i-manager Publications

i-manager's Journal on English Language Teaching (JELT)

Current Issue Vol. 13 Issue 4

Stephen Krashen's Theory of SLA: A Conceptual Framework
The Need for using English for Professional & Global Communication Today: A Critical Review
A Meta-Synthesis of Research on In-Service EFL Teachers' Needs for Inset Programs in Türkiye
A Study of Pre-Service English Language Teachers' Engagement with Faculty-School Collaboration at the English Fest
Assessing Self-Directed English Language Learning Strategies of YouTube Content Creators

Most Cited

Volume 9 Issue 4 October - December 2019

Article

The Native-Speaker Model in Japan: Failure, Success, or Cultural Manipulation?

Adam Crosby*

Kobe City College of Nursing, Kobe, Japan.

Crosby, A. (2019). The Native-Speaker Model in Japan: Failure, Success, or Cultural Manipulation? i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching, 9(4), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.9.4.15231

Abstract

Although Japan spends vast amount of money every year on English education and Japanese university students study and are exposed to oral English for several years, there still persists a hesitance to use and speak English. This paper looks at educational policy in Japan and the adoption of the native-speaker model in Japan. Although the native-speaker model has been adopted in Japan and is considered prestigious, adopting a model that includes nonnative speakers of the outer circle nations would be motivational for Japanese learners of English. This paper signifies the misconception that the nativespeaker model is superior to the nonnative model.

References

[1]. Amin, N. (1999). Minority women teachers of ESL: negotiating white English. In G Braine (Ed.), Non-native Educators in English Language Teaching (pp. 93-104). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

[2]. Befu, H. (1993). Nationalism and nihonjinron. In H. Befu (ed.). Cultural Nationalism in East Asia: Representation and Identity (pp. 107-135). Berkeley, CA: Institute of East Asian Studies.

[3]. Bourdieu, P. (1977). The economics of linguistic exchanges. Social Science Information, 16(6), 645-668. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901847701600601

[4]. Brumfit, C. (1982). English as an international language: What do we mean by “English”? In C. J Brumfit (Ed.), English for International Communication (pp. 1-8). Oxford: Pergamon Press.

[5]. Canagarajah, A. S. (1993). Critical ethnography of a Sri Lankan classroom: Ambiguities in student opposition to reproduction through ESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 27(4), 601- 626. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587398

[6]. Cheung, Y. L., Said, S. B., & Park, K. (Eds). (2015). Advances and Current Trends in Language Teacher Identity Research. London, England: Routledge.

[7]. Cook, V.J. (2002) Language teaching methodology and the L2 user in perspective. In Cook, V. J. (Ed.) Portraits of the L2 User (pp. 321-343). Clevedon: Multilingul Matters.

[8]. Dale, P.N. (1986). The Myth of Japanese Uniqueness. London: Routledge.

[9]. Foucault, M. (1982). The subject and power. Critical Inquiry, 8 (4), 777-795.

[10]. Fushino, K. (2010). Causal relationships between communication confidence, beliefs, about group work, and willingness to communicate in foreign language group work. TESOL Quar terly, 44(4), 700-744. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2010.235993

[11]. Goharimehr, N. (2017). Identity, motivation and English learning in a Japanese context. World Journal of English Language, 7(4), 18-30.

[12]. Honna, N. & Takeshita, Y. (2000) English language teaching for international Understanding in Japan. English Australia Journal, 18(1), 60-78.

[13]. Ivy, M. (1995). Discourses of the Vanishing: Modernity, Phantasm, Japan. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

[14]. JET Programme (2015). The Japan Exchange and Teaching Programme. Retrieved November. 23, 2018 from https://jetprogramme.org/en/about

[15]. Kachru, B. (1985). Standards, codification, and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the outer circle. In R. Quirk and H. G. Widdowson (Eds.) English in the World: Teaching and Learning the Language and Literatures (pp. 11-30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[16]. Koike, I., & Tanaka, K. (1995). English in foreign language education policy in Japan. World Englishes 14(1), 13-25.

[17]. Kosaku, Y. (1992). Cultural Nationalism in Contemporary Japan: A Sociological Enquiry. New York: Routledge.

[18]. Kubota, R. (2002). The impact of globalization on language teaching in Japan. In D. Block and D. Cameron (Eds.) Globalization and Language Teaching (pp. 13-28). London: Routledge.

[19]. McConnell, D. L. (2000). Importing Diversity: Inside Japan's JET Program. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

[20]. Mercer, S. (2011). The beliefs of two expert EFL learners. The Language Learning Journal, 39(1), 57-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2010.521571

[21]. Norton. B. (1997). Language, identity, and the ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly, 31(3). 409-429.

[22]. Osterman, G. L. (2014). Experiences of Japanese university students' willingness to speak English in class: A multiple case study. SAGE Open, 1-14.

[23] Peng, J. E., & Woodrow, L. (2010). Willingness to communicate in English: A model in the Chinese EFL classroom. Language Learning, 60(4), 834-876. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00576.x

[24]. Phillipson, R. (1992a). ELT: The native speaker's burden? ELT Journal, 46(1), 12-18. https://doi.org/10.1093/ elt/46.1.12

[25]. Phillipson, R. (1992b). Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[26]. Phillipson, R. (2001). English for globalisation or for the world's people? International Review of Education 47(3-4), 185-200. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017937322957

[27]. Suzuki, T. (1995). Nihongowa Kokusaigo Ni Nariurka [Can the Japanese Language become an International Language?]. Tokyo: Kodsasha.

[28]. The English Effect. (2013). British Council. Retrieved from www.britishcouncil.org/sites/default files/English-effect-report-v2.pdf#search='british+council+2013+PDF’

[29]. Trinder, R. (2013). Business students' belief about language learning in a university context. English for Specific Purposes, 32(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016 /j.esp.2012.06.003

[30]. Widdowson, H. G. (1996). Authenticity and autonomy in ELT. ELT Journal, 50(1), 67-68. https://doi.org/10.1093/ elt/50.1.67

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Research Paper

The Study of Ergativity Acquisition by Persian-Speaking Learners of English

Zahra Sadat Roozafzai*

ACECR Institute of Higher Education (Isfahan Branch), Iran.

Roozafzai, Z. S. (2019). The Study of Ergativity Acquisition by Persian-Speaking Learners of English. i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching, 9(4), 5-13. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.9.4.15562

Abstract

Considering the controversy about the nature of ergativity, the issue of whether a case morpheme is theta assigning or just structural case-marking, the present study tried to provide an evidence for either side or both. To this aim, the acquisition and use of ergative verbs were studied and possible explications of the errors were presented. According to the results, ergativity is not just a structural case, but a non-structural case marking. Besides, the uninterpretable features or feature trace can account for case errors and present potential explications for the agreement failure. Based on the principles and stages of the Contrastive Linguistics Hypothesis and Error Analysis, the results of the current study can be applicable for the practice of Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL). After the linguistic description and explanation of the errors made by the Persian speakers, learning English as a foreign language, the TEFL practitioners can make use of the findings of the present study to see the points of difficulty and more focus on them.

