Category Archives: Critical Thinking

Integrating ChatGPT in English Language Teaching in Nepalese Community Schools: Opportunities and Challenges

AI in Language, Case Studies, Creativity, Critical Thinking, Education in General, ELT Resource, How AI help in shaping language, reflection, Reflection during Covid-19, Reflections, Research paper, Teacher Education, Teacher identity, Teacher's Experience/anecdotes, Teachers' narratives, Teaching Tips, Technology, Technology in ELT, ,
Mr. Arjun Jung Rayamajhi

Introduction

 The development of artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming the global education system. ChatGPT and effective AI models are now essential innovations in the language teaching and learning field. By providing technology to community schools with limited resources and infrastructure, scholars can gain insight into the potential and challenges of AI in resource-poor environments. This paper is a reflection of the recent empirical studies and my personal experience as a teacher and researcher to relate critically to the effects of ChatGPT on English language teaching. The input analyses the moderation through which AI transforms pedagogy, addresses learners’ differentiated desires, and works under the moral and infrastructural measurement of AI technology in Nepal. The data of this input are grounded in teacher interviews, classroom observations, and student-centred surveys, digging deep into the use and impact of AI tools. The output provides recommendations for maximising ChatGPT use to promote language acquisition in resource-scarce classrooms while alleviating accessibility, training, and moral challenges.

The ChatGPT: A Personalized and Engaging Commitment

The individualized ChatGPT capability to provide learners with feedback that is personal and immediate has been a possible offer of integration of learners up until now; something that is not practicable in a typically busy community classroom. ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence model called OpenAI, which is a state-of-the-art generative machine that can understand and produce human-like text after recognition of the given output. It is, in other words, a pillage of the substitution of creative slaves. It is also a testament to the increasing sensibility that there is a need for differentiated instruction (Zhang, 2022). In its essence, the ChatGPT implies that learners should learn at a pace which is commensurate with the timing that befits them. I personally think the OpenAI model is selfish and a more strenuous taskmaster. The state-of-the-art artificial intelligence OpenAI is more observant than a schoolteacher is and is a capable assistant anytime, even when students are away from the classroom (Sharma & Koirala, 2021). It makes the conversation more interactive and more exciting; the chatbot responds in the way the learner asks the questions. This miraculous discovery also helps shift it from the strength of monologue teaching, making space for the value of voices by offering the learners opportunities to communicate, share, be more interactive, and engage in the conversation (Patel & Uddin, 2022). Indeed, it is a deviation that it is possible because the basis for differentiation and the structure of any learning system is a one-size-fits-all mentality (Thapa, 2021). Time has changed, and increasing sensitivity embraces the ideas of differentiated instruction in such a diversity of educational responses from the learners.

 Pedagogical Transformation: From Deliverer to Facilitator

As for the pedagogical transformation, the other phenomenon observed with the help of ChatGPT is the possibility to shift the role of teachers from the main source of knowledge to the person who designs the improved learning processes (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). The key manifestation of this AI incorporation was the opportunity to use AI not as the medium to replace a teacher but as a tool that supports the learning process. In this way, teachers stop being the main content deliverers and become the facilitators and guardians of the AI-supported learning process. Generally, teachers are also communicators and problem-solvers; they possess the complex skill set that they should hand down to their students. The example of the pedagogical transformation made me reflect on the potential of teachers to design more individualistic and student-friendly plans that incorporate a range of AI-based tools. This, of course, requires teachers to become literate in AI and be aware of the options and the limitations of machines in their problem-solving strategies. To me, such a transfer implies a range of professional development opportunities, a permissive organisational culture, and facilitating policies regarding the conditions under which teachers can participate in experimentation and engage in reflective practice.

 Confronting Challenges: Infrastructure and Equity

I acknowledge that the successful integration of AI requires teachers to balance the affordances of the digital media and their professional judgment and situational knowledge. It challenges teachers to organise print-based interpretations so that the students’ work is steerable, so that it can provide the role of humans, such as motivation and ethical guidance, because their work was or could be used to take advantage of the affordances of the artefact. Even though I view my reflection from an optimistic perspective, it is a fact that the infrastructural and resource challenges persist in the schools of Nepalese communities. For instance, the lack of internet connections, the lack of digitalisation of the devices, and sporadic power interruptions become an obstacle to the promise of the integration of AI. Socially, such disparities present threats of increasing the inequities in education that would favour the students in cities or good school districts over disadvantaged rural students. I think my reflection necessitates an immediate policy action to close this gap and investments in enhancing digital infrastructure and the fair distribution of technology.

 Ethical Considerations: Striking a Balance between Innovation and Integrity

Another ethical aspect that has been imprinted in my mind was the issue of danger. While ChatGPT has the potential of becoming a learning scaffold, one of its applications, the unregulated and unrestricted use, could lead to more plagiarism, reduced creativity, and a weaker need for critical thinking. All three problems touch upon excuses issued by educators when talking about ChatGPT. In my view, the solution is neither to eliminate the use of AI nor to promote the paradigms of its application that would be equitable. Teachers and policymakers play the most active role in the promotion of decency, offering students digital ethics lessons that teach them how to use AI tools meaningfully and responsibly. In the Nepalese context, a considerable amount of national and institutional support is needed. On a national scale, the government should adopt a policy that would regulate the use of AI in education, making it more just. For this, the curricula change is a must, with digital ethics and literacy being added. Moreover, the government should offer guidance and resources for educators, explaining how to use AI responsibly. On the institutional scale, a school should pay due attention to the note of how important academic honesty, perseverance in the face of misuse, and the desire to solve problems instead of finding an easy way out are. Teachers will always be in need; such moral custodians will have to teach students how to become their own moral mentors, inciting them to use ChatGPT as a source of inspiration for development, rather than praise for creativity.

Moving toward Sustainable Integration: Policy Support and Professional Development

As has been discussed above, the integration of ChatGPT cannot be successful via a technical training programme but rather one that is evidence-based with pedagogical, ethical, and reflection aspects. From the reflection I have undertaken, professional development is continuous, situational, and participatory. The aspects can create teacher confidence and innovativeness. Education policymakers can help in developing clear guidelines and ethical norms that ensure AI supplements the current subject matters and increases universal access. To achieve this measure, the initiatives should be co-designed with teachers, students, and communities to be culturally responsive and viable.

Conclusion

 This paper discusses the implementation of ChatGPT in Nepalese community schools, identifying its benefits and drawbacks, and analyzing its potential contribution to English language acquisition. It discusses AI applications like ChatGPT, which offers the possibility to experience a personalized learning process and support engagement growth in the underprivileged setting. The implementation of ChatGPT at Nepalese community schools offers more advantages than disadvantages. While achieving individual educational plans and centring students resulted in multiple case benefits, this method requires stronger control on the part of teachers, infrastructural investments, and ethical considerations regarding the current programme. Policymakers and teachers can use this to understand that while the introduction of new technology can be more advantageous, this consideration should also be supported with a relevant and sensitive approach based on the context and students’ perspectives. This paper confirms the opinion on the potential extension of the educational process with the help of technology. However, it also emphasizes the significance of the human factor, critical thinking, and ethical competence.

The implementation of ChatGPT in Nepalese community schools can truly be an opportunity. It seems to be the most eternal way to individualised learning, which guarantees student interest with the help of an approach based on an individualistic manner. Still, it has a number of challenges, such as the appearance of new teacher roles, impacts on infrastructure, and the necessity to consider ethical considerations all the time. The future of AI-enhanced language learning is conditioned by the context-targeted planning and assumes the consideration of the educator’s expertise, institutional and national policy, and independence of the students.

 References

 Adhikari, P., & Pradhan, S. (2021). Digital inequality and its impact on education in Nepal.    International Journal of Education and Development, 43, 2, 114–128.

Bates, T. (2020). Teaching with AI: Embracing artificial intelligence in education.            Educational Technology Journal, 58, 6, 22–34.

Bhandari, S. (2021). Promoting digital literacy in Nepal’s education system. Asian Journal of Educational Research, 5, 3, 45–52.

Bista, B. (2022). AI and education: Opportunities and challenges in Nepalese community schools. Journal of Nepalese Education, 17, 1, 88–101.

Brown, T., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J. D., Dhariwal, P., … & Amodei, D. (2020). Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33, 1877-1901.

Gautam, M. (2021). Teacher preparedness for AI integration in education in Nepal. Journal of Modern Education, 25, 4,110-125.

Giri, A. (2021). Differentiated instruction in Nepal’s classrooms: An AI perspective. Nepal Journal of Education Studies, 9, 2, 102–114.

Hwang, G. J., & Chu, H. C. (2021). AI-assisted personalized learning and its effects on student performance. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69, 1, 87–104.

Khatiwada, S., & Bhandari, P. (2022). Pedagogical transformation through AI in Nepalese schools. Journal of Educational Development, 10, 1, 50–64.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108, 6, 1017–1054.

Zhang (2022). Towards risk-aware artificial intelligence and machine learning systems: An overview. Decision Support Systems, 159, 113800.

Patel, P., & Uddin, M. N. (2022). AI for algorithmic auditing: Mitigating bias and improving fairness in big data systems. International Journal of Social Analytics, 2(1), 49.

Thapa, K. (2021). Adapted long short-term memory for concurrent human activity recognition. Computers, Materials &Continua, 69(2),16531670.

 

Author’s Bio: Mr Arjun Jung Rayamajhi is an MPhil scholar in English Language Education at Kathmandu University. He is a secondary-level English language teacher at a community school in Nepal, where he has been actively engaged in classroom teaching, academic mentorship, workshops, and training. His research areas are ICT and ICT-based teaching. He can be reached at arayamajhi16@gmail.com.

 

Implementing ICT in Rural Community Schools: A Reflective Journey from a Student to a Teacher

Case Studies, Creative Writing, Creativity, Critical Thinking, Education in General, Global thought, Miscellaneous, reflection, Reflections, Research ideas, Teacher Education, Teacher identity, Teacher's Experience/anecdotes, Teachers' narratives, Teaching Tips, , ,
Mr. Janak Sigdel

Introduction

The integration of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) has transformed educational practices worldwide, fostering innovative teaching and learning experiences (UNESCO, 2018). In developing countries like Nepal, however, ICT implementation remains uneven, particularly in rural community schools. Despite the government’s efforts to promote ICT in education through policies such as the School Sector Development Plan (SSDP, 2016–2023), the challenges in rural contexts continue to hinder its effective use. This study reflects on my personal and professional journey as both a learner and a teacher in Nepal’s community schools, focusing on the challenges of ICT implementation and the realities of the digital divide between rural and urban educational settings. I was born and raised in a rural village in Tanahun District, Nepal. My early education took place in a community school that lacked basic ICT infrastructure, including computers, projectors, and even electricity. Like many rural students, I completed my schooling without ever having seen or used a computer. My only exposure to ICT was through conversations among teachers, which made computers sound like distant, mysterious tools.

The lack of digital exposure during my schooling reflected a broader issue: Nepal’s rural-urban educational disparity, especially in access to technology. Several studies align with my own personal experience, whether as a student or a teacher in various schools. For example, a study by Joshi and Ayer (2024) found that most rural schools in Nepal still lack the infrastructure and training needed for ICT integration. Similarly, Phunyal (2024) reported that many community schools have computers but lack consistent electricity and internet facilities, making their use infrequent and symbolic rather than transformative. Similar challenges are echoed in Lomo et al. (2024) when they reported that insufficient funding, weak stakeholder support, training challenges, poor electricity and internet access, and high maintenance costs constrained head teachers’ efforts to support ICT integration in teaching and learning. It has been reported that teachers have poor ICT skills, schools have poor internet connectivity, and a lack of computers, which creates a significant challenge in its implications (Lamsal, 2022). This report aligns with my personal experience in using ICT in teaching and learning.

Transition to Higher Education and Exposure to ICT

 After completing my School Leaving Certificate (SLC), I moved to Pokhara for higher education. I passed intermediate without seeing computer use in the teaching and learning process. However, this transition marked a turning point in my educational journey. While pursuing my Bachelor’s degree, I joined a computer institute and completed a basic computer course. I also began teaching in a private school, where I observed the effective use of ICT in classrooms. Students were taken to the computer lab for a computer class, as well as being taught the contents through ICT tools.

Teachers used projectors, digital content, and multimedia presentations, and I noticed how students were more engaged and motivated. Their enthusiasm contrasted sharply with my own schooling experience. This observation deepened my understanding of the digital divide, a term referring to the unequal access to technology across social, geographical, and economic boundaries (Van Dijk, J., 2020). However, even in higher education, the integration of ICT was limited. Most lecturers relied on traditional lecture methods, highlighting a systemic gap in technology adoption even at the tertiary level.

ICT in Higher Education: A Source of Inspiration

During my master’s degree at Tribhuvan University, I experienced technology-enhanced learning environments for the first time. Professors used laptops, projectors, and digital resources to teach English, which significantly enhanced classroom engagement. They utilised ICT tools in preparing teaching materials and presentation slides, and employed these tools to involve students in group work. The most exciting thing I experienced was that they provided project work that required students to use computers in reporting the work. The ICT use really brightened up the classroom, ended boredom, enhanced students’ participation, and allowed students to explore the world of knowledge using technology. These experiences reinforced my belief that ICT could revolutionise teaching and learning if properly implemented. It inspired me to become an ICT-oriented teacher who could bring innovation into classroom instruction.

Research supports this realisation. According to Pun (2013), the use of ICT in teaching English promotes learner autonomy, motivation, and language exposure beyond textbooks. Similarly, Adhikari (2022) emphasises that teachers’ attitudes and digital competence play crucial roles in the success of ICT integration. Furthermore, Paudel (2021) argued that teacher professional development programs must include digital literacy and pedagogical training to ensure the sustainable use of ICT in schools.

Encountering Realities as a Teacher in Rural Community Schools

 My enthusiasm for using ICT faced harsh realities when I began teaching in a rural community school in Tanahun. The school lacked not only computers but also electricity. There was no internet connection, either. I had to depend on mobile data to connect to the internet. The mobile data was also poor. I was disappointed with the realities I confronted there at that time. I was just puzzled about how to integrate ICT in my real teaching without ICT tools at school. The classroom size was large. I had the responsibility of dealing with tech-savvy learners who were more interested in using technology in learning a language. I wanted to be a scuba diver, but the circumstances forced me to be helpless. There was also poor support from the administration in utilising ICT in teaching and learning. I talked to the head teacher and the SMC chairperson. They spoke of the financial challenges the school was facing. My colleagues were discussing the lack of opportunities for ICT training, despite their wishes. Only a few teachers are well-trained in ICT. I desperately wished for an appropriate policy at the local level to address the challenges of ICT implementation in the community school. My knowledge and training in ICT felt irrelevant in that context. Similarly, Rana (2018) and Paudel (2022) identify financial constraints, inadequate training, and the absence of institutional commitment as core barriers.

After four years, I was transferred to a secondary school at Bhimad, where the situation was slightly better; there were computers and projectors, but no internet connectivity and unreliable electricity. Moreover, most teachers were digitally illiterate. Even computer teachers conducted classes theoretically without hands-on practice. These challenges align with findings from Sharma (2020), who observed that many rural schools in Nepal possess ICT tools but lack effective usage due to insufficient training, irregular power supply, and a lack of maintenance support.

Current Teaching Experience and Continuing Challenges

Currently, I teach English at a community school in Tanahun. Despite my persistent efforts to integrate ICT tools into lessons, barriers remain. Limited resources, poor connectivity, and a lack of institutional support continue to restrict meaningful ICT use. I have maximised available tools, using personal mobile phones, recorded videos, and downloaded materials, but systematic integration remains out of reach.

This situation aligns with broader national findings that rural teachers face “second-order barriers”—attitudinal, skill-based, and policy-related constraints that prevent effective ICT use (Ertmer, 1999; Paudel, 2021). Dong, C. (2025) reported that teachers faced major obstacles in integrating ICT into their teaching, primarily because they lacked adequate ICT training and professional development Rana and Rana (2020) in the Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology observe that the implementation of ICT in rural Nepal is highly context-dependent, constrained by geography, socio-economic status, and policy support. The persistence of these issues reveals the urgent need for localised training, infrastructure investment, and policy follow-up. Their findings reinforce the idea that rural ICT integration requires systemic rather than individual-level solutions.

Reflections and Implications

My journey from a student deprived of ICT to a teacher striving for ICT integration reflects the systemic inequities in Nepal’s education system. The journey helped me come up with the idea of the challenges of ICT implementation and its corresponding measures. The lack of sufficient ICT resources, inadequate ICT-based training for teachers, inconsistent electricity supply, poor internet access, a lack of alternative sources of electricity, insufficient administrative support, and a lack of ICT skills are identified as the major challenges to the effective implementation of ICT in rural community schools in Nepal.  It underscores that ICT implementation is not merely a technological challenge but a socio-economic and policy issue.

These various experiences helped me to develop the insights to minimise the challenges. Conducting regular ICT training for teachers, promoting digital literacy among students and teachers alike, and community and local government participation in ICT initiatives. Schools must search for financial resources, and stakeholders need to provide administrative and technical support to mitigate the challenges that emerge with the effort to integrate ICT in teaching and learning, particularly in rural community schools. The findings also triggered changes in the policy-making and implementation aspects to seek a solution to the challenges observed. The majority of teachers who have not had the opportunity to learn ICT skills need to be provided with training for proper implementation of ICT in the language classroom, and ultimately to transform the traditional way of teaching to the recent ICT-integrated teaching.

Therefore, policymakers and educational leaders must consider various factors, such as strengthening infrastructure (including electricity and internet access) in rural schools, conducting regular ICT training for teachers, promoting digital literacy among both students and teachers, and encouraging community and local government participation in ICT initiatives. Furthermore, the SMC chairperson and head teachers should share equal responsibility for adopting technology in classroom teaching and learning. The teachers also need to be aware that the use of technology enhances the learning outcome, meeting the goal of quality education. Additionally, various tiers of government need to collaborate to address the challenges of implementing ICT in education. These governments need to formulate an appropriate IT policy and equally emphasise the implementation part. Moreover, these governments need to allocate a budget for infrastructural development and the management of ICT tools in schools. As UNESCO (2023) notes, equitable access to ICT is a key driver of inclusive and quality education. Without addressing the underlying barriers, the digital divide will continue to widen.

Conclusion

This reflective account highlights that ICT integration in rural community schools of Nepal remains a significant challenge despite policy intentions and teachers’ enthusiasm. The author’s experiences mirror those of many rural educators who aspire to innovate but are constrained by contextual limitations. Bridging this gap requires more than distributing devices; it demands sustained commitment to infrastructure development, teacher professional development, and community engagement. Only then can ICT truly transform education in rural Nepal.

 

References

Acharya, C. P. (2014). Use of ICT/Web tools in ELT in Nepal. Journal of NELTA, 19(1–2), 1–13.

Dong, C., Ji, H., Yang, T., Wu, H., Liu, C., Xie, X., … & Zhang, X. (2025). Janus Adsorption of Polar Ion Hubs for Simultaneous Regulation of Zinc Deposition Kinetics and Interfacial Stability in Long‐Cycle Aqueous Zinc‐Ion Batteries. Advanced Functional Materials, e13529. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.202513529

Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first-and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47-61. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02299597

Joshi, K. R., & Ayer, R. (2024). Teachers’ experiences and challenges of integrating ICTs in English language classrooms in rural schools of Nepal. Journal of NELTA Gandaki, 7(1–2).

Lamsal, H. L. (2022). Exploring challenges and opportunities of remote teaching at Nepalese community secondary schools during the COVID-19 pandemic. Utamax: Journal of Ultimate Research and Trends in Education, 4(1), 29-38.

Lomo, D. A., Abonyi, U. K., & Ahwireng, D. (2024). Headteachers’ support and challenges toward ICT integration into teaching and learning in Ghanaian Basic schools. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 24(2), 330–345.

