In the first section, I will give a brief overview of ELT and CLT as it is practiced in India with a brief description of the history and current status of English as a language in India. In the second section, I will broadly summarise all the points raised by Ellis in his article. The third section will critically evaluate the core issues in Ellis’s article that relate to my arguments. In the fourth section, I will detail my own teaching experience to underpin my arguments. Section five will be the conclusion.
Contents
Introduction
Section I (A) The chequered history of English as a language in India: Current status
Section I (B) ELT and CLT in India: Past and present
Section II A broad summary of Ellis’s main arguments
Section III A critical review of core issues
Section IV Teaching experience of an ESL teacher in India
Section V Conclusion
Introduction
“Is the communicative approach culture specific, or is it based on universal generalizations about educational practices that transcend individual cultures? (Ellis 1996). With this rather open-ended question, Ellis throws the floor open to the controversial question of the universal applicability of the communicative approach in light of it being perceived as a western-centric approach, especially in the Asian learner’s context. In other words, Ellis argues that the inherent ‘western’ character and outlook of the Communicative Approach as a language teaching methodology has the potential to cause cultural rifts in the classroom when imposed on contrasting education systems of Far Eastern cultures.
Ellis’ article is underpinned by the notion of ‘mediation’, which he highly recommends, and which he says, can be used as a tool to circumvent the perceived cultural gap between the Western teacher and the Asian learner. The teacher, according to Ellis’ argument, is the ‘mediator’ who has to ‘filter the method’ (1996, 213) of CLT to make it more culturally and pedagogically palatable for the learner. Most significantly, as the communicative approach has ingrained cultural values of the western world, it is up to the Western teacher to present it suitably so as not to offend the local cultural context of the Asian learner.
From the standpoint of an ESL classroom in India today, I argue that Ellis’s assumption of “cultural conflicts arising from the introduction of a predominantly Western language teaching approach to Far Eastern culture,” (1996, 213) is mainly conjecture. It is as Ellis himself says, “Assumptions each party makes about their own and the other party’s culture…are often inaccurate and misleading.” (1996, 216).
I propose to show from my own teaching experience that his perception of a cultural gap existing between the ‘Western’ teacher and ‘Asian’ learner is far off the mark, his rationale being too generalized, non-inclusive, and therefore conjecture. I will demonstrate that the CLT approach being western-centric is not the reason for the occurrence of cultural conflicts, at least not in ESL classrooms in India today. Further, it will be clear from my teaching experiences that the ‘mediation’ that Ellis refers to is not required in India.
In the first section, I will give a brief overview of ELT and CLT as it is practiced in India with a brief description of the history and current status of English as a language in India. In the second section, I will broadly summarise all the points raised by Ellis in his article. The third section will critically evaluate the core issues in Ellis’s article that relate to my arguments. In the fourth section, I will detail my own teaching experience to underpin my arguments. Section five will be the conclusion.
Section I (A) The chequered history of English as a language in India: Current status
English language had a troubled beginning in India because of its tragic, infamous association with British colonialism. Perceived as the elitist ‘language’ of the oppressors, it received extreme censure during pre-independence era. Till independence, English was officially considered as a foreign language. However, post-independence, as English was, to all intent and purposes already functioning as the ‘lingua franca’, and ‘Hindi’ was the ‘official language’ of India, the English language was awarded the status of ‘associate official language’ and the ‘language of administration’. Henceforth, English attained the (un) official status of Second Language. Today, it would not be wrong to say that many educated Indians from the upper strata in society, have native-like proficiency in English, as if it were their first language (Gupta, 2005).
Section I (B) ELT and CLT in India: Past and present
In the ELT sector, the importance of learning English as a language was not realized till the start of the 1980s. Even then, it was taught as a foreign language in government schools and colleges with minimal linguistic or communicative focus, following primarily the grammar-translation method (ibid.).
According to Richards and Rodgers (2002, 244), “Mainstream teaching on both sides of the Atlantic ...opted for Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) as the recommended basis for language teaching methodology in the 1980s.” However, even after CLT was introduced in Government colleges and universities between 1980 and 1990, it plodded along for two decades using the same traditional teacher/exam centric approach till the end of the 20th century.
It was only after 2000, that CLT based ESL classes really gained momentum in India. As the beginning of the new century ushered in liberalisation of the economy, it brought in its wake, ‘globalisation’ with multinational companies and their marketing staff, BPOs (Business Processing Units) or call centres, international food and clothing brands, all who required dynamic young personnel who were proficient in the English language. As a result, ELT underwent a pedagogic transformation and broadened its scope to include CLT (ibid.). The private sector language institutes mushroomed and CLT became the most popular methodology in ESL classrooms in India.
As such, CLT “continues to be the most plausible basis for language teaching today” (ibid.), especially in the current Indian ESL context. Contemporary ESL teachers are beginning to innovate more and more using creative techniques that can all conveniently be parked under the “umbrella term” of CLT or CA (see Harmer 2007 p.70, cited in Littlewood, 2013).
Section II A broad summary of Ellis’s main arguments
In his article, Ellis asks a pivotal question with his title, “How culturally appropriate is the communicative approach?” (1996, 213). He then proceeds to prove that the Communicative Approach (CA) is in fact not universally relevant in light of its Western-centric approach that causes cultural conflicts in the Asian classroom.
The main body of Ellis’s argument revolves aroundhis Vietnam case study (1994)to assess the appropriateness of CA, where the model used to deliver methodology courses was close to the Canale and Swain model of CLT (Canale and Swain, 1980). Ellis finds the Canale and Swain model of CLT unsuitable for Asian learners and teachers mainly as it gives more importance to process and meaning than content and form. Here, Ellis refers to the culture in Asia being of a ‘collectivist’ nature (Hofstede, 1986).
Next, Ellis elaborates on the advantages and disadvantages of teaching in ESL versus EFL environments. He indicates that it is easier for the teacher in an ESL environment as learners can practice their newly acquired language skills outside the classroom, which is not possible in an EFL environment and so the teacher is unfortunately the learner’s sole point of contact for practicing communication in English.
Ellis also explains how social interactions in one culture can be perceived wrongly if seen through the socio-cultural lens of the other. He gives examples of ideal Western teacher-student role being that of 'teacher-as-facilitator'as opposed to the teacher-as-superior-authority for the Asian student.
Lastly, Ellis brings up the idea of“inter-culture”,which would be like a mediating space that “would combine compatible elements from both cultures” (Skutnabb-Kangas and Phillipson, 1985). In this case, the teacher takes up the role of a“cultural mediator”keeping in mind that CLT might not be that “single good concept of good teaching” (Ellis, 1996, 217).
Section III A critical review of core issues
Here, we will look at some of the core issues in Ellis’s article that are relevant to my argument and critically evaluate these in light of current ESL teaching context in India.
The first point of contention with Ellis’s article is his sweeping reference to the term “Asian”, to indicate the ‘Far Eastern cultures’ as he calls it, thereby committing a grievous error of generalisation (1996, 213). Siegel (2003, 183) aptly commented on this phenomenon saying, “that generalisations have been made on the basis of research carried out in only a limited range of sociolinguistic settings….” (cited in Kumaravadivelu, 2008, 43) By referring to a vast continent with many countries – each with its own indigenous culture(s), identity, religion(s) ethnicity and most significantly, language(s) – as one single entity, Ellis summarily dismisses the ethnographic reality of multitudes of fundamentally different nation cultures.
This can result in gross misrepresentation of individual nation cultures. Ellis’ generalized assumption of Asia and Asian learners is clearly refuted by Canagarajah when he acknowledges that “cultures and languages of former colonising nations have attained nativized status in many third world communities,” which holds particularly true for India (2002, 134, cited in Block and Cameron, 2002).
The second point that can be made is that Ellis seems to almost completely ignore the possibility of a non Western ESL teacher teaching in a foreign land or in his/her own home country. These kinds of oversights do lend themselves to a perceived form of “linguistic imperialism” (see Phillipson, 1992; Holliday, 1994; Pennycook, 1989; Holborow, 1999; Pierce, 1989; Canagarajah, 1993). Although he does discuss the ESL/EFL context, he does so briefly and again, from the perspective of a Western teacher. Here, it would not be presumptive to suggest that Ellis’s article projects an “essentialised notion of non-Western national cultures” (Holliday 2016, 266). Essentialism, in the words of Holliday, pertains to a “view of culture that completely encases and defines the individual within it” (ibid.). It is believed by many applied linguists (see Holliday, 2005; Kubota and Lin, 2006; Kumaravadivelu, 2012; Nayar, 2002) that essentialism as a concept thrives on ‘exaggerated’ associations between collectivism and non-native speakers” (Holliday, 2016, 266). It seems as if Ellis inadvertently advocates the concept of essentialism when he views the entire continent of Asia through the lens of his Vietnam EFL experience.
