







































Microsoft Word - 2. Flávius Almeida dos Anjos


14

Appropriate Pedagogy to Teach English:

Contemporary Tendency Focusing on Non-Native

Flávius Almeida dos Anjos 

Center of Culture, Language and Applied Technologies,

Recôncavo of Bahia Federal University (UFRB), Brazil

Article Info

________________
Article History:

Received in 17 December

2018

Approved in 29 July 2019

Published in 29 July

2019

________________
Keywords: Pedagogy; English
language; non-native

____________________

Abstract

___________________________________________________________________
This paper is about the teaching of English. It takes into account the global role this

language gains today, to reflect on how it should be taught. The main objective of it

is to defend a current tendency concerning the teaching of English. In the pursuit of

an appropriate pedagogy to teach English, I propose the focus on non-native

speaker, since I undestand that English is a world language, spoken by a great

number of people, from different cultures, what has recreated this language in many

aspects. That is why this language should not be only taught based on the hegemonic

cultures. The reflection proposed here is, especially, anchored on Freire´s (1996)

ideas on education, mainly when he defends learner’s autonomy. Thus, to teach

English through an appropriate pedagogy, teachers should allow students to have

ownership of it as well, but starting from a local perspective, avoiding, this way, bad

feelings on the part of students.

© 2019 Universitas Negeri Semarang

 Correspondent Address: ISSN 2252-6706
B3 Building FBS Unnes

Sekaran, Gunungpati, Semarang, 50229

E-mail: flaviusanjos@gmail.com

ELT FORUM 8 (1) (2019)

Journal of English Language Teaching

http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/elt



Flávius Almeida dos Anjos / ELT Forum 8 (1) (2019)

15

INTRODUCTION

To get into the appropriate pedagogy world for the teaching of English, it is necessary, first, to reflect

upon some features of this language. Because of the indisputable global role the English language

takes now, several studies have emerged in the last few years. Many of them bring relevant data on

the rise of this language, outlining its historial trajectory, as old English, Middle English until the

Modern English. (Graddol, 2000; 2004). There are some that highlight the trajectory of English as

colonial, imperial and global language. (Graddol, 2000, Lacoste; Rajagopalan, 2005,

Kumaravadivelu, 2005, Crystal, 2012). Others are more delimiters, such as the one of Kachru (1985),

that, to explain the expansion, acquisition and the role of English, displays three circles, the inner,

the outer and the expanding one.

Today, some terms have also been used to make reference to the English language: English as

a global language, English as an international language, World English, Englishes and English as a

língua franca. There are also the varieties Inglish, Chinglish, Espanglish, Singlish. These varieties reflect

the spread of English around the world. Bhowmik (2015), about this, highlights that with the

emergence of new varieties of English, the teaching of this language can not be based either on the

British or American models only. Concerning this, Harmer (2007) says that upon concentrating the

teaching of English, on the British and American varieties, it ignores the others, such as Australian

English, Canadian English and Irish English. But this author remind us that even these varieties are

irrelevant in a setting where the number of world Englishes also have the status of variety,

mentioning English as a lingua franca as one with its own right. What, in fact, is happening is that

English has broken off from its origins and it has been ressignified by a great number of speakers,

giving origin to new Englishes. Thus, in several communication settings, English speakers are using

more the varieties of English they know and they have employed several pragmatic strategies to

communicate with other speakers of English. (Marlinda, 2014).

This points to the fact that English takes a global feature, because of its reinless expansion,

reaching, virtually, all territories. For Crystal (2012), this global feature of English occurs because it

has played a special role in many countries. But for Marlina (2014), English as an international

language, as a paradigm, acknowledges the international functions of this language and its use in a

variety of cultural and economic arena, where speakers of different linguacultures establish

communication and they do not speak each other language.

In this line of thought, Mckay (2009) agrees that English as an international language is used

by people of diverse cultures. Mackay’s tenet aligns with the one of Jenkins (2006), because when the

latter defines English as a lingua franca, she says it is about a common language used by people who

do not share the same cultural background. This new language acquires features of certain social

groups, with several linguistic innovation, in léxicon, grammar and in terms of phonology, different

from the native version. (Jenkins, 2014).

