English Teaching: Instantiations of Positivistic Forms of Convergence and Oppressiveness

  • Glenn Toh


This chapter highlights Adrian Holliday’s rendition of English-speaking Western TESOL as a particularized trope or enactment of English teaching which dissimulates (yet disseminates) culturally divisive and reductionist ideologies. Such ideologies are sustained by the interested and collusive nature of powerful discourses operating within institutional and professional domains, where positivist forms of essentialism and reductionism abet against teacher agency and creativity. Teachers are trained typically within the unimaginative regimes of a generalized TESOL framework founded on static understandings of language, culture and communication with correspondingly deleterious outcomes. Ideological reproductions of orthodoxy routinely forestall dialogue, reflexivity and transformation, while tangible benefits remain for protectors of the status quo not least in the way the system is configured to generously reward conventionality as opposed to criticality.


  1. Barton, D. (2007). Literacy: An introduction to the ecology of written language. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  2. Block, D. (2003). The social turn in second language acquisition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Canagarajah, A. S. (2005). Reconstructing local knowledge, reconfiguring language studies. In A. S. Canagarajah (Ed.), Reclaiming the local in language policy and practice (pp. 3–24). New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Canagarajah, A. S. (2006). TESOL at forty: What are the issues? TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 9–34. Scholar
  5. Canagarajah, A. S. (2013a). Translingual practices: Global Englishes and cosmopolitan relations. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Canagarajah, A. S. (Ed.). (2013b). Literacy as translingual practice: Between communities and classrooms. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Canagarajah, A. S. (2016). TESOL as a professional community: A half-century of pedagogy, research, and theory. TESOL Quarterly, 50(1), 7–41. Scholar
  8. Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. (2013). Towards a plurilingual approach in English language teaching: Softening the boundaries between languages. TESOL Quarterly, 47(3), 591–599. Scholar
  9. Chowdhury, R., & Ha, P. L. (2014). Desiring TESOL and international education: Market abuse and exploitation. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cogo, A. (2016). Conceptualizing ELF as a translanguaging phenomenon: Covert and overt resources in a transnational workplace. Waseda Working Papers in ELF, 5, 1–16.Google Scholar
  11. Dale, J., & Hyslop-Margison, E. (2010). Paulo Freire: Teaching for freedom and transformation. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  12. Dewey, M. (2012). Towards a post-normative approach: Learning the pedagogy of ELF. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 1(1), 141–170.
  13. Edwards, R., & Usher, R. (2008). Globalisation and pedagogy: Space, place and identity. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Firth, A., & Wagner, J. (1997). On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. The Modern Language Journal, 81(3), 285–300. Scholar
  15. Freire, P. (1985). The politics of education: Culture, power, and liberation. London: Bergin and Garvey.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary ed.). New York: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  17. Garcia, O., & Li, W. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism, and education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gass, S. (1998). Apples and oranges: Or, why apples are not orange and don’t need to be: A response to Firth and Wagner. Modern Language Journal, 82(1), 83–94. Scholar
  19. Gray, J., & Block, D. (2012). The marketisation of language teacher education and neoliberalism. In D. Block, J. Gray, & M. Holborow (Eds.), Neoliberalism and applied linguistics (pp. 114–143). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Griffiths, C. (Ed.). (2008). Lessons from good language learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Hocking, D., & Toh, G. (2010). EAP writing: Reflections on divergent perceptions and expectations among tutors and students. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 20(1), 161–183.Google Scholar
  22. Horii, S. Y. (2015). Creating a multilingual/multicultural space in Japanese EFL: A critical analysis of discursive practices within a new language education policy. In X. Curdt-Christiansen & C. Wenniger (Eds.), Language, ideology and education: The politics of textbooks in language education (pp. 145–160). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Holliday, A. (2005). The struggle to teach English as an international language. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Ishikawa, T. (2017). Conceptualising English as a global contact language. Englishes in Practice, 4(2), 31–49. Scholar
  25. Jenkins, J. (2007). English as a lingua franca: Attitude and identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Jenkins, J. (2015). Repositioning English and multilingualism in English as a Lingua Franca. Englishes in Practice, 2(3), 49–85. Scholar
  27. Kohn, K. (2018). MY English: A social constructivist perspective on ELF. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 7(1), 1–24. Scholar
  28. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2003). A postmethod perspective on English language teaching. World Englishes, 22(4), 539–550. Scholar