References

[1]. Abdullayeva, O. (1993). The Acquisition of Ergative Verbs by Turkish EFL Students (Unpublished Postgraduate Thesis), Bilkent University, Ankara.

[2]. Aldridge, E. (2012). Antipassive and ergativity in Tagalog. Lingua, 122(3), 192-203.

[3]. Baker, M. C. (2012). On the relationship of object agreement and accusative case: Evidence from Amharic. Linguistic Inquiry, 43(1), 255-274.

[4]. Bavin, E. L., & Stoll, S. (Eds.). (2013). The Acquisition of Ergativity (Vol. 9). John Benjamins Publishing.

[5]. Bley-Vroman, R. (1988). The fundamental character of foreign language learning. In W. Rutherford & M. Sharwood Smith (Eds.), Grammar and Second Language Teaching: A Book of Readings (pp. 19-30). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

[6]. Bruening, B. (2007), Passamaquoddy as a Split Ergative Language and Its Consequences for Marantz's Ergative Case Generalization (Manuscript). University of Delaware.

[7]. Can, A. (2009). Acquisition of English ergative verbs by Turkish students: Yesterday and today. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 2832-2837. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.504

[8]. Clark, V. P., Paul A. E., & Rosa, A. F. (1998). Language: Readings in Language and Culture. New York: St.Martin's Press.

[9]. Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin, and Use. Greenwood Publishing Group.

[10]. Chomsky, N. (2000). Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Roger Martin, David Michaels & Juan Uriagereka (Eds), Step by Step (pp. 89-155). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

[11]. Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by phase. In Michael Kenstowicz (Ed.) Ken Hale: A Life in Language (pp. 1-52). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

[12]. Coon, J. (2012). Split ergativity and transitivity in Chol. Lingua, 122(3), 241-256.

[13]. Crystal, D. (1987). The English Encyclopaedia of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge.

[14]. Dixon, R. M. W. (1994). Ergativity. Cambridge University Press.

[15]. Dixon, R. M. W. (1992). A New Approach to English Grammar on Semantic Principles. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

[16]. Hawkins, R. (1998, March). The inaccessibility of formal features of functional categories in second language acquisition. In Pacific Second Language Research Forum, Tokyo (Vol. 36).

[17]. Hawkins, R. (2000). Explaining Non-Target-Like Properties of L2 Grammars. Talk given at McGill University, Montréal, Québec.

[18]. Holmberg, A., & Odden, D. (2004). Ergativity and rolemarking in Hawrami. Syntax of the World's Languages (SWL 1), Leipzig, Germany.

[19]. Ingham, R. (1996). The ergative alternation in L2 acquisition. Lexicon Research Group Handbook, (pp. 35- 47).

[20]. Ju, M. K. (2000). Overpassivization errors by second language learners: The effect of conceptualizable agents in discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22(1), 85-111.

[21]. Karacaer, Z. (1998). Anadili Türkçe olan öğrencilerin İngilizce'deki istemsiz geçişsiz fiillerde karşılaştıkları sorunlar ve bu fiillerin öğretimine ilişkin öneriler (Problems encountered by the Turkish Larners of English relevant to the ergative verbs and suggestions about teaching these verbs). Eskiúehir Anadolu Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 8, 168-183.

[22]. Karimi, Y. (2012). Agreement in Iranian ergative languages: The competition of affixes and clitics. Studies in Linguistics, 4 (2), 1-18.

[23]. Kellerman, E. (1978). Giving learners a break: Native language intuitions as a source of predictions about transferability. Working Papers on Bilingualism Toronto, (15), 59-92.

[24]. Lardiere, D. (1998). Case and tense in the 'fossilized' steady state. Second Language Research, 14(1), 1-26.

[25]. Legate, J. A. (2008). Morphological and abstract case. Linguistic Inquiry, 39(1), 55-101.

[26]. Legate, J. A. (2012). Types of ergativity. Lingua, 122(3), 181-191.

[27]. Leung, Y. K. I. (2003). Failed features versus full transfer full access in the acquisition of a third language: Evidence from tense and agreement. In Proceedings of the 6^th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (pp. 199-207).

[28]. Mahajan, A. (2012). Ergatives, antipassives and the overt light v in Hindi. Lingua, 122(3), 204-214.

[29]. Marantz, A.(1991). Case and Licensing. In Germán F. Westphal, Benjamin Ao, and Hee-RahkChae (Eds.), Proceedings of the Eighth Eastern States Conference on Linguistics (pp. 234-253).

[30]. McFadden. T. (2003). Inherent Case and argument structure. In FGLS/SGL Conference.

[31]. Montrul, S. (1997). On the nature of interlanguage grammars: Causatives and transitivity in L2 English. Revised Version of) Article Presented at the American Association for Applied Linguistics, Orlando Florida.

[32]. Ramesh, R., & Sumathi, B. (2010). CAI in Learning Voice in English Grammar among Eighth Standard Students--An experimental study. i-manager's Journal on School Educational Technology, 6(2), 36-41. https://doi. org/10.26634/jsch.6.2.1314

[33]. Reber, A. S. (1993). Implicit Learning and Tacit Knowledge: An Essay on the Cognitive Unconscious. New York: Oxford University Press.

[34]. Robinson, P. (1997). Individual differences and the fundamental similarity of implicit and explicit adult second language learning. Language Learning, 47(1), 45-99.

[35]. Samanta, S. (2017). A study on the attitudes of teachers towards teaching English grammar as second language (L2) and their effects on instructional practices in West Bengal. i-manager's Journal on English Language Teaching, 7(2), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.26634/ jelt.7.2.13495

[36]. Singaravelu, G. (2008). Video game based learning in English grammar. i-manager's Journal of Educational Technology, 5(3), 49-53. https://doi.org/10.26634/ jet.5.3.511

[37]. Singaravelu, G. (2014). Impact of gadget based learning of grammar in English at standard II. i-manager's Journal on English Language Teaching, 4(2), 33-39. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.4.2.2796

[38]. Thouësny, S. (2014). How systematic and random are errors and mistakes in texts written by language learners of French? In 4^thInternational Conference on Foreign Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics (FLTAL).

[39]. Tsimpli, I.M. & Roussou, A. (1991). Parameter-resetting in L2? UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 3, 149-170.

[40]. Van Valin, R. D. (2001). An Introduction to Syntax. Cambridge University Press.

[41]. White, L. (1985). The “pro‐drop” parameter in adult second language acquisition. Language Learning, 35(1), 47-61.

[42]. Whitman, R. L. (1970). Contrastive analysis: Problems and procedures. Language Learning, 20(2), 191-197.

[43]. Woolford, E. (2006). Lexical case, inherent case, and argument structure. Linguistic Inquiry, 37(1), 111-130.

[44]. Yeon, J. (2008). Is there ergativity in Korean?-The definition of ergativity and other uses of the term'ergative'[in Korean]. Han-Geul (Journal of the Korean Language Society), 282, 125-154.

