6
Eight Student-
teachers’ Development
in Understanding
English as an International Language Pedagogy
Abstract
With the wide spread of English as an international language, attention has been paid to the application of EIL pedagogy in TESOL education. There have been many studies and suggestions concerning how to teach EIL. However, there is still lacking of research about EIL pedagogy in Indonesia. This study investigates how eight Indonesian student-teachers develop their understanding of EIL pedagogy throughout a Microteaching class. The data were collected from teaching journals, lesson plans, and portfolios. The study found that the participants have different perceptions about implementing EIL approach into the teaching due to their different ways in gaining knowledge about EIL. At first, they only knew about „source culture‟ and „target culture‟, and then they tried to improve their knowledge by seeking in some sources like from lecture, friends, and internet. As time goes by, their understanding was not limited to „source culture‟ and „target culture‟ but also the use of „international target culture‟. All of them give positive attitudes toward the application of EIL approach as the alternative approach to learn English.
Key words: English as an international language, student-teachers, culture.
Introduction
7 not, as well as between L2 and L1 speakers of English. In other words, EIL is used in the situation where the communication happened between bilingual English speakers, as well as bilingual and monolingual English speakers. It is suggested that English is widely spread all around the world and used by many bilingual English speakers as the medium of communication across cultures.
As the growing number of English speakers in the world, English is used in various contexts, such as academic field, workplace, international trade, global media, tourism, business, technology, and on diplomatic occasions. It means that many learners of English today have specific purposes in learning English. McKay (2002) clearly stated that many individuals learn English not because English is promoted by English-speaking countries, but rather because these individuals want access to scientific and technological information, international organizations, global economic trade, and higher education. Starting from that point, new pedagogies have been proposed to fulfill that demand.
8 how my classmates gain and develop their understanding of EIL pedagogy in Microteaching class.
Besides my curiosity of my classmates‟ development in understanding EIL, there is
another thing that encourages me to conduct this study. While I was looking for some references to gain knowledge about EIL, I realized that there is lack of research about EIL pedagogy in Indonesia, so it gave me more motivation to do this small research. Although English is studied as foreign language in Indonesia, English plays an important role because it is one of courses in the national examination beside Indonesian and Mathematic, especially in high schools. As the students of the pre-service education program, knowing the development of ELT is crucial because they are prepared to be English teachers in future so they should be aware of the current landscape of English (Matsuda, 2003; Renandya; 2011; Zacharias, 2002).
9 Theoritical Framework
EIL pedagogy
Graddol (2006) convincingly argued that the traditional model of EFL teaching based on nineteenth century premises has failed in many aspects, and only a new approach based on English as an international language can contribute to the improvement of English language learning worldwide. There have been numerous studies and suggestions how to teach English as an international language, one of them is by using EIL approach. Integrating EIL approach into the teaching can be done by looking from some aspects below:
English role model
In the nineteen seventies the target of learning was assumed to be a native-speaker variety of English and it was the native-speakers‟ culture, perceptions, and speech that were crucial in setting goals for English language teaching (Richards, 2001). It is supported by Graddol (1997, in Zacharias, 2003) who suggested that native speakers “the source of models of correctness, the best teachers as well as the source of goods and services for those in the outer and expanding circle”. In this sense, all of the English teaching was referred to the inner circle countries.
However, today many experts criticize this assumption due to the different purposes in learning English. Widdowson (1994) stated that bilingual teachers are born with local advantages, and this cannot be replaced by native speakers‟ teachers who are foreign to local teaching cultures and contexts. McKay (2003) also has the same view when she investigated the attitudes of Chilean teachers of English towards EIL and found that the drawback about native speakers is that they are not
familiar with the local context. So in summary, implementing EIL approach in the teaching will give
10 anymore because English is demanded to meet the specific need of the learners which is not to
achieve native-like competence but more on communication ability.