  29. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006a). Dangerous liaison: Globalization, empire and TESOL. In J. Edge (Ed.), (Re-)Locating TESOL in an age of empire (pp. 1–26). Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  30. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006b). Understanding language teaching: From method to postmethod. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2002). Language acquisition and language use from a chaos/complexity theory perspective. In C. Kramsch (Ed.), Language acquisition and language socialization (pp. 33–46). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  32. Leung, C. (2014). Communication and participatory involvement in linguistically diverse classrooms. In S. May (Ed.), The multilingual turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL and bilingual education (pp. 123–146). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Li, W. (2018). Translanguaging as a practical theory of language. Applied Linguistics, 39(1), 9–30. Scholar
  34. Lillis, T. (2003). Student writing as ‘academic literacies’: Drawing on Bakhtin to move from critique to design. Language and Education, 17(3), 192–207. Scholar
  35. Lin, A. M. Y. (2013). Toward paradigmatic change in TESOL methodologies: Building plurilingual pedagogies from the ground up. TESOL Quarterly, 47(3), 521–545. Scholar
  36. Lu, L. J. (n.d.). The ‘Designer Immigrant’ student in Singapore: Incompatible identities in the English language classroom (King’s College, London, Centre for Public Policy Research Working Paper Series, No. 3, 2–11).Google Scholar
  37. Makoni, S., & Pennycook, A. (2007). Disinventing and reconstituting language. In S. Makoni & A. Pennycook (Eds.), Disinventing and reconstituting languages (pp. 1–41). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  38. Makoni, S., & Pennycook, A. (2012). Disinventing multilingualism: From monological multilingualism to multilingua francas. In M. Martin-Jones, A. Blackledge, & A. Creese (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of multilingualism (pp. 439–453). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. May, S. (2014). Disciplinary divides, knowledge construction and the multilingual turn. In S. May (Ed.), The multilingual turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL and bilingual education (pp. 7–31). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  40. Norton, B., & Toohey, K. (2001). Changing perspectives on good language learners. TESOL Quarterly, 35(2), 307–322. Scholar
  41. Oda, M., & Toh, G. (2018). Significant encounters and consequential eventualities: A joint narrative of collegiality marked by struggles against reductionism, essentialism and exclusion in ELT. In B. Yazan & N. Rudolph (Eds.), Criticality, teacher identity, and (in)equity in English language teaching: Issues and implications (pp. 219–236). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
  42. Ortega, L. (2014). Ways forward for a bi/multilingual turn in SLA. In S. May (Ed.), The multilingual turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL and bilingual education (pp. 32–53). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  43. Pennycook, A. (2007). The myth of English as an international language. In S. Makoni & A. Pennycook (Eds.), Disinventing and reconstituting languages (pp. 90–115). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  44. Phipps, A., & Guilherme, M. (2004). Why languages and intercultural communication are never just neutral. In A. Phipps & M. Guilherme (Eds.), Critical pedagogy: Political approaches to language and intercultural communication (pp. 1–6). Cleveland: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rudolph, N., Yazan, B., & Rudolph, J. (2018). Negotiating ‘ares,’ ‘cans,’ and ‘shoulds’ of being and becoming in English language teaching: Two teacher accounts from one Japanese university. Asian Englishes, 1–16. (advance online publication).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Seidlhofer, B. (2011). Understanding English as a lingua franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Toh, G. (2003a). A case for having a more critical orientation to ELT in Southeast Asia. World Englishes, 22(4), 531–538. Scholar
  48. Toh, G. (2003b). Response. World Englishes, 22(4), 548–549. Scholar
  49. Toh, G. (2008). Biz-Com writing: Challenges from academic literacies. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 18(1), 143–165.Google Scholar
  50. Toh, G. (2012). Having English as a resource of multicultural understanding: Exploring possibilities in Japanese ELT. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 33(3), 301–311. Scholar
  51. Toh, G. (2014). English for content instruction in a Japanese higher education setting: Examining challenges, contradictions and anomalies. Language and Education, 28(4), 299–318. Scholar
  52. Toh, G. (2016a). English as medium of instruction in Japanese higher education: Presumption, mirage or bluff?. London: Palgrave-McMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Toh, G. (2016c). Doing justice to an English as a lingua franca paradigm. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 5(2), 355–367. Scholar
  54. Toh, G. (2017a). Graduate school students’ writing in English: Facilitating pathways towards ‘design’. Writing and Pedagogy, 8(3), 561–575. Scholar
  55. Toh, G. (2017b). Provocative encounters reflecting struggles with change: Power and coercion in a Japanese university situation. Policy Futures in Education, 15(4), 512–525. Scholar
  56. Toh, G. (2018). Anatomizing and extrapolating from “Do Not Publish” as oppression, silencing, and denial. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 15(4), 258–281. Scholar
  57. Toh, G., & Hocking, D. (2010). ‘Good idea and opinion seem not important’: Reflections on students’ conceptualizations of academic writing. TESOL Journal, 3(1), 49–63.Google Scholar
  58. Widin, J. (2010). Illegitimate practices: Global English language education. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  59. Zuengler, J., & Miller, E. R. (2006). Cognitive and sociocultural perspectives: Two parallel SLA worlds? TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 35–58. Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Glenn Toh
    • 1
  1. 1.Language and Communication CentreNanyang Technological UniversitySingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations