Authenticity across Languages and Cultures: Themes of Identity in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning 9781800411050

Citation preview

Authenticity across Languages and Cultures

SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION Series Editors: Professor David Singleton, University of Pannonia, ­Hungary and Fellow Emeritus, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland and ­Professor Simone E. Pfenninger, University of Zurich, Switzerland This series brings together titles dealing with a variety of aspects of language acquisition and processing in situations where a language or languages other than the native language is involved. Second language is thus interpreted in its broadest possible sense. The volumes included in the series all offer in their different ways, on the one hand, exposition and discussion of empirical findings and, on the other, some degree of theoretical reflection. In this latter connection, no particular theoretical stance is privileged in the series; nor is any relevant perspective – sociolinguistic, psycholinguistic, neurolinguistic, etc. – deemed out of place. The intended readership of the series includes final-year undergraduates working on second language acquisition projects, postgraduate students involved in second language acquisition research, and researchers, teachers and policymakers in general whose interests include a second language acquisition component. All books in this series are externally peer-reviewed. Full details of all the books in this series and of all our other publications can be found on http://www.multilingual-matters.com, or by writing to Multilingual Matters, St Nicholas House, 31–34 High Street, Bristol, BS1 2AW, UK.

SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION: 157

Authenticity across Languages and Cultures Themes of Identity in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning Edited by

Leo Will, Wolfgang Stadler and Irma Eloff

MULTILINGUAL MATTERS Bristol • Jackson

DOI https://doi.org/10.21832/WILL1043 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress. Names: Will, Leo, editor. | Stadler, Wolfgang, editor. | Eloff, Irma, editor. Title: Authenticity across Languages and Cultures: Themes of Identity in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning / edited by Leo Will, Wolfgang Stadler and Irma Eloff. Description: Bristol; Jackson: Multilingual Matters, [2022] | Series: Second Language Acquisition: 157 | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Summary: “This volume centres around concepts of personal and cultural authenticity in foreign language teaching and learning. The chapters cover a wide range of contexts and disciplines, offering diverse perspectives regarding the role language plays in processes of personal growth, learning, development, self-actualisation and power dynamics”—Provided by publisher. Identifiers: LCCN 2022030509 (print) | LCCN 2022030510 (ebook) | ISBN 9781800411043 (hardback) | ISBN 9781800411036 (paperback) | ISBN 9781800411050 (pdf) | ISBN 9781800411067 (epub) Subjects: LCSH: Language and languages—Study and teaching—Psychological aspects. | Authenticity (Philosophy) | Identity (Psychology) | LCGFT: Essays. Classification: LCC P53.7 .A98 2022 (print) | LCC P53.7 (ebook) | DDC 418.0071—dc23/eng/20220817 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022030509 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022030510 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue entry for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN-13: 978-1-80041-104-3 (hbk) ISBN-13: 978-1-80041-103-6 (pbk) Multilingual Matters UK: St Nicholas House, 31–34 High Street, Bristol, BS1 2AW, UK. USA: Ingram, Jackson, TN, USA. Website: www.multilingual-matters.com Twitter: Multi_Ling_Mat Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/multilingualmatters Blog: www.channelviewpublications.wordpress.com Copyright © 2023 Leo Will, Wolfgang Stadler, Irma Eloff and the authors of individual chapters. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced in any form or by any means without permission in writing from the publisher. The policy of Multilingual Matters/Channel View Publications is to use papers that are natural, renewable and recyclable products, made from wood grown in sustainable forests. In the manufacturing process of our books, and to further support our policy, preference is given to printers that have FSC and PEFC Chain of Custody certification. The FSC and/or PEFC logos will appear on those books where full certification has been granted to the printer concerned. Typeset by SAN Publishing Services. Printed and bound in the UK by the CPI Books Group Ltd.

Contents

Contributors

vii



Foreword: Authenticity in Our Times Claire Kramsch

xiii



Preface: Authenticity Revisited: It’s Getting Personal

xvii

1  The Concept of Authenticity in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning Leo Will and Richard S. Pinner

1

Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching 2  «Что такое аутентичность»? The Concept(s) of Authenticity in Russian as a Foreign Language Wolfgang Stadler and Anna Dreher

17

3  Multilingualism and Authenticity in Russian Heritage Language Teaching Practices Matthew Dame and Natalia Dame

36

4  Authenticity in Language Assessment: Revisiting the ­Implementation of a Key Principle Carol Spöttl, Eva Konrad, Veronika Schwarz, Elisa Guggenbichler and Benjamin Kremmel 5  Authenticity Beyond Teaching Materials: Teachers’ Authentic Care on Students’ Persistence at the Beginner Level of Foreign Language Courses Anna Shkireva

53

67

6  Designing for Authenticity: Making Sense of an English Pedagogical Grammar Course Wendy M. Whitehead Martelle

81

7  Rethinking Authenticity in SLA from the Perspective of L1 Use: A Concept of Cognitive Authenticity Maria Bondarenko

97

v

vi  Authenticity across Languages and Cultures

Part 2: Authenticity and Identity 8

Authenticity, Curricula and Authentic Education Grit Alter

119

9  Authenticity and the Psychology of Language and Learning during Early Childhood Education Wietske Boon and Irma Eloff

135

10  Authenticity in Language Teaching: An African Language Perspective Elsabé Taljard

150

11  When Moral Authority Speaks: Empirical Insights into Issues of Authenticity and Identity in Multilingual Educational Settings Irene Heidt 12  Exploring Authenticity for an Endangered Heritage Language Context: Canadian Doukhobor Russian  Veronika Makarova

165

181

Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics 13  Autobiographical Fairy Tales for Authenticity in the English Classroom: A South African Higher Education Case Study Candice Livingston and Hanlie Dippenaar 14 Indie-Folk Music and the Quest for First-Person Authenticity Håvard Haugland Bamle

201 214

15  Authenticity and Literature(s) in Teacher Education: Bildung in Jigalong and Bárbmo  Annelise Brox Larsen

230

16  Authenticity and Authentic Voices in the Literature Curriculum of Pre-Service Teachers of English Hanlie Dippenaar, Cheryl Logan and Candice Livingston

245

Afterword: Taking Stock of the Authentic – Critical Synthesis and Timely Outlook Magdalena Kaltseis

261

Index

269

Contributors

Grit Alter is a professor for teaching English as a foreign language at the University College of Teacher Education, Tyrol (Austria). Her research interests lie with literary and cultural learning, children’s literature in language classrooms, and critical media literacy. She is involved in critical textbook studies, critical pedagogy and diversity-sensitive teaching. Grit Alter is currently conducting a research project on the implementation of a new school curriculum for teaching foreign languages at primary schools in Austria. Håvard Haugland Bamle is a PhD research fellow at the University of Agder (Norway). His current project deals with song lyrics, authenticity and environmental themes in English and Scandinavian popular music. Håvard Haugland Bamle is also a middle school teacher and a lecturer in the teacher education programme at the University of Agder. Maria Bondarenko, PhD, is a Russian language instructor at the University of Montreal (Canada) and a lecturer of the methodology of L2 instruction at the University of Heidelberg (Germany). She is a co-founder of the international research group Cognitive Pedagogy for Language Learning. Her current research interests focus on various aspects of L2 instruction at the lower proficiency level, including neuroeducational approaches, open-­ architecture and backward curricular design, technology in the L2 classroom (e.g. telecollaboration, instructional video materials) and alternative context-specific approaches to the acquisition of the Russian verbs of motion. Wietske Boon is a specialist counsellor specialising in play therapy techniques (South Africa). She has extensive experience in early childhood education and development and acts as a consultant in the field. She is former acting chair and board member for the Association for the Education and Care of Young Children (AECYC). Wietske Boon is the author of a children’s book, Die virus in die woud. She completed her PhD at the University of Pretoria on mother-tongue, dual-medium and second language education – an exploratory-comparative study on three-year-olds’ social and emotional development. Matthew Dame is currently a master lecturer at the MAT-TESOL programme at Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern vii

viii  Authenticity across Languages and Cultures

California (USA). He received his EdD in teacher education from the University of Southern California in 2017. He has worked as an EFL/ESL instructor in regular and intensive language programmes at universities and language schools in Russia, Morocco, the Czech Republic and the USA. He is now conducting research into critical reflection in teaching in hybrid classrooms. Natalia Dame is a lecturer in the Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures at the University of Southern California (USA). She received her PhD in Slavic languages and literatures from the University of Southern California in 2016. Her book project, The Martyr-Heroine in Russia’s Public Imagination, examines the destabilising effect of the revolutionary martyr-heroine on literary portrayals of women in modern Russian fiction. She has published articles on music and gender in Tolstoy, on the Russian intertexts in Nabokov’s Lolita and on the legacy of Shelley’s Frankenstein in Bulgakov. Her other scholarly interests include heritage language learners and inclusive pedagogy. Hanlie Dippenaar is a deputy dean and an associate professor, Faculty of Education, CPUT, Wellington (South Africa). She has been working in the field of language teaching for the past 30 years and holds a PhD from Northwest University. Her research interests are in community engagement, service learning and language teaching, exploring activity theory and change laboratories in these fields. Anna Dreher is currently a senior lecturer and researcher in the Department of Slavonic Studies at the University of Salzburg (Austria). Her research interests include language education, pragmatics and sociolinguistics, and the teaching, learning, testing and assessing of Russian as a foreign language. She is on the editorial board of the open access journal DiSlaw (Didaktik der Slawischen Sprachen). Irma Eloff is a professor of educational psychology and a former dean of education at the University of Pretoria (South Africa). She is the author and editor of six book publications and more than 90 scientific articles and book chapters. Irma Eloff conducts research in sustainability sciences with specific foci on quality education (SDG 4) and good health and wellbeing (SDG 3). She is a guest professor at the University of Innsbruck (Austria). Elisa Guggenbichler studied French and English as foreign languages and holds an MA degree in teacher education from Innsbruck University (­Austria). She is a member of the Language Testing Research Group (LTRGI) at Innsbruck University. Elisa’s interests lie in language assessment, L2 writing and task development. Irene Heidt received her PhD in Applied Linguistics (specialisation in second/foreign language teaching and learning) in 2020 from Hellenic Ameri-

Contributors ix

can University (USA). Currently, she is working as a postdoctoral researcher for the TEFL Chair at the University of Potsdam and as a secondary school teacher of linguistically diverse students in Berlin (Germany). Her research interest is focused on education for sustainable development, symbolic competence and the intersections of language, power and identity in multilingual foreign/second language education, with a particular focus on ethical and political dimensions. Magdalena Kaltseis (PhD, Klagenfurt University) is currently working as a postdoctoral research fellow at the University of Alberta (Canada). Her research interests lie in applied linguistics, particularly in critical sociolinguistics, contemporary Russian media, discourse analysis, visual communication and in foreign/second language education. She co-edited the first issue of the open access journal DiSlaw (Didaktik der Slawischen Sprachen). Magdalena Kaltseis is now conducting research on the role and concept of the native speaker in Romance and Slavic languages. Eva Konrad is a researcher at the Faculty of Teacher Education at ­Innsbruck University (Austria). She holds an MA in Language Testing from Lancaster University (UK). Her research interests are L2 writing assessment, the effect of dictionaries on writing and the development of reading and listening tasks. She conducts language testing workshops for schools and other educational institutions. Benjamin Kremmel is head of the Language Testing Research Group (LTRGI) at Innsbruck University (Austria). He holds a PhD in Applied Linguistics from the University of Nottingham, UK. His research interests include vocabulary assessment, L2 reading assessment, diagnostic language testing, language assessment literacy and SLA. His work has been published in Language Testing, Language Assessment Quarterly, Applied Linguistics, Language Teaching, PLOS One and TESOL Quarterly. Annelise Brox Larsen, PhD, is an associate professor in English at the University of Tromsø, the Arctic University of Norway, and specifies in literature and didactics. Together with colleagues, she has recently published the articles ‘The influence of improvisation activities on speaking confidence of EFL student teachers’ and ‘Interdisciplinary teaching as motivation: An initiative for change in post-16 vocational education’. She has also written a noteworthy article on reading, ‘An Intertextual Approach to Reading Literary Texts in English in Teacher Education’, published in Acta Didactica Norge. Candice Livingston is presently a senior lecturer and the research coordinator at the Faculty of Education at the Wellington campus of the Cape Peninsula University of Technology (South Africa). Her research interests include decolonising children’s literature and the curriculum, ethics in teaching and preservice teacher training, and teaching with technology.

x  Authenticity across Languages and Cultures

Cheryl Logan is a doctoral candidate in literature for children and young adult literature and a senior lecturer in pre-service education at The Ohio State University at Mansfield (USA). Cheryl currently teaches children’s and young adult literature, language arts methods and writing in educational contexts to undergraduate students pursuing careers in early and middle childhood education. Her research centres on African American young adult novels written by black authors who take up prevalent issues within the sociopolitical context of the #BlackLivesMatter movement. Veronika Makarova is a professor in the Department of Linguistics, University of Saskatchewan (Canada). Prior to taking her position in the University of Saskatchewan and establishing the Department of Linguistics there, she worked in universities in Russia, Japan and the UK. She has published more than 100 articles and five books. Her research interests include bilingualism/multilingualism, Russian as an immigrant and heritage language, Canadian Doukhobor (‘Spirit Wrestlers’) language and culture, language/gender and language/culture interactions. Richard S. Pinner (PhD, University of Warwick) works for the Department of English Literature at Sophia University, Tokyo (Japan). He is interested in the areas of authenticity and motivation in ELT. He recently co-edited a book with Richard J. Sampson called Complexity Perspectives on Researching Language Learner and Teacher Psychology. Veronika Schwarz holds a postgraduate certificate of language testing from Lancaster University, an MA in Spanish, an MA in theatre, film and media studies from the University of Vienna (Austria) and is a certified academic expert for German as a foreign/second language. Her research interests are in L2 writing and listening assessment, reading and listening task development and the effect of creative drama techniques on language skills and their use in speaking tasks. From 2016 to 2020, she was a research assistant with the Language Testing Research Group (LTRGI) at I­ nnsbruck University. Anna Shkireva is a doctorate student at the University of New Mexico, and she teaches Russian at the University of Massachusetts (USA). Her academic interests include second language acquisition, enhancement of language students’ learning, and instructional strategies to support the development of students’ interest. Her work focuses on the impact of a teachers’ authentic care on students’ persistence at the beginner level of foreign language courses. Carol Spöttl established the Language Testing Research Group (LTRGI) at Innsbruck University (Austria) to sustain the testing expertise developed during the government-funded project to reform the Austrian school leaving exam 2007–2013. She holds a PhD in Applied Linguistics from the University of Lancaster, UK. She has delivered numerous training sessions

Contributors xi

internationally on assessment issues and is currently working with colleagues on issues raised in the assessment on literature. Wolfgang Stadler is a professor of Russian linguistics and subject-specific language education, and a former dean of the Faculty of Education at Innsbruck University (Austria). He holds an MA in Language Testing from Lancaster University (UK). Wolfgang Stadler is the (co-)editor of eight books and edited volumes on topics such as connecting cultures, the testing and assessing of foreign language competences, the pragmatics of silence, the linguistics of football and others as well as the author and coauthor of a 100 articles and reviews in the fields of (socio)pragmatics, Russian language teaching and testing, and assessment literacy. He has initiated the open access journal DiSlaw (Didaktik der Slawischen Sprachen) where he is on the editorial board. Elsabé Taljard is currently a professor in the Department of African languages, University of Pretoria (South Africa). Her language of specialisation is Northern Sotho. She is a linguist by training and her main research interest is corpus linguistics. She is also well-versed in African language lexicography and terminology. She is the co-manager of the UP Digitisation node under the auspices of the South African Centre for Digital Language Resources (SADiLaR), which has as its main aim the creation of digital resources for the African languages. Elsabé Taljard is also currently the editor of Lexikos, an ISI-accredited journal with lexicography as its focus. Wendy M. Whitehead Martelle is an assistant professor of Applied Linguistics, ESL and Russian at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (USA). Her research interests include individual differences in second language acquisition, story- and task-based approaches to language teaching, English and Russian linguistics and the acquisition of tense-aspect morphology. Leo Will is a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Giessen (Germany). He is the author of the monograph Authenticity in English Language Teaching and has published a number of additional articles on the subject. He is conducting phenomenological research in the realm of language teacher education and takes an interest in vocabulary learning. Leo Will is also an adjunct professor at Saint Mary’s University Halifax (Canada).

Foreword: Authenticity in Our Times Claire Kramsch

There is hardly a word that better captures the dream of every language learner than the word ‘authentic’ as in ‘authentic language use’ or ‘authentic materials’. Culturally authentic texts bring into the classroom a taste of the real world, not the pedagogically reduced world of foreign language instruction. It evokes encounters with actual native speakers, not anonymous phrases exemplifying rules of grammar; genuine conversational exchanges, not display dialogues; original culture, not the tourist-like culture capsules found in textbooks. This at least was the rallying cry of the communicative approach to teaching foreign languages in the 1970s. The rich and multifaceted collection of chapters offered in this volume revisits this canonical concept of authenticity. Focusing on the teaching of various languages in different educational systems in various parts of the world, it documents the extent to which this concept has been expanded in response to the changes that have occurred in the social and cultural conditions under which foreign languages are taught and learned – issues of learner identity, teacher subjectivity and the multilingual contexts in which languages are studied today. These new conditions in turn have spawned new theoretical frameworks that enable us to see today’s concern for authenticity in its proper historical and political context. While in the 1960s and 1970s authenticity was seen as the intrinsic characteristic of native speakers and real-life texts, the advent of identity politics in the 1980s, the rise of computer communication in the 1990s and globalisation in the past two decades have shifted attention from the linguistic system and its academic gatekeepers to the more messy use of language in everyday life. It is precisely this everyday life that has changed dramatically in the past 50 years. With the spread of mass media, our societies have become more multicultural, networked computers and social media have facilitated intercultural contacts but also simulation and disinformation, and global migrations have made multilingualism a reality of social life. Authenticity is no longer a stable given. It has to be xiii

xiv  Authenticity across Languages and Cultures

co-constructed between conversational partners, teachers and learners, pedagogic strategies and students’ interests; an alignment has to be found between tasks and their purposes, identities and subjectivities, and teachers are called upon to make their students aware of that process. Not only have monolingual native speakers lost their prerogative, but multilingual learners are reclaiming the right to authenticate the language for themselves (Kramsch, 1993: Ch. 6), to author, i.e. to augment their L2 with other languages through translanguaging (Li Wei, 2018) and other multilingual (Cenoz & Gorter, 2015) and translingual practices (Canagarajah, 2013). Foreign language educators now advocate hybrid languaging, intercultural learning and the development of symbolic competence based on ecological authenticity (Kramsch, 2011). Linguistic normativity and purity are reserved for specialised domains such as academic language, the language of publishing houses and scientific research, or the language for special purposes. Thus, the concept of authenticity has taken on much broader meanings than just monolingual native speaker language use. It refers to a new way of looking at language, learner identity, teacher subjectivity, and how to deal with the challenging use of language in multilingual contexts. Authenticity as relation. Spearheaded by Widdowson (1979: Ch. 12) and Kramsch (1993: Ch. 6), the linguistic and cultural authenticity of a text came to be viewed as a relational concept, not a unitary, intrinsic one. Communicative authenticity referred to the alignment of authorial intention and the recipient’s perception and knowledge of conventions. Language learning itself became as much of an authentic process as the language use between native or between native and non-native speakers. Authenticity as process. Norton (1995) was the first to frame the difficulties of immigrants seeking to be integrated into Canadian society as a problem of identity. Were they to leave their old identity at the door and try to become Canadian native speakers? No, says Norton. Authenticity is not the presumed cultural purity of a native speaker; it is multiple, changing and conflictual. Identity denotes agency (Widdowson, 1979), interaction, and a willingness to accept multiplicity, change and ambiguity. It is a deliberate investment. You don’t have to reject the notion of a native speaker, but you do have to create your own identity (Kramsch, 2009). This view of authenticity as agency opened the door to think of SLA not as the acquisition of a second language, but as the acquisition of bilingualism (Ortega, 2014) or even multilingualism. In this view, authentic language learning is the process of becoming a multilingual citizen in a multilingual society. Authenticity as mindset. The focus of language learning shifted from a monolingual to a multilingual mindset. We were reminded that the very boundaries between languages were created to serve national or community interests (Makoni & Pennycook, 2007), whereas in an era of globalisation, the challenge has become how to teach one language

Foreword: Authenticity in Our Times  xv

‘multilingually’. This requires factoring in the multilingual mindset of the students and fostering translingual practices, translation and translanguaging. Teachers too have to see themselves differently now as they have to serve as models of multilingualism, broadly conceived, not just monolingual native or near native speakers. The language teacher’s authentic self is by definition a bilingual self, even for those who teach their own language, and their task is to help their students develop such a bilingual identity (Kramsch & Zhang, 2018). Authenticity itself in crisis. The spread of English as a global language, the growing global mobility across national borders, and global digital communication have problematised the concept of authenticity itself. English as the lingua franca of the planet has unmoored the language from any particular social, historical and cultural meaning and opened it up to the power struggles for symbolic meaning (Kramsch, 2012, 2021, in press). Due to global mobility, the growing number of ‘new speakers’ learning the language of their or other regional communities (e.g. Gaelic, Welsh, Catalan), while welcomed as a means of revitalising these communities, raises the question of linguistic and cultural authenticity (Pujolar & O’Rourke, in press). And the digital medium of communication with its invisible algorithms and its artificially intelligent technology (Akhtar, 2021; Gramling, 2021) presents the greatest challenge to the very notion of authenticity. This volume is all the more necessary to help us envisage how to think of the future multilingually without losing sight of who we are, authentically. References Akhtar, A. (2021) The singularity is here. Artificially intelligent advertising technology is poisoning our societies. The Atlantic, 5 November 2001. See https://www.theatlantic. com/magazine/archive/2021/12/ai-ad-technology-singularity/620521/?utm_source=copylink&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share Canagarajah, S. (2013) Translingual Practice. London: Routledge. Cenoz, J. and Gorter, D. (eds) (2015) Multilingual Education: Between Language Learning and Translanguaging. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gramling, D. (2021) The Invention of Multilingualism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kramsch, C. (1993) Context and Culture in Language Teaching (Ch. 6). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kramsch, C. (2009) The Multilingual Subject. Oxford: OUP. Kramsch, C. (2011) The symbolic dimension of the intercultural. Language Teaching 44, 354–367. Kramsch, C. (2012) Authenticity and legitimacy in multilingual SLA. Critical Multilingualism Studies 1, 107–128. Kramsch, C. (2021) Language as Symbolic Power (Chs. 7–8). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kramsch, C. (in press) Re-imagining foreign language education in a post-Corona world. In Ch. Lütge, Th. Merse and P. Rauschert (eds) Global Citizenship in Foreign Language Education: Concepts, Practices, Connections. Abingdon: Routledge.

xvi  Authenticity across Languages and Cultures

Kramsch, C. and Zhang, L. (2018) The Multilingual Instructor. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Li, W. (2018) Translanguaging as a practical theory of language. Applied Linguistics 39 (1), 9–30. Makoni, S. and Pennycook, A. (eds) (2007) Disinventing and Reconstituting Languages. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Norton Peirce, B. (1995) Social identity, investment, and language learning. TESOL Quarterly 29 (1), 9–11. Ortega, L. (2014) Ways forward for a bi/multilingual turn in SLA. In St. May (ed.) The Multilingual Turn (pp. 32–53). Abingdon: Routledge. Pujolar, J. and O’Rourke, B. (in press) Forum Discussion: Theorizing the speaker and speakerness in Applied Linguistics and Sociolinguistics. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice. Widdowson, H.W. (1979) Ch.12 in Explorations in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Preface: Authenticity Revisited: It’s Getting Personal

