Problematizing Latent Colonialism

Mohammad Tamimy, Iran

Mohammad Tamimy, B.A, Translation Studies, Alborz Institute of Higher Education, Qazvin, Iran, is currently finalizing his master’s degree in TEFL. He has been working as an EFL teacher for about a decade. He has also presented at some international conferences like TELLSI 11. Small group research and qualitative works, especially those entailing socio-cultural dimensions are among his academic interests. E-mail: mohammad.tamimy@gmail.com

Menu

Abstract
Introduction
Global communication
Pedagogy
Implication
Summary
References

Abstract

In this paper, a new version of colonialism is briefly depicted which seems to encourage ethnocentrism, at least latently , in introducing both English ( language) and western-born pedagogical strategies like cooperative learning as a threat to the national culture and identity of the Asian countries. While this latent colonialism seems to protect the cultures and identities from cultural invasion by standing against what it calls westernization, i.e., use of western means, it indeed is hypocritically and perhaps unknowingly encouraging a destructive equilibrium in secluding the learners and teachers from the modern, not necessarily harmful, invitations.

Introduction

Only ones who nowadays migrate are no longer nomads. And migration, whether internal or frontier, is not something rare in the 21st century. People migrate for different push and pull factors. Globalization, mixed marriages, ecological disasters and search for opportunities are among the reasons for which people leave their homes and choose to settle in a new land or city (Bolaffi, 2003).More than 3% of the world’s population ( 190 million) have experienced migration and are living in another country according to the report disseminated by the World Bank in 2006 (Zhao, 2010). Likewise migration, globalization is nothing new. Three thousand years ago, not only goods and people but also cultures journeyed through the Silk Road (Neelis, 2001). Today, cultures can travel far faster than they could do so at the time of Persian Empire. Consequently cultural areas are no longer segregated by the borderlines and cultural interactions could be seen in different situations ranging from homes to educational centers (Lustig & Koester, 2010).

Global communication

Education was once conceived of as a social institution only concerned with local communities, whose cultural patterns shared a lot with one another, but there are controversies around the presence and the connotations of local community in the modern world (Sobel & Taylor, 2011; Torres, 2002; Zhao, 2010). The perish of traditional local borders implies a more diverse population living within a geographical area who need to communicate globally. Globally here could be interpreted as interculturally in the sense that people from different cultural roots are engaged in interactions. Communication in this “flat world”-a term used by Friedman (2005) to imply the global, cosmopolitan and multi-ethnic nature of modern world- necessitates global competence for which an understanding of language along with the culture is an indispensable ingredient (Zhao, 2010).

Language

This multicultural milieu calls for education systems to take the lead and help the students to gain the knowledge of the global competence (Sobel & Taylor, 2011). To answer this call, education systems are required to create some language programs, which is already done to an extent. There are debates over the dominance of English as a component of the global competence .There is a quantum of opinions ranging from pluralingualism to the prevalence of a global lingua franca (Dombi, 2011). On the one end are cynics like Robert Philipson who reject English and consider its dominance as linguistic imperialism. On the other are those who consider English as a culture-free language which privileges no particular group (e.g.,House, 2003). Here we would like to advocate the resistance perspective postulated by Canagarajah (as cited in Hyland, 2006). According to Cangarjah, the very fact that people use English as a global language could not be identified with the capitulation to the imperialistic cultures. Today, people use English to their own advantages and in a more ethical, inclusive and democratic terms. Supporting the resistance perspective, Dombi (2011) does not judge pluralingualism and the dominance of English as mutually exclusive rather than a degree type phenomenon. Although development of English as a transnational language (global lingua franca) shares some aspects with the development of colonial creoles, its use in contemporary world has very little to do with colonialism, if any, because the non-native speakers of English now outnumber the native speakers (Graddol, 2006) and also because of the extent to which English has nowadays been expanded (Durant & Shepherd, 2009; Hyland, 2006). With regard to the above discussion, I would like to suggest prevalence as a substitute for dominance in describing the role of English as a lingua franca (ELF). To sum up, it could be advocated that the prevalence of English as a transnational intercultural communication medium is nowadays acknowledged.

