means that the process of negotiation will begin again because they are in a different social-cultural context. In performativity, identities are not predetermined or pre given to individuals but are rather developed based on the linguistic performance of the individual (Pennycook 2004, p. 8). The over-determined nature of fixation with linguistic activities is rooted in colonialism. Identity is, therefore, more than just a single trajectory of events, but a nexus of multifaceted events. Consequently, people will experience different identities in different contexts, and in the case of teachers, their identities continue to develop in classrooms as they interact with different types of students. Major concerns Like with any popular discourse in research, one of the major concerns is the semantics used in describing the major elements of the discourse. The term native English-speaking teacher (NEST) and non-native English speaking teacher (non-NEST) have been perceived as controversial phrases that are politically incorrect, and users should expect accusations of using discriminatory language. Even though this is a concern, the terms have persisted and are in use by researchers, teachers, and students alike. This is because most students, as well as their teachers, are either from native English speaking or non-native English speaking countries and are themselves either native or non-native speakers of English. Even with polygot or bilingual individuals, there are dominant features of belonging present in them (Medgyes 2000, p. 429-442).. Hence, even though the terms used in the dichotomy have shortcomings, they should be subjected to further scrutiny rather than being overlooked, rejected, or blurred. This paper will use the term native teacher and non-native teachers for the purpose of distinguishing between teacher who are native English speakers and teachers who are non-native speakers of English, respectively. Teaching English as an L2 is not just complicated for the teacher who develops the curriculum, but also the form the language takes when it is received by the students. As people from different backgrounds meet in a classroom and learn English, they also develop their own form of English which Jenkins (2013, p. 484-494) calls ELF. Students learning English use ELF in a different and unique manner, and it does not affect their use of EFL or ENL. In order to teach these students effectively, it is important that the instructor understands their use of ELF. The major concern here is whether a native teacher or a non-native will be in the best position to relate to the students using the ELF (Medgyes 2000, p. 429-442).. There are other important attributes such as experience, teaching qualifications and professional skills that determine the effectiveness of a teacher outside of whether they are native or non-native teachers. Definitions Definitions of native and non-native speakers vary depending on the perspective used to understand them. From a linguistic perspective, native speakers are those who traditionally speak English as their L1 or mother tongue. The challenge that arises with this definition is deciding on what determines one’s ‘native speakershood’. The most popular and straightforward criteria is birth. However, people can be born in one country, then move to one that has a different national language (Canagarajah 1999, p. 77-92). More complications are brought about when considering children from mixed marriages with both parents speaking to them in their respective languages. For instance, a child may be half Irish and half Italian and living in the United States. Can the child still be seen as a native speaker of English? This difficulty is also witnessed when describing which countries should be called English speaking and which ones are not. Kachru (1986) describes three concentric circles that can be used to describe the nature of English speaking in different nations. The inner circle is a constituent of nations that are using English as the primary language while the outer circle are nations that have been historically affected by the spread of English, such as the case in the colonies. These settings have English as the L2. The third is the expanding circle, which consists of nations that have accepted the importance of English in the world and are teaching it as a foreign language. The educational perspective embraces the idea of the world, having changed to such an extent that native speakers of English no longer exist. Consequently, it should be dropped from the professional comprehension of English and instead be replaced by concepts such as more or less accomplished and proficient English users (Canagarajah 1999, p. 77-92). This will also include bilingual, expert speakers and novice speakers (Kilpatrick 2008, p. 44-57). In this case, an English speaker will then be judged according to their mastery of the language in different aspects. However, this perspective is also plagued by different challenges, including whether it is realistic to expect a learner of English as a second language to achieve full mastery of the language, including its cultural allusions and subtleties (Llurda 2004, p. 314-323). This gives rise to further questions, including the criteria that should be used to declare whether an individual has achieved native proficiency. Indeed, there are individuals born in English speaking nations who have spoken it since birth, but still have problems in terms of achieving grammatical proficiency (Canagarajah 1999, p. 77-92). The definition of native speakers is tied to that of a non-native speaker. No one definition of the native speaker has been agreed upon by all researchers. This paper will adopt the definition that native teachers are instructors of the English language who are native speakers of English in that they were born in an inner circle English speaking country. By this definition, non-native teachers are instructors of the English language who were not born in an inner circle English speaking country. Pros and cons As mentioned before, establishing that one is a native speaker is a complex and multifaceted concept. It includes considering education, birth the environment an individual was exposed