Situations in which languages are learned and taught are as varied as the people involved in those processes. Learning English in Germany or Austria is a politically streamlined endeavour. Learning Doukhobor in Saskatchewan (Canada) is a different project entirely. It may not necessarily promise career opportunities in a globalised economy but is usually enmeshed with cultural and religious traditions. Learning Setswana in Southern Africa may take place in a busy market or a doctoral degree programme, and venturing into Russian language studies may open up anthropological understandings that extend way beyond the immediate environment. While many instructional techniques may overlap, one should not ignore the variance in sociocultural contingencies, and one is well advised to attend closely to the personal biographies and sensibilities of all the stakeholders in any given language learning situation. Phrased in existentialist terms, the facticity of language learning, i.e. its given contextual qualities, impinges on the authenticity of its agents. Authenticity has emerged as a buzzword in the SLA literature and is, of course, a beleaguered term. Due to its invariably positive connotations and its colloquial ubiquity, it has been used to denote a multitude of concepts. It may refer to a notion of cultural integrity (e.g. authentic Southern barbecue). It is also used in jurisdiction to attest to the genuineness of objects and documents (e.g. authentic evidence). And within the disciplinary discourse in question, it most commonly denotes a certain type of language learning materials. All these denotations share a conceptual substrate that is most adequately grasped as a vague notion of consistency, a desirable alignment of sorts, though the elements to be aligned may differ from context to context: food, jurisdiction, language (learning), etc. One distinct pattern of alignment shall not go unmentioned, for it elucidates what was meant earlier by authenticity of agents: In philosophy, authenticity has established itself as a conceptual staple of modernity capturing the idea that the individual can forge their own destiny. Existentialists xvii

xviii  Authenticity across Languages and Cultures

from Kierkegaard to Sartre have detailed the human condition as being one of resolute freedom where decisions must be made without yielding to exogenous factors, and personal identities are actively constructed in the process. The individual should thus be aligned (or consistent) with themselves, with their own values and motives. Language plays a central role in this regard. Who a person is, and who they become as they learn a new language, constitutes a primary theme throughout this volume. Van Compernolle and McGregor (2016), as part of their substantive contribution to conceptualising authenticity, make an attempt at synthesising the long-standing concepts of authenticity of correspondence and authenticity of genesis (Cooper, 1983). While – according to Van Compernolle and McGregor (2016: 1) – the former ‘refers to the extent to which the use of language corresponds to some perceived (and perhaps idealised) norm or convention’, the latter ‘refers to the idea that the use of language is authentic in terms of its origins, irrespective of its correspondence to some notion of norms or conventions’. Importantly, the synthesis by Van Compernolle and McGregor (2016) acknowledges the interpersonal fluidity of authentication, thereby transcending notions of linguistic ownership (Widdowson, 1994). The volume at hand hazards a continuation of this thrust while broadening the scope of authenticity. Language itself, though being a correlate of personal authenticity, cannot be described as inherently authentic or inauthentic. It must be investigated in conjunction with – or even as an ancillary element of – culture and identity. For some people, language learning is a marginal cog within an array of life choices. For others, it is the fulcrum of what Rawls (2009) calls a ‘plan of life’: When an individual decides what to be, what occupation or profession to enter, say, he adopts a particular plan of life. In time his choice will lead him to acquire a definite pattern of wants and aspirations (or the lack thereof), some aspects of which are peculiar to him while others are typical of his chosen occupation or way of life. (Rawls, 2009: 365)

Tugendhat (1986) elaborates that aspirations can lead a person to actively pursue specific competencies and that these competencies, provided they are socially valued, have the potential to meld into a ‘life task’ (1986: 275–276). On the strength of that task, the individual finds an authentic place in the world and stands to develop a sense of self-worth. The individual’s quest for a life task plays out within a force field of cultural entrenchment and self-actualisation, a struggle that has been the primary focus of existentialism, as laid out by Will and Pinner in the first chapter of this book. Such considerations should constitute the backdrop to any language learning processes in various contexts, and while they pertain to a certain

Preface: Authenticity Revisited: It’s Getting Personal  xix

psychological macrostructure, it is not difficult to discern their connections with the most practical of language learning realities. Claire Kramsch, who invokes ‘authenticity as agency’ in the foreword to this volume, has expounded elsewhere the phenomenological nature of the language learning experience: What will happen if I use this grammar rule? How does this rule link up with others? Will I be understood? If I use this word in combination with this other word, will I please or offend my interlocutor, get what I want, or will I make myself ridiculous? Also will I be able to say what I really mean? Who will I be in a foreign tongue? Who will I be taken for? How can I be different while remaining the same? (Kramsch, 2005: 221)

The interplay of identity and language learning, as investigated in the various contributions to this book, is invariably underpinned by culturally inherited norms and doxas. It has thus been one of our primary concerns to gather a multitude of voices from miscellaneous settings and cultural realms in order that the correlations between identity and language be elucidated through a variety of perspectives. The chapters in this book invoke authenticity and investigate its different concepts as they play out across manifold language learning contexts and situations. There are contributions from scholars and researchers working in Europe, Africa, Asia, the USA and Canada. It includes empirical reflections on German, English, Russian, Afrikaans and African languages. It also sheds light on the instances of intercultural friction and fusion in places such as South Africa, Canada, Norway and Japan. The original studies presented here also investigate language learning across the full developmental spectrum, from the early years into adulthood. We thus hope to illustrate how personal authenticity and identity permeate the innermost crevices of the language learning endeavour. Starting out from a philosophical vantage point (Chapter 1), the book seeks conceptual consistency with the existentialist notion of authenticity, an effort mostly lacking in the discourse on authenticity and language learning. As of Chapter 2, the implications of that phenomenon are minutely depicted through individual analyses of different attendant aspects in different environments. Both researchers and teachers should benefit from this line of ­epistemology, deriving from it new insights into the complex and all-­ encompassing nature of authenticity and its relationship with language. On the academic side, the book delivers a heightened degree of conceptual alignment with cognate fields, especially with philosophy where authenticity and identity have been highly scrutinised themes for a long time. On the level of language learning and teaching, the case studies in this volume offer tangible examples of how authenticity plays out on the ground across a considerable number of settings.

xx  Authenticity across Languages and Cultures

The introductory chapter ‘The Concept of Authenticity in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning’ by Leo Will and Richard S. Pinner lays the conceptual groundwork for the book. Building on Will’s (2018) extensive discourse analysis, the chapter sketches the semantic genesis of the term ‘authenticity’ and, crucially, bridges the gap between its use in the language learning discourse and its conception in philosophy. The latter offers a new perspective regarding the different individuals involved in language learning and teaching. The rest of the chapters is divided into three thematic sections as their authors apply the concept of authenticity to language teaching, identity and aesthetics. Part 1 Authenticity and Language Teaching By starting out on the definition of the term ‘authentic’ as used in a Russian methodological dictionary, Wolfgang Stadler and Anna Dreher, in Chapter 2, ‘The Concept(s) of Authenticity in Russian as a Foreign Language’, investigate whether in the research literature on Russian language acquisition this term is also related to the lives of native speakers and real-life communication tasks based on authentic texts and material. An analysis of the academic RFL discourse shows that ‘authenticity’ is as yet closely associated with the role of the idealised and infallible Russian native speaker and the concept of monolingual native-speakerism, but they also encounter first approaches paying tribute to the identity of ­students – even if only from the perspective of the text selection concerning the learners’ individual interests. Matthew Dame and Natalia Dame examine the extent to which current trends, i.e. the turn to multilingualism and the philosophical perception of authenticity, have been applied in teaching Russian heritage language learners in the US. The authors ground their study ‘Multilingualism and Authenticity in Russian Heritage Language Teaching Practices’ on a half-semester-long observation of three Russian heritage language instructors at three institutions of higher education. The data show that these instructors perceive heritage language learners as inauthentic Russian speakers by measuring their language competency against a native speaker standard. Carol Spöttl, Eva Konrad, Veronika Schwarz, Elisa Guggenbichler and Benjamin Kremmel argue that in today’s environment with issues arising from globalisation, digitalisation, mobility and transculturality, the importance of authenticity in assessment remains unchallenged, but test developers need to re-evaluate how to reflect these new developments in their tests to ensure generalisability of their score interpretations. Traditionally, only texts produced by native speakers were considered authentic. In today’s globalised world, however, the reality of language use is multilingual, and with English as a lingua franca, the native speaker paradigm is no longer useful. Thus, in Chapter 4 ‘Authenticity in Language

Preface: Authenticity Revisited: It’s Getting Personal  xxi

Assessment: Revisiting the Implementation of a Key Principle’, the authors discuss standards and reference frameworks, but also questions about the suitability of texts and tasks. Anna Shkireva illustrates the importance of foreign language teachers’ attitude and authentic care on student motivation levels in language learning in Chapter 5 on ‘Authenticity Beyond Teaching Materials: Teachers’ Authentic Care on Students’ Persistence at the Beginner Level of Foreign Language Courses’. She argues that supportive environments can influence students’ persistence in foreign language learning and positions a teacher’s authentic care as pivotal in student retention in foreign language learning programmes. Wendy M. Whitehead Martelle, in her chapter ‘Designing for Authenticity: Making Sense of an English Pedagogical Grammar Course’, offers insights into the redesigning of an undergraduate pedagogical grammar course while using the concept of authenticity in language teaching and learning as a foundation and guide. One central element of investigation consists in metalinguistic conversations between the learners. In Chapter 7 ‘Rethinking Authenticity in SLA from the Perspective of L1 Use: A Concept of Cognitive Authenticity’, Maria Bondarenko describes a widespread tendency to ban classroom activities based on translation, contrastive grammar/phonetics (L1 vs. L2) and explicit instruction in the L1 from the repertoire of recommended instructional strategies. She mentions issues of identity and cultural background before introducing an inclusive sociocognitive model of L1 in language learning. Part 2 Authenticity and Identity Grit Alter traces different concepts of authenticity as they are ­explicitly and implicitly invoked in national school curricula in Germany, Austria and Switzerland with regard to English as a foreign language. Her chapter ‘Authenticity, Curricula and Authentic Education’ reveals political agendas by drawing on the work of philosophical theorist, John Dewey. In Chapter 9, ‘Authenticity and the Psychology of Language and Learning during Early Childhood Education’, Wietske Boon and Irma Eloff explore the psychological dimensions of authenticity in language learning during the early years in an African context. They utilise vignette research to present the complexities of multilingual learning environments and argue for prominent acknowledgement of the social-emotional aspects of language and learning. They also present a case to expand the situatedness of ‘authenticity’ beyond formal learning environments. In another chapter from the African continent, Elsabé Taljard agitates for a pragmatic interpretation of ‘authenticity’. In her chapter, ‘Authenticity in Language Teaching: An African Language Perspective’, she reflects on the historical antecedents of African languages in the South African

xxii  Authenticity across Languages and Cultures

context and showcases how the earlier formalist, structuralist approach as well as the communicative competence approach may limit authenticity. She argues for the use of electronic corpora to promote societal and individual multilingualism. Irene Heidt, in her chapter ‘When Moral Authority Speaks: Empirical Insights into Issues of Authenticity and Identity in Multilingual Educational Settings’, refers to Foucault’s notion of morality to show that learning a second language does not only serve the acquisition of grammar and vocabulary but is also a space for the inculcation of moral values, thus producing valued subject positions. The chapter brings to the fore the current political, cultural and religious tensions within increasingly multilingual and multicultural classrooms in the German educational system. Veronika Makarova addresses the applications of authenticity frameworks to the teaching and learning of Doukhobor Russian, a minority heritage language in Canada, combining the linguistic features of the 19th-century Russian dialects with elements from other languages. In Chapter 12 ‘Exploring Authenticity for an Endangered Heritage Language Context: Canadian Doukhobor Russian’, she presents authenticity challenges differing from the ones found in either indigenous or typical heritage languages contexts, which are due to multiple factors related to the specificities of individual and community identities, unique cultural and historic components, as well as a complex relationship not only with English, but also with Standard Russian and resulting varied models of ‘nativeness’. Part 3 Authenticity and Aesthetics In Chapter 13, ‘Autobiographical Fairy Tales for Authenticity in the English Classroom: A South African Higher Education Case Study’, Candice Livingston and Hanlie Dippenaar raise epistemic awareness of Afrikology, by facilitating the inclusion of Afrocentric thinking in the English curriculum of teacher education students. Their study provides a platform for student voices to emerge via transcoded and translanguaged autobiographical fairy tales that allow for authentic contextualisation of personal identity in the African classroom. Håvard Haugland Bamle, in his chapter ‘Indie-Folk Music and the Quest for First-Person Authenticity’, explores theoretical approaches to harnessing the potential of different music genres for language learning purposes. He draws on the concepts of authenticity put forth by various musicologists, thus detailing the presence of a quest for ‘first-person’ authenticity in songs in recognition of authenticity as an ethos of personal engagement. Annelise Brox Larsen, in her chapter ‘Authenticity and Literature(s) in Teacher Education: Bildung in Jigalong and Bárbmo’, proposes a rethinking of the literary canon in Norwegian teacher education programmes. The study builds on thematic links being created between the readers’

Preface: Authenticity Revisited: It’s Getting Personal  xxiii

local culture and the situation of Aborigines in Australia and Native Americans in the USA. The chapter ‘Authenticity and Authentic Voices in the Literature Curriculum of Pre-Service Teachers of English’ presents an innovative study where the notion of ‘mirrors, windows and sliding doors’, as illustrated by Rudine Sims Bishop, is leveraged to promulgate and explore diverse lived experiences through engagement with authentic literature. Hanlie Dippenaar, Cheryl Logan and Candice Livingston share insights from an intercontinental study, where students from the US and South African contexts participate in critical dialogue/s, thereby enhancing authenticity, self-understanding, a sense of identity and well-being. Finally, a concluding meta-analysis of this entire volume is presented by Magdalena Kaltseis. This final chapter in the book, entitled ‘Taking Stock of the Authentic – Critical Synthesis and Timely Outlook’, highlights the unifying elements across all chapters, and it captures the unique value this volume provides. Importantly, Kaltseis adds a cautious note invoking the ‘dark side’ of authenticity as she projects future developments pertaining to both language learning and the academic discourse. This volume contains both theoretical and empirical contributions, and it was peer-reviewed prior to publication. It fulfils, on the one hand, the desideratum identified by Will, namely to further develop and clarify the discourse on authenticity. Pinner’s recent reconceptualisation of the concept, on the other hand, has highlighted its philosophical underpinning. Our motivation for this anthology stems from both, and the contributions to authenticity across languages and cultures subscribe to the philosophical heritage of authenticity, overcoming widespread notions of native-speakerism and cultural essentialism. It addresses transcultural approaches in teaching as a fruitful concept, and it pays tribute to the self and identity development of language learners. References Cooper, D.E. (1983) Authenticity and Learning: Nietzsche’s Educational Philosophy. London, Boston: Routledge & K. Paul (International Library of the Philosophy of Education). Kramsch, C. (2005) Desire in language: The neglected dimension of language learning. In S. Duxa, A. Hu and B. Schmenk (eds) Grenzen überschreiten. Menschen, Sprachen, Kulturen: Festschrift für Inge Christine Schwerdtfeger zum 60. Geburtstag. With assistance of Inge Christine Schwerdtfeger (pp. 209–224). Tübingen: Narr. Rawls, J. (2009) A Theory of Justice. First published in 1971. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Tugendhat, E. (1986) Selbstbewußtsein und Selbstbestimmung. Sprachanalytische Interpretationen (3rd edn). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp (Suhrkamp-Taschenbuch Wissenschaft, 221). Van Compernolle, R.A. and McGregor, J. (2016) Introducing authenticity, language and interaction in second language contexts. In R.A. van Compernolle and J. McGregor

xxiv  Authenticity across Languages and Cultures

(eds) Authenticity, Language and Interaction in Second Language Contexts (pp. 1–9). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Widdowson, H. (1994) The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly (28/2), 377–389. Will, L. (2018) Authenticity in English Language Teaching: An Analysis of Academic Discourse. Münster: Waxmann.

1 The Concept of Authenticity in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning Leo Will and Richard S. Pinner

Introduction

Authenticity in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning (FLTL) has been subject to innumerable interpretations and reconceptualisations over the past 40 years. Today, the term’s denotation is highly contested and diversified. This editorial chapter offers a conceptual synopsis of authenticity, which serves to elucidate and disentangle the incongruity of the various concepts. One of these concepts shall receive particular attention, for it promises to provide a theoretical foundation from which many practical implications can be derived. The concept in question has been referred to as ‘authenticity of individual behaviour’ (Will, 2018) and is rooted in philosophical thought. To unearth those roots and investigate them with a steady eye to the everyday practices of language learners and teachers is an unprecedented endeavour standing to bridge the gap between the most fundamental theory and the most tangible instances of application. Rather than conceiving of our work as a reconceptualisation, which would imply yet another pivot, we view this chapter as a contribution to the conceptual refinement and cohesion of authenticity in FLTL. Denotation and Connotation

Authenticity as a term has multiple denotations within the context of FLTL. We shall refer to these denotations as concepts. The following conceptual taxonomy has been extrapolated from the academic discourse (Will, 2018): (1) Textual authenticity Authentic text, according to many definitions, is any text that is not produced for the purpose of language learning. 1

2  Authenticity Across Languages and Cultures

(2) Authenticity of text reception A given text cannot be judged as authentic or inauthentic per se, but any reader or listener will engage in an individual process of authentication, which may be more or less successful based on a multitude of factors. (3) Real-world authenticity Activities are authentic when they resemble everyday communicative activities without focusing on language analysis and manipulation. (4) Classroom authenticity Activities are authentic when they remain true to the classroom setting, which likely includes form-focused procedures. (5) Authenticity of individual behaviour A person is authentic when their actions are an expression of their true self without being overly influenced by contextual factors such as other people’s behaviour. (6) Cultural authenticity Individuals, activities and artefacts are authentic when they hail from the so-called target culture, which is the perceived culture of the people who speak the target language as their mother tongue. The concept of textual authenticity is quite consolidated and well established among both scholars and language teachers. Although scholars are hesitant to incorporate a native-speaker element in their definitions (Appel, 1995: 52; Davies, 1984: 184; Harmer, 1983: 146; Lee, 1995: 324; Little et al., 1989: 25; Morrow, 1977: 13; Nunan, 1989: 54; Wilkins, 1976: 79; Young, 1993: 452), most teachers will rely on the sorts of authentic text that have undergone the traditional gatekeeping practices of the publishing industry, e.g. journalistic texts, short stories, novels, films, news broadcasts, etc. Rarely do these formats feature language produced by non-native speakers. With regard to English, these habits lead to an exclusion of lingua franca materials from the classroom (Margić & VodopijaKrstanović, 2018). Whether that hinders language learning or not is beside the point. The sociolinguistic effect might be that an image of native speaker superiority is tacitly perpetuated, which we will elaborate in the next section. Definitions of textual authenticity in the vein of ‘materials which have not been specially written or recorded for the foreign learner’ (Wilkins, 1976: 79) may not explicitly presuppose that such materials be produced by a native speaker, yet the common practices of language teachers around the world lead to a de facto denotation which strongly prioritises text stemming from that sanctioned group. Even non-authentic text of the kind predominating in textbooks shows a strong bias towards the native speaker, though in that context it is the depiction of fictional characters that reflects that slant, thus furthering the subtle message that a language is best learned when modelled by the native speakers. Another concept, that of cultural authenticity, undergirds these

The Concept of Authenticity in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning  3

dynamics. Individuals are obviously more than mere producers of spoken or written text. Their actions, and maybe even their appearance, are seen as representative of a given culture. It is therefore not only a person’s utterances that are deemed authentic or inauthentic, the entire person is viewed accordingly based on their origin. Textbook characters being predominantly native speakers may be partially rooted in such notions of authenticity. This prioritisation of native speakers is of course one that manifests itself within the fictional realm of learning materials. While the ramifications in that case may be considered diffuse or even negligible, similar biases come to bear on employment practices in many countries. The entrenched ideas of cultural and linguistic (i.e. textual) authenticity tend to favour people from native-speaking countries. Even if the native speaker is not mentioned directly, representations of authenticity tend to gravitate towards prestige varieties of the language due to the perceived cultural capital with which they are decorated and imbued. The Political Aspects of Authenticity

The political aspect of the FLTL industry, in particular English language teaching, has been discussed and problematised at great length (Canagarajah, 2008; Pennycook, 1994). The argument is that as language teachers, we are on the frontline where different nations, cultures and their underlying ideologies meet, and thus it behoves us to act with a critical understanding and an appropriate level of empathy and understanding (Crookes, 2013). As authenticity is part of the everyday vocabulary of FLTL, even to the extent of being used to market and sell materials and courses, it is vital that we acknowledge the political connotations of authenticity in our work. Authenticity is very much a political concept that is employed to assert the validity and superiority of one thing whilst decrying its rival as fake or inferior. As Umbach and Humphrey explain: Authenticity offers a conceptual language that renders other political concepts intelligible, and connects political ideas with lived experience. Ideas about authenticity form part of the preconditions for the ideological contestation of other political concepts in political argument. (Umbach & Humphrey, 2017: 9)

As such, authenticity is present in political discussions (by which we mean any discussions relating to human affairs) as a way of highlighting the correct or right way of being or doing, by contrasting it with the other way, which by extension is wrong or false. We will discuss the philosophical connotations of authenticity in the latter part of this chapter, but for now we can simply say that authenticity historically equates to being true to one’s self, and that one’s actions must be congruent with one’s beliefs in order to be authentic.

4  Authenticity Across Languages and Cultures

As we briefly discussed in the previous section, the concept of authenticity within FLTL is almost always, either overtly or indirectly, connected to some notion of the ideal ‘native speaker’. The ‘native speaker’ is heavily problematised and naturally such a concept is untenable for a language such as English, where the number of L2 speakers greatly outnumber those of L1 and its use around the globe is predominantly that of a lingua franca. Within FLTL, although the existence of the so-called ‘native speaker’ has been debated and the concept thoroughly debunked, the existence of real-world prejudices and discrimination based on the perception of ‘nativeness’ are very tangible. These are discussed under the term of native-speakerism, and authenticity is very central to these prejudices (see Lowe & Pinner, 2016 for further discussion of the link between authenticity and native-speakerism). By way of example, Figure 1.1 shows a close replica of a banner from a website in Japan which offers English lessons via teleconferencing. For purposes of anonymity, we have rechristened the company SenseiSabetsu and removed the photographs. The website is in Japanese, but we have carefully translated the banner into English. SenseiSabetsu offers one-toone lessons and boasts three types. The first type of lesson is with a ‘native instructor’ and is advertised as costing from 350 yen. The second type of lesson, also from 350 yen, is with a Japanese instructor who is clearly advertised as a ‘bilingual’, thus also invoking some sense of ownership of the language. The third type of lesson is with a Filipino instructor and costs only 187 yen. The ‘native’ teachers offer ‘beautiful pronunciation’, ‘natural expressions’ and ‘rich vocabulary’, whereas the Filipino teachers are merely ‘friendly’ and ‘good for people who want lots of lessons at a low cost’. The Japanese teacher is recommended for those who want to focus on ‘grammar, formal qualifications (such as language tests), and studying techniques’. They are also recommended for beginners. It is interesting to see how overtly this advertisement differentiates employees based purely on their nationality. The advert is also rather vague about the term ‘native’, but we can assume it means either a US or UK citizen (which, of course, would be no guarantee that the person spoke English as first language). There appears to be a hierarchy for English varieties, which expands around the world and influences employment practices, and this hierarchy is based on the notion of authenticity. In other words, who is the most authentic speaker of a language, what is the real version of the language, what is it supposed to sound like and how is it genuinely spoken? Of course, not just with English but with any language, these questions have no definitive answer as speech is unique right down to an individual’s voice and idiosyncratic way of speaking. And yet, so powerful is the association of authenticity throughout FLTL that students are sought, teachers are hired, lessons are sold and an entire industry is structured around this concept. The example illustrates also how different societies value the essentialist (i.e. collective) notion of

The Concept of Authenticity in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning  5

Figure 1.1  Example of an online language school in Japan

authenticity in contrast to the existentialist (i.e. individual) notion of authenticity. While the advertisement above seems ideologically acceptable in a country like Japan, the same cannot be said for many Western societies where such practices may be viewed as discriminatory. One reason for the persistence of authenticity as a political concept within FLTL is that the act of learning another language is often in and of itself a means for increasing one’s cultural capital. By this we mean that

6  Authenticity Across Languages and Cultures

the acquisition of another language makes one more socially mobile, more of a valuable asset to employers, better equipped to deal with international situations. Foreign languages are taught at many schools around the world, often as compulsory subjects, for the reason that having citizens who can converse and participate in the international arena can stimulate the economy. Private language schools are a multibillion-dollar industry, and the learning of a foreign language is more often than not sold as a means to a better life. Bourdieu’s ideas about capital, which he presented in Langage et Pouvoir Symbolique (Language and Symbolic Power) (2001), have been associated with the learning of other languages because language can almost be seen as a form of social currency which enables speakers access to certain other resources (Kanno & Norton, 2009; Norton, 2013; Norton Peirce, 1995). Cultural capital is, consciously or unconsciously, ascribed to speakers with particular accents (Block, 2014) and who match certain visual/racial stereotypes (Amin, 1999; Braine, 1999; Kubota & Lin, 2009). This, then, creates a hierarchy of authenticity which is based on simple linguistic traits such as accent, but it also naturally invokes other aspects too such as race and class, thereby perpetuating subtle forms of essentialism. As teachers and researchers who work within the field of FLTL, it is important to be aware of the existence of these prejudices and to do what we can to bolster our own students’ sense of self-worth as a speaker of another language. This is necessary in order to prepare them for the realities of their language use and in order to help eliminate the damaging forms of discrimination. Those working in the field of FLTL ought to seek to remedy asymmetrical power relations that exist in the world and are mediated through languages and the ideologies behind them, particularly those within our own institutions, whether they manifest themselves in employment practices or staffroom talk or even character representations in textbooks. Such discussions, we argue, far from being misplaced in a language lesson, can actually make for some very interesting authentic content. The Philosophical Concept of Authenticity

The subtitle of this book invokes identity as a key correlate of authenticity. In the humanities, the term authenticity features most prominently as a philosophical concept, with the individual acting as a potentially dynamic agent apt to construct authenticity in conscious acts of self-­ realisation. The individual will thereby shape – or fail to shape – their own personal identity. This concept is one of the central tenets in ­existentialism. Paradoxically, it is quite the opposite of what the ­native-speaker mystique is predicated on. Spelled out and applied to particular individual practices one may say that ‘an action is authentic when it realises a free choice and is an expression of what a person genuinely feels and believes’ (Van Lier, 1996: 13). In the