Maski Rana, K. (2018). ICT in rural primary schools in Nepal: Context and teachers’ experiences. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Canterbury).

Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology (2019). Education in Figures 2019. Government of Nepal.

Paudel, P. (2021). ICT integration in community schools of Nepal: Opportunities and barriers. Journal of Education and Social Studies, 4(1), 56–67.

Pun, M. (2013). The use of multimedia technology in English language teaching: A global perspective. Crossing the Border. International Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 1(1), 29–38.

Rana, K., & Rana, K. (2020). ICT in rural primary schools in Nepal: Context and teachers’ experiences. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(1), 36–53.

Tondeur, J., Van Braak, J., Ertmer, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2017). Understanding the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and technology use in education: A systematic review. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(3), 555–575.

UNESCO. (2018). ICT Competency Framework for Teachers (Version 3).

UNESCO. (2023). Global Education Monitoring Report 2023: Technology in Education. Paris: UNESCO.

Van Dijk, J. (2020). The digital divide. John Wiley & Sons.

 

Author’ Bio: Mr. Janak Sigdel is an English teacher at  Chandra Jyoti Secondary School, Ghirhing, Tanahun. He is the Roster Trainer of the Education Training Centre, Gandaki Province. Currently, he is pursuing an MPhil from Nepal Open University. He can be reached at schoolchandrajyoti31@gmail.com.

 

Enhancing Learner Engagement through Translanguaging Pedagogy: A Reflective Narrative from a Multilingual ELT Classroom in Nepal

Author identity, Creative Writing, Critical Thinking, Education in General, Reflections, Teacher Training, Teacher's Experience/anecdotes, Teaching Tips, , ,
Mr. Khem Raj Rauteda

Introduction

Teaching English in a linguistically diverse classroom presents a complex challenge, particularly in a multilingual context like Nepal, where students bring with them rich linguistic backgrounds from their homes and communities. I teach at Sharada Secondary School, a community school located in Itahari, Sunsari. Since 2022, I have been working with students from various ethno-linguistic backgrounds, including Tharu, Rai, Limbu, Maithili, and Nepali. Reflecting on my experience of teaching English in such a diverse setting, I initially employed an English-only approach as the medium of instruction, instituting rules that enforced speaking only English in the classroom. I felt a sense of satisfaction as the class remained silent. However, after some time, I began to realize that the students’ silence and passivity were not conducive to effective learning. This reflection prompted me to adopt more reflective practices, which are essential for teachers’ professional growth and for addressing the everyday challenges that arise in teaching (Rauteda, 2024b).

The disengagement of my students became a significant concern for me. I encountered numerous challenges during class, particularly regarding student motivation and engagement. I observed that many students were hesitant to speak, fearful of making mistakes, and often remained passive throughout the lessons. This situation forced me to reflect critically on my teaching methods and seek alternative pedagogical approaches. Consequently, I adopted translanguaging as an intervention in the classroom—an approach that allows students to utilize their full linguistic repertoire in the learning process (Gaarcia & Wei, 2014; Phyak, 2018; Rauteda, 2022; 2024a). This reflective writing aims to provide an in-depth analysis of a moment when my teaching successfully engaged the majority of my students through a planned intervention using translanguaging pedagogy within a PAR framework. In this discussion, I outlined what I did, what the students did, and the reasons I believe the lesson was effective, supported by theoretical insights and research findings.

The Problem Identified: A Disengaged and Struggling Classroom 

At the beginning of my career, I worked at private colleges in the Kathmandu Valley, where monolingual instruction was preferred in ELT classrooms. This practice shaped my teaching habits. After passing the Teacher Service Commission (TSC) examination, I became a permanent teacher at a government school, where I attempted to apply the methods I had previously used in private colleges. Initially, my English classes were dominated by monolingual practices, focusing solely on English instruction, as dictated by the traditional curriculum. However, I quickly noticed that my students were hesitant to participate. Even basic questions often went unanswered. Their lack of confidence and visible anxiety toward English created a barrier to meaningful engagement. I found my students completely silent in the classroom. Despite using various materials such as pictures, slides, and English-language videos, the students remained passive and showed little interest. I then realized that this silence was a result of implementing a monolingual instructional approach in a multilingual setting. In this context, Garcia and Wei (2014) argue that monolingual methods in multilingual environments can alienate learners and limit their ability to express their understanding.

The students’ silence, lack of participation, and poor writing skills indicated a need for change. I realized that their home languages were being ignored in the classroom, causing English to feel disconnected from their everyday lives. As a teacher in a multilingual community, this contradiction deeply troubled me. One day, I asked my learners in the Nepali language why they remained silent in my class. They explained that they did not understand the language I used during lessons. The majority of them requested that I incorporate both Nepali and English in the classroom to enhance their understanding. Consequently, their demands and my realizations prompted me to seek alternative ways of teaching English in a multilingual context. This led me to consider translanguaging pedagogy through participatory action research (PAR).

Planning for Change: Participatory Action Research as a Tool

In response to students’ disengagement and lack of motivation, I chose to conduct action research within my ELT classroom to address the identified issues. I made this decision with the belief that action research provides practical solutions to everyday challenges and fosters professional growth for teachers (Rauteda, 2025a). Subsequently, I planned to implement PAR, which is a cyclical process comprising planning, acting, observing, and reflecting (Cohen et al., 2018). PAR allowed me to include my students as co-participants in the learning process. I designed a translanguaging-based intervention that enabled students to utilize their full linguistic repertoires (Garcia, 2009; Rauteda, 2022). According to Garcia and Wei (2014), translanguaging involves deploying students’ complete linguistic abilities without strictly adhering to the boundaries typically associated with named languages (national and state languages). Based on the benefits of using hybrid language practices in ELT classrooms, I aimed to employ translingual practices to create space for students’ home languages in the learning environment. Through PAR, I sought to transform my pedagogical approach by engaging students in a culturally and linguistically responsive manner. Additionally, my goal was to enhance student engagement in classroom activities through empowerment, while also seeking pedagogical empowerment for myself.

 

Conceptual Understanding of Translanguaging

Translanguaging is a language practice used by bilingual and multilingual speakers, wherein individuals naturally, dynamically, and purposefully utilize various languages and linguistic resources simultaneously (Garcia, 2009). This concept was first developed by Cen Williams in 1994, who created opportunities for students to alternate languages in their reading and writing, as well as in their receptive and productive skills (Garcia & Leiva, 2014). Translanguaging refers to the intentional mixing of different languages (Rauteda, 2024a). As Garcia (2009) notes, translanguaging involves the use of multiple linguistic practices by bilingual individuals to navigate their bilingual environments. Multilingual speakers can fluidly transition between languages, viewing their linguistic repertoire as a cohesive system (Canagarajah, 2011). Scholars have referred to translanguaging using various terms, including ‘polylingualism’ (Jorgenson, 2008), ‘metrolingualism’ (Pennycook, 2010), ‘codemeshing’ (Canagarajah, 2011), and ‘pluriliteracy’ (Garcia, 2009). From a language use perspective, translanguaging is a flexible and strategic approach that employs multiple languages (Garcia & Wei, 2014). This approach can assist students in developing both their cognitive and socio-emotional skills while leveraging the diverse and dynamic language practices of learners (Garcia & Kleyn, 2016; Vogel & Garcia, 2017). Consequently, translanguaging serves as a valuable practice for multilingual learners, addressing diversity in the classroom and promoting social justice by maximizing the use of each learner’s linguistic repertoire. It can also empower disadvantaged students who face barriers solely due to language differences. Moreover, Li Wei (2011) introduces the concept of a “translanguaging space,” which serves as a framework illustrating the setting in which students can utilize all their linguistic, cultural, and epistemic assets in the learning process. In my classroom, instead of separating languages, I embraced them as complementary resources. I encouraged students to use languages they are familiar with, such as Tharu, Maithili, Limbu, or Nepali, to express their thoughts, scaffold their learning, and produce creative outputs.

Implementing Translanguaging Pedagogy

As a teacher-researcher, I implemented translanguaging using various strategies at different stages. In the following sections, I present details on how I enacted translanguaging within a PAR framework, the impact of this intervention on my teaching, and what the intervention achieved. This information is organized into themes and subthemes.

Designing the Activity

I designed an activity focused on creating or collecting stories in the languages that students are proficient in. The purpose of this activity was to enhance their writing skills, encourage interaction, and appreciate local knowledge. Additionally, it aimed to promote co-learning and bridge the gap between the classroom, content, and community.

For this task, I divided the class into eight heterogeneous groups, mixing students from different language backgrounds. This grouping encouraged peer learning and cross-cultural dialogue. Each group created and collected stories in their preferred languages. They then presented these stories in the classroom and discussed them among group members. After the discussions, the stories were translated into multiple languages, including Tharu, Nepali, English, and Rai. Finally, the stories were compiled and presented as multilingual, multimodal storybooks. As a post-method teacher, I aimed to theorize my practice and apply theoretical concepts, using these activities to scaffold my students’ learning. I wanted to connect them with their culture, language, and community. Consequently, this activity aligned with Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory, particularly the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), which emphasizes the importance of social interaction and scaffolding in learning (Vygotsky, 1978).

What the Students Were Doing

Students engaged in various activities both individually and in groups. They created and collected stories, participated in discussions, made presentations, translated texts, transformed stories into multimodal formats, and even organized them into a book. Their involvement in these activities led to significant changes in their behavior and attitudes. The intervention fostered collaboration, cooperation, engagement, and motivation among the students, helping them develop a sense of agency (Rauteda, 2022; 2024; Rauteda & Luitel, 2025; Rauteda, 2025b). Moreover, this experience transformed the students’ behavior. Those who had previously remained silent became active participants, displaying excitement while collecting stories from elders in their communities. Sharing these stories in class instilled a sense of pride in them. They began to view their languages and cultures not as obstacles but as bridges to learning English. In their groups, students discussed word choices, translated idioms, and assisted one another in crafting coherent narratives. The classroom evolved into a lively, collaborative space filled with energy and multilingual dialogue. Students not only practiced English but also enhanced their thinking, reading, and writing skills.

What I Was Doing as a Teacher

As a teacher, I shifted my role from the sole authority to a facilitator and co-learner. I moved around the groups, providing language support, answering questions, and encouraging dialogue. I praised their efforts in both languages and emphasized the value of their home languages. Instead of correcting every mistake, I focused on meaning-making and creative expression. I also created space for students to present their stories to the whole class, which boosted their confidence. This student-centered pedagogy reflects Freire’s concept of dialogic education (Freire, 1970), where learning emerges through mutual dialogue and respect.

 Classroom Outcomes of Translanguaging Pedagogy through PAR

The primary objective of implementing this pedagogical strategy was to enhance student engagement in ELT classrooms and to develop students’ writing proficiency in English. The integration of translanguaging pedagogy within a PAR framework proved to be particularly effective in a multilingual and culturally diverse classroom. This approach not only supported students’ linguistic and academic growth but also improved classroom management by fostering greater learner participation, collaboration, and empowerment. Through this intervention, students were encouraged to draw upon their full linguistic repertoires, which made learning more inclusive, dynamic, and responsive to their lived experiences. The following sub-sections illustrate the transformative outcomes of this pedagogical approach, highlighting how translanguaging through PAR contributed to culturally and linguistically responsive teaching, enhanced literacy and language development, increased learner agency, and strengthened classroom relationships.

Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Pedagogy

Teaching is more effective when it is closely connected to culture and language. Research studies (Garcia & Wei, 2014; Phyak, 2023; Rauteda, 2022) have shown that language instruction is most effective when linguistic and cultural diversity are celebrated and respected in the classroom. Furthermore, these practices can lead to increased engagement, motivation, and academic achievement (Gay, 2010). During the project, the students worked on local phenomena. They wrote, collected, and translated stories from their local context and even used their home language. This practice helped them connect with their culture. By validating cultural norms and local languages, I was able to teach in a culturally and linguistically responsive way. It fostered the students’ identities and made them proud of their culture and language, which boosted their confidence. Throughout the project, the students became more motivated and confident, and they developed a more positive attitude towards their learning. By integrating home languages into the classroom, I created a safe space where students felt seen, respected, and capable. Thus, translanguaging enabled me to be accountable to local culture and language, enhancing my students’ engagement and motivation in the classroom.

 Enhanced Literacy and Language Skills

The intervention significantly enhanced both literacy and language skills among the students. Through activities such as storytelling, translation, and group discussions, students cultivated a range of literacies. They learned to navigate between languages, structure narratives, and articulate complex ideas. This aligns with Hornberger’s (2003) “Continua of biliteracy” model, which advocates for literacy development across diverse languages and modalities. Furthermore, as students engaged in tasks like searching for equivalent words in online dictionaries and Google, they also improved their digital literacy. Ultimately, they became more familiar with the structure and organization of books. This experience demonstrates that involving students in multilingual activities can effectively foster both language skills and digital literacy.

 Increased Participation and Agency

Agency refers to an individual’s capacity to act, initiate actions, self-regulate, or effect change in their circumstances. It can also be viewed as a form of resistance (Giddens, 1984; Ortner, 1984). Additionally, agency encompasses an individual’s ability to apply principles or theories in specific contexts. In this case, the intervention served to enhance the agency of both the teacher and the students, as they challenged the monolingual instruction and enacted micro-level resistance in the classroom through translanguaging (Rauteda & Luitel, 2025). Moreover, the students assumed greater ownership of their learning. Group work fostered accountability and collaboration, empowering them to become autonomous learners willing to take risks in their education. Consequently, they developed a stronger connection with each other and the classroom environment. Their engagement increased as they transitioned from passive recipients of knowledge to active creators of knowledge.

Building Relationships

Establishing a good rapport is crucial for effective teaching and learning. In my research, the intervention played a significant role in fostering positive relationships between the teacher and students, as well as among the learners themselves. The activities allowed me to connect with my students on a deeper level, enabling me to learn about their lives, traditions, and communication styles. This emotional connection not only built trust, which is vital for successful learning, but also encouraged students to share personal experiences, which has proven beneficial for their psychological well-being. As they began to support one another, share ideas, and collaborate, they expressed a preference for group work as part of their assignments. As a result, teaching became more effective, promoting linguistic inclusivity, collaborative learning, real-world applications, a redefined role for teachers and students, and opportunities for creative expression.

Conclusion

This reflective narrative demonstrates how the implementation of translanguaging pedagogy within a PAR framework significantly enhanced learner engagement in a multilingual English classroom. By integrating students’ home languages alongside English, I was able to create a culturally responsive environment where learners felt valued, confident, and motivated. The intervention not only promoted active participation, literacy development, and student agency but also transformed my own role from a traditional authority figure to a facilitator and co-learner.

The experience reveals several key insights. First, monolingual approaches can silence learners in linguistically diverse classrooms, whereas translanguaging affirms students’ linguistic and cultural identities. Second, translanguaging fosters collaboration and mutual respect, enabling learners to connect classroom activities with the knowledge they bring from their communities. Third, these practices contribute to broader educational goals by promoting equity and social justice in language teaching.

For teachers in similar contexts, this reflection suggests that translanguaging can serve as a potent pedagogical tool for bridging gaps between students’ lived experiences and classroom learning. Although this account is based on a specific classroom experience, it emphasizes the importance of embracing multilingual resources in ELT. Future reflective and research-based studies could further explore how translanguaging can be systematically integrated into classroom practices across Nepal.

References

Canagarajah, S. (2011). Translanguaging in the classroom: Emerging issues for research and pedagogy. Applied Linguistics Review, 2(1), 1–28.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education. Routledge.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Herder and Herder.

Garcia, O. & Leiva, C. (2014). Theorizing and enacting translanguaging for social justice. In Blackledge, A., & Creese, A. (eds.), Heteroglossia as practice and pedagogy (pp. 199-216). Springer.

García, O. (2009). Bilingual education for the 21st century: A global perspective. Wiley Black-Well.

Garcia, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education. Palgrave Macmillan.

Garcia, O., and Kleyn, T. (2016). Translanguaging theory in education. In O. Garcia and T. Kleyn (eds), Translanguaging with multilingual students, (pp. 23–47). Routledge.

Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. Teachers College Press.

Giddens, A. (1984). Constitution of society polity press. Cambridge.

Hornberger, N. H. (2003). Continua of biliteracy. Multilingual Matters.

Jorgensen, J. N. (2008). Polylingual languaging around and among children and adolescents. International Journal of Multilingualism, 5(3), 161–176.

Li, W. (2011). Moment analysis and translanguaging space: Discursive construction of identities by multilingual Chinese youth in Britain. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(5), 1222-1235.

Ortner, S. B. (1984). Theory in anthropology since the sixties. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 26(1), 126-166.

Pennycook, A. 2010. Language as a local practice. Routledge.

Phyak, P. (2018). Translanguaging as a pedagogical resource in English language teaching: A response to unplanned language education policies in Nepal. In K. Kuchah & F. Shamim (Eds.), International Perspectives in Teaching English in Difficult Circumstances (pp. 49-70). Palgrave.

Phyak, P. (2023). Translanguaging as a space of simultaneity: theorizing translanguaging pedagogies in English medium schools from a spatial perspective. Modern Language Journal, 107(1), 289-307.

Rauteda, K. R. (2022). Translanguaging as a pedagogical resource in multilingual ELT classrooms: Exploring perceptions and practices [Master’s Thesis]. Tribhuvan University.

Rauteda, K. R. (2024a). Unveiling pedagogical translanguaging: Investigating teachers’ translingual practices and purposes in ELT classrooms. English Language Teaching Perspectives, 9(1-2), 51–66.

Rauteda, K. R. (2024b). Bending back to the professional activities: Unveiling the role of reflective practice in teachers’ professional development. Journal of NELTA Gandaki, 7(1-2), 98–110.

Rauteda, K. R. (2025a). English language teachers’ knowledge, use, and perceived effectiveness of action research for professional development. Indonesian Journal of English Language Studies (IJELS), 11(1), 39-52.

Rauteda, K. R. (2025b). Translanguaging for transformation: Identity, equity, and pedagogical resistance in Nepalese ELT classrooms. Indonesian Journal of English Language Studies (IJELS), 11(2), 150-162.

Rauteda, K. R., & Luitel, B. (2025). Teachers’ pedagogical resistance of EMI through classroom translanguaging in Nepalese science classrooms. IJIET (International Journal of Indonesian Education and Teaching), 9(2), 441-456.

Vogel, S., & García, O. (2017). Translanguaging. In G. Noblit & L. Moll (Eds.). Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. Oxford University Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Author’s Bio: Mr. Khem Raj Rauteda is an MPhil scholar at the Graduate School of Education, Tribhuvan University, and a Lecturer of English Education at Janta Multiple Campus, Itahari. He has been actively involved in academic publishing for over five years, contributing research articles to both national and international journals. Rauteda has also served as a reviewer for several scholarly publications and has presented numerous papers at national and international conferences. His areas of interest are Translanguaging, CDA, Multilingualism, and Teachers’ Professional Development. He can be reached at krauteda@gmail.com.

Anniversary Issue of ELT Choutari (March- May 2025) (17-113)

Academic writing, blog, Creative Writing, Creativity, Critical Thinking, Curricula and materials, Editorial, Education in General, ELT Resource, Interview, Lesson Plan, Miscellaneous, Teacher's Experience/anecdotes

Dear Valued Readers and Contributors,

Greetings!

We are pleased to announce the release of the Anniversary Issue of ELT Choutari (March- May 2025). This issue presents a collection of reflective accounts from English language teachers and practitioners, offering diverse perspectives on teaching, learning, and research. The contributions explore the transformative power of reading, the evolution of pedagogical practices, the integration of AI tools in academic writing, and the application of the 7E instructional model in the language classroom. Collectively, these reflections underscore the significance of innovation, adaptability, and critical reflection in enhancing educational practices and learner engagement.

