The blog has moved! The new blog can be found by clicking on this link: http://nnesintesol.blogspot.com Keiko Samimy

Celebrating the 10th Anniversary of the NNEST Caucus

The NNEST Caucus Member

of the Month

July 2008

samimy [dot] 2 [at] osu [dot] edu

Ana Wu: Could you tell us your linguistic and professional background, and why you decided to become an educator?

Prof. Samimy: I was born in a small town in the northern part of Japan. For some reason, I always knew that I would become a teacher in some capacity. When I was in middle school, I joined girl scouts just out of curiosity. One day, we had a get-together with American girl scouts whose fathers were stationed at the American air base near my home town. Through this meeting, I became acquainted with an American girl who was kind enough to invite me to her home. Although my English was quite limited, this experience was so positive that I decided to become an English teacher then. In addition, when I was learning English in middle school, my teachers heavily relied upon either grammar translation or the audio-lingual method, and as far as I could tell, they did not speak English. Even as a student, I thought that it was fraudulent that my English teachers could not use English as a tool for communication. Later in college, I received a scholarship from the Rotary International Club to come to America to study English. Although my initial plan was to stay here only for one year, I ended up completing my B.A., MEd, and Ph.D. degrees in America.
My B.A. is in English from Clarke College. I enjoyed studying American and British literature with professors who were mainly Catholic nuns. Since I went to a Catholic school in Japan, it was a comfortable environment for me to study in. When I was completing my B.A. at Clarke, I met Dr. Charles A. Curran who was a clinical psychologist at Loyola in Chicago. As some of you might recall, he was well-known for his language teaching approach, Community Language Learning (CLL) in the 70’s. He was looking for a research assistant who could teach him and his research group a less commonly taught language and assist him with his research projects. Since my first language was Japanese and I was very enthusiastic about his research, I was hired right away. I spent the next four years working for Dr. Curran at Loyola. As a clinical psychologist, he had many interesting insights into human learning. Based on Rogerian counseling or client-centered therapy, Dr. Curran developed the notion of whole-person learning which later was applied to subjects such as foreign languages, mathematics, and statistics, which were perceived to be anxiety provoking to some learners. Through my apprenticeship with Dr. Curran, I became an expert in CLL and have been applying the key principles in my teaching ever since. Due to the unexpected death of Dr. Curran, I moved to Urbana-Champaign, to pursue my Ph.D. in foreign and second language education at the University of Illinois, where I met wonderful scholars such as Professors Douglas Brown, Sandra Savignon, Braji Kachru, and Lyle Bachman. During my stay at U of I., I became interested in teaching Japanese as a foreign language, and was hired as a graduate teaching assistant. Here, I employed many strategies and insights that I had learned from Dr. Curran. Upon the completion of my Ph.D., I was hired as a lecturer to teach Japanese at the University of California at San Diego, and a few years later, I began my career as an assistant professor in foreign and second language education at The Ohio State University.



Ana Wu: You have published extensively about non-native speakers and World Englishes issues, including the very cited article "Revisiting the colonial in the postcolonial: Critical praxis for nonnative-speaking teachers in a TESOL Program," with Prof. Brutt-Griffler (TESOL Quarterly 33(3), 413-31, 1999). As an expert, what is your definition of a native speaker? What do you think speakers will be called in the future?
Prof. Samimy: First of all, I don’t feel that I am qualified to be called an expert in this area, but the issues related to nonnative speakers and the related research have a personal significance to me. The more I study this topic, the more I realize the complexity of the issue that we are faced with. I become frustrated when I learn how deep seated discrimination is against nonnative speakers of English or accented English, both in the U.S. and abroad. Every year, at OSU, our program graduates 20 or so MA students and perhaps 5-6 Ph.D. students who are mostly international students. Yet we often hear from our graduates that it is hard to compete with the native speakers in the job market, either in ESL or EFL contexts, due to linguistic or racial discrimination. In some Asian countries, I noticed that job advertisements clearly state that being a native speaker is a top priority regardless of qualifications.
What is my definition of a native speaker or a nonnative speaker? What should we (NNES) call ourselves in the future? These are very tough questions to answer. Scholars in our field have written books and articles on this topic but I don’t think we have reached a consensus yet with regard to what constitutes a native speaker or a non-native speaker. Until recently, I thought that Cook’s (1999) term, “multi-competent language users” was a good alternative to avoid the binary distinction between native and nonnative speakers and thus allows identity options for NNESs. But calling ourselves “multi-competent language users” may diffuse or cover up some of the issues related to us, and furthermore, it might deprive some potential opportunities for us to openly discuss them. I believe that in order for us to empower each other, we need to look at the truths and realities surrounding us, even if it may be very painful. Only then, can we begin to talk about possible solutions. So, as Paul Matsuda eloquently argued in his article, “Proud to be a Nonnative English Speaker”, TESOL Matters, 2003), I think we should continue to call ourselves nonnative speakers until the term becomes anachronistic or obsolete.

Ana Wu: You were one of the former leaders of the NNEST Caucus. As someone who has witnessed its growth and international projection, what else do you think the caucus can do to address the voices of international English teachers? How do you think the caucus could empower the nonnative professionals?
Prof. Samimy: We have made quantum leaps with regard to making ourselves visible and our voices heard in the TESOL community. Yet as I mentioned before, the “native speaker superiority” myth among both native and non-native speaking TESOL professionals is still deep-seated. In order to counter this, we need to begin our efforts from the pre-service ESL/EFL teacher education program. One of the effective strategies may be to require all the TESOL programs both in ESL and EFL contexts to include readings on NNES professionals. Since at OSU NNES issues are regularly addressed in our courses, it surprises me when I learn that some of our new Ph.D. students have never heard about debates on NNES professionals. As the number of NNES professionals surpasses its native speaking counterparts, it is not unreasonable to mandate that all TESOL programs include some readings related to NNES.
Research on mentoring has consistently revealed a positive impact on both mentor and mentees. Graduate students who received professional and psycho-social support from their mentors seem to achieve excellence in their future professions. I believe that providing a strong mentoring relationship is a great way of empowering NNES professionals for both pre-service and in-service teachers. In 2007 TESOL, for example, the NNES Caucus organized a panel which focused on mentoring issues related to NNES professionals. We need to continue to keep this dialogue going through our research and conference presentations to establish a strong network among ourselves.


