Whose culture exactly? Challenging the notion of “target language culture” in ESL/EFL writing classrooms

• In Event: The Writingworld: Power Dynamics in Language, Literacies, and Pedagogies Across Contexts

Abstract

Writing can be viewed as a sociopolitical phenomenon often controlled by racial and linguistic elites as textual-material and assessment policies (Presenter 1). This is especially observable in English as a second language learning classrooms in the Global South where instructional materials are more often drawn from the Anglo-American spheres. Responding to the conference call to contribute to conversations on how we may resist or challenge the politicized, racialized, and I would add “whitewashed” forms of teaching, this practitioner inquiry (Cochran-Smith & Donnell, 2006; Hennessy et al., 2021; Wolkenhauer & Hooser, 2017) will report on a writing pedagogy that troubles the belief and assumption that using “target language culture materials only” is effective for language learning. I employed the first presenter’s conceptualization of Writingworld in order to enrich our understanding of culturally and linguistically responsive teaching practices (Hammond, 2014) and resist colonialist language learning policies and ideologies (Cushing, 2023; Meighan, 2022; Roche, 2019.

These pedagogical exercises were implemented in an 11th grade high school English as a second language course of an international school in southern China whose students were predominantly Chinese nationals. Although international schools more often market themselves as inclusive spaces that embrace diversity and multiculturalism, linguistic imperialism and monolingual bias continue to proliferate in these domains especially in English medium institutions (Huckle, 2021). The international English language curriculum adopted by this school repeatedly highlight the emphasis on target language culture in instructional materials and assessment measures. Whilst there are certainly compelling reasons for learning the culture of the speakers of a language, I argue that imposing the use of target language culture materials only is simplistic and insensitive to the rich cultural practices of the community and those of the students’ own. This can also be problematic especially when it comes to questions on whose “target language cultures” are represented and erased. Although there are merits, this certainly does not promote culturally responsive literacy instruction especially when assessment guidelines dictate that learners talk about “target language culture” in both their writing and oral assessments.

The presentation will highlight how the teaching of “summary writing” was made more culturally relevant by rejecting texts produced from the Anglosphere and instead utilizing a locally produced text that highlights the Chinese New Year celebrations. I will also discuss how learners’ multilingual repertoire was used in pre-writing activities such as when they engaged in dialogue about their experiences celebrating the holidays, the beliefs and rituals they practiced, and how they conceptualized and made sense of these practices. The presentation will conclude by providing practitioner evaluation and reflections on this classroom practice, zeroing in on how students responded to the tasks and how the theory utilized may further challenge hegemonic language teaching practices.  

Author

• Cris Delatado Barabas, McGill University