As language teachers, we devote a large portion of our time to planning lessons, designing material, evaluating students’ progress, and attending to the various needs of our pupils. However, writing, a critical tool for our personal and professional development, frequently remains overlooked during these hectic routines. For educators, writing is more than just a scholarly endeavour. It serves as a tool for reflection, professional growth, and engagement in the broader discourse outside classrooms. It is because we are documenting our experiences and making sense of our pedagogical decisions, our classroom difficulties, and our evolving identities.

Unlike previous issues, this is a generic issue which features reflections by influential ELT experts,  researchers. and teachers.  We hope their experiences and anecdotes will benefit our esteemed readers.

In a conversation with Chandra Bhadur Lama, Dr. Bal Ram Adhikari sketches out how reading was important in his personal and professional growth. Connecting his personal experiences, he highlights the importance and benefits of reading for a language learner. Building on his reflections, he argues that viewing reading solely as a receptive skill is a limited and often misguided perception. He emphasises the importance of redefining reading as an active, interpretive process. Furthermore, he advocates for a shift from explanatory to explorative reading, proposing several strategies to foster deeper engagement and critical thinking in the reading process.

Dr. Narendra Raj Paneru, in his article, reflects on his English language teaching and learning journey. He reveals his memories of learning English in three phases: learning shaped by memorisation and punishment during schooling, mechanical learning in higher education, and eventually the realisation that teaching is not merely conveying information but rather communicating the essence of a topic in the language that resonates with students. Reflecting on his personal and professional experiences, he sketches out a picture of a paradigm shift from chalkboards to clicks.

Similarly, Saban Kumar K.C. highlights the importance of AI tools in research and academic writing. Drawing instances from his thesis-writing journey, he sketches out how AI tools like ChatGPT, QuillBot, and Grammarly prove to be good research assistants in various phases of research planning, execution, and reporting. He also points to the pros and cons of using AI and recommends the way forward.

Likewise, Mr. Sagar Parajuli reflects on the 7E instructional model while teaching the story Treasure in the Forest, highlighting how it enhanced student engagement, critical thinking, and creativity in the English language classroom. Despite challenges like time constraints, linguistic barriers, and evaluation misalignment, the model fostered a more inclusive and student-centred learning environment. The experience reaffirmed the importance of reflective teaching and adaptive lesson planning for meaningful language learning.

For your convenience, here are the hyperlinks to the blog posts:

  1. Reading as a Log in the Ocean: A Life Shaped by Words by Bal Ram Adhikari (PhD)
  2. A Journey from Englishless Roots to English Classrooms by Narendra Raj Paneru (PhD)
  3. AI in Academic Writing: A Researcher’s Reflection by Er. Saban Kumar K.C.
  4. Reflective Writing on Lesson Planning Using 7E Model in English Language Teaching by Sagar Parajuli

Lastly, we extend heartfelt gratitude to our co-editor, Ganesh Kumar Bastola, and all our editors and reviewers—Jeevan Karki,  Mohan Singh Saud, Dr. Nani Babu Ghimire, Dr. Jnanu Raj Poudel, Sagar Poudel, Binod Duwadi, Puskar Chaudhary, Yadu Gnawali, and Dasharath Rai—for their dedicated efforts in bringing this issue to completion.

ELT Choutari is a platform for researchers, scholars, educators, and practitioners to share insights, practices, and narratives from classrooms and communities. We invite you to contribute to our upcoming first quarterly issue (June-August 2025) by submitting your articles and blogs to 2elt.choutari@gmail.com.

If you find value in the interviews, articles, and reflective pieces, please share them within your circles and feel free to leave your comments below each piece.

Happy Reading! Thank you.

 

Lead Editor- Ms. Karuna Nepal

Co-lead Editor-Mr. Ganesh Kumar Bastola

Welcome to Third Quarterly Issue 17 (112)

Creative Writing, Critical Thinking, Education in General, English as a Global Language, English Medium Instruction, Global thought, Language planning and policy, Miscellaneous, reflection, Reflections, Scholarly Article, Teacher Education, Teacher's Experience/anecdotes, ,

Dear Esteemed Readers and Contributors,

Greetings!

We are delighted to announce the release of the Third quarterly edition of ELT Choutari (October-December 2024), dedicated as a special issue focusing on “Mother Tongue Based Multilingual Education Policies Practices and Research Nepal.”

Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE) in Nepal is grounded in the belief that students learn best in their native language, which enhances cognitive development and academic success. Introduced after Nepal’s democratic transition in 1990, MTB-MLE aims to preserve linguistic diversity while improving educational outcomes for children from various ethnic and language backgrounds. Despite strong policy frameworks supporting MTB-MLE, its implementation has faced challenges, including limited resources, teacher training, and community resistance. The policy’s success hinges on developing contextually appropriate teaching models and addressing the complex multilingual needs of Nepal’s classrooms, particularly in rural and marginalized areas.

This edition presents an exclusive interview with two renowned scholars—Professor Dr. Yogendra Prasad Yadava and Professor Dr. Ram Ashish Giri—as they explore the complexities of MTB-MLE (Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education) policies, practices, and research in Nepal. Delving into its multifaceted challenges and opportunities, their discussion illuminates the cultural, educational, and sociopolitical dynamics shaping language-in-education reforms in the region.

Professor Yadava highlights Nepal’s policy-practice disconnect in implementing Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTB MLE). Despite constitutional guarantees for mother-tongue education, contradictory laws impede implementation. He identifies systemic challenges: underdeveloped policies, scarce resources, and lack of localized materials. Effective execution requires teacher training, community language awareness, and rigorous research to evaluate and refine programs. Yadava stresses collaborative partnerships with academic and civil institutions to align practical strategies with evidence-based research, ensuring policy coherence.

Professor Ram Ashish Giri discusses the cognitive, pedagogical, and linguistic challenges of Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE) in Nepal. He emphasizes the importance of designing policies that reflect the country’s multilingual reality and align with local aspirations, advocating for the inclusion of English alongside native languages. Giri critiques the gaps between policy intentions and practical implementation, citing inadequate resources, teacher training, and community support.

Additionally, the issue includes three scholarly papers by devoted researchers from Australia and Nepal :

Naomi Fillmore’s paper explores the challenges and successes of incorporating Indigenous and minority languages into education systems globally. She examines initiatives in Nepal, Australia, the Philippines, and New Zealand, highlighting the importance of mother tongue-based multilingual education (MTB-MLE). While these countries face similar issues like resource development and teacher training, each context offers unique approaches. Fillmore emphasizes the crucial role of community involvement, policy support, and culturally appropriate educational content.

Dr. Uma Nath Sharma discusses the integration of students’ mother tongues (MT) in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) education in Nepal, highlighting both the theoretical benefits and practical challenges. He emphasizes how MT enhances comprehension, cognitive development, and cultural identity, supported by theories like Cummins’ interdependence hypothesis. Despite these advantages, societal biases, teacher reluctance, and institutional pressures favoring English create obstacles. Sharma advocates for the use of translanguaging as a transformative pedagogical approach, allowing students to use their MT alongside English.

Dr. Bishnu Khadka presents the tension between Mother-Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE) policies and English Medium Education (EME) practices in Nepal, focusing on equity and inclusion. Analyzing policy documents, reports, and field studies, Khadka identifies challenges such as inadequate resources, insufficient teacher training, and sociocultural biases favoring dominant languages. The study highlights the gap between policy intentions and grassroots realities, which limits marginalized communities’ access to quality education.

For your convenience, here are the hyperlinks to the articles:

  1. Mother Tongue Based Multilingual Education Policies, Practices and Research in Nepal by Professor Dr. Yogendra Prasad Yadava
  2. Mother Tongue Based Multilingual Education Policies, Practices and Research in Nepal by Professor Dr. Ram Ashish Giri
  3. Global Perspectives on Indigenous Languages in Education: Commonalities, Challenges, and Reflections by Naomi Fillmore
  4. Reflections on the Use of Students’ Mother Tongue in Nepalese EFL Classes by Uma Nath Sharma
  5. Mother-Tongue or Other-Tongue Education? by Dr. Bishnu Kumar Khadka

We would like to express our sincere gratitude to our co-editor, Dr. Nani Babu Ghimire, along with all our editors and reviewers—Jeevan Karki, Ganesh Kumar Bastola, Mohan Singh Saud, Sagar Poudel, Binod Duwadi, Puskar Chaudhary, Yadu Gnawali, and Dasharath Rai—for their unwavering dedication and invaluable contributions in bringing this issue to the readers.

ELT Choutari is a platform for researchers, scholars, educators, and practitioners to share insights, practices, and narratives from classrooms and communities. We invite you to contribute to our upcoming anniversary issue (January-March 2025) by submitting your articles and blogs to 2elt.choutari@gmail.com.

If you find value in the interviews, articles, and reflective pieces, please share them within your circles and feel free to leave your comments below each piece.

Happy Reading!

Thank you.

Dr. Jnanu Raj Paudel- Lead Editor of this issue

Dr. Nani Babu Ghimire- Co- Editor of this issue

Mastering the Art of Responding to CFP

Creative Writing, Creativity, Critical Pedagogy, Critical Thinking, Education in General, Global thought, Professional Development, Reading, reflection, Teacher Education, Teacher identity, Teachers' narratives, , , ,
Shiva Mainaly

Aristotle urges us to be a master of metaphors to grasp a living reality of a thing. Following the footsteps of Aristotle, George Lakoff and M. Johnson introduce a perspective on metaphor—a perspective that takes metaphor as imaginative rationality. Admittedly, I am inspired by these two theorists. My inspiration is that I could not help using a simile to share my modest success in getting some of my responses to Call for Conference Proposals (CFP)  accepted: Writing changes: remaking rhetoric in times of uncertainty organized by Corridors 2022 at Virginia Tech University, and  Geographies of the Fantastic and the Quotidian organized by Pacific Ancient and Modern Language Association (PAMLA) 2022 at University of Los Angeles California. For Corridors, I developed a paper entitled “Pedagogical Emasculation in the Wake of AI’s Growing Applications”, and for PAMLA, I submitted an abstract with the title “Backsliding New Materialism and a Resurgence of Interest in Virtue Ethics and Anthropomorphism”.

While responding to these two CFPs successfully, I came to know that responding to a CFP is almost similar to being a gentleman caller. Forgive my wild rush to John Dryden called ‘yoking heterogeneous ideas by violence’. More technically, responding to CFP and being a gentleman caller are distinctly disparate realms of activities. Just as forwarding a love/marriage proposal without paying sufficient courtship to a lady for a quite bit of time may backfire and probably end in rejection, so is answering to CFP without doing an extensive inquiry and without having background information on the topic. Any rush to reply to the CFP may backfire on the responder, often ending in outright rejection, which might weaken confidence and concentration. It is this point of commonality that pushed me to choose this figural trope. The fate of being a jilted lover is a bitter pill to swallow for any obsessed lover, in much the same way as it is for a responder to cope with the rejection of the abstract submission to CFP. With this figural gesture, I would like to reflect on my experience of responding to a host of CFPs.

We have seen many calls for proposals (CFP): CFP for conferences; CFP for book chapters and journal articles; CFP for intermezzo and review essays; CFP for web texts and digital projects; CFP for a success story and cross-border narrative; CFP for blogs and reflective writings, CFP for cases of advocacy, activism, and intervention; and to name just a few. Scholars, researchers, and instructors alike tend to respond to different CFPs they come across. Every responder to CFP deploys a nuanced approach. In spite of each scholar’s unique response style to CFP, there should be a few widely practised formularies to deal with CFP. Based on a few instances of my success in responding to CFP, I would like to craft a short account of responding to CFP.

In trying to emerge as a conference hopper, I kept exploring many other venues that organize national and international conferences such as the New Berry Library Conference (NBLC), Popular Culture Association (PCA), Modern Language Association (MLA) Pedagogical Training and Workshop, Northeast Modern Language Association (NEMLA), Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC), Rhetoric Society of Europe (RSE), Rhetoric Society of America (RSA) and the list goes on. Actually, these venues release CFPs that tend to address any aspect of burgeoning issues, ranging from colonial reckoning, the rhetoric of precarity and the rise of authoritarianism to social justice, the linguistic justice, power and precarity attendant to AI’s growing application in learning and teaching space. Being well informed of all these burgeoning issues and of relevant proposals to address the issue constitute a core competency on each CFP responder’s part.  Based on these two and various other successive experiences of responding to CFP, I would like to talk about some tips and strategies with which I succeeded in getting my conference proposals approved. I presented at a conference scheduled to take place at the University of Virginia Tech. Similarly, another conference proposal of mine was also accepted. In the second week of November 2022, I presented at a conference at the University of California, Los Angeles.

First, getting to the heart of an issue that takes centre stage in the CFP description is essential if we are to touch all the bases of CFP.  While describing an issue/topic for CFP, the CFP issuer tends to be specific in producing an outline of the issue; at the same time, they often write, ‘the CFP moves around this topic, but not limited to…’, to allow for a somewhat flexible space to explore and probe the proposed issue.

Previously, while formulating an excellent abstract draft for a conference call, I used to take a general approach without homing in on a specific aspect of the CFP. After multiple rounds of rejection, I learned that people want to listen to specific things. Though the conference offers a smorgasbord of various potential topics, it would be in our best interest to dwell on the specificity of the issue. As soon as I shirked off this tendency to drift away from the axis of specificity, I realized that it wouldn’t be challenging to hit the target with the single most focused thrust to the specificity. To this end, it appears that any temptation toward delving deep into the topic in a manner most lithe and supple because exploring any issue by being specific is crucial to the acceptance success of a response to CFP. As to some heuristics and nuances with which the exploration of an issue would lead to a reliable unfolding of the issue, I have come to propose here: Test the efficacy of the issue in different cultural contexts, check on its limit, be aware of its fallibility, assess if its relevance is rooted in time and occasion, reflect on its impact on our normative practice and pragmatic life, and finally stretch your imaginative faculty to probe the issue under consideration with a detached mindset. The simultaneous shifts in my mindset led me to come across an acceptable topic for the CFP I was managing to respond to.

Second, though the power of forming a fresh, attention-grabbing, and shift-stimulating perspective of any responder to CFP is highly valued, the ability to introduce this perspective tactfully and without a lag matters the most. To translate this realization into action, I reflected on my expectations about how CFP evaluators take my abstract submission and what metric they would apply to assess the submitted abstract. I also pondered if their metrics and criteria remain consistent or if they apply abstract-specific metrics. I did my best to align the core thrust of my conference abstract with the CFP evaluators’ submission-specific yardstick of judgment. At the top of my talent, I aimed at ‘striking the right chord’; with the right chord being struck precisely, the net outcome is an acceptance call.

Third, the responder to CFP should not come to terms with the issue on the first go. Instead, the responder should let the proposed issue come to terms with a cumulative effort to develop a fresh perspective. For this, curious and consistent immersion in the latent and the manifest dimensions of the issue is required of those who play what Peter Elbow calls the Believing and Doubting Game. The fourth point is the assertion that with the idea of responding to CFP comes the responsibility to CFP. CFP wishes to garner a wide range of ideas, thoughts, propositions, perspectives, comments, questions, critiques, and curiosities. Most CFPs expect a concrete contribution of ideas to the platform the CFP is creating. Thus, every responder to CFP needs to internalize that to respond to CFP is to contribute something new, a fresh perspective, a nuanced approach to dealing with the proposed issue anew, a distinct approach indeed!

The fifth point that guided my approach to responding to CFPs is being aware that often CFPs asks for a fresh take on burgeoning issue/problem. Any response to CFP should look like a solution. Adopting a down-to-earth overture is a curtain-raiser to grappling with CFP head-on. The sixth tip comes in the guise of tonality. Maintaining an insistent tone serves two-pronged purposes: one is to bracket off any interference from digressive and deluding thoughts, and the other is to help the proposed perspective gain purchase. The use of an insistent tone wards off any trace of opaqueness that might arise while homing in on the target expectation of CFP. A response to CFP needs to be formed in keeping with the persistent presumption that whether others accept a proposal or not hinges on the same tone underpinning the proposal’s substratum.

The seventh clue to conveying a response to CFP is tricky. Throughout career-building in the academic field, students, scholars, and instructors respond to different types of CFP. Their responses often vary from acceptance and partial acceptance to outright rejection. In the case of outright rejection, it might be tough to bear the brunt of rejection, which might sap the spirit and entelechy one has been cultivating since the beginning of one’s academic footprint. In this condition of being in a low spirit due to sporadic rejection, one must groom oneself with a philosophical maxim, dictum, or conviction. In the wake of angst and anxiety consequent upon the rejection of any response to CFP, it would be tactful if one with the experience of rejection switches instantly from the erstwhile mental frame of lapsing into frustration and lamentation to a new mindset informed by the conviction that having been rejected means being hurled on the rose bed of renewal.

The last trick that may prove pivotal is catching a glimpse of and acting following the zeitgeist of contemporaneity that by and now diffuses across the world of CFPs. The spirit and entelechy of inclusion have penetrated every stroke of knowledge-making. Any linguistic shred and fragment are redolent of an alienating, exclusionary, and unjust practice, triggering a domino effect that ultimately spoils the inherent acceptability of the proposed perspective, no matter how full the proposal would be. All these strategic clues ultimately come down to a praxis that justice-fostering, dignity-ennobling, and identity-acknowledging rather than a collocational, standardized, and stereotypes-filled language pave the way for enriching the acceptability of proposed response to CFP.

Graduate students preparing to enter the job market are always hard-pressed to devote their whole time to completing their dissertation research. Nevertheless, they must invest more time in responding to CFPs for conferences, book reviews, review essays, success narratives, cross-border narratives, writing about their observation, and reflective writing. Since responding to the CFPs for a book chapter, journal articles, and intermezzo requires both intensive and extensive efforts, involvement, and time, it is relevant to conclude that trying to catch low-hanging fruit is an appropriate option for them. However, in no way should it not be understood as an underestimation of the potency and potentiality of graduate students inching closer to a threshold of the job market because there is quite an incredible number of graduate students who have already adorned their CVs with gems of their productive scholarship. However, speaking from a practical perspective and arguing in consideration of the pressure of time, including plenty of both teaching and administrative responsibility on the part of graduate students, there is every reason to advise that trying to catch low-hanging fruit still sounds like a lucrative and economical alternative for graduate students. In connection with this, responding to the CFPs for a conference, book review, review essay, essay on graduate student’s observation, and reflective writing such as cross-border narrative would be inviting and enticing for Ph.D. candidates on the verge of graduation who have built up a professional mindset of plunging into the job market soon.