Another term is “World English” (WE), used by Rajagopalan (2005) to make reference to the

English language in an expanding process around the world. This author characterizes WE as a

linguistic phenomenon that emerges from the contact of 2/3 non-native users. This linguistic contact

does not happen based on the pattern of the hegemonic cultures, however, it emerges articulated with

these speaker’s identity and with the influence of their culture, mainly non-native.

The term World Englishes can be defined as the norm that includes all varieties of this language.

(Farrel & Martin, 2009). The “s”, added to English, signals the plurality of this language, that not

being local any more, it turned into new versions, it has become the language of the world, that is

why the word “world”, as an adjective. This term was, in the truth, coined by Kachru, in early 1979,

to evidence how the English language works in different settings in the world. In this sense is that for

Kumaravadivelu (2005), English has, inevitably, given origin to a great number of local varieties and



Flávius Almeida dos Anjos / ELT Forum 8 (1) (2019)

16

these varieties have multiplied themselves to the point of pluralizing it as World Englishes. Bhowmik

(2015) reflects about this, when he says that:

The continuous spread of English worldwide has put it in a unique situation. For example,
because of its spread over time, English has become more hybridized and diverse,
phenomenon captured by the term World Englishes. (Bhowmik, 2015, p. 143).

Actually, the sociolinguistics of English has been more complex than the ones of other

languages (Marlina, 2014), what has required more critical eyes on how to teach this language,

thinking of practices that ensure its character of “world language” and that make possible the

assumption of new learners/users.The aim of this paper is to reflect on a viable educational

alternative for English brazilian students. I intend to deconstruct wrong notions that overestimate the

mythical image of the native speaker, that feed, even today, the ELT1 powerful industry, because

although English non-native speakers outnumber the native ones, the latter still enjoys the privilege

of being “native”. (Bhowmik, 2015). Therefore, it is necessary to understand the character of world

language that English takes in the contemporaneity. Although, there are people who do not take this

fact into account, it affects deeply the pedagogy to teach and learn this language, if we have the

commitment with our students, to teach them English for life. Regardless of the issues that leaded

English to this status, it is necessary to think of alternatives that can support learners of this language,

in order to favor the learning process, making possible that learners may use this language more

autonomous.

The term “pedagogy” mentioned here should be understood as an approach that ensures the

learning consolidation. However, in the specific case of learning/teaching English, this approach is

defined according to the speakers of this language, mainly based on the old fashioned labels “native”

and ‘non-native”. In fact, what exists are speakers of a language! Because of this, this paper signals,

in someway, a brake of paradigms with these patterns. It is anchored is assumptions that also

authorize new speakers of English to use it with ease, without being tied in patterns that inferiorize

learners, what, many times, hinder them to go ahead and get progress as English users.

Thus, based on this linguistic reality, briefly outlined here, how does the teaching of English

should happen nowadays? Before trying to answer this question, that is about the pedagogy of

English, I want first to say something about the current pedagogy to teach English used in many

settings, based, exclusively, on the native speaker. After, I reflect on a pedagogy, I think, it is

appropriate for Brazilian learners, for example. I want to say as well, that my idea is to write about

the appropriate pedagogy to teach English, but it is closely linked to Freire´s (1996) view of

education.

Appropriate pedagogy for english brazilian learners

Before making comments on the appropriate pedagogy to teach English, I start saying some words

on the inappropriate one. Traditionally, the pedagogy to teach English has been that one based on

the native speaker. In my opinion, the problem here is with the exclusivility that embraces only the

two hegemonic cultures. About that, Kumaravadivelu (2012a) highlights that, historically, the

pedagogy to teach English has been dominated by the assumption that English bilingual users’ goal is

to conquer the native competence. Such practices have made possible to erase the identity of many

learners, because in many contexts, institutions and teachers still believe in the native speaker’s

supremacy fallacy and his culture and adopt methodologies that subvert the attempt to maintain

learner’s identity and the exposure of his culture. Concerning this, Mota (2010) remind us that, in

1 English Language Teaching.



Flávius Almeida dos Anjos / ELT Forum 8 (1) (2019)

17

1970, there were pedagogical practices that engedered actions in the classrooms, aiming at

memorizing the foreign culture values, what favored the development of a superiority atmosphere on

the part of the native speaker. In practice, for example, this happened when learners were stimulated

to change their names by a foreign one; to imitate characters of a book or movies, making them

believe that they had a new (but false) identity. And, in this sense, it is necessary to be cautious not to

allow that the teaching of a foreign language be solely a fiction universe, making learners abandon or

erase their identities.

