Author Archives: Ju Seong Lee

Flora Debora Floris


Brief-bio Flora Debora Floris is a lecturer at Petra Christian University, Surabaya, Indonesia where she teaches general/business English and language teaching methodology courses. She has published and given talks on the integration of technology in English language teaching, teachers’ professional development and the teaching of English as an International language. Her recent published papers include Unlocking the potential of SAMR with Willy A. Renandya (English Teaching Professional, 2019), A conversation about supporting teacher research with Willy A. Renandya (ETAS Journal, 2018), and Mining Online L2 Learning Resources: From SLA Principles to Innovative Task Design with Willy A. Renandya and Bao Dat (Multilingual Matters, 2018).

Interview by Ju Seong Lee

1.Thank you for joining us on NNEST-of-the-month blog. Could you briefly tell us about your personal and professional background?

First of all, I would like to say thank you for giving me this valuable opportunity. It is a great honor to share my experiences with the readers of the NNEST of the Month Blog, one of my favorite columns to read.

In terms of academic background, I got my bachelor’s degree in English education from Widya Mandala Catholic University in Surabaya, Indonesia and my master’s degree (MA in ELT) from Assumption University in Bangkok, Thailand. The master program I enrolled in shaped my awareness of critical issues in ELT especially on the issues of teaching EIL. The director of the program Prof. Alan Maley and my lecturers came from different countries and spoke different first languages. Despite their background differences, all of them had graduated from reputable universities and had a lot of professional experience in ELT in various parts of the world. Their deep knowledge and hands-on experiences in teaching, doing research and publication have obviously influenced their classroom practices and inspired their MA students.

Professionally speaking, I have been working at the English Department of Petra Christian University in Surabaya, Indonesia since 2000. I teach a wide range of courses mostly on general English, business English, and language teaching methodology courses.

I also serve as a reviewer and editorial board member for some local and international journals including TEFLIN Journal, RELC Journal, and TESL-EJ. I also assist Dr. Willy A. Renandya, a senior language teacher educator of the National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore to maintain Teacher Voices ( which is an online Facebook forum for language teachers, textbook writers, curriculum specialists, and researchers in English language teaching or applied linguistics. The forum was established in 2011 and it now has more than 10,000 members from 40 countries.

2. One of your teaching/research interests includes pedagogical implications of English as an international language (EIL). How did you become interested in this topic?

I became interested in the issues of teaching EIL during my MA study when I took a World Englishes course under the guidance of Dr. Mario Saraceni (currently Reader in English Language and Linguistics in the School of Languages and Area Studiesat the University of Portsmouth, UK). The course really opened my eyes and mind to the world that lies outside of American and British English. The issues of Englishes, Braj Kachru’s circles, native and non-native teachers, English as a medium of instruction, and many others were things that I never thought about at that time. The World Englishes course was a revelation; and I grew my interest on the teaching of English as an international language from this course. On the second year of my MA study, I started my publication journey. My first published article was on the issue of using English as a medium of instruction at Indonesian universities (see Floris, 2002).

3. Can you share a couple of activities of how ELT practitioners can integrate EIL-informed pedagogy into the classroom?

I would recommend readers to refer to the following sources as they present some suggested activities for teaching EIL.

  • Floris, F.D. (2014). Introducing English as an International Language (EIL) to Pre-Service Teachers in a World English Course. PASAA Journal, 47 (January – June 2014), 215 – 231.
  • Matsuda, A. (2017) Preparing Teachers to Teach English as an International Language. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Another good reference isTEFL Equity Advocates website which presented lesson plans aiming at raising students’ awareness of the issues of native speakerism and other EIL issues (

4 . Why is it important to introduce EIL-related topics to pre- and in-service teachers in Indonesia?

Well, for me there are at least three major reasons. First, English is used more as L2 than as a mother tongue, and, consequently, the notion that English is exclusively owned by the native-speaking communities is no longer valid as the non-native speakers now also have a right to be heard in matters affecting the language (Widdowson, 1994).

Second, English is now the most widely taught as a second and foreign language in the world (Crystal, 2003). More and more people learn the language from teachers of English to be able to communicate in English. In this global era, I believe that the goal of teaching English should be as what Matsuda said, i.e.  to prepare students as competent users of English as an International Language (EIL) (Matsuda, 2018).

Third, the majority (up to 80%) of English language teachers are non-native speakers of the language (Canagarajah, 1999); and the majority of trained ESL/EFL teachers are Non-Native English Speaker Teachers (NNESTs) (Graddol, 2006). Sadly speaking, however, some studies conducted by Reves & Medgyes (1994), Samimy & Brutt-Griffler (1999), Inbar-Lourie’s (2001), and Llurda & Huguet (2003) (as cited in Braine, 2005) show that many NNESTs still consider their NEST colleagues as better language teachers despite of their academic and professional qualifications. A small study towards 11 pre-service teachers taking my course also showed similar findings. At the beginning of the course all pre-service teachers believed that NESTs would serve as the best language teachers because English is the language of native speakers and it is used as their daily communication tool (Floris, 2013). To date, I still find such belief among my student-teachers and our graduates. I find it frustrating when I realize that even our very good student-teachers and graduates still see themselves as imperfect users of English who need to be taught proper English by native speakers.

I was very fortunate that the Head of the English Department and my colleagues strongly supported the idea of having a course Teaching English as an International Language for our student-teachers. The course aims to increase pre-service teachers’ awareness and favorable attitude towards EIL and the teaching of EIL. I also try to introduce the EIL concept in some other subjects such as in Current Issues in Language Educationin which our student-teachers are asked to critically examine various teaching approaches.

5.What are some pedagogical challenges when designing and implementing EIL-related activities? How can teachers overcome these challenges?

It is very challenging to introduce the concept of EIL to people who feel that native speakers are the best models, the best variety is American or British English, or best teaching approach is the one developed and taught by the ‘white’.