At last, I would like to opine my thoughts on a type of stereotype that recurs in most of the announcements of CFP. On seeing sentences—such as ‘for book reviews and review essays, graduate students are encouraged and welcomed to contribute’—I felt irreparably stung by a scorpion of inferiority and of being pigeonholed. A query flashed across my mind instantly. There anyone, including me, could not but ask a question—why cannot graduate students, especially PhD candidates, respond to higher CFPs? The answer is obvious. In a general sense, responding to the higher CFPs demands time, resources and involvement. Graduate students are busy people who have a lot of work to do. I too was not an exception to this condition. Therefore, I was occasionally pained to see this sentence, but now I have mastered such a normal thought. With this unpleasant stream of thought, I would like to cut a long story short by saying that trying to catch low-hanging fruit—CFPs for conferences, book reviews, review essays, and reflective and observational writings—is a wise approach to redressing the harsh rhetoric of publish or perish. For clarity’s sake, I have presented below some pointers that could be helpful for any responder responding to a CFP:

  • Read and understand the CFP: It is in our best interest to go through the CFP document to understand the theme, topic, and requirements. Supportive here is the idea of paying attention to guidelines, word limits, formatting instructions, and submission deadlines.
  • Choose the right topic: Selecting a topic that aligns well with the theme of the conference or event is of enormous importance. Responders ought to make sure their research is relevant and innovative. Being mindful of the contributions the responder’s abstract makes is worth pondering.
  • Prepare an abstract: Of all the pointers pivotal to making a success of responding to CFP, crafting a compelling abstract that summarizes our paper or presentation is instrumental. So, the responder needs to clearly state the problem they are addressing, their methodological choice, and critical ideas and insights. It is good to ensure that the abstract is concise and engaging. The most crucial thing is the need to capture the attention of the reviewers.
  • Follow the submission guidelines: Successful responders to CFP ought to adhere to the submission guidelines provided by the organizers. They should pay close attention to formatting requirements, citation styles, and any specific file formats they may request.
  • Highlight your contribution: Each scholarly and institutional venue tends to judge an individual contributor to CFP in terms of their contribution. To that end, it is essential for them to clearly articulate the unique contribution of their work. The key to mastering this hurdle is to explain how it fills a gap in the existing literature, provides novel insights, or offers a fresh perspective. The responder need not dither about emphasizing their research’s significance and potential impact.
  • Present your qualifications: In an age in which an assertion is evaluated vis-à-vis self, highlighting our expertise, qualifications, and relevant experience in the field we are part of is of paramount importance. To buttress our credibility as responders to CFPs, providing a brief overview of our academic or professional background is imperative to establish credibility.
  • Proofread and edit: Before turning in our response to CFPs, it would be a cautionary measure to carefully proofread and edit our paper or abstract. If we ensure that our abstract is well-structured, free of grammatical errors, and coherent, it will be accepted. This is the principle we all need to live by. For that purpose, we can opt for feedback on our abstract from colleagues or mentors to improve the quality of our writing.
  • Meet the deadline: Submitting our response without crossing the specified deadline is advantageous because late submissions are typically not accepted. Hence, being proactive and active while planning our time and allowing for ample review and revision is of utmost importance.
  • Tailor your response: What matters most is the customization of our response to the specific requirements of the CFP. Reviewers are interested in hearing specific things; no one likes hearing general things. Thus, it is good to keep any idea of submitting generic or recycled content at bay. Tuning our response with the particular and genuine requirement is pivotal to actualizing the chance of acceptance.
  • Be professional and courteous: Since being soft and gracious matters a lot, it would be beneficial if they interact with the organizers and reviewers professionally and respectfully if they respond promptly to any inquiries or requests for additional information. The secret formulary to heighten our chance of having our abstract approved is one associated with living with a growth mindset and collaborative disposition throughout the process.

Works Cited

Garver, E. (1994). Aristotle’s rhetoric: An art of character. University of Chicago Press.

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2008). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.

About the Author: Shiva Mainaly is a PhD in rhetoric and composition from the University of Louisville. Currently, at North Dakota State University (NDSU), he will become a postdoctoral research fellow from August 2023. A prolific author, he has published numerous articles in prestigious journals like the Journal of International Students, Constellation, and Composition Studies.

English and New Englishes in Multilingual Context: What’s Been Gained and Forgotten?

Critical Outlook, Critical Thinking, Interview, Reflections, , , ,

Bal Krishna Sharma (PhD) is an associate professor of applied linguistics at English Department, College of Letters, Arts and Social Sciences, University of Idaho, US. He is interested in the role of English in multilingual contexts. He studies the dynamics of teaching, learning and use of English in order to examine the topics of language ideology, intercultural communication, identity and pedagogy. He has been studying the issues of culture, representation, and the economy of language from the perspectives of tourism workers in the Nepal’s tourism industry. Likewise, he investigates what English, other international and minority languages mean for a workplace where the commodification and representation of languages and cultures is a major driving force. He is also investigating language-related ideologies and identities of non-native English speaking faculty as U.S. universities in STEM fields.

So, in this post, Jeevan Karki has facilitated a conversation with him, which unfolds the global discourse in ELT, (second) language acquisition, English language teaching in multilingual contexts, critical language teaching, English language policy and practices in Nepal.

Feel free to comment, ask questions and share the conversation to continue the discourse. Here is the YouTube video for you: 

Here is the list of questions covered in the conversation:

Q1: What are you busy at currently?

Q2: The global conversation in ELT is very critical towards ‘standard English’, while the goal of English language education in non-English speaking countries is to develop proficiency in standard English (either British English, American English or so on). So, have the critiques been too idealistic about it or the practitioners not aware of this conversation?

Q3: Ofelia Garcia (2017) says that “there is no second language acquisition in the traditional sense but children are acquiring languages together/in totality.” What does this mean to the field of SLA? What are the future directions of SLA?

Q4: In the short history of English language teaching, 50 years or less, what has Nepal gained from it and what has Nepal forgotten in this race?

Q5: And what should be the role of English in multilingual contexts like Nepal?

Q6: Parents and stakeholders don’t seem much concerned about preserving and promoting their own languages as much as they are concerned about immersing their children in the English language right from pre-school. Why does this happen? What can be done about it?

Reference:

Garcia, O. (2017, June 7). Ofelia García – Translanguaging [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5l1CcrRrck0 

Dear teachers, you can write and publish!

Critical Thinking, Reflections, Teaching Tips, Writing, , , ,
Jeevan Karki

In my past nine years of association with ELT Choutari as a reviewer and editor, I reviewed and edited hundreds of manuscripts, and communicated with dozens of teachers to encourage them to write. Based on this experience, I argue that teachers are undoubtedly the right professionals to write and publish and every teacher (including schoolteachers) can do so.

ELT Choutari generally gives space to new and first-time authors, hence it encourages teachers and teacher educators to share their experiences through writing. While exploring the potential teachers to write and publish, I have come across different types of teachers. When I approach them, initially most of them show interest, gradually some of them drop with some excuses and a few of them try, nonetheless. Interestingly those who give it a try, majority of them produce publishable write-up when they are guided through a series of writing processes.

I would like to recall a case of a particular teacher here. He is a schoolteacher of English language having rich experiences of teaching English to speakers of other languages from a variety of backgrounds. He used to show interest in writing and publishing on ELT Choutari. Once I personally approached him and discussed the possible issues and areas to write following the call for articles. He was all set to go. The next week, when I followed up, he responded that he was going to start soon. Later, when I followed up, he said he had just begun writing something and would finish by the next week. The next week was the deadline but he didn’t respond. I told him that we could give a few days more if he wished to finish but he quit stating he would contribute in a future issue.

In the next issue, with multiple follow-ups and reinforcement, he submitted a write-up on teaching vocabulary. It was a well-organised write-up in about 2000 words. However, there were two major issues with it- structure and content. Structurally, it was heavily influenced by the format of research-based journal paper as he included even an abstract section for a blog piece. Talking about the contents, he went on giving an introduction to teaching vocabulary and explaining different methods and techniques of teaching vocabulary, which was followed by a few tips of his own. When I anlyased it, the majority of the content in it was merely the reproduction of what was already available. So, where is the voice of the author? He was only explaining and summarizing other’s ideas, which is readily available on Google.

Then I realised why teachers like him are anxious about writing and publication in Nepal. Instead of narrating his own real practices and experiences of teaching vocabulary, he went on explaining and summarizing others’ ideas, which can be challenging for first-time authors for two reasons. First, the ideas of others should be well reproduced and paraphrased to avoid plagiarism. Second, such a write-up is less likely to be published because it is commonly available on the Web. If I were him, I would compose the write-up on my first-hand experiences of trying out different methods and techniques. Sometimes teachers also devise their own techniques or strategies to fit in their context. Capturing the same experiences and practices would be fantastic content to write about as it would be easier to write one’s experiences, which would have enough space for the author’s voice.

Most of the Nepali English teachers are anxious about writing and publication and consider that it is not their cup of tea. One of the major reasons behind it is the lack of a culture of reflection and journaling. They have decades of teaching experience and they even teach their students how to write a good paragraph or an essay but paradoxically, they are unable to produce reflective writing themselves. They teach different language skills using multiple methods (including some local methods), but they rarely reflect upon their practices. Like, what’s working and what’s not working? What’s going good and what’s not? Which methods or strategies should I continue and which to drop? This culture of reflection and making notes would also develop writing habits and boost their confidence. However, they are simply following the teaching-learning principles and practices of their gurus, where there was rarely any scope of reflection and writing. Therefore, the present generation of teachers must break this tradition and should start the culture of reflection and documentation, which would enable them to write and publish with ease.

What to write and what not ?

There is a popular saying, which goes, “cut the coat according to the size of your cloth.” The same is true in the case of writing too. So rather than choosing a heavy topic or summarising others’ ideas, the easy way is to write what you do, see, face, or experience in your everyday classroom. Therefore, it is better to choose the issue or topic, in which you feel comfortable to write. In the above case, for example, the teacher could have focused on the challenges he was facing while teaching vocabulary and strategies he used to overcome the challenges. Or he could also have highlighted the methods and strategies, which were the best working in his context. Similarly, he could also have critically examined the popular teaching methods and strategies and their applicability in his context.

Writing issues and topics are right in your classroom, all you need is to reflect on your own practices and classroom phenomena. Please remember that classroom is a lab from where very powerful theories and practices have been developed. Therefore, the easy way of reflection is to ask questions like below to yourself:

  1. Why am I doing what am I doing?
  2. Why am I using this method instead of another?
  3. What if I try this over that?
  4. Is this method facilitating the learning of my students? If yes, why? If no, again why?
  5. Which methods and techniques do my students enjoy and learn from the most?
  6. Why don’t my students sometimes learn the way I want them to learn? What’s wrong with my process?
How to write?

First, we should remove the illusion that all writing and publication must be research-based and formal. Please remember, publishing papers in the journals could be your goal but initially, you can start with something as simple as a reflective narrative or a blog, which don’t necessarily require any research frame or literature review. Take this blog for instance. Is there any research frame or literature review in it? No, I’m just reflecting on my experiences, and adding my voice to it. So, you can also simply write about the good practices in your classroom, challenges, or striking moments in your professional life.

The simple way to write powerful writing is to choose simple but meaningful and relevant issues from our everyday practice and narrate it in a captivating way like the way you narrate something orally to someone. Choosing the right issue and narrating in the form of a story is one of the easiest ways of writing, which any teacher can do. Voice your ideas instead of summarizing others’ ideas. If your story is engaging and relevant, readers will read and enjoy it. I also started my writing journey with narrative reflections. For instance, see HERE.

Narrative reflections and blogs are the stepping stones in one’s writing journey. Our experiences serve as content in such writing and narration works as the writing style. And there is nothing right or wrong about the narration technique. Narrating is way easier than writing some formal academic composition. Reflective narrative and blogs are informal in styles, juicy to read and yet they can raise important issues. For instance here is one by Karna Rana , another here by Alban S. Holyoke, and here is another by Yashoda Bam. Once you are confident and comfortable on writing them, then you can gradually move towards other scholarly writing and research papers.

Concluding remarks

Writing can be as easy as narrating an interesting event to our friends and family. Therefore, choosing interesting practices, challenges, striking events, or observations from your classroom and putting them in the form of a story would produce a good write-up. Moreover, reading related literature also provides ideas and confidence in writing, so read a few blogs and guidelines HERE before starting your own. Write and show it to your colleague, who cares for writing. Hear his/her feedback, review, and finalise.

Dear teachers, writing and publication on the blogs and web magazine like ETL Choutari is not as hard as you think. Therefore, before wrapping up this piece, I would like to note the following:

  • Teachers have rich experiences and issues to write about. So why not to write?
  • Reading and writing are part of the teaching profession, so, let’s make it our professional practice.
  • If teachers don’t write, how can they expect their students to write?
  • Writing helps us to better understand and to be better understood.
  • You definitely have some good practices and success stories and if you document them, others will benefit, and you will develop a writing habit.

Now looking forward to reading your reflective narrative and blogs on future issues.

[Note: since you have come up to here reading it, please share your feeling, feedback, or any question related to it in the comment box below, which will encourage the author. Thank you!]

Can be cited as: Karki, J. (2021, April 20). Dear teachers, you can write and publish. [blog post]. Retrieved from: https://eltchoutari.com/2021/04/dear-teachers-you-can-write-and-publish/

The Author: Jeevan Karki is a freelance teacher trainer, researcher, and writer. He serves as an expert in designing materials and developing training for the literacy program at Room to Read. He has authored several op-eds and blogs including some national and international journal articles. He is also an editor of ELT Choutari and the Editor-in-Chief at MercoCreation.

ELT conference culture and confusions in Nepal: A personal reflection

Critical Thinking, Reflections, , ,
Pramod K. Sah

A conference is an occasion to bring together professionals to share their research and teaching practices, including day-to-day professional struggles and pleasures. It also provides opportunity to engage with fellow teachers’ and researchers’ experiences. Attending a conference supports continued professional development of ELT teachers. Borg (2015) lists several of such benefits; for example, a) giving participants a sense of achievements, b) allowing positive comparisons with ELT professionals from elsewhere, c) creating a belief in their own potential, d) enhancing their credibility in the eyes of colleagues, and e) reducing feelings of isolation. Similarly, IATEFL (2017) argues that it “provide[s] general support in helping teachers and other ELT professionals in their professional development, and to provide a platform where they can offer their views, exchange research, and teaching experiences and learn from each other in the field of professional development.” These are the basic norms of ELT conferences, but the question remains whether these promises are kept ‘true’ in all conferences. There is also very limited empirical knowledge on whether teachers and other professionals benefit from attending conferences.

I’m personally often positive about attending conferences and, therefore, I try attending at least one international conference every year. Luckily enough, I have already attended (and going to attend) a number of national and international conferences in 2019. While I’m in Nepal (at the time of writing) for some academic purposes, I also got opportunities to attend two major conferences of Nepal: ‘2nd Annual ELT and Applied Linguistics Conference’ and ‘National NELTA Conference 2019’. I’m sharing what I have recently experienced at both conferences via-a-via my experiences of different international conferences like TESOL International Convention and AAAL Conference in the USA, IATEFL in the UK, Language Planning and Policy Conference and ACLA in Canada. The purpose of this piece is to critically review the overall effectiveness of these conferences, which may help the concerned organizers and attendees to effectively organize and get benefitted from ELT conferences in future. The areas of improvement of these conferences that I discuss are by no means, meant to demotivate the academic spirit to put up these conferences in the low-resource context.

The first conference, ‘2nd Annual ELT and Applied Linguistics Conference’, was organized by the Department of English Education, Tribhuvan University (TU). This conference was able to gather professionals from different parts of Nepal, including a handful number of participants from abroad. One of the keynote speakers was an internationally recognized professor, Gary Barkhuizen, based in the University of Auckland, New Zealand, who has excellent contributions in the field of narrative inquiry, in particular. Other keynote and plenary speakers included locally renowned professors of ELT. Interestingly, the conference looked exciting with the presence of enthusiastic graduate-level students from TU, some of whom were always rushing from one session to another. The second conference was the ‘National NELTA Conference 2019’ held at Solidarity International School, Hetauda, which was attended by a large number of English language teachers from all over the country, including a very few international delegates. All keynote and plenary speakers at this conference were ELT scholars and professionals from Nepal.

The first point I would like to discuss is the central theme of conferences and keynotes/plenaries. Most conferences announce their central theme every year, which basically invites delegates to bring discussions around that theme and extend the debate forward. It’s often the case that, at least, keynote/plenary speakers discuss major arguments related to the themes in relation to their empirical research/theoretical underpinnings. In this regard, the ‘National NELTA Conference 2019’ had theme ‘Transformation in ELT Methods: Addressing 21st Century Classroom Contexts’, which indicated that the conference envisioned to bring together discussions on effective ways of addressing the issues of ELT, prominent in this millennium. However, I struggled to find any talks, including keynotes/plenaries focusing on the theme. In fact, in my search for the term ‘transformation/transform’ and ’21st century’ in the program schedule, the former appeared only twice, and the latter appeared once. In this regard, the topic of one keynote talk, i.e., ELT in Post-Method Era, sounded enthusiastic as I anticipated some critical discussions of different teaching methodologies that can have significant relevance to the Nepalese context, but the talk was merely limited to listing all ELT methods often found in ELT books. The talk also included different microstrategies of teaching English that Kumaravadivelu (1994) suggested about 25 years ago, but the presentation neither made a clear reference to Kumaravadivelu nor there was any critical discussion appropriating those microstrategies to the characteristics of 21st century ELT in Nepal. In fact, there was no element of ‘transformation’ in the talk, at all. Uniquely, the same professor was there as a keynote at both conferences with the same topic, without almost no alteration. The ‘2nd Annual ELT and Applied Linguistics Conference’ had one keynote talk, which nevertheless tried to align with the central theme of ‘Policies, Practice, and Possibilities in ELT’. In this particular keynote, the speaker showed some ‘possibilities’ of ELT through ‘narrative inquiry’ as a new practice.

Further, I was expecting some critical discussions on different issues in relation to the Nepalese context under the light of existing literature of Nepal, but hardly anyone made a reference to research in Nepal. For example, in one plenary at the NELTA conference, the speaker tried to critically review the phenomenon of English-medium instruction (EMI) in Nepal. I particularly liked the points that the speaker made against the uncritical promotion of EMI, but the speaker didn’t make any reference to research on EMI in Nepal. There has recently been some research on EMI in Nepal—available in the forms of journal articles, chapters, and dissertations—suggesting some unique findings. However, the speaker only cited a couple of studies on EMI from other South Asian countries, not any from Nepal. The speaker also made claims, which aren’t valid. For example, the speaker claimed EMI policy as “illegal” in Nepal, which is not true. The National Curriculum of Nepal (2008), stating the medium of instruction as Nepali, or English, or both Nepali and English, gives a clear legal background for EMI in Nepal. There can, nevertheless, be an argument that EMI is illogical/ineffective, but again such argument needs to be put forward in reference to research.

Another unacceptable claim, made by one of the panelists in the panel on EMI in the 2nd Annual ELT and Applied Linguistics Conference, that there is no research conducted on EMI proved the research ignorance of some of the invited scholars. This problem was seen in almost all the talks I attended. There was another professor presenting on the use of L1 in ELT classrooms at the NELTA conference, who didn’t cite any research from Nepal. This time, as it was a concurrent session, I had an opportunity to ask a question and I, in fact, asked why the speaker didn’t cite any research from Nepal. Not surprisingly, the speaker also mentioned that there is no such research undertaken in Nepal. With frustration, I told the speaker that I myself have published a study on the use L1, among some other scholars, and the speaker really needed to at least ‘google’, which will direct to available published research. I think such unacademic practices can be checked during the proposal screening process that proposals not making references to research should be declined. Of course, the conferences will also have to provide a relevant rubric for successful proposals.

There were some other instances of keynote/plenary speakers giving very illogical/unacademic answers to the questions. For example, one plenary speaker presented his/her action research on a given teaching activity that he designed and experimented. S/he claimed that the students developed “confidence” as a process of learner autonomy and hence, the success of the activity. One audience, who was another professor of TU, was seriously concerned about the “validity” of the research findings that how he would believe that the students developed confidence. He specifically asked how the confidence was measured as the presenter hadn’t mentioned research design and data analysis in the presentation. The plenary speaker answered, “I looked at my students’ faces, and I knew they were confident.” I couldn’t believe that the speaker didn’t mention any point of his/her data analysis and, instead, gave such an illogical/unacademic answer. But, unexpectedly enough, there was a huge round of applause from the mass, which made me really confused about what just happened. I couldn’t understand why there was such appreciating applause at that kind of answer. Perhaps the speaker was a well-known ELT expert and the audience—the majority of them were university students—had just “wowed” at the answer without deeply thinking about it.  Similarly, there were lots of “गफ” (bluffs), which also consisted “mocking” of English accent/use of school-level English language teachers with low English proficiency that was not only unacademic but also in-humanizing. As experts, we’re meant to discuss how we can come up with solutions to overcome weaknesses of English language teachers in Nepal and we can also check our own practices in teacher education programs at the university, instead of making fun of poor teachers at academic gatherings. For instance, while presenting research findings, another plenary speaker often made fun of the teacher participants who didn’t have the technical/practical knowledge on “teaching writing”, which also received lots of laughter and claps from some audience.