Ana Wu: In 2007, the NNEST Caucus will celebrate its 10th anniversary. In terms of non-native speakers and World Englishes issues, what topics do you think need further research? What topics (if any) can NNES professionals best contribute using their background as a resource?
Prof.Samimy: I think George Braine has mentioned in his earlier interview with you the lack of English competency among NNES teachers. I, too, believe that improving NNES professionals’ language proficiency, particularly their oral proficiency, is an important topic for us to pursue. We need to learn and document personal histories of NNES professionals who have achieved excellent “academic” oral proficiency, as researchers (e.g. Casanave & Vandrick, 2003; Casanave & Li, 2008) have done with NNES graduate students and professionals with regards to their literacy practices and scholarly publication. In addition, in order to explore this further, we should offer a seminar which focuses on academic oral proficiency. In fact, at OSU I have offered a graduate seminar which focused on NNES’ oral proficiency in the past two years. Traditionally, issues related to NNES graduate students have been mainly under the purview or jurisdiction of ESL programs. However, in 2006 and 2007, I offered the Oral Proficiency seminar in collaboration with the Spoken English Program and the Teaching Center on campus. We designed a syllabus, making sure to integrate both theoretical and practical aspects of English oral communication for NNES graduate students including ITAs. In the seminar, the students were required to do a mock teaching and a conference presentation, and received peer feedback as well as feedback from faculty members. To summarize, as we shift our focus from “native principle” to “intelligibility principle” (Levis, 2005), NNES can become excellent role models for educating future English teachers across the world. Much research is needed in this area.
Similarly, with an increasing interest in World Englishes, English as an International Language, we need to re-examine the definition of communicative competence. The oft-cited definitions of communicative competence by Hymes (1967; 1972) or Canale and Swain (1980) may no longer be appropriate for learners of English as an International Language. And as we re-define the construct of communicative competence, we will need to re-examine the pedagogical models that are based on it. Other research topics that deserve our attention are: “NNES’ willingness or unwillingness to communicate”, and “NNES teachers’ Communicative Competence vs. Communicative Confidence,” just to name a few.

Ana Wu: Besides being a respectful researcher, you developed one of the first courses in NNEST issues at a North American university. Would you share any vivid memories (positive or negative) from this experience? Is this course still offered?
Prof. Samimy: I feel very fortunate that my colleagues at Ohio State have been very supportive of my offering the seminar for NNES professionals. It is one of the elective courses for both MA and PhD students in our program. Since it was first offered in 1997, I have been offering it every other year or whenever it is possible. One of the nice things that came out of the seminar is that we have created a wonderful community of NNES professionals who have become deeply aware of their sense of being an agent of change vis-à-vis TESOL professional communities. It is wonderful to see that some of these students who took the seminar are now becoming the leaders of TESOL organizations nationally or internationally. I do hope that these leaders will invest their time and energy in mentoring newcomers.
Perhaps one of the most memorable experiences was having the only native speaker in the NNES graduate seminar in 2002 (see TESOL Quarterly (2008), 42 (1), pp. 123-132). From this experience, I learned the importance of creating opportunities for both native and non-native speakers to experience ideological and identity conflict through which they can recognize each other as legitimate members of TESOL professional communities.

Ana Wu: Thank you for this inspiring interview!

Karen L. Newman

Celebrating the 10th Anniversary of the NNEST Caucus

The NNEST Caucus Member

of the Month

June 2008

newman [dot] 301 [at] osu [dot]

Here are my questions to Prof. Newman:
1. Could you tell us your linguistic and professional background, and why you decided to be an educator?

2. You grew up in Trinidad, Morocco, Germany, and California, and holds an M.A. in Germanic Studies. As a native speaker of English, what made you be interested in NNEST issues? Why did you join the NNEST Caucus? What insights have you gained from this experience?

3. As an expert in nonnative English speaking teachers in K-12 education and language teacher professional development, what do you think of the NS-NNS dichotomy?

4. You were the NNEST Caucus Chair in 2006-2007. In 2008, the Caucus celebrates its 10th anniversary. What would you like to see its members do or initiate? What other areas of NNEST issues do you think need further investigation?

5. You have extensively written about collaborative approaches and mentoring practices. In a NNEST-NEST collaborative model, what can both parties gain from this peer collaboration?

*****************

Nonnative Speaker and TEFL Carpetbagger:
A Not-so-short Story of How I Became an NNEST, in Three Acts

Karen L. Newman

Stories are a powerful part of our identities as teachers, and each of us, particularly in the NNEST Caucus, has a very personal story about what brought us to the field of English language teaching, and why we are so committed to advancing research and advocacy for nonnative-speaker teachers. My story of starts with my childhood in North Africa, where I grew up as the child of English-speaking parents, and where I was surrounded by diverse languages and cultures from a very early age. Subsequent moves to Germany and to the U.S. forced me to adjust to radically different languages and cultures, and set the path for my future career as a language teacher. But my story of becoming a language teacher is one that has been, at times, very painful, as I came to personally experience and witness acts of discrimination towards professionals in foreign and second language education. Here, I share my story of my developing professional identity as a language teacher and advocate, one that has spanned almost 20 years in the profession.

