A Narrative of Intransigence and Disingenuousness

  • Glenn Toh


Following earlier discussion on language, ideology and power relations, this chapter provides readers with an account of an English as a Lingua Franca program in a well-established Japanese university. The unfolding of events epitomize the manner in which narratives bear (bare) out instances of professional inconsistencies and intransigencies which banefully disrupt genuinely enlightened and emancipatory ways of approaching language teaching. Resistant and intransigent behaviors on the part of teachers roped albeit involuntarily into change initiatives for which they have little understanding or sympathy are seen to be sources of misalignment (and mischief), adversely affecting transformative ideals. The chapter concludes with the observation that contradistinctive epistemologies and contrary ideologies frustrate sincere attempts at advocating for more dynamic, accommodative and humanizing understandings of language and language teaching.


  1. Alderson, J. C. (2009). The micropolitics of research and publication. In J. C. Alderson (Ed.), The politics of language education: Individuals and institutions (pp. 222–236). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bamberg, M. (2005). Narrative discourse and identities. In J. C. Meister, T. Kindt, & W. Schernus (Eds.), Narratology beyond literary criticism: Mediality, disciplinarity (pp. 213–237). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barton, D. (2007). Literacy: An introduction to the ecology of written language. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  4. Block, D. (2017). Political economy in applied linguistics research. Language Teaching, 50(1), 32–64. Scholar
  5. Block, D., & Gray, J. (2016). ‘Just go away and do it and you get marks’: The degradation of language teaching in neoliberal times. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 37(5), 481–494. Scholar
  6. Canagarajah, A. S. (2013). Negotiating translingual literacy: An enactment. Research in the Teaching of English, 48(1), 40–67.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. Council of Europe. (2011). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Strasbourg: Language Policy Unit.Google Scholar
  9. Dardot, P., & Laval, C. (2013). The new way of the world: On a neoliberal society. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  10. Dendrinos, B. (1992). The EFL textbook and ideology. Athens: N. C. Grivas.Google Scholar
  11. Dornyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and punish: The Birth of the prison. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  13. Foucault, M. (1982). The subject and power. In H. Dreyfus & P. Rabinow (Eds.), Michel Foucault: Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics (pp. 208–226). Brighton: Harvester.Google Scholar
  14. Foucault, M. (1984). Truth and power. In P. Rabinow (Ed.), The foucault reader (pp. 1–75). New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  15. Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary ed.). New York: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  16. Goodier, T. (n.d.). Working with CEFR can-do statements: An investigation of UK English language teacher beliefs and published materials. London: King’s College London and the British Council.Google Scholar
  17. Goosseff, K. A. (2014). Only narratives can reflect the experience of objectivity; effective persuasion. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 27(5), 703–709. Scholar
  18. Gray, J., & Block, D. (2014). All middle class now? Evolving representations of the working class in the neoliberal era; the case of ELT textbooks. In N. Harwood (Ed.), English language teaching textbook (pp. 45–71). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Green, A. (2010). Conflicting purposes in the use of can do statements in language education. In M. Schmidt, N. Naganuma, F. O’Dwyer, A. Imig, & Kazumi Sakai (Eds.), Can do statements in language education in Japan and beyond (pp. 5–48). Tokyo: Asahi.Google Scholar
  20. Holliday, A. (2005). The struggle to teach English as an international language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Holliday, A., & Aboshiha, P. (2009). The denial of ideology in perceptions of ‘nonnative speaker’ teachers. TESOL Quarterly, 43(4), 669–689. Scholar
  22. Jaynes, S. (2015). Making strategic change: A critical discourse analysis. Journal of Organization Change Management, 28(1), 97–116. Scholar
  23. Jenkins, J. (2014). English as a lingua franca in the international university: The politics of academic English language policy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Jenkins, J. (2015). Repositioning English and multilingualism in English as a Lingua Franca. Englishes in Practice, 2(3), 49–85. Scholar
  25. Kubota, R. (2011a). The politics of school curriculum and assessment in Japan. In Y. Zhao, J. Lei, G. Li, M. He, K. Okano, D. Gamage, H. Ramanathan, & N. Magahed (Eds.), Handbook of Asian education: A cultural perspective (pp. 214–230). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. Kubota, R. (2011b). Immigration, diversity and language education in Japan: Toward a glocal approach to teaching English. In P. Seargeant (Ed.), English in Japan in the era of globalization (pp. 101–122). London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006). Dangerous liaison: Globalization, empire and TESOL. In J. Edge (Ed.), (Re-)locating TESOL in an age of empire (pp. 1–26). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  28. 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
  29. 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
  30. Menard-Warwick, J. (2014). English language teachers on the discursive faultlines: Identities, ideologies and pedagogies. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  31. Pavlenko, A. (2007). Autobiographic narratives as data in applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics, 28(2), 163–188. Scholar
  32. Pennycook, A. (1996). Borrowing others’ words: Text, ownership, memory, and plagiarism. TESOL Quarterly, 30(2), 201–230. Scholar
  33. 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
  34. Polkinghorne, D. E. (1995). Narrative configuration in qualitative analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 8(1), 5–23. Scholar
  35. Richards, J. C. (1993). Beyond the textbook: The role of commercial materials in language teaching. RELC Journal, 24(1), 1–14. Scholar
  36. Rivers, D. J. (2013). Institutionalized native-speakerism: voices of dissent and acts of resistance. In S. A. Houghton & D. J. Rivers (Eds.), Native-speakerism in Japan: Intergroup dynamics in foreign language education (pp. 75–91). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sargent, J., & Winward-Stuart, J. (2010). Implementation of a can do based syllabus in an eikaiwa. In M. Schmidt, N. Naganuma, F. O’Dwyer, A. Imig, & K. Sakai (Eds.), Can do statements in language education in Japan and beyond (pp. 250–265). Tokyo: Asahi.Google Scholar
  38. Sato, Y. (2010). Using can do statements to promote reflective learning. In M. Schmidt, N. Naganuma, F. O’Dwyer, A. Imig, & K. Sakai (Eds.), Can do statements in language education in Japan and beyond (pp. 184–199). Tokyo: Asahi.Google Scholar
  39. Seargeant, P. (2009). The idea of English in Japan: Ideology and the evolution of a global language. Buffalo: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Street, B. (2003). The implications of the ‘New Literacy Studies’ for literacy education. In S. Goodman, T. Lillis, J. Maybin, & N. Mercer (Eds.), Language, literacy and education: A reader (pp. 77–88). Stoke on Trent, Trentham.Google Scholar
  41. Thompson, J. B. (1987). Language and ideology: A framework for analysis. Sociological Review, 35(3), 516–536. Scholar
  42. Thompson, J. B. (1990). Ideology and modern culture: Critical social theory in the era of mass communication. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  43. Toh, G. (2012). Having English as a resource for multicultural understanding: Exploring possibilities in Japanese ELT. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 33(3), 301–311. Scholar
  44. Toh, G. (2016a). English as medium of instruction in Japanese higher education: Presumption, mirage or bluff?. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Watson, G. (2003). Ideology and the symbolic construction of fairness in organizational change. Journal of Organization Change Management, 16(2), 154–168. Scholar
  46. Widin, J. (2010). Illegitimate practices: Global English language education. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

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

Personalised recommendations