Culture

So far, the necessity of including English language programs as an intercultural communication means has been shed light on. Many language programs ,whether in ESL or EFL contexts, could be found all over the world .But in these language programs something is usually missing and that is culture (Nieto, 2010). Banks (as cited in Sobel & Taylor, 2011) maintains that English language teachers need to appreciate the role of the students’ native cultures and languages to implement a more effective program. Lack of cultural awareness on the part of teachers and planners might not only place students at a distinct disadvantage, but also might even lead to the education failure (Swartz & Bakari, 2005). Arguing against the view that considers cultural diversity as a deficit, Mosley and Zoch (2012) introduce diversity as a potential resource through which educated citizenry could more easily be cultivated . Bellefeuille, McGrath, and Jamieson (2008), also, accentuate the need for diversity recognition and suggest some diversity competence enhancing strategies among which are enhancing curricula that gives attention issues of diversity and improved faulty recruitment strategies.

Pedagogy

Given the above arguments, how diversity can be skillfully and cautiously be employed so that the education is enriched. This is the main impetus for culturally sensitive pedagogy. Modern education should acknowledge the multiculturalism, ranging from countries to counties, while not stereotyping. Some scholars like P.-M. Nguyen, Terlouw, and Pilot (2005); P. M. Nguyen, Elliott, Terlouw, and Pilot (2009); P. M. Nguyen, Terlouw, and Pilot (2006), unwantedly, have fallen into the trap of stereotyping while taking strong stances against colonialism and Western pedagogical imports. While P. M. Nguyen et al. (2009) appear to be against the colonialism, they are actually swimming along the latent colonialism in that they are unknowingly publicizing the ethnocentrism under the guise of culturally responsive pedagogy. The border line between these two concepts is narrow enough to make a balanced approach almost unreachable. While cultural responsive pedagogy, consciously, welcomes all the theories no matter where they have been originated from, ethnocentrism defies all on the spot. Ethnocentrism defines learners as the absolute descendants of their heritage (history) while in the modern world our culture can no longer be operationalized in terms of our historical Culture, the way our forefathers were. Instead, our culture is the result of the symbiotic reactions between the past, present and future. Given our culture, beliefs and norms, whatever pedagogical import could be analyzed and modified to privilege us; neither to blindly modernize nor to dogmatically localize.

Implication

Although reflection pieces of this type do not usually come up with direct implications for teachers and educational practitioners, I would like to address the reviewer’s invitation for some implications with few words. Firstly, Policy makers are advised to resist their own temptations and ideological proclivities so that the real beneficiaries of education- namely, learners- can be given opportunity to decide what is culturally appropriate. Secondly, those policy makers and researchers, usually obsessed with the perils of neocolonialism for the national integrity, are suggested not to undermine their national integrity through the latent colonialism. The following paragraph quoted from David and Govindasamy (2003) adequately clarify how anti-colonialism might lead to latent colonialism.

The main issues in language education in Kuala Lumpur and the country have a long historical backdrop. Pragmatic policies could have averted the most contentious one: the existence of a vernacular schooling system alongside the national schools. The nationalistic fervour that followed independence removed English from its administrative and educational importance, giving Malay greater importance as the medium of instruction in the former Malay and English schools. At the same time, this encouraged the development of separate Mandarin and Tamil schools, resulting in a multi-medium schooling system that may have become an impediment to national unity and integration, segregating students along linguistic lines. (p.227)

Summary

According to Canagarajah (2006), there is an all-important debate between globalization and decolonization/localization: ”While decolonization focuses on linguistic [and educational] practices within the nation-state, globalization makes national borders porous and brings in linguistic [and educational] influence from outside” (p.202). To address this dilemma, two extremes are conceivable: resurgence to nationalism or submission to globalization. Given the drawbacks of extremism, there is nowadays a consensus within the field that culturally responsive education can take the middle ground in addressing both parties’ concerns. This piece was also to caution against the penchant for interpreting culturally responsive education in favor of nationalism. This biased interpretation, through the promotion of stereotyping, irrationally denies new insights and methodologies just because they are Western. In short, I would like to claim that post-colonial researchers are susceptible to unknowingly fall in the trap ethnocentrism in their confrontation with colonialism. And that is why I have opted to call ethnocentrisms latent colonialism.