Act One: Facing the prospect of the summer unemployment that’s a perennial part of teaching, I’m relieved when I receive an invitation to interview for a position in a high school German immersion program that’s partnering with the university where I work as a teaching assistant for undergraduate German. Although it’s been almost two decades now since that muggy May day of my interview, I vividly remember walking to the building, sitting in the waiting area, and being introduced to the program director, who is about to interview me. I’m wearing my special “interview suit”, the one that I’d saved up from my meager TA salary to buy for the occasion, and some high heels that made me look taller than I am, and that were pinching my toes. With the can-do attitude of my then-youthful self, I shake the director’s hand, feeling completely confident that this is one job that’s “in the bag”. After all, I’d spent many years working hard to achieve a high degree of spoken and written proficiency in this complex language that has 16 permutations of the definite article, and I’d gotten decent teaching evaluations from my most recent second-year German students. I’d also gotten a number of awards for my undergraduate studies in German and my language proficiency, and many native speakers told me that they’d never met an American whose German skills were as strong as mine.

As I ease into the director’s wooden office chair and we begin to chat, I share my interest in the position, and launch into my rehearsed spiel about my background and qualifications. Barely do I say a few words before I sense that something is “off” in the room. The director is looking oddly at me, and the thought occurs to me that, like a bad date, this interview might be slipping south in a hurry. Well, let’s see how it progresses, I muse, as it’s not over yet. The director leans forward, cocking her head toward me, and her eyes narrow to small, bird-like slits, as if she’s scrutinizing something on me that was out of place. Was my makeup wilting in the heat, I wonder, or worse yet, was a remnant of my recent lunch still stuck between my teeth? I knew I should have visited the ladies’ room for one last check before this interview!

I continue to plod through my script, imagining that I must have forgotten to take the price tag off my suit, or that some other wardrobe malfunction is befalling me. But before I can wonder any further about the director’s perturbation, she puts up a hand to interrupt me, and lobs a question at me for which I don’t have a pat, prepared answer: “So… are you a native speaker, then?” Uh-oh, I think. Now what? Let’s see, deflect away from my weaknesses and accentuate my strengths, that’s what the book of interview tips told me to do, right? And boy, do I really need this job, but I’ll be found out if I bluff it at this interview, so, o.k. then, I guess I’d better tell the truth. Here it comes: “Well, n-no,” I stammer, “but I do have lots of experience with…” “Well, then, thank you very much for coming, but we’re not interested,” she says, flashing me a momentary faux-smile. “We only hire native speakers in this program. That’s what the paying parents and students expect, and that’s what we offer. Good-day!”

She bolts up from her desk, and motions me toward the door, as if she’d just discovered that I’d committed some bizarre act, like the man I’d read about in the campus newspaper who’d been found crawling on the carpet under the library carrels, sniffing unsuspecting women’s feet. I continue to sit in the chair with my mouth open, but the words just aren’t coming out, and the bell isn’t yet ringing. What have I done wrong? Oh, I get it now, I’m getting the hook! This interview’s over, Karen, time to get up and leave.

I mutter some sort of apology and a half-hearted “thank you”, but thank you for what, and why was I apologizing, I asked myself, as I feel the words slip out. Am I not an example of what students might hope to achieve in their language study? I stagger my way out of the building, lingering in front of it for a few minutes as my anger slowly rises, and I debate whether I shouldn’t turn around, go back inside, and insist that the director take a closer look at my resume. Or maybe I should take the matter up with the administration, I think, because supposedly, they have these anti-discrimination rules here at the university. But wait, there’s nothing on the books about language, is there? And what if it costs me my future, and ruins my chances of finishing my degree? What if I gain the reputation as a troublemaker? I have no ammunition or words. In the end, I do nothing, but I do take off my heels and walk home barefoot, in tears, occasionally checking over my shoulder to assure myself that the campus foot-sniffer isn’t following me. In my naïvete, I lack an understanding of what has just happened, but know that it was horribly unfair, because the door was already closed before I stepped through it. I’m not a native German speaker and never will be, no matter how many awards they hang on me, or how many compliments I get. Maybe it’s time for another job. I spend that summer filing papers for $3.35 an hour at a local bank, and within a few months of my degree, I become a secretary, tutoring German on the side, and those few months turn into a few years.

Act Two: It’s five years later, and I’m in Vienna’s First District, walking down Wollzeile towards Café Diglas, where I go most days after school to read the International Herald Tribune and drink a mélange, served artfully by Herr Jahn, my favorite waiter, and in whose section of the café I always sit. A few months earlier, I’d submitted an application to teach English in Austria through the Fulbright Association. To get my part-time teaching job at a local, top-tier Gymnasium, all I’d had to do was to write an essay, check off the box that I was an American citizen and native speaker of English in possession of an undergraduate degree, and wait for the results of the committee. Did I mention that my teaching experience or knowledge of the local language weren’t prerequisite? I board a plane, happen into a beautiful new apartment in sight of vineyard-covered hills, meet a pair of fellow English teachers who become my closest confidants and travel buddies, and as a teacher, I enjoy minor cult status at my school, particularly with the 6th grade students, who beg me to translate the lyrics to their favorite Backstreet Boys’ songs and wait outside the teachers’ room for a chance to practice their English with me when I emerge. I’m living the expat life, seeing Europe on a shoestring and savoring every minute, from nights in the standing room section at the Vienna State Opera, to weekend walks in the Vienna Woods or visits to “Blaues”, where we know the owner and drinks are on the house. Students and parents alike beg me to tutor them in English, and are willing to pay whatever my asking fee might be.