The third core issue is that Ellis again seems to have overlooked the single most important event of the century: the impact of globalisation and advances in technology. First of all, globalisation significantly affects the economic conditions “under which language learning takes place” (Block and Cameron (eds.) 2002, 5). In India, globalisation resulted in an exponential growth of job opportunities for the communicatively competent English language user. The middle class, who previously believed that English language served no functional purpose, jumped on the ‘learn English bandwagon’ with great enthusiasm (Gupta, 2005). Block and Cameron sum it up well saying, “people have always learned languages for economic reasons but post globalization, the “linguistic skills of workers at all levels” acquired a heightened value (see, for example, Cameron, 2000; Cope and Kalantzis, 2000; Gee et al., 1996, cited in Block and Cameron (eds.), 2002, 5).
The multinational companies with their need for fluent English communicators provided the impetus for CLT to become an established and popular language teaching approach. The English language came to be treated as a highly valuable economic commodity (see Heller, 1999a, cited in Block and Cameron (eds.), 2002, 5). The private English Language sector became the new seats of learning for what was now called ‘Global English’ with the achievable goal of “communicative competence” (Hymes, 1972, cited in Richards and Rodgers, 2002, 159).
“It also affects the choices made by institutions (local and national, public and private) as they allocate resources for language education” (Block and Cameron (eds.) 2002, 5). While the established Government and public sector universities scoffed at the private sector language institutes, it were these institutes that, post globalisation, became committed to providing the best of resources for the language teaching courses. They justified the theory that “the commodification of language affects people’s motivation” (ibid.) as they spared no effort and money to get the best of materials and quality resources from Cambridge University Press and other such top notch names in the international education sector (Gupta, 2005).
However, it is new technologies and media (enter internet, chat rooms, social media, etc.) that have created a ‘global cultural consciousness’ (Kumaravadivelu, 2003c). Hence, Ellis’s traditional view of teacher ‘filtering the method’ and being a ‘cultural mediator’ is rejected by Kumaravadivelu as he finds it simply not suitable in “these days of cultural globalization” (2003c).
Both new technology and media have had a great “impact on second language learning” (Warschauer and Kern, 2000, cited Block and Cameron (eds.), 2002, 5) and have gone on to literally change the classroom experience of learning languages. For instance, in the ESL world, Internet has replaced the teacher in more ways than one. In non-virtual classrooms, the teacher is no longer the sole informant on culture, and in virtual ESL classrooms, the physical presence of the teacher is deemed redundant.
Section IV Teaching experience of an ESL teacher in India
The following presents two examples of my own teaching experiences that will serve to corroborate the arguments given above.
A.In 2005, post industrial boom in India, I found myself conducting ESL classes in a leading private language sector to a classroom full of young adult learners (21-25 yrs) who were taking an English language course to get a job at one of the multinational call centres
The communicative approach has always been my preferred teaching methodology as it allows me to create my own innovative mix of different approaches and techniques. The two main methods that I generally, and in this case, employed were TBLT (e.g. Willis, 1996, cited in Richards and Rodgers, 2002, 223) and the Natural Approach (Richards and Rodgers, 2002, 179), both pedagogic extensions of CLT. I am an enthusiastic proponent of using popular media and so I used a broad range of pop art that showcased the “contemporary Western culture” such as popular English songs, English movies, magazines and newspapers. The goal in these classes was to “to develop communicative competence through personally meaningful learning experiences” (Littlewood, 2013, 1).
The participants and I had peer–like interactions, which came as no surprise to them. In fact, it made them lose their inhibitions and engage more spontaneously with the target language. As the purpose was to be “communicatively competent”, they had to soak up the western culture, which they found to be very enjoyable and useful in an informative way for their future jobs in a multinational settings. They were definitely not ‘collectivist’ in their attitude towards language learning. On the contrary, they were open, and eager to imbibe the ‘Western’ culture, especially if it meant that they would become proficient English language users.
As Canagarajah (2002, 134) declares, “it is not clear that third world students do not want to be acquainted with foreign teaching methods and materials”. Besides, according to him, “some of them will migrate to those European and North American communities to continue their educational and social life.” Thus, Ellis’s ‘non-Asian, stereotypical’ (Littlewood, 2000, cited in Harmer, 2003, 291) picture of the Asian learner, being culturally resistant to a western language teaching approach, proves to be untenable at best.