There were some other less significant issues that looked bizarre to me. First, the management of both conferences lacked mobilization of volunteers and clear plans. While TU conference had mobilized some graduate students as volunteers who tried to take up their responsibility seriously, NELTA conference had school children as volunteers who were not really able to understand the conference situation. The conferences should try looking for volunteers from the conference attendees, which I think will be more effective. Moreover, the catering service was another area to pay high attention as due to long queue it was affecting the preceding and the following sessions. Similarly, I often saw one of organizing committee members at the TU conference requesting attendees to join on-going sessions as it seemed the majority of attendees weren’t going to sessions. Although it’s true that many attendees like to connect with fellow attendees, but not at the cost of on-going sessions. Attending sessions and engaging in discussion, I think, should be the first priority, which I found missing at both conferences. Keeping track of session-time was another big area of improvement, which really influenced the schedule of different sessions. Most keynote/ plenary speakers seemed to take so much of extra time, which eventually influenced the timing of the following sessions. As a result, I missed several sessions that I was interested to attend.

Finally, the conference culture is not new in Nepal but, for me, its effectiveness is really an issue. The organizers, first, have to move beyond the ideology of making some limited people happy and re-think of people who could best support English language teachers with new ideas during the conference. We don’t need repetition of ideas and experts at the conference. International conferences don’t really invite the same scholars every year. I think there are several Nepali scholars working in different countries, doing excellent works, who can be invited to these conferences. We also really need to think about maintaining diversity in experts who are invited, meaning the representation of race, gender, ethnicity, age, etc. Second, we need to peer review proposals, otherwise, there is danger of unintellectual/illogical/inhuman discussions. The local national conferences should also be a means of promoting/up-lifting local scholarship. This reflection is a kind message to many of us, who tend to fall into the (mal)practices discussed above, to bring in intellectual and critical discussions instead of repeating old ideas/knowledge and mocking the less-knowledgeable others. Third, the conference organizers really need to plan the conference in terms of employing volunteers, not only for on-site needs but also for the peer-review process. Most importantly, we should start teaching what “conference” really means to our university students, so they can utilize most from attending conferences. They need to be prepared to problematize and question ideas being presented rather than uncritically accepting everything and clapping, shouting, and hooting as we do in cinema theaters.

 

References

CDC (Curriculum Development Centre). (2008). Primary education curriculum. Sanothimi, Bhaktapur: Government of Nepal.

Kumaravadivelu, B. (1994). The postmethod condition: (E)merging strategies for second/foreign language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 27-48.

IATEFL (2017). IATEFL’s mission, goals and practices. Available at:https://members.iatefl.org/downloads/member_info/IATEFL_mission_goals_practices.pdf

Borg, S. (2015). The benefits of attending ELT conferences, ELT Journal, 69(1), 35–46.

The author:

Pramod K. Sah is PhD Candidate and Killam Scholar in the Department of Language and Literacy Education at the University of British Columbia, Canada. He has earned an M.Ed. in English Language Teaching from Tribhuvan University, Nepal, and an MA in TESOL with Applied Linguistics from the University of Central Lancashire, UK. His work is driven by the core values of social justice indexes, for example, class and ethnicity, in English language education policies and practices in low- and middle-income polities, often drawing on Pierre Bourdieu’s critical social theories. His research works can be accessed at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Pramod_Sah5

A Professional Journey of Exploration, Experience and Expression

Critical Thinking, Reflections, Teacher's Experience/anecdotes, , , , ,
Bal Ram Adhikari*

This paper recounts my professional journey as a university teacher that I started nearly one and a half decade ago. In this narrative account, by exploration I mean textual exploration, experience stands for direct contact with language, working in and through language, and expression has to do with communicating ideas through writing.

Underlying assumptions:  i) learning ceases with over-repetition; exploration gives continuity and safeguards against fossilization; ii) language has to enter into and move through the experiential zone; iii) expression is vital for communication; communication failure leads to professional alienation.

First two years and repetition of sickness

When I started teaching at the university, the entry requirement I possessed was the Masters degree. It was the only professional competence I possessed to teach Masters course. I had some level of confidence because I was going to teach the same course I had studied. The campus where I started my university career was like my home. However, I did not have extensive reading and writing experience apart from coursework, particularly the Masters thesis. My knowledge in the subject was limited. I was confined to the given course, but the subject I thought, for example, Translation Studies demanded interdisciplinary readings in Linguistics, Applied Linguistics, contemporary critical theories like post-structuralism. Apart from reading across these different subject courses, the courses also required me to have experience of translation.

When I recall those early days, particularly the first two years or so, I was a course-teller rather than a teacher. Gradually, I felt more comfortable with the course content, since I had repeated the same course. Also, I felt more secure in the class. However, the lack of job satisfaction led to the devoid of academic charm. I was suffering from what Nietzsche has called “repetition sickness” (Myerson, 2001).

My key professional responsibility

What lies at the heart of my profession is teaching the prescribed courses to prospective English teachers. That is, my first and foremost duty is to stand in front of the class and deliver lectures to the students in the classroom. Other professional responsibilities include supervising researchers, training teachers, designing courses, compiling and editing course materials. Again, all these revolve around the key responsibility i.e. teaching.

Classroom teaching has limited reaching

After some years when I started attending the conferences and visiting the academic forums and creative writing workshops, I began to realize that classroom teaching has limited reaching. I was alienated from the broader academic community. It often struck me that only by confining myself to classroom activities, I might not be able to expand my professional presence beyond university premises. Only by teaching one cannot grow professionally. This feeling would often strike me.

I often asked myself:

  • To what extent can I call myself a professional teacher?
  • Do I only teach or do I also READ?
  • Do I only teach and read or do I also WRITE?
  • Do I only teach, read and write or do I also SHARE?
  • Do I only teach, read, write and share or do I also CARE the emerging writers?

These questions were in fact inspired by Penny Ur’s (1991) notion of professionalism. The questions like these urged me to set on the journey of exploration, experience and expression by means of reading, writing and translating documents.

Desire for expanding my professional presence

I prefer not to limit myself to the reading and writing within my profession. I love plunging into the open space of reading and writing beyond the given profession so that I can traverse neighbouring disciplines, and bring back insights and information to expand and strengthen my profession. I have sensed that it has helped me expand my core identity as an English teacher. Apart from a teacher, now I can also call myself a writer and translator. Translation and creative writing have connected me to the broader audience.

Reading for exploration and experience

Reading is a process of exploring texts as well as information. I normally explore three zones of texts. I often begin with the core zone i.e. the texts prescribed in the course. It’s vital for my professional survival and success of my students in the examinations. However, reading the course texts is not enough. Then, I explore additional texts related to the core zone. I call them the texts from the peripheral zone. I need to deepen and widen my reading experience. To this end, I site the prescribed topic or text in the neighbouring disciplines like linguistics, literature, philosophy, and also refer students to such disciplines to broaden their understanding. Whenever I have time, I choose one of the areas and take to independent reading. I call this the texts from the outer zone. Let me give an example, poststructuralism and translation, a topic from the course. The course requires me to deal with the topic from the linguistic perspective only. Apart from linguistics, I move to peripheral texts that shed light on the topic from the literary and philosophical perspectives. Later I suggest students to carry out an independent study of poststructuralism when they have time.  Thus, as an advanced academic reader, I encourage my students to move to the outer zone from the core.

This exploration helps the reader experience the content and language from different disciplinary perspectives, with varying degrees of intensity. Moreover, it is the process of reading across the disciplines. With such exploration, we become the members of broader academic and creative communities. However, there is a risk involved in such a reading. The reader should not forget to return home i.e. his/her own discipline, say ELT in our case. The only aim of reading beyond the home profession is to enrich one’s professionalism in terms of language and content, not just to become a textual wanderlust.

Writing for exploration, experience and expression

I realized, very late though, that writing is equally intensive and hard to reading, but it is also a source of self-satisfaction. This exploration needs more physical and mental preparedness, more commitment and more motivation than reading. While writing this article, I am exploring my inner and outer worlds simultaneously. Writing requires me to explore my own consciousness by reflecting on professionally who I am, what I am doing, what my expectations are, what my students expect from me, and how I can contribute to my professional community. In a similar vein, I need to explore relevant information available in the textual world to such questions. Writing is the combination of information that I collect from various sources.

Writing is an event. It is the event that engages the writer in language, in content and in context. For example, I, while writing this article, am experiencing English directly. I am not just thinking about English but thinking in and doing through English. I am face-to-face with its components ranging from spelling at the lowest level to discourse at the highest.

I always find myself in crisis while writing because every time I am unsure of spelling. I look for suitable words, proper structures, natural flow in the texture, effective rhetorical devices, relevant information and striking insights. Moreover, by writing I am linked with my students beyond the classroom. It has extended my presence beyond the classroom and multiplied the number of my audience. It has also helped me become a producer of knowledge rather than a mere consumer.

Translation for exploration, experience and expression  

Translation has been instrumental in shaping and expanding my profession in terms of language, content and my identity. My early inclination to translation was due to my desire to improve my English. Later this inclination morphed into a life-long passion and profession. When I start translating a piece of work, I find my English inadequate. So, I need to search English dictionaries for better words, suitable expressions, natural sentence constructions and effective rhetorical devices. It has compelled me to be a tenacious language learner. Moreover, supplementary reading is a must in translation. In order to translate a Nepali book in English, I need to read peripheral English books. For example, when translating Yasodhara, a poetic play in Nepali by Sharada Subba, I had to explore several books and even movies in Buddhism. That led me to the path to Buddhist literature. Old Path White Clouds is one of them. Apart from being helpful in translation, insights from reading of the books like this have broadened my understanding about life and my relationship with students. This book has changed my attitude to teaching as service rather than merely a means of livelihood.

Moreover, while translating, I am engaged in the double helix of reading and writing. My reading is directed to writing. I need to read the text in the deepest possible level and (re)write it in the most accurate way. In both the cases, I am in intimate contact with language. Drawing on my experience, I agree with Sujeet Mukherjee’s (1981) revelation – Reading for translation is the highest form of reading. This acute process of reading has given me a means of expression. I have been expressing myself through translation for many years by now. I believe that I can contribute to the disciple by translating and writing about translation.

Benefits I have reaped from this triune journey

I have reaped a lot of benefits from this triune journey. Some of them are as follows:

  • Contribution to university courses: Selecting texts for such courses as Interdisciplinary Readings is next to impossible without wide reading. With this, I have been able to contribute to university reading courses, particularly in the text selection from literature, philosophy and critical theories.
  • Exposure to language and content across disciplines: I find myself shuttling back and forth across different reading zones. It gives me a sense that I am studying about language, content and its style. This makes my reading interesting and exciting. I can directly experience English used in other disciplines. Such reading exposes me to a variety of language and content. It has helped me guide students, earn their trust. This has improved my English and given me content to contemplate, to teach and to write.
  • Safeguard against professional lethargy: Constant reading, writing and translating has freed me from professional lethargy.
  • Knowledge contributor: My role as a teacher is not only the consumer of knowledge but also the producer of knowledge.
  • Sharing beyond the classroom. I have been able to share my ideas beyond the classroom by means of print and electronic media.
  • Self-humility: Finally, the journey has taught me self-humility i.e. I don’t know but I try to know.

References:

Mukherjee. S (1981). Translation as discovery. India: Allied Publishers.

Myerson, G (2001). Nietzsche’s thus spake Zarathustra. UK: Hodder & Stoughton.

Ur. P (1991). A course in language teaching.  Cambridge: CUP.

 

*Mr Adhikari is a lecturer of English Education at Tribhuvan University. Moreover, He is also a translator, editor, poet, and essayist. You can follow him on Twitter @balaramadhika14/bal ram adhikari

Writing a Writing Education in Nepal

Critical Thinking, Writing, , , , ,
Shyam Sharma, PhD

One of the most common activities that we do on a daily basis, and do it in increasingly more ways for more purposes, is writing. But writing for us is also like water for fish. “What water?” one fish might ask another fish that starts talking about water, unless the latter has been thinking about or deliberately observing water surrounding it. Likewise, most of us don’t pause to think and talk about writing. It is just what people do, and they have habituated, often fossilized, thoughts about it or have nothing to say. That means it’s important for us as educators to think about how we are going to meet the increasing academic, professional, and social demands of writing in Nepal. 

In this post, I’d like to share some thoughts and experiences, and a particular vision, about how Nepalese academe could adopt and advance writing as a discipline and pedagogy, as a profession and vocation within the academic context. I am not thinking about creative writing, the writing done by the special “writers” within the humanities, or the writing done by a few “scholars” in other disciplines. Nor am I thinking about writing done by journalists or other kinds of professionals who write for a living. I am thinking about writing as a subject, like social studies or math in secondary school, and like compulsory English or particle physics in college. How can we advance writing as an independent subject that is taught by academic scholars or teachers who have studied it as a subject? How can we advance scholarly conversation and research about writing, in its academic and professional forms, for improving its social and economic applications? How can we develop writing as a field of study and practice, as a matter of curriculum and policy, as an issue of public awareness and demand? How can we help our schools and universities adopt systematic teaching, research, and training of teachers and other professionals around writing as a foundational part of secondary and higher education, as a vehicle for professional development? How can we write a writing education of our own?

We do currently have a writing education of sorts. It exists in many forms, many contexts, many manifestations. It is not a separate subject/curriculum taught to students across the board; there are only a course or two within disciplines like English Education. Writing should be a distinct subject, or at least a part of “writing, research, and communication” skills course. Instead of considering writing as one of four language skills and taught within English or Nepali language courses, we must add academic writing as a foundational course in high school and college. We must offer specialized and/or discipline-specific writing courses, such as professional writing to help college and university students prepare for different professions, scientific writing and technical writing to help students write well in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) and engineering, and writing courses for students who want to pursue academic careers in social science and humanistic fields. We also need academic and professional writing as a set of courses that form undergraduate writing major. And in order to produce writing teachers and scholars/researchers, we need writing degrees at the Master’s, MPhil, and Doctoral levels. We need departments of writing. We need conferences, journals and professional organizations for writing teachers and scholars.

One key question is what discipline is going to adopt writing, whether a new group of scholars are going to emerge and advance writing as an independent discipline, what shape our version of the discipline and profession of academic writing is going to take? Indeed, how do we characterize the courses/curricula and professional expertise in writing that we already have? Are the writing teachers, most of whom do not have specialized degrees or extensive training in the teaching and research of writing, going to lead this charge? Should they be connected to the broader community of writing scholars in the outside world? Are they and their new discipline and professional community–if such things are emerging or emerge in the future–going to be housed within another discipline, such as English Studies, English Education, or Applied Linguistics? Should a discipline and pedagogy of academic writing be limited within the context of English or Nepali for that matter? If so, what do the disciplinarity and linguistic identity of those other disciplines mean to the advancement of writing as a (sub)discipline and to the development of scholars/teachers with a distinct professional identity?

While putting in writing the chain of thoughts above, I was also thinking that we are yet to develop a significant understanding about writing–whether in our conferences and journals, blogs and other professional discussions or through curriculum change and teaching practices. As I indicated at the beginning of this post, Nepalese academe seems generally vague about academic writing, perhaps because it is not interested in this subject and only pay attention to it when there is a crisis. Writing is like a machine that people only talk about when it breaks down. Teachers talk about students “poor writing” when students fail in exams i.e. if they don’t assume that the students would have written perfectly if they knew what to write but writing mediates and can make or mar both the process and product of learning and assessment. It can open or close doors to the profession and often social success. Writing is not only a means of assessment in our education system–in fact, too much so–but also plays increasingly important professional functions. It is a means of democratic deliberation and participation, playing increasingly important roles there as well in a young democracy. And writing goes beyond professional application and social/civic action to empowering the individual in an era of rapid technological advancement and globalization where we conduct more work and communication through writing. So, it is time to challenge and reject problematic beliefs about writing in their place, teach and advance better understanding about the roles that writing plays in practice in today’s society (as well as academe). For instance, if we look at the so-called “genius” students, it is often because they know how to express and organize well what they know, through writing. They have a better grasp of the connection between reading or research and writing. They read and write rhetorically consciously. But these facts are lost on teachers and institutions alike because of the prevalence of many myths about writing.

Writing, many assume, comes naturally to individuals with a creative bent of mind. In reality, scientists who publish the results of their systematic research aren’t creative writers; nor are economists, journalists, or historians who are prolific writers. Writing is also often seen as an unteachable skill, one that must naturally emerge from regular reading, sustained practice, or just waiting until one has to do different kinds of writing in the “real world.” Learning to write happens, that is; there’s no need to teach writing. These assumptions and myths about writing take us back to understanding the nature and function of writing that we do or need. They prompt us to study the writing that our students must do, identify their struggles and failures and strengths, develop curricular and pedagogical strategies of intervention, put pressure on curricular and educational policies to recognize and integrate and support the teaching and study of writing. We must develop curricular models that will fit our own national and local contexts and needs. But we must also advance advocacy and education about writing–and that is what I mean by “writing” a writing education.

There is a need for those of us who are interested in making Nepal’s writing education visible, in promoting it professionalizing it, to come together and share our experiences and visions. There is a need for us to develop selling points, to show the exigency, to demonstrate the benefits of a more systematic and advanced writing education in secondary and tertiary education. It may not be the same discipline that we see in North America or Europe, or even in the rest of South Asia. It has to be built upon the expertise and resources we currently have, the demands and needs we can identify through research and exchange of ideas and practices. It is high time that we bring together those who are interested in and invested in teaching and advancing writing otherwise into a professional network or organization. This can help us educate other stakeholders about the benefits of teaching/learning writing more substantively, more systematically, more purposefully. It can help us show its applications that already exist, the gaps and pitfalls of how the teaching/learning of writing is currently done. We are yet to demonstrate to academe and the professions alike the importance and needs of well-developed writing skills in our students and our professionals.

It is time for Nepal’s writing teachers and scholars, in whatever proportion they would assume this academic/professional identity, to study and write the history of writing education in Nepal. We must understand and communicate what we have done well and what we haven’t. Collective action and ongoing conversation about academic and other forms of writing can also help us develop the arguments, the curriculum, the pedagogy, the practice, and the advocacy that we need for engaging other stakeholders. Together we can understand the uptakes, identify and try to overcome the obstacles. It is high time.  

Welcome to the June Issue of ELT Choutari: Language Planning and Policy

Critical Thinking, Editorial, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Language Plan & Policy

Editorial

English teachers should initiate discussion on rationales of English medium of instruction

It is common to experience different issues in teaching-learning process in educational institutions, which is not desirable but inevitable. Most of the problems can be solved through an effective communication and discussion among the team.

One of the key issues in our educational institution now is the appropriate use and practice of language/s both as a medium of instruction and access of children’s mother tongue in teaching learning. Before addressing the issue of mother tongue based multilingual education, there has arisen another key issue in teaching learning, which is the increasing use of English as a medium of instruction in our multicultural and multilingual classes. And the interesting thing is the practice of English medium instruction is merely guided by a statement in policy, which states that “the medium of instruction at school level can be Nepali, English or both. However, Mother tongue can be used up to basic level and the same language should be used for a language subject.” There is no any other policy guidelines to systematise this practice. Schools are imitating each others and the practice is increasing. In this backdrop, the communities, local governing bodies and teachers as local executives should also play an important role to make a wise decision on the language practice in the educational setting. An initiation from a teacher also can make a big difference. Therefore, teachers, especially English teachers should initiate effective communication and discussion among the team to avoid the situation from getting worse because they know more about English language and its limitation.