As I walk down Wollzeile, and see my reflection in one of the expensive shop windows, it dawns on me that there’s something wrong with this perfect picture. Earlier that day, Beate, my native Viennese colleague who has opened her heart and home to me, tells me that, despite her many years of seniority and training, and her full-time position in our school, she and I earn the same meager teacher’s salary. How can it be that I earn the same for half the amount of work, and half the experience, I wonder. Nobody asks her to tutor them. And sometimes, I notice that the students are rude to her and scoff at her when she’s teaching. They question the accuracy of her English when she grades their work, and their parents sometimes do, too. People turn to me as the native-speaker “authority”, the “real” arbiter of English, even though couldn’t explain predicate phrase rules if my life depended on it. With a growing sense of guilt, I realize that I’m profiting from a situation that I didn’t create, but that I am complicit to. My presence in our school is touted as a plus, but at what cost to my colleagues? Am I little more than a TEFL carpetbagger, I wonder, moving in to take advantage of a vulnerable situation, an actor in a bizarre play that prompts my colleagues to look over their shoulders and resent my presence? I’m a native English speaker, and nothing I do can change that. This dubious “award” is given to me by accident of birth, not merit. But how do I promote my colleagues’ strengths in the face of this happenstance? I’m at a loss, and I do nothing. I finish out the year and, with a sad heart, return to the U.S., leaving my question unanswered.

Act Three: I’m studying for my Ph.D. in Language Education at Indiana University, taking a course with Bill Johnston on issues in teacher education. In the classroom are then-fellow graduate students Ahmar Mahboob (University of Sydney, Australia), Karl Uhrig (Kent State University), Semen Yildiz (Bogazici University, Turkey) and Sibel Tatar (Bogazici University, Turkey). Bill has assigned to us to read several chapters of George Braine’s recently-published 1999 book, and to come to class ready to discuss them. We’ve read them, and boy, are we ready! In small-group discussion, the five of us talk about this manifesto on the inequity that pervades our field of English language teaching. We read of the painful experiences of colleagues who have suffered at the hands of biased employers and an unsympathetic public, and whose professional lives have been constrained by the native speaker fallacy. Bill challenges me to consider whether my carpetbagging has implicated me as his “postmodern paladin” (see Johnston, 1999), a witting or unwitting courtier in world of English teaching, or whether I can champion the hope of making our profession a true profession, with a defined knowledge base, system of apprenticeship, and equitable hiring practices for its diverse members.

I recognize that Bill, George and colleagues whom I am soon to meet in TESOL’s NNEST Caucus, have given me the words to comprehend and mediate the ignorance that I myself encountered as a nonnative German teacher in the U.S., and circumstances that I myself profited from and to which I was complicit as a native English teacher abroad. I know that “my” English is but one of a variety of World Englishes, each with its own unique history and validity. What to do? This time, I’m not as ignorant. Ahmar, Karl and I set to work on a research study to understand the extent to which hiring practices in our own U.S.-based TESOL programs exclude nonnative English speaking teachers. We document a pattern of bias, based on such spurious factors as accent and citizenship. Lia Kamhi-Stein publishes our paper in her 2004 volume. Our personal and professional lives are forever changed by our friendships and our understanding of the power and politics that have touched each of us in Bill’s class and beyond, and that each of us have the power to overcome as activists and advocates for a teacher equity based not on birthright, but on merit and professionalism. We all have the ammunition, and we have only to forge it ourselves. We meet other like-minded professionals in the NNEST Caucus, and commit ourselves, each in our own milieu, to working for the justice we seek and which we desire for all professionals in our field.

These three acts that I share, are among those that have had the most powerful impact on my personal and professional identity as a humanist, teacher, researcher, and teacher educator in foreign and second language education. Our profession, unlike many others, is one where the personal and professional intersect, and where identity and teaching practice are so closely tied together. People sometimes inquire why I, as a native speaker, am a member of the NNEST Caucus. How can I not be? If my identity as teacher educator includes the commitment to uphold professional and moral standards, drawing from my own lived experiences, then it is my responsibility to confront discrimination and ignorance toward our practitioners whenever I can. And as a member of an international profession, I know that we are all nonnative speakers of some language, and if one of us native speaker-teachers profits, it is at the expense of another—that somewhere, one of us “nonnatives” is losing out.

Nkonko M. Kamwangamalu

Celebrating the 10th Anniversary of the NNEST Caucus

The NNEST Caucus Member

of the Month

May 2008

nkamwangamalu [at] Howard [dot] edu

Ana Wu: Could you tell us about your professional background and why you decided to become an educator?
Prof. Kamwangamalu: Let me first tell your readers about my social and academic background. I was born in a rural village in Zaire, now the Democratic Republic of Congo. My entire primary and secondary education was exclusively in French, the official language of the Congo. After graduating from college with a BA in English language and literature, I was offered the Fulbright scholarship to study linguistics at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, where I obtained the PhD degree in 1989. Then my academic journey as a college professor started, taking me to Singapore, Swaziland, South Africa (my adoptive country) and, finally, to Howard University, where I am now based.