Varieties of English accent and pronunciation
Cook (1999) claimed that non-native accents were often seen as a failure of learning the English language. However, McKay (2002) criticized this statement as „native speaker fallacy‟ because it reinforces a narrow definition of expertise in language teaching, one in which great deal of prestige is given to native-like pronunciation and intuition. It is also supported by Jenkins (1998, in Talebinezhad, 2001) who asserted that the acquisition of native like accent is no longer the ultimate objective of the majority of learners. I personally agree with the last two statements because every country has different accent. Indonesia, although its location is very close to Malaysia, they have different accent of speaking. So does Malaysia with Singapore or Thailand, they also have its own accents. English, as its spread widely in the world, there is no necessity to follow native speakers‟ accent because imitate others‟ accent is unnecessary. Canagarajah (1999, in McKay, 2002) noted:
Many periphery professionals feel compelled to spend undue time repairing their pronunciation or performing other cosmetic changes to sound native. Their predominant concern is in effect "How can I lose my accent?" rather than “How I can be a successful teacher?” The anxiety and inhibitions about their
pronunciation can make them lose their grip on the instructional process or lack rapport with their students.
11 (Canagarajah, 1999), Japan (Matsuda, 2003; Kubota, 2009), Taiwan (Liou, 2009), Indonesia (Zacharias, 2012), and many others because EIL approach could expose the variety of English accents.
Another phonological issue in EIL context is about teaching pronunciation. As I have mentioned before, it was commonly believed that the main purpose of learning a new language was to communicate with its native speakers. Zacharias (2003) in her research about teachers‟
belief of ELT in Indonesia found that native speakers were preferable as the model for teaching pronunciation because of the assumption those native speakers have appropriacy, accuracy, and naturalness in speaking English. The same finding also shared by Liou (2009) who conducted research about EIL in Taiwan which the majority of the teachers believed that teaching standard pronunciation to students is essential in their teaching practice. However, English is learned for different purposes today which the native speakers‟ proficiency will not be the goal of learners‟
linguistic production. Richards (2002) stated that in the context where EIL approach is applied, it is not necessary to try to eradicate the phonological influences of mother tongue nor to seek to speak like a native speaker. It means that speak English as perfect as native speakers are not the main goal of integrating EIL approach. Even EIL approach gives kind of freedom to English speakers to speak with the phonological influence of their mother tongue as long as it can be understood by the both speakers and listeners.
Cultural materials
12 are teaching meaningless symbols or symbols to which the student attaches the wrong meaning. So it is clear that teaching language is always alongside with teaching culture because those two things are inseparable. However, as the growth of English as an international language, there is a change in a way of teaching language together with its culture. McKay (2002) argued that some of the cultural contents in teaching English (teaching target culture) may be irrelevant to students‟
concerns; sometimes they may even present cultural conflicts. So, whose culture that should be taught in the context of EIL? To answer this question, Jin & Cortazzi (1999) distinguished three types of cultural information that can be applied in English language teaching:
- „source culture‟ that draw on the learners‟ own culture.
- „target culture‟ that focused on the culture from inner circle countries, and
- „international target culture‟ that use the culture from both native and non-native English countries.
Different from traditional model of EFL teaching which usually used the target culture, EIL approach could accommodate all of the types‟ cultural information above as the teaching material. Then, McKay (2002) proposed that the used of „source culture‟ in EIL context seemed the most appropriate because it provides students with an opportunity to learn more about their own culture and to learn the language needed to explain these cultural elements in English. I agree with this statement because the learners are more familiar with their own culture so that it can ease them to receive the lesson. Moreover, „international target culture‟ also suggested as the
13 teachers should always have in mind when teaching culture is the need to raise the students‟
awareness of their own culture and the target culture.
Problems in applying EIL pedagogy
EIL is considered as a new pedagogy so that there still many debates among educational experts about the strengths and weaknesses of this approach. Common problem that usually appears in accommodating EIL approach is:
Question of Standard English
The wider spread of English on the world has resulted in the development of many new English varieties which led to the discussion about the standards that should be presented in the English language teaching. McKay (2006) stated that there should be different standards for different contexts of use and that definition of each Standard English should be determined locally rather than determined outside its context of use. The problem is that if different place has different standard of English, there will be many standards English according to where the English is used. In addition, different Standard English will lead to what McKay refers as lack of intelligibility among speakers of English. So based on this case, the confusion will appear among the English teachers who want to apply EIL approach because they are bewildered with the different standard of English that should be presented in their teaching.
