The Privileging of English Language Use in Academia: Critical Reflections from an International Doctoral Seminar

Jon Woodend; Lisa Fedoruk; Avis Beek; Sylvie Roy; Xuequin Xu; Janet Groen; Xiang Li

doi:10.19136/etie.a2n3.3058

Autores/as

Jon Woodend Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary
Lisa Fedoruk Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary
Avis Beek Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary
Sylvie Roy University of Calgary, Werklund SChool of Education http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0980-5898
Xuequin Xu Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary
Janet Groen Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary
Xiang Li Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.19136/etie.a2n3.3058

Resumen

In this article, we, a Canadian team of doctoral researchers, reflected on our journey during an International Doctoral Research Seminar held in Beijing in 2015. As five doctoral students and two academics, we met with our doctoral colleagues from academic institutions in Brisbane (Australia) and Beijing (China). Although we did not discuss or negotiate which language we would be using in China, we were confronted with our assumption that English would be used, and that some the participants had a lower level of English competency than expected. It was apparent that this assumption of English language use privileged some (i.e., Canadian and Australian teams) while disadvantaging others (i.e., Chinese team). This confrontation brought up questions and concerns about equity in participation. As a result, this article chronicles the Canadian team reflecting on the International Doctoral Research Seminar including our privilege of using English, and coming to the position of wanting to create a more inclusive space for all participants to engage equitably in this international collaboration. As such, our reflections in this article focused on the domination of English as a lingua franca in academic spaces, in addition to how we decided to facilitate a transcultural space for all participants to be included.

Biografía del autor/a

Sylvie Roy, University of Calgary, Werklund SChool of Education

Werklund school of Education
Associate Dean Research and prof

Referencias

Ahn, H. (2014). Teachers’ attitudes towards Korean English in South Korea. World Englishes, 33, 195–222.

AUTHORS. (2018). Critical reflections in international contexts: PolyEthnographic accounts of an international doctoral research seminar. The Qualitative Report, 23, 1256-1269.

Bhabha, H. (1994). The location of culture. London, England: Routledge.

Blommaert, J. (2005). Discourse. A critical introduction. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Blommaert, J. (Ed.) (1999). Language ideological debates. Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter.

Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York, NY: Greenwood.

Chang, B-M. (2011). The roles of English language education in Asian context. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 15, 191-206.

Cohen, L., L. Manion & K. Morrison. (2018). Research Methods in Education. London, New York: Routledge. 8th edition.

Crystal (2003). English as a global language. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University.

Gee, J. P. (2004). New times and new literacies: Themes for a changing world. In S. Warshauer Freedman & A. F. Ball. (Eds). Bakhtinian perspectives on language, literacy, and learning (pp. 279-306). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Gil, J. (2011). A comparison of the global status of English and Chinese: Towards a new global language? English Today 27, 52-9.

Graddol, D. (1997). The future of English? London, England: British Council. Retrieved from http://www.britishcouncil.org/learning-elt-future.pdf

Guo, S., & Guo, Y. (Eds.) (2016). Spotlight on China: Changes in education under China’s market economy. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

Guo, Y. (2012). Teaching English for economic competitiveness: Emerging issues and challenges in English education in China. Canadian and International Education, 41, 28-50.

He, D., & Li, D. (2009). Language attitudes and linguistic features in the “China English” debate. World Englishes, 28, 70–89.

Jacquemet, M. (2005). Transidiomatic practices: Language and power in the age of globalization. Language and communication, 25, 257-277.

Kachru, B. (1997), World Englishes and English-using communities. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 17, 66-87.

Kramsch, C. (1999). Global and local identities in the contact zone. In C. Gnutzmann (Ed.). Teaching and learning English as a global language: Native and non-native perspectives (pp. 131-143). Tüumbingen, Germany: Stauffenburg Verlag.

Kroskrity, P. V. (2010). Language ideologies. Evolving perspectives. In J. Jaspers, J.O. Ostman & J. Werschueren (Eds), Society and language use (pp. 192- 211). Amsterdam, NetherlandsL: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Levis, J., Sonsaat, S., & Link, S. (2017). Students’ beliefs about native vs. non-native pronunciation teachers. In de Dios Martinez Aguda J. (Ed.), Native and non- native teachers in English language classrooms: Professional challenges and teacher education (pp. 205–238). Boston, MA: De Gruyter Mouton.

Luke, A. (2008). Using Bourdieu to make policy: Mobilizing community capital and literacy. In J. Albright & A. Luke (Eds.) Pierre Bourdieu and literacy education (pp. 347-362). New York, NY: Routledge.

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Mu, G. M. (2018). Linguistic field in an international doctoral workshop: Sociological implications for doctoral pedagogy. Paper presented at the Symposium of Asia-Pacific Talent and Knowledge Mobilities Calgary, Canada, 11 October.

Mu, G. M., Liu, L. L., Fu, W., Hao, D., Jia, N., Qin, Y., Wu, X. (2019). Using English at an international doctoral workshop: A three-level field analysis. In G. M. Mu, K. Dooley, & A. Luke (Eds.), Bourdieu and Chinese education: Inequality, competition, and change (pp. 192- 213). New York: Routledge.

Mu, G. M., Zhang, H., Cheng, W., Fang, Y., Li, S, Wang, X., & Dooley, K. (2019). Negotiating scholarly identity through an international doctoral workshop: A cosmopolitan approach to doctoral education, Journal of Studies in International Education, 23, 139-153.

Pennycook, A. (2007). Global Englishes and transcultural flow. London, England: Routledge.

Phillipson, R. (2009). Linguistic imperialism continued. Hyderabad, India: Orient Blackswan Private Limited.

Rallis, S. F., & Rossman, G. B. (2003). Learning in the field: An introduction to qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

Stein, S. & de Andreotti, V.O. (2016). Cash, competition, or charity: International students and the global imaginary. Higher Education, 72, 225-239.

Verschueren, J. (2012). Ideology in language use: Pragmatic guidelines for empirical research. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Welsch, W. (1999). Transculturality: The puzzling form of cultures today. In M. Featherstone & S. Lash (Eds.), Spaces of culture: City, nation, world (pp. 192- 213). London, England: Sage.