Blog Post #11: Globalization's Influence on Language Education

As globalization and the use of World Englishes increase, an English instructor’s pedagogical choices also increase. Because so many different varieties and contexts for English exist, it is difficult for educators to choose which English variety (or varieties) to teach. Instructors must determine not only what is appropriate for the context in which they are teaching, but also which linguistic information their students must know in order to use English in other contexts in the future. With this issue in mind, I appreciate Matsuda and Matsuda’s suggestion to “teach the principles and strategies of discourse negotiation” (372). This focus on discourse negotiation can provide students with strategies to adjust their writing to fit a variety of different situations. By analyzing a rhetorical situation (including audience, purpose, and genre), students can develop an awareness of how the decisions they make as writers can affect a reader’s view of their writing. Students can then use this knowledge to either conform to or challenge the privileged discourses of the powerful.

Kubota’s article shed more light on the issue of globalization and its impact on language teaching. She describes how globalization has created the discourse of kokusaika in Japan, which “blends both Anglicization and nationalism” (27). This discourse promotes an essentialist view of cultures and encourages a strong Japanese national identity. However, it unfortunately fails to pay attention to ethnic and linguistic diversity in both Japan and other parts of the world. As a result, Japan’s JET program tends to favor white English teachers from North America or Britain, thus perpetuating the idea that native speakers, particularly those who align to stereotypes, are the best teachers. Although I believe that English education should focus on diversity within the English-speaking population, I find it interesting that the educational systems in Japan actually use English as a foreign language to promote nationalistic perspectives. Kubota reveals that kokusaika helps Japan “claim its power in the international community through Westernization,” as well as “express and explain unambiguously Japanese points of view in the world while maintaining Japanese identity” (17). I find it sad that this discourse does not allow multiple perspectives or focus on diversity, yet I think this Anglicization-nationalism hybrid is very creative. The Japanese seem to have recognized the power of discourse, and rather than challenge the discourse of the powerful (Western nations), they have embraced this discourse and used it to promote their own cultural and national identity.

Of course, the problem with this discourse is that it fails to promote any type of cultural or linguistic pluralism. As a language educator, I want my students to understand that language is never cut and dry. By teaching students to take a rhetorical approach to language, as I mentioned earlier, I hope that I can empower them to both critically analyze English and use it in a way that will empower them.