Global Englishes and Teacher Education: Present Cases and Future Directions

Introduction

It needs to be recognized that teacher education is key in ensuring that a global Englishes (GE)-informed curriculum and pedagogy are practiced when the English language is used as a global language. As an umbrella term, GE includes world Englishes, English as a lingua franca (ELF), and English as an international language (Fang and Ren, 2018; Galloway, 2017). In recent years, the concept of GE has been applied to challenge the emphasis on native-speakerism in English language education (Holliday, 2006).

The importance of implementing a GE-informed curriculum and pedagogy has been discussed in previous studies (Fang and Widodo, 2019; Rose and Galloway, 2019; Rose et al., 2020). These studies have shown that teachers are key stakeholders, as they are driving forces in implementing GE into their teaching, thus reinforcing a GE-informed pedagogy. However, traditional teacher education programs have largely neglected the importance of incorporating GE into language teaching, and they have not supported GE-informed teacher education programs (with exceptions see, e.g., Matsuda, 2017; Selvi and Yazan, 2021). This thematic review addresses the importance of English language teacher education from the GE perspective. In this paper, teacher refers to English language practitioners from primary education to tertiary education in different contexts of implementing GE in the classroom.

Moving From a Traditional English Language Teaching Model

In traditional native-oriented English language teaching (ELT) programs, non-native English-speaking teachers (NNESTs) tend to suffer linguistic discrimination and feelings of inequality, which may lead to low self-confidence, anxiety, job insecurity, and even job burnout due to their non-native identities (Rudolph et al., 2015; Ruecker and Ives, 2015). The monolithic ontology of English has dominated traditional ELT theory and practice, which needs to be revisited through teacher education programs. If teachers have an opportunity to be offered the concept of GE for pre- and in-service trainings, they could develop a GE awareness and incorporate such notion into their teaching, and thus transform more inclusive identities during their career (Jenkins, 2015; Rose and Galloway, 2019).

Traditional ELT is based on native speaker norms, which has led to an ideology of native speakerism (Holliday, 2006). Hence, teachers use certain syllabi, which they are asked to follow in teaching and assessing their learners. From the native-speakerism ideology, teachers’ competence is often evaluated according to standard English (Fang, 2018; Houghton and Rivers, 2013). However, the deep-rooted native-speakerism ideology should be challenged from the GE perspective to raise teachers’ awareness of the diversity of the English language. This includes not only NNESTs, who may suffer marginalization due to the native speakerism ideology (Kumaravadivelu, 2006), but also native English-speaking teachers (NESTs), who are traditionally privileged based on their language competence. From the GE perspective, NESTs should develop more realistic understanding of the English language instead of imposing “native-like” proficiency to their students. They should no longer be privileged because of their status but learn to be language educators who view English as a complex linguistic entity that reflects social changes in power and hierarchy, identity and dominance, and inequality and struggle (Fang, 2018; Kubota, 2016; Pennycook and Makoni, 2020).

However, we do not deny that GE-informed teacher education has been emphasized in teaching training programs and teacher development (Matsuda, 2017; Prabjandee, 2020; Selvi and Yazan, 2021), but it has been primarily implemented by a group of GE scholars in their own contexts. Moreover, GE teacher education should also recognize teacher cognition for sustainable reflections on “the plurality as well as the fluidity of the use of English observed in various international communicative contexts” (Marlina, 2018, p. 4, italics in original).

Teacher Cognition of Global Englishes in Teacher Education

Teacher cognition refers to “what teachers think, know, and believe and the relationships of these mental constructs to what teachers do in the language teaching classroom” (Borg, 2003, p. 81). From a broader perspective, teacher cognition includes teachers’ knowledge, beliefs, conceptions, and attitudes (Rose et al., 2020). Teachers’ beliefs are usually shaped by their prior experiences, especially those related to their own learning experiences. When the cognition pattern of a teacher is established, it will continue to play a vital role throughout the teacher's career (Borg, 2003).

Teacher cognition plays a significant role in schooling, professional coursework, contextual factors, and classroom practice (Borg, 2003). Influenced by their cognition, teachers decide what materials to use, what content to teach, what activities to conduct in classrooms, as well as other aspects related to teaching. The understanding of language teachers’ beliefs significantly facilitates teaching strategies, contributing to the development of foreign language learners’ second language acquisition. As main stakeholders in teacher education, teachers have a salient influence on students’ English learning outcomes as well as on their perspectives on the English language. To fit the global spread of English and adopt the concept of GE, teachers must shift their cognition from traditional assumptions about ELT to a GE-informed perspective.