Mackay (2009) questions this (wrong) conception that the target pedagogy to teach English

should (or must) be based on the native speaker’s norms. In this sense, this author argues about

reasons to reject the native speaker model as a pedagogical practice to teach English. She believes

that this rejection should occur because the pragmatic nature of communication should be

considered, that is to say, for her, English as a global language is used in several social settings, by

many speakers of English legitimized. In this line of thought is that Kumaravadivelu (2012a) suggests

an epistemic break of our indelible colonial dependence. He suggests a careful reconceptualization

and organization of knowledge. Thus, it seems that Kumaravadivelu (2012a) proposes a

descontinuity of the way English has been taught, since new guidelines have emerged in light of the

role this language gains today.

In practical terms, Kumaravadivelu (2012a) puts in check the native speaker’s competence as

model to be reached. He also puts in evidence that the center based knowledge system, somehow,

spreads issues such as native accent, native teachers, native speaker competence, methods from

western universities, researches based on hegemonic cultures etc. Because of these issues, that still

bring problems and impede the teaching/learning process, is that Kumaravadivelu (2012a) proposes

to break our dependence with terminologies such as ESL, EFL, EAL, WE, ELF e EIL2, so that we

can undo the ties with the native speaker episteme. He also suggests to break our dependence of the

compentence based on the hegemonic cultures and, that is why, it is necessary to spread the

conception of the English language plurality and the understanding that this language is not property

of a specific culture or community solely anymore (Baker, 2009).

Thus, if we truly agree with Kumaravadivelu (2012a), concerning the fact of breaking with

these conceptions, especially regarding the terminologies that frame us in patterns, almost confinable,

we have to admit that our generations can not stand anymore the adoption of inappropriate

pedagogies to teach/learn English. Besides that, nobody should go on carrying the burden of having

to try to equal to the native speaker, what has been a[n] (unreachable) goal of many institutions,

without thinking of the consequences of this prerrogative for learners. Almost always these

pedagogies put us in patterns, such as learners and speakers of English as a foreign language, who

aim to reach the standard of speakers of English as a first language, or the English of the native

speaker, or the English from the inner circle, that is, from the hegemonic cultures. Thus, it is clear

that learners of a “foreign language”, in Brazil, suffer, even without knowing it, a comparative exam.

(Grigoletto, 2005). This brings out unpleasant consequences, when a serious inferiority feeling

emerges on the part of the students. (Harmer, 2007). That is why Ramathan and Morgan (2009) draw

the attention to inadequate pedagogies to teach English for speakers of other languages, that are in

evidence, even today.

In this sense is that Matsuda (2009) warns as well to the fact that teaching English as an

international language requires practices different from the traditional, that is to say ELT, that places

2 ESL – English as a second languag, EFL – English as a foreign language, EAL – English as a
Asian language, WE – World English, ELF – English as a lingua franca e EIL – English as na

international language.



Flávius Almeida dos Anjos / ELT Forum 8 (1) (2019)

18

English as the language of The United Kingdom or The United States. This approach is outdated

and, for some experts, it might bring negative consequences for learners. Farrel and Martin (2009)

point that this might happen because: 1. to insist in teaching the (supposed) standard English might

devalue other varieties of English in the world, because it still persists this notion that any form of

English different from this standard is inferior and 2. teaching the standard English might provoke

discrimination, because some employers, for instance, might discriminate speakers of other varieties

of English, which are not hegemonic.