Thanks to the technology, nowadays we have unlimited online resources that we can use in introducing EIL and designing EIL-related activities. The International Dialects of English Archive (, for example, presents more than 1,000 English recordings made by people (natives) living in 100 different countries. This is a very good website to introduce our students or teacher trainees to various Englishes in the world. Another good website is The TEFLology Podcast ( which presents discussions on current issues in ELT. Featured speakers come from various countries and teach in many different parts of the world showing that nativeness should not be a major issue in language teaching. I also need to mention Matsuda’s 2017 book and TEFL Equity Advocates website as sources to get ideas on how to bring EIL topics to language classrooms. I believe there would be more practical sources or references available in the future.

6. Could you tell us about your current and future teaching/research plans?

I am preparing two book chapters on teacher professional development, two articles on EIL, and one edited book on inspirational stories from English classrooms. I hope to get them all published in 2019. I have just started doing my doctorate in a state university in Indonesia, and I am planning to conduct my research on the issue of teacher research. It is quite challenging to manage my time as I also have classes to teach and children to take care of. I am trying my best though.


Braine, G. (2005). A history of research on non-native speaker English teachers. In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-native language teachers: Perceptions, challenges and contributions to the profession(pp. 13-23). New York: Springer.

Canagarajah, A. S. (1999). Interrogating the “native speaker fallacy”: Non-linguistic roots, non-pedagogical results. In G. Braine (Ed.),Non-native educators in English language teaching(pp. 77-92). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language (2nd ed.).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Graddol, D. (2006). English next. Retrieved March 1, 20-9, from‐next‐2006.pdf

Floris, F.D. (2002). Immersion program at Indonesian universities: Good or evil?. English Edu, 1 (2), 367-378.

Floris, F.D. (2013). Exploring Beliefs of Pre-Service Teachers toward English as an International Language. ThaiTESOL Journal, 26 (1), 46-75.

Floris, F.D. (2014). Introducing English as an International Language (EIL) to Pre-Service Teachers in a World English Course. PASAA Journal, 47 (January – June 2014), 215 – 231.

Matsuda, A. (2017) Preparing Teachers to Teach English as an International Language. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Matsuda, A. (2018). Is Teaching English as an International Language All about Being Politically Correct? RELC Journal, 49(1), 24–35.

Widdowson, H.G. (1994) The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly28 (2), 377–381.

Cristina Sanchez-Martin


Cristina Sanchez-Martin has recently earned her PhD in English Studies from Illinois State University and will begin her job as assistant professor in applied linguistics at Indiana University of Pennsylvania in the 2018 Fall semester. Her work revolves around investigating how humans understand and navigate composing and language practices across languages and in transnational contexts.

  1. Could you tell us about your personal and professional background? What led you to pursuing your doctoral study at Illinois State University (ISU)?

I was born in Salamanca (Spain), a region traditionally associated with standard language ideologies in Spanish. Since I was little I started to become interested in “non-standard” language practices by listening to my grandparents and people from a small rural town. After high-school, I decided to continue pursuing a career in the humanities. The university of Salamanca offered the option to complete two BA degrees simultaneously in Hispanic Philology and English Studies, which took a bit longer than a traditional program, but it was worth it. Retrospectively, I think that experience helped me to see the types of things that scholars in one area study as opposed to the other one. In other words, I started to realize the overlaps and gaps within a field of study. In my third year, I applied for a study abroad program called Erasmus in Durham University (UK). This study abroad program was funded by the European Union to facilitate mobility in Europe, not just to promote student exchange but also the exchange of knowledge and expertise. Once again, it was an extremely rewarding experience at the personal and educational levels. It was interesting to see what English Studies meant in the context of the UK, as opposed to Spain. And, the other way around: I noticed the types of things that students of Spanish Philology (which was called Hispanic Studies there) learned in the UK, which needless to say, added new and distinctive aspects to what I was learning in Salamanca. I feel like I started to make sense of learning as situated, and to look for the dualism and networked aspects of transnationalism to understand my own growth as a language user. Thanks to one of my mentors, Dr. Izaskun Elorza, I started to become involved in organizing conferences and to participate in scholarly events related to language and mobility. I took her advice and completed an MA degree in Translation and Intercultural Mediation, the closest field of inquiry to what in the U.S. is rhetoric and composition. With my mentors Dr. Ovidi Carbonell and Dr. John Hyde, I learned about the linguistic aspects relevant to “translating the other” (Carbonell, 1997). I began to investigate the relationship between language and composing/translating from a social justice standpoint. I also completed a MA degree in English teaching, which prompted pedagogical questions regarding all the other dual experiences I had had before. Connecting the dots between previous experiences is what led me to apply for the PhD at Illinois State University. In particular, the work of Dr. Lisya Seloni clicked with me. An interdisciplinary program, where I could bridge together my previous experiences in English teaching, translation, writing, and linguistics, seemed perfect to continue looking for answers (and to pose more questions!).

  1. As a professional development coordinator in the writing program leadership team at Illinois State University, you have been mentoring international graduate students. What major challenges do they face? What strategies do successful international students employ to cope with these challenges?