The Concept of Authenticity in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning  7

context of language learning, Van Lier has been the first to reference existentialism as his conceptual starting point, which entails a focus on the individual actors and their inner senses. He concurrently states that authenticity ‘has nothing to do with the origination of the linguistic material brought into the classroom’ (Van Lier, 1996: 127), a notion harking back to Widdowson’s seminal statement that it would be ‘better to consider authenticity not as a quality residing in instances of language’ (Widdowson, 1976: 263). Van Lier’s explicit alignment with existentialism deserves a rigorous continuation, for it promises advancements in conceptual depth. This chapter is thus not a re-conceptualisation but a philosophically informed extension of hitherto vague and disparate strands in FLTL. Sartre and Heidegger are among the authors most commonly invoked as one seeks an understanding of existentialist authenticity. While Heidegger ostensibly intends his account of authenticity to be ‘purely and ontologically descriptive rather than ethically and ontically critical’ (O’Brien, 2011: 71), it is Sartre who accompanies authenticity with rather explicit value propositions. In L’Etre et le Néant (Being and Nothingness), authenticity is contrasted with mauvaise foi (‘bad faith’): [It is not the case] that one cannot radically escape bad faith. But this requires the individual to recover actively from being foul, a recovery which we will call authenticity. (Sartre, 1943: 111; translation by LW)1

If authenticity presupposes an escape from bad faith, then it is worth exploring the concept of bad faith in order to approximate a grasp on authenticity: Bad faith has the structure of a lie. Only what changes everything is that, in bad faith, it is to myself that I hide the truth [...] bad faith does not come from outside the human reality. You do not suffer from bad faith, you are not infected by it, it is not a state. But consciousness affects itself in bad faith. [...] I must know as a deceiver the truth that is hidden from me as I am deceived. Better still, I must know this truth very precisely in order to hide it from myself more carefully (Sartre, 1943: 89; translation by LW)2

Bad faith is thus quite clearly undesirable, yet its precise meaning remains elusive. Setting Sartre’s statements against Heidegger’s Sein und Zeit (Being and Time) serves to elucidate the issue. Similarly to Sartre, Heidegger advances a correlate of inauthenticity (Uneigentlichkeit), which is more cogently laid out than authenticity itself. That correlate is das man, which derives from the impersonal singular pronoun man and is often translated as ‘the One’ as in ‘One should never …’. Because ‘das Man’ [...] prescribes all judgments and decisions, it relieves the respective existence of responsibility. ‘Das Man’ can afford, as it were, that one constantly refers to it. It can most easily answer for everything,

8  Authenticity Across Languages and Cultures

because it is not one who has to stand up for anything. [...] Everyone is the other and no one is himself. [...] One is in a mode of dependence and inauthenticity. (Heidegger, 1963: 127–128; translation by LW)3

Inauthenticity is conceptualised as an individual’s pre-reflexive adherence to social norms. Conversely, ‘the authentic person is seldom a conventional person. The concept of authenticity is not a concept of adjustment’ (Grene, 1952: 270). The ideal of individuality had already gained some currency at the time. In 1897, Oscar Wilde writes scathingly in De Profundis: ‘Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else’s opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation’ (Wilde, 2001: 16). Still, the existentialists oppose determinism with an absoluteness that exceeds Locke’s deliberations on personal identity, Rousseau’s introspection and Nietzsche’s assertion that ‘God is dead’. Being thrown into the world (Geworfenheit), the individual should not look to others for orientation but develop a resoluteness (Entschlossenheit) in realising their own desires, motifs and beliefs. Authenticity develops into the conceptual fulcrum of existentialism and, quite surprisingly, it emanates into the public discourse. Today, saying that a person is authentic will not result in puzzlement among a non-academic audience (Coupland, 2003: 417; Firozi, 2016). To the contrary, ‘[a]uthenticity seems to be the value of the moment, rolling off the tongues of politicians, celebrities, Web gurus, college admissions advisers, reality television stars’ (Rosenbloom, 2011: 1). The term’s colloquial meaning is illustrated by an analysis of the two candidates running for the American presidential office in 2016: With his willingness to violate social norms and make off-the-cuff remarks, Trump certainly comes across as true to himself. By contrast, many voters (including Jon Stewart) seem to think Hillary Clinton’s public persona comes off as controlled, cold, and fundamentally inauthentic. [...] But when a person strays from socially acceptable behavior, we attribute their actions to their inner dispositions and conclude that the person is being authentic. (Leary, 2016)

The conceptual and terminological cohesion is remarkable given that much of the philosophical nomenclature is either absent in everyday discourse or semantically distorted as it transitions to the colloquial realm. However, the description of how Trump and Clinton are perceived as authentic and inauthentic, respectively, points to the one criticism that is commonly levelled against authenticity, namely that the concept is susceptible to narcissism. Socially divergent behaviour might be glorified as authentic for its mere defiance of das Man. Charles Taylor addresses this problem stating that authenticity can’t be defended in ways that collapse horizons of significance. Even the sense that the significance of my life comes from its being chosen – the case where authenticity is actually grounded on

The Concept of Authenticity in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning  9

self-determining freedom – depends on the understanding that independent of my will there is something noble, courageous, and hence significant in giving shape to my own life. [...] It may be important that my life be chosen, [...] but unless some options are more significant than others, the very idea of self-choice falls into triviality and hence incoherence. (Taylor, 1991: 38–39)

Sartre himself sees to pre-empt such claims, stating that the individual committed to self-realisation must follow the premise that choosing oneself means ‘choosing everyone else’ (Sartre, 2002: 4),4 which is clearly reminiscent of Kant’s categorical imperative. Authenticity as a vacuous defiance of norms is thus insufficient according to Sartre. We may hazard a hypothesis that Joe Biden’s presidential campaign in 2020 acknowledged such shortcomings. In one of the televised debates, Biden commits a Trump-like breach of decorum when hissing at his adversary: ‘Just shut up, man!’ Unlike Trump however, Biden’s image had been thoroughly groomed with highly moralistic positions from climate change to immigration, thus abiding by the Sartrean principle. In the context of FLTL, such moral intricacies need not govern educational praxis. Rather, it shall suffice to point out the link between authenticity and language learner autonomy (Little et al., 2017), which ultimately takes us back to Van Lier’s understanding of authenticity as established above. Veering between Essentialism and Existentialism

The conceptual babel that is authenticity can be sorted into the six distinct meanings previously introduced (see also Will, 2018). Cutting across this taxonomy, however, is a polar undercurrent with essentialist notions at the one extreme and existentialist notions at the other (see Pinner, 2019). By essentialism we refer to a theory that ascribes a certain inherent essence to all members of a group or culture. Since membership is determined by birth and upbringing, the essence that comes with it is ordained upon the individual rather than actively achieved. The essence may comprise cultural norms, practices, values and the like. However, in FLTL, these rather diffuse elements are accompanied by one very specific quality, namely language proficiency. It is for this reason that essentialism in FLTL amounts to what has been termed native-speakerism, i.e. the idea that growing up in a certain linguistic environment will yield individuals who infallibly function as language models and, by extension, will make excellent language teachers of their mother tongue. An illustrative example of this essentialist presupposition is the online language school in Japan offering courses at different price points (see above), of which the highest category consists of classes exclusively taught by native speakers. The latter being advertised as the vessels of ‘beautiful

10  Authenticity Across Languages and Cultures

pronunciation, natural expressions and rich vocabulary’ is indicative of how essentialist notions in FLTL can play out. The phrasing invokes naturalness, which is semantically contiguous to authenticity while carrying a similarly positive connotation. This case exemplifies the barriers for nonnative speakers who aim for a decent-paying job in the business but cannot overcome their roots regardless of how qualified they are. On a more subliminal level, the overtness of the advertisement stands to normalise the unequal allotment of cultural capital based on essentialism. This normalising effect is equally at play with learning materials predominantly portraying characters from the Anglo-American realm. In the latter case, one is hard-pressed to identify specific individuals who are put at a disadvantage, but seeds are planted and assumptions are perpetuated, with the target groups – more often than not – being in their formative years. To expose essentialism, it makes sense to take a point-of-reference approach to understanding authenticity. If, for example, the online language school in Japan were to describe their native-speaker-taught classes as ‘authentic learning’, it stands to reason that ‘authentic’ would refer to the aforementioned essence, namely the teachers’ nationalities with all their concomitant qualities. The use of the word would be in line with ‘authentic Indian food’ where the reference point is a certain prototype, if not stereotype, of geographically situated practices, ideally represented by a true Indian chef. The essence allows for slight variations, but one would surely be perplexed to find pasta dishes on the menu. The essence is constituted by what most people in a given community do, what they have done traditionally, what they typically look like and so on. Essentialism is therefore rooted in the concept of collective identity (or social identity) as opposed to personal identity (Rucht, 1995: 9–10). 5 Although the essentialist reference point is malleable, it retains a certain degree of stability through its sociocultural moorings. This is not the case for the existentialist concept of authenticity. Here, the point of reference is a moving target, for it depends on the personal identity of the individual: ‘the achievement of an authentic self [is contingent upon] the creation of a personal belief system by means of which the individual acknowledges that his first loyalty is to himself. The key reference points are set from the inside’ (Giddens, 1991: 80). Authenticity has thus two potential reference points, which are difficult to reconcile, for one of them stresses group affiliation while the other stresses individuality.6 Across the globe, foreign languages are learned and taught under vastly different conditions. What remains consistent is that identities are involved and that language is an inherent part of anyone’s identity. The edited volume at hand seeks to analyse a number of starkly divergent FLTL contexts with a watchful eye to issues of authenticity. It is thus the human element in language learning and teaching that receives particular attention, while the unique distinction of this book emerges through a juxtaposition of agency and structure. After all, any language

The Concept of Authenticity in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning  11

learning experience hinges on its sociocultural situatedness, allowing for interesting explorations against the backdrop of authenticity. Notes (1) [C]ela ne veut pas dire qu’on ne puisse échapper radicalement à la mauvaise foi. Mais cela suppose une reprise de l’être pourri par lui-même que nous nommerons authenticité. (2) La mauvaise foi a donc en apparence la structure du mensonge. Seulement, ce qui change tout, c’est que, dans la mauvaise foi, c’est à moi-même que je masque la vérité. [...] [L]a mauvaise foi ne vient pas du dehors à la réalité humaine. On ne subit pas sa mauvaise foi, on n’en est pas infecté, ce n’est pas un état. Mais la conscience s’affecte elle-même de mauvaise foi. [...] [J]e dois savoir en tant que trompeur la vérité qui m’est masquée en tant que je suis trompé. Mieux encore je dois savoir très précisément cette vérité pour me la cacher plus soigneusement. (3) Weil das Man [...] alles Urteilen und Entscheiden vorgibt, nimmt es dem jeweiligen Dasein die Verantwortlichkeit ab. Das Man kann es sich gleichsam leisten, daß ‚man‘ sich ständig auf es beruft. Es kann am leichtesten alles verantworten, weil keiner es ist, der für etwas einzustehen braucht. […] Jeder ist der Andere und Keiner er selbst. [...] Man ist in der Weise der Unselbständigkeit und Uneigentlichkeit. (4) Quand nous disons que l’homme se choisit, nous entendons que chacun d’entre nous se choisit, mais par là nous voulons dire aussi qu’en se choisissant il choisit tous les hommes. En effet, il n’est pas un de nos actes qui, en créant l’homme que nous voulons être, ne crée en même temps une image de l’homme tel que nous estimons qu’il doit être. (5) In der Psychologie und Sozialpychologie [sic] steht ‚personale‘ Identität zumeist für die Einzigartigkeit des Individuums (‚individuelles Selbst‘). Dagegen verweist ‚soziale‘ Identität auf die überindividuelle Prägung der Person etwa als Träger bestimmter Rollen, Inhaber eines bestimmten Status oder Angehöriger eines bestimmten Kulturkreises (‚kollektives Selbst‘). (6) The only interface between the two is when a person makes a free choice to cohere with group norms. Emcke calls this type of choice ‘voluntary selectivity’ (2018: 27–28).

References Amin, N. (1999) Minority women teachers of ESL: Negotiating white English. In G. Braine (ed.) Non-Native Educators in English Language Teaching (pp. 93–104). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum. Appel, J. (1995) Diary of a Language Teacher. Oxford: Heinemann (European Language Classroom). Block, D. (2014) Social Class in Applied Linguistics. London: Routledge. Bourdieu, P. and Thompson, J.B. (2001) Langage et Pouvoir Symbolique. Paris: Seuil (Points Essais, 461). Braine, G. (1999) From the periphery to the center: One teacher’s journey. In G. Braine (ed.) Non-Native Educators in English Language Teaching (pp. 15–28). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum. Canagarajah, A.S. (2008) The politics of English language teaching. In N.H. Hornberger (ed.) Encyclopedia of Language and Education (pp. 213–227). Boston: Springer US. Coupland, N. (2003) Sociolinguistic authenticities. Journal of Sociolinguistics 7 (3), 417–431. Crookes, G.V. (2013) Critical ELT in Action: Foundations, Promises, Praxis. London: Routledge.

12  Authenticity Across Languages and Cultures

Davies, A. (1984) Simple, simplified and simplification. What is authentic? In C.J. Alderson and A.H. Urquhart (eds) Reading in a Foreign Language (pp. 181–195). Harlow: Longman. Emcke, C. (2018) Kollektive Identitäten. Sozialphilosophische Grundlagen. Frankfurt: Fischer. Firozi, P. (2016) Barbara Boxer rejects that Clinton is “inauthentic”: “She’s WASPy”. www.thehill.com. See http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/283987barbara-boxer-rejects-that-clinton-is-inauthentic-shes (accessed June 2016). Giddens, A. (1991) Modernity and Self-Identity. Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Cambridge: Polity Press. Grene, M. (1952) Authenticity: An existential virtue. Ethics 62 (4), 266–274. Harmer, J. (1983) The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman. Heidegger, M. (1963) Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Kanno, Y. and Norton, B. (2009) Imagined communities and educational possibilities: Introduction. Journal of Language, Identity & Education 2 (4), 241–249. Kubota, R. and Lin, A. (eds) (2009) Race, Culture, and Identities in Second Language Education: Exploring Critically Engaged Practice. London: Routledge. Leary, M. (2016) Psychology shows why we shouldn’t elect “authentic” candidates like Donald Trump. Quartz. See http://qz.com/754055/psychology-shows-we-shouldntelect-authentic-candidates-like-donald-trump/ (accessed August 2016). Lee, W.Y. (1995) Authenticity revisited: Text authenticity and learner authenticity. ELT Journal 49 (4), 323–328. Little, D., Dam, L. and Legenhausen, L. (2017) Language Learner Autonomy: Theory, Practice and Research. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Little, D., Devitt, S.M. and Singleton, D.M. (1989) Learning Foreign Languages from Authentic Texts. Theory and Practice. Dublin: Authentik. Lowe, R.J. and Pinner, R.S. (2016) Finding the connections between native-speakerism and authenticity. Applied Linguistics Review 7 (1), 27–52. Margić, B.D. and Vodopija-Krstanović, I. (2018) English language education in Croatia: Elitist purism or paradigmatic shift? In G. Ferguson, B. Seidlhofer, N. Sifakis and Z. Tatsioka (eds) Using English as a Lingua Franca in Education in Europe (pp. 51–72). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Morrow, K. (1977) Authentic texts and ESP. In S. Holden (ed.) English for Specific Purposes (pp. 13–15). London: Modern English Publications. Nunan, D. (1989) Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Norton Peirce, B. (1995) Social identity, investment, and language learning. TESOL Quarterly 29 (1), 9–31. Norton, B. (2013) Identity and Language Learning: Extending the Conversation (2nd edn). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. O’Brien, M. (2011) Heidegger and Authenticity. From Resoluteness to Releasement. New York: Continuum. Pennycook, A. (1994) The Cultural Politics of English as an International Language (Reprint 2013 edn). Abingdon: Routledge. Pinner, R.S. (2019) Social Authentication and Teacher-Student Motivational Synergy: A Narrative of Language Teaching. Abingdon: Routledge. Rosenbloom, S. (2011) Authentic? Get Real. The New York Times. See http://www.nytimes. com/2011/09/11/fashion/for-only-the-authentic-cultural-studies.html?pagewanted=1&_ r=2 (accessed April 2013). Rucht, D. (1995) Kollektive Identität: Konzeptionelle Überlegungen zu einem Desiderat der Bewegungsforschung. Forschungsjournal Soziale Bewegungen 8 (2), 9–23. Sartre, J.P. (1943) L’être et le néant. Essai d’ontologie phénoménologique. Paris: Gallimard.

The Concept of Authenticity in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning  13

Sartre, J.P. (2002) L’existentialisme est un humanisme. Paris: Gallimard (first published in 1946). Taylor, C. (1991) The Ethics of Authenticity. Cumberland: Harvard University Press. Umbach, M. and Humphrey, M. (2017) Authenticity: The Cultural History of a Political Concept. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Van Lier, L. (1996) Interaction in the Language Curriculum. Awareness, Autonomy and Authenticity. New York: Longman. Widdowson, H.G. (1976) The authenticity of language data. In J.F. Fanselow and R.H. Crymes (eds.) On TESOL ‘76. Selections based on teaching done at the Tenth Annual TESOL Convention (261–270). Washington, DC: TESOL. Wilde, O. (2001) De Profundis. Phoenix-Library.org. (first published in 1897). Wilkins, D.A. (1976) Notional Syllabuses. A Taxonomy and its Relevance to Foreign Language Curriculum Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Will, L. (2018) Authenticity in English Language Teaching: An Analysis of Academic Discourse. Münster, New York: Waxmann. Young, D.J. (1993) Processing strategies of foreign language readers: Authentic and edited input. Foreign Language Annals 26 (4), 451–468.

Part 1 Authenticity and Language Teaching

2 «Что такое аутентичность»?1 The Concept(s) of Authenticity in Russian as a Foreign Language Wolfgang Stadler and Anna Dreher

What is it that helps students participate genuinely in learning activities that they consider personally relevant …? Florentina Taylor, 2013: 1

Introduction to Authenticity in Russian as a Foreign Language Teaching

This question in the epigraph is taken from Florentina Taylor’s book Self and Identity in Adolescent Foreign Language Learning. Not only does it constitute Taylor’s ‘decade-long interest’ in the various factors that make up genuine and authentic (=a.) learning (Taylor, 2013: 1), but it also expresses our curiosity in a. Russian language teaching, in genuine texts and materials, a. assessment and in all the other complex issues of a conceptual taxonomy for authenticity (=A.) in the teaching of Russian as a foreign language (RFL). Widdowson (1978: 80) was the first to highlight the difference between genuineness and authenticity, applying the first term to the attributes of a text itself, and using the latter as a characteristic of the relationship or interaction between reader and text. In Russian, there are three words corresponding to the English term A.: аутентичность, достоверность and подлинность, literally meaning authenticity, credibility and genuineness. As with Widdowson, it is mainly the term аутентичность (=A.) that is widely used in the Russian research literature and in Russian textbooks, while the other two terms, подлинность (genuineness) and especially достоверность (credibility), ‘have failed to catch on in the [RFL] discourse’ – a statement used by Will (2018: 24) for the few instances where genuine is used to describe nonadapted or non-pedagogic English texts. The methodological dictionary 17

18  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

Novyj slovar’ metodičeskich terminov i ponjatij by Azimov and Ščukin (2009) lists подлинный (genuine) as a synonym of аутентичный (=a.) (Azimov & Ščukin, 2009: 25), meaning originating from the source. In the authors’ view, the source of real speech activities can only be the native speaker, who produces texts that per se are original and not aimed at learners’ needs or specific competence levels but intended as messages to other speakers in the community. Yet, on the other hand, they say a. tasks and learning activities are dependent on newspapers, magazines, public transport and theatre tickets, letters, advertisements and announcements, radio and TV programmes (Azimov & Ščukin, 2009: 25) originating from this community. According to the authors, a. tasks promote real-life communication while being based on those a. materials. They do concede, however, that the materials may need to be shortened, adapted or adjusted to fit the specific teaching and learning objectives in the RFL classroom. So, what role does the Russian native speaker play? Is s/he still the role model we have emulated and striven for in teaching, with tasks and language use situations as close to the Russian culture and the Russian environment as possible? ‘[T]he issue of authenticity is deeply implicated in the problem of native-speakerism’, writes Pinner (2016: 47), and while the native speaker of English may be dead (Paikeday, 1985), we see the Russian native speaker very much alive and in opposition to the инофон (speaker of another language) or неноситель языка (non-native speaker) (Charčenko, 2015: 105). According to Charčenko (2015), Russian native speakers as the a. source of real speech activities are defined on the basis of their языковая личность (linguistic identity), лингвокультурная грамотность (linguocultural literacy) and their языковая деятельность (mastery of language skills), which are mainly characterised through the absence of errors made by non-native speakers, as in Charčenko (2015: 108): ‘[Г]лавным критерием, по которому можно определить носителей языка, является количество и качество допущенных ошибок’. Bykova (2014: 120) goes even further when she states that only a native speaker of language and culture, a Russian-speaking teacher, is able to fully combat communication errors and mistakes of foreign students. Somewhat exaggeratingly, we could say that the Russian native speaker is flawless, adheres to linguistic norms, represents the sociocultural Russian community, and both actively and genuinely uses his/her L1 in each and every domain of life. The non-native speaker, however, is faulty, linguistically and culturally incompetent, displays inauthentic behaviour and distorts the Russian language towards the system of his/her own L1. The sections below deal with the implication of the various concepts of A. and native-speakerism in the academic RFL discourse, starting with an overview of the literature on subject-specific education, moving on to Russian language policy documents, analysing MAPRJaL (International

The Concept(s) of Authenticity in Russian as a Foreign Language  19

Association of Teachers of Russian Language and Literature) collections and selected research papers taken from journals of the past 20 years. We will also explore whether the terms a./A. are negotiated explicitly or implicitly (Will, 2018), which role the concept of the Russian native speaker plays and whether the terms appear as parts of the same concepts as expressed by Azimov and Ščukin’s (2009) in task А., real-world materials and textual А., the last being the most consolidated and ‘wide-spread’ concept of A., according to Will (2018: 58). We will investigate which role the other concepts play – namely A. of text reception, A. of individual behaviour, classroom A. and cultural A., according to Will (2018), and whether they figure at all in RFL literature. Finally, we will present an overview of the concept(s) of A. as discernible in the RFL discourse. Authenticity in the Russian as a Foreign Language Literature

For this section, we have selected six textbooks (i.e. introductions to RFL), namely Bergmann (ed. 2014), Ščukin (2012), Bykova (2014), Petrikova et al. (2015), Lysakova (ed. 2016) and Akišina and Kagan (2018). The most elaborate and detailed explanations of the terms a./A. are to be found in Bergmann’s Fachdidaktik Russisch (ed. 2014), in Ščukin (2012) and in Lysakova (ed. 2016). In Bergmann (ed. 2014), it is the concepts of text A. and real-life A. that are invoked primarily. With regard to text A., the contributors point out that as soon as real target language derived from text corpora is used in the foreign language classroom, it becomes detached from the target-culture-related context. The original communication among native speakers is transferred into another discourse world, thus losing its status of being ‘authentic’ (Bergmann, ed. 2014: 54). It is also emphasised that the A. of materials is supported by the use of (modern) media. Further important key words in Bergmann (ed. 2014) are task A. and assessment A. Not only learning tasks, but also test tasks should be designed in such a way as to contain the most a. use of language possible, and the same should be demanded from learners’ performances (Bergmann, ed. 2014: 92). Having said that with obvious reference to the concept of TBLT, in her most recent contribution, however, Bergmann (2020: 12) takes a different point of view regarding text selection, as she thinks it is high time to question the general request for authenticity. This stance may also hold true for classroom assessment, as especially in teacher-made tests a reference to real-life (real-world A.) is not always feasible. Yet teachers would be ill-advised to ignore target language use situations by and large (Bergmann, ed. 2014: 290), even if ‘absolute authenticity is unobtainable on a test’ (Basturkmen & Elder, 2006: 688). In Ščukin (2012), we find a total of 37 mentions of the term a. on 638 pages, most of which concern textual A. (31 times). Other collocations to be found are ‘а. произношение’ and ‘а. общение’ (a. pronunciation and a. communication), where the former is defined as ‘free of

20  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

accent’ (безакцентное), resembling the pronunciation of the native speaker (Ščukin, 2012: 77). The Russian native speaker is also very present in the definition of a. texts given by Ščukin: ‘[...] они содержат материал, являющийся реальным продуктом носителей языка, не предназначены специально для дидактических целей, но используются на занятиях с учебной целью для формирования коммуникативной компетенции’ 2 (Ščukin, 2012: 479). Interestingly, the author also mentions the concept of A. of individual behaviour (Ščukin, 2012: 28) at one point, when defining a. communication as communication on any topic (‘а. тип общения’ как ‘общение на свободную тему’) (see also Will, 2020: 10–11). In the textbooks on RFL by Bykova (2014), Petrikova et al. (2015), Lysakova (ed. 2016) and Akišina and Kagan (2018), the concepts of textual А. as well as real-life A. dominate again, but cultural A. is also mentioned in some instances – especially in connection with a. materials which are said to have true cultural potential (Lysakova, ed. 2016: 247). It should be noted, though, that in the most recently published textbook (Akišina & Kagan, 2018), the term a. is neither defined nor negotiated at any point. Does this mean that by 2018 the term has already become a common and self-explanatory term in the RFL discourse, whose negotiation the authors no longer consider necessary? The section below on A. in MAPRJaL Collections will help to answer this question. Authenticity in Russian as a Foreign Language Policy Documents

