Nama: Muhamad safroni Hidayatullah

Nim: 190107082

Argumentative Writing

Assignment 22-27 November 2021

Please extract and write the arguments that respectively support both the native and non-native English
speaking teachers from the two readings shared to your WA group. You must collect your work to your
class leader who will then submit to me by no more than Friday, 26 th November 2021. Bear in mind that
you must paraphrase all the main arguments, give the reasons and examples.

Note: You must cite the references and name the word doc file by your name.

Arguments Pro Native English Speaking Teachers (NEST)

1. Argument 1: Yet Kramsch (1997) points out that native speaker speech is inevitably influenced

by geography, occupation, age and social status, and that “standard” forms of English are the

exception rather than the norm. Paikeday (1985, as cited in Kramsch, 1997, p. 362) frames the

idea of the native speaker as the ultimate authority on linguistic correctness as a “convenient

fiction, or a shibbole.

Reasons: However, NESTs’ speech could be difficult for L2 learners to understand, and the

differing linguistic and cultural background of most NESTs sometimes inhibited learning.

Example: Han’s (2005) small-scale investigation of the Korean context pointed to a possible

perception that NESTs lacked insight into the local educational context and sometimes failed to

establish rapport with students.

2. Argument 2: Clark and Paran’s (2007) perpetuate a hegemony that favors educators,

academics, language institutes, and publishing companies in the Center countries (Kachru, 1986)

where English is a national or official language. These people enjoy higher salaries, greater

prestige, textbook sales, research funding, and management and academic positions.
 Reasons: Kirkpatrick maintains that the most appropriate linguistic benchmarks should be

derived from bilingual or multilingual speakers using English as a lingua franca in region-specific

contexts.

Example: Nevertheless, the “convenient fiction” that native speakers are the ideal teachers of

English language continues to dominate the English language teaching profession (cf. Wang,

2012), and teachers who are not native speakers find themselves viewed as deficient educators.

3. Argument 3: Mahboob’s (2003) study of 32 students in an intensive English program at a U.S.

college revealed a range of opinions: NESTs were perceived to have good oral skills, a wide

vocabulary, and knowledge about their own culture, but they often had little facility with

grammar and had difficulty explaining complex items (cf. Lasagabaster & Sierra, 2005).

Reasons: They were perceived as having little language learning experience and lacked

knowledge about language by students struggling to master the L2 themselves (Arva &

Medgyes, 2000).

Example: Cheung and Braine’s (2007) study of 420 students in Hong Kong revealed a generally

favorable attitude toward non-NESTs, whose perceived effectiveness matched native-speaker

teachers.

4. Argument 4: The most common perceived advantage of learning English from a NEST was

exposure to native pronunciation as a model for linguistic output (VLE = 60%; JLE = 54%; see

Table 1), enabling respondents to improve their pronunciation by imitating a native speaker’s

talk “just like babies do” (JLE 19).

Reasons: One commonly voiced issue was accuracy, summed up in JLE 25’s assertion that “some

non-native teachers can’t pronounce correctly.” Another perception was that non-NESTs’

pronunciation was inferior, as VLE 34 mentions, “The pronunciation of a non-native-speaker

teacher is normally not as good exact as a native speaker teacher.”

 Example: Of 43 international students surveyed by Pacek (2005) at a British university, 24

agreed that clear pronunciation was paramount in language teachers, but only 7 argued

specifically for native-speaker pronunciation.

Arguments Pro Non-Native English Speaking Teachers (N-NEST)

1. Argument 1: In my opinion, being aggressive is a very serious issue among teachers because

non-NESTs have linguistic problems that may cause negative attitude towards their students. In

contrast, luckily pessimistic type is believed to be the most common one among students. These

kinds of students are obsessed with grammar and pays little attention to pronunciation and

vocabulary, and almost none to linguistic appropriateness.

Reasons: Medgyes furthermore states that by being both teacher and learner at the same time,

non-NESTs are driven into a constant state of bad feeling.

Example: These, of course, may result in the production of many types of errors such as

phonological, structural and semantic.

2. Argument 2: Medgyes points out that NESTs are only potentially superior and that in some cases

non-natives do better in certain areas of language use. Medgyes found that every non-NEST has

his or her own problems when using English; however, he found some patterns in the areas of

difficulties.

Reasons: The most frequent areas are fluency and vocabulary, followed by speaking,

pronunciation, and listening comprehension.

Example: At the bottom of the list were grammar, idiomatic expressions, appropriacy,

intonation, and prepositions.

3. Argument 3: In many cases, Non-NESTs are more able to anticipate language difficulties.

According to Larsen-Freeman and Long, it is estimated that between 23% and 51% of the errors

that occur between two languages are due to the transfer and interference from L1.10
 Therefore, a non-NEST can definitely take advantage from this condition, whereas NESTs do not

really have this experience.

Reasons: As nonNESTs are also learners themselves, most likely they are still struggling with

English and this makes them more sensitive and understanding with their students’ problems.

Example: Where a teacher usually acts as a partner to his or her students. Students, as a

consequence, learn better from such teachers.

4. Argument 4: In regard to language being spoken, Non-NESTs can benefit from sharing the

learner's mother tongue. In a monolingual setting, for instance that of Indonesian speakers

teaching English in Indonesia, their mother tongue can be used as a bridge of communication.

Reasons: In this case, it would be easier for the Indonesian non-NESTs to use the students'

language and translate the term as ‘kereta’ because it can save much time, fortunately.

Example: For example, if a student asks what the word's car’t means, it will be very easy for a

native teacher to explain the meaning of the word in English. But the students may have a

chance of misunderstanding the word as a 'trolley' or 'wagon' instead.