Section I:

Languages such as English, Spanish, and French have always been in an interesting
position as languages considered native to a large number of countries. For example, if we
look at English, it is commonly recognized as the language of England, the United States,
Australia, and Canada, among other countries, as well as being recognized as an official
language in many other countries that do not first come to mind when listing English-speaking
countries, such as Nigeria and Singapore. With so many countries in such vastly different
regions of the world speaking the same language, naturally differences exist between the dialects
spoken. This begs the question, what is the correct from of English? And if multiple
acceptable forms of English exist, what form should be taught to learners of English? In order
to tackle these questions, research in the field of English as an International Language has been
increasing over the years. This research has led to doubts about the existence of a correct
English and the belief that native speakers are the ideal speakers and teachers of English,
leading to the production of new principles and practices related to English as an International
Language. However, these principles and practices are not always adopted, as can be seen in
both generally in recent research and more specifically in my personal experiences teaching in
South Korea and the United States.
To begin, it was long believed that English was, to some extent at least, a homogeneous
language with correct and incorrect forms. Research in the mid-1980s dispelled this myth,
declaring English as a non-homogeneous language lacking a single norm (Canagarajah 2014).
This means that, rather than only accepting the grammar and lexicon of countries whose English
is traditionally viewed as correct, such as England and the United States, the grammar and
lexicons of all countries that have adopted English are also accepted and viewed as correct.

This shift is particularly significant as many outer circle communities, postcolonial countries that
use English as a second language, have indigenized English (Moussu and Llurda 2008;
Canagarajah 2014). Recognizing these indigenized Englishes is an important step in changing
the definition of English. Recent changes do not stop there, however, as it is not only the English
of outer circle countries that are being recognized. Due to the influence of globalization,
expanding circle countries, countries that use English as a foreign language, have also been
developing local varieties of English that further deviate from native varieties. These varieties
are also becoming more valued, leading to changes in how English is taught.
In order to thrive in a world with so many different varieties of English, the definition of
competence in English has changed, and rather than focusing on teaching a constructed norm
of English, pedagogy has been shifting its goal to a more procedural mastery of English. The
definition of English competency traditionally found its roots in mastery of grammar. However,
to accommodate new views on the nature of English, some scholars have shifted the basis of
competency to propositional knowledge and procedural knowledge (Canagarajah 2014).
Through these two sets of knowledge, learners of English will have a much broader mastery of
English and will be able to navigate not only the forms of English most prevalent in the media,
but also all other forms of English by developing creativity and flexibility within their English
ability. To this end, Canagarajah puts forth three components of English education he believes
are vital in developing procedural ability: language awareness, rhetorical sensitivity, and
negotiation strategies (2014). Language awareness consists of understanding grammar in a more
general sense rather than focusing on a few specific grammars. In other words, it is based on
general knowledge about how grammar works in various languages (Canagarajah 2014). In the
context of English as an International Language, this is a relevant skill as learners will need to

navigate more English grammars than they can hope to learn in their entirety. Rhetorical
sensitivity consists of, awareness of genres, conventions, and contexts that motivate one to
choose the type of English to be used, and to adjust appropriately (Caranajah 2014). This skill
will allow learners to adjust their English to fit a wider range of circumstances and to understand
how those they communicate with are adjusting their English to fit the situation as well. Finally,
negotiation strategies consist of knowledge of ways to achieve communication with others who
have unfamiliar norms or values (Caranajah 2014). Due to globalization, these strategies are
necessary to communicate with very diverse group of people who speak English. In this way, the
idea of global Englishes has greatly changed pedagogical strategies for teaching ESL and EFL.
Further changes have occurred, however, in pedagogical theory related to who should be
teaching English.
There is a long-held belief across all foreign language education that the ideal teachers of
foreign languages are native speakers of those languages. This belief was based on the idea that
only native speakers thoroughly know the correct variety of English. As research on English
as an International Language has changed the definition of English in such a way that there is no
longer a correct version, the need for native speakers as teachers because they are the only
ones who fully understand correct English becomes a moot point. Therefore, the criteria for
the ideal language teacher must change to evaluate speakers on their ability to facilitate student
growth towards the goals previously mentioned and their objective ability to utilize English
effectively rather than natively. Based on these new criteria, there is much evidence that native
speakers are not necessarily the best teachers of English.
To begin, native teachers have few advantages over non-native teachers. Speaking a
language from the time you are a child does not mean that you are inherently skilled at that