to, levels of proficiency, self-identification, cultural affiliation, self-confidence, political allegiance and the sequence that language is learned (Faez 2012, 231-249). A non-native teacher does not only speak as an L2; they also work within an EFL environment, has monolingual learner groups, and they speak the same language as their students (Medgyes 2000, p. 429-442). Evidence shows that students perceive behavioural differences between native and non-native teachers (Medgyes 2000, p. 429-442). Discrepancies in language proficiency was cited as accounting for most of the differences in teaching behaviour. In explaining the differences in teaching behaviour, there are both positive and negative differences that manifest. Nonnative teachers were found to be preoccupied with being accurate and maintaining the formal features of the language. They work harder at sustaining the bolts and nits of grammar, formal registers, and the printed word. Additionally, non-native teachers also lack in fluency and also have limited insight about the micro intricacies of meaning (Faez 2012, p. 231-249). Owing to the lack of complete proficiency in the English language, non-native teachers will also doubt whether they have used the language appropriately. In this context, the term complete proficiency refers to knowledge of the English language within its traditional context of manifestation. Because of the preoccupation, they also have poor listening skills and are often unfamiliar with colloquial English. Logical deduction results in the conclusion that non-native teachers will place greater emphasis upon language elements that they have a better comprehension of (Faez 2012, p. 231-249). As a result, having a restricted understanding of context will result in their teaching unfamiliar language elements to their students. Examples that they use are likely to be isolated and without contextual considerations. Owing to their preoccupation with difficulties in language, they may be reluctant in loosening their grip on the lessons and the class. Rather than the language manifesting naturally, it will seem more scripted and bookish in nature. Given the fact that a non-native teacher has linguistic inferiority, they will need to possess certain qualities that will give them a competitive edge (Faez 2012, p. 231-249). For instance, in language acquisition, bilingual children have an additional advantage of developing an executive function to deal with the two languages, as opposed to monolingual children who will not develop this functioning because there is no need to. Similarly, non-native teachers will develop particular qualities that enable them to have a competitive edge and be effective instructors. Since non-native speakers will relate more to non-native students, they will be in a better position to develop and better leaner model. In addition, they will be more effective in teaching strategies of language learning. They will also give their students more information about English and be better and anticipating challenge sand difficulties in language and develop better strategies to prevent these challenges and difficulties. They will pay more attention in class and, therefore, be more sensitive to students (Llurda 2004, p. 314-323). These teachers will also benefit from the skill of being familiar with the student’s mother tongue. This knowledge will allow them to understand the errors and challenges specific to the student better. For instance, if the students keep writing words with ‘W’ as ‘V’ (instead of wind it’s vind), the instructor who is from Germany will understand the nature of the problem. Native teachers, on the other hand, will have an opposite experience during their instruction. They speak better English and rather than using scripted or book language, they will use real language with greater confidence. They will also employ more flexible approaches in teaching, be more innovative and have less empathy for mistakes made by students. Being more familiar with the language, they will also be able to perceive problems and needs. They also focus on using free to instruct students rather than using controlled methods of instructing. They also take more risks in terms of using more material for instruction, as opposed to only using the material that has been suggested by the curriculum. Language teachers have two models that teachers can use in instruction, including the learner and language models. Nonnative teachers will develop more effective learner models while native teachers will develop better language models. Nonnative teachers have more insight in instruction of the language. This is because of the differences in language acquisition for the two (Llurda 2004, p. 314-323). Native teachers are often unaware of their acquisition, and they will, therefore, not understand the internal mechanisms that control and direct language. Nonnative teachers are not likely to give their students' information on the strategies to use in language acquisition. On the other hand, native speakers are less aware of the mechanisms of language acquisition and are less likely to give their students' information on strategies of language acquisition. While both teachers will use the methods (standard teaching guidelines that have been developed) to teach their students, they will have different methodologies (unique teaching style developed by the teacher) of instruction, which are informed by their experiences (Faez 2012, p. 231-249). These experiences inform learning differently. While the native teacher focuses on what is right and what is wrong in using the particular language, the non-native teacher will focus on the harder and easier elements that can be learned in English. Future direction Since it has been established that native and non-native teachers have differing teaching behaviour, the next logical step is to determine where research and pedagogy should head from there. The reality is that the global world has ensured that there cannot be just native teachers or just nonnative teachers in most academic institutions. Teaching English,today,is evolving, and there is a need to identify instances where the native and non-native teacher can complement each other. If the most