Thus, it is clear, by the ideas raised thus far, that my thought about the appropriate pedagogy

to teach English aligns with that one that may benefit the learner. The appropriate pedagogy to teach

English in Brazil is the one that acknowledges the learners in their individualities, with their own

brazilian identities. In another text (Anjos, 2019), I argue about which English variety one should

teach in Brazil, in the future. I answered that it could be the Brazilian English version, since the

wrong idea, that the only model considered pedagogically appropriate would be the standard

English, does not find resonance among experts anymore. (Rajagopalan, 1999). In this sense, it is

necessary to acknowledge the idiosyncratic form that brazilans speak English. And there is someone

who does this, because in his own words:

Brazilian Portuguese English, for example, I define as the kind of English I need to know about

when I go to Brazil, otherwise I will be unable to converse efficiently with local people in English.

It would be amazingly useful to have a glossary of the English language of Brazilian cultural

references. (Crystal, 2010, p. 2).

Crystal (2005) believes that when a great number of people use English in a country, they end

up developing their own English. This way, in several parts of the world, the English language

receives a natural charge from the local context it is being used and the users’ mother tongue ends up

exerting influence in the syntatic and phonological organization as well. This happens because the

new speakers opt to keep their identities, transfering, thus, features of their own mother tongue.

(Jenkins, 2007). In this option, there is a natural language appropriation attitude. Based on that, we

should make efforts to understand that the appropriate pedagogy to teach English should also be the

appropriation pedagogy; the one that can prepare learners to be both local and global speakers, so

that they can feel comfortable to use this language with national and international cultures, so that

they can have control of this language as well. (Kramsch & Sullivan, 1996).

METHODS

This paper presents some data of the research3 I conducted with a group of undergraduate students,

in Brazil. I define the methodology I used as of ethnographic stamp. As an ethnographic researcher, I

tried to interpret the meaning of social experiences, analysing learners’ evaluative reactions, in the

English language classroom. I followed the line that to understand a culture, it is necessary to

describe it, and that is what I did. I took note of students’ attitudes and also interviewed them with

the objective to find out their reactions behind their speeches. To do that, I based myself on Bortoni-

Ricardo’s (2009) inquiries, that researchers should answer: a) what is happening here?, b) what these

actions stand for people who are involved with these actions and c) how these actions which have a

3 This research was properly protocoled at Plataforma Brasil, as the current academic formalities
require, and it had approved opinion by the Ethic Committee, from the Federal University of Bahia
(UFBA), which number of certification is (CAAE) é 59915516.7.0000.5531. The proceedings
adopted in this research obey the ethic criteria concerning research with human beings, according to
the resolution CNS N° 466 de 2012.



Flávius Almeida dos Anjos / ELT Forum 8 (1) (2019)

19

place in a microcosm as the classrooom are related with dimensions of macrosocial nature in several

levels, starting from the local system where the school in inserted, the city and the national

community? For this purpose, it was used three instruments to collect the data: 1. Questionnaire, 2.

Interview and 3. Fieldnotes. Thus, it is a qualitative study, developed under the light of Applied

Linguistics, which tried to to find out some answers for questions that emerge from an

epistemological curiosity.The research took place in one of the centers of the Recôncavo of Bahia

Federal University and 91 (ninety-one) learners took part in it. Next, I briefly present some findings

and my interpretation of them.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

To be aligned with the objectives of this paper, in the next lines, I comment the findings based on

some scholars. (Matsuda, 2009; Mackay, 2009; Kumaravadivelu, 2012, 2012a; Harmer, 2007). Let us

start with Matsuda (2009), when he says that to teach English today requires (new) practices,

different from the traditional ones. Old fashioned practices to teach English have a strong relation

with demotivation to learn this language. About this Anjos, Scheyerl [in press] say it seems obvious

that the teacher’s methodological choices influence learning, because they might cause motivation or

demotivation. The teaching/learning sources and methods ensure not only the studies continuity or

waiver, but success or failure as well. As a proof of this, I share three statements, where it is clear that

the teaching methodology, somehow, was causing demotivation.

Question: Do you feel yourself motivated to learn English here at this university?

