Research Problem
“An investment in the target language is also an investment in a learner’s own social identity, which changes across time and space” (Norton, 1997, p. 411). The English language has been consistently dynamic since the first migration of English speakers; the use, form, and purpose evolving to fit the needs of the communities it is utilized by. Historically, English language instruction upheld a native-speaker model as the ultimate goal to which language learners compared themselves (McKay, 2002). Recently, the support for the native-speaker model has waned as some educators have embraced the idea of English being an international language (EIL), a language belonging to everyone and no one at the same time. By this definition, English is a language that is both global and local as it is used for “wider communication both among individuals from different countries and between individuals from one country” (McKay, 2002, p. 5). This definition is additionally supported by the fact that non-native speakers significantly outweigh native-speakers within global English language users (McKay, 2002).
This redefinition of English has not only affected academics, but also the English language learners (ELL) whose pursuit of the language is now altered. In theory, the acceptance of EIL implies that the native-speaker model is considered obsolete. Instead, ELL are given the opportunity to embrace English as their own and educators are encouraged to promote intelligibility rather than native-speech pronunciation. Levis (2005) describes the intelligibility principle and the nativeness principle as contradictory ideas. Intelligibility is the belief that one’s accent is not a negative factor; language learners simply need to be understandable in their speech. Conversely, “Nativeness holds that it is possible as well as desirable to achieve native-like pronunciation in a foreign language” (Levis, 2005, p. 370).
Interestingly, recent research suggests that it is in fact the students themselves, not necessarily the educators, who demand instruction that is framed around the notion of native-like speech (Scales, Wennerstrom, Richard & Wu, 2010). This resistance to intelligibility can be attributed to sociocultural reasons; specifically, the perceived idea that the achievement of nativenesses will grant you membership into the "inner-circle" (McKay, 2002). Many language learners equate the inner-circle with a high level of status and privilege (Norton, 1997). A major problem with this resistance is that unrealistic goals are created, and fostered, for language learners who desire native-like speech as adults. From previous research, it is well established that past the age of six, one cannot attain native-like pronunciation (Derwing, 2003; Golombek & Jordan, 2005; Munro & Derwing, 1995; Scales, Wennerstrom, Richard & Wu, 2006). If this is accepted as true, then members of the outer circle and expanding circle are set up to fall short (McKay, 2002). How this affects students’ speaking confidence and sense of identity within the English language is an important aspect of language learning to consider. The promotion of positivity and inclusion within English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) instruction begins with the broad understanding that a native accent is neither attainable nor should it be the main objective. Instead, the focus on feeling understood while speaking the language allows for a sense of membership and individual identity. This leads to the question: how does the introduction of EIL within the ESOL classroom affect student speaking goals and feelings of membership within the global English speaking community?
This redefinition of English has not only affected academics, but also the English language learners (ELL) whose pursuit of the language is now altered. In theory, the acceptance of EIL implies that the native-speaker model is considered obsolete. Instead, ELL are given the opportunity to embrace English as their own and educators are encouraged to promote intelligibility rather than native-speech pronunciation. Levis (2005) describes the intelligibility principle and the nativeness principle as contradictory ideas. Intelligibility is the belief that one’s accent is not a negative factor; language learners simply need to be understandable in their speech. Conversely, “Nativeness holds that it is possible as well as desirable to achieve native-like pronunciation in a foreign language” (Levis, 2005, p. 370).
Interestingly, recent research suggests that it is in fact the students themselves, not necessarily the educators, who demand instruction that is framed around the notion of native-like speech (Scales, Wennerstrom, Richard & Wu, 2010). This resistance to intelligibility can be attributed to sociocultural reasons; specifically, the perceived idea that the achievement of nativenesses will grant you membership into the "inner-circle" (McKay, 2002). Many language learners equate the inner-circle with a high level of status and privilege (Norton, 1997). A major problem with this resistance is that unrealistic goals are created, and fostered, for language learners who desire native-like speech as adults. From previous research, it is well established that past the age of six, one cannot attain native-like pronunciation (Derwing, 2003; Golombek & Jordan, 2005; Munro & Derwing, 1995; Scales, Wennerstrom, Richard & Wu, 2006). If this is accepted as true, then members of the outer circle and expanding circle are set up to fall short (McKay, 2002). How this affects students’ speaking confidence and sense of identity within the English language is an important aspect of language learning to consider. The promotion of positivity and inclusion within English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) instruction begins with the broad understanding that a native accent is neither attainable nor should it be the main objective. Instead, the focus on feeling understood while speaking the language allows for a sense of membership and individual identity. This leads to the question: how does the introduction of EIL within the ESOL classroom affect student speaking goals and feelings of membership within the global English speaking community?