I am grateful to have had the opportunity to work for the writing program at Illinois State University in the capacity of professional development coordinator. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Dr. Joyce Walker, director of the program, for having provided the space for practical grounded pedagogies that enable productive conversations on language diversity. The philosophies of the writing program centered around the idea of writing research in the world from a Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) perspective, and its pedagogical application (Pedagogical Cultural Historical Activity Theory -PCHAT) certainly facilitate the work of international graduate students and instructors. The idea is that there isn’t one type of writing that is “good writing”, in the same way that there isn’t one type of language that works for all situations. In other words, instead of telling students “this is what good writing is like” and “this is what proper and good language is like”, we help students to become researchers of situated writing and language practices that are meaningful to them. For international instructors, this approach allows them to illustrate to students their own writing and language identities as they as used to navigate unexpected and new situations across languages, borders, modalities, etc. And perhaps more obviously, the experiences of international instructors who speak more languages than English contribute to challenging language ideologies like the myth of linguistic homogeneity (Matsuda, 2006) and monolingualism (Horner et al. 2011). However, we all have previous knowledge that enables learning as well as knowledge that prevents or blocks it. For example, some of the recurrent challenges that I have encountered have to do with what we think learning and teaching are like. Sometimes we have ingrained ideologies regarding the roles of students (they are supposed to receive the knowledge from the teacher) and teachers (the ones who provide objective answers to students). To create and maintain a productive learning environment, we have to identify these ideologies and engage in meaningful conversations in the classroom. From my experience, for international instructors, especially if they have learned English in Foreign Language contexts, this might be a challenge. If they have learned to use standard language in their essay writing (or other school genres frequently included in the curriculum of English language courses), they might feel unprepared to respond to students’ non-standard language and writing practices if they understand their role as teachers in traditional ways. In other words, they might not feel legitimized to help students with their writing (especially if students are users of mainstream Englishes). Finally, their identities as a minority international graduate students and speakers of other languages intersect with other identity markers of difference, so learning about how one’s identities are taken up in the classroom space is essential to become reflective teachers.

  1. What recommendations do you have for language instructors and language program coordinators to better assist international students?

To me, it is essential to attend to their (academic) socialization, which moves beyond academic settings and it takes place through participatory practice. The work of scholars like Sandra Zappa-Hollman, Patricia A. Duff, and Lisya Seloni (among others) provides great insights into socialization, which I see as an “innovative, transformative, and sometimes contested process” (Kobayashi, Zappa-Hollman, & Duff, 2017, p. 293). In addition, as Zappa-Hollman and Duff’s 2015 study demonstrated, the framework of “individual networks of practice (INoP)”, which builds on the theoretical constructs of community of practice and social network theory, was useful to investigate how INoP places the student at the center of his/her socialization process in relation to unique networks and contexts. Through this framework, the authors found that students’ academic literacy development was significantly influenced by “humans and other forms of support” (p. 25) beyond their professors and classmates, demonstrating the “complexity and unpredictability” of language socialization (p. 26). If this is part of students’ learning, classrooms pedagogies and programmatic initiatives have to account for it through realistic activities, projects, learning outcomes and assessment practices. The volume Collaborations & Innovations: Supporting Multilingual Writers Across Campus Units (2017) edited by Kim, J.Y, Hammil, M.J., Matsuda, P.K. (2017) offers great ideas for the types of cross-unit collaborative practices that can be implemented in and in between different classroom spaces and other settings/institutions on campus.  Finally, international students have a lot to offer, particularly in the context of increased internationalization and/or diversification of U.S. institutions. If we listen to their experiences, we can all become more knowledgeable of what learning is like in the 21st century.

  1. You have recently completed your dissertation “Teaching writing through transformation: Linguistically diverse writing teachers’ enactments of transactional writing and linguistic diversity”. What is your core message that you want to convey?

My dissertation was a qualitative study in which I used constructivist grounded theory and multiple ethnographically-oriented case studies to investigate what linguistic diversity looks like in first-year composition courses mostly populated by so-called “native speakers of American English”. Specifically, I investigated how linguistically-diverse (“non-native”) English instructors used their previous knowledge of languages and transnational writing to teach composition. The results of my study indicated that the classroom becomes a contested space, where language as a concept is reconstructed and redefined based on lived experiences. These case studies showed that instructors understand linguistic diversity in divergent ways, embracing their own lived experiences as subjects with intersectional identities (as well as their students’) as learning opportunities to theorize language and writing practices. The data also suggested that linguistically diverse writing instructors disrupt the myths of linguistic homogeneity and monolingualism in composition in various ways. However, challenging these myths did not happen without obstacles. Some of the issues that linguistically diverse writing instructors must deal with are the dichotomy between native and non-native speakers, a deficit mindset, and the tokenization of linguistic diversity. In general, engaging in discussions about these aspects proves to be transformative and contributes to their growth as reflective teachers and their students’ learning.

  1.  During your doctoral studies, you taught “Gender in the Humanities”, and attended a professional seminar “Strategies to address the challenges of female educators” at ISU. How did you become interested in gender issues? Can you share a couple of strategies that can be applicable to NNEST issues?

As a transnational scholar, I have had to think about how my identity influences how I navigate academic spaces and vice versa. At the beginning, I wasn’t sure about why I felt uncomfortable and unwelcomed in some situations, but as I started reading feminist scholarship, I realized what was going on and that other minorities go through similar issues. In multiple occasions, I have had to account for myself while others didn’t have to. For example, during my graduate career I worked as an English teacher at the English language institute in a public university in the U.S. and as the ESL specialist at a liberal arts university. In both cases, I was frequently identified as a “non-native” English teacher or writing specialist through unproductive statements and questions, which to me, was an indirect “inspection” of my pedagogical, linguistic and writing skills. If no productive conversations follow and there isn’t an honest desire to learn from each other’s experiences, those situations become othering practices. Feminist scholarship has helped me to position myself and to identify discriminatory ideologies and behaviors that do not contribute to the promotion of equality regardless of the identity traits used to mark people (nativeness, gender identification, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, class, ability, language, etc.). Therefore, the strategies I recommend are 1) become familiarized with some feminist scholarship and with the work of linguists like Kubota, Belcher, Park, Seloni, and Pavlenko (among many others), 2) identify your own privileges as well as oppressions, 3) document, or at least, identify how you move across spaces (including classrooms) and what your body tells you about those spaces and who inhabits them, 4) share your experiences with your support networks and mentors, and 5) be a reflective human!