[45]. Yip, V. (1994). Grammatical consciousness-raising and learnability. In T. Odlin (Ed.), Perspectives on Pedagogical Grammar (pp. 123-139). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[46]. Zobl, H. (1989). Canonical typological structures and ergativity in English L2 acquisition. In Susan M. Gass & Jacquelyn Schachter (Eds.), Linguistic Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition (pp. 203-221). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Research Paper

Peer Interaction in an EFL Context: Task Variety, Proficiency Level and Awareness of Learners

Zeynep Aysan-Sahintas* , Seda Okur, Muslume Demir*

* English Language Teaching Program, Middle East Technical University, Turkey.

Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Middle East Technical University, Turkey.

* Foreign Languages Unit, Çankaya University, Turkey.

Aysan-Sahintas, Z., Okur, S., and Demir, M. (2019). Peer Interaction in an EFL Context: Task Variety, Proficiency Level and Awareness of Learners. i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching, 9(4), 14-27. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.9.4.16091

Abstract

Examining the awareness of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners and their on-task behaviours during pair work activities in the classroom, this qualitative case study aimed to reveal the effectiveness of peer interaction in L2 learning and the factors that have an impact on the effectiveness of peer interaction in pair work tasks. The participants of the study consisted of a group of 21 adult learners in a higher education EFL context. Observations, field notes, audio-recordings of peer interaction during tasks and lastly semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect data. The findings show that the interaction in pair work activities in EFL classrooms can facilitate learning through cooperation and collaboration. In addition to this, the learners' awareness and behaviours are multidimensional since they are related to the 1) self, 2) peer & teachers, and 3) tasks. The results have implications for effective use of pair work activities in EFL classrooms.

References

[1]. Achmad, D., & Yusuf, Y. Q. (2014). Observing pair-work task in an English speaking class. International Journal of Instruction, 7(1), 151-164.

[2]. Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. Addison Wesley Longman, White Plains: NY.

[3]. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1-47. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/i.1.1

[4]. Cray, E., & Currie, P. (1996). Linking adult learners with the education of L2 teachers. TESOL Quarterly, 30(1), 113- 130. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587609

[5]. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design Choosing Among FiveTraditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

[6]. Crookes, G., & Chaudron, C. (2001). Guidelines for language classroom instruction. In Celce-Murcia, M. (Ed.), Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language (pp. 29-42). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.

[7]. Della-Neve, C. (1985). Brain-compatible learning succeeds. Educational Leadership, 43(2), 83-85.

[8]. DiCamilla, F. J., & Anton, M. (1997). Repetition in the collaborative discourse of L2 learners: A Vygotskian perspective. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 53(4), 609-633. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.53.4.609

[9]. Dobao, A. F. (2012). Collaborative writing tasks in the L2 classroom: Comparing group, pair, and individual work. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(1), 40-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.12.002

[10]. Dobao, A. F., & Blum, A. (2013). Collaborative writing in pairs and small groups: Learners' attitudes and perceptions. System, 41(2), 365-378. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.system.2013.02.002

[11]. Eguchi, M., & Eguchi, K., (2006). The limited effect of PBL on EFL learners: A case study of English magazine projects. Asian EFL Journal, 8(3), 207-225.

[12]. Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Harlow: Longman.

[13]. Hart, L. A. (1986). A response: All "thinking" paths lead to the brain. Educational Leardership, 43(8), 45-48.

[14]. Jones, L. (2007). The Student-Centered Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

[15]. Jonhson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., Roy, P., & Zaidman, B. (1985). Oral interaction in cooperative learning groups: Speaking, listening and the nature of statements made by high-medium, and low-achieving students. The Journal of Psychology, 119(4), 303-321. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 00223980.1985.10542903

[16]. Kim, Y. (2009). The effects of task complexity on learner-learner interaction. System, 37(2), 254-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.02.003

[17]. Kinsella, K. (1996). Designing group work that supports and enhances diverse classroom work style. TESOL Journal, 6(1), 24-30.

[18]. Kobayashi, M. (2003). The role of peer support in ESL students academic oral tasks. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 59(3), 337-370. https://doi.org/10.3138/ cmlr.59.3.337

[19]. Kowal, M., & Swain, M. (1994). Using collaborative language production tasks to promote students' language awareness. Language Awareness, 3(2), 73-93. https://doi. org/10.1080/09658416.1994.9959845

[20]. Kuo, C.V. (2011). Student perceptions of student interaction in a British EFL setting. ELT Journal, 65(3), 281- 290. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccq063

[21]. Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1993). How Langauages are Learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[22]. Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 413- 468) San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

[23]. Long, H. M., & Porter, A. P. (1985). Group work, interlanguage talk, and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 19(2), 207-228. https://doi.org/10.2307/ 3586827

[24]. Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction and second language development. An empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(4), 557-587. https://doi.org/10.1017/s02722631 99004027

[25]. McDonough, K. (2004). Learner-learner interaction during pair and small group activities in a Thai EFL context. System, 32(2), 207-224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system. 2004.01.003

[26]. Nelson, G., & Carson, J. (1998). ESL students' perceptions of effectiveness in peer response groups. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(2), 113-131.

[27]. Nummela, R. M., & Rosengren, T. M. (1986). What's happening in students' brains may redefine teaching. Educational Leadership, 43(8), 49-53.

[28]. Ohta, A. (2000). Rethinking recasts: A learnercentered examination of corrective feedback in the Japanese language classroom. In J. K. Hall & L. Stoops Verplaetse (Eds.), Second and Foreign Language Learning Through Classroom Interaction (pp. 47-72). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

[29]. Philp, J., & Iwashita, N. (2013). Talking, tuning in and noticing: exploring the benefits of output in task-based peer interaction. Language Awareness, 22(4), 353-370. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2012.758128

[30]. Philp, J., Walter, S., & Basturkmen, H. (2010). Peer interaction in the foreign language classroom: What factors foster a focus on form? Language Awareness, 19(4), 261-279, https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2010.516831

[31]. Phipps, W. (1999). Pairwork: Interaction in the Modern Languages Classroom. London: CILT.

[32]. Pica, T., Lincoln-Porter, F., Paninos, D., & Linnell, J. (1996). Language learners' interaction: How does it address the input, output, and feedback needs of L2 learners? TESOL Quarterly, 30(1), 59-84. https://doi.org/10.2307/ 3587607

[33]. Prabhu, N. (1987). Second Language Pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[34]. Reid, J., Forrestal P., & Cook, J. (1989). Small Group Learning in the Classroom. Scarborough WA: Chalkface Press.

[35]. Richards, J. C., & Lockhart, C. (1994). Reflective Teaching in Second Language Classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press.

[36]. Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative Language Teaching Today. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[37]. Robinson, H.A. (1994). The Ethnography of Empowerment. Transformative Power of Classroom Interaction. London: The Falmer Press.

[38]. Savignon, S. (1991). Communicative language teaching: State of the art. TESOL Quarterly, 25(2), 261- 77.https://doi.org/10.2307/3587463

[39]. Schweers, Jr., C. W. (1995). Negotiated interaction transfer and the second language classroom. TESL Reporter, 28(1), 1-14.