language (Moussu and Llurda 2008). This can be seen clearly in various areas, such as the SAT.
If being a native speaker were the only criterion for being proficient at English, there would be
no need for native English speakers to take the English section of the SAT as they would all
perform at approximately the same level as all other native English speakers. This is not the
case, however, as native English speakers receive vastly different scores on the SAT. Therefore,
it is possible that a very proficient non-native English speaker may have a higher English ability
in some respects than a less proficient native English speaker. This idea is supported by research
that found well-education non-native English speakers to be considerably more intelligible than
native English speakers in global settings (Moussu and Llurda 2008). For this reason, it is
possible that in many cases non-native teachers are more suitable as educators of English than
native teachers.
Research in English as an International Language has further expanded upon this point by
challenging the very dichotomy of native and non-native teachers. In todays globalized world,
in many respects, the idea of a native speaker has become old-fashioned (Moussu and Llurda
2008). As the worlds citizenry becomes more mobile and more people start learning foreign
languages, it becomes more difficult to define speakers as native or non-native. If a child moves
with their family to an English speaking country at the age of three, are they considered a native
speaker of English? What if they move at the age of six? What if a child in a non-English
speaking country attends international schools for the entirety of his education even though he
speaks his countrys language at home? When faced with questions such as these, the variables
at play in the native versus non-native dichotomy become clear and the distinction begins to look
more and more artificial. This complexity translates over when considering English teachers,
demanding a more all-encompassing measure of English teaching proficiency (Moussu and

Llurda 2008). This means that the native teacher may not always be the ideal teacher. In
short, with advances in research concerning English as an International Language, the myth of
native speakers making the best teachers has been challenged and, arguably, debunked. As a
result, the ideal of ESL and EFL pedagogy has altered to include a more complex definition of
the ideal teacher.
If I look at my own teaching experiences in South Korea through the lens of English as
an International Language research, I see more practices based on traditional ideas rather than
more recent research come forth. Generally speaking, South Koreans still view native speakers
as the ideal teachers of English regardless of their teaching qualifications (Park 2009). Between
Kyunghwa Girls High School, Kyunghwa Girls English Business High School, and Kyunghwa
Girls Middle School, there are four native English teachers, but only two have degrees in
education, with only one of those being focused on TESOL. While all of the teachers have
varying experience in teaching, it is not their experience or educational qualifications that
secured them a job at Kyunghwa. They were also chosen to fill the quota of native teachers that
Kyunghwa wishes to have. Furthermore, I have noticed that Kyunghwa present their native
teachers strategically in order to recruit students. For example, even though we are only here as
students teachers for a month, we are being featured in both the brochure for Kyunghwa Girls
High School and Kyunghwa Girls English Business High School in order to convince middle
school students to apply to one of the Kyunghwa high schools. The non-native English teachers
are not features nearly as heavily even though they execute more of the English education.
Native English student teachers for a month being more of a draw than highly qualified nonnative teachers for three years reflects the still prevalent belief in South Korea that native
teachers are the ideal teachers of English.

Furthermore, Kyunghwa still demonstrates the idea that language and identity are
intertwined. Many South Koreans imagine white native speakers when they think of native
speakers of English. Therefore, Korean Americans are encouraged to suppress their
Koreanness when teaching to better approximate a native speaker (Park and Lo 2012).
While I did not witness exactly such an incident, comments from one of the native teachers at
Kyunghwa alluded to the same belief of the ideal white native speaker. During our time at
Kyunghwa, there have been times when the native teachers were called on to participate in
various events. Most recently, we were asked to offer flower tributes to the countries that aided
South Korean during the Korean War during a Korean War Memorial service. All of the native
teachers had heard about this in advance with the exception of one. When I asked this native
teacher if he was also going to be offering flowers at the ceremony since Id been told all the
native teachers would be doing so, his response was that he was not sure since he was not the
right kind of native teacher. When I asked him what he meant, he explained that all the other
native teachers were at least partially white while he was the only Asian-American native
teacher, so he might no be the one that the school wants to show off. Based on these
experiences, it would seem that at least at Kyunghwa there is still a strong belief in the
correctness of one English and the supremacy of the native teacher in teaching this correct
English.
Outside of my experiences in South Korea, my experiences in the United States talking
with and teaching conversational English to non-native English teachers who are sent by their
home countrys government to the United states to learn English have suggested that the idea that
teachers should be teaching the correct form of English is still prevalent. To begin, the fact
that teachers, generally from less wealthy countries, are being sent to English speaking countries

in order to improve their English, costing their countries a great sum of money, suggests that the
idea of the supremacy of certain forms of English requires them to go abroad rather than study
more in their home country. Furthermore, many of the teachers I have talked to, if not all, have
expressed their discontent with their English skills because their grammar is not always
completely accurate, taking American English as the standard, even though they are more than
capable of communicating with native speakers. This discontent suggests that the goal of the
schools that they work at is the traditional grammatical accuracy rather than the procedural
knowledge suggested by Canagarajah.
When pondering why in my experience there is a great lack of English education based
on the idea of English as an International Language, I began to wonder if it is related to the
challenges of practicum work that we read about before our practicum began. Seeing as research
on English as an International Language is rather recent, teachers who have been out of school
for a long time may not be as familiar with the field as those who have just graduated from
school. Therefore, it is possible that the classrooms that new teachers do their practicum in will
be using traditional methods instead of methods based on the more recent research. This would
lead to the reality shock described by many student teachers when they find that the
pedagogical methods they have learned in the classroom are different than those they witness
during their practicum. There are many ways that students could react to this tension between
theory and practice, but it is quite common for student teachers to simply adapt to the methods
used by their cooperating teacher (Canh 2014). If this is commonly the case, then it is possible
that, while students learn about English as an International Language and the pedagogical
implications of this research, in order to fit with their cooperating teachers style of teaching they
push this learning to the back of their mind and teach based on more traditional methods. This