effective method of doing so is to be identified, it is essential to identify the qualities that make each of the teacher groups most efficient in instruction. The ideal non-native teacher is one who has achieved a near native proficiency in the English language (Llurda 2004, p. 314-323). Excellent command of English is one of the most essential selection criteria employed when looking for teachers of the English language. While this has been stressed many times in literature, it is more important to ensure that teacher training includes strategies to make them proficient in English. This same proficiency is also among the most effective predictors of the professional success of a non-native teacher. The single most critical professional duty that a non-native teacher should have is to improve their proficiency in English. This brings up another question, which is whether L1 and L2 learners are best taught by native or non-native teachers. On one hand, it would be best for the L2 learner to be taught by a non-native teacher who will have knowledge on how to deal with problems that are uniquely specified for L2 learners (Faez 2012, p. 231-249). On the other hand, they may need a native teacher because they will help the learner develop a contextual and cultural comprehension of English. In contrast, the success of a native teacher rests on the extent to which they can achieve the distinguishing features of non-native teachers (Liu 2008, p. 103–118). Hence, they also need to achieve a particular degree of proficiency in their students’ native language or languages. A multi-competent and multilingual teacher is more capable than one who is not. The multi-competency also includes the ability to relate to the contextual and cultural elements of one’s students. This means going to the extent of learning about a different culture. Conclusion Differences in teaching behaviour between native and non-native teachers of English have been discussed drawing on evidence from case studies with experiential evidence, as well as empirical evidence. A greater percentage of the archetypal deviations witnessed between the two groups can be attributed to the diverse language backgrounds that they have. This is not similar to suggesting that a higher level of proficiency in English language is a guarantee to one becoming a successful teacher. Evidence suggests that despite their ‘linguistic impediment’ non-native teachers have an equal chance of becoming successful teachers, and this can be improved significantly by greater teaching experience (Liu 2008, p. 103–118). In addition, there are complex mechanisms involved in developing effective teaching strategies, most of which have nothing to do with proficiency in English language. In addition, proficiency in the language can now be acquired by most individuals with access to good academic institutions and reading material. However, native speakers of English have an added advantage as teachers when it comes to understanding the context of the curriculum. In countries that are yet to establish English instruction definitively, instructional material may be understood by native teachers than non-native ones owing to contextual differences. On the other hand, a non-native teacher with similar contextual elements as the student will be in a better position to help them understand. The ideal English teacher in both the native and non-native aspect is one who has achieved proficiency in the English language and who keeps improving. On top of this skill, they should also possess other skills that constitute an effective instructor, such as good communication skills and social, cultural, and pedagogic appropriacy. Both teacher groups serve useful purposes in their own way. It cannot be said that one is more important than the other within a learning context because they meet the needs of the students in one way, or another. Consequently, in an ideal academic institution, there should be a balance between native and non-native teachers who will serve as complements to each other in weaknesses and strengths (Carless 2006, p. 328-335). Where one is weak, another will be strong, and most importantly, they will learn from each other improving their skills and proficiencies. Given a favourable mixing of the two, various collaboration forms are possible, and learners will only gain from these. List of References Canagarajah, AS 1999, 'Interrogating the "native speaker' fallacy": nonlinguistic roots, non-pedagogical results', in G Braine (ed), Non-native educators in English language teaching, Lawrence Erlbauffi, Mahwah, NJ. pp. 77-92. Carless, D 2006, Collaborative EFL teaching in primary school, ELT Journal, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 328-335 Faez, F 2012, “Reconceptualizing the Native/Nonnative Speaker Dichotomy,” Journal of Language, Identity & Education, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 231-249. Jenkins, J 2006, “Current perspectives on teaching World Englishes and English as a lingua franca,” TESOL quarterly, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 157-181. Jenkins, J 2013, “English as a lingua franca from the classroom to the classroom,” ELT journal, vol. 66, no. 4, pp. 484-494. Kachru, BB 1986, The alchemy of English: The spread, functions and models of nonnative Englishes, Pergamon, Oxford, England. Kilpatrick, A 2008, “Language variation and the multilingual speaker of English: Implications for English language teaching,” The new English teacher, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 44-57. Liu, L 2008, Co-teaching between native and non-native English teachers: An exploration of co-teaching models and strategies in the Chinese primary school context, Reflections on English Language Teaching, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 103–118 Llurda, E 2004, “Non-native-speaker teachers and English as an International language,” International journal of applied linguistics, vol. 14, no. 3. pp. 314-323. Medgyes, P 2000, When the teacher is a Non-native speaker, Unit V: Skills for Teachers, pp. 429-442 Pennycook, A 2004, “Performativity and language studies,” Critical Inquiry in Language Studies: An International Journal, vol. 1, no.1, pp. 1–19. Read More