[40]. Shehadeh, A. (2011). Effects and student perceptions of collaborative writing in L2. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(4), 286-305. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jslw.2011.05.010

[41]. Storch, N. (2002). Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work. Language Learning, 52(1), 119-158. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/1467-9922.00179

[42]. Storch, N. (2007). Investigating the merits of pair work on a text editing task in ESL classes. Language Teaching Research, 11(2), 143-159. https://doi.org/10.1177/13 62168807074600

[43]. Storch, N. (2013). Comparing pair and small group interactions on oral tasks. RELC Journal, 44(3), 361-375. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688213500557

[44]. Storch, N., & Aldosari, A. (2010). Learners' use of first language (Arabic) in pair work in an EFL class. Language Teaching Research, 14(4), 355-375. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/1362168810375362

[45]. Storch, N., & Aldosari, A. (2013). Pairing learners in pairwork activity. Language Teaching Research, 17(1), 31- 48. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168812457530

[46]. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 320-337. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540- 4781.1998.tb01209.x

[47]. Swain, M., Brooks, L., & Tocalli-Beller, A. (2002). Peerpeer dialogue as a means of second language Learning. Annual Review of Applies Linguistics, 22, 171-185. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190502000090

[48]. Tognini, R. (2008). Interaction in Languages Other than English Classes in Western Australian Primary and Secondary Schools: Theory, Practice and Perceptions (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation), Edith Cowan University, Perth, Western Australia.

[49]. Ur, P. (1981). Discussion That Work: Task-Centred Fluency Practice. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

[50]. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Interaction between Learning and Development. In M. Gauvain & M. Cole (Eds.), Readings on the Development of Children (pp. 34-40). New York: Scientific American Books.

[51]. Watanabe, Y., & Swain, M. (2008) Perception of Learner Proficiency: Its Impact on the Interaction between an ESL Learner and her Higher and Lower Proficiency Partners. Language Awareness, 17(2), 115-130. https://doi.org/10.2167/la432.0

[52]. Watanebe, Y. (2008). Peer-Peer Interaction between L2 Learners of different proficiency levels: Their interactions and reflections. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 64(4), 605-635. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.64.4.605

[53]. Westbrook, F. (2001). Lessons from the other side of the teacher's desk: Discovering insights to help language learners. English Teaching Forum, 49(1), 2-7.

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Research Paper

English Learners’ Attitudes toward English as an International Language: A Qualitative Inquiry

Muhammad Rahimi* , Maryam Pakzadian **

*School of Foreign Languages, Qilu University of Technology (Shandong Academy of Sciences), Jinan, China.

**Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.

Rahimi, M., and Pakzadian, M. (2019). English Learners' Attitudes toward English as an International Language: A Qualitative Inquiry. i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching, 9(4), 28-40. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.9.4.16107

Abstract

This article reports on a qualitative study that investigated English learners' attitudes toward English as an International Language (EIL). Four major findings were identified in the current study. First, majority of the participants thought that English belongs to all its users, regardless of being its native speakers or not. Second, lack of knowledge of Outer Circle varieties led the students to stick to the two major Inner Circle varieties of English—American and British Englishes as standard norms. Third, majority of participants embraced localisation of English and considered it as a manifestation of local cultures. Furthermore, the learners admitted that their local government has attached great value to learning English, but they were concerned about the utilitarian view of education, since majority of the learners focus merely on obtaining high scores on English exams. Fourth, the learners expressed their dissatisfaction with the imbalanced contemporary English teaching and stated that developing communication competence should be the main goal of English instruction. Therefore, the authors suggest that effective measures be taken at policy making, materials development and pedagogy levels to promote the legitimacy of all varieties of English and meet the needs of today's English learners.

References

[1]. Aliakbari, M., & Monfared, M. (2014). Iranian students' beliefs and motivations towards English. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98(6), 200-206. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.407

[2]. Alsagoff, L., McKay, S. L., Hu, G., & Renandya, W. (Eds.) (2012). Principles and Practices for Teaching English as an International Language. New York: Routledge.

[3]. Bayard, D., Weatherall, A., Gallois, C., & Pittam, J. (2001). Pax Americana? Accent attitudinal evaluations in New Zealand, Australia and America. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 5(1), 22-49. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467- 9481.00136

[4]. Berg, B. L. (2004). Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences (5^th Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

[5]. Block, D. (2004). Globalisation and language teaching. ELT Journal, 58(1), 75-77. https://doi.org/10.1002/ 9781444324068.ch12

[6]. Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (5^th Ed.). White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.

[7]. Brutt-Griffler, J., & Samimy, K. (2002). Transcending the nativeness paradigm. World Englishes, 20(1), 99-106. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-971X.00199

[8]. Byram, M. (1998). Cultural identities in multilingual classrooms. In J. Cenoz & F. Genesee (Eds.), Beyond Bilingualism (pp. 96-116). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

[9]. Canagarajah, A. S. (1999). Resisting Linguistic Imperialism in English Teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

[10]. Canagarajah, S. (2005). Reclaiming the Local in Language Policy and Practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

[11]. Canagarajah, S. (2006). Changing communicative needs, revised assessment objectives: Testing English as an international language. Language Assessment Quarterly, 3(3), 229-242. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1543431 1laq0303_1

[12]. Canagarajah, S. & Said, S. B. (2011). Linguistic imperialism. In J. Simpson (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Applied Linguistics. Abingdon: Routledge.

[13]. Dailey, R. M., Giles, H., & Jansma, L. (2005). Language attitudes in an Anglo-Hispanic context: The role of the linguistic landscape. Language and Communication, 25, 27-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2004.04.004

[14]. Davari, H., & Aghagolzadeh, F. (2015). To teach or not to teach? Still an open question for the Iranian education system. In C. Kennedy (Ed.), English Language Teaching in the Islamic Republic of Iran: Innovations, Trends and Challenges (pp.13-22). UK: British Council.

[15]. Dörnyei, Z. (2008). Research Methods in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[16]. Giddens, A. (2000). Runaway World. London: Routledge.

[17]. Holliday, A. (2005). The struggle to Teach English as an International Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[18]. Jenkins, J. (2006). Current perspectives on teaching world Englishes and English as a lingua franca. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 157-181. https://doi.org/10.2307/ 40264515

[19]. Jenkins, J. (2012). English as a lingua franca from the classroom to the classroom. ELT Journal, 66(4), 486-494. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccs040

[20]. Jenkins, J. (2015). Global Englishes: A Resource Book rd for Students (3 Ed.). Abingdon: Routledge.

[21]. Kachi, R. (2004). Factors predicting native and nonnative listeners' evaluative reactions to Japanese English (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation), Ohio State University.

[22]. Kachru, B. B. (1981). The pragmatics of non-Native varieties of English. In Larry E. Smith (Ed.), English for Cross- Cultural Communication. London: Macmillan.