B.In 2010, I lived in Ladakh (India) for over a year to teach English as a Second Language to professionals from the tourism and NGO sector. Ladakh is a tourist destination that attracts thousands of Western tourists every year during the summer months. However, language can sometimes become a barrier in providing good service in the tourism and hospitality sector. Therefore, acquiring proficiency in the English Language –the global language of communication– is a necessity. Also, there is a felt need in the tourism/hospitality sector for staff/personnel to be comfortable with the Western culture as they cater to Westerners mainly. I had two groups that were divided in terms of their English proficiency and expected outcome levels. With both groups, the objective was to enable basic-to-decent communication skills and a certain level of comfort with the Western culture. Given the context of this situation, I realised that both groups needed to have more up-close and personal contact with the Western culture. In effect, they needed a Western ESL teacherfor the very reasonsthat Ellis argues create cultural conflicts in the classroom. These students needed to assimilate the Western culture in the egalitarian, informal and interactive way that is the hallmark of Western culture embedded in CA. And who could do this better than a Western teacher whose, as Ellis puts it, “fundamental orientation to language teaching is ‘communicative’” (1996, 213).
In the end I managed to arrange for a steady stream of highly motivated Western volunteers for 3 months who gave extremely interesting culture workshops 3 times a week, employing broadly the pedagogic framework of CA. The workshop sessions were a great success with the participants.
Section V Conclusion
“We are heading towards a single global culture,” argues Benjamin Barber (Block and Cameron, 2002) and I cannot agree more.
As “CLT is…understood to mean little more than a set of very general principles that can be applied and interpreted in a variety of ways” (Richards and Rodgers, 2002, 244), it is inarguably one of the most flexible approaches that can lend itself to any culture and/or context with absolute ease and felicity notwithstanding who employs the approach, a Western teacher or a non-Western teacher.
From my experiences as a non-Western ESL teacher in a country enamoured by all things ‘Western’, and from critical views gathered from the applied linguistics domain, it can be argued that Ellis’s contention of cultural conflicts taking place because of western centric approach and/or Western teacher does not hold in a post-globalised, modernised, and social media-obsessed world.
In a multicultural, multilingual society such as India, a multicultural approach that “can also dispel stereotypes that create and sustain cross-cultural misunderstandings and miscommunications” (Kumaravadivelu, 2003c) would be appropriate. Thus, I propose a form of ‘multicultural mediation’ that enables a meaningful cross-cultural exchange of ideas and experiences that redefines the teacher-student ideal in a way that is compatible with a ‘single global culture’.
Bibliography
Alsagoff, L., W. Renandya, G. Hu, and S. McKay (eds.) (2012)Principles and practices for teaching English as an international language. New York: Routledge.
Barber, B. (1995)Jihad versus McWorld. New York: Random House.
Block. D. and D. Cameron (eds.) (2002)Globalization and Language Teaching. London: Routledge.
Brumfit, C.J. and K. Johnson (eds.) (1979)The communicative approach to language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Canagarajah, S. (2002) Globalization, methods, and practice in periphery classrooms. In Block and Cameron, pp.134–150.
Canale, M. and Swain, M. (1980) Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing.Applied Linguistics1: 1–47.
Doughty, C. and M. H. Long (eds.) (2003)The handbook of second language acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell.
Duszac, A. (ed.) (2002) Us and Others: social identities across languages, discourse and cultures. Amsterdam: John Benjamin.
Ellis, G. (2012) How culturally appropriate is the communicative approach?ELT Journal50(3).
Ellis, G. D. (1994). The Appropriateness of the Communicative Approach in Vietnam: An Interview Study in Intercultural Communication. Unpublished MA thesis. Faculty of Education, La Trobe University, Melbourne.
Gupta, D. (2005) ELT in India: A Brief Historical and Current Overview.Asian EFL Journal7(1): 197-207.
Hall, G. (ed.) (2016) Routledge handbook of English language teaching. London: Routledge.
Harmer, J. (1989) The Practice of English Language Teaching, London: Longman.
Harmer, J. (2007)The Practice of English Language Teaching. Harlow: Pearson Longman.
Hofstede, G. (1986) Cultural differences in teaching and learning.International Journal of Intercultural Relations10.
Holiday, A. (2016) Appropriate methodology: towards a cosmopolitan approach. In Hall, pp.265-77.