Teaching has been a vocation and a passion for me since childhood. I recall everybody in my village calling me “teacher” long before I even graduated from primary school. It would not be an overstatement to say that I was born to be a teacher. While growing up there were three professions to which the youth of my generation aspired: teaching, priesthood, and medicine. It was fashionable and a mark of a higher social status to be a teacher, a priest or a medical doctor. I decided to become a teacher because, of all the three professions, teaching was what I liked most and was, cost wise, what my parents could afford. I had a passion for mathematics and languages, and I was even a high school math-teacher. It never occurred to me that I would become an English teacher and a linguist. I cannot explain how this happened. However, in hindsight and given the prominence of English in today’s world, I think I made the right choice by studying linguistics in English. I was trained in theoretical linguistics and sociolinguistics at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and I published in both areas while a graduate student as well as early in my career as a college professor. However, for the past fifteen years my teaching/research has focused on sociolinguistics. Teaching has been a very rewarding profession for me, for it has opened up my eyes to the world. The profession has allowed me to travel extensively, to visit places that I never dreamt of seeing in my lifetime, and to work with peers and establish a network of friends from various parts of the world. Against this background, I consider myself as an international citizen, as a citizen with no borders, so to speak.

Ana Wu: Sridhar and Sridhar (cited in Coetze-Van Roy, 2006) argue that the existing Second Language Acquisition theories have lost their explanatory power because they do not take the contexts of world Englishes learners into consideration. As an expert in multilingualism, language and identity, and sociolinguistics, what issues do you think need further research? What topics can NNES professionals better contribute with their background as resources?
Prof. Kamwangamalu: The emergence of new varieties of English in former British and American colonies indicates clearly that English has become pluricentric, that is, the United Kingdom and the United States no longer have the monopoly over norm creation and innovations in the language. Accordingly, NNES professionally should begin by problematizing the very concept of NNES itself. This concept, which seems to have been entrenched in the literature, is the flip side of an old, value-laden dichotomy of native vs non-native speakers of English. The dichotomy raises a number of important questions that I believe should be of interest to professionals in the field. Some of these, such as ‘who owns English?,’ have been the object of inquiry over the years. Others, however, are as yet to be investigated. For instance, what do we call the children who, due to language shift--as is the case for some children in Singapore (Gupta and Yeok, 1995) and for the younger generations of Indians in South Africa--speak no other language but English? Are these children native speakers of English, of at least the variety spoken in their communities? As I argue elsewhere (Kamwangamalu, in press), if we are to legitimize the varieties of English that have emerged in postcolonial countries in Asia and Africa, it must be acknowledged that there are children in these countries who speak English as L1, and in some cases as the only medium of communication available in their linguistic repertoire, just as is the case for most children in the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand or the United States. Investigating these questions might generate a new research paradigm for New Englishes, a paradigm that does away with the current dichotomy of native vs non-native speakers of English.

Ana Wu: As a professor, you have extensive experience teaching at Howard University in the US, the National University of Singapore, and at the University of Swaziland and the University of Natal in South Africa, where you were both professor and director of the Linguistics Program. What were you most vivid memories in your professional practices?
Prof. Kamwangamalu: I have taught diverse groups of students over the years, and have learnt a lot from them. They have enriched my own research in ways that I cannot possibly describe. I feel fulfilled and proud especially at graduation time, when I see my students receive their own degrees as I did mine years ago. For me as an international citizen, this is giving back to the world community, a community to which I owe much of my own professional development as a scholar.

Ana Wu: When you were a student, you were ranked three times as an excellent Graduate Teaching Assistant, and have also received a Fulbright award. Now, besides being a professor, you serve in the editorial board of World Englishes, having served before for other reputable publishers, such as Multilingual Matters. Also, you have presented over fifty scholarly papers at professional meetings in many countries. Did you encounter obstacles for being a minority? How did you overcome them? What advice would you give to NNES graduate students or novice teachers who are minorities in their working environment?
Prof. Kamwangamalu: As an international citizen, I have never considered myself a minority in my profession. I do understand, though, that the term minority has by far wider currency in the west and other places than in the traditional Africa’s communal culture in which I was raised. In that culture, the line between minority and majority groups was blurry. This background, coupled with my educational training, has prepared me to work anywhere my skills as a teacher are needed. My advice to the younger generation of ‘minority’ scholars is this: Be disciplined, work hard and let your work speak for itself. Build healthy work relationships with your peers, irrespective of whether they are from the majority or minority group or culture. Never internalize the idea of being a minority, even if you know that you are one, for doing so would most likely hold you down.

Ana Wu: As an authority in language policy and planning, codeswitching, and African linguistics, would you tell us the status of local English teachers with non-standard accent as opposed to those who present an American or British accent in (South) Africa?
Prof. Kamwangamalu: In Africa, most teachers of English are trained locally by colleagues who were themselves trained either locally or overseas. Irrespective of where they were trained, teachers of English in Africa do speak the language with a local rather than American or British accent. Local accent does not necessarily mean non-standard accent. Just like NNES, non-standard accent is another attitudinally loaded term, which NNES professionals should problematize especially as it applies to English teaching in the postcolonial societies.

Ana Wu: How many languages and dialects can you speak? When you were in Singapore, did you talk in Chinese? What makes you a successful language learner?
Prof. Kamwangamalu: I speak five languages. These include French, English and three African languages, viz. Lingala, Swahili and Ciluba, my mother tongue. Also, I can exchange greetings in Zulu. African languages are so similar that if you know one language you will find it easier to learn any others to which you are exposed. As for Chinese, I must admit I missed the opportunity to learn the language while I was in Singapore. However, I can say ‘hello’ and ‘thank you’ in Chinese, as well as ‘hello’ in another Asian language, Korean, which I picked from my Korean friends and classmates at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.

Ana Wu: Thank you for your time and for this insightful interview!

Reference:
Coetzee-Van Rooy, S. (2006). Integrativeness: Untenable for World Englishes Learners? World Englishes, 25 (3), 437-450.

