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.


Popular posts from this blog

Are you an Open Educator?

Image from What is an Open Educator? According to a recently published article from the International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning (IRRODL):

An Open Educator chooses to use open approaches, when possible and appropriate, with the aim to remove all unnecessary barriers to learning. He/she works through an open online identity and relies on online social networking to enrich and implement his/her work, understanding that collaboration bears a responsibility towards the work of others.

Does this sound attractive for English language teachers? It seems to some who offer courses through or with YouTube. But what does it mean "to remove all unnecessary barriers to learning?" Working for free? Not necessarily. If you read the article, it seems you'd be working on a sliding scale depending on the socioeconomic status of the learners, but this sliding scale is a sliding slope. How can poor le…

Engagement with Research as Professional Development

Last Thursday, I was reviewing literature for a research project that is just underway, and I came across a couple tables that resonated with me so much that I had to share it on Twitter. The tables come from Simon Borg's 2010 article "Language Teacher Research Engagement."

These tables would have come in handy if I had found them prior to my research project with teachers at an intensive English program (IEP) in the United States. They would have supported my professional learning and curriculum development philosophies as an administrator because I believe these two areas, professional learning and curriculum development, should have strongly overlapping goals as an English language teacher. Furthermore, I believe that it is in the best interest of an institution to support this in order to improve the curriculum. This belief is based on the assumption that curriculum is not static because is based on the needs of the learners, which are dynamic, as well as the resear…

Revisiting Multiliteracies & Moving On

I have been interested in a multiliteracies approach to English language learning and teaching for almost a decade now. I've been blogging about it since 2010 and I gave a presentation on this for two conferences in Iowa. I decided to put this interest aside so I could complete my dissertation on another topic and search for jobs. Now that a few years have passed, I'd like to share how my interest has changed.

The foundation of my interest is best represented by the Prezi I made (below) for my 2010 MIDTESOL Conference presentation:

My primary reference was Stuart Selber's 2004 book Multiliteracies for a Digital Age, published by Southern Illinois University Press. While working for the Kirkwood Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching (KCELT), I found some similarities between my highlighted concepts from Selber's book and the Framework for 21st Century Learning, which you can view at The third category (Information, Med…