14 The Study
Context of the study
The setting of the study is an English Department of Satya Wacana Christian University. It is located in a small town of Salatiga, Central Java, Indonesia. English is the medium of instruction in the classroom. Moreover, this faculty has several native teachers so that the students can still have an opportunity to use English outside the class to interact with them. It gives an advantage for both students and native teachers to have a communication across culture. In this major the students are prepared to be English teacher so that they are introduced with some courses related to English Language Teaching (ELT).
One of the courses that I selected to conduct this study is Microteaching course. Microteaching is a course where the students teach fellow students. This course is a two-credit course conducted for 14 weeks in a semester with approximately 12 students in a class. Throughout the semester, each student needs to do 3 mini lessons. The mini lesson should be noticed as a learning experience of designing lesson plans, developing materials and teaching techniques for a 15-20 minutes lesson. According to the course syllabus of Microteaching in Satya Wacana Christian University, the purpose of Microteaching course is to develop a community of beginning teachers who are able to:
1. Critically and constantly reflect their own teaching and their profesional identities as a teacher of English;
2. Situate their teaching according to the local context; and
3. Be sensitive towards the students‟ learning needs, affects, and bilingual identities.
15 mini lessons. Besides, I also enrolled in this class so I have a benefit to know more about the situation of the class.
Participants
The participant of this study is eight student-teachers from Microteaching. Actually, there are twelve students but I only choose eight students who are selected purposively based on the completeness of the participants‟ data (lesson plans, teaching journals, and portfolio) from mini
lesson 1 until mini lesson 3, and the appropriateness of the data content with my research topic about the development of understanding EIL pedagogy. Besides, I also use „sample of convenient‟ strategy (Blackledge, 2001, in Zacharias, 2011) which mean that the participants are
accessible to be met or asked in case I find difficulties about their data. Moreover, the names of the participants are pseudonyms.
Instruments of data collection
The data for the study is collected from the participants‟ : Lesson Plan
16 Teaching Journal
Besides designing lesson plan, the students also had to write pre and post teaching journal. This teaching journal was developed by Zacharias (2011) following Burns (2010) and Richards (1994) action research cycle of topic, planning, action, observation, and reflection. There were two sections in pre teaching journal, topic and planning, where the students should explain their reason in choosing topic, how it connected to EIL approach, what the teaching activity they planned, also the preparation for the teaching. It was done before the teaching.
Moreover, in the post teaching journal there was action, observation, and reflection section where the students should reflect their own teaching since it was done after the teaching. In the action section, the students explained about how their teaching was going. It was done right after the teaching. In the observation, the students interpreted their teaching by viewing their teaching video. The last section, reflection, the students were required to mention their weaknesses, their strengths, what aspects worked well and what did not, their overall impression about the teaching, also the reflection of their teaching. There were 24 teaching journal collected from the participants with approximately 1000-1500 words for each journal.
Portfolio
17 Micro teaching course also what they have learned during that process, particularly they had a theme which focus on their experience in integrating EIL approach. Then, in the argument section, the student-teachers gave elaboration and explanation about their reflective focus. Meanwhile, artifact was the proof of the student-teachers‟ argument, it could be lesson plan, teaching materials, or teaching journals. Each participant submitted one portfolio with approximately 10-20 pages, so there were 8 portfolios collected.
In short, the instruments of data collection can be summarized as follow: Table 1. Instruments of data collection
18 Data analysis procedures
After getting all of the data from the participants and categorizing by its kind, I started to analyze the data by reading the portfolio first because in the portfolio I could see clearly how the participants explain their own development of understanding EIL. Then, I continued to read the teaching journals and the lesson plans. I highlighted some important themes on the data related to EIL, such as the participants‟ perception, feeling, and difficulties in understanding EIL pedagogy. For this data analysis process, I used „thematic analysis approach‟ (Greg, 2012) which means that I would examine the data collected from various participants and would identify themes (and label them as codes or categories) as they emerge when examining the data, as the same themes continue to emerge I grouped the data together. The analysis included the participants‟ perception toward EIL, the participants‟ confusion in dealing with EIL, the participants‟ effort in applying EIL, and the participants‟ progress in understanding EIL. Based on that analysis, I elaborated how the participants‟ understanding of EIL pedagogy was
developed then drew a conclusion.
Findings and discussion
In this section, I would give brief explanation how the development of student-teachers‟ understanding EIL pedagogy. Because it talked about progress of understanding, it would be better if I explained it chronologically from mini lesson 1, mini lesson 2, and mini lesson 3.