An ELF-Aware Teacher Education Model

Because of the development of GE and frequent intercultural encounters, English should no longer be viewed as a linguistic/cultural symbolic system used by its native speakers. English has become an international language, thus challenging the traditional native speaker goals of ELT. Before the term GE was widely adopted in teacher education programs, the term EIL (English as an international language) or ELF was more popular when referring to EIL/ELF-informed teacher education.

Bayyurt and Sifakis (2015) divided the ELF-aware teacher education model into three phases: theory, application and evaluation. The theory phase involves theory building, in which teachers are exposed to theoretical aspects of ELF. This exposure involves interactions with non-native speakers, which are assisted by multimedia resources for ELF (Bayyurt and Sifakis, 2017; Cameron and Galloway, 2019). After this period of exposure, student teachers are supposed to be aware of the role of English in communication in the global context, and they can critically reflect on the global spread of English. In the application phase, teachers are required to apply the learned principles to local contexts. They design their own pedagogical plans to suit their specific contexts. They start teaching lessons, which they must record for later evaluation. In the final evaluation phase, teachers are required to evaluate and reflect on their teaching practice through self and peer evaluations. The two premises of self-evaluations are their own understanding of ELF and the specific conditions in their pedagogical contexts (Bayyurt and Sifakis, 2017).

GE Teacher Education Programs

Previous studies have examined the model of theory, application, and evaluation in teacher education programs (Bayyurt and Sifakis, 2017; Kemaloglu-Er and Bayyurt, 2018), which will be discussed in this section. Again, some previous studies adopted the term EIL/ELF teacher education in previous studies, which in essence was the same as GE-informed teacher education used in this thematic review.

To bridge the gaps in ELF-aware pre-service teacher education in the Turkish context, Kemaloglu-Er and Bayyurt (2018) conducted a teacher education project based on a transformative teacher education model. They argued that ELF-aware teacher education programs effectively foster student teachers to define ELF and implement ELF-aware pedagogy in their own ways through exposure to and critical reflection on theoretical aspects of ELF. Through application, student teachers develop the ability to evaluate not only their own practice but also the advantages of and barriers to ELF-aware pedagogy. However, barriers to ELF-aware pedagogy remain, such as the exam culture and resistance from other stakeholders such as parents.

In the Japanese context, where endonormative models of English have been called for, Hino (2017) incorporated a cultural perspective into ELT and conducted a year-long program entitled “Principles and Practices of EIL Education.” In the theory phase, teacher trainees were presented with authentic EIL examples of communication in recordings of a range of non-native English, which exposed them to linguistic and cultural diversity. In addition, examples of EIL pedagogical practices were accompanied by materials of non-Anglophone linguacultures, providing a basis for subsequent theoretical discussions in the evaluation phase and in developing their own EIL pedagogy in the application phase. In this phase, the “Content and ELF Integrated Learning” approach was applied to integrate ELF with an emphasis on interactional dynamism. This phase provided student teachers with opportunities to experience authentic EIL interaction, which proved highly effective in their ability to recognize the interactive and dynamic nature of EIL.

Vettorel and Lopriore (2017) investigated different implementations of teacher education programs in two cases in Italy. In case 1, in the initial three units, GE was explained to the student teachers, fostering their reflections on their existing knowledge of Englishes, adaptations to variations of English, and their experience of ELF. In the next three units, the student teachers were introduced to GE-aware pedagogy, including textbook evaluation, lesson planning, and content-based and skill-oriented teaching. In case 2, to explore different examples of English in various contexts, GE was embedded in three components: English culture and literature, language teaching methodology, and information and communications technologies. In both case 1 and case 2, student teachers’ reflection on and motivation to incorporate GE into their pedagogical practice were promoted. The program provided student teachers opportunities to become acquainted with the plurality of GE and form an inclusive perspective on GE-informed pedagogy.

In the context of Brazil, where the ELF perspective is relatively new, ELF-aware pre-service teacher education remains sparse. With the purpose of raising ELF-aware pedagogy, El Kardi et al. (2017) conducted an ELF teacher education program with undergraduate pre-service teachers. This program was designed to acquaint student teachers with various aspects of ELF. From the perspective of ELF-aware teaching and teacher education, the student teachers were inspired by their reflections on learning methodologies, theories, and practices, and they envisaged the pedagogical implications of ELF. The theory phase began with an introduction to the status of English and the origin of ELF. The knowledge of ELF was demonstrated concerning its linguistic, political/social, and educational implications. In the evaluation phase, the student teachers learned implications of ELF, which they evaluated through practicing task-based learning. Regarding the implications of ELF, multimedia resources were exploited to learn about the characteristics of Englishes. The exposure to theories and implications of ELF enabled both the student teachers and the teacher educators to reflect on and improve their pedagogical practice.