  1. Could you tell us about your current and future projects?

I am interested in integrating Pedagogical Cultural Historical Activity Theory (PCHAT), the practical application of Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) (Walker, 2017; Prior, Walker, and Riggert-Keiffer, 2019), in writing courses for multilingual students. In terms of writing teacher education, I plan to contribute to conversations around the potential of transdisciplinarity as a methodological and pedagogical lens to understand the relationship between language, writing, and mobility for the 21st century.  Finally, I hope to develop a feminist mentoring initiative for and by linguistically diverse students and to add to conversations on (academic) socialization.

Thank you!


Carbonell, O. (1997). Traducir al otro. Traducción, exotismo, poscolonialismo. Cuenca: Ediciones de la Universidad de Castilla la Mancha.  

Horner, B., Lu, M. Z., Royster, J. J., & Trimbur, J. (2011). Language difference in writing: Toward a translingual approach. College English73(3), 303-321.

Kim, J.Y, Hammil, M.J., Matsuda, P.K. (2017). Intensive English Programs and First-Year Composition: Bridging the Gap. Collaborations & Innovations: Supporting Multilingual Writers Across Campus Units, 121-135.

Kobayashi, M., Zappa-Hollman, S., & Duff, P. (2017). Academic discourse socialization. In P. Duff & S. May (Eds.), Language socialization. Encyclopedia of language and education (3rd ed.). New York: Springer.

Matsuda, P. K. (2006). The myth of linguistic homogeneity in US college composition. College English68(6), 637-651.

Prior, P., Walker, R.J, and Riggert-Keiffer, D. (2019). Languaging the Rhetorical Tradition: Pedagogical CHAT in middle school and college. Forthcoming.

Walker, R.J. (2017). CHATPerson and the ANT -The Story of Pedagogical CHAT. [Handout]. Retrieved from

Zappa-Hollman, S. & Duff, P. A. (2015). Academic English socialization through individual networks of practice. TESOL Quarterly, 49(2), 333-368.

Prof. Li-Shih Huang

Dr. Li-Shih

An Interview with Prof. Li-Shih Huang, University of Victoria, British Columbia

Interviewer: Madhukar K C


  1. Thank you very much for joining us on the NNEST-of-the-month blog. Could you briefly tell us about your background and how you got interested in learning language and becoming an educator, especially a teacher of English?

Thank you for the kind invitation and the opportunity, and above all, for what you and the NNEST-IS members do in your advocacy work for NNEST in our profession. Since I am someone who tends to shy away from talking about myself, I will instead focus on the serendipitous occurrences in my life that led me to where I am today. Before specializing in second language education, I had worked in the advertising industry and subsequently for a prestigious group in the hospitality sector for seven years. During that time, I was also teaching EFL at private schools any time I got a chance. While moving through the organization’s ranks, working long hours on all the major holidays because of the nature of the business, an opportunity arose for me to take on teaching English for Specific Purposes at a hospitality university, which I took. Discovering that teaching, and not the success of climbing the corporate ladder or securing major sponsors for hosting over a hundred events a year, was what really spoke to my heart, I decided then to return to Canada to pursue a master’s degree in education, enrolling initially in the comparative education program. But then one evening while waiting for my class to begin, I decided to sit in on a class in second language learning taught by Birgit Harley, and that evening changed the trajectory of my life. The next day I switched to another program, and, as the saying goes, the rest is history.


  1. What are your main areas of interest for research, publishing, and presentation at conferences? How do you think your academic publishing and your presentations at conferences contribute to the literature of NNEST issues, World Englishes, ELF, and EIL?

My interests in research and scholarly dissemination extend quite broadly, including areas such as EAP needs and outcomes assessment, corpus-aided teaching and learning, learner strategies in language learning and language testing, and reflective learning. Gratefully I’ve had support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC), the Educational Testing Service (ETS), and the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) for my work in these areas. In publishing and presentations, I try to devote my attention to both scholarly and professional audiences, perhaps the latter more, as I expressed in this op-ed, which I authored a few years back. This choice is also evident in the nearly five dozen articles or posts I have published for teaching purposes. I’m not certain how much I have contributed to the areas you specify, but an area I have devoted regular attention to is raising the awareness of learners and instructors about ways to support NNES learners and teachers. Over the past decade, these efforts have included 291 presentations and workshops I have delivered across 25 units, both within and beyond my institution.


  1. Could you share with us your memories of some of the opportunities and challenges you encountered as a consequence of your NNES identity while working as a language-teaching professional in Canada?

I am fortunate because I have been afforded opportunities to continue to develop my skills and expertise, and I rarely, if ever, have felt that my differences impeded me from pursuing what I do. Although it’s been pointed out that pronunciation may be the linguistic feature that faces the most judgment as it is the most noticeable, such that one’s accent can easily evoke bias in others, people’s perceptions about who we are do not define us. Rather, our accents and linguistic backgrounds are part of who we are, as I have often shared with my students since the late 1990s, when the “native-like” pronunciation model and accent “elimination” reigned supreme. I intentionally, and critically, use pedagogical tasks in my own teaching to question previously held assumptions, to honor my students’ voices, and to shift how learners view themselves as they come to see that differences are not deficiencies to be eliminated but rather can enrich our voices and facilitate our development. To me, perhaps the biggest challenge lies not in teaching the what-and-how of communication, but in expanding the ability to suspend judgment and to question our own assumptions and interpretations, since these assumptions, which are often deeply rooted in our upbringing and experiences, are critical to transforming our perspectives. Challenges surely abound in what we do every day, challenges that may relate directly or indirectly to our NNES identity and, by extension, to our qualifications to meet our students’ learning needs. Challenges, however, often come with meaningful and rewarding moments that let us know that what we do matters, that we are making a difference in the lives of language learners. My position has indeed enabled me to see the challenges of learners from the viewpoints both of someone who has been trained to tackle those challenges, and someone who has gone through those challenges herself. These perspectives have in turn uniquely benefited me in designing and implementing various research and service programs in my areas of specialization.


