 Native-speakerism in ELT has been investigated over for several decades

 One of the most illustrative definitions belongs to Holliday (2005, p.6)

o “an established belief that ‘native speaker’ teachers represent a ‘Western culture’ from which spring
the ideals both of the English language and of English language teaching methodology’’
 Issues related to Native-Speakerism have been discussed even more eagerly once with the “nonnative
English-speaking-teacher (NNEST) movement” in the 1990
o Brain (1999), Cook (1999), Kramsch (1997, 1998)
o Brain (1999) pointed out prejudice in the profession of NNEST.
o Thomas (1999) explored prejudices against NNEST held by both students and teachers
o Canagarajah (1999) noted that teaching qualifications are based on linguistic, not professional
qualifications. He also noted that the native speaker preference prevents the development of
TESOL because it “denies the participation of Periphery teachers on equal terms” (p. 87)
 The first to point out issues of Native-Speakerism was Phillipson (1992) who argued that Inner Circle
countries created the native speaker fallacy
o Connected the spread of English with the history of colonisation – race and native-speakerism
 Romney (2010) critiqued the inner/outer-circle notion itself as racist, marginalizing countries like India and
recommended Graddol’s (2006) revised model as an alternative in that it shifted the focus away from
“nativeness and race” toward “use, expertise, and competence” (p. 29).
 Brain (2010) Nonnative Speaker English Teachers: Research, Pedagogy, and Professional Growth – the
first single author book on the topic
 Mullock (2010) addresses the questions ““Does a good language teacher have to be a native speaker?
 Longcope (2018) suggests that an efficient way of overcoming the ideology of Native-speakerism in Japan is
teaching World Englishes at least at the university level because it would provide students with a better
understanding of the actual demographics of English and the variety that lays within English not only in
native but also non-native contexts.
o To change deeply held ideologies that privilege inner circle varieties, scholars suggest, teacher
training programs need to take several steps: introduce critical theories about language ideology
and examples of World English varieties and formulate strategies to combat native speakerism in
the field (Floris, 2013; Kiczkowiak et al., 2016; Kumaravadivelu, 2016).
 As English has become the language of international business, travel, education, and mass media.
Therefore, students no longer learning English to communicate with idealized native speakers, but with
English users from a wide range of cultural backgrounds, and primarily other speakers of English as a
second or foreign language (Crystal, 2012; Graddol, 1997; Matsuda, 2006)  scholars have called for new
paradigms of ELT that reflect “the linguistic, functional, and cultural diversity associated with the English
language today” (Matsuda, 2018, p. 25).
o Scholars emphasis on communicative strategies and locally created norms over mastery of a
native speaker variety, provide alternative models who are expert L2 users of English, demonstrate
the value of codeswitching and innovation, and “problematize the exclusive focus on the U.S. and
U.K” in ELT (Matsuda, 2018, p. 26)
 The reason why native-speakerism still persists is that in practice English language teaching globally lacks
not only teaching materials but also an acknowledgment of the diversity of English (Galloway & Rose, 2017)
 Ishikawa (2018) problematise the idea of monolingualism in relation to ELF
o He criticises monolingualism saying that
- “Monolingual competence is a deprived notion with a limited range of linguistic (and
perhaps also cultural) resources, solong as English is considered to be a language for
global communication” (p.11)
- “Monolingual competence is simplistic and naïve in the face of the current complex world”
(p.11)
o English is situated along multiple other languages
o Students’ repertoires are inevitably hybrid with influences from their L1 and maybe other non-
English languages at their disposal
o Global communication hardly includes any monolingual interactions which is in antithesis with the
monolingual assumption of English native-speakerism
o Rather than linguistic competence in such a context it is important to know pracgmatic
accommodation strategies (Jenkins, 2000, 2014)
What is then the ideal profile of an English instructor fit for the current ELT context
 Someone who is skilful in both pragmatic strategies and the appropriation of linguistic and cultural resources
in communication should be seen as capable users of English as a global lingua franca (Cogo 2018: 360;
Baker 2015: 95-97).
Why relate ELT and ELF
  According to Rudolph and Rudolph (2018) citing Jenkins (2015) the dynamic field of (ELF) wants to dismiss
dominant approaches to language ownership, learning, use and instruction based on an idealized “native
speaker (NS)”
ELF scholars contribute to the field of ELT, and the destabilization of approaches to language policy, hiring practices,
teacher education and classroom practice grounded upon essentialized and idealized nativeness in English. (p.19)
o Aims to problematise the exclusivity of the “E” in ELT.

What approach would it be suitable to take in order to address the idealisation of Native-Speakerness is through
criticality (Pennycook, 2001, 9) which involves a constant questioning of the normative assumptions of applied
linguistics. By approaching the matter critically it is possible to begin to address deeper questions of gender, class,
sexuality, race, ethnicity, culture, identity, politics, ideology, and discourse.
 Houghton and Rivers (2013) explore widespread exclusionary attitudes and practices rooted in native-speakerist
forms of prejudice in Japan, and the impact upon “native-speaker” teachers.
 The “nativespeaker” model is rejected in the fields of intercultural communicative competence (ICC) Byram
(1997)- proposed the concept of the intercultural speaker who can mediate between ANY given language(s) and
culture(s)) as a possible replacement for the “native-speaker” concept
 World Englishes (WE) and English as a Lingua Franca (ELF)- expression of local cultures through English,
viewing English as a vehicle through which to resist English linguistic imperialism by encouraging users to take
“ownership” of English, with ELF researchers also aiming to make ELF more functionally effective as an
international language. The ultimate aim of ELF research seems not to prescribe a set of ELF norms but to
orient teacher attitudes towards “taking ownership of English”, while working with existing teaching materials
that approximate standard English since there is no alternative.