Yong Yan Li

Celebrating the 10th Anniversary of the NNEST Caucus

The NNEST Caucus Member

of the Month
April 2008

Yongyan [dot] Li [at] alumni [dot] cityu [dot] edu [dot] hk

Ana Wu: Could you tell us your linguistic, educational and professional background, and why you decided to be an educator?
Prof. Li: I was born in a small peaceful town in Northern Jiangsu, Mainland China, in the 1970s. It was a few years before the end of the Cultural Revolution, but perhaps the isolation of the small town from the outside world has also shut out a messy world for me. As a kid, I remember being forced to practice calligraphy and memorize Tang poems. But I enjoyed more going with my older brother looking for bird nests under the rooftop of a big auditorium at a nearby Party School. Many years later in a middle school in Nanjing when I started to learn English, I did start to develop a flair for learning texts by heart. Fine combing of grammar points, pattern-drills, and learning texts by heart finally led to my good performance in English in the entrance examinations for higher learning institutions. So I landed at an English Department.

Embarking on a scholarly path of working with language came naturally to me as I have grown up witnessing my father, a professor of Chinese linguistics, engaging in scholarly work that never seems to end! Many people have told me that an academic career suits me well – I don’t know what makes them say so – is it perhaps because they saw that I’m socially clumsy and look like an ivory tower person?

I have always seen myself more as a “student” than an educator. Or I must have combined the two roles. My best example of illustration is this: eight years ago I was teaching English to a big group of doctoral science students at Nanjing University. Although English publications were a graduation requirement for many science disciplines at the university, I saw these students having much difficulty writing academic papers in English. I decided to help them one day. Believing that doing research in this area would be a necessary preparation toward the goal, I came to Hong Kong to become a PhD student working on the research topic of Chinese doctoral science students writing for international publication.

Ana Wu: You have been awarded the 2008 TESOL Award for Distinguished Research for your TQ article "Apprentice Scholarly Writing in a Community of Practice: An Intraview of an NNES Graduate Student Writing a Research Article." As an expert in second language writing, what are the positive attributes NNES writers have?
Prof. Li: I’m most lucky and honored to be the recipient of this award. I believe the award was a recognition of a series of articles that I have published (some jointly with Prof. John Flowerdew) in a number of applied linguistics journals. But I definitely cannot claim to be an “expert” in second language writing (in the sense of either the practice itself or the research in this regard).

To me the biggest asset of an NNES writer like myself is our ability to function in two (or several) languages and to cross borders in our perspectives. My English may need editing before publication, but scholarship is not just all about writing itself. The process of conducting research, where we need, more often than not, to interact with our compatriots and consult documents/literature published in our native language(s), constitutes the foundation of our writing. I also find excitement in our role of being potential “bridges” between the local context and the international scene. We can help to shift the academia in the periphery, facilitate mutual understanding between the periphery and the center, and work toward more balanced knowledge making across the globe in our profession.

Ana Wu: What advice would you give to NNES graduate students or novice teachers who are interested in submitting research paper for publications?
Prof. Li: Looking back, in the past three years or so I have had quite several experiences of submitting research papers for publication. Now instead of regarding the publication process as a mysterious black box, I anticipate possible hiccups and am ready to meet the challenge of revising papers many times to get them published. The readiness I have developed for the process has a lot to do with my confidence in the peer reviewers in our discipline. I am fortunate to have almost always received detailed feedback from reviewers, who struck me as making sincere efforts to be unbiased and helpful. In return, when I have the opportunity to be a reviewer of a manuscript, I provide my comments in a likewise conscientious manner. I advocate and have benefited immensely from peer support.

All my articles in international journals have undergone major revision even to the extent of rewriting the whole piece before publication. Revising my manuscripts over and over again according to the suggestions from my mentors and the referees – while myself gaining new understanding and conception of the subject matter in the process – has been the most important learning experience of mine in terms of academic publications. I also came to learn that it is crucially important not to give up on a project that we trust is worthwhile. There must be some way out of a difficult situation if we try different solutions and push ahead with persistence.

Ana Wu: One of your areas of research is English for international academic communication. What do you think of the NS-NNS dichotomy?
Prof. Li: I think we have to admit that in terms of using English for international academic communication, the challenges faced by a scholar who is locally trained in an EFL context, such as China, is all too obvious. In the past few months I have talked extensively to humanities and social sciences (HSS) scholars trained in Mainland China. Those who have indeed published in international journals are of two categories: returned scholars from overseas, and people in the English department. Other than these people, I have not come across a single domestically trained person, young or older academic, who is able to write for scholarly publication in English, even though a few avant-garde young academics seem to strongly aspire to the goal and hope to have a breakthrough in the near future (e.g., by collaborating with someone more competent in English). Overall, we may say the official push (e.g., in the form of bonus payment schemes set for international publication) has ignored the reality – the reality is the general Chinese academics in HSS are simply not able to do academic writing in English by themselves.

Given their better English, those in TESOL or English applied linguistics are more likely than those in other HSS disciplines to publish in English. Indeed in China, we are seeing a sign of this group’s international publications growing. However, for the future years I tend to believe that much of the contribution will come from the returnees, as shall be the case in other HSS disciplines. A core issue that is more far-reaching than the language barrier may be the separate research paradigms found between a periphery context and the center. The local research paradigm has both resulted from tradition and been shaped by the current local concerns.

I would join many others in our field and propose that research published in local languages should be respected and made accessible to the outside. On the other hand, where a periphery scholar wants to get published in an international journal, accommodation to the conventions and paradigms in the international academia as well as to the guidelines of the journal is necessary. Difference in the rules of the game should be allowed to exist in different communities, in addition to the efforts that are made to bridge the sites.