  1. You were awarded the Mary Finocchiaro Award for Excellence in the Development of Pedagogical Materials by TESOL International owing to your expertise and creativity in designing pedagogical materials. You were also the recipient of the 2014 Humanities Teaching Excellence Award and the 2017 TESOL Award for an Outstanding Paper on NNEST Issues. Could you highlight the main thrust of your research paper on NNEST issues to our valued readers from TESOL community and beyond?

In my research under one of my current SSHRC grants, I am working to contribute to refugee resettlement efforts by developing culturally sensitive language training, which is critical to integrating refugee learners into the Canadian workforce and society. Faced with limited funding and resources, Canada is having to address enormous challenges related to language training as it seeks to resettle an unprecedented influx of Syrian refugees. As headlines have reported, over 36 cities across Canada are encountering critical problems related to language training for refugees. My work, which draws on approaches to teaching language that are backed by the most up-to-date theories and research, aims to identify the language-learning needs of the Syrian refugees and integrate them into a language-training program that builds on their own rich linguistic and cultural backgrounds. The project incorporates several sources of data to capture their specific needs, including needs assessment surveys, interviews with learners and teachers, and learner corpora. This work will also help practitioners working with refugee learners, and will be extended to any instructor interested in developing lessons or units that are grounded in theory and empirically substantiated, and that draw on learners’ own languages to scaffold English-language learning based on task performance. The final phase of this work will involve empirically substantiating the instructional materials and approach.


  1. You are currently an Associate Professor of Applied Linguistics and the Learning and Teaching Scholar-in-Residence. What courses do you teach for graduate programs at UVic? As an NNES teacher educator, what opportunities and challenges have you experienced working at your university so far?

I teach mainly core courses that survey key areas in the broader field of applied linguistics and research methods. A great deal of my time in the graduate program is devoted to mentoring the students’ research projects required for their doctoral candidacy papers or theses/dissertations. These have involved a wide range of topics, including testing and assessment, learner strategies, refugee resettlement, EAP needs, instructional approaches and methods for French as a second language, language-teaching methods in language revitalization, Japanese pedagogical material development, second language writing, game-based learning, and vocabulary learning in Russian. For me personally, one of my biggest ongoing challenges, as for many of us in our line of work, revolves around work-life balance. I am often asked whether or not I sleep! Maintaining a high level of engagement and time commitment to do the job well and meet personal and professional expectations is time consuming. Being an NNES instructor and imposing high standards of work on myself often doubles the amount of time I need to complete my work. There are also the issues posed by the growing evidence for inherent gender and race-related biases, whether explicit or implicit, in student evaluations. So being acknowledged by awards for pedagogical material design, teaching, and research and being placed in the category of “a very small, very exceptional coterie of professors who earn top ratings from students” has been truly uplifting and heartening. As an NNES teacher educator, I see a great many opportunities working with the next generation of teachers and teacher educators. This past term, for example, among three articles published by ELT journals in 2017 that I offered as options for my students to choose one to explore (following my approach detailed in my article), the group selected the article about equity and enrichment in the TESOL practicum. The wonderful discussion that ensued inspired in all of us a great deal of hope and optimism about the progress of the profession in the hands of these future teachers, NES and NNES alike, with whom I have had the privilege to work. Raising awareness is a first step to creating ripple effects that can transform our own individual and collective practices, and thereby change the state of our professional community.


  1. What advice would you give to your NNES students at UVic and TESOL professionals who wish to succeed as EFL instructors and researchers in Canadian schools/colleges/universities? What advice would you provide to graduate students (Master’s and Ph.D.) trying to publish their research works in peer-reviewed journals?

I’m not sure I have the best advice to offer those wishing to succeed as instructors and researchers in Canada because this work has been a life-long quest of my own. In my work of training future ELT professionals, my deep commitment to connecting theory, research, and practice is known to any student who has taken my courses. These courses are carefully built around facilitating various tasks and activities that require students to experiment throughout the term, so they can learn experientially how to apply the theories and discussions they have read in research articles written for practitioners. Specifically, they make the application through their own experimentations in a recursive and cyclical process involving feedback, reflection, and revisions, as they build their professional practical knowledge and repertoires. Never stop experimenting with your approaches and methods, and never stop challenging your own assumptions, are not only words of advice for my students, but are also what I practice personally. For practicing teachers, I would go a step further to encourage them to share their discoveries with other instructors, whether informally or through presentations and publications, as I have also sought to do over the years. For instance, I have written many posts for various trade publications that are the fruit of such experimentations.

It’s fair to say that in order to connect theory, research, and practice in this way, I believe that practitioners must stay abreast of the literature and research on pedagogy so they can make informed decisions. I am a firm believer that no one can tell you unequivocally what will work best for you in your own teaching contexts, or that there is a one-size-fits-all solution to your teaching challenges. And certainly, no study in the sea of literature can tell your particular story or directly answer your own teaching-related questions. It is only through experimenting and testing our own hypotheses—whether informally through trial and error, or formally if your institution supports such professional development through action research or SoTL (scholarship of teaching and learning)—that we can continue to reflect on our experiences and improve our practices. Seek out peers or colleagues who share similar interests and would be interested in collaborating on research directly relevant to your own teaching. Then mobilize or translate that knowledge so that those who share similar challenges can benefit from your insights. For early career teachers, my advice would be to seek out opportunities to hone your skills and develop your expertise. Speaking from my personal experience, the countless hours I have put into developing a lesson, course, series, or program, whether remunerated or not, cannot be replaced by any amount of training, classroom learning, or textbook reading.

For graduate students trying to publish their work, there is no shortage of advice offered by those who have dedicated their lives and work to helping other emerging (and established) scholars publish (e.g., @write4research, @ThomsonPat, and @explorstyle). This is a complex area that deserves more than a brief response, but if I had to choose one piece of advice from which I would have benefited during my early career (and as I look at the manuscripts I never returned to!), I would encourage these students to look at “revise and resubmit” in a positive light. (This is one reason I encourage graduate students in all my courses to revise and resubmit their work as many times as they like.) Take heed of the astute advice offered by Robert MacIntosh and the wise words of Robert Graves: “There is no such thing as good writing. Only good rewriting.” Writers have different approaches to writing, and there are no right or wrong answers; find out what works optimally for you—when, where, how, with whom, and why. Learn to deal with (even harsh) rejections because they come with the territory, and write your own story of perseverance.