In the context of Nepal, the increasing shift to the English as a Medium of Instruction (EMI) seems to be guided by two major factors. First, to stop the transfer of students to private boarding school and increase students in community school. Second, the belief that the English language proficiency of students can be enhanced by teaching all subjects in English medium.

There are several other factors behind the distrust of parents towards community schools, resulting the decrease in number of students. Merely introducing English medium instruction does not solve the problems but its impacts can further deteriorate the condition of school. On the other hand, schools and parents believe that the teaching all academic subjects in English can improve the language proficiency of students. But are schools only English language teaching centres? Or they have roles to deliver the academic contents effectively to students as set by curriculum. Can the existing teachers deliver the contents effectively in the new language? Are students ready for that? Most importantly, is it necessary to deliver all academic contents in English language from primary level? What is the rationale behind it? What do the researches suggest?

We, therefore, need to consider several important questions before making the decisions of language shift in schools. It is very important decision, which can affect the future of children and society but schools are taking it very lightly.

As an English teacher, we can do something to rethink and review this practice. Firstly, we ourselves should be clear that language is just a medium to deliver the information, knowledge and skills. Therefore, the medium of instruction should be the language in which both the students and teachers feel comfortable. It has been huge challenge even for teachers of English to teach English effectively around the nation and how can other teachers teach academic subjects (well packed with contents) effectively to students? Therefore, let’s teach English language subject effectively first. If only English language is taught effectively, students can achieve a level of conversational English. In the name of EMI, actually parents are asking for a workable conversational English, which is possible through effective teaching of the English language. It is not necessary to make such a big shift to attain this purpose. As an English teacher, if we only can clarify these illusions in our school management and school family, it could avoid the random practice and decisions regarding the medium of instruction.

And presenting you the June issue for you, we have tired to re/start the discussion on the language planning, policy and language practices. This issue is packaged with language planning and policy, language in education, professional development and general thoughts on education. The following lines will guide you to select the writing in the area of your interest:

In the first post, Kumar Narayan Shrestha talks about language planning and policy, and its process, and also reviews the language planning and policy of Nepal.

Similarly, Gyanendra Kumar Yadav explores the actual language practice and the issues related to language policy and English language teaching (ELT) in Nepal.

Likewise, a PhD scholar Karna Rana, shares the global need of multilingual citizens and rationales for education in children’s mother tongue.

In an exclusive interview, Dr. Prem Phyak shares his insights on the effective approach to language planning and policy analyzing the flaws in the existing language planning and policy. Similarly, he also shares the possible approach in language in education and multi-lingualism and evaluates ELT in Nepal.

In another post, to present you a different taste, Dr. Shyam Sharma urges us to reframe our perspectives and look the realities through positive lens and encourages everyone to take action from their level for language policy and quality education for all.

In the last but the not the least post, Shikha Gurung shares how teachers can continue their professional development through the three dimensional act of reflection, research and networking.

Here is the complete list of the posts in this issue:

  1. Language Planning in Nepal: A Bird’s Eye View: by Kumar Narayan Shrestha
  2. Language Practices and Food for Thought for Language Policy Makers: by Gyanendra Kumar Yadav
  3. So What, If Not Mother Tongue?: by Karna Rana
  4. Language Planning and Policy Should Embrace Inclusive and Co-learning Practices: Dr. Phyak: by Prem Phyak
  5. Beyond Beating Dead Horses: by Shyam Sharma
  6. A Three Dimensional Approach to Professional Development of English Language Teachers in Nepal: by Shikha Gurung

Finally, I would like to thank Karna Rana for his rigorous support in reading and editing. Likewise, I am thankful to Ashok Raj Khati and Praveen Kumar Yadav for their support to release this issue. Similarly, special thank goes to all the contributors of the issue.

Read, comment, share and write your own practices and send to us at 2elt.choutari@gmail.com

Happy reading!

Jeevan Karki the Editor of the issue
Jeevan Karki
the Editor of the issue

So What, If Not Mother Tongue?

Critical Thinking, Language planning and policy, , , , , , ,
Karna Rana
Karna Rana

“Probably I’m the only person here who speaks one language. I wish I could speak more languages.” – An English native.

Why language matters in our daily life becomes a hot chilli at teatime, at lunch break, on a journey and at other round tables. One day on a fifteen-minute teatime break, one of my workplace colleagues who speaks only English said, “Probably I’m the only person here who speaks one language. I wish I could speak more languages.” His statement caused laughter among the four of us who used to sit at the table, and they were from different countries. All of us except he could speak at least two languages. There were other colleagues from China, Taiwan, India, Malaysia, Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, Korea, Samoa, Fiji, Somalia, Ethiopia, Pakistan, Jordan, and some other countries. I was among them from Nepal. He was the only English native in the group of about fifty-five people excluding the supervisor. Those who were from different countries could speak their mother tongue as well as English. Most of them had colleagues from their own countries and majority of them were females. The environment obviously allowed them to speak in their own  languages. There were four of us (only males) not having colleagues from our countries. The English native who used to sit beside me could only understand English. When others were talking in their own languages, he used to look at their face and smile, which was unusual for English native living in the English country.

It is an example to understand the scope of multiple languages. The place of language as a situation has a connection with several social and cultural aspects. Whether the right to language matters or not, the place where someone is, has a value of speech. The smile of the English native would not often deliver his thoughts when other language speakers used to communicate in their own languages. The situation requires a link language (lingua franca) for verbal communication between the different language speakers. It is still not sure whether the link language can fully transmit their understandings, feelings and meanings. It often happens that two different language speakers using a link language get confused and misunderstand each other. Moreover, the link language may not transmit the feelings of the speakers. When we talk about feelings, it is one of the main characteristics that makes us distinctive, i.e. human being among the creatures in the world. The human feeling is associated with the place where he or she is born and grown up. Thus, beyond than the right to language, there are other human-related important aspects that need to be understood before imposing any other language on the speakers.

“It often happens that two different language speakers using a link language get confused and misunderstand each other. Moreover, the link language may not transmit the feelings of the speakers.”

It may be worthy to write about a seminar on e-Learning and language development that I recently attended in New Zealand. Although the seminar was intended to focus on the research related to digital technology and language development of preschool children, the atmosphere gradually emphasised the socio-cultural aspects of language. A professor from Samoa used Taro (Colocassia in English and Pidaloo in Nepali) farming as a metaphor to develop language in children. His childhood story of planting baby colocassia in a wide land in the right season and harvesting thousands of tonnes of colocassia reflected that the children are the seeds of language which grow in a wide range. When he focused on the right season to plant, it indicated the age of children when they start their social life and acquire language. His words ‘harvest tonnes of colocassia’ represented the growth and development of language. His metaphor was sufficient for us to understand how we can save several indigenous languages in Nepal. In the seminar, the further interaction emphasised that the children’s cognitive development depend on their culture. Another professor remarked that the children conceptualise in their own language other than English in the classroom. She added that the children think in their language and communicate. She suggested that it is necessary to promote the children’s mother tongue from personal, community and national levels. For knowledge, New Zealand has a number of immigrants from different countries who have their languages.

I recently visited Linwood College ( a secondary school with year 13) in Christchurch, New Zealand. It was my second visit to the school to observe the classrooms with a group of Teaching Quality Improvement (TQI) project trainees from Bangladesh. In the interaction with the principal,  head of English Language Learning and other three teachers, Navjot, the head of English  Language Learning, briefly explained about the school environment and classrooms. She stated that the school had students from 21 countries including Nepal. She further explained that the children from different countries and socio-cultural backgrounds speak their languages. However, they have to speak the next language ‘English’ and write in English. She specifically focused on their two different varieties of English, that is, heard language and eye language. She added that the children from different language backgrounds in her school also learned English in their communities or countries. However, they faced difficulties to understand native English at the initial stage. She gave an example that the immigrant children have eye language as they learned English by reading books in their countries. She said that the children learn English from the books, but they think in their mother tongue and try to express in English. It was an example for me to understand why second language learning and speaking becomes so complicated. She also mentioned that her school encourages the immigrant children to use their language. She said, “I encourage them to speak their language and strengthen their language. Use the language as much as they can.”

When I stand on the socio-cultural ground of Nepal, I see a number of indigenous communities, their cultures and different languages. The census of 2011 recorded 125 languages excluding dialects in Nepal. We know that Nepali is the primary language in school education where English is the next language in the community schools. However, the private schools, as well as some community schools, have imposed the English language as a medium of learning and instruction. It is wise not to criticise against the schools’ English language policy without in-depth study in this field in the country. However, it requires the government authority to consider mother tongue as a language of thought and expression, as well as the right to the mother tongue. It is the only way to save the culture, community and the national identity.

Does the above example suggest the education planners in Nepal consider school teaching in those dominated languages in Nepal?

Mr. Rana is a PhD Candidate in School of Teacher Education College of Education, Health and Human Development University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. 

He can be reached at karna.maskirana@pg.canterbury.ac.nz

Language Planning and Policy Should Embrace Inclusive and Co-learning Practices: Dr. Phyak

Critical Thinking, Language planning and policy, , , , , , ,

Teaching English as a language is different from using English as language of instruction

Prem Phyak
Prem Phyak

Prem Phyak (a PhD from the University of Hawaii, USA) is a lecturer, at department of English Education, Tribhuvan University, Nepal. His area of PhD is Second Language Studies, with a focus on multilingual ideologies, policies and pedagogies. His research areas cover identity, agency, and social justice in the intersection of language, space and education.

Our Choutari editor Jeevan Karki has spoken to Dr. Phyak on the area of language planning and policy in the context of Nepal. 

1. Welcome and congratulations Dr. Phyak for your fresh doctoral degree from the University of Hawaii. What are you doing these days?

Thank you, Jeevanji. It took me sometime to settle in Kathmandu. I spend most of my time teaching at both Masters and M.Phil./PhD programs at the Central Department of Education, Tribhuwan University.  Besides, I am working on a project Art, Language and Public Space. I am looking at the enactment of multilingualism in public space of Kathmandu and exploring both the reproduction and resistance of monolingual ideologies through the use of languages in city space.

 2. As we know, one of your areas of interest is language policy in education. For our readers, can you explain what language policy and planning is and why does it become crucial in Nepal, a multilingual country?

Yes, my research draws on interdisciplinary approaches to language education.  There are multiple perspectives of language policy. Traditionally, language policy has been defined as what different bodies of government decide about the use of languages in various agencies like education, mass media and government offices. This perspective is top-down and constructs language policy as a normative (establishing, relating to, or deriving from a standard or norm) practice, which may not necessarily recognize complexity of linguistic diversity and multilingual practices in real life situations.  But my perspective on language policy is bottom-up approach. For me, language policy is what and how individuals, communities, and institutions practise languages in their real life without any censorship and symbolic dominance. From this perspective, each individual is taken as an agent of language policy. Since each individual and community can decide, what language should be used where and for what purposes. It is important to understand on-the-ground language practices. More specifically, language policy is simply a legitimacy of actual language practices on the ground. This perspective goes beyond language-policy-as-text idea to language-policy-as-practice.

“Language policy is simply a legitimacy of actual language practices on the ground.”

In Nepal, language policy discourse is dominantly guided by a top-down and normative ideologies. In other words, government tends to adopt a one-size-fits-all approach in the creation and implementation of language policy. Yet, such a policy does not work in multilingual contexts where languages across their boundaries and practices become fluid and dynamic. Therefore, language policy should be grounded on multilingual ideologies as experienced by bi-/multilingual speakers and epistemologies of language minoritised people.  For me, language policy is ‘plural’ and ‘multiple’ and should recognize language practices of all individuals and communities; it should not impose monolingual ideologies in the guise nation-state and neoliberal ideologies. This perspective on language policy is crucial in a multilingual context like Nepal for two reasons. First, this perspective recognises bi-/multilingual identities of each individual. Second, while taking language policy as a multiple and agentive process, this perspective challenges normative boundaries between language that create hierarchy and unequal power relations among languages. Most importantly, it is necessary to situate language policies within local language practices in various domains, particularly at home and an immediate community of interlocutors.

3. So, regarding the language in educational planning is concerned, do you think Nepal is following a right model? I make a reference here, many children start their early foundation of schooling from English in Nepal.

A great question, Jeevan-ji! Yet, I should be careful when I say ‘a right model’.  The notion of ‘right model’ in language-in-education planning can be hegemonic and may reproduce linguistic inequalities. Developing one ‘right model’ of language education planning may support a deficit view of language education that considers particular languages, mostly minoritised languages, problem while giving educational value to other languages. Rather than saying ‘a right mode’, I would like to use locally appropriate and linguistically sensitive approach.  This approach to language education planning recognises all children’s language practices as resource for learning, both language and academic content.

“We should embrace locally appropriate and linguistically sensitive approach for the language in education.”

Nepal’s current language education planning is extremely narrow and unable to embrace real multilingual practices. Although there is some level of awareness of the importance of multilingualism in education, at macro level, both language policy discourses and pedagogical practices reproduce monolingual ideologies of language. For example, I had an opportunity to attend two language policy-related discussions in the last five months in Kathmandu. Both discussions were attended by linguists, teacher educators, government officials and teachers. Although those programs were organised to analyse issues concerning multilingual policies in education, the discussions could not challenge rather reproduced monolingual ideologies. Mostly because the discussion questions were framed by upholding monolingual perspectives, the panelists could not go beyond linguistic boundaries and neoliberal language ideologies. For instance, most often, in one discussion, the panelists were asked to express their opinions about the use of English against multilingual education. In another discussion, panelists were focusing on a ‘trilingual policy’ (English, Nepali and one ‘mother tongue’) and analyzing that the use of minoritised languages in public domains (e.g., education) is a problematic. Both perspectives see multilingualism in education as problem and construct binary oppositions between languages. For example, in the first discussion multilingual education is presented as anti-English language teaching while the second discussion, which was intended to discuss legitimacy of ‘mother tongues’,  simply wrongly interprets ‘trilingual policy’ as multilingual policy. Such discussions invite tensions, but do not lead us to decision-making processes that are informed by academic research and on-the-ground language practices and meaning-making processes.

The increasing use of English as medium of instruction and its teaching from the pre-primary level should not simply be celebrated as a panacea, as seen in the current language education policy discourses, rather it should be understood as a part of broader ideologies, pedagogies and policies of multilingualism. I don’t mean multilingual education is anti-English, but it is, as studies have consistently shown, an incredible resource for learning English and any other languages. More importantly, it is important to understand that teaching English as a language is different from using English as language of instruction. Our policies have given space to teaching English as a compulsory subject from the first grade. Teaching of English and any other languages is not a problem, but reproducing monolingual English ideology is a grave issue.  The body of literature from language learning and teaching from multilingual contexts have identified that using students’ prior linguistic knowledge (home language) in classroom pedagogies has a transformative impact in student learning. It is important to understand that students’ communicative and academic literacy knowledge in their home language plays a foundational role in learning new languages and academic content. In the current policies and ideologies of English language teaching, we have not been able to embrace students’ multilingual competence. While embracing outmoded the-earlier-the-better and the-more-the-better ideologies, the current language policies and practices are supporting subtractive model of language education. This model eventually leads to multilingual students’ lack of access to knowledge.

4. While having research on medium of instruction, I had a talk with some of the parents from Sherpa, Rai and Magar community. I asked them what if there was a provision of educating their children in their mother tongue in schools, they said there was no scope of their language for the future of their children and hence they were not enthusiastic about what you called ‘students home language in classroom pedagogies’. Therefore, if the community feel that multilingual approach to education is not necessary for them and even not possible, why do we need this? 

I think the problem lies in how we frame our questions about language, but not with what parents and communities think about language. The problem lies in power relation constructed in our language education policies that have reproduced the dominance of particular languages, backed up by political and economic reasons for long, rather than educational and socio-cultural relevance. As you have said, parents are often asked whether they see the relevance of their home languages in relation to Nepali and English. They are asked which language(s) they prefer to be used in education. Such questions create a binary relation between languages and are deeply influenced by a monolingual ideology. But we have not asked parents what multilingual education actually is nor have they been engaged in understanding what multilingual education actually is. We have not asked an inclusive question about language and discussed with them how multilingual education is relevant to supporting quality and effective learning of all children. In other words, our questions make parents think that their home languages do not have value in education. It is not uncommon for parents to have negative attitudes towards home languages in the context where language education policies are guided by political economic rather than educational rationale.

5. The national and international policy documents assert the use of Mother-tongue-based Multi-lingual-Education. However, the practitioners say, it is next to impossible to practise it in Nepal, where more than 125 local languages are recognised. Therefore, what can be the practical solution for it? Or has the time come to look for another alternative approach?

I don’t think ‘practitioners’ are saying that multilingual education is ‘next to impossible to practice’. Indeed, in the context like Nepal, what is impossible is not to have a multilingual policy. I know that there is a dominant ideology, based on 18th/19th century European monolingual ideology, which portrays multilingualism as problem in education and other public spheres. However, as multilingualism is our reality, it will be costly, from both educational and socio-cultural perspective, to imagine and impose monolingual policies and pedagogical practices in education.  The argument that multilingual education is impossible to implement due to a greater number of languages is fundamentally flawed and reproduces a deficit view of language education. More importantly, such a view is ill-informed and not supported by any educational and language learning studies, but it is politically motivated (supporting status quo and maintaining power relations among languages). What is true, as I have mentioned above, we have not been able to engage in informed discussions and decision-making processes. Seeing multilingualism as problem in multilingual country is the byproduct of ill-informed discussions. There are schools, communities and states, around the world, that have been using multiple languages in education successfully.

Although multilingualism in education is indispensable to support effective teaching learning, the existing multilingual education policy has two major issues. First, the transitional bilingual education model which gives space for using students’ home languages (other than Nepali) up to Grade 3 only does not support students to develop academic competence in multiple languages. This model, which eventually focuses on learning of dominant languages, does not contribute to develop multilingual competence of students. Second, the policy does not provide clear guidelines towards adopting multilingual pedagogies. We can see that, both in policy documents and pedagogical practices in schools, the existing multilingual education, unfortunately seems to support monolingual ideologies. For example, I have observed that most teachers and government officials interpret multilingual education as teaching of three languages—Nepali, English and one mother tongue—separately in school. While embracing this kind of separatist ideology, teachers are discouraging the use of multiple languages for pedagogical purposes in the classroom. Teachers are not educated and empowered to use multiple languages to achieve pedagogical goals in a planned and systematic way. My point is that we have to discuss what alternative pedagogical approaches, which embrace basic principles of multilingualism in education, that do not support a separatist ideology rather embrace an inclusive and co-learning practices could an effective approach. Two-way bilingual education programs, content-integrated multilingual education, inquiry-based learning and translanguaging pedagogies are some of the alternative practices that could appropriate in Nepal. These pedagogical approaches recognize linguistic and cultural capitals of all children in teaching-learning processes. Rather than considering multilingualism as a problem, these pedagogies take all students’ languages and language practices as integral part of learning language and academic contents. While saying this, I would not argue for a one-size-fits-all approach rather I focus on the need for working with teachers, students and communities in developing pedagogical tools that best address their linguistic, cultural and educational needs.

6. How do you evaluate the English language teaching (ELT) policy and practices in Nepal? What kind of policy should be developed to fit our context?