In this section, we will consult (the Russian translation (OKVIJa, 2005) of) the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) and its Companion Volume, look at examples of Russian curricula/syllabi (for the use of these terms see Alter in this volume) in Austrian and German schools of secondary language education, and we will also scan the Russian version (EPPIJa) of the European Portfolio for Student Teachers of Languages (EPOSTL=CoE, 2007) in order to reveal which role A. plays in these documents. CEFR

Written or spoken texts are a. when they are ‘produced for communicative purposes with no language teaching intent’ (CEFR, 2001: 145). Curiously, this explicit definition given as a participial phrase is missing in the Russian version OKVIJa (2005). A. texts can be ‘неадаптированные’ (untreated) as in daily newspapers or broadcasts, or they can be ‘специально подобранные и адаптированные’, ‘специально составленные’, ‘обработанные’ (selected, graded and/or edited) ‘so as to be judged appropriate to the learner’s experience, interests and characteristics’ (CEFR, 2001: 146). They can even be composed to resemble a. texts

The Concept(s) of Authenticity in Russian as a Foreign Language  21

(‘приближенные к аутентичным’). Not in all cases is the term explicitly negotiated as in the example above in the English CEFR original. Mostly, synonyms such as ‘unmodified’ are used to explain what a. entails (‘чтения “неадаптированных” аутентичных текстов – газет, журналов, книг, вывесок и объявлений’) and examples are given to clarify what the a. sources might be – newspapers, magazines, books, public signs and notices (OKVIJa, 2005: 135). Implicit mentioning of A., by which is meant the use of the term without explaining its meaning (Will, 2018: 102), occurs, for example, in the descriptor for sociolinguistic competence in appropriate social settings – ‘by exposure to authentic language’ (OKVIJa, 2005: 154). An explicit mentioning is obvious in the phrase ‘face to face with native speakers’ (OKVIJa, 2005: 143), by which the authors once again stress one of the general approaches to learning a second or foreign language. Most commonly, however, there is no explicit negotiation of A. at all in OKVIJa (2005) but a mere and relaxed appearance of the word a. in numerous collocations with text(s) (‘a. тексты’ in 14 out of 20 entries), while collocations such as a. language, a. interaction, a. discourse, a. situation, a. use and a. utterances occur only one time respectively – a fact that emphasises the dominance of textual A. in the Council of Europe’s Russian Framework edition. Finally, it should be noted that – astoundingly – the CEFR Companion Volume with New Descriptors (Council of Europe, 2018) does not contain the terms a./A. at all. 3 Curricula

The Lehrplan für Fremdsprachen (Erste, Zweite) (Curriculum/ Syllabus for (First, Second) Foreign Languages) used in Austrian General Secondary Schools (Allgemein bildende höhere Schulen) lists eight entries of the term ‘authent-’. The first three appear in the Section ‘Didactic (Subject-specific) Principles’, suggesting that a. encounters (with native speakers) should be fostered in the language classroom and that the greatest possible A. would be achieved with the help of ‘new technologies’, using the foreign language as an a. means in activities of interdisciplinary communication (https://tinyurl.com/vus4njf). In the section ‘Didactic Principles’ for learners in Grades 5–8, A. is highlighted under the heading ‘Communicative Competence as the Overall Learning Objective’ in connection with linguistic means and target language use situations. With regard to teaching methods, learning strategies and classroom activities, both teaching materials and texts should be up-to-date and a. In all instances, the stem [a]uthent- is simply used as a catchword of sorts, presupposing that the recipients know and understand what the word means and relying on its positive connotation. No explicit definition of the term is given.

22  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

A search of the Gemeinsamer Rahmenlehrplan (Framework Curriculum) for Russian for Berlin and Brandenburg Schools leads to 19 results and delivers a similar picture as the Austrian Lehrplan (https://tinyurl. com/yyctxf6z). Under the heading ‘Learning Objectives’, the stem ‘authent-’ is used in collocations with encounters, materials and texts. A. texts need to be applied for promoting functional communicative competence. Listening and audio-visual reception as well as reading comprehension should be trained by means of a. texts at stages F, G and H (which correspond to the CEFR levels A2, B1 and B2) by using simple texts for reading at A2 level and longer reading texts at B1 and B2. For mediation, a. texts are suitable at B1 level; complex texts can be used for mediation only at B2. So, we see that also in the German curricula the word a. is used without further explanation, its meaning being taken for granted, as no explicit definition of the term is provided. EPOSTL

In this reflection tool for language teacher education, the word a. appears twice in the scales captioned ‘Методика’ (methodology), indicating what teachers should achieve when dealing with speaking and writing skills in class: ‘I can evaluate and select a variety of materials to stimulate speaking activities/writing (authentic materials, visual aids etc.)’ (Council of Europe, 2007: 21; 23). The Russian version EPPIJa (https://tinyurl.com/ y8dn68nv) uses the synonym ‘неадаптированный материал’ (nonadapted material) instead of the expression ‘a. materials’ in the original. In the glossary, the word ‘native speaker’ is used in the definitions of ‘communication strategies’ and ‘compensation strategies’: Strategies are equated with tactics used either by learners, for example, when ‘basing what is written on models, phrases, words taken from native speaker sources’ (Council of Europe, 2007: 74) or by native speakers and learners of a language ‘when they do not know, or cannot immediately recall a word or words needed when speaking or writing’ (Council of Europe, 2007: 75). So, in short, the native speaker is the role model learners should turn to in class, when they are at a loss for words, or when they use or copy language from genuine sources to give their own writing an ‘authentic’ touch. Authenticity in MAPRJaL Collections (2015, 2019)

For this section, we analysed two anthologies of the International Association of Teachers of Russian Language and Literature (MAPRJaL 2015; MAPRJaL, 2019), searching for the terms a./A. in order to find out how much attention is paid to the topic of A. by RFL methodologists and among Russian teachers, and which concepts of A. are dealt with in the two collections.

The Concept(s) of Authenticity in Russian as a Foreign Language  23

In purely quantitative terms, the term a. is mentioned 78 times (across 1183 pages) in the 2015 anthology. Two contributions feature a./A. in the title. In the most recent anthology from 2019 (2055 pages in total), the term a./A. is mentioned only 51 times and only one contribution in the entire anthology gives prominence to the word a. in its title. Does this mean that the interest in the topic has somewhat diminished in the RFL discourse during the past four years? The dominant collocations, which are formed by the adjective a. in both anthologies, are ‘a. тексты’ (a. texts) and ‘a. (аудио-/видео-) материалы’ (a. audio/video materials). Thus, we see once again that textual A. exclusively represents the various concepts of A. In the volumes analysed, the following collocations can be found: • volume 2015 (one occurrence respectively): ‘а. языковая среда’, ‘а. коммуникация’ (also ‘а. акт общения’, ‘а. речь’, ‘а. реакции’), ‘а. тесты’, ‘а. продукт’, ‘а. учебно-научный дискурс’, ‘а. контент’, ‘а. источники’, ‘а. ситуации’, ‘а. модели поведения’, ‘а. обстановка’, ‘а. фамилии’; the collocation ‘а. языковые ресурсы’ occurs twice;4 • volume 2019 (one occurrence respectively): ‘a. источники’, ‘а. конструкции’, ‘а. контекст’, ‘а. передача’, ‘а. ситуации’, ‘а. способы/ приемы’, ‘а. языковая среда’; the collocations ‘а. образцы речи’ and ‘а. русская речь’ appear twice. 5 Additionally, not only are the adjectives ‘подлинный’/‘достоверный’ (genuine/credible) used as synonyms for a., but also ‘естественный’, ‘реальный’, ‘реально существующий в языке’, ‘оригинальный’ (natural, real, really existing in the language, original). It is noticeable that in most contributions, the terms a./A. are used implicitly or rather casually (Ex. 1), and only in a few are they explicitly negotiated (Ex. 2). (1) Если говорить об учебном материале, то наиболее эффективным для формирования и совершенствования языковой и коммуникативной компетенций, на наш взгляд, является использование аутентичных текстов из отраслевых журналов нефтегазового профиля.6 (MAPRJaL, 2015: 540, emphases added) (2) Большую роль в развитии и поддержании мотивации к изучению иностранного языка играет использование на уроках аутентичных материалов, отражающих реальную языковую действительность и способствующих эффективному формированию культурологической компетенции.7 (MAPRJaL, 2019: 1043, emphasis added) However, in the older MAPRJaL collection (2015), the terms a./A. are explicitly explained in 10 instances, while in the more recent volume (2019), this is the case only in three. In many definitions of (textual) A., the Russian native speaker is mentioned in one way or another, such as ‘аутентичные тексты, созданные носителями языка в условиях естественного речевого общения’8 (MAPRJaL, 2015: 37) or ‘устные и

24  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

письменные материалы, изначально созданные носителями языка для носителей языка’ 9 (MAPRJaL, 2015: 189). In the second volume, for example, we find the following quotation, highlighting the importance of direct contact with Russian native speakers’ authentic speech: ‘[...] студент, не имеющий непосредственного общения с носителями изучаемого языка, лишен возможности услышать аутентичную русскую речь’10 (MAPRJaL, 2019: 1148). Having discursively analysed both anthologies, we may conclude that only four out of the six concepts of A. according to Will (2018) are displayed in varying degrees: textual A. (dominant); real-world A.; cultural A. (in a limited form and in connection with textual A.); and A. of individual behaviour (in a very limited form, only marginally). Surprisingly, in consonance with our results, the concept of real-world A. and the closely connected task A. do not attract much attention among Russian methodologists. In connection with real-life tasks, the term a. is only used in a few instances (e.g. MAPRJaL, 2015: 136, 189, 192). The concept of A. of individual behaviour is even more sporadic in these anthologies, as only two references occur (see Ex. 3 and 4): (3) Теоретики педагогики и психологии неоднократно подчеркивали важность осмысленной, значимой тематики в контексте аутентичной коммуникации, а также фокус на общении и его результатах, а не на грамматических конструкциях.11 (MAPRJaL, 2015: 190, emphasis added) (4) Работа по аутентичным текстам, отобранным с учетом актуальности информации и коммуникативных потребностей учащихся, [...].12 (MAPRJaL, 2015: 541, emphasis added) This insignificance seems all the more astounding taking into consideration how relevant and influential real-life A. and A. of individual behaviour have become in the current Western RFL – influenced by the discourse on real-life exposure and task-based language teaching and learning in literature on English as a second or a foreign language (cf. Ellis, 2003; Nunan, 2004; Pinner, 2014, 2016; Ushioda, 2011b). As already mentioned above, the terms a./A. are less present in the more recent volume (2019) and are negotiated explicitly only in a few places. This may be interpreted in the sense that the authors already take the meaning of a. for granted and therefore do not provide a definition. This attitude is detrimental to the academic discourse: In the 2019 anthology, we find some imprecise and contradictory formulations, such as: ‘Грамматический материал изучается непосредственно в контексте лексических тем на основе художественных и аутентичных текстов’13 (MAPRJaL, 2019: 1259), hereby suggesting that fictional texts are not authentic. Another quote goes ‘Объективные атрибуты языковой среды [...] вне языковой среды частично компенсируются аутентичными текстами (в широком понимании)’14 (MAPRJaL, 2019: 1327), leaving

The Concept(s) of Authenticity in Russian as a Foreign Language  25

open what exactly is meant here by ‘а. texts in а broad sense’. In order to avoid such unclarities or pitfalls, authors should be more accurate and precise in their expressions and provide references or unambiguous definitions of the terms, even if to them they may seem self-explanatory. The Concept(s) of Authenticity in Selected Russian Research (2000–2020)

For this section, a total of 35 papers written in Russian and published during the past 20 years were subjected to a discourse analysis (for a full list, see: https://tinyurl.com/yxmrasqv). The paramount criterion for the selection of the articles was the explicit mentioning of the terms a./A. in the title of the article, as we assumed that the authors would deal with the concept of A. specifically and explain it in detail. Another reason for the timeframe was that older papers seemed too difficult to access. All 35 contributions chosen for the analysis can be assigned to the academic discourse of foreign language education (for both school and university). When selecting our texts, we investigated, first, the tables of contents and, second, the bibliographies in order to determine which authors or works are most relevant and most frequently cited in the RFL discourse. In addition to the most cited Western authors (Breen, 1985; Van Lier, 1988; Widdowson, 1990; more rarely Edelhoff, 1985; Harmer, 2000; Nunan, 1999; Wilkins, 1976), we have identified four Russian authors who have exerted a great impact on the Russian discourse on A. and who are still cited in recent publications. These names include Kričevskaja (1996), Voronina (1999), as well as Nosonovič and Mil’rud (1999a, 1999b). The conception of A. by the latter authors was then subjected to a more in-depth analysis. If we take a look at the headings of the various articles, we can see that nearly all of them (26) use the adjective a., most often in collocations such as ‘a. материалы’ (9) or ‘a. тексты’ (8) (a. material or a. texts), followed by the expression ‘а. видеоматериалы’ (6) (a. video materials). The collocations ‘a. речевые ситуации’ (a. speech situations), ‘а. речевое поведение’ (a. speech behaviour) and ‘а. оценивание’ (a. assessment) occur only once. So, we see that text(ual) and material A. are the most common concepts in the RFL discourse. The noun A. appears in the title of only seven articles and, among others, includes the forms ‘грамматическая а. речи’ (grammatical A. of speech), ‘содержательная A. учебного текста’ (content A. of a learning text) and ‘A. как методическая категория’ (A. as a methodological category). In 4 out of the 35 publications, the term a./A. is used implicitly or rather casually. All other writers try to define the terms a./A. explicitly, especially, as mentioned above, when using the terms ‘a. materials’ or ‘a. texts’. Having analysed the papers, it turns out that out of the six A. concepts described in Will’s taxonomy (2018), five are also present (in varying

26  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

degrees) in the RFL discourse (here listed in the order of their importance): textual A., real-world A., A. of text reception, (rather vaguely) cultural A. and (very vaguely) A. of individual behaviour. Thus, the concept of classroom A. seems completely faded out in the RFL discourse, which is not surprising considering that Breen’s conceptualisation was quite the outlier back in 1985. Several Russian authors (e.g. Avdeeva et al., 2001; Kijan, n.d.; Savinova & Michaleva, 2007; Sulimova, 2014; Tomašuk, 2016; and some others) point to the complexity and ambiguity of the term A. and the difficulty of differentiating between different A. concepts (‘терминологическая путаница’). Sulimova (2014: 20) stresses the growing popularity of the term a. in the RFL discourse. The authors also comment that the term is often used as a synonym for other adjectives such as ‘подлинный’, ‘оригинальный’, ‘естественный’ (genuine, original, natural) as in ‘естественная среда’ (natural environment) or ‘естественное общение’ (natural communication), and less often for ‘истинный’, ‘документальный’, ‘настоящий’, ‘реальный’ (true, documentary, current, real). With regard to the definition of textual A., the Russian native speaker still plays a prominent role in the RFL discourse. Most authors trying to define a. texts or a. materials make use of the term ‘носитель языка’ (native speaker), as does Voronina (1999: 56): ‘Под аутентичными [...] понимаются тексты, которые заимствованы из коммуникативной практики носителей языка. Такие тексты отличаются живостью и яркостью стиля, образностью языка, ясностью и доступностью изложения мыслей’, or Savinova and Michaleva (2007: 118): ‘Аутентичные материалы – это материалы, созданные носителями языка для носителей языка для неучебных целей’. In these authors’ opinions, а. texts are characterised by a vivid and bright style, and they are distinguished by imagery of language, clarity and accessibility of thought. It is the native speaker who is the source of а. texts that are created for non-teaching purposes. The need to work with a. texts is accentuated by most authors, since, in their opinion, such texts are important for the ‘illusion of belonging’ (‘весьма значимы для создания “иллюзии приобщения” к чужой среде обитания и языка’: Kričevskaja, 1996: 13) and for developing learners’ socio-cultural competence (‘способны стать основным средством развития социокультурной компетенции студентов’: Sergeeva & Čikunova, 2011: 148). Several of them, however, express concerns about the possible difficulty of a. materials and their unsuitability for teaching purposes, as in Nosonovič and Mil’rud (1999b: 6): ‘[а. материалы] порой слишком сложны в языковом аспекте и не всегда отвечают конкретным задачам и условиям обучения’. Similarly, Kazakova and Evtjugina (2016: 54) point out the mismatch between learner proficiency and a. language units due to their cultural peculiarities: ‘[…] отмечается сложность аутентичных текстов для понимания, связанная с различием культур,

The Concept(s) of Authenticity in Russian as a Foreign Language  27

несоответствием уровня владения языком и используемых аутентичных языковых единиц, быстрое устаревание информации, […] существовани[е] различных диалектов и акцентов’.15 For these reasons, many authors agree with Nosonovič and Mil’rud’s (1999a, 1999b) concept of using ‘methodologically a. texts’ in RFL lessons written by teachers or textbook authors, which, at the same time, must meet all criteria of text(ual) A.: Такие тексты, созданные в учебных целях и максимально приближенные к естественным образцам, мы называем методически аутентичными. Они возникают в среде иноязычного учебного взаимодействия и соответствуют, с одной стороны, нормам и задачам естественного общения, а с другой – методическим требованиям, языковому и интеллектуальному уровню учащихся?16 (Nosonovič & Mil’rud, 1999b: 6; emphasis added)

In their first article (Nosonovič & Mil’rud, 1999a), the authors describe the requirements for the linguistic design of such ‘methodologically a. texts’, and in this context mention various ‘A. conditions’ – such as ‘структурная А.’ (logical structure, text coherence and cohesion), ‘лексико-фразеологическая А.’ (use of lexical and phraseological expressions), ‘грамматическая А.’ (grammatical means specific, i.e. authentic, for the target language) and ‘функциональная А.’ (linguistic means adapted to the respective communication situation and appropriate to it). Nevertheless, as the authors themselves indicate, there is more to an a. text than language: ‘[…] язык сам по себе еще не делает текст аутентичным’ (Nosonovič & Mil’rud, 1999b: 6). That is why they formulate further criteria that no longer relate to the linguistic design but to ‘содержательная А.’ (content A. of texts). Here, they list the following parameters (Nosonovič & Mil’rud, 1999b: 7–11): (1) ‘Культурологическая А.’, comparable to Will’s (2018) cultural A.: The texts used should convey knowledge about the (everyday) culture and mentality of the target country. For example, students should learn how to write and design a letter or a postcard (!) in the target language, using congratulations formulae customary in the target language, etc. (2) ‘Информативная А.’ (informative A.): This means that the texts should correspond to the learners’ age and interests, and the topics dealt with must be relevant for the pupils. ‘Текст можно признать информативно аутентичным, если он вызывает естественный интерес у читателя и слушателя’ (Nosonovič & Mil’rud, 1999b: 8). This parameter probably overlaps with the concepts of A. of text reception and A. of individual behaviour. (Pinner, 2016; Will, 2018) (3) ‘Ситуативная А.’ (situational A.): Situations exemplified in the texts should be natural and typical of the representatives of the target

28  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

language, and the topics offered in the texts should be interesting and topical for them. It is also important to ensure the A. of the text type. (Here overlaps with the concept of real-world A. are discernible). (4) ‘A. национальной ментальности’ (A. of national mentality): This criterion of the ‘content A.’ of texts in foreign language lessons somehow contradicts the previously presented criterion of ‘situational A.’ in so far as a topic which is considered acceptable in the home culture should be avoided in a textbook, if it would or could hurt the learners’ feelings. The authors define the criterion as follows (Nosonovič & Mil’rud, 1999b: 10): При отборе материала нельзя забывать о национальной специфике той страны, для которой он предназначается. Попытка отразить типичную для жизни носителей языка ситуацию не всегда может быть адекватно воспринята читателем. Это относится к тем случаям, когда автор текста и читатель являются представителями глубоко различных по своей сути культур с несходными социальными стереотипами и ценностями. […] При организации учебного процесса в России необходимо принимать во внимание особенности нашего менталитета и быта.17 (Emphases added)

In particular, when writing textbook texts, teachers and textbook authors should avoid topics that are perceived taboo in the country in which the RFL lessons take place, even if they are not regarded as such in the target country. (5) ‘Реактивная А.’ (reactive A.): This type of text A. corresponds to Widdowson’s (1976) concept of A. of text reception, even if Nosonovič and Mil’rud (1999b: 11) do not explicitly refer to it. What they stress, however, is that learners’ reactions need to be mentally and emotionally meaningful to them: […] при разработке учебного текста ему нужно придавать способность вызывать у обучаемого аутентичный эмоциональный, мыслительный и речевой отклик. […] Реактивно аутентичные учебные материалы стимулируют ответную деятельность учащегося, превращают ее из чисто учебной в личностно значимую. (Еmphasis added)18

(6) ‘А. оформления’ (A. of external text design). A ‘didacticised’ text should nonetheless give learners the impression that they are dealing with a real reading or listening text, which should contribute to and stimulate their motivation. For example, listening texts should contain background noises so that the learning situation resembles real-life. It is interesting that this criterion of external text design, which was already mentioned by the Russian authors in 1999, has found its way into the Companion Volume (Council of Europe, 2018) almost 20 years later. In the scale Listening to announcements and instructions, for example, we find indications that the listening texts should contain

The Concept(s) of Authenticity in Russian as a Foreign Language  29

auditory disturbances and that learners should be able to grasp information despite these circumstances: ‘The situation is complicated by the fact that the announcement or instructions may well be delivered by a (possibly faulty) public address system, or called out by a speaker some considerable distance away’ (Council of Europe, 2018: 58). (7) ‘А. учебных заданий к текстам’ (A. of learning tasks based on texts): In the definition of this term, we again see clear references to the concept of real-world A. and task orientation. The authors point out that whether a text will be perceived as a. or not depends a lot on the nature of the task accompanying it: ‘[…] От характера задания во многом зависит, будет ли текст воспринят как аутентичный’. (Nosonovič & Mil’rud, 1999b: 12) Nosonovič and Mil’rud’s concept has resonated in the RFL A. discourse and is quoted in numerous (including even the most recent) publications. Besides textual A., the concept of real-world A. is ever-present in the Russian discourse. For example, Černych (2009) talks about ‘а. оценивание’ (a. assessment) in real-life situations created for students to demonstrate their skills and knowledge: ‘[должны быть созданы] ситуации, приближенные к реальной жизни, где учащиеся должны продемонстрировать применение знаний’ (Černych, 2009: 203). Černych (2009) names the portfolio as one example of an a. test instrument. Golubeva (2015), likewise, relies on the concept of real-world A. and considers a. speaking situations a basis for communicative RFL lessons. In her argumentation, she follows the logic of task orientation, saying that teachers need to offer students a significant number of a. model situations as input (Golubeva, 2015: 97): Задача преподавателя […] – предложить учащимся описания значительного числа модельных аутентичных речевых ситуаций. Кстати, […] естественным поводом для общения могут быть не только информационные лакуны, но и интерес к собеседнику, теме и др.19

In Golubeva’s argumentation, the concepts of real-life A. and A. of individual behaviour (Will, 2018) overlap, when requesting that students need to show an intertest in performing the tasks: ‘[…] аутентичная речевая ситуация предполагает наличие собственного интереса у учащихся к выполнению заданий’ (Golubeva, 2015: 99; emphasis added). Šul’gina (2013) uses terms such as ‘a. задание’, ‘a. обучение/ образование’, ‘а. личность’ (a. task, a. teaching/education, a. personality) as well as (implicitly) ‘а. оценивание’ (a. assessment), mingling the concepts of real-life A. and A. of individual behaviour. She suggests that not only should learning tasks be closely related to real-life situations but also correspond to the learners’ personal interests (Šul’gina, 2013: 60).