  1. We often come across discriminatory job advertisements on social media, websites of various ELT/TEFL/TESL industry (i.e., universities, colleges, private language and training schools) that tend to perpetuate the ideology of native speakerism. Could you shed light on Canadian EFL/ELT academic contexts with regard to hiring policies and practices? How do you think ELT/TESOL educators should address this prevalent issue of bias and discrimination to bring social justice and professional equity?

This is a really challenging, sensitive, and emotionally charged question for many, and one that is difficult for me to respond thoughtfully and succinctly. I cannot speak to the Canadian ELT context with regard to hiring policies and practices because I do not have the expertise, nor have I immersed myself in the literature enough to form an objective viewpoint. However, I do think it fair to say that it is not uncommon to come across or experience discriminatory practices. My most recent encounters have been related to, in one case, serving on a search committee where I experienced overt biases that for me shattered the façade of the hiring process. Another case relates to a hiring post listing “no Asian face” and “native speaker only” as among the qualifications shared by an admirable, outspoken twitter user. The eye-opening experience was the number of responses arguing that there was nothing wrong with making “native speakers only” one of the eligibility criteria, which underscores the challenges ahead of us. Having said that, I also recognize that in recent years, because the ideology of native speakerism has risen to the surface, our collective consciousness of its ramifications has also increased considerably, thanks to scholars and practitioners whose work has prompted reflection and a call for change. Various professional bodies have also taken a strong stance on equity issues related to our profession. My own awareness of these issues, though not necessarily related to hiring, has also greatly increased because of recent life occurrences heightened by the current geopolitical climate. I’ve learned that statements about diversity, inclusion, and equity are not enough, nor are they sufficient in combating implicit or structural bias and discrimination. In the post-secondary context, it is, however, encouraging to see the work by Frances Henry and other race-focused and social justice scholars who have joined forces to push us to think and examine more deeply the ways that race and racism play out on Canadian campuses over issues related to equity in pay and hiring, the lack of visibility of racialized faculty, and racial discrimination. These have been treated using empirical evidence in their work titled “The Equity Myth: Racialization and Indigeneity at Canadian Universities” (2017).

Certainly, we still have a long road ahead to affect changes at the micro- and macro-levels, but I also believe in my heart of hearts that, first and foremost, one does not have to engage in discriminatory practices in order to be an impediment to equity in our profession. Silence will do it. Silence is never neutral. As Nelson Flores has encouraged us: “Disrupt the notion of right/white ELT qualifications by sharing experiences of racist nativism in order to prompt reflection” (2017). Above all, I hope that we will all consider lending support to our less privileged colleagues. It’s one thing to proclaim to care about equity and diversity, but another thing entirely to put such a proclamation into action. To borrow the words of Deb DeHass, “It is everyone’s responsibility, every day and at every level, to create the culture that can make [inclusion] happen.” It starts with me, with you, and with the voices of many other people.


Work cited in order of appearance:

Huang, L.-S. (2012, October 2). There’s a disconnect between “scholarly value” and how we reach audiences who need research. LSE Impact Blog. The London School of Economics and Political Science. Retrieved from

Flaherty C. (2016, January 11). Bias against female instructors. Inside Higher Education. Retrieved from

Huang, L.-S. (2015, September 25). Getting the horses to drink: Three ways to promote student ownership of reading assignment. Faculty Focus. Retrieved from

MacIntosh, R. (2018, February 1). Career advice: How to handle ‘revise and resubmit’ requests. Times Higher Education. Retrieved from

Henry, F., Dua, E., James, C. E., Kobayashi, A., Li, P., Ramos, H., & Smith, M. S. (2017). The equity myth: Racialization and indigeneity at Canadian universities. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.

Flores, N. (2017, September 20). Not having the right/white qualifications for English language teaching. Retrieved from

Wittenberg-Cox, A. (2017, August 3). Deloitte’s radical attempt to reframe diversity. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from

Nicola Galloway


Dr. Galloway

Dr. Nicola Galloway works as a Lecturer in Education (TESOL) at the University of Edinburgh, where she teaches a course on Global Englishes language Teaching. She has written two books on the topic and is currently finalising her recent monograph, Rose, H and Galloway, N ( 2018). Global Englishes Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press.

Interviewer: Ju Seong (John) Lee

1. Thank you for joining us on NNEST-of-the-month blog. Could you briefly tell us about your personal and professional background?

I began my teaching career as an Assistant Language Teacher (ALT) on the JET (Japan Exchange Teaching) Programme in Japan, where I worked for two years as a ‘native’ English-speaking teacher. After gaining my MSc in TESOL in Scotland, I returned to Japan to work at a university. After six years, I moved to one of Japan’s first English Medium Instruction (EMI) universities, where I was responsible for EAP curriculum design and evaluation. During this time, I completed a PhD at The University of Southampton in the field of Global Englishes. I then joined The University of Edinburgh in 2012 to take on the role of a Lecturer in Education (TESOL). I am also the course co-ordinator for a course on Second Language Teaching Curriculum and Global Englishes for Language Teaching (GELT).

2. Your research interests include English learners’ attitudes towards English and ELT, Global Englishes (GE) curriculum design and materials development. How did you become interested in these areas?