[23]. Kachru, B. B. (1985). Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the outer circle. In R. Quirk & H. G. Widdowson (Eds.), English in the World: Teaching and Learning the Language and Literatures (pp.11-30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[24]. Kirkpatrick, A. (2011). English as an Asian lingua franca and the multilingual model of ELT. Language Teaching, 44(2), 212-224. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0261444810000145

[25]. Kirkpatrick, A. (2015). World Englishes and local cultures. In F. Sharifian (Ed.), The Routledge and Book of Language and Culture (pp. 460-470). London: Routledge.

[26]. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2012). Individual identity, cultural globalisation and teaching English as an international language: The case for an epistemic break. In L. Alsagoff, W. Renandya, G. Hu & S. L. Mckay (Eds.), Teaching English as an International Language: Principles and practices (pp. 9- 27). New York: Routledge.

[27]. Lai, H. Y. (2008). Learning English as an International Language or Not? A study of Taiwanese Students' Motivation and Perceptions (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation), Warwick University, Coventry, UK.

[28]. Lee, J. S., & Hsieh, J. C. (2018). University students' perceptions of English as an international language (EIL) in Taiwan and South Korea. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 01434632.2018.1438448

[29]. Liou, Y. S. (2010). Who wants EIL? Attitudes towards English as a lingua franca in the world: A comparison between college teachers and students in Taiwan. College English: Issues and Trends, 3. Taipei, Taiwan: Chengchi University.

[30]. Matsuda, A. (2003). The ownership of English in Japanese secondary schools. World Englishes, 22(4), 483- 496. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2003.00314.x

[31]. Matsuda, A. (2017). Preparing Teachers to Teach English as an International Language. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

[32]. McKay, S. L. (2002). Teaching English as an International Language: Rethinking Goals and Approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[33]. McKay, S. L. (2003). Toward appropriate EIL pedagogy: Reexamining common ELT assumptions. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/1473-4192.00035.

[34]. McKay, S. L., & Brown, J.D. (2016). Teaching and Assessing EIL in Local Contexts Around the World. New York: Routledge.

[35]. Meilin, C., & Xiaoqiong, H. (2015). China English at home and in the world. English Today, 21(3), 27-38. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078406004081

[36]. Pan, L., & Block, D. (2011). English as a global language in China: An investigation into learners' and teachers' language beliefs. System, 39(3), 391-402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.07.011

[37]. Parmegiani, A. (2014). The (dis)ownership of English: Language and identity construction among Zulu students at the University of KwaZulu-Natal. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 17(6), 683-694. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2014.953775

[38]. Pennycook, A. (1998). English and the Discourses of Colonialism. London: Routledge.

[39]. Phan, H. L. (2005). Toward a critical notion of appropriation of English as an international language. Asian EFL Journal, 7(3), 34-46.

[40]. Phan, H. L. (2009). English as an international language: International students and identity formation. Journal of Language and Intercultural Communication, 9 (3), 201-214. https://doi.org/10.1080/147084-70902748855.

[41]. Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[42]. Rezaei, S., Khosravisadeh, P., & Mottaghi, Z. (2018). Attitudes toward world Englishes among Iranian English language learners. Asian Englishes, 1-18. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/13488678.2018.1440367.

[43]. Richards, J., & Sadeghi, K. (2015). The idea of English in Iran: An example from Urmia. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 37 (4), 419-434, https://doi.org/10.1080/ 01434632.2015.1080714

[44]. Sharifian, F. (2009). English as an international language: Perspective and Pedagogical Issues. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

[45]. Sharifian, F. (2010). Glocalisation of English in world Englishes: An emerging variety among Persian speakers of English. In T. Omoniyi & M. Saxena (Eds.), Contending with Globalisation in World Englishes. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

[46]. Smith, L. (1976). English as an international auxiliary language. RELC Journal, 7(2), 38-43. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/003368827600700205

[47]. Takeshita, Y. (2010). East Asian Englishes. In A. Kirkpatrick (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of World Englishes (pp. 265-281). Abingdon: Routledge.

[48]. Tanaka, F. (2010). A survey-based study of Japanese university student attitudes toward EIL and implications for the future of English education in Japan. Asian Englishes, 13(1), 48-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/13488678. 2010.10801272

[49]. Tokumoto, M., & Shibata, M. (2011). Asian varieties of English: Attitudes towards pronunciation. World Englishes, 30(3), 392-408. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2011. 01710.x

[50]. Widdowson, H. G. (1998). The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly, 28(2), 377-388. https://doi.org/ 10.2307/3587438

[51]. Zhang, Q. (2013). The attitudes of Hong Kong students towards Hong Kong English and Mandarin accented English. English Today, 29, 9-16. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0266078413000096

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Research Paper

The Relationship between First Year English Major Students' Language Learning Strategy Use and Learner Autonomy

Nam Thanh Ta* , Phuong Uyen Ngo, Tran Bao Thi Le*

*-*** Can Tho University of Technology, Can Tho, Vietnam.

Ta, N. T., Ngo, P. U., and Le, T. B. T. (2019). The Relationship between First Year English Major Students' Language Learning Strategy Use and Learner Autonomy. i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching, 9(4), 41-49. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.9.4.15996

Abstract

The present study investigated learner autonomy level and the use of language learning strategies in a sample of 163 firstyear English majors in university. The aim of the study was to find out the correlation between language learning strategies and autonomous learning. The data collection instruments included a self-rating questionnaire and an open-ended interview. Results indicated the participants were moderately autonomous learners and their overall frequency of strategy use was medium with the most frequent use of memory and social strategies and the least of compensation and Affective strategies. Pearson correlation indicated that there was a positive correlation between learner autonomy and overall language learning strategy as well as across the six strategy categories. Understanding the relationship between learners' strategy use and autonomy may enable EFL instructors to incorporate language learning strategy training in teaching to ultimately improve learners' English language skills.

References

[1]. Aoki, N., & Smith, R. C. (1999). Learner autonomy in cultural context: The case of Japan. In S. Cotterall & D. Crabbe (Eds.), Learner Autonomy in Language Learning: Defining the Field and Effecting Change (pp. 19-27). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

[2]. Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and Researching Autonomy in Language Learning. Harlow, England: Longman.

[3]. Camilleri, A. (1999). Introducing Learner Autonomy in Teacher Education. Retrieved March 8, 2018, from archive.ecml.at/documents/pubcamilleria.pdf

[4]. Chamot, A. (1999). Learning Strategy Instruction in the English Classroom. Retrieved November 22, 2018, from http://jalt-publications.org/tlt/articles/2538-learningstrategy- instruction-englis-classroom

[5]. Chan, V. (2001). Readiness for learner autonomy: What do our learners tell us? Teaching in Higher Education, 6(4), 505-518.

[6]. Chan, V. (2003). Autonomous language learning: The teachers' perspectives. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(1), 33-54. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510120078045

[7]. Cohen, A. D. (1998). Strategies in Learning and using a Second Language. London: Longman.