30  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

Conclusion

In summary, we can say that in the RFL discourse, A. is (as yet) closely associated with the role of the idealised and infallible Russian native speaker and the concept of monolingual native-speakerism. Russian up to this time functions as a lingua franca in several countries of the former Soviet Union, not yet in all of them, and represents an important communication tool in this territory: As time went by, several newly independent states acknowledged the usefulness of Russian and legalized its role and functions, if only as language of interethnic communication. The situation has also stabilized in states where the role of Russian has not been legalized. All in all, although its functions have been significantly reduced, Russian is still used on a daily basis by 23 million ethnic Russians, 11 million Russophones, and many more bi- and multilingual non-Russians in the Near Abroad [...]. The popularity of Russian TV channels, press, and literature significantly contributes to the process of Russian maintenance. (Pavlenko, 2006: 92–93)

This might be the reason why the native-speakerism ideology is still common among Russian foreign language professionals ‘although [this paradigm is] no longer sustainable in today’s reality’ (see Spöttl et al. in this volume). There are signs, however, that the changing construct of the English native speaker will sooner or later influence the pervasive concept of the Russian nositel’ jazyka. In several places, the New Companion Volume has already departed from the idealised image of the native speaker as a point of reference in foreign language teaching. We find evidence of this at the very beginning when the common reference levels are being described: ‘It should be emphasised that the top level in the CEFR scheme, C2, has no relation whatsoever with what is sometimes referred to as the performance of an idealised “native-speaker,” or a “well-educated native speaker” or a “nearnative speaker.” Such concepts were not taken as a point of reference during the development of the levels or the descriptors’ (Council of Europe, 2018: 35). And even in regard with phonological control the authors departed from the one and only native speaker norm when revising the phonology scale: ‘The phonology scale was the only CEFR illustrative descriptor scale for which a native speaker norm, albeit implicit, had been adopted. In an update, it appeared more appropriate to focus on intelligibility as the primary construct in phonological control, in line with current research, especially in the context of providing descriptors for building on plurilingual/pluricultural repertoires’ (Council of Europe, 2018: 47). A. interaction in the RFL classroom occasionally still models itself on the characteristics attributed to this image: linguistic identity, linguocultural literacy and mastery of language skills. Many textbooks (i.e. introductions to RFL) use the terms a./A. casually, in an allegedly

The Concept(s) of Authenticity in Russian as a Foreign Language  31

self-explanatory way, often as ‘a desirable component’ (Pinner, 2014), and if explicit definitions are given, it is mainly in connection with texts, materials and (real-life) tasks. So Azimov and Ščukin’s (2009) definition of ‘a.’ in their dictionary entry is proven right. Language policy documents focus almost exclusively on textual A. (CEFR), a. encounters and new technologies (school curricula), with the native speaker as a role model (EPOSTL), or they avoid this concept altogether (Companion Volume). The most recent compilations of world-wide contributions to RFL teaching (MAPRJaL, 2015, 2019) reveal only a marginal interest in A., and explicit negotiations of the term are declining. Textual A., material A. and real-world A. appear as casual terms or common catchwords, whose meaning is considered self-descriptive. Many collocations show no negotiation at all when synonyms such as естественный, реальный, самобытный (natural, real, original) are merely placed side by side. Present-day publications have shown that earlier works by Kričevskaja (1996), Voronina (1999) and Nosonovič and Mil’rud (1999a, 1999b) remain quite influential in the RFL discourse on A. Nosonovič and Mil’rud argue that preference needs to be given to ‘methodologically a. texts’ in the foreign language classroom, when teaching and learning activities are planned and carried out. Some authors, however, are beginning to take a critical approach to this concept. On the one hand, they point out the inaccuracies in use, and on the other hand, the concept of classroom A. is completely faded out. A. testing is not of prime importance in the RFL discourse, yet target-language use situations and a. tasks are recommended for assessment. Will’s (2018) conceptual taxonomy of A. has been contrasted with the seven categories of Nosonovič and Mil’rud (1999b), in which the authors focus mainly on content A., saying that (genuine) language alone does not guarantee a text’s A. Texts should convey cultural knowledge, relevant information, natural and typical topics, national mentality and lifestyle. They should evoke meaningful reactions, increase motivation and be accompanied by real-life tasks. What is remarkable about Nosonovič and Mil’rud’s categorisation is that they pay tribute to the individual identity of learners, thus being in line with the authors of the Editorial, who suggest the concept of A. veer from a predominantly essentialist to an existentialist course (see Will & Pinner in this volume). These notions appear to feed into a larger trend where the learner is assisted in finding their personal identity (Ushioda, 2011a) and participating genuinely in learning activities (Taylor, 2013). Notes (1) So, what is authenticity? (2) [...] they [a. texts] contain material that is a real product by native speakers, not specifically designed for didactic purposes, but used in class for learning purposes to develop communicative competence.

32  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

(3) We do not know whether a Russian translation of the CEFR Companion is planned or in preparation. (4) a. language environment, a. communication (a. act of communication, a. speech, a. reactions), a. tests, a. product, a. educational-scientific discourse, a. content, a. sources, a. situations, a. behaviour patterns, a. surnames; a. language resources. (5) a. sources, a. constructions, a. context, a. transmission, a. situations, a. methods/ techniques, a. language environment; a. speech samples, a. Russian speech. (6) If we speak about educational material, the most effective for the formation and improvement of linguistic and communicative competences, in our opinion, is the use of authentic texts taken from magazines dedicated to the oil and gas industry. (7) An important role in developing and maintaining motivation to learn a foreign language is played by using authentic materials in class that reflect the actual language reality and contribute to the effective formation of cultural competence. (8) a. texts created by native speakers in a natural speech environment. (9) Oral and written materials originally created by native speakers for native speakers. (10) A student who does not have direct contact with native speakers is deprived of the opportunity to hear a. Russian speech. (11) Theorists of pedagogy and psychology have repeatedly emphasised the importance of meaningful, significant topics in the context of a. communication, as well as the focus on communication and its results, rather than on grammatical constructions. (12) Work with a. texts selected on the basis of relevance of information and the communication needs of students. (13) Grammatical material is studied directly in the context of lexical themes based on fictional and a. texts. (14) Objective attributes of the natural language environment [...] are partially compensated by a. texts (in а broad sense) outside the natural language environment. (15) [...] the difficulty of understanding authentic texts due to different cultures, the mismatch between the level of language proficiency and the authentic language units used, the rapid obsolescence of information, [...] the existence of different dialects and accents. (16) We call such texts created for educational purposes and as close as possible to natural samples, methodically a. Do they arise in an environment of foreign language learning interaction and correspond, on the one hand, to the norms and tasks of natural communication and, on the other hand, to the methodological requirements, language and intellectual level of the students? (17) When selecting the material, one should not forget the national specifics of the country for which it is intended. An attempt to reflect the typical situation of native speakers may not always be adequately perceived by the reader. This is the case when the author and the reader of the text come from different cultures with dissimilar social stereotypes and values. [...] When organising learning processes in Russia, it is necessary to consider the characteristics of our mentality and everyday life. (18) When developing a text of instruction, it should evoke in the learner an a. emotional, cogitative and verbal response. [...] Reactive a. learning material stimulates the learner’s response, transforming it from a purely learning activity into a personal one. (19) The task of the teacher [...] is to offer students a significant number of a. speech situation models. By the way, [...] a natural reason for communication may not be a lack of information, but interest in the interlocutor, or the topic, etc.

References Akišina, A.A. and Kagan, O.E. (2018) = Акишина, А.А. / Каган, О.Е. (2018) Учимся учить. Москва: Русский язык. Курсы. Avdeeva, I.B., et al. (2001) = Авдеева, И.Б., Васильева, Т.В., Левина, Г.М. (2002) Рассуждение об аутентичности в методике обучения иностранных учащихся инженерного профиля. Мир русского слова 4, 55–63.

The Concept(s) of Authenticity in Russian as a Foreign Language  33

Azimov, E.G. and Ščukin, A.N. (2009) = Азимов, Э.Г. / Щукин, А.Н. (2009) Новый словарь методических терминов и понятий (теория и практика обучения языкам). Москва: ИКАР. Basturkmen, H. and Elder, C. (2006) The practice of LSP. In A. Davies (ed.) The Handbook of Applied Linguistics (pp. 672–694). Malden: Blackwell. Bergmann, A. (ed.) (2014) Fachdidaktik Russisch: Eine Einführung. Tübingen: Narr Studienbücher. Bergmann, A. (2020) Texte zum Sprachenlernen: Bedingungen und Ziele der Auswahl. PRAXIS Fremdsprachenunterricht Basisheft 5, 9–12. Breen, M.P. (1985) Authenticity in the language classroom. Applied Linguistics 6 (1), 60–70. Bykova, O.P. (2014) = Быкова, О.П. (2014) Обучение русскому языку как иностранному в иноязычной среде. Москва: Русский язык. Курсы. Charčenko, E.B. (2015) = Харченко, Е.Б. (2015) Носитель русского языка как объект филологического исследования. Вестник Челябинского государственного университета 15 (370), Вып. 96, 104–110. Council of Europe (2001) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Council of Europe (2007) European portfolio for student teachers of languages: A reflection tool for language teacher education. See https://tinyurl.com/y8dn68nv (accessed July 2020). Council of Europe (2018) CEFR: Companion volume with new descriptors. See https:// tinyurl.com/y59mtql9 (accessed July 2020). Černych, A.I. (2009) = Черных, А.И. (2009) Аутентичное оценивание в системе дополнительного образования детей. Сибирский педагогический журнал 11, 201–210. Edelhoff, C. (1985) Authentizität im Fremdsprachenunterricht. In C. Edelhoff (ed.) Authentische Texte im Deutschunterricht (pp. 7–30). Ismaning: Max Hueber Verlag. Ellis, R. (2003) Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. EPPIJA = Европейский центр иностранных языков / Совет Европы (2007) Европейский портфель для будущих преподавателей иностранных языков. See https://tinyurl. com/y8dn68nv (accessed July 2020). Gemeinsamer Rahmenlehrplan für Berlin und Brandenburg Moderne Fremdsprachen Jahrgangsstufen 1–10. See https://tinyurl.com/yyctxf6z (accessed July 2020). Gesamte Rechtsvorschrift für Lehrpläne – allgemeinbildende höhere Schulen, Fassung vom 15.07.2020. See https://tinyurl.com/vus4njf (accessed July 2020). Golubeva, A.V. (2015) = Голубева, А.В. (2015) Аутентичные речевые ситуации как основа для коммуникативного преподавания РКИ. Мир русского слова 4, 94–100. Harmer, J. (2000) How to Teach English: An Introduction to the Practice of English Language Teaching. Edinburg: Gate Longman. Kazakova, M.A. and Evtjugina, A.A. (2016) = Казакова, М.А. / Евтюгина, А.А. (2016) Аутентичные текстовые материалы в обучении иностранному языку. Вестник Бурятского государственного университета. Образование. Личность. Общество 4, 50–59. Kijan, O.N (n.d.) = Киян, О.Н. Аутентичность как методическая категория в обучении иностранному языку. See https://www.isuct.ru/conf/antropos/section/4/KIYAN. htm (accessed July 2020). Kričevskaja, K.S. (1996) = Кричевская, К.С. (1996) Прагматические материалы, знакомящие учеников с культурой и средой обитания жителей страны изучаемого языка. Иностранные языки в школе 1, 13–17. Lysakova, I.P. (ed.) (2016) = Лысакова, И.П. (ред. 2016) Методика обучения русскому языку как иностранному. Москва: Русский язык. Курсы.

34  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

MAPRJaL (2015) = МАПРЯЛ (2015) Русский язык и литература в пространстве мировой культуры: Материалы XIII Конгресса МАПРЯЛ = 13th Congress of the International Association of Teachers of Russian Language and Literature (Granada, 13–20 September). MAPRJaL (2019) = МАПРЯЛ (2019) Русское слово в многоязычном мире: Материалы XIV Конгресса МАПРЯЛ = 14th Congress of the International Association of Teachers of Russian Language and Literature (Nur-Sultan, 29 April–3 May). Nosonovič, E.V. and Mil’rud, R.P. (1999a) = Носонович, Е.В. / Мильруд, Р.П. (1999а) Параметры аутентичного учебного текста. Иностранные языки в школе 1, 18–23. Nosonovič, E.V. and Mil’rud, R.P. (1999b) = Носонович, Е.В. / Мильруд, Р.П. (1999b) Критерии содержательной аутентичности учебного текста. Иностранные языки в школе 2, 6–12. Nunan, D. (1999) Second Language Teaching and Learning. Boston: Heinle and Heinle Publishers. Nunan, D. (2004) Task-based Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. OKVIJa (2005) = Совет Европы (2005) Общеевропейские компетенции владения иностранным языком: изучение, обучение, оценка. Страсбург и Москва: МГЛУ. Paikeday, T. (1985) The Native Speaker Is Dead. Toronto: Paikeday. Pavlenko, A. (2006) Russian as a Lingua Franca. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 26, 78–99. Cambridge University Press. Petrikova, A. et al. (2015) = Петрикова, А., Куприна, Т., Галло, Я. (2015) Основы межкультурной дидактики. Москва: Русский язык. Курсы. Pinner, R.S. (2014) The authenticity continuum: Towards a definition incorporating international voices. English Today 120, 30 (4), 22–27. Pinner, R.S. (2016) Reconceptualising Authenticity for English as a Global Language. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Savinova, N.A. and Michaleva, L.V. (2007) = Савинова, Н.А. / Михалева, Л.В. (2007) Аутентичные материалы как составная часть формирования коммуникативной компетенции. Вестник Томского государственного университета 294, 116–119. Sergeeva, N.N. and Čikunova, A.E. (2011) = Сергеева, Н.Н. / Чикунова, A.E. (2011) Аутентичные видеоматериалы как средство развития социокультурной компетенции студентов экономических специальностей. Педагогическое образование в России 1, 147–157. Sulimova, L.A. (2014) = Сулимова, Л.А. (2014) Использование аутентичных материалов на разных этапах обучения иностранному (немецкому) языку. In Г.Д. Ахметова (ed.) Педагогическое мастерство: Материалы V Международной научной конференции (pp. 19–22). Москва: Буки-Веди. Ščukin, A.N. (2012) = Щукин, А.Н. (2012) Обучение речевому общению на русском языке как иностранном. Москва: Русский язык. Курсы. Šul’gina, E.M. (2013) = Шульгина, Е.М. (2013) Аутентичность как одно из методических условий формирования иноязычной коммуникативной компетенции студентов посредством технологии веб-квест. Язык и культура. Приложение 2, 59–63. Taylor, F. (2013) Self and Identity in Adolescent Foreign Language Learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Tomašuk, N.V. (2016) = Томашук, Н.В. (2016) Роль аутентичных материалов в обучении иностранному языку. Евразийский научный журнал 10, 40–41. Ushioda, E. (2011a) Language learning motivation, self and identity: Current theoretical perspectives. Computer Assisted Language Learning 24 (3), 199–210. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/09588221.2010.538701.

The Concept(s) of Authenticity in Russian as a Foreign Language  35

Ushioda, E. (2011b) Motivating learners to speak as themselves. In G. Murray, X. Gao and T. Lamb (eds) Identity, Motivation and Autonomy in Language Learning (pp. 11–24). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Van Lier, L. (1988) The Classroom and the Language Learner. New York: Longman. Voronina, G.I. (1999) = Воронина, Г.И. (1999) Организация работы с аутентичными текстами молодежной прессы в старших классах школ с углубленным изучением немецкого языка. Иностранные языки в школе 2, 56–60. Widdowson, H.G. (1976) The authenticity of language data. In J.F. Fanselow and R.H. Crymes (eds) On TESOL ‘76. Selections based on teaching done at the Tenth Annual TESOL Convention [in New York, NY March 2–7, 1976] (pp. 261–270). Washington, DC: TESOL. Widdowson, H.G. (1978) Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Widdowson, H.G. (1990) Aspects of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wilkins, D. (1976) Notional Syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Will, L. (2018) Authenticity in English Language Teaching. An Analysis of Academic Discourse. Münster: Waxmann. Will, L. (2020) Authentizität: Ein kontroverses Konzept. PRAXIS Fremdsprachenunterricht Basisheft 2, 8–11.

3 Multilingualism and Authenticity in Russian Heritage Language Teaching Practices Matthew Dame and Natalia Dame

Introduction

Imagine Russian heritage language learners (HLLs) in a Russian language class at a present-day American university. These are students whose parents or grandparents arrived before and after the fall of the former Soviet Union in one of the four waves of Russian immigration to the US (Dubinina & Polinsky, 2013; Kagan & Dillon, 2006; Lavretsky et al., 1997). These students come from all over the former Soviet Union and bring with them their own unique idiolect of Russian. Some of them may be from Kazakhstan, where Russian is an official co-language, or from Armenia, where many inhabitants speak not only Armenian but also Russian. Some may be from a part of Ukraine where Surzhyk (Suržyk), a language that utilises the elements of Russian and Ukrainian, is spoken, and many may come from cities all over Russia. There may also be students who were born in the United States and whose only connection to Russian and Russia is through their parents, grandparents, other relatives and/or any old films, records or books that were brought when they moved to the United States. Given their various linguistic, ethnic and cultural backgrounds, these Russian HLLs might speak Russian in a non-standard way. Hence, the question arises: what kind of Russian will the instructor teach her students? Will she focus on the so-called Standard Russian and, in so doing, promote a doctrine of native speakerism and a monolingual classroom (Holliday, 2006)? If so, will she then view these students’ competences in Russian as inauthentic and their multilingual backgrounds as hindering her teaching objectives? Or will she forego Standard Language Ideology (SLI) (Lippi-Green, 1994; Showstack, 2017) and, instead, use a multilingual approach and encourage linguistic variation as an advantage rather 36

Multilingualism and Authenticity in Russian Heritage Language Teaching Practices  37

than an impediment to language learning? While these questions may sound familiar to many heritage language (HL) researchers, they are yet to inform a study about the perceptions of multilingualism and authenticity in Russian HL teaching practices. Our chapter offers a useful example of such a study by starting a dialogue about the role of authenticity in a Russian HL classroom between global HL scholars and Russian HL researchers and teachers. The past decade has seen research in second language acquisition (SLA) and bilingual education adopt a strong multilingual approach to learning a second language (Kramsch, 2012; Ortega, 2020). This move has distanced researchers from the essentialist ideologies of authenticity and native speakerism, which define authenticity as an innate, nonchangeable linguistic and cultural phenomenon and posit the native speaker as the sole bearer of that authentic language and culture (Creese et al., 2014; Lowe & Pinner, 2016; Pinner, 2016; Tseng, 2020). In abandoning these antiquated views, SLA researchers now approach authenticity as an expression of individual behaviour – namely, a fluid construct that changes depending on the situation or the learner and, as such, represents the learners’ ‘freedom of choice to make decisions that are expressive of their true self’ (Will, 2018: 225; cf. also Lowe & Pinner, 2016 and Pinner, 2016). In a similar vein, SLA researchers also criticise the concept of native speakerism as both outdated and hegemonic (Creese et al., 2014; Lowe & Pinner, 2016; Tseng, 2020). The concept is considered outdated because of its idealisation of the abstract homogenous target language. It is considered hegemonic due to its prescriptive ideological and sociopolitical stance on what or who should constitute the model of language learning. To illustrate, in his study of English as a Second Language (ESL) teaching practices for Foreign Language Learners (FLLs), Holliday (2006) defined native speakerism as an ideology, according to which Western culture, language and pedagogy are represented and controlled by the supposedly supreme native English speaker. The problem with this understanding is the binary construction of Self and Other that gives the impression of ‘an imagined, problematic generalized Other [students and colleagues] to the unproblematic Self of the “native speaker”’ (Holliday, 2006: 386). By presenting the native speaker as both superior and authentic, the doctrine of native speakerism automatically endows her with more social and linguistic capital (Bourdieu, 1991) which, in turn, enables her to exercise more power and control over the so-called non-native speakers and/or FLLs. This makes the classroom imbalanced at best and oppressive at worst since the native speaker’s multilingual and/or non-native speaking students and colleagues could be viewed from a deficit perspective as inauthentic and imperfect speakers of the target language and, as such, become possible victims of discrimination (Creese et al., 2014; Lowe & Pinner, 2016; Tseng, 2020).

38  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

A similar problem might arise with Russian HLLs, who may also feel their linguistic and cultural competences below the Russian native speaker standard and, thus, consider their own knowledge of Russian language and culture disingenuous and illegitimate. The multiplicity of languages spoken by multilingual Russian HLLs as well as the still popular notion of teaching Standard Russian in Russian language classrooms highlight yet another parallel between the issues faced by FLLs and Russian HLLs, should their teachers support monolingualism and native speakerism. In view of this parallel, the larger purpose of this chapter is to examine to what extent the current SLA focus on multilingualism and authenticity of individual behaviour has been adopted in Russian HL research and practice. To begin, we present the problematic criteria with defining HLLs in general and Russian HLLs in particular. We then discuss the ways in which global HL researchers and Russian HL researchers have responded to SLA scholars’ recoil from monolingualism and cultural authenticity. Next, we provide specific examples from a half-semester-long qualitative investigation of one Russian language class at an institution of higher education in the South-Western United States. In these examples, we explore whether the actual classroom practice of teaching Russian HLLs corroborates or rejects the latest SLA and HL research on the benefits of multilingualism and the authenticity of individual behaviour (Pinner, 2016; Van Lier, 1996; Will, 2018). Finally, we offer a conclusion and recommendations for incorporating the students’ diverse linguistic and cultural identities into the Russian HL classroom. Our chapter provides a fresh perspective on the concept of authenticity in several ways. First, it initiates an important conversation about the perceptions of authenticity by Russian HL instructors, which is a largely overlooked issue in the studies of Russian HLLs. Second, it demonstrates the value of linguistic capital theory (Bourdieu, 1991) and positioning theory (Davies & Harré, 1990) for investigating how the HL instructor’s view of authenticity, i.e. as a predetermined cultural and linguistic monolith or as an invitation for her students to explore their multifaceted selves, affects the HLLs’ willingness to communicate in their HL in the classroom. Third, our chapter shows a close correlation between the instructor’s support of native speakerism and/or SLI and her adherence to the essentialist perspective of authenticity. While this may not be a surprising finding, it does raise our awareness of the crucial role that the instructor’s definition of authenticity plays in either promoting or suppressing a multilingual and multicultural classroom. It also reveals that positioning (Davies & Harré, 1990) HLLs as authentic speakers does not necessarily foster the authenticity of individual behaviour in the classroom. The reason for this discrepancy is that the instructor may equate authentic speakers with native speakers and, through this essentialist perspective, inadvertently negate her HL students’ right to a free and creative

Multilingualism and Authenticity in Russian Heritage Language Teaching Practices  39

expression of self. Finally, our chapter offers an important insight into the negative effects of overusing English in an HL classroom, which not only lowers the communicative value of the HL in the eyes of HLLs, but also inhibits their use of the HL as an authentic vehicle to convey their multicultural identities. Defining the Heritage Speaker

Defining heritage speakers (HS) has proven to be problematic to this day (Benmamoun et al., 2013; He, 2010; Hornberger & Wang, 2008; Kupisch & Rothman, 2018; Leeman, 2015; Ortega, 2020; Polinsky & Kagan, 2007; Van Deusen-Scholl, 2003). One of the main reasons for this difficulty is the complexity and diversity of HS’ linguistic and cultural competences and backgrounds. While there may be similarities in the ways different HS acquire an HL, their linguistic and cultural experiences do not easily follow the traditional rules of language acquisition and eschew forced binary classifications, such as native/non-native, multilingual/monolingual, and foreign language/heritage language learner (Ortega, 2020). Another problem with defining HS is the different foci of various HL studies. For example, the definition of HS used by linguists, who are largely interested in studying the HS’ language acquisition, differs from the definition of HS as learners (or HLLs) used by practitioners, who are mostly concerned with improving HS’ language skills (Kagan, 2010; Kagan & Dillon, 2006). Because of their diverse research purposes, linguists and practitioners have offered a wide spectrum of HS’ definitions that range from a narrower focus on language development to a broader emphasis on the culture and society (Benmamoun et al., 2013; Ortega, 2020). The former indicates that HS are somewhat proficient in the language and grew up in the household speaking it or learning it, whereas the latter specifies that HS have some sociocultural or sociolinguistic connection to the language but may not have learned it while growing up. These definitions have been further categorised by Ortega (2020: 17) who placed them into three major strands: ‘sociolinguistic, educational, and linguistic’. The educational and sociolinguistic strands of research follow the broad definition and accept that an affiliation with the HL, no matter how distant, is acceptable for one to be called a heritage speaker. The linguistic strand is representative of the narrow definition and is concerned with the proficiency of HS against a standard language and with the ways in which other variables, such as exposure to the HL and literacy skills, affect the linguistic development of HS. While Ortega (2020) shows that all three strands offer valuable information to the study of HS, she views the focus on the linguistic strand alone as problematic and suggests that HL research ‘must be informed by the sociopolitical realities of systemic marginalization and linguistic insecurity that shape the inequitable

40  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

multilingual learning experiences of HL speakers and their minoritized communities’ (Ortega, 2020: 41). In other words, the study of HS should be more than an analysis of their linguistic skills but an investigation of different sociocultural and sociolinguistic factors that play an important role in constructing their cultural and linguistic identities. The linguistic definition of HS is also considered problematic because of its frequent emphasis on SLI (Lippi-Green, 1994; Showstack, 2017), according to which many HS are defined as having ‘incomplete acquisition’ (Kupisch & Rothman, 2018: 573) of the HL. Under these auspices, HS are often viewed from a deficit perspective as ‘unbalanced bilinguals’ (Rakhilina et al., 2016: 1), who are positioned against a fictitious monolingual native speaker. This perspective has been criticised by several educational and sociocultural researchers for its focus on an ideal and abstract linguistic standard (He, 2010; Kupisch & Rothman, 2018; Lowe & Pinner, 2016; Showstack, 2017) and for its removal of HS’ agency in determining their own identity as HS (Leeman, 2015). A common argument against this perspective is that a communicatively competent HS’ grammar cannot be considered ‘incomplete, only different’ (Kupisch & Rothman, 2018: 573). For this reason, HS’ grammar should not be judged against some generalised theoretical language model but against the speaker’s ability to accomplish specific communicative purposes. In a corresponding argument, Kupisch and Rothman (2018) and Benmamoun et al. (2013) also question the validity of the comparison between monolinguals and bilingual HS. One problem with this comparison is that it does not take into account different cultural contexts, linguistic changes, language variations and the speakers’ diverse literacy and schooling backgrounds. Another problem is that it advances the essentialist view of linguistic and cultural authenticity as a pre-existing canon of competences that HS may or may not have (Pinner, 2016; Will, 2018). One way to combat this view is to approach authenticity as ‘a dynamic concept which will need to be assessed and evaluated on an individual basis’ (Lowe & Pinner, 2016: 33; Pinner, 2016) and to encourage HS to use their cultural and linguistic repertoires in class. Such inclusive practices will not only legitimise the students’ status as authentic speakers of the HL, but will also promote the authenticity of individual behaviour rather than impose some presumably authentic linguistic and cultural knowledge onto HS. And, in the case of Russian HS, whose cultural and linguistic experiences are both diverse and complex due to their ancestors’ Soviet past, the practice of including these experiences in the HL classroom may be the key to enabling these students’ authentic expressions of self. Defining the Russian Heritage Speaker

As we have seen, much global HL research supports SLA scholars’ current move away from the notion of native speakerism and the

Multilingualism and Authenticity in Russian Heritage Language Teaching Practices  41

essentialist view of authenticity (Holliday, 2006; Lowe & Pinner, 2016). Where are Russian HS situated in this discussion, according to contemporary Russian HL researchers? Most Russian scholars fall into the space between educational and linguistic categories outlined by Ortega (2020). In their discussion of Russian HLLs, Polinsky and Kagan (2007) use a narrower definition provided by Valdés (2001: 38), who describes the HLL in the US as someone ‘who is raised in a home where a nonEnglish language is spoken, who speaks or at least understands the language, and who is to some degree bilingual in that language and in English’. Russian HL researchers further classify Russian HLLs according to their linguistic proficiency with the standard version of Russian acquired through their exposure to the Soviet/Russian education system (Kagan & Dillon, 2006). The focus on the HLLs’ linguistic proficiency measured against Standard Russian has been the subject of most studies of Russian HLLs, which examine the role of various factors, such as HL input, exposure, literacy and schooling, in determining HS’ language level and linguistic issues. For example, Kagan and Dillon (2006: 93) referred to Russian HS as the ones who had an ‘interrupted childhood experience’ and, as a consequence, had asymmetrical knowledge of Standard Russian. Likewise, Polinsky (2011) found that adult Russian HS encountered attrition with specific aspects of Russian related to morphological inflection, such as relative clauses, due to a lack of continual input. In addition to identifying this erosion, Polinsky and her colleagues also discovered that many Russian HS utilised calques, or direct language transfer from English, as well as employed new forms in their language not tied to the syntax of either Russian or English (Rakhilina et al., 2016). Despite this last finding by Rakhilina et al. (2016), according to which Russian HS show evidence of having their own idiolects, most Russian HL researchers appear to support SLI (Lippi-Green, 1994; Showstack, 2017) as they attempt to explain and overcome the HLLs’ many struggles in developing a native-like proficiency. And, while some recent Russian HL scholarship has acknowledged the necessity of viewing all HLLs through a multilingual educational lens (Carreira & Kagan, 2018) to accommodate their diverse learning styles and motivations, this necessity has neither manifested in current classroom-based research nor become a subject of a separate study. Therefore, we have concluded that most Russian HL scholarship has not fully confronted the ideas of native speakerism, monolingualism or authentic Russian language and culture as problematic to HL teaching practices. As we now move to our discussion of these practices in an actual Russian language classroom, we aim to examine whether a Russian language teacher reflects the linguistic focus of most Russian HL research or incorporates the broader sociolinguistic and educational concerns of greater SLA and HL scholarship in her teaching approach.