Ana Wu: As an NNES professional in Hong Kong, what have been your most vivid memories (positive or negative) in your academic and professional practices?
Prof. Li: I hesitate to call myself an NNES professional in Hong Kong, as so far I have been shuttling between Hong Kong and Mainland China for research and family. My vivid memories do not concern enjoying Hong Kong as a multicultural metropolis, for the farthest place I have been to in Hong Kong is Prof. George Braine’s home in the beautiful countryside (see his monthly interview at this site) which is about an hour away from the city.

In Hong Kong, doctoral students only receive three years of studentship (which, of course, also depends on good progress on a yearly basis) to complete their PhD. (Beyond three years no studentship is received; however, one needs to continue to pay tuition.) I remember the solitary time I spent in my dormitory room writing and revising the chapters of my PhD dissertation and the papers to be submitted for publication. And my memories are also of the innumerable emails I exchanged with my research participants and, more importantly, with my academic mentors: John Flowerdew, George Braine, Christine Pearson Casanave, Xiaoming Li and a few others. I consider myself extremely lucky to have had their mentorship, so that from where I am now, I look to the future, anticipate challenges, and know how to step ahead. One of my mentors said this to me – it has stayed in my memory and I want to share it with all of you:

“There is one thing I would like you to achieve: To be a content, happy, and positive person, for the opportunities you are having and for the better future you are able to strive for and achieve. Keep up your spirit and find the most efficient and economic way of solving your problems. Never give up.”

Ana Wu: Thank you for this interview! Congratulations on your 2008 TESOL Award for Distinguished Research!

Aya Matsuda

Celebrating the 10th Anniversary of the NNEST Caucus

The NNEST Caucus Member

of the Month
March 2008

aya [dot] matsuda [at] asu [dot] edu

Ana Wu: Could you tell us your background and how you became interested in being an educator?
Prof. Matsuda: I was born in Tokyo, Japan, where I lived until 17. My Japanese-monolingual parents provided a literacy-rich environment for me to grow up in, which I am sure is partially responsible for my career choice as a language teacher and researcher, but they did not speak English or introduced me to the language.
Eighth grade was the turning point for me as an English learner and a future English teacher. We had a new English teacher, Ms. Itoh—or “Kyoko-sensei” (Ms. Kyoko, with her first name) as we fondly called her. She was not an authoritative type and was more like a cool big sister than a teacher, but we respected her tremendously because she was fluent in English and had a lot of experience in using the language both in Japan and abroad. Explicitly and implicitly (i.e., sharing her experience using the language), Kyoko-sensei stressed that our ultimate goal in learning English is not to do well on the exam but to be able to use English to communicate in a real world. Her message was powerful and motivating: whenever we got lost among the vocabulary lists to memorize and textbook dialogues to practice, we reminded ourselves that they were step stones to become a successful English user like Kyoko-sensei. This experience has put the “classroom English” in a new perspective for me.

Another way Kyoko-sensei empowered and inspired me was that she was not a returnee, a student who has lived abroad because of his/her parents’ business. By the 8^th grade, English was already my favorite school subject, but I was convinced I would never be very good at the language because I was not a returnee. Our school had a number of children who have previously lived in an English-speaking country, and these children clearly stood out in English classes with their native-like pronunciation and fluency. Then I met Kyoko-sensei. She had visited but never lived abroad before, but she was very fluent in English and was comfortable using it. Observing the way she used English showed me that you do not have to be a native speaker or even sound like one to become a competent use of the language.

After spending a year with Kyoko-sensei, I decided that I would become an English teacher like her. A teacher who knows that English is not merely a school subject but a living language in which people tell stories, have arguments, and make jokes. A teacher who can help students maintain a goal in language learning that goes beyond an immediate classroom. A teacher who can inspire students and serve as a role-model. My journey to become an English teacher began then.

It is amazing to realize that my interests as a teacher and researcher have not really changed since the 8th grade. As a teacher, I constantly push students to make connection between the course materials and their life outside of school. My perspective as a teacher and researcher still focuses more on the language use in communicative contexts than the form of language itself. And both as a teacher and researcher, I am interested in preparing nonnative speakers of English become an effective user of English, especially in an international context. Although the specific details may change over time, these themes will probably guide my professional career for many more years to come.

Ana Wu: Some of your areas of research are the studies on teaching English as an international language and World Englishes. As an expert, how do you think professors could create courses which students are exposed to world varieties of English, gain cross-cultural awareness, and engage in critical inquiry about the English language? What suggestions would you give?
Prof. Matsuda: It would be impossible to suggest one "perfect" syllabus for all as I believe that teaching is a highly contextualized thing. Factors such as students' interests, goals and academic readiness as well as the bigger picture of the curriculum and the teacher's interests and expertise should all be taken into consideration when creating a course.

In the past, the World Englishes course I created was offered for upper undergraduate and graduate students, mostly in the English department, and its primary goal was to introduce students to the field of World Englishes studies broadly. Specifically, I kept the following in mind as I prepared the course:

* Linguistic varieties of English

World Englishes studies naturally include the discussion of different varieties of English (or Englishes) that have emerged as a result of the world-wide spread of the language. In my course, I used the internet and other resources to expose students to both written and oral samples of Englishes found in different parts of the world. Since many of students were linguistic majors with some experiences with linguistic analysis, we sometimes tried to analyze the features of a particular variety of English. One of the most popular activities was to read articles from English newspapers across the world, written about the same event. We compared and contrasted the lexicon and syntax of Englishes as well as different genre conventions, rhetorics, and even the contents of those articles.

* Functional varieties of English

I also made sure that students were exposed to another “-es” of Englishes, which is the diversity in functions the language performs. We discussed the use of English as the dominant language in a society (i.e., UK, US), as an intranational lingua franca (i.e., India, Singapore), and as an international language. We also explored the English use in different mediums (e.g., ads) across the world.