Mini lesson 1: EIL approach is about accommodating target culture and source culture By looking at the participants‟ data in their first mini lesson, the basic understanding of
19 culture (Cortazzi & Jin, 1999) into the teaching. In this case, target culture is English (western culture), then source culture is Indonesian (local culture, e.g Javanese). This understanding they got from the lecture‟s presentation entitled “Developing materials for your student - teaching using an EIL approach” made by Zacharias (2011) in the second meeting of Microteaching course. For the first mini lesson, Arumi and Lili shared the same topic about „shopping lifestyle‟
and they implemented EIL approach by accommodating both English and Indonesian culture. From Lili‟s lesson plan dated 02/10/2011 it can be seen that she started her teaching by exposing „bargaining‟ as Indonesian shopping habit then „going to auction‟ as American shopping habit.
She had an expectation that the students will tend to be more active when talking about what they have experienced before (bargaining) than talk about other experienced that they never feel before (auction).
Arumi shared the same case as Lili which exposed about „shopping lifestyle‟. From her teaching journal dated 02/10/2011 she began her teaching by giving a text about how Americans sell their old stuffs via internet, then showing some pictures of second-hand markets in Indonesia to represent the local culture. It is different from Lili who exposed Indonesian culture first then American culture later. Arumi stated in her teaching journal that she wanted to find out whether her students will be more motivated to use English which contained Indonesian culture, instead of western culture. The similar case also found in Denny and Febri‟s teaching who brought topic about „engagement‟. Both of them integrated EIL by comparing two different engagement
20 Indonesia is a multicultural country which has various local cultures, so it would be interesting to expose more than one Indonesian culture in his teaching.
Different from other student-teachers who exposed western and local tradition as the implementation of EIL approach, Ranthi had strong belief that EIL approach also could be done by accommodating local voice (Javanese accent) as teaching material. It was shown on her mini lesson when she assessed students‟ listening skill by giving a recording made by her and her
friend; both of them are Javanese, talked about Indonesian food. Ranthi is one of the opinions that non-native English speakers also could be good English teachers as she stated in her teaching journal that:
English as an international language is varieties English used today within different cultural background. I can combine my own culture with teaching English. I used local people in my recording because they can be a proper model of English speaker. (Ranthi, teaching journal, reflection, 18/10/2011)
Ranthi‟s confidence in saying that proper model of English speakers could come from non-native
speakers is supported by Philipson (1992) who claimed that non-native teachers can be better qualified than native teacher because they have been through the complex process of acquiring English, have insights on learners‟ linguistic and cultural needs, aware of the difficulties and the difference between L1 and L2. Cook (2001) strengthened the feasibility of non-native speakers as English role models by noted that bilingual teachers may be a better model than the model embodied by native speakers.
Besides accommodating Javanese voice in the recording, Ranthi also exposed „source culture‟ by providing a text entitled “I love Indonesian food” which contained some special food
21 By mentioning the names of Indonesian food such as Tongjie tea (famous tea brand), fermented soybean, fresh salad with peanut sauce, ginger syroup, cassava bread, chayotte stew, and sour cucumber salad, it appears that Ranthi wanted to expose the culture that close to the students. Ranthi acknowleged that her students didn‟t know the English term for Indonesian food before she gave the explanation, therefore, she thought that this activity could arise the students‟ awareness of some vocabularies, especially that related to their own culture (Ranthi, teaching journal, observation, 18/10/2011). It is confirmed with McKay‟s statement (2003) that the
cultural content of EIL materials should not be limited to native English-speaking cultures, EIL materials could provide students the vocabulary and informationn by including local culture content.
22 their teaching. One of the significant difficulties was found in Arumi‟s teaching journal dated 02/10/2011 which expressed her confusion related to Standard English pronunciation and grammar. At that time, Arumi was bewildered about how applying EIL approach to teach speaking skill. She questioned about the use of standard pronunciation and grammar while she included Indonesian culture on her material. Her confusion was clearly seen from her statement below:
What makes it difficult and makes me feel unsure is that I also use material and example from Indonesian culture context while I still use standard grammar and pronunciation. I have questions in my mind like Is it okay if I do not pronounce English words correctly as the British do? Do I have to teach my students to always use correct grammar? … . Honestly, I still not sure whether in EIL approach I have to use standard British pronunciation or not. (Arumi, teaching journal, topic, 02/10/2011)
Actually, what happened to Arumi is a common confusion in applying EIL approach since the different beliefs among English teachers regarding the view of standard pronunciation and grammar. The survey conducted by Liou (2009) showed that majority of English teachers believed that teaching standard pronunciation and grammar is very important:
The majority of the teachers (98%) believed that teaching standard pronunciation to students is essential in their teaching practice. Equally important is to teach correct grammar in the classroom with 96% of the teachers agreeing that English teachers should be able to teach correct grammar in the classroom.