would delay the evolution of ESL and EFL to include the ideas of English as an International
Language. I have not read extensively on this topic, however, so this is purely a potentiality for
now and something I may look into more in the future.
Section II:
At Kyunghwa Girls English Business High School, we taught girls of ages ranging from
15 to 18 separated into three grades. The lesson plans that follow were written for girls in the
second and third grades, making them between 16 and 18 years old. Kyunghwa Girls English
Business High School is a private high school for girls who intend to directly enter the workforce
upon graduation, rather than continuing on to university. Therefore, the focus of the school is on
business and the goal of the school is to be able to teach students the English they need to be
successful in the business world, though they do not have enough teachers proficient in business
English to fully achieve this goal at this time. Because of this, the conversational English classes
taught by the native English teachers usually focus on business skills such as taking a phone
message in English or answering interview questions in English. We were teaching during the
examination period, however, so we were asked to create lessons not based on business to help
the girls both improve their conversational English and relax while waiting to take their exams
(students would leave for approximately ten minutes during class to take their one-on-one oral
final examination and then return to class). In order to fulfill these goals, we chose travel as the
topic of our lessons as it is something that is not too challenging to talk about and would both
show students how English can be useful outside of the business context they usually focus on
and encourage a greater curiosity about the world.
Each class at Kyunghwa Girls English Business High School is separated into A-level
and B-level students for their English classes with native teachers. The A-level students have

higher English proficiency and are taught in a smaller class while the B-level students have
lower English proficiency and are taught in a larger class. B-level classes are provided with a
Korean co-teacher to translate instructions while A-level classes are taught without a Korean coteacher. Some students at Kyunghwa Girls Business High School have studied abroad, and all
of these students are placed into the A-level class for their grade. While there is a significant
difference in ability between the first grade B-levels and the second grade B-levels, there is not a
significant difference between the second grade B-levels and third grade B-levels, so we were
instructed to teach them the same lesson. While the students come from various middle school
backgrounds, all of them studied English in middle school and the majority of them also attend
English academies after school. While they are high school students, their English ability is
actually more similar to that of the Kyunghwa Girls Middle School students than the Kyunghwa
Girls High School students.
Our content objectives for this unit were the ability to speak about their desires to travel
to certain places, the ability to speak about what they wish to do if they hypothetically travel to
the places to which they wish to go, the ability to tell others about their past travel experiences,
and the ability to ask others about past travel experiences. Because students were coming and
going throughout the lesson, we decided to focus on forms that students were familiar with from
their English classes with Korean teachers so that they would still be able to participate in the
lesson even if they missed the explanation portion of the lesson. The objectives were helpful in
this respect as they led us to choose the functions to express desire to go somewhere and express
desire to complete certain activities in certain places, with, I wish I could go to and, I wish
I couldin as the forms respectively, to fulfill the objectives of the first lesson and to talk
about past experiences, talk about lac of past experiences, and ask about the past experiences of

others, with, I have + (past participle), I have not + (past participle), and, Have you + (past
participle), as the forms respectively, to fulfill the objectives of the second lesson. We also
decided to use a group activity to practice the forms rather than a partner activity so that students
could have more opportunities to talk as they were in smaller groups, but would not be hindered
by members leaving for their examination.
We provided comprehensible input by talking about places we wished to travel to and
places we had been to before explaining the grammar we would focus on for the day. In order to
elicit comprehensible output, we had students practice the key grammar forms through a game
that required many repetitions of the key forms. This allowed students to both become familiar
with the forms and to build muscle memory that would allow them to say the forms more easily
and naturally. In order to encourage more authentic output, rather than mere memorized
responses, we decided to ask questions to students at the end of class about their personal travel
desires or experiences that would allow them to use the grammar forms they had practiced. We
were able to gauge if students had met the objectives both by walking around during the activity
to gauge their comfort and accuracy with the phrases and through asking questions to individual
students at the end of the lesson so we could confirm students abilities to use the grammar forms
we had practiced in actual conversations, our true objectives of the lessons.

References
Canagarajah, S. (2014). In search of a new paradigm for teaching English as
an international language. TESOL, 5(4), 767-785.
Canh, L. V. (2014). Great Expectations: The TESOL practicum as a
professional learning experience. TESOL, 5 (2), 199-244.
Moussu, L. & Llurda, E. (2008). Non-native English-speaking English language
teachers: History and research. Lang. Teach, 41(3), 315-348.
Park, J. K. (2009). English fever in South Korea: its history and
symptoms. English Today, 25, 50-57.
Park, S. Y. & Lo, A. (2012). Transnational South Korea as a site for a
sociolinguistics of globalization: Markets, timescales,
neoliberalism. Journal of Sociolinguistics,16(2), 147-164.