* Different geographical areas

Since many of my students had never been out of the region of the country they lived in, one of my goals was to expand their interests to other parts of the US as well as to the world. When selecting readings and visuals for the class, I made sure that they represented different regions of the world and countries students were less familiar with.

* "Micro" and "macro" issues

Although the course was titled “World Englishes,” our discussion was never limited to the language itself. The diverse background of students (e.g., linguistics, literature, composition, creative writing, education, history, political science, international relations) was a great asset to this course because all contributed their own interests and expertise during the class discussion, which often showcased the interdisciplinary nature of the World Englishes studies. A several weeks of the courses were devoted specifically to talk about the social, cultural, political, economical and pedagogical implications of the world-wide spread of English.

* Localizing the World Englishes topics

One challenge of this course was to bring the World Englishes discussion “home”—some students, especially undergraduate students, struggled to relate to issues abroad because it was too far from their reality. And this was one point I did not want to compromise because I strongly believe that we learn best when we make connection between what we are learning and our “real life.” One strategy I used to address this challenge was to bring in several international students and put students into small groups for conversation. My students asked questions about the guests’ experience in learning and using English back home as well as in the US, but they also enjoyed “typical college conversations” about parties and other cultural events. This conversation helped my students see that these people students read about may use English in a very different way from them but yet they are in fact real people like themselves.

Ana Wu: As one of the first leaders of the NNEST Caucus, what improvements have you witnessed in the past 10 years, and what would you like to see the members do or initiate?
Prof. Matsuda: Ten years ago, the NNEST issues were not even considered as a legitimate research topic by most people. Now, we see a number of high-quality research publications and conference presentations. Even among TESOL professionals who are not particularly dedicated to NNEST topics, we see increased awareness of the strength of NNESTs and complexity of NNEST issues as well as the positive changes in people's attitudes. The NNEST Caucus and the hard work of its members are responsible for these exciting changes, and I am confident that the things will keep moving forward even after the caucus becomes an IS or another kind of group.

I do believe, however, that it is important to remember that not everyone is “moving forward” in the same way. In TESOL, we continuously have an influx of new professionals who struggle with the biases and sense of insecurity many of us felt 10 years ago. There are many language program administrators and teacher educators who have not been exposed to NNEST research and discussion. We need to keep reaching out to those people and help them become better informed and empowered, just like we were through our involvement with the NNEST caucus.

Ana Wu: If you were to name a (or a few) seminal paper on NNEST issues, what would that be? Why?
Prof. Matsuda: I would choose “Non-native educators in English language teaching” (1999; edited by George Brain). Many people would probably agree with me as it is one of the first (or THE first?) book that specifically focused on NNEST issues. The book presented the collective voice of NNESTs and put the NNEST issues on the radar for many TESOL professionals.

And the collection also has some personal significance to me. It is an important book for me because I do NOT have a chapter in it. At the 1997 TESOL convention, I was on the panel with several of contributors for the book, and George, in his friendly and assuring way, strongly encouraged me to contribute a chapter. And I said no. “There is no way I can do it.” “I’m only a graduate student.” “I don't have any publication.” "Besides, I am not a native English speaker.” Those were my reasons. George and Jun Liu addressed each of them and explained to me why they were not good enough reasons. They even offered to help me prepare a chapter. But I still said “no.”

Looking back, I cannot believe how stupid I was to let go of such an opportunity. But I appreciate how this book helps me remember what it was like for me 10 years ago. It reminds me that there are many novice professionals who are as vulnerable as I was back then and could use a bit of mentoring, encouraging and nudging to flourish.

Ana Wu: You and your husband, Prof. Paul Kei Matsuda, are much respected leaders in the teaching community. Besides collaborating in publications and giving presentations together, you both teach in the same university. What is it like to be married to another professional from your field and how does it affect yourself as a professional?
Prof. Matsuda: People often ask what it is like to have my husband working in the same field and at the same school. This is a tough question to answer—not because I find it too personal but because I don’t know it any other way. We got married in June 1995, and two months later, we started our graduate studies (MA for me and PhD for my husband) together in the English department at Purdue University. Since then, except for one year immediately after we finished our PhDs, we have been always at the same school (in fact, in the same department until this year). While we have distinctive identities as scholars and have topics and fields that each of us claim as “(primarily) mine,” our professional interests overlap significantly and we often go to the same conferences.

For me, it works well that we share much of our professional context. First, it is convenient to have someone nearby who not only understands what kind of work I do but also who also knows about the field himself. I can bounce of my research and teaching ideas and get immediate and informed feedback, pretty much 24/7. This is a privilege not many people have. For ESL teachers and researchers, it is not rare to be the only ESL person in the entire department or at the school, and this kind of conversation needs to be reserved for conferences. Having an easy access to a colleague, especially a good one, is a definite plus.

Second, it is nice to have a colleague who shares the institutional context (i.e., thoroughly familiar with the culture and politics) but yet is not in the position to evaluate me professionally. When I am feeling frustrated or disappointed at work and when I feel too vulnerable to talk to my colleagues, it is nice to have someone I can show my insecurity without having to explain the context. I am lucky enough to have several colleague-friends whom I can share my concerns, but I feel even luckier that one of them is married to me.

Third, I like that my husband understands what I do and what is important for me. I like being able to share everything with my spouse and the fact that we do similar things makes it easier. He understands that the “break” is not a break for me but the time to catch up with work. He understands why I am stressed right before a conference. He understands why I want to publish things for no money. My work and doing a good job with it are important for me, and I appreciate that Paul understands it and also shares the same values.

Of course, if you ask Paul the same question, you may get a completely different answer…:-)

Ana Wu: Thank you for this delightful interview!