[8]. Dickinson, L. (1995). Autonomy and motivation: A literature review. System, 23(2), 165-174. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/0346-251X(95)00005-5

[9]. Green, J., & Oxford, R. (1995). A closer look at learning strategies, L2 proficiency, and gender. TESOL Quarterly, 29(2), 261-297. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587625

[10]. Gremmo, M., & Riley, P. (1995). Autonomy, selfdirection and self-access in language teaching and learning: The history of an idea. System, 23(2), 151-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(95)00002-2

[11]. Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and Foreign Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

[12]. Knowles, M. (1975). Self-Directed Learning: A Guide for Learners and Teachers. New York: Cambridge, the Adult Education Company.

[13]. Lamb, M. (2004). It depends on the students themselves: Independent language learning at an Indonesian state school. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 17(3), 229-245. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 07908310408666695

[14]. Little, D. (1991). Learner Autonomy: Definitions, Issues and Problems (Vol. 1). Dublin: Authentik.

[15]. Littlewood, W. (1996). Autonomy: An anatomy and a framework. System, 24(4), 427-435. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/S0346-251X(96)00039-5

[16]. Littlewood, W. (1999). Defining and developing autonomy in East Asian contexts. Applied Linguistics, 20(1), 71-94. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/20.1.71

[17]. Liu, D. (2004). EFL proficiency, gender and language learning strategy use among a group of Chinese technological institute English majors. ARECLS E-Journal, 1(1), 20-28.

[18]. Naizhao, G. (2006). An empirical investigation of cultivating students autonomous learning capacity in college english teaching. Retrieved December 12, 2018, from http://www.celea.org.cn/teic/67/67-45.pdf

[19]. Nunan, D. (1996). Toward autonomous learning: Some theoretical, empirical and practical issues. In R. Pemberton, E. S. L. Li, W. W. F. Or & H. D. Pierson (Eds.), Taking Control: Autonomy in Language Learning (pp. 13-26). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.

[20]. Ok, L. K. (2003). The relationship of school year, sex and proficiency on the use of learning strategies in learning English of Korean junior high school students. Asian-EFLJournal, 5(3), 1-35.

[21]. O'Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[22]. Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know. New York: Newbury House.

[23]. Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies: Theoretical assumptions, research history and typology. In Wenden, A. & J. Rubin (Eds). Learner Strategies in Language Learning (pp. 15-30). Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall.

[24]. Sinclair, B. (2000). Learner autonomy: The next phase. In B. Sinclair, I. McGrath & T. Lamb (Eds.), Learner Autonomy, Teacher Autonomy: Future Directions (pp. 4-14). Essex: Pearson Education Limited.

[25]. Tarone, E. (1983). Some thoughts on the notion of communication strategy. In C. Faerch & G. Kasper (Eds.), Strategies in Interlanguage Communication (pp. 61-74). London: Longman.

[26]. Trinh, Q. L., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2003, September). An EFL Curriculum for Learner Autonomy: Design and Effects. Independent Language Learning Conference. Melbourne: Australia.

[27]. Trinh, Q. L. (2005). Stimulating learner autonomy in english language education: A curiculum innovation study in a Vietnamese context (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation), University of Amsterdam.

[28]. Wenden, A. (1991). Learner Strategies for Learner Autonomy: Planning and Implementing Learner Training for Language Learners. Hemel Hemstead Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall.

[29]. White, C. (1995). Autonomy and strategy use in distance foreign language learning: Research findings. System, 23(2), 207-221. https://doi.org/10.1016/0346- 251X(95)00009-9

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Research Paper

EFL Students and Instructors' Perceptions on How Digital Literacy is Perceived in the Turkish Context: A Qualitative Study

Ceyhun Yukselir* , Fatma Yuvayapan**

*-** Department of English Language and Literature, Osmaniye Korkut Ata University, Turkey.

Yukselir, C., and Yuvayapan, F. (2019). EFL Students' and Instructors' Views on How Digital Literacy is Perceived in the Turkish Context: A Qualitative Study. i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching, 9(4), 50-64. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.9.4.16608

Abstract

This study explores EFL students and instructors' perceptions on digital literacy to understand their perceptions towards using digital tools in English language classrooms. The participants (N=136, 46 females and 90 males) are EFL students enrolled at a state university located in southeast part of Turkey, who are studying in different departments ranging from engineering, aviation management to architecture and medicine in addition to EFL instructors (N=27, 20 females and 7 males) working in the same university. The study was designed as qualitative in nature in order to develop a deeper interpretation of participants' understanding of the concept of Digital Literacy (DL). An open-ended questionnaire with background information section was used as the data collection tool for both groups separately. The data collected were analysed by conducting content analysis. Findings indicate that EFL students and instructors' understanding of DL was centered on different concepts. EFL students considered DL skills as a tool to reach and analyse information on the net whereas these skills serve as a means of social interaction and communication for EFL instructors. The Implications of the findings are also discussed for EFL students and instructors in Turkey with regard to English language teaching field.

References

[1]. Allen, C., & Berggren, J. (2016). Digital literacy and sustainability – a field study in EFL teacherdevelopment. In S. Papadima-Sophocleous, L. Bradley & S. Thouësny (Eds), CALL Communities and Culture – Short Papers from EUROCALL 2016 (pp. 14-19). https://doi.org/10.14705/ rpnet.2016.eurocall2016.53

[2]. Avidov-Ungar, O., & Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2011). Teachers in a world of change: Teachers' knowledge and attitudes towards the implementation of innovative technologies in schools. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 7(1), 291-303.

[3]. Buck, A. (2012). Examining digital literacy practices on social network sites. Research in the Teaching of English, 47(1), 9-38.

[4]. Celik, S., & Aytin, K. (2014). Teachers' views on digital educational tools in English language learning: Benefits and challenges in the Turkish context. Tesl-Ej, 18(2), 1-18.

[5]. Chase, Z., & Laufenberg, D. (2011). Embracing the squishiness of digital literacy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 54(7), 535-537. https://doi.org/10.1598/ JAAL.54.7.7

[6]. Cirit, N. C. (2015). Assessing ELT pre-service teachers via Web 2.0 Tools: Perceptions toward traditional, online and alternative assessment. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 14(3), 9-19.

[7]. Cote, T., & Milliner, B. (2018). Asurvey of EFL teachers' digital literacy: A report from a Japanese Unıversity. Teaching English with Technology, 18(4), 71-89.

[8]. Digital Literacy European Commission Working Paper. (2007). Retrieved from https://www.ifap.ru/librar y/ book386.pdf on August 5, 2019.

[9]. Durriyah, T. L., & Zuhdi, M. (2018). Digital Literacy with EFL Student Teachers: Exploring Indonesian Student Teachers' Initial Perception about Integrating Digital Technologies into a Teaching Unit. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 6(3), 53-60. Educational Technology, 24(1), 108-122. https://doi.org/10.14742/ ajet.1233

[10]. Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2004). Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the digital era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(1), 93-106.

[11]. Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2009). A holistic model of thinking skills in the digital era. In Rogers, P., Berg. G., Boettcher, J., Howard, C., Justice, L., Schenck, K. (Eds.), Enclopedia of nd Distance Learning (2 Ed) (pp. 1088-1093). New York: Information Science Reference.