A31: No. Because the university doesn’t aim the teaching of English to embrace the deficiencies of all
students, mainly those who didn’t have contact with the language. The university “throw” the language
as if all learners were fluent in it. Besides that, it teaches a “mechanic”, boring English, the one which
does not stimulate the learner to go deeper in the knowledge. When I studied the subject, at UFRB, I
studied the verb to be the whole semester, what I studied my whole school life.

A39: No. I believe that the university does not use attractive methods so that learners can have access to
English. Conversation practice and courses continuity are lacked.

A89: I don’t feel myself motivated. During my academic life I took part in some courses offered by the
university, but they didn’t have a level parameter and I didn’t get to follow the group, the methodology
was not good and the tutor frightened who didn’t have knowledge.

A31’s statements is relevant for this analysis, because though there are people who believe that

this attitude (“I studied the verb to be the whole semester”) is typical of the elementary education

system, I can assure that it occurs in higher education as well. That is why it is necessary to rethink

the teaching of English together with the university, its board, with professors and learners, in order

to pursuit alternatives that may make viable the English language learning consolidation, with

methods and approaches sensitive to the learners’ reality, what may extinguish from this setting a

high number of beliefs and negative attitudes. (Anjos & Scheyerl, [in press]) These last statements

signal, somehow, Almeida Filho’s (1993) coherence, on the fact that the inconsistency between the

leaner’s culture to learn and the teacher’s culture to teach may cause resistance and demotivation to

learn a new language.

Secondly, Mackay (2009) questions whether the pedagogy to teach English should be based on

the native speaker´s norm. About this, many leaners still think they should learn to speak English just

like an American, for example. However, as I mentioned, Kumaravadivelu (2012a) alerts on the

need to break our colonial dependence, upon proposing the descontinuity of the way English has

been taught, based on the hegemonic cultures exclusively. In this sense, it is of crucial importance



Flávius Almeida dos Anjos / ELT Forum 8 (1) (2019)

20

teachers’ action, in order to make learner’s aware on the fact that any English learner can speak

English keeping his/her own identity, his/her sense of nationality. Next, I share some learners’

statements, which show how learners changed their way of thinking about this issue:

A71: I think that we should not imitate [the native speaker], as we discussed in classroom. There are
regional particularities. Languages are merged, they are influenced by many other languages, other
people, but if we get to speak in a way that others can understand our message, I think it is essential. I
think what matters is to establish communication. It is not a priority, in English, in my point of view, to
speak English just like a native.

A4: I thought like this, but later, when the teacher explained in classroom, that he knows a teacher who
has a brazilian northeast accent, I got quite happy, because we “print” our own identity. It is about what
teacher said on língua franca, to bring what is not only of them, but what is ours as well.

A25: Actually, I thought like this before, in the beginning of the classes. I believed we had to get closer at
most of the target language. But we learned and I understood it is not necessary. We can speak with a
[brazilian] northeast accent, with our own particularities.

As we could realize, there was an attitude change concerning the native accent, as the only

model to be followed, taught and learned. Thus, it is evident, the need of linguistic educators ready to

contribute with attitude changes, what, in many contexts, underestimate non-native speakers of

English, influencing their motivation to learn this language.

Thirdly, Harmer (2007) mentions unpleasant consequences, such as inferiority feelings on the

part of learners, because of a pedagogy based on the hegemonic cultures norms. In the research, I

also asked the participants about their feelings when speaking English with other people. Next I share

some of their answers:

A12: An illiterate in a language extremely used, which is part of our everyday life.

A40: I feel myself inferior. But I know its importance!

A52: I have a feeling of “superiority” of that person, I think he/she is a step ahead of me.

In this sense, several foreign language learners feel themselves decreased in their self esteems,

because they attend learning settings which spread the hegemonic cultures sovereignty in detriment

of the learners, product of a macabre ideology, which makes students feel ashemed of their own

linguitic condition (Rajagopalan, 2003).