42  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

Theoretical Background

In order to better understand the dynamic of classroom interaction between an HL teacher and her HLLs, we have engaged with linguistic capital theory by Bourdieu (1991) and positioning theory by Davies and Harré (1990). Bourdieu (1991) argues that languages cannot be separated from their cultural context and that certain dialects have more convertible cultural, social and economic capital, due to the dominant class that uses these dialects. Hence, if the Russian HL teacher is found to prioritise Standard Russian over the HS’ Russian, her teaching practices may be informed by Bourdieu’s (1991) argument about the hegemonic power of the dominant class (educated Russian native speakers) and the dominant language (Standard Russian). As a complement to Bourdieu’s (1991) theory, positioning theory (Davies & Harré, 1990) suggests that individuals are determined by the discursive practices that they undertake, which include interactive positioning, or how one positions the other in discourse, and reflexive positioning, or how one positions oneself. Interactive positioning has been successfully employed by several researchers in ESL and HL classes to analyse the effects of the teacher’s positioning of her students on student language and identity development (Cho, 2014; Kim, 2017; Showstack, 2017). By using positioning theory in a Russian HL classroom, we aim to show that the instructor’s interactive positioning of her HL students may convey her own perception of authenticity, namely, whether she views authenticity as an HL student’s freedom to express her unique language and culture or as a prescriptive standard to be imposed upon an HL student by her teacher. Methods

For the purposes of privacy, we have assigned pseudonyms to the names of the site and of all the participants. We gathered ethnographic data by observing classes for half a semester at one beginner Russian foreign language (FL) course at Coastal Community College (CCC). We chose this site because of permitted access and because we were informed that the classroom had a contingent of Russian HLLs. Our observations of each class lasted roughly for 1 hour to 1 hour and 30 minutes. We then formally interviewed the instructor of the course at CCC three times. Each interview lasted for about 30–40 minutes; during each interview, semi-structured interview protocols were employed. We also had several informal interactions with the instructor ranging from the discussions after class to electronic correspondence. The data were organised from the interviews and observations into categories and coded. As we were aware of our positionality and its possible influence on our research, we employed several techniques to account for researcher bias, such as

Multilingualism and Authenticity in Russian Heritage Language Teaching Practices  43

‘researcher identity memos’, triangulation and member checks (Maxwell, 2005: 25; Merriam, 2009). Site and Participants

CCC is a large, multicultural community college located in a middleclass neighbourhood in the South-Western United States. Despite its size, it offered only one Russian language course per semester. The Russian FL course that we observed was a beginner class. It was taught by Professor Katia and had between 15 and 20 students depending on the night, 5 of whom were HLLs. Professor Katia has a Master’s degree in Slavic Languages and Literatures. She began teaching Russian at CCC in late 1999. She studied one semester in Russia and had a strong interest in Soviet culture because she started to learn Russian during the Cold War. Professor Katia also grounded her appreciation of the culture through the structure of the language. Results and Interpretation

Our data at CCC indicated that Professor Katia largely followed a linguistic approach (Ortega, 2020) for teaching Russian to both FLLs and HLLs in her beginner Russian class. The goal of her lessons was to present the basics of a Russian linguistic structure and then practise it in class. For example, at the beginning of each observed class, Professor Katia explained what linguistic student learning outcomes the class would achieve. She then used a grammar-translation method for most of her activities, which included doing cloze exercises for noun endings, filling in the blanks with prepositions, writing out verb conjugations, group corralling of correct grammar and pronunciation forms, and translating. Professor Katia’s linguistic focus on Standard Russian grammar and pronunciation suggested her larger support of SLI (Lippi-Green, 1994; Showstack, 2017) and native speakerism (Holliday, 2006). Interestingly, she also interactively positioned (Davies & Harré, 1990) her HLLs as native Russian speakers by promoting their linguistic expertise to other FLLs as both authentic and legitimate. For example, while presenting a new grammar point, Professor Katia would first pose a grammatical or phonetic question to the whole class and then depend on the group of Russian HLLs as respondents. One such instance occurred when Professor Katia was explaining the morphology of Russian verbs. After conjugating several verbs, she told the class: ‘some of you already know it [the morphological changes to the verb], you don’t even have to think, да? [“yes”?]’. To the whole class, she continued: ‘If you are like Steven or Arkadii or […] other people in here [motioning to the HLLs] – you don’t even have to think, да? [“yes”?]; у вас интуиция [“you have intuition,” speaking to the HLLs] or [you just have to] look it up [speaking to the FLLs]’. In another

44  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

instance, Professor Katia said with a smile that ‘for most of us, it is difficult to pronounce Russian, but not for Steven or Arkadii [looking at the HLLs]’. Several minutes later, she jokingly asked one of the HLLs ‘to stop answering every question’, implying that he knew all the answers. In like manner, Professor Katia suggested that to check if one’s pronunciation was correct, one may need a ‘portable Arkadii’ because ‘he brings you all the answers’. By stating that her Russian HLLs had some inherent, natural understanding of Russian grammar and pronunciation, Professor Katia endorsed their special status as authentic speakers of Russian and confirmed their linguistic authority to the other FLLs in class. A telling example of this confirmation occurred when Professor Katia specifically mentioned that they [presumably she and the other FL students] were lucky to have HS in class. During group work exercises, she also repeatedly asked the HLLs to help other FLLs complete their tasks or translate from Russian into English and, in so doing, advanced the status of each HLL from a regular student to a teacher’s assistant. Professor Katia’s validation of her HLLs’ authentic knowledge of Russian was not limited to their language skills but extended to their cultural competences. One such example occurred when Professor Katia asked her students if they watched Russian films and what films they knew. This question was largely directed at the HLLs, who were happy to demonstrate their familiarity with Russian culture by providing the names of several Russian films that they had seen. In response, Professor Katia agreed that some of these films were ‘lovely Soviet-era movies’ and that they were worth watching, which indicated her willingness to authenticate the HLLs’ cultural expertise. In another instance, Professor Katia asked her HLLs to translate a Russian text about Sputnik, which further demonstrated her expectations of the Russian HLLs to be knowledgeable about the event. While these exchanges suggested that Professor Katia interactively positioned (Davies & Harré, 1990) Russian HLLs as her linguistic and cultural confidants, there were several limitations to this positioning. These limitations were related to Professor Katia’s largely essentialist view of authentic language and culture. One example of linguistic essentialism occurred when one of the HLLs did not answer a grammar question right away but instead began to fumble with words and jokingly offered alternative responses. Professor Katia appeared to be frustrated by this language play and asked the HLL in an irritated tone: ‘Why are you making stuff up? Just read it’. After the HLL finally produced the expected answer, Professor Katia happily replied that he was ‘her hero’ and thanked him for the response. By showing her disapproval of the HLL’s word play, Professor Katia seemed to disavow the HLL’s right to individual expression. Conversely, by subsequently praising the HLL for giving her the ‘correct’ response, she conveyed her support for grammatically standard answers

Multilingualism and Authenticity in Russian Heritage Language Teaching Practices  45

and her view of language as a fixed system rather than a flexible generator of meanings in different contexts. In regard to culture, a similar essentialist perspective was observed. One example of this ensued during Professor Katia’s remarks about the aforementioned Russian films. Apart from expressing her appreciation for the film titles named by her HLLs, Professor Katia did not follow-up with the discussion of the films or inquired about the HLLs’ experiences with these films. This suggested Professor Katia’s overall essentialist approach to teaching Russian culture as she presented certain cultural attributes that were supposed to constitute Russian culture but did not solicit her HLLs’ opinions about them. Another similar example occurred in Professor Katia’s presentation of Sputnik as an important part of Russian culture. In this activity, the input of the HLLs was limited to their linguistic competences as they were asked to translate the text but not to offer their thoughts on the cultural meaning of the event. And, while this teaching practice supports our earlier assertion about the larger linguistic focus of the class, it also provides another example of the instructor’s static view of culture as some inherent knowledge given to the students rather than expressed by them. Indeed, during our observations there were very few opportunities for the HLLs to communicate their cultural attitudes and origins. Despite the fact that several HLLs came from countries other than Russia, such as Ukraine and Belarus, there was a limited attempt to engage them in sharing their multilingual and multicultural origins. In one such attempt, Professor Katia explained that the Ukrainian pronunciation was different from Russian, but that all three languages – Ukrainian, Russian and Belarusian – were similar to each other and belonged to the East Slavic languages. She then asked one HLL to confirm her explanation. This interaction, however, did not go beyond a single-phrase reply, and Professor Katia did not extrapolate further on her HLLs’ multicultural backgrounds or give them activities to express their multilingual identities. The lack of activities for the HLLs’ self-expression may have been one of the reasons for their limited engagement in the class. While the HLLs did act as the main respondents to Professor Katia’s queries, the communicative function of these responses was reduced to answering some basic grammar questions and translating for other FLLs. Based on our observations, performing this function was relatively easy for most HLLs because of their more advanced knowledge of Russian. And, since there were no other forms of participation offered to them in class, it might have been the reason why their communicative agency was low and why they neither attempted to speak beyond what Professor Katia asked of them nor actively contributed to the lesson on their own accord. Another possible reason for the HLLs’ limited speaking in class could have been their ‘language shyness’ (Krashen, 1998: 41). Language shyness

46  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

occurs when the HLL knows the language but is not completely fluent and might have problems with certain grammatical constructions. Further support for the HLLs’ language shyness was provided by Professor Katia, who confirmed that the average Russian HLL in her class had some typical HS’ grammar issues, such as confusion with case endings and spelling. This could explain why the HLLs seemed to be comfortable answering simple grammar and pronunciation questions but might have been reticent to express their thoughts with more complex structures and in more communicative contexts. This reticence could also have been exacerbated by Professor Katia’s teaching of Standard Russian and her focus on correct linguistic forms. For that reason, the HLLs might have felt the pressure to speak a standard version of Russian instead of their own variant and, being unsure of that version, chose not to express themselves in their authentic language beyond the bare minimum asked of them. This pressure, in turn, might also have been intensified by Professor Katia’s positioning (Davies & Harré, 1990) of the HLLs as native speakers and a linguistic authority for other FLLs. In so doing, she might have inadvertently imposed an idealised language standard onto her HLLs’ actual language skills, which could have devalued their own variation of Russian and promoted language shyness (Krashen, 1998). Further support for this assertion is found in Professor Katia’s admission that many of her HLLs actually did want to learn to communicate, stating ‘family members’ as a possible reason. For example, Professor Katia revealed that Steven ‘set up his grandparents on the internet, so that they could write little vignettes about their life’, which Steven would then read. These statements suggest that the HLLs did have a desire and a rationale to improve their Russian communication and literacy skills. Hence, their reticence to express themselves in class and their wish ‘to sink into the shadows’ (Professor Katia, personal communication) could not be likely explained by their lack of motivation. Nor could it be supported by the HLLs’ inability to converse in Russian due to the fact that during our observations several HLLs in the centre of the class did utilise Russian between each other for brief periods of time. While most of their exchanges were short, such as one sentence or one phrase, their impromptu nature constituted an authentic attempt by the HLLs to speak in Russian and, as such, conveyed their willingness and capacity to use Russian in real-life contexts. The HLLs’ desire to communicate was also noticed by Professor Katia, who mentioned that, in her opinion, the HLLs used the class as a social occasion to talk with other HLLs. This statement was confirmed by other instances, in which many of the HLLs sat together in the class and often talked with each other in English, occasionally intermixing one Russian phrase here and another English phrase after. The frequency of these language interactions between the HLLs suggested that they were more comfortable using Russian with each other as opposed to using it

Multilingualism and Authenticity in Russian Heritage Language Teaching Practices  47

with the teacher. This, in turn, supports our earlier assertion that by demonstrating her adherence to Standard Russian, Professor Katia might have decreased her HLLs’ desire to express themselves to her in their own authentic way. Likewise, the fact that the HLLs attempted to create their own communicative space in the classroom further highlighted their need to share their multicultural experiences. Since this need did not appear to be addressed in a linguistically-oriented classroom environment, which did not try to incorporate the HLLs’ diverse backgrounds, they might have felt disengaged from class activities and, as a result, formed their own group to overcome their language shyness (Krashen, 1998). Significantly, one other possible reason for the HLLs’ language shyness might have been the consistent use of English as the lingua franca of the class by Professor Katia and by the HLLs. When asked about her approach to the class and the use of English and Russian, Professor Katia offered this statement: To be frank, I don’t know the proportion but [I] use a lot more English than I should; but it also fluctuates depending on what we’re talking about. The challenges of using only Russian are that even if you speak Russian, they respond in English; most of the class doesn’t understand what you’re talking about; if you’re talking about rules of behaviour, etc., you need to make sure to get it across to everyone.

And, as it related to the consistent English language use by the HLLs, Professor Katia thought that some of them were more comfortable in English than in Russian. For example, she singled out Arkadii, saying that she thought it was ‘easier for Arkadii to joke in English’. While the balanced use of both English and Russian would have been an example of a multilingual classroom, the instructor’s positioning of English as the lingua franca in a Russian language class may have had an adverse effect on the HLLs’ use of Russian. First, it promoted a more monolingual, English-speaking environment, in which English held the dominant position over Russian as a preferable language of communication. The fact that Russian was taught from a linguistic perspective as a set of grammatical forms, whereas English was used to express meaning in various contexts, might have further contributed to the HLLs’ perception of the lower value of Russian as a vehicle for communication in the classroom. In a similar vein, the already high symbolic capital of English as the dominant language of the US (Bourdieu, 1991) may also have been intensified by Professor Katia’s consistent use of it as the language of authority and discipline in her classroom. Hence, the hegemonic power of English in the Russian language class may have discouraged the HLLs from speaking more Russian and dissuaded them from expressing their authentic multilingual identities, such as their sense of humour in the case of Arkadii, in Russian. Likewise, the use of English as the main means of

48  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

interaction between Professor Katia and her students may also have increased the HLLs’ language shyness (Krashen, 1998) and curbed their use of Russian between each other to a few words or phrases. Conclusion

These data revealed that Professor Katia interactively positioned (Davies & Harré, 1990) her HLLs as native speakers and as an authority on Russian language and culture in her HL teaching practice. According to HL research, this positioning could have been beneficial to the HLLs’ sense of confidence and encouraged them to express their multilingual identities (He, 2010; Leeman, 2015; Tseng, 2020). In practice, however, it did not necessarily give the HLLs the freedom or the opportunities to convey their authentic selves in the classroom. Nor did it decrease their language shyness (Krashen, 1998) or encourage them to share their multicultural backgrounds. Instead, we found that despite being praised for their authentic understanding of the Russian language and culture, the HLLs were reluctant to speak Russian with the Professor and preferred to interact with other HLLs in some Russian but mostly in English. So, what happened? Why did the Professor’s support of her HLLs’ authentic status as Russian native speakers not result in a more communicative classroom? In our opinion, this breakdown happened for three reasons: the Professor’s linguistic focus on correct Russian, her adherence to a native speaker standard and cultural authenticity, and her predominantly monolingual English-speaking classroom environment. Our data demonstrated that Professor Katia largely followed a linguistic philosophy (Ortega, 2020) and supported SLI (Lippi-Green, 1994; Showstack, 2017) and native speakerism (Holliday, 2006). Since the purpose of each class was for the HLLs to correctly utilise a grammatical structure from Standard Russian, there was little room for incorporating the HLLs’ Russian idiolects or for using them in various communicative contexts. Furthermore, when Professor Katia commended her HLLs for answering her grammar questions in a correct manner and complimented their innate sense of language, she implicitly confirmed the status of Standard Russian as the only authentic form of Russian. In so doing, she could have discouraged her HLLs from utilising their home language, which might have been the unique linguistic forms of Russian and English discovered by Rakhilina et al. (2016), for fear of making mistakes with Standard Russian and of losing their status as authentic Russian speakers in the eyes of Professor Katia and the class. Our data also showed that Professor Katia conveyed an essentialist perception of linguistic and cultural authenticity. She did so by presenting both Russian language and culture as ready-made phenomena passed onto the students by the teacher rather than fluid constructs expressed by the students in diverse communicative situations (Lowe & Pinner, 2016;

Multilingualism and Authenticity in Russian Heritage Language Teaching Practices  49

Pinner, 2016; Will, 2018). Based on our observations, the HLLs were not encouraged to express authenticity of individual behaviour in class and, as a result, created their own shared cultural space with other HLLs. Hence, we concluded that the essentialist view of authenticity seemed to counter the purpose of positioning the HL students (Davies & Harré, 1990) as authentic representatives of language and culture. Finally, we found that Professor Katia preferred to use English as the lingua franca in the Russian language classroom for reasons of convenience, despite the demonstrated level of linguistic proficiency of most Russian HLLs. In so doing, she utilised her position as a language authenticator to endorse the linguistic capital (Bourdieu, 1991) of English as the dominant language of the classroom at the expense of Russian and any other languages spoken by her HLLs. This could have been another contributing factor to the HLLs’ language shyness (Krashen, 1998) and their reluctance to express themselves in Russian or in other languages in a largely monolingual English environment. The consistent use of English also prevented us from assessing whether Professor Katia would still have positioned her HLLs as authentic speakers, had they been given an opportunity to speak more Russian and, specifically, their own variant of Russian. Therefore, based on the collected data, we concluded that the turn towards multilingualism and the authenticity of individual behaviour in SLA and global HL research and practice (Kramsch, 2012) had not yet reached the Russian HL/FL classroom despite recent calls for its inclusion (Carreira & Kagan, 2018). Limitations

Our research had several limitations. The main limitations were time and access. Our findings would have benefitted from more time spent in the classroom to understand the rationale behind Professor Katia’s inclass teaching choices. Likewise, more access to Professor Katia’s teaching materials and syllabus would have allowed us to better comprehend her teaching philosophy as it related to SLI and authenticity. Another limitation was the fact that this was a mixed-level classroom that consisted of FL and HL students with very different needs. Since this setup presents a difficult situation for any teacher because of the constant need for differentiated instruction (Carreira & Kagan, 2018), it may have contributed to the issues that we observed. Indeed, Professor Katia stated that the HLLs needed their own class, and this assertion has frequently been made in HL literature (Carreira & Kagan, 2018; Friedman & Kagan, 2008). Recommendations

Our recommendations provide suggestions for each of the three issues examined in our conclusion: the linguistic focus on Standard Russian, the

50  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

essentialist views of authenticity and the dominant place of English in a Russian classroom. In the first case, we recommend that practitioners and researchers re-evaluate their understanding of what it means for a Russian speaker to be authentic and eschew native speakerism and SLI (LippiGreen, 1994; Showstack, 2017). We do not claim to suggest that professors and researchers of Russian HLLs not instruct students in Standard Russian, as much data show that many Russian HLLs want to learn Standard Russian grammar (Swender et al., 2014). However, we found that to view the Russian HLLs’ language variation as incomplete and to treat them as ‘unbalanced bilinguals’ (Rakhilina et al., 2016: 1) could be detrimental to their multilingual development and promote a sense of linguistic deficiency (Tseng, 2020). As language authenticators (Bourdieu, 1991), Russian HL instructors have the power to increase awareness of language differences (Showstack, 2017) and to encourage students to utilise their Russian by authenticating rather than delegitimising its use. They can do so by providing their HLLs with different contexts and registers so that the HLLs may have the freedom and the motivation to use their language variants in class without the fear of sounding ‘incorrect’ or ‘inauthentic’. This last suggestion will also require expanding the linguistic focus of the class to account for the sociocultural (He, 2010) and sociopolitical (Leeman, 2015; Ortega, 2020) dimensions of language learning. Since language is produced in interactions that entail varied expressions of authentic identities, Russian HL instructors should provide a variety of content-based communicative tasks and exercises for the HLLs to share their multicultural backgrounds. This practice may decrease the HLLs’ language shyness (Krashen, 1998) by giving them time and space to express their diverse experiences in class. It may also enable the instructors to make a long-overdue shift from the essentialist perspective of authenticity towards its constructionist understanding as an expression of each student’s individuality (Lowe & Pinner, 2016; Pinner, 2016). Finally, in order to create a truly multilingual classroom, the use of English as the lingua franca could be curbed and the use of other minority languages spoken by the HLLs encouraged. In the case of English, its excessive presence may have resulted in endorsing its hegemonic status and, as a result, discouraged the HLLs from speaking Russian as their minority language. Conversely, in the case of languages other than Russian, such as Ukrainian or Belarusian, their inclusion in the class may have ensured a true multilingual experience for the HLLs by helping them express their multilingual identities freely. These last two recommendations may not only diminish the linguistic capital (Bourdieu, 1991) of both Standard English and Standard Russian but may also reduce language shyness (Krashen, 1998) and promote the authenticity of individual behaviour in multilingual Russian HLLs.