[12]. Eshet-Alkalai, Y., & Chajut, E. (2009). Changes over time in digitalliteracy. Cyber Psychology & Behavior, 12(6), 713-715.

[13]. Eshet-Alkalai, Y., & Chajut, E. (2010). You can teach old dogs new tricks: The factors that affect changes over time in digital literacy. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 9(1), 173-181.

[14]. Hobbs, R., & Tuzel, S. (2017). Teacher motivations for digital and media literacy: An examination of Turkish educators. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(1), 7-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12326

[15]. Hockly, N. (2012). Digital literacies. ELT Journal, 66(1), 108-112. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccr077

[16]. Hutchison, A. (2012). Literacy teachers' perceptions of professional development that increases integration of technology into literacy instruction. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 21(1), 37-56. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 1475939X.2012.659894

[17]. Juurakko-Paavola, T., Rontu, H., & Nelson, M. (2018). Language teacher perceptions and practices of digital literacy in Finnish higher education. AFinLAn vuosikirja, 75(1), 41-60. https://doi.org/10.30661/afinlavk.69640

[18]. Kennedy, G. E., Judd, T. S., Churchward, A., Gray, K., & Krause, K.-L. (2008). First year students' experiences with technology: Are they digital natives? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(1), 108-122.

[19]. Krippendorf, K. (1980). Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodologies. London, UK: Sage.

[20]. Liu, J. (2009). A survey of EFL learners' attitudes toward information and communication technologies. English Language Teaching, 2(4), 101-106.

[21]. Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., & Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students' use of digital technologies. Computers & Education, 56(2), 429- 440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.09.004

[22]. Martin, A., & Grudziecki, J. (2006). DigEuLit: Concepts and tools for digital literacy development. Innovation in Teaching and Learning in Information and Computer Sciences, 5(4), 249-267. https://doi.org/10.11120/ ital.2006.05040249

[23]. Ng, W. (2012). Can we teach digital natives digital literacy? Computers & Education, 59(3), 1065-1078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.016

[24]. Oz, H. (2015). Assessing pre-service english as a foreign language teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge. International Education Studies, 8(5), 119-130.

[25]. Oz, H., Demirezen, M., & Pourfeiz, J. (2015). Digital device ownership, computer literacy, and attitudes toward foreign and computer-assisted language learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 186, 359-366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.028

[26]. Pegrum, M. (2010). 'I link, therefore I am': Network literacy as a core digital literacy. E-learning and Digital Media, 7(4), 346-354. https://doi.org/10.2304/ elea.2010.7.4.346

[27]. Pianfetti, E. S. (2001). Focus on research: Teachers and technology: Digital literacy through professional development. Language Arts, 78(3), 255-262.

[28]. Rambousek, V., Štípek, J., & Vaňková, P. (2016). Contents of digital literacy from the perspective of teachers and pupils. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 217, 354-362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.02.101

[29]. Saglam, A. L. G., & Sert, S. (2012). Perceptions of inservice teachers regarding technology integrated English language teaching. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 3(3), 1-14.

[30]. Son, J. B., Park, S. S., & Park, M. (2017). Digital literacy of language learners in two different contexts. JALT CALL Journal, 13(2), 77-96.

[31]. Son, J. B., Robb, T., & Charismiadji, I. (2011). Computer literacy and competency: A survey of Indonesian teachers of English as a foreign language. Computer-Assisted Language Learning Electronic Journal (CALL-EJ), 12(1), 26-42.

[32]. White, J. (2015). Digital Literacy Skills for FE Teachers. Learning Matters. London, Sage Publication.

[33]. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Research Paper

A Critical Reflection of Constructivist Teaching in CLT at Higher Secondary Education in Bangladesh

Robiul Islam*

Department of English, Ishwardi Government College, Bangladesh.

Islam, M. R. (2019). A Critical Reflection of Constructivist Teaching in CLT at Higher Secondary Education in Bangladesh. i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching, 9(4), 65-77. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.9.4.16006

Abstract

In this study, the theory and practices of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) have been investigated in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classroom. The study applies constructivism learning theory in CLT for developing communicative competence among students of higher secondary education in Bangladesh. Though the national curriculum of Bangladesh has started CLT for decades, still, students' competence in using the English language for communication is questioned. In this reality, following constructivism theory, scaffolding, and cooperative learning strategies, lesson plans were prepared for the students of eleven grade in Bangladeshi college. After conducting the lessons, this researcher arranged a summative assessment, where he found that paradigm shifts in the instructional strategies of teaching English from lecture method to constructivist teaching in CLT would bring about a revolutionary change in achieving communicative competence of the students. Again, for effective implementation of CLT in EFL context like Bangladeshi colleges, proper class size, seating arrangement, a trained teacher and right context should be maintained strictly; otherwise, all efforts will go in vain.

References

[1]. Attle, S., & Baker, B. (2007). Cooperative learning in a competitive environment: Classroom applications. International Journal of Teaching & Learning in Higher Education, 19(1), 77-83.

[2]. Balan, J. (2014). English Global Dominance and the Other Languages of Higher Education & Research. Colombia Global Centre, Colombia University.

[3]. Benson, P., & Voller, P. (2014). Autonomy and Independence in Language Learning. Routledge.

[4]. Blumenfeld, P. C. (1992). Classroom learning and motivation: Clarifying and expanding goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84 (3), 272-281. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.272

[5]. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42. https://doi.org/10.3102/001318 9X018001032

[6]. Chang, K. E., Sung, Y. T., & Chen, I. D. (2002). The effect of concept mapping to enhance text comprehension and summarization. The Journal of Experimental Education, 71(1), 5-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220970209602054

[7]. Cunningham, D. J. (1991). Assessing constructions and constructing assessments: A dialogue. Educational Technology, 31(5), 13-17.

[8]. Dennen, V. P. (2004). Cognitive apprenticeship in educational practice: Research on scaffolding, modeling, mentoring, and coaching as instructional strategies. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 813-828).

[9]. Dyson, B., & Grineski, S. (2001). Using cooperative learning structures in physical education. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 72(2), 28-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2001.10605831

[10]. Erling, E. J. (2017). Language planning, English language education and development aid in Bangladesh. Current Issues in Language Planning, 18(4), 388-406. https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2017. 1331496

[11]. Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50-72. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1937-8327.1993.tb00605.x

[12]. Harmer, J. (2008). How to teach English. ELT Journal, 62(3), 313-316. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccn029

[13]. Hartman, H. (2002). Scaffolding & Cooperative Learning. Human Learning and Instruction (pp. 23-69). New York: City College of City University of New York.

[14]. Humphries, S., & Burns, A. (2015). 'In reality it's almost impossible': CLT- oriented curriculum change. ELT Journal, 69(3), 239-248. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccu081

[15]. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Making cooperative learning work. Theory into Practice, 38(2), 67- 73. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849909543834

[16]. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (1994). The New Circles of Learning: Cooperation in the Classroom and School. ASCD.