However, the great majority of the participants did not see the native speaker as superior,

because of the fact of being born in developed countries, quite different from what I found out in the

data of my master’s thesis (Anjos, 2013), when a great number of the participants showed to have

overvaluing attitudes toward the native speaker, when they said the native speaker is superior,

putting themselves in a inferiority position, giving support to the supremacy of the developed

countries, which have English as their official language. And thus such overvaluing attitudes have

put the native speaker in a pedestal, immune of any critic, idealized, the perfect model to be follwed,

but that can never be reached.

Thus, I have said that an appropriate pedagogy to teach English should be that one which

respects learners individuality and their national idiosyncrasies. In practical terms, about this, for

instance, I have verified, in my classes, the emergence of sentences such as “I have 19” instead of “I

am 19”; “I am married with Mary” instead of “I am married to Mary” as well as “she work” instead

of “she works”. Look at my note:



Flávius Almeida dos Anjos / ELT Forum 8 (1) (2019)

21

Class 7, October 10 th, 2017, English Laboratory 1
The topic of the class today was ‘talking about age’, to teach them to talk about age, years and
months. Firstly, I showed them some slides with this question: ‘how old are you?’ and some
possible answers. Also, I showed them some brazilian people and asked them to guess their
ages. They tried well. Next, I asked all of them ‘how old are you?’ I could realize that most of
them used the verb ‘to have’ instead of ‘to be’, as an influence of our native language
[portuguese], in which we use the verb to have to talk about age (eu tenho 19). [...]

This excerpt is an inequivocal proof of an idiosyncratic way of speaking English in Brazil.

That is why I draw attention to the fact that teachers should take into account local and idiosyncratic

issues to teach English. In this line of thought, Kumaravadivelu (2012b), in a post-method

perspective, describes what he calls Particularity. It is about the fact that teachers should take into

account features of the learners and the context of learning. For Kumaravadivelu (2012b), any

pedagogic knowledge, to have local relevance, must emerge from daily teaching practices. An

example of this is in the ethnographic note I did:

Class 1, May 10th, 2016, English Language Laboratory
The class started at 12. The topic was “talking about family”. Initially, I showed them some
slides with definitions of term ‘family’. Next, I asked them some questions: what is family for
you? what are the types of family?, what are families for? And how can a person form a family? Theses
questions provoked a great reflection among the group, with different opinions on the
conceptions of family. One of the students, for instance, said to be bisexual, and that she has
not decided whether she will form a family with a man or a woman. Another learner said to
be evangelical, and that family is only the union of a man and a woman. Later, I showed them
images of different types of families, traditional, modern, nuclear etc. And thus we established
a very interesting dialog. They talked about their families and what they thought about
contemporary families formations. At last, I showed them a slide with the biggest family in the
world: ‘Ziona family’, from India, with 181 members. The class went on quite interesting and
it was finished with an activity about family to be revised in the next class.

Thus, to me, it was evident an atmosphere favourable to reflection, when learners got engaged

in the learning process, expressing their opinions, from their own perspectives, resulting in positive

attitudes toward learning English, because of a teaching/learning based on local and global

perspectives. Next, I offer my final considerations on this reflection.

CONCLUSION

In many English teaching/learning context, a language approach, in a sociofunctional perspective is

applied. However, quite distant from learner’s reality, because many teachers still opt to “sell”

exclusively images of beautiful and successful artists, from families without problems, harmoniously

happy (Scheyerl, 2012) and they have forgotten to make a local approach. That is why Kramsch and

Sullivan (1996) defend that the appropriate pedagogy to teach English should be a process of

appropriation both local and global. And I think there should not be privilege, to avoid division of

worlds.

I would like to emphasize what Kramsch and Sullivan (1996) defend, because when they say

that language pedagogy should be based on a global thinking, but as a local practice, they, somewhat,

touch in a fundamental tenet of the Freirian critical pedagogy. Relating their thought with a local

reality to teach English, I realize the importance to focus on non-native, since critical pedagogy

advocates that the classroom should be an arena to discuss social reality with learners, seeking to

provoke an intimacy with their social experience (Freire, 1996).