Multilingualism and Authenticity in Russian Heritage Language Teaching Practices  51

References Benmamoun, E., Montrul, S. and Polinsky, M. (2013) Heritage languages and their speakers: Opportunities and challenges for linguistics. Theoretical Linguistics 39 (3–4), 129–181. Bourdieu, P. (1991) Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Carreira, M. and Kagan, O. (2018) Heritage language education: A proposal for the next 50 years. Foreign Language Annals 51 (1), 152–168. Cho, H. (2014) ‘It’s very complicated’. Exploring heritage language identity with heritage language teachers in a teacher preparation program. Language and Education 28 (2), 181–195. Creese, A., Blackledge, A. and Takhi, J.K. (2014) The ideal ‘native speaker’ teacher: Negotiating authenticity and legitimacy in the language classroom. The Modern Language Journal 98 (4), 937–951. Davies, B. and Harré, R. (1990) Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 20 (1), 43–63. Dubinina, I. and Polinsky, M. (2013) Russian in the U.S. In M. Moser and M. Polinsky (eds) Slavic Languages in Migration (pp. 1–28). Wien: University of Vienna. Friedman, D. and Kagan, O. (2008) Academic writing proficiency of Russian heritage speakers: A comparative study. In D. Brinton, O. Kagan and S. Bauckus (eds) Heritage Language Education: A New Field Emerging (pp. 181–198). New York: Routledge. He, A.W. (2010) The heart of heritage: Sociocultural dimensions of heritage language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 30, 66–82. Holliday, A. (2006) Native-speakerism. ELT Journal 60 (4), 385–387. Hornberger, N. and Wang, S. (2008) Who are our heritage language learners? Identity and biliteracy in heritage language education in the United States. In D. Brinton, O. Kagan and S. Bauckus (eds) Heritage Language Education: A New Field Emerging (pp. 3–35). New York: Routledge. Kagan, O. (2010) Russian heritage language speakers in the U.S.: A profile. Russian Language Journal 60, 213–228. Kagan, O. and Dillon, K. (2006) Russian heritage learners: So what happens now? The Slavic and East European Journal 50 (1), 83–96. Kim, J.I. (2017) Issues of motivation and identity positioning: Two teachers’ motivational practices for engaging immigrant children in learning heritage languages. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 20 (6), 638–651. Kramsch, C. (2012) Authenticity and legitimacy in multilingual SLA.  Critical Multilingualism Studies 1 (1), 107–128. Krashen, S. (1998) Language shyness and heritage language development. In S. Krashen, L. Tse and J. McQuillan (eds) Heritage Language Development (pp. 41–49). Culver City: Language Education Associates. Kupisch, T. and Rothman, J. (2018) Terminology matters! Why difference is not incompleteness and how early child bilinguals are heritage speakers. International Journal of Bilingualism 22 (5), 564–582. Lavretsky, E., Meland, D. and Plotkin, D.A. (1997) Children from the former Soviet Union. In G. Johnson-Powell, J. Yamamoto, G.E. Wyatt and W. Arroyo (eds) Transcultural Child Development: Psychological Assessment and Treatment (pp. 328–346). New York: John Wiley and Sons. Leeman, J. (2015) Heritage language education and identity in the United States. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 35, 100–119. Lippi-Green, R. (1994) Accent, standard language ideology, and discriminatory pretext in the courts. Language in Society 23 (2), 163–198. Lowe, R.J. and Pinner, R. (2016) Finding the connections between native-speakerism and authenticity. Applied Linguistics Review 7 (1), 27–52.

52  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

Maxwell, J.A. (2005) Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach (2nd edn). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Merriam, S.B. (2009) Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation (2nd edn). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Ortega, L. (2020) The study of heritage language development from a bilingualism and social justice perspective. Language Learning 70, 15–53. Pinner, R. (2016) Reconceptualising Authenticity for English as a Global Language. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Polinsky, M. (2011) Reanalysis in adult heritage language. New evidence in support of attrition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 33 (2), 305–328. Polinsky, M. and Kagan, O. (2007) Heritage languages: In the ‘wild’ and in the classroom. Language and Linguistics Compass 1 (5), 368–395. Rakhilina, E., Vyrenkova, A. and Polinsky, M. (2016) Linguistic creativity in heritage speakers. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 1 (1), 43, 1–29. Showstack, R.E. (2017) Stancetaking and language ideologies in heritage language learner classroom discourse. Journal of Language, Identity and Education 16 (5), 271–284. Swender, E., Martin, C.L., Rivera-Martinez, M. and Kagan, O.E. (2014) Exploring oral proficiency profiles of heritage speakers of Russian and Spanish. Foreign Language Annals 47 (3), 423–446. Tseng, A. (2020) ‘Qué barbaridad, son latinos y deberían saber español primero’: Language ideology, agency, and heritage language insecurity across immigrant generations. Applied Linguistics 42 (1), 113–135. Valdés, G. (2001) Heritage language students: Profiles and possibilities. In J.K. Peyton, D.A. Ranard and S. McGinnis (eds) Heritage Languages in America: Preserving a National Resource (pp. 37–77). Washington, DC and McHenry, IL: Center for Applied Linguistics and Delta Systems. Van Deusen-Scholl, N. (2003) Toward a definition of heritage language: Sociopolitical and pedagogical considerations. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education 2 (3), 211–230. Van Lier, L. (1996) Interaction in the Language Curriculum: Awareness, Autonomy and Authenticity. London: Longman. Will, L. (2018) Authenticity in English Language Teaching: An Analysis of Academic Discourse. Münster: Waxmann.

4 Authenticity in Language Assessment: Revisiting the Implementation of a Key Principle Carol Spöttl, Eva Konrad, Veronika Schwarz, Elisa Guggenbichler and Benjamin Kremmel

Introduction

Language assessments, by their very nature, are rarely (or at least should not be) an end in and of themselves. Rather, they are a means to the end of inferring or generalising a test performance to language use outside the classroom or test situation, often referred to as the real world, or real-life, target language use (TLU) domains and situations. In language assessment, authenticity is thus considered ‘a critical quality of language tests’ (Bachman & Palmer, 1996: 23). Particularly in the paradigm of communicative language assessment, authenticity has been regarded as the prerequisite for valid score interpretations and generalisations to performance beyond the test situation for decades. Morrow (1991: 112), for instance, highlighted the ‘overriding importance of authenticity’ in communicative language testing, and Wood (1993) even went so far as to claim that authenticity was a more important issue for assessment than validity or reliability as the latter two would coalesce into the issue of the former. The crucial role of authenticity in language testing can therefore be deemed a given, an uncontested sine-qua-non. Conceptualisations of authenticity in language testing, while still featuring some diversity, particularly in the past, have thus been relatively stable and uniform in recent decades. Only few language testing researchers would consider it equivalent to mere face-validity these days (Bachman, 1991; Fulcher, 2015). Instead, the view of authenticity laid out by Bachman (1990) as comprising situational authenticity and interactional authenticity seems to be predominant and almost consensual. Situational authenticity refers to the degree of correspondence of a test task and the TLU task, 53

54  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

and interactional authenticity is ‘a feature of the cognitive activities of the test-taker in performing the test task’ (Khalifa & Weir, 2009: 7). As such, the notion applied in most language assessment contexts likely corresponds to the definition of authenticity as real-world authenticity as proposed by Will (2018) in his taxonomy, while simultaneously subsuming aspects of textual authenticity (as one element of situational authenticity) and authenticity of text reception (interactional authenticity, later evolved into interactiveness) (Bachman & Palmer, 1996). The field of language assessment would consider authenticity more accurately operationalised if test tasks, and all their inherent elements, reflect procedures and situations naturally occurring in real life outside the language learning classroom. This striving for authenticity as ‘realism’ (Bündgens-Kosten, 2014: 457) is underlined particularly well by Lewkowicz’s (2000: 48) observation that it is mainly situational authenticity – ‘the perceived match between the characteristics of test tasks to target language use tasks’ – that has received most attention from test developers and validation researchers. Bachman and Palmer (1996) ground the importance of authenticity for testing in (a) its role in building an argument for construct validity, and (b) its effect on test takers who are believed to respond more favourably to a test that appears authentic and relevant to them and their language use. While this latter effect of authenticity is under-researched and therefore not a very strong argument for efforts for more authenticity in language tests, the significance of authenticity for construct validity cannot be understated. Will’s (2018: 54) question ‘whether situational authenticity is desirable’ can thus certainly be answered in the affirmative. Clearly, ­(situational) authenticity in language assessments lies at the heart of any generalisations beyond the test situation. In addition, Grabe and Jiang (2013: 12) stress the positive washback for language instruction that is generated by ‘the use of realistic texts, tasks, and contexts’. It is therefore evident that authenticity plays a key role in language assessment and goes far beyond considerations of using genuine texts as input or stimulus material. The starting point for considering authenticity in a language test is the definition of the TLU situation and the processing it requires. While the importance of authenticity in assessment, and also its conceptualisation, therefore remains largely unchallenged, there is arguably a need in today’s rapidly evolving environment with issues arising from globalisation, digitalisation, mobility and transculturality, for revisiting how the operationalisation of authenticity in the language assessments of today and the future might need reconceptualising. The principle of authenticity thus affects an array of aspects in a test: the input or stimulus, the test format, the test conditions, the task and its situational context, its interactional opportunities as well as the scoring criteria, and even the authenticity of the response (Burton, 2020; Stadler, 2015).

Authenticity in Language Assessment  55

The present chapter will examine two areas in particular, in which the field of language assessment needs to reconsider how future tests can better ensure situational and interactional authenticity. These are (a) the impact of new technologies on real-world communication, and (b) the multilingual reality of language use in today’s globalised world. For each of these two, we will discuss how the authentic assessment of individual skills is impacted and how testing should move forward so as not to jeopardise the generalisability of the scores it generates. Technology in Authentic Assessment

Since the advent of the World Wide Web in the early 1990s and the subsequent digitisation of society, communication has increasingly moved to a digital environment. This development has an impact on considerations of authenticity in assessing the traditional language skills. Reading and writing have largely moved from paper to screens, and technology has also changed how and where people listen and speak. Large-scale assessments have followed the development towards digitisation and moved their tests to computer administration. The mode of administration, however, is not enough to provide an adequate degree of real-world authenticity. Reading, for instance, in a digital environment has affected both what authentic reading texts and reading situations may look like and how readers interact with them. Some researchers have thus suggested a necessity for expanding current models of reading to address reading digital texts (Wylie et al., 2018). Digital texts may cover a wide area and range of texts that are displayed on screens but are structurally similar to printed text, to multidimensional texts that contain, for example, hyperlinks or embedded videos. Test tasks that correspond closely to the TLU would need to sample from the variety of these reading texts and also mirror how learners would typically interact with them. This is, however, still rarely implemented in language tests. Through the increased popularity of messengers and texting, reading has also become more interactive and has, in combination with writing, partly even replaced spoken communication. These text genres may be less useful for assessing higher levels of reading due to their length and textual structure, but they have a place in the assessment of lower-level reading. Also, test designers may need to consider whether assessing reading as an isolated skill can really capture this interactive aspect. This is not a new problem, as reading is rarely a completely isolated activity (Alderson, 2000), but Bachman and Palmer’s (1996) implication that testing isolated skills decreases authenticity should be revisited in light of this change in reading behaviour. Reading digital texts might also require readers to develop new skills. For example, navigating a text that is movable through scrolling is

56  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

cognitively more demanding than reading a text that is fixed on a page (Støle et al., 2018). Authentic tests of reading should also reflect how learners synthesise information from different sources (Britt et al., 2013; Rouet, 2006), and test developers need to consider this in the task demands and interfaces of their assessments. Particularly in the era of ‘fake news’, readers are also increasingly required to judge the quality of the texts they read online, which may foster higher-level reading skills of evaluation as well as ‘considerations of author purpose, stance, and credibility’ (Coiro & Dobler, 2007: 245). Sadly, this is also an area largely unexplored in assessment to date, with the main focus still solely on comprehension. These changes in text structures and reading behaviours might, in fact, necessitate the development of new test formats. For example, Coiro and Dobler (2007: 224) find that ‘online reading prompts new tasks such as querying internet search engines, sifting through lists of disparate search results, and navigating multilevel informational websites’. Texts with hyperlinks may be used for tasks that assess reading to integrate information from multiple texts. Assessment of higher-level reading may include tasks focusing on evaluation and interpretation of reading texts. Although reading digital texts is clearly a central component of current authentic reading, it is important that this is seen as an extension of and not a substitute for more traditional reading skills. Støle et al. (2018: 218) warn that ‘an operationalisation of reading as a skill predominantly based on reading in digitised environments runs the risk of ignoring key cognitive components of reading’. Readers are confronted with both digital and printed texts, and therefore authentic reading assessment should cover both. This is also crucial because research suggests that readers may use different cognitive processes, depending on whether the text they read is printed or on screen (Coiro & Dobler, 2007; Wylie et al., 2018). Similar concerns apply to listening. The traditional audio-only construct of listening (Bejar et al., 2000; Buck, 2001; Choi et al., 2003) is increasingly questioned with so much audio-visual listening, or rather viewing, taking place in the real world through social media and other channels. In fact, listening might need to be conceptualised as a multimodal skill today (Field, 2013). Authentically, such listening input material incorporates additional implicit information through paralinguistic (e.g. intonation) or non-linguistic features and cues (e.g. face, lips and body language/movement; graphs, pictures or other visual background information) that need to be understood just like linguistic cues. The question whether and what kind of visual cues affect candidates’ performances has yielded contradictory findings to date (Batty, 2015; Ginther, 2002; Gruba, 1993; Shin, 1998; Suvorov, 2009; Wagner, 2016), but it seems without question a direction that listening assessment needs to explore to remain authentic. However, it is not only the input materials or types of listening that have changed due to technology, but also the listening behaviour itself.

Authenticity in Language Assessment  57

Self-paced listening, where learners can pause and repeat input at their own discretion, is a standard practice today for people listening to podcasts, YouTube videos and other listening material. This begs the question whether a test situation should not mirror these circumstances in the interest of real-world authenticity. Many tests, however, still rely on single play listening, mainly for reasons of practicality, even though there is now robust evidence to support arguments for double play or even self-paced listening (Holzknecht, 2019), also from an interactional authenticity viewpoint. Listening as part of interactive speaking has also changed considerably through the channels now available. Videoconferencing tools, such as Skype or Zoom, follow distinct interaction patterns that are rarely mirrored in speaking test tasks. The pivot of many test providers to online at-home test administration in light of the COVID-19 pandemic (Isbell & Kremmel, 2020) has probably accelerated considerations in this respect, but it is still early days to judge whether these authentic modes of delivery are here to stay, and whether testing organisations will make full use of their potential and aim at capturing the distinct nature of this type of spoken interaction instead of merely delivering the same speaking tasks, but through the mode of a video call. It is worth noting, however, that technological advances themselves have also had a negative effect on the speaking components of many exams (Nakatsuhara et al., 2021). With increased computing power and attempts to cut examining costs came a push in recent years towards using automated assessment in the productive skills. The speaking construct and the authenticity of assessing speaking have been impacted particularly by this. While automated assessment may be a useful tool in assessing lower-level speaking skills, it is less suitable for scoring higher-level skills, e.g. discourse organisation (Bridgeman et al., 2011). The pursuit of economising and automatising the assessment of spoken language has resulted in many computer-based tests either cutting interactive speaking tasks altogether and relying solely on one-way speaking tasks, or, even worse, narrowing their speaking construct to tasks that are easily and reliably machine-scorable, such as reading aloud. It seems that technology could arguably have set speaking assessment back, and this would indeed warrant attention, not least from an authenticity perspective. For the skill of writing, recent years have also seen major upheavals in the devices and practices we employ in written communication. New technologies have emerged and accelerated written communication, facilitated collaboration, revision, publication and immediate worldwide exchange. Not only have technological developments, such as computers, the internet, and word-processing or publishing tools, modified the use of writing technologies, but the change in writing material has also brought about a change in social and writing practices, giving rise to new genres of mobile and online communication as well as blended learning in writing

58  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

instruction (Bazerman, 2012; Coiro et al., 2014; Harding, 2014; Jin et al., 2020; Lewis, 2007). All of these elements impact, or at least should impact, how we conceptualise authentic tasks for writing tests. They raise interesting issues, such as whether and how spell checkers and grammar checkers, collaborative tools, etc. can be used in testing situations without interfering with other test quality and security criteria. While the largescale implementation of digital media in language assessment is still outstanding, Cushing Weigle (2016) identifies abundant room for development and improvement in the next few years. If, however, we exclude digital media and new literacy practices from assessment, we face the risk of excluding the real world and the (slow) digitalisation of the classroom from the language tests (Coiro et al., 2014). This, by definition, would limit the situational authenticity of writing tasks. Likewise, when it comes to interactional authenticity, there is an urgent need for re-examining the construct of writing in the digital era and overcoming a print-media oriented approach (Harding, 2014). Since digital technologies may be ephemeral, being continually developed and replaced, Lewis (2007: 230) maintains that ‘rethinking writing in digital times means focusing on practices over tools’. Indeed, the new ways of writing, also referred to as new literacies, are larger social and historical trends (Coiro et al., 2014; Lewis, 2007). These new literacy practices are ‘multiple, multimodal, and multifaceted’, mixing different genres and media in ‘post-typographic forms of inscribing languages’ (Coiro et al., 2014: 15, 7). The emerging genres, such as chats and blogs, merge features of spoken and written language (Kern, 2006); more recent developments of voice commands and dictation tools further blur the boundaries between both codes. Language and tone are increasingly replaced by symbols (‘emoticons’ and ‘emojis’), creating hazy boundaries between text and other features or tools (Harding, 2014; Mishan, 2017). Technological possibilities, such as multiple windows and images, offer the possibility of working synchronously and foster writing behaviour that resembles ‘the cut and paste style of bricolage and juxtaposition for production and exchange’ (Lewis, 2007: 233). As intertextuality and interaction in the form of response, hypertext and comments have become the guiding norm in today’s writing practices; we must endeavour to present learners with assessment tasks that resemble this. While writing research has seen a shift towards process-oriented writing assessment (e.g. Barkaoui, 2016; Révész et al., 2017), the writing processes in innovative genres and formats are still poorly understood. Yet, they would provide insights into the demands of new literacies when developing interactionally authentic digital writing tasks, which is all the more important in times of blended/online learning. To ensure authentic assessment of writing, it is paramount to keep in mind that specific writing practices and traditions have evolved in different social domains or professions. These

Authenticity in Language Assessment  59

differences may be so strong that even a highly skilled writer in one domain is unlikely to be equally acquainted with writing practices in another domain (Bazerman, 2012). For rating productive skills, this highlights the need to overcome the focus on linguistic features but consider the respective content areas and disciplines (Cushing Weigle, 2016), in particular when assessing language for specific purposes (LSP). Authentic rating should be guided by the criteria applied to performances in the real world (e.g. see Special Issue of Language Testing in 2016 on Authenticity in LSP Testing). The issues outlined imply that the field of language assessment has to re-invent itself in the constructs, task types, inputs and communicative scenarios it employs, and these exciting developments and innovations to strive for increased authenticity have only just begun. It should also be clear that one way forward to address many of these challenges may lie in increased task-based or integrated rather than independent item-based assessment. In fact, these calls are not new but appear to take some time to manifest. For instance, Godwin-Jones (2008: 7) called for more integrated tasks to simulate the ‘reading-to-write culture’ of the digital era. More generally, Plakans (2012: 249) maintains that ‘[t]reating language as holistic or as an amalgamation of reading, writing, listening, or speaking, rather than as isolated abilities may allow for different or more substantive interpretations of performances that are transferrable to real world domains’. Despite what may be happening with the demand for automated assessment and the detrimental effects this technology has on the authenticity of some exams, it is also encouraging to simultaneously witness a renewed interest in integrated tasks and their implementation in other tests (Plakans, 2012). When developing test tasks that ‘reflect procedures and situations from outside the classroom’ (Will, 2018: 59), this inevitably raises the question of what the real world looks like for second language users and whether the traditional communicative activities reception, production and interaction actually still suffice in modern language tests given the real-world relevance of mediation. The construct of mediating between texts or languages, despite being clearly a prevalent language activity in the real world, has traditionally been neglected in language assessment. The publication of the CEFR Companion Volume (Council of Europe, 2018) with its particular focus on added sections and scales for mediation appears to have instigated a wide-ranging discussion and significant change with some exams already exploring new task types to address this dereliction, using new technologies (e.g. Xu & Pinnington, 2020). This notion of communication entailing a collaborative effort between language users, with interlocutors taking on intermediary roles and accommodating, adjusting and even negotiating for meaning, as well as the need for authentic assessments to reflect this brings us to the second main issue.

60  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

Language(s) in Authentic Language Assessment

The real world outside of test situations today is diverse and multilingual. Language assessments aiming for real-world authenticity should take this into account. Societal developments and new technologies have turned an increasing number of people into producers, receivers and responders of text and discourse and have contributed to the globalisation of communication, or what Mishan (2017: 12) calls ‘an international playground of its language speakers’ of different proficiency. This, of course, presents a major challenge to educational contexts in general, and language assessment specifically. In particular, the emergence of Global English and English as a lingua franca has made target-language use situations, populations and norms increasingly heterogeneous and complex (Leung & Lewkowicz, 2006; Pinner, 2016). In an increasingly multilingual society, goal-oriented communication, e.g. in English, with non-native speakers of English might be more frequent and authentic than communicating with native speakers. For the assessment of productive skills, it is therefore essential that test developers identify new ways of authentic assessment that overcome a monolingual way of thinking and bias in testing (Cushing Weigle, 2016). Similarly, the reality of multilingualism affects the assessment of receptive skills, particularly regarding the choice of input texts. Traditionally, only texts produced by native speakers were considered authentic. However, for receptive skills testing, it may in fact be more genuine or natural for language users to encounter spoken or written text produced by a non-native speaker than by a native speaker. Natural speech in authentic input for listening, for instance, should therefore not only represent mostly unscripted text and features, such as hesitations and redundancies (Ockey & Wagner, 2018) but also reflect the varieties of a particular language being tested (e.g. World Englishes). Tasks, predominantly integrated in nature, should elicit mediation strategies and mirror the accommodation, negotiation and collaboration taking place in real life between language users (Harding, 2015; Harding & McNamara, 2017). Unfortunately, to date, this is still a largely neglected issue (Harding & McNamara, 2017). Test providers still rely heavily on scripted textual input and sound files (see, e.g. Wagner, 2016; Yanagawa, 2016 for listening), ‘polished and clearly-enunciated spoken texts’ in listening assessment (Ockey & Wagner, 2018: 24), and there are hardly any features of lingua franca communication to be found in prominent language tests, let alone language classrooms. In addition, new literacies, as outlined earlier, have not only triggered new forms of agency, performativity, and circulation within the target language and culture (Lewis, 2007), but they also question cultural authority and authorship. In the digital era, the authoritative position of the publisher is fading and so are prescriptive norms in favour of a more

Authenticity in Language Assessment  61

democratised use of language(s) (Kramsch et al., 2000). Authorship and ownership are not restricted to a limited group of proficient speakers or writers anymore but become ‘the privilege of any language user, at equal par with any other’ (Kramsch et al., 2000: 87; see also Pinner, 2016). Together with the demise of the native speaker paradigm, this may be seen as part of a general push towards democratisation of how language is understood, which needs to be reflected in language testing. Although language tests will always serve, to some extent, a gatekeeping function, this may trigger a move away from their ‘long history of use as instruments of social and cultural exclusion’ (McNamara, 2000: 68). It is necessary, when discussing authenticity in language tests, to distinguish it from the concept of native-speakerism, which depicts the native speaker as the only inherently authentic representative of a language and culture (Widdowson, 1994). Test developers need to be aware that their decisions on what is authentic (and therefore desirable) in assessment, may contribute to ‘“othering” [those from] outside the English-speaking West according to essentialist regional or religious cultural stereotypes’ (Holliday, 2006: 385). The native speaker paradigm, although no longer sustainable in today’s reality, may still permeate the criteria for rating productive skills: How is accent handled in rating scales for a speaking test? Are raters specifically instructed to consider issues of politeness, or ‘the construct “appropriateness”, which is culturally relative and closely bound with cultural identity’ (Thuy & Nguyen, 2018: 6)? Likewise, task development involves choices that can contribute to inclusion or exclusion of parts of the English-speaking world through aspects such as the provenance of a reading text, the accent of a speaker in a listening input text, the setting, content or topic of a task, and visual input. If a misguided perception of authenticity can lead to native speakerism, a timelier interpretation of authenticity can help avoid this othering. At the heart of situational authenticity (Bachman, 1990) lies the choice of test tasks from the TLU task situations and contexts. Rather than focusing on the imagined language use of a socially construed native speaker who is, after all, an idealisation (Davies, 2012), test developers should make use of the wide variety of TLU tasks of English speakers, independent of their provenance. Thus, Global English can be conceptualised to oppose ‘linguistic imperialism’ (Pinner, 2016: 41). Authenticity is not an absolute concept. To understand it and put it into practice, one needs to consider historical as well as geographical contexts (Kramsch et al., 2000; Mishan, 2017). This has repercussions for large-scale assessment. Because these assessments operate globally, they run the risk of promoting a seemingly universal concept of language and culture. Any generic view of language and culture however must be inherently less authentic since real-life language use is always bound to a particular context. One way to address this problem may be through localisation within globalised assessment, also known as glocalisation.