Farzi et al. (2021) conducted a GE-informed professional development course for a group of rural teachers in China who went to a Canadian university for teacher training. In the theory-building phase, exposure to varieties of English and GE resources fostered student teachers’ understanding of GE theory and its practical value in ELT. In the application phase, the student teachers formulated a context-specific lesson plan based on the theory built in the first phase. In the evaluation phase, the student teachers self-reflected on their implementation of the lesson plan to determine differences in EFL teaching realities between their local rural context of the Expanding Circle and the Canadian context in the Inner Circle. This program boosted student teachers’ confidence in their student-centered English pedagogical practice and attempted to bridge the gap between theory and practice by enabling students to combine theory and practice in a tailor-made lesson plan.

Challenges and Future Directions of GE-Aware Teacher Education

The GE-informed teacher education programs have made remarkable achievements. However, because the long-held traditional native-speakerism ideology on English language education is not easily changed, existing challenges require attention, especially in pre-service teacher education. In particular, there is a strong link of native-speakerism in language education in practice, let alone many teacher training programs with efforts on GE-aware teacher education. Some challenges of GE-aware teacher education are discussed as follows.

First, the ideology of native-speakerism in language education remains entrenched. Hence, teachers cling to standardized English and are ambivalent about practicing what they learn in theory-building (Kemaloglu-Er and Bayyurt, 2018). Second, a paucity of relevant materials and available curricula are impediments to taking full advantage of the GE/ELF-aware teacher education model (Bayyurt and Sifakis, 2017). It is recognized that Matsuda (2017) has complied a key volume on preparing teachers to teach EIL, and that a latest volume by Selvi and Yazan (2021) has provided more practical guidance for language teacher education for GE. Still, we need further exploration of bottom–up voices regarding teachers’ own cognitive development, their willingness, and challenges of implementing GE/ELF-informed pedagogy before, during, and after teacher training programs in various contexts. Third, the gap between theory and practice cannot be ignored when student teachers teach their lessons. They are constrained by the requirement to prepare students for university entrance examinations based on native-speaker norms. Teachers are also restricted by their specific contexts, which include education policies, types of institutions, and exam-orientedness (Fang and Widodo, 2019).

To deal with such challenges, first, the adequate exposure of students to GE-related concepts and issues should be ensured so that they comprehend the status of English “to establish an ELF-aware mindset” (Soruç and Griffiths, 2021, p. 3). In this exposure, authentic materials and real-life international interactions should be included to facilitate theory-building. Second, teachers should be equipped with strategies to raise the GE awareness of other stakeholders to reduce stress due to the native-speakerism imposed on them. Third, localized textbooks could serve as appropriate teaching resources. By incorporating and contextualizing local culture content into textbooks, teachers could counter the negative influence of native-speakerism, empower themselves, and better address students’ needs. Fourth, collaborative action between teachers and students is needed. In addition to the collaborative work of educators in evaluation, collaborative efforts should also be made to choose appropriate pedagogical materials.

Future directions for GE-aware teacher education programs can help both pre-service and in-service teachers by various means, such as looking inward, looking around, and looking forward. First, the term “looking inward” means that teachers should learn to foreground their prior beliefs through self-reflection. Based on the time spent observing and interacting with their peers, teachers have inevitably come to their own conclusions about education. Thus, by facilitating teachers to voice their thoughts about their teaching choices and beliefs, self-reflection can be an effective tool for engaging teachers and teachers-to-be in revisiting English and its teaching (Choi and Liu, 2020). Second, the term “looking around” means that teachers should stay informed about their sociolinguistic landscape. ELT teachers should play the role to teach English as a global language used in multiple varieties by diverse speech communities. ELT teachers are well informed about the principles emerging from their scholarly realm, and they are able to develop instructional sequences, lesson adaptations, policies, and tests that make sense of GE/ELF curriculum innovation to suit their local contexts. Lastly, based on a clear understanding of their internal and external local contexts, teachers can “look forward” to integrating GE/ELF principles in lesson design and implementation (Marlina, 2018; Matsuda, 2017) that suits their own ELT context.