But how can teachers conduct this task? To make that happen, teachers need to be familiar

with what they propose to share with their students. Richards (2017) calls this of “teacher knowledge



Flávius Almeida dos Anjos / ELT Forum 8 (1) (2019)

22

teaching” and also “pedagogic content knowledge”, what for him includes the knowledge of the

subject the teacher will teach, the set of techniques it will be applied together with theories, beliefs,

tenets, values and ideas, so that he/she can prepare learners for the world outside classroom. This

can also be done through a foreign language, since we understand education is a form of intervention

in the world. (Freire, 1996). Thus, we need to provide our students with the best tools we are able to.

However, readers can also ask: what does he mean whe he says “focusing on non-native”? As

teachers, we should grasp the idea that English is not the same anymore! This way, the appropriate

pedagogy to teach English should take into account the role of English in the world, but especially

who are the learners, their origins, their local perspectives. I mean, as teachers, we need to humanize

the teaching/learning process. But how? Being sensitive to our students. Listening to them.

Supporting them, to make them progress. It means to teach English respecting the idiosyncratic way

of this non-native speaks English, mainly. It is to understand that non-natives’ mother tongue and

their particular cultures will influence in the production and the communication through English,

because their monther tongue grammatical and phonological structure probably will influence in the

production of the new language. It is to accept these facts as creative contingent samples. So, with the

focus on non-native, given the current status of English, the process will produce better outcomes.

This is my hope!

REFERENCES

Almeida Filho, J. C. P. 1993. Dimensões comunicativas no ensino de línguas. Campinas, SP:

Editora Pontes.

Anjos, F. A. 2013. “Pra que aprender inglês se não vou para os Estados Unidos”: Um estudo sobre

atitudes de alguns alunos da escola pública em relação à aprendizagem do inglês como língua

estrangeira. Salvador: UFBA. 2013. 152 f. Dissertação de mestrado. Mestrado em Língua e

Cultura. Instituto de Letras, Universidade Federal da Bahia (UFBA).

Anjos, F. A. 2019. Desestrangeirizar a língua inglesa: um esboço da política linguística. Cruz das

Almas: Edufrb.

Anjos, F. & Scheyerl, D. [in press]. The need of language politics for the teaching of English in

higher education in Brazil: a brief reflection under the light of logisti factors.

Baker, W. 2009. The cultures of English as a língua franca, In: Tesol Quarterly, vol. 43, no. 4, p. 567-

592.

Bhowmik, S. K. 2015. World Englishes and English language teaching: a pragmatic and humanstic

approach. In: Colomb. Appl. Linguist. Journal, vol 17, no. 1, p. 142-157.

Bortoni-Ricardo, S. M. 2009. O professor pesquisador. Introdução à pesquisa qualitativa. São Paulo:

Parábola Editorial.

Crystal, D. 2005. A revolução da linguagem. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar Ed.

Crystal, D. 2010. New Englishes: going local in Brazil. Disponível em:

http://www.davidcrystal.com/. Acesso em: 13/set/2017.

Crystal, D. 2012. English as a global language. USA: Cambridge University Press, 2a ed.



Flávius Almeida dos Anjos / ELT Forum 8 (1) (2019)

23

Farrel, Thomas, & Martin, Sonia. 2009. To teach standard English or world Englishes? A balanced

approach to instruction. In: English teaching fórum, n. 2, p. 2-7.

Freire, P. 1996. Pedagogia da autonomia: saberes necessários à prática educativa. 15ª Ed. São

Paulo: Paz e Terra.

Graddol, D. 2000. The future of English? The United Kingdom: The Bristish Council.

Graddol, D. 2004. English Next: Why global English may mean the end of English as a foreign

language. The British Council. London: The English Company (UK) Ltda.

Grigoletto, M. 2005. Ideologia e processos identitários: o simbólico em questão. In: Maximina, M.

F. et alii, Linguística Aplicada & Contemporaneidade. São Paulo: Pontes Editores, p. 53-63.

Harmer, J. 2007. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Edinburg: Pearson education limited,

4th edition.

Jenkins, J. 2006. The spread of EIL: a testing time for testers. In: ELT journal. Vol. 60/1, p. 42-50.

Jenkins, J. 2007. English as a lingua franca: attitude and identity. Oxford, UK: Oxford University

Press.