My research interests in the pedagogical implications of Global Englishes stem from my experience on the JET programme. I initially completed a joint MA degree in Geography/Politics, not in Education. Despite having a future goal of becoming a teacher (a primary school teacher at that time), I had no experience of teaching English and did not have any teaching qualifications. During my time in Japan, I soon felt very inferior to my non-native speaking counterparts, as they had a much superior knowledge of the English language, teaching experience and knowledge of the students’ mother tongue and educational context, and I could not speak one word of Japanese at that time! I began to question my role in Japan – why I was being asked to change my Scottish accent and write in American English, why I was generally being used as a tape recorder – “Stand up Nicola. Read from…. Students, repeat after Nicola” and why all of these Japanese students were imitating a Scottish girl trying to speak with an American accent. I also started to wonder why my students were learning English in this small mountain village, who their future interlocutors would be and why there was this focus on America. Basically, I was questioning why I was there and whether I was of any real use to the students.

I returned to Scotland to further my education and to embark on a career in TESOL. My MSc dissertation focused on the employment of ‘native’ English speaking teachers in Japan (Assistant Language Teachers in Japan: Imperialism or Empowerment?). My interest in this area increased further when I returned to Japan to work in a university setting, where I taught content-based courses and EAP courses in English. I began asking myself more questions, such as: How do my students use English outside of the classroom?  To what extent is the native English-speaking model, which is being taught by a native English speaker, meeting their needs? What are their attitudes towards English and their teachers? What is their understanding of the role of English as a global language? Is there a more appropriate way to prepare them to use English as a global language? As I researched the topic, it became evident that the lack of an extensive body of research at the classroom level was problematic.  Theoretical developments were outpacing research and I felt that practitioners may need, and benefit from, more practical suggestions. This encouraged me to embark on a PhD at The University of Southampton with Professor Jennifer Jenkins. I examined students’ attitudes towards English and ELT in an Expanding Circle context from a fresh perspective. My study looked at their attitudes towards English and learning the language, what factors influence these attitudes and how a course in Global Englishes could influence these attitudes. In a sense, it was an action research project and I initially hoped that my doctoral research would not only contribute to theory, but also help inform my own teaching practice. However, after submitting my thesis, I returned home to Scotland and took up a post at The University of Edinburgh. I introduced a course there on Global Englishes Language Teaching and have recently become interested in incorporating Global Englishes into teacher education as part of a bigger aim towards instigating a paradigm shift in the field of TESOL away from native English speaking norms.

 3. You have consistently encouraged English teachers to consider incorporating GE into ELT. What are the most rewarding and challenging aspects of implementing GE?

The rise of English as a global language has changed the foundations of how the language is taught and learned. The pedagogical implications of this have led many scholars to call for a paradigm shift in the field of TESOL. This shift is necessary to ensure the TESOL classroom is reflective of the new sociolinguistic landscape of the 21st century. Several concrete proposals for change have also been put forward, and these have been grouped together into a Global Englishes Language Teaching (GELT) framework (Galloway, 2011; Galloway & Rose, 2015). GELT is not a prescriptive model for ELT. It aims to emphasise the diversity of global teaching practices and the diversity of students’ needs around the globe. It is a student-centered framework for curricula that aims to enable TESOL practitioners to critically evaluate their curricula in relation to Global Englishes. It emphasizes the need to raise awareness of the issues associated with the spread of English and to prepare learners to use English in various global and local communities of practice. By promoting a more global ownership of English it is hoped that GELT will help emancipate non-native speakers from native speaker norms.

However, instigating a paradigm shift is a challenging task. Despite the growing debate on the need for a critical examination of ELT/TESOL in relation to the globalization of English, the industry continues to focus on native English norms. Teacher training manuals and ELT materials continue to focus on static representations of English and constrained representations of future use of the language with native speakers in inner circle cultures. This is unfortunate, given that ELF is now the most common use of the language today. The movement towards GELT requires a conceptual transition, in terms of both how the language itself is viewed and how it is taught. Many ‘barriers’ have been identified (Galloway and Rose, 2015) and it is important to acknowledge the various environmental constraints to implementing change that may exist in different contexts. Testing is one of these barriers and there continues to be a mismatch between the English used by test-takers and the English they are assessed on. Measuring test-takers on their intercultural strategic competence and their ability to use ELF in international situations may also be daunting for TESOL practitioners who are used to testing students on ‘errors’ or deviations from the ‘standard’ norm. A further ‘barrier’ relates to the attachment to the idea of a ‘standard’ English and such a deeply ingrained ideology is difficult to challenge. Many TESOL practitioners, and students, cling to ‘standard’ norms and have fixed ideas about how English should be taught.

 4. You are currently involved in a research project with our previous guest, Dr. Heath Rose. How do you think GE can be incorporated in teacher education?

Heath and I are currently finishing our monograph with Cambridge University Press, Rose and Galloway (2018) Global Englishes for Language Teaching, that will be published later in the year. It aims to build on the growing literature on the pedagogical implications of Global Englishes research, which includes a number of edited books devoted to the topic of ELT (e.g., Alsagoff, 2012; Matsuda, 2012) and articles in language teaching journals (e.g., Jenkins, 2012)(Jennifer Jenkins, Cogo, & Dewey, 2011). It also aims to widen the debate on the need for change in ELT practice in light of such research, by offering a detailed examination of what GELT, or incorporating a Global Englishes perspective into the ELT classroom, would look like.

In order to achieve the paradigm shift towards GELT, it is crucial not to alienate experienced teachers by telling them that their current teaching practices are irrelevant and outdated. It is also important that calls for change are grounded in classroom-based research, and not on moral or theoretical arguments. In order to bridge a theory practice divide, we call for more research carried out by practitioners in our book, and we also report on three empirical studies, one of which involves pre- and in-service TESOL practitioners undertaking a GELT course on an MSc TESOL programme. It is important that GELT teacher education raises pre- and in-service practitioners’ awareness of the fact that there is an alternative way of thinking about English and that the most common use of the language today is as a lingua franca. In TESOL books aimed at practitioner researchers and teacher trainees, language is still characterized by norms of ‘standard’ varieties, rather than the diversity and plurality of ELF interaction. They also need the opportunity to examine the pedagogical implications of the global spread of English, and opportunity to revisit fundamental TESOL theories and concepts in light of Global Englishes research. However, it is important not to tell teachers what to do, or to suggest that the pedagogical practices familiar to them, and those on the programme as a whole, are wrong.