ELT policies and practices are unplanned and deeply shaped by global neoliberal ideologies. I have always argued that learning English is necessary; however, the construction and imposition of monolingual ideology as panacea for addressing educational issues is counterproductive for both ELT and learning academic contents. Second language acquisition and literacy studies have clearly shown that students cannot learn both language and academic content effectively if they are taught in a language they are not fully competent. In this regard, there are two major issues concerning ELT in Nepal. First, a dominant misconception takes ELT and the use of English as medium of instruction (EMI) synonymously. Considering ‘compulsory English’ (as a subject of teaching from the first Grade) insufficient, there is a growing trend to adopt EMI policy to teach content area subjects such as science, mathematics, and social studies. This policy is grounded on the assumption that students learn English better if all subjects are taught in English. However, what is lacking is critical and informed discussions and analysis whether or not this policy contributes to students’ cognitive and academic investment in learning processes. A growing body of literature has suggested that teaching students in a language they are not fully competent leads to lack of access to knowledge, cognitive investment and creativity in classroom.  So the current monolingual view on ELT should be critically assessed and adopt a multilingual approach to English language pedagogy. In doing this, it is important to engage teachers in pedagogical planning to create space for multiple languages for an effective learning process, while achieving the goals of lessons.

“English is necessary; however, the construction and imposition of monolingual ideology as panacea for addressing educational issues is counterproductive for both ELT and learning academic contents.”

7. Finally, what do you suggest to a critical mass of scholars in the field of linguistics, applied linguistics and language education and ELT in Nepal?

I would like to highlight two major points. First, linguists, applied linguists and language educators, including ELT practitioners, should engage themselves in discussions that are informed by theories and findings from second language acquisition, language policy and illiteracy studies. This engagement includes understanding of both policies and practices from other multilingual contexts and critical assessment of whether or not language policies and practices are supporting students’ agency, identity and existing linguistic and cultural capital. This kind of engagement is necessary to make informed-decisions in language policy and develop alternative pedagogies in language education. Second, it is important to engage teachers, students, parents and other stakeholders in analysing language ideologies and pedagogies in order to raise their awareness of multilingualism and its importance in language education. For this, concentrated efforts should be invested in developing pedagogical tools and materials in collaboration with teachers, students and communities and implement in the classroom. Doing this will shift our attention towards embracing multilingualism as an integral aspect of education. For this, we should discuss how teachers can use multiple languages in the classroom in a planned and purposeful way. I would argue that rather than reproducing monolingual ideologies—both in policies and practices—our emphasis should be how to bridge gap, created by separatist ideology, between languages and discuss in what teachers can tap in students’ existing language competence. In sum, there is a need for reframing our language policy discourses and focus more on learners and their identities in language education.  

 

Beyond Beating Dead Horses

Critical Thinking, Education in General, , , , , , , , , , ,

From Frustration to Actions on Language Policy and Quality of Education for All

Shyam Sharma
Shyam Sharma

A couple of days ago, while I was video-chatting from here in New York with a cousin in Nawalparasi, the conversation turned to education. This thirty some year-old brother said he had discontinued education since we met a decade ago, gone to the Middle East to make money, returned home to start a wholesale store (which wasn’t doing well), and wasn’t sure what else to do. He didn’t have the desire to return to college: he didn’t see any point in pursuing higher education. “Higher education, especially if you can’t go to super-expensive private colleges, doesn’t lead to opportunity in this country,” he said. “Not anymore.” I did not know how to respond as he went on to generalize. As a fairly successful “product” of public education, I found the education part of the conversation depressing (in spite of all the joy of connecting and chatting with him about many other topics).

In rhetoric and writing courses, I teach students that effective communication depends on analysis/understanding of context, audience, medium, and purpose (CAMP). When my cousin gave me a mini lecture on education, I thought about my context (distantly chatting with a relative after a long time), audience (someone whom I didn’t want to disagree with, given his experience), medium (a video chat where the quick back-and-forth of an informal conversation didn’t facilitate deeper engagement), and purpose (it made no sense to try to challenge him on the subject of education in general). What he said was probably true for him, and it was probably true for other people in his situation or mindset. But I couldn’t stop thinking about how I as a scholar could have communicated better about education. I certainly wasn’t effective (unless giving up was an effective thing to do) and I also thought that people like me aren’t good at engaging members of the public about complex issues about education.

When I hung up and I returned to writing this post, I couldn’t help drawing analogies. Knowing what I know about the context, audience, medium, and purpose of this writing, I couldn’t find much enthusiasm to write it. I am writing in a context where many people like me have written about multilingualism as an asset, about the lack of language policy in the country, and about the dangers of monolingual instruction in the name of “quality” education. The audience, which will include mostly scholars/teachers of language and ELT, many of whom have also written many times about fundamental realities regarding language and language policy. The medium of a blog and this particular venue didn’t look like the best way to achieve my purpose (or, rather, desire) of making any impact in how the public and policy makers think about multilingualism and language policy in education.

Regardless of what a few scholars/teachers say, private schools are going to continue to sell English language (a medium) in the name of “quality education” (the objective). The Ministry of Education will remain being the dog that the mythical tails about English will continue to wag. And, even more depressing, even scholars of language will continue to repeat superficial nonsense about English. Just scroll through Facebook and you will find our most informed scholars repeating the platitude that English is “the world language”; don’t tell them that more Nepalis need Hindi and Arabic to find opportunities in the world beyond our borders. Go to fancy conferences and nobody will show exactly how teaching in English somehow magically improves education; don’t ask those who are making grand arguments with all the grand assumptions if they have research evidence since some British guy did a study in the 1980s (surprise, surprise, he found that because there weren’t enough teachers who could use English fluently, it was hurting learning). Don’t ask our scholars why they still don’t oppose English “only” as the medium of instruction in private schools, why they don’t talk about education at large, why they conflate the currently terrible situation of public education with the inevitability of public education as an approach to educating the public in a country like ours.

Like it was pointless to challenge my cousin about the value of higher education (he had figured it all out, for himself and for everyone), it also seemed to make little sense to write one more time about changing course, formulating new policies, rethinking dominant assumptions . . . regarding language teaching, language policy, and multilingualism. More broadly, I thought about how unfashionable it seems for Nepali scholars to defend and seek to improve public education, and that made me almost give up and say sorry to the editor whom I had promised a blog post for this issue.

So, what’s the point of beating the same old dead horses?

Then it dawned upon me that I was looking at the situation only through a pessimistic lens. I was failing or refusing to look at more positive things. By focusing on persisting problems, I was unable to recognize more promising developments in society. Maybe I could redirect my energies if I want to contribute more than I now do? Urging a similar shift in perspective for us as a group of language educators and public intellectuals, I would like to share some thoughts. I think that we should reframe our conversation after nearly a decade (on this forum) of focusing on realities and challenges about multilingualism and language policy in Nepal. What can those of us who are not at home contribute best—how can we better partner with colleagues on the ground? How can those of us on the ground affect policy and public opinion even better? As we strive to keep the conversation alive, what new directions could we take?

First, while we may be concerned about persisting mythologies of monolingualism and the absence of well-informed language policy, let us also recognize positive developments. People are more conscious today about the dangers of monolingualism, especially those of suppressing minority languages, than before the democratic revolution. Nothing may have happened in terms of government policy or even seriousness among scholars who could reshape language policy, but it seems to me that the questions and debates are out there in the mainstream today. Building on whatever progress we see, let us keep working to emphasize them. Let us keep calling out intellectual laziness, pointing out logical flaws, and acknowledging complex thinking about language policy. Let us continue the conversation, writing in venues that reach larger and larger audiences. Let us network with people in positions with policy or even political impact. We owe it to society to inform them—far beyond just complaining about them.

Second, let us work with the private sector to improve quality of education, to implement common sense language policy, and to use the leverage of their resource or willpower toward affecting public education as well. For example, there are a lot of private schools whose administrators and teachers are willing to invite public school teachers and administrators into training and conversations. There is a lot of goodwill (as well as desire to market brands) in the private sector. Many educators who are in the private sector also work in the public sector; many of them came from public education and they have a deep sense of loyalty and responsibility to protect and improve access to quality education regardless of financial ability of their fellow citizens, now and in the future. Many of us attack the villains in the private sector—or, rather, we see villains and ignore the average, hardworking educators and education leaders in them. This is a problem I need to overcome a little more myself :). I think we must partner a lot more than we already do with private schools, contribute our expertise, engage their leaders, and listen to them more carefully.

“We must partner a lot more than we already do with private schools, contribute our expertise, engage their leaders, and listen to them more carefully.”

Third, we should do our best to help the society stop blaming the victims—which we can start by directing our own energies from attacking the villains to appreciating those who do it right—in the public sector. For example, a lot of well-meaning intellectuals working in education (as well as people working in different professions) are angry with public school teachers for engaging in politics, for being lazy and dishonest, for their irresponsibility and unprofessional attitude. The problem with focusing our energies on what is wrong is that we may end up aggravating the problems while doing nothing toward solving them. What if we look at public school teachers as the victims and products of a certain social and political condition? What if we can contribute toward shifting their energies from politics to professional development? In some of the professional development webinar series that I did with a regional public university, I have felt very strongly that we were able to greatly encourage professors who wanted to stay away from politics and leverage the power of knowledge and change that they could affect through teacher training and professional networking. One of the most politically aggressive teachers came on board and emphasized how eager he is now to join the professional development initiatives.

Fourth, let us shift attention from discourse to practice. Of course, we should not create or reinforce false dichotomies between theory/discourse and practice: we are in a profession where talk is our trade. We talk to teach students, to train teachers, to engage the public, and to build and expand professional networks. But we should think more clearly about the outcome of our talking and writing: do we want teachers to go to class with a different mindset about language, administrators to change the current language policy, institutions to listen to us more because we speak to them? How can we develop training programs, modules, materials, and teams that can shift the focus from outdated views about language and multilingualism to practices that will empower students from different linguistic backgrounds? We can turn conversations on social media into series of webinars that involve educators and academic administrators in conversations about policy and practice.

“We can turn conversations on social media into series of webinars that involve educators and academic administrators in conversations about policy and practice.”

 

Fifth, let us reach beyond the city. Technology now allows us to expand the reach of our conversation, networking, training, and resource-sharing. I remember my cousin telling me: “If you don’t want to forget your brother, you don’t have to anymore”—telling me that he was speaking to me from a nearby petroleum pump where there was wifi. It is important, however, to be patient and realistic—both about technology and about what we want to achieve. It takes time and willingness to change our own perspective (and gain patience) when working with people in new contexts. Last year, when I landed in a small town in western Nepal after having run a yearlong webinar series on how to integrate writing across the curriculum (a series that later shifted focus into “how to implement the semester system), I was shocked to find out how bad wifi and data bandwidth were on the ground. While I was working online for nearly a year, I had only seen the few determined colleagues on the ground who must have done everything possible to find or create a fairly good connection before they talked to me: I had assumed that the same kind of connection must be available for most people. As I sat on one particular flight of stairs of a hotel in Surkhet where wifi worked—in total darkness, attacked by a thousand mosquitoes, after midnight when the connection got better—to try to answer any important emails from my university in New York, I was humbled to the point of tears. At that time, I was not as angry at the mosquitoes as I was with myself, when I remembered saying, “For future meetings, let us make sure in advance that we have good connection so that our conversation is uninterrupted.” It turns out that my colleagues would prepare for good connection but no amount of “preparation” would guarantee good wifi. These days, I am much more patient when someone isn’t there, when technology doesn’t work, when new participants need to be brought up to speed, and so on. If we keep expanding our conversation and our commitment and patience for it, we will be able to look back with pride in ten more years—both regarding language policy work and regarding the quality and impact of education at large.

Finally, let us not be afraid or shy to speak our minds. We have seen a lot of negativity against scholars who tried to share their ideas, even when they didn’t challenge established power structures. I don’t know where all the leg-pullers have gone, but we have seen those who continued to share knowledge thrive and grow and make bigger and bigger impacts on society. If you have ideas and energy, come join the conversation here; contribute to other venues if your ideas better fit there; comment and like and repost and having fun learning and sharing ideas on various blogs and other social media. We must invest more of our energies for maximum impact, and one of the ways of doing that is to keep writing and connecting and supporting others. Since we started this humble venue in 2009, I have observed how many contributors and facilitators of this forum have realized their potentials—especially by contributing to the potentials and progress of others.

Let us keep giving back to the profession, the society, and the world! Thank you for reading this post, and hopefully for writing (more) for Choutari in the future.

 

Children Taught Me English language

Critical Thinking, Reflections, , , , , , , , , , ,
Karna Rana

When I was a cowboy going to high school in the late 1980s, there was no educational mission in my life. Born in a poor economic background, even thinking of high school after primary school (Year Five) was just like imagery. Almost all the primary school graduates used to travel to India for work after primary school education in our locality. This came to me too in the long run of schooling but my illiterate (cannot read and write) mother and two elder brothers (who could not complete even their primary school due to loss of father) insisted me to join high school which was/is at the distance of three and half hour walk from home. After learning English alphabets at grade four and five, my journey to learning English in high school started in the mid-80s. That used to take whole morning to reach the high school after crossing dense forest, river, and walks up and down the hills via three villages. Over three hour walk in the morning and the same distance back home after school every day was more than enough to make me very tired. The dreams might be away from the sleeps but the real dream of life i.e learning English and speaking like professional was alive even in the sleeps, every walk and work throughout the high school.

Although there was no English learning environment in my school, the thought of learning English emerged listening to the rhymes of the kindergarten children of private school and looking at a couple (both teachers) of the school. I wished I could speak English like those couple teachers who were running that kindergarten school. There was no any English language learning centre around the school. Otherwise, I would have possibly joint the class. Gradually, I completed my high school with almost ‘no learning of English language’. I could just read words without understanding what the text meant. However, I passed SLC by memorising the texts, especially teacher’s notes. I must thank those high school teachers for their intensive teaching of English grammar that supported me to learn English in university later. Apparently I could not speak English even if I had every day English class from primary to high school.

This is a common sense – Nepal was/is not a ground of English though the neighbour had been colonial land of English for hundreds of years. I must thank the earlier generation of Nepali who saved Nepal and the diversity of over 125 languages that exist in Nepal even today. Though I could not learn proper English in high school, I learned formal English during my university education. How I learned English is quite interesting to share here. In fact, I learned almost no English from university classes but I learned English speaking and writing from my teaching profession at private schools in Kathmandu. Thank God, I got a job at private primary school where I used to teach kindergarten children. Actually I was learning more than teaching those kids in the school. The English language began with ‘May I come in, sir? May I go to toilet, sir? Come in. Go…’ Wow! How lovely the children were, who taught me English speaking and writing which was really helpful to study English on campus. I could speak general English in the very first year of my teaching profession. That teaching was reflected in the result of my I. Ed. English papers when I got very good marks. Therefore, I always thank those kids who taught me English language.

Let me continue the issue of professionalism in English language. Since 1995, the beginning of my university education and teaching profession excluding high school, I have been learning English. When I was almost at the scratch level even after SLC, I thought of developing English in me. I could develop English to some extent from my teaching profession as well as university education. I was always keen to develop my academic English proficiency throughout I.Ed, B.Ed and M.Ed. That was the main reason I selected English as major subject in the university. Sometimes I used to feel wretched when I could not understand native speakers’ English on TV or movies. Of course I had been teaching English at different English medium schools and community campus in Kathmandu for about eighteen years before travelling to the United Kingdom for my second Masters in September 2009. However, language is observed in communication and academic arts. One of the reasons behind going to study MA in Education in the UK was the same to develop English language in me.

Let me tell my real story in the UK. I could mostly understand the people in the university but it was quite different when I had to communicate with customers at my work. I used to work in service oriented company where I had to speak over the phones and face-to-face with local English people. I don’t know how many mistakes I might have done in the very first month due to misunderstanding of people’s language. There I realised what the real English is. This reminded my linguistic theory that I learned in B.Ed and M.Ed classes in Nepal ‘Language is human specific.’

I believe this reflective story is worth sharing with teachers, policy makers and English language learners. Only running after English language may be killing our innovative and productive life. At the same time, it should be understood that language is/not universal phenomenon and it should be realised in the education policies of the nation. As an emerging researcher, I have been reading education policy of Nepal and other countries, there is a gap between socio-cultural values and English language education in Nepal. As I said earlier Nepal was/is not the land of English where over 125 languages still exist with their socio-cultural diversities. Quite significant, most of the developed countries are gradually adopting migrant languages to reflect their diversity, inclusion and preserve their socio-cultural values. When we lose our languages, our socio-cultural values also die with the language. One reality that we have to understand is that language is not solely education. This is just the vehicle of education.

Lastly, I am writing this from the land of English (i.e. New Zealand). Just a reminder, I have realised very lately that English is just a language for communication that anyone can learn from the environment. This is similar to one of the 125 languages in Nepal. Now I speak and write English but I wasted my valuable time of life just running after English language and ignoring life skills. Now I think, I should have learned how to cultivate a beautiful flower in a pot that would give me handsome earning in any part of the world.

Mr. Rana is a PhD Candidate in the School of Teacher Education, College of Education, Health and Human Development, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

Editorial (July 2015 Issue): EFL teachers in ‘super-difficult circumstance’

Critical Thinking, Editorial, Education in General, EducationInEmergency,

Namaste and welcome to the July 2015 issue of Choutari!

We hope you enjoyed our June issue which also focuses on education and EFL teaching in Nepal’s post-disaster situation. You can read the issue here.

In this issue, we have three blog posts and a photography project. In my own article, I have discussed the preliminary findings of the survey on the role of EFL teachers in Nepal’s post-disaster situation, which I call “super-difficult circumstance.” The teachers’ responses reveal a multitude of difficulties (e.g., psycho-social, educational and economic challenges) caused by the recent earthquake. Most importantly, the findings of the survey reveal the “transformative agency” of EFL teachers who transgress the “schooled pedagogy” and can create their own “pedagogy of disaster” to help their students recover from the traumatic experience.

In the second post, Nirjana Sharma, an education journalist based in Kathmandu, shares a featured news story based on her observation of the schools on the resumption after a month-plus unscheduled holidays following the earthquake. 

July Issue of ChoutariIn another article, Dinesh Thapa shares with us his own involvement in the relief and recovery operations in the earthquake-affected areas. He begins with telling his own story and discusses empirical findings about how people are affected by the earthquake. His article is a testimony to redefining the role of “teacher-as-researcher” and an important material for EFL teaching.

Praveen Kumar Yadav’s post focuses on his own classroom experience teaching his students after the earthquake. His story documents the importance of teachers’ role in facilitating the earthquake-related discussions in EFL lessons. More strikingly, the way in which he has framed the devastating stories in his “world literature” course resonates what I call the “pedagogy of disaster.”

The Choutari team always explores new ways to promote pedagogical discussions among EFL teachers. We have initiated a “photography project” for EFL teaching. Influenced by the Critical Photography Theory” (Wells, 2015) and the “Critical Art Pedagogy” (Cary, 2011), the goal of this project is to promote the use of photos/pictures in EFL teaching.

Table of contents
  1. From ‘schooled pedagogy’ to ‘pedagogy of disaster’: The role of EFL teachers in the super-difficult circumstance of post-disaster Nepal, by Prem Phyak
  2.  School resumption brings smiles to children, by Nirjana Sharma
  3. The impacts of the earthquake on education: Contemplation of an EFL teacher, by Dinesh Thapa
  4. I survived and have a story to tell, by Praveen Kumar Yadav
  5. The photography project’: Pictures in EFL teaching, by Choutari Team

I hope you enjoy reading this issue.

Happy readings!

Prem Phyak (Guest editor)

(With Praveen Kumar Yadav)

From ‘schooled pedagogy’ to ‘pedagogy of disaster’: The role of EFL teachers in the super-difficult circumstance of post-disaster Nepal

Critical Thinking, EducationInEmergency, ELT Resource,
Prem Phyak
Prem Phyak

Introduction

The memory of taking classes in a temporary shelter made up of bamboo and tin after the 1988 earthquake is still vivid in my memory. The two-story building of my school on the slope of the mountain village in eastern Nepal was very badly shaken by the earthquake. We could not take classes in the old building. The villagers, teachers, and students worked very hard for many days to build a temporary shelter and run classes. I still remember that in the shelter we used to read aloud “Hello Sita, Hello Ram. Knock, Knock. Knock, Knock” to let our teachers know that we are engaged in doing our tasks. Many times, we could not take classes due to rain and storm. I don’t quite remember how our teachers helped us recover from dreadful experience from the disaster, but the Friday cultural programs and the outdoor activities including field trips were part of fun activities. I wish I had a camera or a cell phone to take the pictures of classes in the shelter during that time. Nobody in the village had these devices then. The situation now has changed a lot. The villagers have cellphones to take pictures and upload them on Facebook to share with wider audience about the updates from the village. We have seen the “social media power” during and post-disaster stage of the April 25 earthquake.

