Skip to main content

What is glocalized communication?

I came across the term "glocalized communication" a few years ago when I was researching perspectives, on teaching English language learners, similar to mine.  I found the term in a chapter of a book about language policies edited by Suresh Canagarajah.  The chapter is an extension of an article written by the same authors a few years earlier.  Below is the reference to that article.

Lin, A., Wang, W., Akamatsu, N., & Riazi, A. M. (2002). Appropriating English, expanding identities, and re-visioning the field: From TESOL to teaching English for glocalized communication (TEGCOM). Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 1(4), 295-316.

What appealed to me the most came not from the original article but from the last section of the chapter, titled "International TESOL Professionals and Teaching English for Glocalized Communication (TEGCOM),"   in which the authors proposed a research program for TEGCOM.  I believe that providing their preliminary outline for this program will help you understand my perspective as a teacher and a researcher:
  1. "Toward socially, culturally, historically, and institutionally situated perspectives in doing research on English language learning, curriculum development, and teacher education in a variety of contexts; foregrounding the social, cultural, and historical situatedness of human communication and activities.
  2. "Decentering the production of the discipline's knowledge and discourse from Anglo-speaking countries to a diversity of sociocultural contexts in the world.
  3. "Drawing on anthropological research methods and interpretive sociological methods, including narrative analysis, discourse analysis, school, cultural, and critical ethnography, cultural studies, and autobiographic studies" (2004, p. 218-219).
Similar to the authors' claim, this worldview has helped me develop a deeper understanding of diverse local pedagogical practices that I have encountered in Japan, South Korea, Russia, and the United States.  I have become more aware of issues of agency, identity, ownership, appropriation, resistance, and the use of the English language in diverse contexts.  The final claim is something that I believe I brought with me when I entered the field of English language teaching from my liberal arts undergraduate education and being raised in a multicultural family, "a deeper understanding of various cross-cultural encountered in diverse sociocultural settings."

One of the key ideas to TEGCOM is the attempt to remove the false dichotomy of native speaker and non-native speaker.  Even in 2013, this false dichotomy is still widely used.  I admit to using it as a label for novices or those outside the field of English language teaching to understand, but I feel that this does not help the social and cultural perspectives of the English language.  For me, tackling this issue helps me develop the perspective of teaching English for glocalized communication.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is Wikipedia Too Difficult to Read?

Image from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Afghan_man_reading_Wikipedia_article_in_Kandahar.jpg The short answer via statistical analysis is yes .  For more information, read  Lucassen, T., Dijkstra, R., & Schraagen, J. M. (2012). Readability of Wikipedia.  First Monday at   http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3916/3297 .  Wikipedians are aware that the open online encyclopedia may be too difficult, and there is a discussion of its reading level at  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reading_level . Much of this discussion took place over a decade ago, but the gist is that many contributors write at or for the college level. What appeals to me most is at the end of the page, where Wikipedians are discussing accessibility and what it means to be open to all. Here's my screenshot (in case it gets edited later). What does this mean for English language teachers? I was interested in seeing how selected Wikipedi...

The Horror! A Listening Curriculum for English Language Learning

I've been inspired by Clare Maas' blog post , which was inspired by Dr. John Field's TEASIG/CRELLA talks, to share my shock at the listening curriculum of an intensive English program where I previously worked. To be fair, this listening curriculum was designed twenty years prior and my job was to lead faculty efforts to revise it. Unfortunately, the program went through financial difficulties and leadership changes, resulting in the "non-renewal" of most of the curriculum committee members. Upper-Level (EAP) Listening (B2-C1) Listening was relatively equally integrated with speaking and reading skills in one course set apart from another course that focused much more on writing. This was the case for the two highest levels for students who intended to matriculate into the university as undergraduates. The highest level was not dependent on any one coursebook, so all of the listening material had to be collected by the instructors. When I was the curriculum ...

Adrian Holliday

In January 2015, the University of Warwick (UK) hosted a lecture by Dr. Adrian Holliday, whose work has greatly influenced my dissertation.  The lecture was recorded and can be viewed at http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/al/research/groups/llta/activities/events/holliday .  If you are interested in watching the video, I advise that you wear headphones as Dr. Holliday was not wearing a microphone.   For this blog, I briefly summarize the video, highlighting what I found most provocative.  Following that, I explain how Holliday's work has influenced my research and teaching philosophy for the past 5-10 years. Summary of "Revisiting appropriate methodology, BANA, TESEP and 'contexts'" The main purpose of this lecture was for Holliday to reflect upon his book Appropriate Methodology and Social Context , published 20 years ago by Cambridge University Press.  In this lecture, he integrated criticism from another professor whose research I admire, Dr. Suresh Ca...