Holliday, A. R. (1994)Appropriate methodology and social context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Holliday, A. R. (2005)The struggle to teach English as an international language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Howatt, A.P.R (1984)A History of English Language Teaching.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hymes, D.H. (1972) On communicative competence. In Pride and Holmes pp.269-293.
Kubota, R. and Lin, A. M. Y. (eds.) (2006)TESOL Quarterly40.Special Issue on Race.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2003c) Problematizing cultural stereotypes in TESOL.TESOL Quarterly37: 709–719.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006) Understanding language teaching: From method to postmethod. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2012) Individual identity, cultural globalisation, and teaching English as an international language: the case for an epistemic break. In Alsagoff et al., pp.9-27.
Nayar, B. (2002) Ideological binarism in the identities of native and non-native English speakers. In A. Duszac, pp.463-80.
Pennycook, A. (1989) The concept of method, interested knowledge, and the politics of language teaching.TESOL Quarterly23: 589–618.
Phillipson, R. (1992)Linguistic imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pride, J. and J. Holmes (eds.) (1972)Sociolinguistics: selected readings. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Richards, J. C. and Rodgers, T. (eds) (2001)Approaches and methods in language teaching.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C. and Rodgers, T.S. (2001).Approaches and methods in language teaching.2nd ed.,Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Siegel, J. (2003) Social context. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), pp. 178-223.
Skutnabb-Kangas, T. and Phillipson, R. (1985) Intercommunication and Intercultural Competence.ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED353778.
Frequently asked questions
What is the central argument of the text?
The text challenges the assumption that the Communicative Approach (CA) to language teaching is universally applicable, particularly in Asian contexts. It argues against the idea that cultural conflicts arise from imposing a Western-centric approach in ESL classrooms in India today.
What is the author's teaching experience background?
The author's teaching experience is in the ESL sector in India. They teach adult learners in private language institutes and professionals in tourism and NGO sectors in Ladakh.
What does the first section discuss?
Section I provides a brief overview of ELT and CLT in India. It describes the history and current status of English as a language in India, acknowledging its troubled past and current role as an associate official language.
It is devided into two parts: part A, where The chequered history of English as a language in India: Current status is discussed, and part B, where ELT and CLT in India: Past and present are talked about.
What is summarized in the second section?
Section II summarizes Ellis's main arguments from his article "How culturally appropriate is the communicative approach?". This includes his Vietnam case study, the advantages and disadvantages of ESL vs EFL environments, the teacher-as-facilitator role, and the concept of "inter-culture."
What are the core issues critically reviewed in Section III?
Section III critiques Ellis's generalizations about "Asian" cultures, his neglect of non-Western ESL teachers, and his oversight of the impact of globalization and technology on language learning. It emphasizes that globalization resulted in an exponential growth of job opportunities for the communicatively competent English language user, and that new technologies and media have created a ‘global cultural consciousness’.
What teaching experiences are presented in Section IV?
Section IV details two teaching experiences: one with adult learners preparing for jobs at multinational call centers, where a Western culture approach was beneficial, and another in Ladakh, where a need for Western cultural understanding necessitated exposure to Western volunteers.
What is the conclusion of the text?
The conclusion suggests that the world is heading towards a single global culture, with CLT being a flexible approach that can adapt to any context. It argues against the idea that cultural conflicts arise due to Western-centric approaches or Western teachers in a post-globalized world, advocating for a "multicultural mediation" that enables cross-cultural exchange.
What are some of the key words used in the text?
Key words and phrases include Communicative Approach (CA), English Language Teaching (ELT), Culture, Western-centric, ESL, EFL, India, Globalisation, Cultural Mediator, Inter-culture.
Who is Ellis and what is his view on the communicative approach in Asia?
Ellis is the author of the article "How culturally appropriate is the communicative approach?". The text analyses and argues against his views. His stance is that the CA is not universally relevant because of its Western-centric approach that causes cultural conflicts in Asian classrooms. The author of the text argues against this point.
What is the viewpoint regarding “mediation” in the text?
The author argues that the “mediation” that Ellis refers to is not required in India. The author rejects Ellis’ traditional view of the teacher ‘filtering the method’ and being a ‘cultural mediator’, as he finds it simply not suitable in “these days of cultural globalization.”
- Quote paper
- Suchie Dutta (Author), 2018, A critical evaluation of Greg Ellis’ article "How culturally appropriate is the communicative approach?", Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1288688