[17]. Jacobs, G. M., & Farrell, T. S. (2003). Understanding and implementing the CLT (Communicative Language Teaching) paradigm. RELC Journal, 34(1), 5-30. https://doi. org/10.1177/003368820303400102

[18]. Kagan, S. (1989). The structural approach to cooperative learning. Educational Leadership, 47(4), 12- 15.

[19]. Karim, J. S. (2018). The Role of Classroom Environment in Learning English in Bangladesh: HSC Level (Doctoral Dissertation, East West University).

[20]. Kayi-Aydar, H. (2013). Scaffolding language learning in an academic ESL classroom. ELT Journal, 67(3), 324-335. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cct016

[21]. Kosnik, C., Menna, L., Dharamshi, P., & Beck, C. (2018). Constructivism as a framework for literacy teacher education courses: The cases of six literacy teacher educators. European Journal of Teacher Education, 41(1), 105-119. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2017.1372742

[22]. Li, D. (1998). “It's always more difficult than you plan and imagine”: Teachers' perceived difficulties in introducing the communicative approach in South Korea. TESOL Quarterly, 32(4), 677-703. https://doi.org/10.2307/ 3588000

[23]. Liang, T. (2002). Implementing Cooperative Learning in EFL Teaching: Process and Effects. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation), National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan.

[24]. Littlewood, W. (2007). Communicative and taskbased language teaching in East Asian classrooms. Language Teaching, 40(3), 243-249. https://doi.org/ 10.1017/S0261444807004363

[25]. Mamun, M. M., Sultana, N. & Shayeekh-Us-Saleheen, M. (2011). Classroom Practices in Teaching English at Tertiary Level in Bangladesh. Eastern University Journal, 3(2), 91-101.

[26]. Manzer, J. P., & Bialik, D. M. (1997). Team and group learning strategies for business and economics classes. In Business Education Forum (Vol. 51, No. 4, pp. 32-35).

[27]. McKenzie, J. (1999). How Teachers Learn Technology Best. Bellingham, WA: Fno Press.

[28]. Peyar, A. (2011). CLT in Theory and Practice (Doctoral Dissertation), East West University.

[29]. Rahman, M. (2015). Teaching English at HSC Level in Bangladesh: An empirical appraisal. ASA University Review, 9(1), 203-216.

[30]. Richardson, L. (2003). Writing: A method of inquiry. In Lincoln, Y. S., & Denzin, N. K. (Eds). Turning Points in Qualitative Research: Tying Knots in a Handkerchief (pp. 379-396). Walnet Greek, CA: Alta Mira Press.

[31]. Rouf, M. A., & Sultana, K. N. (2015). Learner Role in CLT: Practices in the Higher Secondary Classrooms. Journal of NELTA, 20(1-2), 34-40. https://doi.org/10.3126/nelta.v20i1- 2.19775

[32]. Skehan, P. (2003). Task-based instruction. Language Teaching, 36(1), 1-14.

[33.] Steffe, L. P., & Gale, J. E. (Eds.). (1995). Constructivism in Education (p. 159). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

[34]. Ventimiglia, L. M. (1994). Cooperative Learning at the College Level. Thought and Action, 9(2), 5-30.

[35]. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j. 1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x

i-manager's Journal on English Language Teaching (JELT)

Current Issue Vol. 13 Issue 4

Most Read

Most Cited

Volume 9 Issue 4 October - December 2019

The Native-Speaker Model in Japan: Failure, Success, or Cultural Manipulation?

Adam Crosby*

Kobe City College of Nursing, Kobe, Japan.

Crosby, A. (2019). The Native-Speaker Model in Japan: Failure, Success, or Cultural Manipulation? i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching, 9(4), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.9.4.15231

Abstract

References

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

The Study of Ergativity Acquisition by Persian-Speaking Learners of English

Zahra Sadat Roozafzai*

ACECR Institute of Higher Education (Isfahan Branch), Iran.

Roozafzai, Z. S. (2019). The Study of Ergativity Acquisition by Persian-Speaking Learners of English. i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching, 9(4), 5-13. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.9.4.15562

Abstract

References

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Peer Interaction in an EFL Context: Task Variety, Proficiency Level and Awareness of Learners

Zeynep Aysan-Sahintas* , Seda Okur**, Muslume Demir***

* English Language Teaching Program, Middle East Technical University, Turkey. ** Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Middle East Technical University, Turkey. *** Foreign Languages Unit, Çankaya University, Turkey.

Aysan-Sahintas, Z., Okur, S., and Demir, M. (2019). Peer Interaction in an EFL Context: Task Variety, Proficiency Level and Awareness of Learners. i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching, 9(4), 14-27. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.9.4.16091

Abstract

References

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

English Learners’ Attitudes toward English as an International Language: A Qualitative Inquiry

Muhammad Rahimi* , Maryam Pakzadian **

*School of Foreign Languages, Qilu University of Technology (Shandong Academy of Sciences), Jinan, China. **Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.

Rahimi, M., and Pakzadian, M. (2019). English Learners' Attitudes toward English as an International Language: A Qualitative Inquiry. i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching, 9(4), 28-40. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.9.4.16107

Abstract

References

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

The Relationship between First Year English Major Students' Language Learning Strategy Use and Learner Autonomy

Nam Thanh Ta* , Phuong Uyen Ngo**, Tran Bao Thi Le***

*-*** Can Tho University of Technology, Can Tho, Vietnam.

Ta, N. T., Ngo, P. U., and Le, T. B. T. (2019). The Relationship between First Year English Major Students' Language Learning Strategy Use and Learner Autonomy. i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching, 9(4), 41-49. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.9.4.15996

Abstract

References

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

EFL Students and Instructors' Perceptions on How Digital Literacy is Perceived in the Turkish Context: A Qualitative Study

Ceyhun Yukselir* , Fatma Yuvayapan**

*-** Department of English Language and Literature, Osmaniye Korkut Ata University, Turkey.

Yukselir, C., and Yuvayapan, F. (2019). EFL Students' and Instructors' Views on How Digital Literacy is Perceived in the Turkish Context: A Qualitative Study. i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching, 9(4), 50-64. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.9.4.16608

Abstract

References

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

A Critical Reflection of Constructivist Teaching in CLT at Higher Secondary Education in Bangladesh

Robiul Islam*

Department of English, Ishwardi Government College, Bangladesh.

Islam, M. R. (2019). A Critical Reflection of Constructivist Teaching in CLT at Higher Secondary Education in Bangladesh. i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching, 9(4), 65-77. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.9.4.16006

Abstract

References

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Zeynep Aysan-Sahintas* , Seda Okur, Muslume Demir*

* English Language Teaching Program, Middle East Technical University, Turkey.

Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Middle East Technical University, Turkey.

* Foreign Languages Unit, Çankaya University, Turkey.

*School of Foreign Languages, Qilu University of Technology (Shandong Academy of Sciences), Jinan, China.

**Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.

Nam Thanh Ta* , Phuong Uyen Ngo, Tran Bao Thi Le*