Jenkins, J. 2014. Global Englishes: a research book for students. Taylor and Francis, Florence.

Kachru, B. B. 1985. Standards, codification and sociolinguistics realism: The English language in the

outer circle. In: Quirk, R.; Widdowson, H. G. English in the world: Teaching and learning the

language and literatures, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 11-30.

Kramsch, C., & Sullivan, P. 1996. Appropriate Pedagogy.In: ELT Journal. Vol. 50. July.Oxford

University Press, p. 199-212.

Kumaravadivelu. B. 2005. Deconstructing Applied Linguistics: a postcolonial perspective. In:

Maximina, M. F. et alii, Linguística Aplicada & Contemporaneidade. São Paulo: Pontes

Editores. p. 25-37.

Kumaravadivelu, B. 2012a. Individual identity, cultural globalization, and tecahing English as na

international language. The case for an epistemic break. In: Alsagoff, L., Hu, G., &

Renandya, W. A. Principles and practices for teaching English as an international language.

Routledge, United Kingdom, p. 15-34.

Kumaravadivelu, B. 2012b. Language Teacher Education for a Global Society: a modular Model for

Knowing, Analyzing, Recognizing, Doing and Seeing. New Yoork: Routledge.

Lacoste, Y. 2005. Por uma abordagem geopolítica da difusão do inglês. In: Lacoste, Y., &

Rajagopalan, K. (Org.). A geopolítica do inglês. São Paulo: Parábola Editorial, p. 7-11.

Marlina, R. 2014. The pedagogy of English as an international language (EIL): more reflections and

dialogues. In: Marlina, R., & Giri, R. A. The pedagogy of English as an international



Flávius Almeida dos Anjos / ELT Forum 8 (1) (2019)

24

language: perspectives from scholars, teachers, and students, Springer International Publishing

Switzerland, p. 1-19.

McKay, Sandra Lee. 2003. Toward na appropriate EIL pedagogy: re-examiningcommon ELT

assumptions. In: International Journal of AppliedLinguistics, vol 13, no. 1, p. 1-22.

McKay, S. L. 2009. Pragmatics and EIL pedagogy. In: Sharifian, F. English as na international

language, perpspectives and pedagogical issues. Great Britain, m

Matsuda, Aya. 2009. Desiable but not necessary? The place of world Englishes as na international

language in English teacher preparation programs in Japan. In: SHARIFIAN, Farzard.

English as an international language, perpspectives and pedagogical issues. Great

Britain,multilingual matters, p. 169-189.atilingual matters, p. 227-241.

Mota, K. 2010. Incluindo as diferenças, resgatando o coletivo- novas perspectivas multiculturais no

ensino de línguas estrangeiras. In: Mota, Kátia, Scheyerl, Denise. (Org.) Recortes

interculturais na sala de aula de línguas estrangeiras. Salvador: EDUFBA, p. 37- 62.

Rajagopalan, K. 1999. Of EFL teachers, conscience, and cowardice. In: ELT journal. Vol 53/3 July.

Oxford University Press, p. 200-2016.

Rajagopalan, K. 2003. Por uma linguística crítica. Linguagem, identidade e a questão ética. São

Paulo: Parabola.

Rajagopalan, K. 2005. A geopolítica da língua inglesa e seus reflexos no Brasil. Por uma política

prudente e propositiva. In: Lacoste, Y, & Rajagopalan, K. (Org.). A geopolítica do inglês. São

Paulo: Parábola Editorial, p. 7-11.

Ramanathan, V., & Morgan, B. 2009. Global Warning? West-based TESOL, Class-Blindness and

the Challenge for Critical Pedagogies. In: Sharifian, F. English as an international language,

perpspectives and pedagogical issues. Great Britain, matilingual matters, p. 169-189.

Richards, J. C. 2017. Teaching English through English: Proficiency, Pedagogy and Performance. In:

RELC Journal, Vol. 48(1) 7–30.

Scheyerl, D., & Siqueira, S. (Orgs.) 2012. Materiais didáticos para o ensino de línguas na

contemporaneidade: contestações, proposições. Salvador: EdUFBA.