References

Bellefeuille, G., McGrath, J., & Jamieson, D. (2008). A pedagogical response to a changing world: Towards a globally-informed pedagogy for child and youth care education and practice. Children and Youth Services Review, 30(7), 717-726. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.11.013

Bolaffi, G. (2003). Dictionary of race, ethnicity and culture. London ; Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE Publications.

Canagarajah, A. S. (2006). Negotiating the local in English as a lingua franca. Annual review of applied linguistics, 26(1), 197-218.

David, M. K., & Govindasamy, S. (2003). Language education and ‘nation building’in multilingual Malaysia WORLD YEARBOOK EDUCATION 2003: LANGUAGE EDUCATION (pp. 219).

Dombi, J. (2011). ENGLISH AS A LINGUA FRANCA IN INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION. Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Brasov, 4(53), 183-187.

Durant, A., & Shepherd, I. (2009). ‘Culture’ and ‘Communication’ in Intercultural Communication. European Journal of English Studies, 13(2), 147-162. doi: 10.1080/13825570902907185

Friedman, T. L. (2005). The world is flat : a brief history of the twenty-first century (1st ed.). New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Graddol, D. (2006). English next : why global English may mean the end of 'English as a foreign language'. London: British Council.

House, J. (2003). English as a lingua franca: A threat to multilingualism? Journal of sociolinguistics, 7(4), 556-578.

Hyland, K. (2006). English for academic purposes : an advanced resource book. London ; New York: Routledge.

Lustig, M. W., & Koester, J. (2010). Intercultural competence : interpersonal communication across cultures (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Mosley, M., & Zoch, M. (2012). Tools that come from within: Learning to teach in a cross-cultural adult literacy practicum. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(1), 66-77. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2011.09.003

Neelis, J. (2001). Religions of the Silk Road: Overland Trade and Cultural Exchange from Antiquity to the Fifteenth Century. The Journal of Asian Studies, 60(4), 1180-1182.

Nguyen, P.-M., Terlouw, C., & Pilot, A. (2005). Cooperative learning vs Confucian heritage culture's collectivism: confrontation to reveal some cultural conflicts and mismatch. Asia Europe Journal, 3(3), 403-419.

Nguyen, P. M., Elliott, J. G., Terlouw, C., & Pilot, A. (2009). Neocolonialism in education: Cooperative learning in an Asian context. Comparative Education, 45(1), 109-130.

Nguyen, P. M., Terlouw, C., & Pilot, A. (2006). Culturally appropriate pedagogy: the case of group learning in a Confucian Heritage Culture context. Intercultural Education, 17(1), 1-19.

Nieto, S. (2010). Language, culture, and teaching : critical perspectives (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

Sobel, D. M., & Taylor, S. V. (2011). Culturally responsive pedagogy : teaching like our students' lives matter. Bingley: Emerald.

Swartz, E., & Bakari, R. (2005). Development of the teaching in urban schools scale. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(7), 829-841. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2005.05.014

Torres, C. A. (2002). Globalization, Education, and Citizenship: Solidarity versus Markets? American Educational Research Journal, 39(2), 364.

Zhao, Y. (2010). Preparing Globally Competent Teachers:A New Imperative for Teacher Education. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(5), 422–431. doi: 10.1177/0022487110375802.

Please check the British Life, Language and Culture course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the How to be a Teacher Trainer course at Pilgrims website.