According to Connelly & Clandinin (1990)

 The narrative inquiry method is used in studies of educational experience  educational
research is the reconstruction of personal and social stories
 Focus on human experience
 Holistic method
 Qualitative research
Process
 researcher listen first to the practitioner's story
 the practitioner is given the time and space to tell her or his story
 the researcher needs to be aware of constructing a relationship in which both voices are
heard (researcher/interviewee)
 collaborative mutual story telling
 Data can be in the form of field notes of the shared experience, journal records,
interview transcripts, others’ observations, storytelling, letter writing, autobiographical
writing, documents such as class plans and newsletters, and writing such as rules,
principles, pictures, metaphors, and personal philosophies.

Aim:

Justify the reasons why should be eradicated or limited

Inquire about why Native Speakerism is so resilient in Korea
What points I want to make:

 Move away from idealising native speakers

 Challenge the idea of native speaker in the ELF frame in a new context which has been
understudies (Korea)

Contextualisation
 Justification for your own research in the context of other studies, showing how it
builds on and/or orients to these
 Literature review and own knowledge of the relevant field and sub-field

Kachru (1992, pp. 10-11)

„English acquires a new identity, a local habitat, and a name. […] English has now, as a
consequence of its status, been associated with universalism, liberalism, secularism, and
internationalism‟

 ELF (English as a Lingua Franca)

o legitimate all users of English,
o Native English is no longer considered to be privileged for international and
intercultural communication
o importance of mutual intelligibility, negotiation, and accommodation skills
in communication (Cogo & Dewey, 2012).

With the development of ELF, the ELT is being reconstructed standards and standards and
learning goals are being reshaped  ELF wants to make English used as a lingua franca a more
effective international language

 Rejection of the idea of “native speaker” which is “fuzzy and controversial to describe”
(Medgyes, 2004, p. 436)
 Accent on the “Intercultural speaker” (Byram, 1997)
 Encouragement of the expression of local cultures through English and overcoming
English linguistic imperialism

By looking at Native-speakerism from the point if view of ELF it is suggested that teachers,
native or non-native, should take ownership over the language while working with standard
teaching materials which show the lack of critical language awareness of ELF

This current is also prevalent in Korea as reflected in the most recent Education Reforms

Lee 2018 1
 Globalisation and the dependence on the US after the Korean war made English
instrumental in achieving social mobility, which has contributed to a fervor for English language
learning in education.

Methodology

 a description of the data collection procedures to be used and a justification for

these (showing why they are appropriate and why alternatives were rejected)
 a consideration of practical issues (e.g. permissions, gaining entry, ethics),
showing that data collection is possible
 the analytical approach which you plan to adopt

Interviews: data to be collected from teachers with experience teaching in Korea

Narrative inquiry method (Fang, 2018)
 discourse can be a valuable tool for eliciting meaningful data.
 Interview as narratives from a post structural perspective - participants can tell
their stories while constructing, negotiating, and re-constructing their identities
through the process of story-telling (Connelly & Clandinin, 1990)
According to Connelly & Clandinin (1990)
 The narrative inquiry method is used in studies of educational experience  educational
research is the reconstruction of personal and social stories
 Focus on human experience
 Holistic method
 Qualitative research
Process
 researcher listen first to the practitioner's story
 the practitioner is given the time and space to tell her or his story
 the researcher needs to be aware of constructing a relationship in which both voices are
heard (researcher/interviewee)
 collaborative mutual story telling
 Data can be in the form of field notes of the shared experience, journal records,
interview transcripts, others’ observations, storytelling, letter writing, autobiographical
writing, documents such as class plans and newsletters, and writing such as rules,
principles, pictures, metaphors, and personal philosophies.
Timetable
 usually 3 years for a full-time
Timetable dependent on finding funding
Desired start Summer semester 2023 or ASAP – dependent on funding
Pre PhD application for possible PhD funding sources
Ex.
DAAD Doctoral Scholarship
DAAD One-year grants for doctoral candidates
First year = reading, planning data-collection, courses, conferences.
Second year = more reading, more planning, and data-collection, courses, conferences.
Third year = more data-collection, data-analysis, courses, conferences, maybe a month at
another uni;
Maybe application for the GKS for research candidates
Become a visiting student at a Korean University (Sungkyungkwan University) in
order to conduct and improve research
Fourth year = writing up the thesis and any accompanying papers.

References
Benke and Medgyes, 2005
Cheung and Braine 2007
He and Miller 2011
Liu and Zhang 2007
Madrid and Conado 2004
Mahboob 2004
Sammy and Brutt- Grifller 1999