Teaching EFL Writing & the Politics of Globalization-influenced Changes

The article by You discusses the varied effects that globalization has had on the teaching of English as a Foreign Language in China (and other non-English-dominant countries). The influence of globalization has led to changes in the way English is being taught, and further demands of the organizations in power have, by decree, ensured that the specified changes are implemented. In 2004, the Ministry of Education in China published “Teaching Requirements for College English Curriculum,” a decree that specifies changes in curriculum, pedagogy, assessment, and administration.  Included in this decree’s is “the teaching of language learning strategies and cross-cultural communication skills” (190), as well as a change in the way English literacy is defined and quantified. Instead of two levels of proficiency or language ability, with unclear delineations of each level (which had previously been in effect), the new decree outlines three very specific levels of ability that can define a student’s proficiency upon exiting the English program. There is a clear message in the new decree: students who plan to pursue advanced degrees will have to perform at high levels to proceed.  In addition, the decree specifies the expectation of a high level of student proficiency with technology and with independent, individualized learning strategies.  Technological literacy goes hand in hand with language literacy.

I find it interesting that what is happening in the 21^st century in China is not far behind what is happening in the United States. In fact, it has not been that long ago that I was teaching in the computer lab at a Peoria high school, and similar “decrees” were issued (you know how school boards and parent groups can be!), which produced many changes in our school’s curriculum involving student achievement and technology. Just as we experienced (our desire for the changes was not on equal pace with our school’s ability to afford the desired technologies), apparently schools in China are experiencing or have recently experienced. One of the biggest challenges is to make everything that you want happen when you need it to happen. Unfortunately, it takes time (a significant amount of it), and money (a huge amount of it), and terrific planning skills – to make it work, and it does not stop there. Once you get the ball rolling, you must set in place the operations (and the resources) to keep it moving, and moving smoothly.  Yes, English is a necessary “tool for international communication” (190) in our global society, and the changes in curriculum and pedagogy are warranted. However, the problems faced by the institutions in China have been faced by other institutions making similar changes, and these problems/challenges should have been anticipated. The fact that there was dissension in the teaching ranks shows that despite cultural differences, teachers have similar attitudes when placed in similar situations. It also seems apparent that faculty and staff need advance notice and preparation to ensure that anticipated changes are presented in a thorough fashion to all interested (and uninterested, but involved) parties—prior to the changes being implemented. Things usually go smoother when more people are knowledgeable about the way the new equipment/curriculum/ teaching methods are supposed to work.

Graduate Studies for L2 Learners

Several important concepts stand out from the readings for this week. George Braine points out that the level of academic literacy required of students in graduate school involves “more than the ability to read and write effectively” (60). Graduate students must have a solid knowledge of their subject matter, good research skills, as well as “sound social skills” evidenced by frequent opportunities for communication with others within their department. In addition, despite the relationship of one’s writing skills to success in graduate courses, case study research indicates that “a collaborative relationship” with one’s advisor “is essential to” the success of the student (65).

Graduate students whose first language is other than English face additional challenges than do native speakers of English, as the article by Canagarajah points out. In the past few decades, teachers have focused on grammatical proficiency and cultural differences between students representing various multilingual groups. However, as Canagarajah has noted, these pedagogical concerns are perhaps not as important in today’s world, since, due to the increased globalization of English and Anglo/American culture, many ESL students are more aware than in previous years of “Western linguistic/cultural characteristics” (10), and therefore, they have developed a rather “hybrid” (11) perspective in terms of their “composing strategies” in English (12).  The challenges faced by non-native speaking graduate students of today involve the need to understand and negotiate the “identities, values, and discourses” (21) that these multilingual/multicultural students have brought with them in relationship to those of the dominant language/culture and its implicit ideologies.

I found the “social skills” aspect of graduate student development quite interesting. As important as knowledge of one’s subject matter and the ability to express oneself both orally and in writing must be, it seems equally (or more) important to possess the social aptitude for successful interactions with others in the department to be truly successful in a graduate program. This seems to be one of the most challenging aspects of graduate school for an L2 learner.

Second Language Writing in First Year Composition Classes

      The Leki and Matsuda articles seemed to encapsulate many of the issues that we have discussed in class regarding the teaching of writing in college composition courses. Leki outlines the following problems:

1) Students are required to take a composition course during the first year of the undergraduate program, which may not be the most effective time for a writing course.

2) These first-year courses are often staffed by the least experienced instructors or teaching assistants, which may not produce the best results (if the hoped-for result is better quality writing production from the students taking the courses).

3) These courses are often over-crowded, which might lead the instructor to spend less time, on average, assessing or commenting on each writing assignment, which in turn could translate into lower rates of improvement in writing skill by the students.

4) There seems to be an assumption that one year is enough time for all students (whether native English speakers or students who are non-native English speakers but have satisfied university admission requirements) to develop the necessary writing skills (or improve existing skills) to succeed in the academic environment of a university setting.

            Leki includes the above problems as “part of the negative legacy that second language (L2) English writing students and practitioners have inherited and typically must live with” (Leki 59).  This “negative legacy” might also be considered negative for some native English speaking students. For example, students who speak dialects other than “privileged varieties” (Matsuda 639) may have many of the same difficulties with composition courses as do international students and others for whom English is a second (or subsequent) language.

            In addition, Matsuda points out that “the myth of linguistic homogeneity” is not simply a problem in English composition courses; indeed, its repercussions abound in classrooms in universities throughout the United States. Many educators have realized that the majority of courses taught in America reflect, both in content and in ideology, a socio-cultural background that most native-English speakers can relate to, and can integrate new concepts with, but that many international students and many other English language learners (even at advanced proficiency levels) find difficult to understand, because they do not possess the knowledge required to connect these concepts to their existing background knowledge in the subject area.

            It seems that as the demographics of first-year composition courses in colleges and universities have changed, in many cases, the instruction has not changed. Many teachers find themselves facing students from a wide variety of ethnic and linguistic backgrounds, and despite their training, may not feel prepared to handle the challenges of teaching writing according to their notion of the “standard,” which is often what they assumed their job to be.

           Have the goals of the job changed? Or do they need to change? Should instructors of English writing courses, such as first-year composition, include other language skills (such as speaking) as part of the curriculum? Should this be a consideration only for classes offered as an option to ESL students in the university? Leki discussed briefly the fact that L2 students in American universities are typically not offered, and usually are not required to take “credit courses for any language skills besides writing…” (61). We know that it is important for all students to develop effective writing skills, especially those students who are planning to pursue further academic coursework, but should students whose first language is not English have the opportunity to register for an alternative first-year undergraduate course for credit, such as a course that combines writing and speaking toward a goal of improving L2 communication overall?