23 develop a greater tolerance of difference, and the ability to adapt and adjust their expectations according to the interlocutors and settings.
Overall, in this first mini lesson, most of the participants‟ basic understanding about EIL
approach is about accommodating target culture as well as source culture. Either they used both western and local cultures as the implementation of EIL approach or focused on local culture only. However, they also faced the difficulties about the implication of EIL approach such as the question of Standard English pronunciation and grammar.
Mini lesson 2: Different perceptions about EIL approach
If in the first mini lesson most of the participants had similar opinion that accommodating culture is part of the implementation of EIL approach, in the second mini lesson, various perceptions received by the participants due to their improvement in understanding EIL. For example, in the teaching journal dated 14/11/202, Ranthi wrote that she has gained more knowledge about the application of EIL approach from her friends‟ mini lesson:
At this time, I learned further than before how to apply EIL framework in teaching English from my friends and my own mini teaching.... From those examples I can perceive that beside of varieties English used today, EIL concept also bring several cultural background in teaching. Hence, I am able to use either the students own culture or comparing the target language culture to another as a content of the material. (Ranthi, teaching journal, planning, 14/11/2011)
24 also could be done by exposing students‟ culture or comparing target culture with others. It is
reflected in her second mini lesson when she used a video of wayang (traditional Javanese puppet) as a teaching material. She chose wayang to prepare the students to be able to use English to talk about their own cultures and issues which are important to them, as Mckay (2002) said that using the source culture is a way of empowering the students and making them practice using English to express their own culture and identity.
A similar case happened to Lili who also felt that her understanding of EIL approach is improved. It was seen in Lili‟s teaching journal dated 16/12/2011, she knew her understanding was improved in the way of applying EIL approach as she wrote that:
Entering my 2nd mini-teaching, my understanding about EIL was improved. Let‟s look at my Grading sheet from my lecture. She said that I have taught EIL-ly. I also feel that I started to deeply understand what the meaning of EIL is. EIL means English is our language too. The owner of English is not only British, American and Australia, but Indonesia also has English (Lili, portfolio, 16/12/2011)
Frm the statement above, Lili made sure her understanding of EIL was improved by positive comment from her lecture that said she was successfully accommodating EIL approach in her teaching. At that time Lili exposed the different accent of English by providing a song entitled “Price Tag” which sung with two different accents, American and Thai. After hearing the song,
25 acceptable; there was nothing wrong with diversity of English accent in the world (Lili, teaching journal, topic, 31/10/2011).
If Ranthi perceived EIL approach by bringing students‟ culture as the teaching content
and Lili introduced different kind of English accents, Denny taught EIL approach by exposing a national heritage which was Komodo Island. At that time Komodo Island became a familiar issue in the society because it was included in the “Seven Wonders Candidates”. In Denny‟s
teaching journal dated 08/10/2011 he wrote that choosing Indonesian cultural site would be more EIL friendly rather than exposing other places outside Indonesia. He also stated his purpose in choosing Komodo Island:
In this lesson plan I chose Komodo Island as my topic because the issue has become hot news in our society. … I also consider EIL concept that I have to follow in
my lesson plan. So I choose Indonesian place (Komodo Island), instead of another place in the world. Perhaps, by choosing Indonesian place, the student will be more familiar to the topic and easier to understand the material that I give later. (Denny, teaching journal, topic, 08/11/2011)
Actually there were many candidates for Seven Wonders besides Indonesia such as Malaysia and Thailand, however, Denny chose Komodo Island because it is located Indonesia so that the students would be familiar with the site. Denny‟s purpose in choosing topic was pretty similar with Ranthi who also expected that bringing familiar topic into the class would make the students easier in understanding the material.