By advocating the inclusion of GELT in TESOL practitioner education courses, we are not suggesting abolishing current content. Rather, we want to encourage a critical examination of key concepts and theories through a Global Englishes lens, particularly for those working in contexts where students are likely to use ELF. We also want to encourage them to see themselves not as passive receivers of an education, but as important agents of change in the curriculum innovation process, hence our call for more action research in our upcoming book.

5. What are the advantages of learning GE for EFL students? If any, do you think there are any drawbacks?

GELT is a student-centered framework for curricula that aims to enable TESOL practitioners to critically evaluate their curricula in relation to Global Englishes. Based on the proposals for change in the literature, this perspective of ELT emphasizes the need to raise awareness of the issues associated with the spread of English and to prepare learners to use English in various global and local communities of practice. It is early days for GELT, yet the growing body of studies examining the impact of GELT on learners’ attitudes show that learners have positive attitudes. There is also a growing body of studies reporting positive responses to incorporating a GELT perspective into TESOL practitioner education programmes. Practitioners and curriculum planners will always want to know why an innovation is better than what they have at present, and this growing body of research on GELT is helpful to communicate the benefits of GELT.

Global Englishes research highlights a mismatch between what is currently taught in the ‘traditional’ ELT curricula and how the language is used as a lingua franca. It showcases, for example, that ‘errors’ and ‘mistakes’, often highlighted in mainstream ELT materials and assessments, do not necessarily result in a communication breakdown. Such research provides insights for curricula planning. We do recognize that not all ELF users have the same needs and ‘native’ English norms may still be appropriate for some learners. Indeed, GELT is based on the context-sensitive nature of such communication, and aims to increase learners’ choice, recognizing the diverse needs of learners today. Whilst students’ desire to learn native English should not, of course, be dismissed, it is important for researchers, and practitioners, to explore these attitudes, and students’ needs, in more depth. An effective GELT curriculum should not only be based on an understanding of learners’ goals and motivation for learning the language, but also on their needs.

6. GE studies and resources for teachers seem to be in great demand but quite limited in volume. Could you recommend materials and resources for those who are interested in implementing GE-oriented pedagogical ideas at the instructional level?

 Some recent publications lesson plans and activities. There is also an increasing number of GE texts that include practical suggestions and ideas (e. g., Alsagoff, McKay, Hu & Renandya, 2012; Bayyurt & Akcan, 2015; Cogo & Bowles, 2015; Galloway, 2017; Galloway & Rose, 2015; Matsuda, 2012). Useful resources can also be found on the following website:

7. How do you think GE will develop in the language learning context in the future?

In order to achieve macro-level change in ELT, it is important to recognize that the implementation of ELT curriculum innovation is complex in itself and even more so with regards to GELT. The process has to be planned properly and planners have to take into account various factors, which may influence successful implementation. Careful consideration of the various factors (outlined in Rose and Galloway, 2018) will enhance the potential for successful and sustained long-term innovation. It is also crucial not to alienate experienced teachers by telling them that their current teaching practices are irrelevant and outdated. Giving adequate consideration to these factors and also to the context within which practitioners are working will help reduce the possibility of them being resistant to change. GELT aims for a bottom-up approach to curricular innovation that values both teacher and learner agency in the curriculum innovation process. However, I do not wish to be idealistic and do recognize that this will need time and support. It is also important that calls for change are grounded in classroom-based research, and not on theoretical arguments. We need more research carried out by practitioners.

8. Could you tell us about your current and future research plans?

Currently, I am finalizing the chapters for the new book. I am also writing several papers reporting on GELT in relation to teacher education and am planning further work examining the attitudes of key stakeholders in the field with the overall aim of contributing to GELT curriculum innovation. My aim is to address the scarcity of research that offers practitioners concrete suggestions on how to implement change.

I am also conducting work within the context of the internationalization of Higher Education. My British Council funded project focused on the growing global phenomenon of EMI at the higher education level. I am particularly interested in how the expanding international student body, and the use of English as an academic lingua franca, is shaping higher education.

I am also currently working with a computer software company as part of a Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP) to contribute to an online educational platform for young learners in China. The project finishes soon, but we hope to continue with the work.


Alsagoff, L., McKay, S. L., Hu, G., & Renandya, W. A. (2012). Principles and practices of teaching English as an international language. (L. Alsagoff, S. L. McKay, G. Hu, & W. A. Renandya, Eds.). Bristol: Routledge.

Bayyurt, Y., & Akcan, S. (2015). Current Perspectives on Pedagogy for English as a Lingua Franca. (Y. Bayyurt & S. Akcan, Eds.). Berlin, München, Boston: DE GRUYTER.

Cogo, A., & Bowles, H. (2015). International Perspectives on English as a Lingua Franca: Pedagogical Insights.

Galloway, N. (2011). An investigation of Japanese students` attitudes towards English. PhD Thesis submitted to The University of Southampton.

Galloway, N. (2017). Global Englishes and change in English language teaching: Attitudes and impact. Global Englishes and Change in English Language Teaching: Attitudes and Impact.

Galloway, N., & Rose, H. (2015). Introducing Global Englishes. Routledge.

Jenkins, J. (2012). English as a Lingua Franca from the classroom to the classroom. ELT Journal. Retrieved from

Jenkins, J., Cogo, A., & Dewey, M. (2011). Review of developments in research into English as a lingua franca. Language Teaching, 44(3), 281–315.

Matsuda, A. (2012). Principles and Practices of Teaching English as an International Language (New Perspectives on Language and Education). (A. Matsuda, Ed.). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Rose, H and Galloway, N. (2018). Global Englishes language Teaching. Cambridge University Press.