The 7.8 magnitude (April 25, 2015), followed by hundreds of aftershocks including the 7.4 magnitude (May 12, 2015)– took  more than 9,000 people’s lives  and destroyed more than 510,762 homes. Various news reports show that more than 25,000 classrooms of 8,000 schools have to be rebuilt. BCC estimates that more than 90% of schools are destroyed in the hardest-hit districts such as Sindhupalchok, Dolakha, Gorkha, Rasuwa, and Ramechhap. The government estimates the costs of $7 billion, a third of the country’s gross domestic product, to rebuild the damaged physical infrastructures. However, what is missing from the discussion is how to help about two million children who are directly affected by the disaster. While the school dropout has been a thorny issue even before the earthquake, this disaster might further contribute to the increase the dropout rate. UNICEF estimates that more than 1.2 million Nepali children (5-16 years old) are out of school and warns that thousands of children may not join school if appropriate measures are not developed in the post-earthquake stage. Since many children from rural villages have to be relocated in other safe places, they may not find a conducive environment and support to go to school and fully participate in educational activities.

In this blog post, I present the preliminary findings of an ongoing survey research on the role of EFL teachers in the “super-difficult circumstance” of the post-disaster Nepal.  I am using the term “super-difficult circumstance” to embrace the multitude of issues connected with the recent earthquake. I argue that this disaster is not just an earthquake but the convergence of other cascading disasters such as landslides, flooding, and food shortage that directly impacts on children’s educational activities. Moreover, the super-difficult circumstance not only includes lack of physical infrastructures (e.g., school buildings, furniture), but also, and most importantly, complex socio-cultural, economic and political ecology that affect smooth operation of educational activities in the post-disaster situation of Nepal.

The language of disaster: What should EFL teachers know?

Disaster, which affects our daily lives, society, and economy, has never been the focus of English language teaching. Due to the disciplinary boundary, disaster has often been taught as a content of science, geography/social studies, and environmental/population studies. However, the global occurrences of disasters (e.g., hurricane, typhoon, earthquake, flooding, drought, and glacial lake outburst) is increasingly affecting our lives. The world has already experienced numerous disasters in which millions of people died. The Tōhoku Earthquake/Tsunami (2011, Japan), East Africa Drought (2011, East Africa), Haiti Earthquake (2010, Haiti), Pakistan Earthquake (2005, Pakistan), Hurricane Katrina (2005, USA), and Indian Ocean Earthquake (2004, Indonesia), among others, have already taught us so many lessons about disaster management and humanitarian assistance. Should EFL teachers be aware of such disasters and their impacts? How can they contribute to responding to such disasters through teaching?

Of course, EFL teachers should be aware of various types of disasters and help their students become more resilient to cope with traumatic experiences from disasters. The first thing that EFL teachers can do is to incorporate and help students understand various disaster-related concepts in their lessons. The integration of the disaster-related topics definitely enriches vocabulary and the content level awareness of students.

“Disaster” is not easy to define. It literally refers to a sudden event or calamity that causes physical destruction and human suffering. Although there is a debate on the meaning of the term “disaster”, the near consensus definition is: a situation or event, which overwhelms local capacity, necessitating a request to national or international level for external assistance [The Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED)]. Other terms such as “catastrophe” and “calamity” are also used to describe disaster. Two important points we should be aware of are: a) disaster can be used as a cover term which includes all kinds of incidents or events that cause human sufferings; b)  as Enrico Quarantelli, a famous scholar of the  sociology of disaster, argues, disasters are not always “natural” but  a “social phenomenon”. Quarantelli and his colleagues argue that disasters are deeply rooted in the social structure; the location of the people, their sociopolitical and economic status, and the type of governance. Although EFL teachers may not contribute to the technical aspect of disaster, they can be instrumental in addressing social issues surrounding disaster.

The recent “Nepal earthquake” has revealed a number of sociocultural issues that EFL teachers can discuss in the classroom to help their students develop “critical language awareness.” In the previous issue of Choutari, Charlotte Benham analyzes various lessons that EFL teachers can learn from the recent disaster. She argues that EFL teachers can learn how some people are unequally affected by the recent disaster and engage their students in a critical analysis of social inequalities as seen in the relief and recovery operations. A number of scholars from other disciplines (such as anthropology, political science, sociology, education, and economics) have highlighted the need for a social justice approach in the “relief”, “rehabilitation”, “recovery”, and “rebuilding” stage of disaster. In the same issue of Choutari, Rojita Adhikari, Neha Shah, Anuradha Sharma, Chetan K Timilsina and Jeevan Karki present on-the-ground experiences and lessons learned from the disaster. EFL teachers can learn many important lessons from their stories. They all highlight the role of teachers as a “change agent” and a “resilient actor” in the post-disaster Nepal.

On a positive note, the recent earthquake has given us rich corpus of language that EFL teachers can use in the classroom. Local, national, and international newspapers have paid a due attention to the Nepal earthquake and documented it in different forms (text, audio, image, and video). Teachers can easily access these materials and use in the classroom. Some key vocabulary words that are used in newspapers include: magnitude, rubble, reeling, avalanche, aftershocks, tremor, epicenter, victims, donors, mitigation, rebuilding, temporary shelter, relocation, resistance, settlements, perish, assurance, high-rise building, trigger, death toll, rescue, emergency, charity, trauma, jolt, shocking, resume, tent, makeshift, ravage, woe, grapple, volunteer, soaring, wipe out, desperate, devastating, injured, limp back , decease, massive, strike, drone, chopper etc. Teachers can use these words in their lessons in multiple ways. Other words/phrases that promote students’ critical thinking include: poverty, corruption, caste-system, untouchability, social exclusion, unequal distribution, poor, rich, urban, rural, overhead costs, rotten rice, discrimination, leftover, (lack of)access to power, NGO-graphy etc. These words/phrases can be used as a base for critical language awareness in EFL classes. However, this requires teachers to transgress “the schooled pedagogy”–the scripted pedagogy adopted in school curricula–and be aware of sociocultural issues connected with the disaster. This “pedagogy of disaster” is collectively built on the life experiences of students, teachers, and communities.

The preliminary findings of the survey

I am receiving encouraging responses from the EFL teachers; out of 100, 25 EFL teachers have already responded to the survey. As an ongoing research the final results of this survey will be shared in the future issues of Choutari. In what follows, I present the preliminary findings.

Trauma and the super-difficult circumstance: All the respondent-teachers have gone through traumatic experiences in the post-earthquake stage. Although there was no any human casualty in their own and immediate relatives’ family, these teachers had “a very traumatic experience” as they were trembled by “the series of main shocks and aftershocks”. One teacher recounts that “all my family members were worried, nervous, confused and restless” while another teacher says he is so much terrified and could not find any “strategy to be free.” Four respondent-teachers have lost their houses and twelve teachers’ school buildings are destroyed. They have to prepare temporary shelters to run classes. Three teachers reveal that they are “financially affected” as they are jobless due to their workplace closure for one and a half months. All the respondent-teachers spent their nights in a tent for 15-25 days. The 65.5 per cent of teachers say that the earthquake has destroyed their schools/colleges/universities that cannot be used for educational activities. Twenty-eight percent of them mention that they are deeply affected by the “loss of their students”. Three teachers report that some students “have not come back” as they lost their houses. One university teacher mentions that they are running their classes in a private college in Kathmandu as the building of their university cannot be used for educational activities. Some major issues reported by the EFL teachers are as follows:

  • Less individual attention, no focus on teaching, and traumatic feelings all the time.

All students are not present in class. They have gone to Terai in their relatives home fearing the frequent aftershocks. Students are not in complete mood of learning, in a way they have lost enthusiasm in learning after the quake.

No readiness for learning. Still aftershocks are trembling them so they feel insecure at school as buildings have cracks somewhere.

  • Students fear of another quake.

Students are not comfortable in the class. School buildings have cracks so they are frightened.

Even the sound of the vehicles make them feel earthquake tremor. They do not dare to sit even in the tent.

Not all but some of them are still afraid of earthquake. For example, they are reluctant to go to their previous classroom on the third floor of the building.

Yes, they are afraid. They try to stay out of the enclosed area. They have completely forgotten their assignments and deadlines.

  • Student cannot concentrate on their subject matter while teaching (they always relate the example or substance of teaching with earthquake).

Many of my students have cracked buildings in their village and their parents and relatives are in very difficult situation. So, students are frustrated and they are not able to concentrate on their study. It’s been very difficult for them to follow the normal time table. They are still restless and worried. In addition to this, there are cracks in the college building and students feel insecure to attend class in rooms which are located in the upper level.

They feel a bit better now as they would like to continue their study after the quake but they still have a fear that earthquake might come again. The Facebook rumor of big earthquake coming has affected their psychology.

The role of EFL teachers in the recovery

The respondent-teachers have contributed to providing relief materials to the earthquake survivors in many ways. They have raised funds, collected food, provided drinking water, participated in rescue operations, distributed medicine, and made shelters for the survivors. These teachers have played very critical role to help their students recover from the deep traumatic experiences from the disaster. Some of the major activities these teachers have done in their classes are as follows:

Counseling: Most of the respondent-teachers have provided counselling services to their students after the reopening of their schools. One teacher says “we have talked to our students and suggested that they should not be worried”.  Another teachers reveals that “we have tried to look and act normal.” These teachers have shared with their students the information about the disaster and how they can remain alert. Some of the teachers have also helped to build temporary learning centers where their students feel safer to learn before they go to school. These teachers have also helped their students buy books, stationery, bags, and uniforms.

Sharing experiences: The majority of the respondent-teachers encouraged students to share their personal experiences in class.  One teacher recounts “I started the class with sharing about the experience. Also asked the students to share how they helped the more unfortunate members of the community.” These teachers also engaged students in making plans to respond to the future disaster. For example, one of the teachers says:

 We all shared our stories together in the beginning, and I talked about the Psychological First Aid (PFA) on the first day of the class. We also talked about how we helped other people in trouble and how we should be helping them in the future. I told them that disasters like earthquake are natural and they come without any alert and we need to face them.

Another teacher shares:

I have started the class narrating my story of survival in the earthquake. The theme or topic of that day’s class was “I survived & I have a story to tell”. I first told them my story and asked them to share their stories of survival. Though the students felt hesitant to share their story, I facilitated them and gave them freedom to use any language and to use any format of storytelling, which they find convenient. As a result, the class became so interesting later. The next days, I have started teaching them with flexible time without sticking to the time schedule of a session. I am not teaching them seriously like I did before the earthquake. The flexible lesson and methods as per their convenience are used in the class so that they will not feel any burden in their mind while teaching. These days, I have stopped giving serious assignments, e.g. in written form but just reading assignment. I chose more interactive sessions which I believe can help them recover from the shock.

Fun activities: Some respondent-teachers are also doing various fun activities with the students. One teacher, for example, has shared her “muktak and gajal” with the class to help students forget the deep shock and sense of fear. Another teacher does not like the idea of sharing personal stories. He believes that it is necessary to “divert their mind to other topics [by] involving them in various creative, fun and entertaining activities such as painting, music, dance and funny quizzes including games.” Some of the respondent-teachers have also used songs, jokes, and newspaper readings as part of classroom activities.

Integrating disaster-related topics in EFL lessons

The respondent-teachers did not include the disaster-related topics in their lessons in the past. But they have started incorporating them after the recent earthquakes. While responding to the question of whether or not he includes the disaster-related topics in his lessons, one of the respondent-teachers asserts that:

Not much in the past but now I do include the disaster-related topics in my lesson. Yesterday, I was teaching them Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) and we discussed at quite length how we can engage the students in discussion to rebuild Nepal. My students came up with some wonderful activities that can be used in high school English class.

Likewise, another teacher says that “I frequently show them movies and videos for taking precautions about the quake.” Some of the respondent-teachers have already started engaging students in developing plans for staying safe in the future disasters. For example, one respondent has already “asked the students to draw pictures of the scene they have seen in and around their homes; to tell me stories they have; to tell me how they felt during and after the quake; to draw pictures on how they can stay safe etc.” These teachers are also engaging students in critical thinking activities and make them aware of how the disaster has affected some people unequally. For example, one of the respondent-teachers ask his students to discuss how the people in Tundikhel [temporary shelters] are living; how they manage food every day; and what they do during rainy days. At the same time, these teachers are also aware of the fact that the repetition of the disaster-related stories might keep students thinking about the devastation. For example, a teacher argues that “I do not want to continue …talking about disaster [as it] will further affect the students. One of students told me that she did not like to hear more about the earthquake as she has already been fed up of listening about it through family, media and friends.”

Conclusions

The preliminary findings of the survey show two critical points. First, it shows that  EFL teachers in the Nepal’s post-disaster situation are, going beyond the “schooled pedagogy”, focusing on the “pedagogy of disaster’ which includes multiple activities inside and outside of the classroom. By participating in rescue, relief, and recovery activities, the EFL teachers have redefined their role as a “change agent” and demonstrated profound agency to the rebuilding of the country. Second, the EFL teachers have shown their critical awareness about the issues associated with the disaster. As one of the teachers argues, the earthquake survivors should not be treated as “beggars” rather they should be considered as a source of knowledge. The storytelling activities alongside counseling and the integration of disaster-related topics in EFL lessons are important classroom strategies for teachers to help students cope with the traumatic experience from the disaster. Following Arjun Appadurai (1996), a famous sociocultural anthropologist and a major theorist in globalization studies, I reiterate that it is important for EFL teachers to engage students to “document” the stories and experiences from Nepal’s earthquake and share them with the global ELT community. This process will not only help EFL teachers develop teaching materials and an archive of knowledge, but also raises students’ critical awareness about society, culture and education.

References 

Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity al large: cultural dimensions of globalization (Vol. 1). U of Minnesota Press.

Quarantelli, E. L. (Ed.). (2005). What is a disaster?: a dozen perspectives on the question. Routledge.

[Acknowledgement: I would like to thank all the teachers who responded to the survey.]

‘The photography project’: Pictures in EFL teaching

Creativity, Critical Pedagogy, Critical Thinking, Teacher's Experience/anecdotes

The Choutari team has initiated a new ‘photography project’. The aim of the project is to promote the use of photography/pictures in EFL teaching. In this project, the Choutari team members share with the larger ELT community a variety of photos they take in different times and places. We do not create our own stories out of these pictures, rather we leave it open for multiple uses (e.g., essay writing, story writing/telling, critical pedagogy, group work, participatory research)as per the need of EFL teachers . In acknowledging the importance of photos/pictures in EFL teaching, this project is influenced by the “Critical Photography Theory” (Wells, 2015) and the “Critical Art Pedagogy” (Cary, 2011). We encourage our fellow colleagues all over the world to use these pictures (of course, acknowledgement is appreciated) for the classroom purposes and participate in the discussion on various issues concerning the use of photography in EFL teaching.

To begin, we share the photos taken by Prem Phyak, our past editor, in different locations and times in Nepal.

IMG_0671

IMG_2730

SDC15681

SDC15533SDC15545

IMG_3322SDC15962

Is Grammar a Liberating Force or an Obstacle for Communication?

Critical Thinking, Teacher's Experience/anecdotes
Instructor of English Educational Training Center, Surkhet
Ramesh Prasad Ghimire Instructor of English,
Educational Training Center, Surkhet

 

Initiation

In recent years some government schools of Nepal are slowly moving towards English medium instruction (EMI). Some schools have started teaching all the subjects except Nepali in English. This is happening mainly at primary level (grade 1 to 5). National Center for Educational Development (NCED) has made a decision to provide training for the school teachers who are interested in using English as a medium of instruction. NCED has made MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) with British Council (BC) for conduction training for the school teachers.

The project has been given a name National Initiative to Improve Teaching in English (NIITE). It is a three years project. The project focuses on training the primary level teachers (grade 1 to 5) but the main focus of the training according to Jovan Illic, the head of Programmes at British Council, is on the teachers who are teaching in grade three, four and five.

The target area of the project is all the seventy five districts of Nepal. However, the three districts of Nepal Surkhet, Nawalparasi, and Jhapa have been selected as the piloting district for conducting training for this year. These districts have been selected as piloting districts because the demand of the teachers was high from these districts. In the first year, it is aimed at training 7000 primary level teachers.

My experience

As an English trainer, I was always worried about our primary level teachers’ English. Last year I conducted EMI training in ETC Surkhet for 50 primary level teachers.  Most of the teachers’ English proficiency was very poor and my focus was on improving their English rather than equipping them with some skills and teaching techniques. I was so worried about their English. I was thinking how they could conduct English medium classes without having some proficiency in English. I even carried out an action research focusing on developing their English proficiency. I was not free from my worry throughout the year. This year too I have to train 150 primary level teachers in Educational Training Center (ETC), Surkhet.  The tormenting question that strikes me all the time is “How can a teacher teach in English without being able to use some English for general communication?”. And I hope majority of the teachers who are using English as a medium of instruction at the basic level might be worried about their own language ability.

Fortunately, I attained EMI training this year. It was master training of trainers (MTOT) jointly organized by NCED and BC in Nepalgunj from 14 to 18 March. One of the key message that I got from the training is grammar is not a thing to be worried about in communication. Grammar is, in fact, not a liberating force but an obstacle in effective communication. If you know nouns and verbs you can communicate. For example, if you are thirsty and want to drink water, you can say “Give water.” instead of “Can I have a glass of water, please?” I already had got this idea in University but it was, I think, in my subconscious level of mind.

Some of you may be worried about grammar especially with written English. But one thing that we should not forget here is that in EMI classes, grammar is less important than fluency and communication of meaning. If you are able to communicate your intended message to your reader or listener then your language is okay even if it is grammatically incorrect. Grammar develops itself in course of time if language is used for communication. This is the key of current communicative approaches to language teaching as well. If you look at how children learn their first language, you will find that they use single word or simply two words for communication and their message is perfectly intelligible for the adults. Their grammatical system develops much later in life. But it is important to have a good store of vocabulary. The lexical approach to language teaching also focuses on the prime role of vocabulary in learning a language and communication. Some other lessons that I learned from this training are:

  • First fluency then accuracy
  • Make your instruction as short as possible
  • Use very few words and much demonstration
  • Do not speak much in the classroom, encourage students to speak much in which they use whatever language they can
  • Teaching is very easy; just go into the classroom and give students something to do so that they forget that they are in the classroom.
  • Use a lot of visual aids and actions for communication of meaning

My instance

I am not happy with this government policy, however. I do not think that teaching in English guarantees quality in education.  In the name of using English in the classroom, the students should not be deprived from the basic understanding of the subject matter. Before making any new policy we need to look at our local ground realities and contexts. I personally think that we still need some years to make a jump to EMI in this county. I have observed some of the EMI classes in Surkhet and have some discussion with the teachers as well as students. I suggest dear teachers to use some Nepali or other mother tongues of the students to some extent in EMI classes. But one thing that impressed me was that the students said that they loved English classes much and they were more active smart and confident than the students who were in Nepali medium classes.

My plan

Now I am convinced that my trainee teachers who are participating in EMI training in ETC, Surkhet can handle EMI classes even if their language proficiency is not so advanced. My first action in this training will be to make my participants feel that English is not difficult and grammar is not so important in communication in this context. I am planning to make them feel this not by telling but by demonstrating.