26
story: fireworks as the teaching material. Although it was taken from American program, the content of the recording was not only talked about American culture but also the culture from France, India, Australia, and China which also used fireworks for a certain occasion. She thought that an event which held annually could be seen as part of the culture from that country, for example, New Year celebration and French Revolution celebration (Dhanik, teaching journal, topic, 14/11/2011). However, Dhanik was surprised when she got feedback from her peers who said that her material was not EIL as she expressed in her teaching journal below:
However, two of my friends think that my material is not too EIL because it‟s taken from VOA. I think American is part of the EIL so it is fine to bring VOA as my material in the class moreover the content of this recording is not only talk about America, but my peer may think that EIL tends to be not American or carry another culture rather than American and British culture. It‟s still confusing for me. (Dhanik,
teaching journal, reflection, 14/11/2011)
From the statement above, I can see that the difference EIL perceptions among the participants may affect someone‟s belief. Dhanik believed that EIL could take material from inner circle country as long as the content also exposed the culture from outer or expanding circle, on the other hand, her friends considered that EIL approach were likely be to done with the culture outside inner circle. From that moment, Dhanik understanding of EIL became blurred.
From all of the explanation above, some of the participants confidently said that their understanding of EIL was improved in the second mini lesson if compared to the first mini lesson. The development can be seen from the lecture and friends‟ feedback. As Lili had
27 understanding of EIL becomes loose because the comments from her friends that said her material was not too EIL. Moreover, in the second mini lesson, the participants‟ understanding of
EIL is more varied. One of the participants said that EIL approach can be applied by accommodating students‟ culture, other opinion said that EIL approach enabled teachers to teach
about variety of English accents, another perception said that EIL could be done by exposing national heritage which familiar for the students. Nonetheless, whether it is positive or negative, whether they have the same or different perception toward EIL, it is part of the participants‟ process in understanding EIL.
Mini Lesson 3: Satisfaction in understanding EIL approach
In this last mini lesson, the development of participants‟ understanding of EIL pedagogy can be clearly seen in their teaching journal and portfolio. I do not find any statement that express the participants‟ confusion or difficulties in applying EIL approach. However, they still
have various understanding of EIL. Here, I highlighted three perceptions that appear in this last mini teaching. First, the perception that accommodating „source culture‟ in the teaching material,
it is reflected in four participants‟ last teaching. Second, the opinion that perceived by two participants who brought a recent cultural event into the class. Third, one of the participants believed that EIL approach could be implemented by exposing multiculturalism around the world.
By seeing the participants‟ teaching material, most of them still believed that exposing „source culture‟ is the best way to accommodate EIL approach in the teaching. For example,
28 and then Widya brought Jamu (herbal Javanese beverage) as the teaching material. They had an assumption that bringing „source culture‟ will be able to raise the students‟ awareness to respect
their own culture although they are learning foreign language (Febri, Lili, Dhanik, Widya, lesson plan, 16/11/2011).
Moreover, there are two participants who have a perception that EIL also could be done by bringing real cultural event that happened recently in their surroundings as material. For instance, Arumi brought the issue about SEA Games which recently held in Indonesia as she stated in her teaching journal below:
Sea Games was still a hot issue at that time. My understanding about EIL had also improved. As I said in my pre-teaching journal, teaching using EIL approach means bringing real recent event happening in Indonesia as well as culture which Indonesian people talk about it using their Indonesia-English, and creating material and activity for teaching by our selves. (Arumi, portfolio, 29/11/2011)
From the statement above, Arumi clearly stated that her understanding of EIL was improved by knowing that EIL approach also could be applied by bringing recent cultural event happening in Indonesia. Besides that, Arumi also used a recording which contained a conversation between four Indonesian people talking about SEA Games. Indirectly she introduced an English variety what she called it Indonesian-English to the students.
A similar view conveyed by Rina who took the advantage of the cultural event which recently happened in Central Java called “Mas & Mbak Jawa Tengah” as her teaching material.
29 I feel the material that I gave to my students had already entered into EIL because I taught one particular culture which is Javanese culture. I make my students promoting tourist attractions in Central Java so they could learn to love their own culture. When they were given the task about describing and promoting tourist attractions, they are very enthusiastic to keep up with the activities. (Rina, teaching journal, action, 07/12/2011) Rina confidently said that she was successfully applied EIL into her teaching because she picked the culture that close to the students so that the students could learn their own culture. In her teaching, Rini asked her students to pretend to be the winner of “Mbak & Mas Jawa Tengah”
then they should to promote some places in Central Java to the foreigners. It is interesting since the students are encouraged to describe the local places using English. It is supported by McKay (2002) who stated that EIL encourages the learners to gain a deeper understanding of their own culture so that they can share these insights when using EIL with individuals from different cultures. In addition, ”Mas & Mbak Jawa Tengah” activity could make the students eager to do
the task.
Furthermore, another perception was carried by Ranthi who apply EIL approach by using „international target culture‟ which means use great variety of cultures in English- and
non-English-speaking countries around the world (Cortazzi & Jin, 1999). In this very last teaching, Ranthi taught about procedure text and chose „tea‟ as her teaching topic simply because she thought that tea is a popular beverage in the world.
Every country has different kind of “tea” which cultural traditions have been built
30 based on the video of making refreshing Indian tea (chai). This activity related with EIL because the speaker of the video is come from India. (Ranthi, lesson plan, 14/12/2011) It is true that every country has different kind of tea even there is a „tea ceremony tradition‟ from
several countries in the world, such as Cha-no-yu tradition from Japan, Darye tradition from Korea, and Tea Time from England. So it is a great idea to bring the multiculturalism to the class. In her teaching Ranthi used pictures of tea from different countries in the world and an Indian video about making tea. Ranthi had said that the used of pictures could grab the students‟ interest and the video would be a good example to teach procedure text. In addition, Ranthi selected Indian video in order to make the students aware of English accent variety. She told that when she played the video, her students acknowledged the way the Indian said „tea‟ was different from native speaker.
Regardless the different perceptions of EIL among the participants, the last mini lesson is their satisfaction in understanding EIL approach, they are no longer facing confusion or difficulty related the implementation of EIL into the teaching. Most of them confidently stated that they have understood the concept of EIL:
I think that my understanding about EIL framework is getting focused. (Widya, teaching journal, reflection, 16-12-2011)
Overall, I felt satisfied with my last mini teaching. I have shown my development in making the materials and activities with EIL approach. (Ranthi, teaching journal, reflection, 16-12-2011)
31 I started to try my capacity to understand EIL by my last mini teaching and finally I really understood what was called by EIL. (Rina, portfolio, 16-12-2011)
Finally in my third mini-teaching, my understanding about EIL is improved. With EIL, I could be explored with a variety of many cultures, many identities, many sounds and many more. Lili, portfolio, 16/12/2011)
Finally, in this stage I came with a clear understanding through what an EIL material is. In the last mini teaching I didn‟t think too much to decide what kind of material I
should give to my students. (Dhanik, portfolio, 16/11/2011)
32 Conclusion
This study is aimed to find out how the process of student-teachers‟ development in understanding EIL pedagogy in a Microteaching course. The result reveals that the participants have different perceptions toward EIL and they have their own way to implement EIL approach in their teaching. Since this study analyzes the process of development, I chronologically analyze the data from mini lesson 1, mini lesson 2, and mini lesson 3.
In the first mini lesson, most of the students perceived EIL as a medium to accommodate both „source culture‟ and „target culture‟ in the teaching material. This understanding is derived from the lecture‟s presentation in the beginning of the course. However, there is a participant
who has different opinion toward EIL, she had an understanding that EIL approach also could be done by accommodating local voice (Javanese accent) as teaching material in order to raise the students‟ awareness about the thought of English role model. In this stage, some participants are
still seeking about the notion of EIL itself so that they faced kind of confusion, for example they questioned the standard pronunciation that should be used in EIL context.
Then, in the second mini teaching the participants‟ understanding of EIL approach are
developed in more varied way. First opinion is about the use of students‟ culture as the point of teaching EIL approach. Second opinion is that teaching English variety accents is also part of EIL approach. Third, the opinion that EIL approach means the use of authentic material from inner circle countries. The last is the opinion that EIL approach can be a bridge to introduce the national heritage to the students. The participants perceived EIL in a various way as a result of their effort to gain knowledge about EIL such as, learning from friends‟ teaching, considering lecture and friends‟ feedbacks, asking other friends outside the class, looking at friends‟ teaching
33 participants faced a confusion regarding her different opinion with their friends. She questioned the use of authentic material from inner circle countries is part of EIL or not.
Eventually, the third mini lesson is the satisfaction of participants‟ understanding of EIL;
they are no longer face confusion or difficulty in implementing EIL approach. Nevertheless, there is still different perception among the participants; even some of the participants build new perception about EIL approach. Those new beliefs are the accommodating recent cultural event that happened recently in the students‟ environment, then the belief that bringing „international target culture‟ is a good way to expose the students with different variety of culture that exist in
the world.
The most important limitation lies in the fact that I only investigated student-teachers in the Microteaching course in English Department Salatiga. Further study perhaps can investigate students-teachers from other courses or faculties even it will be better from another university in Indonesia because there will be more variation of student-teachers‟ perceptions about EIL pedagogy and the way they develop the understanding.
34 Acknowledgement
35 References
Acar, A. (2006). Models, norms and goals for English as an International language pedagogy and task-based language teaching and learning. Asian EFL Journal, 8(3). 174-190.
Cook, V. (1999). Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 33(2), 185-210.
Cortazzi, M., & Jin, L. (1999). Cultural mirrors: Materials and methods in the EFL classroom. In E. Hinkel (Ed), Culture in Second Language Teaching (pp. 169-206). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Firth, A. (1996). The discursive accomplishment of normality on „lingua franca‟ English and
conversation analysis. Journal of Pragmatics (26), 237-259. Guest, Greg. (2012). Applied Thematic Analysis. California: Sage.
Ha, P. L. (2005). Toward a critical notion of appropriation of English as an International language. Asian EFL Journal, 7(3). 1-14.
Horibe, H. (2008). The place of culture in teaching English as an International language (EIL). JALT Journal, 30(2). 241-254.
Jenkins, J. (1998). Which pronunciation norms and models for English as an international language? ELT Journal, 52(2), 119-126.
Kachru, B. (1985). Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: the English language in the outer circle. In R. Quirk & H. G. Widdowson (Eds.), English in the World: Teaching and Learning the Language and Literatures (pp. 11-30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Liao, P. (2004). English as a global language and its effect on Taiwan‟s English education.
36 Liurda. E. (2009). Attitudes toward English and an International language: The pervasiveness of native models among L2 users and teachers. In Sharifian, F. (Ed.) (2009) English as an International Language. Perspectives and Pedagogical Issues. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Maadad, N., & Misco, V. (2011). The English language and cultural appropriateness. Sosiohumanika, 4(1). 111-128.
Matsuda, A. (2003). Incorporating World Englishes in teaching English as an International Language. TESOL Quaterly, 37(4). 719-729.
Misco, V. & Madad, N. (2011). The English language and cultural appropriateness. Sosiohumanika, 4(1), 111-126.
McKay, S. L. (2002). Teaching English as an International Language: Rethinking Goals and Approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McKay, S. L. (2003). Toward an appropriate EIL (English as an International Language) pedagogy: re-examining common assumptions. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 1–22.
McKay, S. L. (2003). Teaching English as an International Language: the Chilean context. ELT Journal, 57(2), 139-148.
McKay, S. L. (2006). English as an International Language: Language and society (pp. 89-115). New York: Oxford University Press.
Modiano, M. (1999). International English in the global village. English Today, 15(2), 22-28. Momenian, M. (2011). The identity and L2 accent from an EIL angle. Journal of Language and
37 Richards, J. C. & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language
Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J.C. (2002) 30 Years of TEFL/TESL: A Personal Reflection, RELC Journal, 33(2), 1-35.
Sunichi, I. (2001). What constitutes “good pronunciation” from L2 Japanese learners‟ and native speakers‟ perspectives?. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 8(1),
277-290.
Talebinezhad, M. R. (2001). Basic Assumptions in Teaching English as an International Language. The Internet TESL Journal, 7(7). Retrieved from http://iteslj.org/Articles/Talebinezhad-EIL.html
Widdowson, H. (1994). The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly, 28(2), 377-389.
Zacharias, N. T. (2003). A survey of tertiary teachers‟ beliefs about English Language Teaching in Indonesia with regard to the role of English as a global language. MA-ELT Thesis, Assumption University of Thailand, Bangkok, Thailand.