62  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

This term originated in the business jargon of the 1980s to describe adapting a global product for a local market (Robertson, 1995). Any test can only be validly used for the population for whom it was validated (O’Sullivan, 2012). For use with another target group, a test needs to be revalidated and, if necessary, adapted and localised. For example, O’Sullivan (2019) found that the difficulty of vocabulary items may differ according to the test takers’ L1; therefore, vocabulary lists would need to be adapted to the language background of the test population. The challenge for international test providers is to balance reliability and validity of measurement with authenticity and practicality. Evidently, language assessment is, in many aspects, lagging behind the reality it should strive to emulate for authentic assessment. This lack of real-world authenticity, both in terms of situational as well as interactional authenticity, is even more pronounced when taking into account not only the varieties of one particular language, but multilingualism in general. Emerging concepts and phenomena such as translanguaging (García & Li, 2014) pose significant challenges for language assessment and the field has only started to engage with these. It is still unclear how these fleeting conventions would impact language assessment and the criteria and standards it seeks to implement, and the compliance to static conventions it aims to assess. However, it probably needs to find a way to account for it if it wants to uphold the principle of authenticity. Conclusion

There is, of course, a natural tension between the ideal of authenticity and the idea of assessment, and in fact, the same can be said for classroom teaching. While some might argue from an existentialist viewpoint that language assessments can never be truly authentic, as ‘an action is authentic when it realises a free choice and is an expression of what a person genuinely feels and believes’ (Van Lier, 1996: 13) and assessment situations often restrict this, there are nonetheless grounds to argue there is some compatibility as individuals can usually choose whether and how to react to or interact with given assessments, tasks and even classroom situations (Grene, 1952). It thereby goes without saying that the purpose of a test task can only ever be to attempt to simulate real-world situations and the role of the test developers is to design test tasks that ‘[simulate] the tasks that test takers could be expected to perform in the real world outside the classroom or test situation’ (Leung & Lewkowicz, 2006: 213). The scholarly debate of authenticity has therefore often voiced concerns that test tasks can only be approximations of the TLU situation (e.g. Gan, 2012; Guariento & Morley, 2001; Long & Crookes, 1992) and that task demands, such as word or time limits, are a threat to authenticity (Shaw & Weir, 2007). It also needs to be taken into account, however, that authenticity is merely one criterion among several others, albeit a crucial one, for rendering assessments useful, valid,

Authenticity in Language Assessment  63

reliable and fair tools to gauge and predict how competently language learners would fare in future TLU situations. In striving for real-world likeness, the importance of authenticity in assessment remains unchallenged. Yet in today’s rapidly evolving environment with issues arising from globalisation, digitalisation, mobility and transculturality, considerations of how to reconceptualise authenticity (Pinner, 2016) and implement it in language tests certainly need addressing. The chapter has outlined how these issues have impacted the nature of communication and language use in the real world. It has argued that test developers need to re-evaluate how to reflect these new developments in their tests to ensure generalisability of their score interpretations. This chapter has discussed some of the key issues in the field of language assessment, particularly those that EFL assessment will need to grapple with in the future if it is to meet this self-imposed quality criterion. However, it is but an exploration into important challenges for authentic language assessment, specifically related to technological and societal advances and their impact on the nature, mode and (linguistic) diversity of communication, and by no means intended to be exhaustive. Similarly, proposed solutions such as promoting more integrated, task-based assessment are not meant as the cure-all for all authenticity-related concerns, but merely the start of a conversation about re-thinking authentic language assessment for future-proof real-world relevance. References Alderson, J.C. (2000) Assessing Reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bachman, L.F. (1990) Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bachman, L.F. (1991) What does language testing have to offer? TESOL Quarterly 25, 671–704. Bachman, L.F. and Palmer, A.S. (1996) Language Testing in Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Barkaoui, K. (2016) Examining the cognitive processes engaged by APTIS writing task 4 on paper and on the computer (ARAGs Research Reports Online AR-G/2016/1). See https://www.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/barkaoui.pdf (accessed July 2020). Batty, A.O. (2015) A comparison of video- and audio-mediated listening tests with manyfacet Rasch modeling and differential distractor functioning. Language Testing 32 (1), 3–20. Bazerman, C. (2012) Writing, cognition, and affect from the perspectives of sociocultural and historical studies of writing. In V. Wise Berninger (ed.) Past, Present, and Future Contributions of Cognitive Writing Research to Cognitive Psychology (pp. 69–104). New York: Psychology Press. Bejar, I., Douglas, D., Jamieson, J., Nissan, S. and Turner, J. (2000) TOEFL 2000 listening framework: A working paper (TOEFL Monograph Series MS-19). See https:// www.ets.org/research/policy_research _reports/publications/report/2000/iciu (accessed July 2020). Bridgeman, B., Powers, D., Stone, E. and Mollaun, P. (2011). TOEFL iBT speaking test scores as indicators of communicative language proficiency. Language Testing 29 (1), 91–108.

64  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

Britt, M.A., Rouet, J.F. and Braasch, J.L. (2013) Documents as entities. In M.A. Britt, S. Goldman and J.-F. Rouet (eds) Reading: From Words to Multiple Texts (pp. 160–79). New York: Routledge. Buck, G. (2001) Assessing Listening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bündgens-Kosten, J. (2014) Key concepts in ELT: Authenticity. ELT Journal 68 (4), 457–459. Burton, J.D. (2020) ‘How scripted is this going to be?’ Raters’ views of authenticity in speaking-performance tests. Language Assessment Quarterly 17 (3), 244–261. Choi, I.-C., Kim, K.S. and Boo, J. (2003) Comparability of a paper-based language test and a computer-based language test. Language Testing 20 (3), 295–320. Coiro, J., Knobel, M., Lankshear, C. and Leu, D.J. (2014) Central issues in new literacies and new literacies research. In J. Coiro, M. Knobel, C. Lankshear and D.J. Leu (eds) Handbook of Research on New Literacies (pp. 1–21). New York: Routledge. Coiro, J. and Dobler, E. (2007) Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies used by sixth-grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the Internet. Reading Research Quarterly 42 (2), 214–257. Council of Europe (2018) Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Companion volume with new descriptors. See https://rm.coe.int/ cefr-companion-volume-with-new-descriptors-2018/1680787989 (accessed July 2020). Cushing Weigle, S. (2016) Second language writing assessment. In R.M. Manchón and P.K. Matsuda (eds) Handbook of Second and Foreign Language Writing (pp. 473– 494). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Davies, A. (2012) Native speaker. In C.A. Chapelle (ed.) The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Wiley & Sons Ltd See https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ epdf/10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0855 (accessed August 2020). Field, J. (2013) Cognitive validity. In A. Geranpayeh and L. Taylor (eds) Examining Listening: Research and Practice in Assessing Second Language Listening (pp. 77–151). Cambridge: UCLES Cambridge University Press. Fulcher, G. (2015) Re-examining Language Testing. Abingdon: Routledge. Gan, Z. (2012) Test-task authenticity: The multiple perspectives. Changing English 19 (2), 237–247. García, O. and Wei, L. (2014) Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Ginther, A. (2002) Context and content visuals and performance on listening comprehension stimuli. Language Testing 19 (2), 133–167. Godwin-Jones, R. (2008) Emering technologies web-writing 2.0: Enabling, documenting, and assessing writing online. Language Learning and Technology 12 (2), 7–13. Grabe, W. and Jiang, X. (2013) Assessing reading. In A.J. Kunnan (ed.) The Companion to Language Assessment (Vol. 1) (pp. 185–200). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. See https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/9781118411360.wbcla060 (accessed July 2020). Grene, M. (1952) Authenticity: An existential virtue author. Ethics 62 (4), 266–274. Gruba, P. (1993) A comparison study of audio and video in language testing. JALT Journal 15 (1), 85–88. Guariento, W. and Morley, J. (2001) Text and task authenticity in the EFL classroom. ELT Journal 55 (4), 347–353. Harding, L. (2014) Communicative language testing: Current issues and future research. Language Assessment Quarterly 11 (2), 186–197. Harding, L. (2015) Adaptability and ELF communication: The next steps for communicative language testing? In Selected Proceedings from the IATEFL TEA SIG 2014 Conference. Granada. Harding, L. and McNamara, T. (2017) Language assessment: The challenge of ELF. In J. Jenkins, W. Baker and M.J. Dewey (eds) Routledge Handbook of English as a Lingua Franca (pp. 570–582). Abingdon: Routledge.

Authenticity in Language Assessment  65

Holliday, A. (2006) Native-speakerism. ELT Journal 60 (4), 385–387. Holzknecht, F. (2019) Double play in listening assessment. Lancaster University. See https://doi.org/10.17635/lancaster/thesis/812 (accessed July 2020). Isbell, D.R. and Kremmel, B. (2020) Test review: Current options in at-home language proficiency tests for making high-stakes decisions. Language Testing 37 (4), 1–20. Jin, T., Su, Y. and Lei, J. (2020) Exploring the blended learning design for argumentative writing. Language Learning 24 (2), 23–34. Kern, R. (2006) Perspectives on technology in learning and teaching languages. TESOL Quarterly 40 (1), 183–210. Khalifa, H. and Weir, C.J. (2009) Examining Reading: Research and Practice in Assessing Second Language Reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kramsch, C., A’Ness, F. and Wan Shun, E.L. (2000) Authenticity and authorship in the computer-mediated acquisition of L2 literacy. Language Learning and Technology 2 (4), 72–95. Leung, C. and Lewkowicz, J. (2006) Expanding horizons and unresolved conundrums: Language testing and assessment. TESOL Quarterly 40 (1), 211–234. Lewis, C. (2007) New literacies. In M. Knobel and C. Lankshear (eds) A New Literacies Sampler (pp. 229–238). New York: Peter Lang. Lewkowicz, J.A. (2000) Authenticity in language testing: Some outstanding questions. Language Testing 17 (1), 43–64. Long, M.H. and Crookes, G. (1992) Three approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly 26 (1), 27–56. McNamara, T. (2000) Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Mishan, F. (2017) ‘Authenticity 2.0’: Reconceptualising ‘authenticity’ in the digital era. In  A. Maley and B. Tomlinson (eds) Authenticity in Materials Development for Language Learning (pp. 10–25). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Morrow, K. (1991) Evaluating communicative tests. In S. Anivan (ed.) Current Developments in Language Testing (pp. 111–118). Singapore: South East Asian Ministers of Education Organization (SEAMEO) Regional Language Centre. See https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED365144.pdf (accessed July 2020). Nakatsuhara, F., Inoue, C. and Khabbazbashi, N. (2021) Measuring L2 speaking. In P.  Winke and T. Brunfaut (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition and Language Testing (pp. 285–294). New York: Routledge. O’Sullivan, B. (2012) Assessment issues in languages for specific purposes. Modern Language Journal 96 (Focus Issue), 71–88. O’Sullivan, B. (2019) Localisation in learning systems. Paper presented at the 1st British Council New Directions in English Language Assessment (Mexico City, 21–23 March). See https://americas.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/01._localisation_ in_learning_systems_-_barry_o_sullivan.pdf (accessed July 2020). Ockey, G.J. and Wagner, E. (2018) Assessing L2 Listening. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Pinner, R.S. (2016) Reconceptualising Authenticity for English as a Global Language. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Plakans, L. (2012) Writing integrated items. In G. Fulcher and L. Harding (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Language Testing (pp. 249–261). London: Routledge. Révész, A., Michel, M. and Lee, M. (2017) Investigating IELTS Academic Writing Task 2: Relationships between cognitive writing processes, text quality, and working memory (IELTS Research Reports Online Series 2017/3). See https:// www.ielts.org/-/media/research-reports/ielts_online_rr_ 2017-3.ashx (accessed July 2020). Robertson, R. (1995) Glocalization: Time-space and homogeneity-heterogeneity. In M.  Featherstone, S.L. Robertson and R. Robertson (eds) Global Modernities (pp. 25–44). London: Sage Publications.

66  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

Rouet, J.-F. (2006) The Skills of Document Use: From Text Comprehension to Webbased Learning. New York: Routledge. Shaw, S.D. and Weir, C.J. (2007) Examining Writing: Research and Practice in Assessing Second Language Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Shin, D. (1998) Using videotaped lectures for testing academic listening proficiency. International Journal of Listening 12 (1), 57–80. Stadler, W. (2015) Teaching and testing sociopragmatics in the Russian Language Classroom. Athens Journal of Philology 2 (3), 149–162. Støle, H., Mangen, A., Frønes, T.S. and Thomson, J. (2018) Digitisation of reading assessment. In M. Barzillai, J. Thomson, S. Schoeder and P. van der Broek (eds) Learning to Read in a Digital World (pp. 205–221). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Suvorov, R. (2009) Context visuals in L2 listening tests: The effects of photographs and video vs. audio-only format. In C.A. Chapelle, G. Jun and I. Katz (eds) Developing and Evaluating Language Learning Materials (pp. 53–68). Ames: Iowa State University. Thuy, T. and Nguyen, M. (2018) Aptis General writing test task 4: An analysis of testtakers’ pragmatic performance and cognitive processing (ARAGs Research Online Reports AR-G/2018/2). See https://www.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/ nguyen_and_marwan_report.pdf (accessed July 2020). Van Lier, L. (1996) Interaction in the Language Curriculum: Awareness, Autonomy, and Authenticity. London: Routledge. Wagner, E. (2016) Authentic texts in the assessment of L2 listening ability. In J. Banarjee and D.Tsagari (eds) Contemporary Second Language Assessment (pp. 438–463). London: Continuum. Widdowson, H.G. (1994) The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly 28 (2), 377–389. Will, L. (2018) Authenticity in English Language Teaching: An Analysis of Academic Discourse. Münster: Waxmann. Wood, R. (1993) Assessment and Testing: A Survey of Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wylie, J., Thomson, J., Leppänen, P.H.T., Ackerman, R., Kanniainen, L. and Prieler, T. (2018) Cognitive processes and digital reading. In M. Barzillai, J. Thomson, S. Schoeder and P. van der Broek (eds) Learning to Read in a Digital World (pp 57–90). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Xu, J. and Pinnington, A. (2020) Developing computer-based speaking tasks to assess the ‘mediation’ construct. Paper presented at the CRELLA Online Research Seminar (Bedfordshire, 1 July). Yanagawa, K. (2016) Examining the authenticity of the Center Listening Test: Speech rate, reduced forms, hesitation and fillers, and processing levels. JACET Journal 60, 97–115.

5 Authenticity Beyond Teaching Materials: Teachers’ Authentic Care on Students’ Persistence at the Beginner Level of Foreign Language Courses Anna Shkireva

Introduction

Teachers’ attitudes towards students’ learning play an important role in understanding students’ persistence in the FL classrooms. Teachers are able to make a positive contribution towards the students’ motivation to learn if the classroom provides a supportive atmosphere (Lightbown & Spada, 2012: 88). Supportive relationships are essential in the learning process itself, and trust and commitment provide the human base from which learning and teaching can be carried out (Farr, 2001: 475–476). This human base reflects the authentically caring ideology in the works of Noddings (2013), Prillaman et al. (1994) and Valenzuela (1999), which the latter defines as ‘a reformulation in which schools’ functionaries are to embark on a search for connection where trusting relationships constitute the cornerstone for all learning’ (Valenzuela, 1999: 263). In her most recent work, Noddings (2013) suggests that, first and foremost, teachers should be caring for their students, only then can they be enactors of specialised functions. Thus, schools and universities should not be considered places where they train the intelligence, but rather where they nurture and maintain care through teachers’ attitudes. The one-semester foreign language (FL) requirement in some US colleges could be detrimental to student retention due to their psychological disposition and casual interpretation of learning outcomes. Students who do not show rapid progress during their first semester of classes often wish 67

68  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

to not continue their studies in FL and thus show little persistence towards language studies. Hence, in order to generate a supportive environment that can influence students’ persistence, FL teachers need to embrace the principles of authentic care in their classrooms. The aim of this chapter is to provide insights into the relationship between authentic care and pedagogy in FL. The concept of teacher’s authentic care was first introduced by Noddings (1988); however, the notions of teacher’s authentic care were manifested at the beginning of the 20th century, through pedagogies of other significant educational thinkers, such as Vygotsky (1994) and Freire (1993). I will also use their work as a basis for expanding the discourse on authentic caring in a functional way. The central focus of this discussion is on teachers. In particular, I want to discuss the effects of teacher’s authentic care on student’s persistence in FL classes. In this chapter, I question why students leave FL classes, what is the definition of care in an educational context and how teacher’s authentic care can potentially improve student retention. Lastly, I question if teachers’ authentic caring pedagogy can become a new principle in FL pedagogy, and if yes, what should teachers do in order to make it happen? To answer these questions, I first investigate the reasons why students do not persist with their studies of FL after they complete their language requirement at university. Then, I review the literature on care in the educational context, mostly drawing on Noddings’ (2013) concepts of care, Vygotsky’s (1994) concept of переживание (pereživanie) and Freire’s (1993) process of humanisation and examine them in relation to teacher’s authentic care. Then, I examine how teachers’ authentic caring pedagogy can potentially be grounded in the foundation of an FL pedagogy. I also provide examples of authentic teacher’s pedagogy in my practice and show how it can possibly increase students’ persistence and improve their learning. The purpose of this chapter is to explore teachers’ authentic care at the beginner level of FL instruction. The knowledge and understanding of teachers’ authentic care can potentially impact the strategies and instruction of FL at the beginner level in US colleges and therefore increase students’ persistence to study an FL. Finally, the information gained from this chapter can be used in the discussion of practical and policymaking issues in the field of FL instruction. Persistence in FL

There have been diverse debates on the best methods in teaching both in and out of the FL classroom. Yet, for various reasons, including the differences in a given learner’s background and teaching styles, the definition of the best method to teach FL still remains uncertain. The problem

Authenticity Beyond Teaching Materials  69

with the idea of a best method in FL education is that a best method does not exist; besides that, there should not be any adherence to a best method in teaching FL as any kind of teaching method cannot be described as perfect. Searching for the best method aims to create automation, which, in its essence, rejects interpersonal activity and can be applied only in work dealing with objects (Noddings, 1992: 20). A similar discourse has been seen in the work of Prillaman and Eaker (1994), who argued against the prioritised technical discourse over the expressive discourse (Prillaman & Eaker, 1994: 3–4). The former discourse supported the observable elements of teaching: the effective curriculum, course objectives and assessment, whereas the latter discourse emphasised the unmeasurable subjective relations between teacher and student, interaction, and intuition – all essential elements in the field of FL learning and teaching. Hence, instead of discussing the best method in FL education, it would be preferable to expand all the possible ways to enhance students’ learning of FL, and, in doing so, potentially increase their persistence. One study by Davis (2020) defines persistence as a ‘substantial positive outcome of basic psychological need fulfilment and autonomous motivation’ (Davis, 2020: 4) in addition to other essential elements of language learning, such as engagement, performance and achievement. Although there is a vast amount of research that investigates the concept of motivation in relation to language learning – Gardner and Lambert (1972), Guilloteaux and Dörnyei (2008), Dörnyei and Al-Hoorie (2017) – ­minimum research attention has been directed at the examination of teacher’s attitudes and behaviours that can influence student’s persistence to study an FL at the beginner level. In my pursuit of understanding ­teacher’s authentic care in university FL courses, I will explore teachers’ behaviours and affective disposition in relation to students’ motivation and persistence. In 2011, the president of the Modern Language Association of America, Russell A. Berman, stated ‘despite the pressures and opportunities of globalisation, we are becoming a nation of second-language illiterates’ (Berman, 2011: 31). In 2018, the report of the Modern Language Association of America revealed an indisputable drop of 6.7% across total enrolments in other than English FL classes in institutions of higher education between 2009 and 2013 (Looney & Lusin, 2018: 2). Between the BE autumn of 2013 and the BE autumn 2016, the report revealed an indisputable drop of 9.2% across total enrolments of FL classes in colleges and universities (Looney & Lusin, 2018: 2). These statistics indicate the urgent need for FL educators to implement such instruction and strategies that eventually will improve US college students’ enrolments in language classes and increase their persistence to study FL. In respect to this chapter, studies by Gibson and Shutt (2002) and Graham (2006) show that some reasons for students to discontinue their FL studies are related with dissatisfaction in teaching style or instruction

70  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

and with lack of self-confidence in the target language. On the contrary, the studies by Awad (2014) and Graham (2006) highlight that students persist in their studies if they experience instructor support and an increase in self-confidence. Thus, the reasons why students persist or discontinue their FL studies above are also related with factors that can be influenced by teachers, their attitude towards students (such as beliefs about students’ language aptitude) and teachers’ instruction. According to Dörnyei’s (1994) framework on FL motivation, there are three major dimensions of language learning: language level, learner level and learning situation level. The learning situation level is presented by three kinds of motivational components. The first kind relates to coursespecific motivational components that include interest, relevance, expectancy and satisfaction. The second kind – teacher-specific motivational components that include affiliative drive, authority type and direct socialisation of motivation (modelling, task presentation, feedback). And the last kind relates to group-specific motivational components that include goal orientations, norm and reward system, group cohesion and classroom goal structure (Dörnyei, 1994: 280). From my standpoint, an FL teacher is capable of influencing all elements on the learning situation level, which in return can affect the learner level and thus the learner’s motivational orientation for language learning. Understanding the elements on the learning situation level can help teachers to create such strategies in the classroom that would be adjusted according to students’ needs. Furthermore, the strategies that are organised around the learning situation level could increase students’ self-efficacy and therefore enhance students’ interest and persistence in FL. In summary, there are personal and situational reasons why students do not persist with their studies of FL after they complete their language requirement at the university. Personal reasons may reflect their psychological disposition towards language learning, such as the lack of selfconfidence, anxiety, their beliefs about aptitude or talent to be able to learn FL or connection of learning material with their personal experience or prior language. Situational reasons may include class environment and the cohesion of the group, teacher’s support and communication, scaffolded or non-scaffolded instruction, and the comprehensibility or difficulty of the material. The crucial element of all these reasons and sub-reasons is that the teacher may have a capacity to influence all of them in a positive or in a negative direction. In the further sections of this ­chapter, I will view how a teacher’s individual behaviour of authentic care may affect students’ motivation and persistence towards FL. The Concept of Care

The problem with the concept of care in education is not that teachers do not care for their students, but rather with the complexity of the

Authenticity Beyond Teaching Materials  71

concept itself. The discourse on caring in education, that it is essential to effective teaching, lacks measurable accountability (Prillaman & Eaker 1994: 5). Wilde (2012) also emphasised the challenges with bringing care into the educational discourse and stated that the concept of care ‘may be difficult to conceptualize, measure or quantify’ (Wilde, 2012: 1) and that in the early stages of this millennium ‘care suffers in institutional settings’ (Wilde, 2012: 11). Other researchers, such as Brubaker (2005), NowakFabrykowski (2007) and Velasquez et al. (2013), investigate the challenges on how to measure care, the lack of the clarification of its meaning and its implementation in different educational settings. What is more, ‘today teachers have become little more than technicians not trusted to use their imagination, creativity and education’ (Nieto, 2015: 3), and teacher’s practices tend to ignore the caring aspects of teaching, as they belong to subjective, emotional experience which is considered as individual and not objective (O’Connor, 2008: 119), and thus not suitable for a standardised curriculum. The etymology of the noun care consists of various meanings, among them are: watchful attention, responsibility, charge, supervision, etc., whereas the verb to care includes: to feel interest or concern, to have a liking, fondness, etc. (Merriam-Webster, n.d.). For the purpose of this chapter, the concept of care is primarily viewed as those actions, behaviours and emotions that emerge from the teachers’ innate (or authentic, as it will be discussed further) motivation to support and help their students to succeed in their studies. The importance of care meets the fundamental human need to secure the love and respect of others (Hachey, 2012: 40), to develop the innate support for each other, because ‘as human beings, we want to care and to be cared for’ (Noddings, 2013: 7), and to view caring ‘as a fundamental and encompassing human motivation’ (Mayseless, 2016: 2). The four main components of Noddings’ (2013) caring pedagogy are: modelling, dialogue, practice and confirmation. According to Tappan (1998), these central components are also reflected in Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory. Tappan (1998) tracks the parallels between Nodding’s caring pedagogy and Vygotsky’s conception of relation between learning and development. For instance, Tappan (1998) views Noddings’ components of modelling, dialogue and practice in the light of Vygotsky’s concept of the Zone of Proximal Development, the process in which both modelling and imitation play an important role, and which is fundamentally dialogical and mediated action in nature (Tappan, 1998: 28–30). In regard to the attempt to make the parallel between the last element of Nodding’s pedagogy – confirmation, which is in its essence the encouragement ‘of the best possible self’ (Noddings, 2013: 195), Tappan (1998) highlights the core of Vygotsky’s conception of relation between learning development, which is the focus on the potential level of development of a learner, and not on the actual level of development.

72  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

In my own practice of teaching FL at the beginner level, I found one of the most essential features of caring relationships with students to be the expression of a sincere (authentic) sense of concern for students, seeing their subjective reality, their vulnerability towards FL, and living the experience of teaching and learning FL as a joint activity. Viewing caring relationships through the sense of concern for students and living through this experience together also reflects another concept of Vygotsky’s: pereživanie. The Russian word pereživanie is translated as lived, emotional experience. In most contemporary research, the concept of pereživanie has tended to be on the students’ pereživanie with emphasis on their lived, emotional experiences. These sociocultural influences are important for ‘the formation of language attitudes’ (Bartram, 2010: 65), and thus are relevant in relation to students’ persistence. In one of his last works, Vygotsky (1994) defines pereživanie as: A unity where, on one hand, in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that which is being experienced … and on the other hand, what is represented is how I, myself, am experiencing this, i.e. all the personal characteristics and all the environmental characteristics are represented (in perezhivanie). … So, in an emotional experience (perezhivanie) we are always dealing with (an?) invisible unity of personal characteristics and situational characteristics, which are represented in the emotional experience (perezhivanie). (Vygotsky, 1994: 341)

As it was mentioned earlier, in education, pereživanie is usually viewed in regard to students’ emotional and subjective experiences. The verb pereživat’ (the cognate verb of the noun pereživanie), however, can offer a different perspective on this concept and its understanding. Pavlenko (2005) suggests that ‘the verb “pereživat” has no single-word translation equivalent in English, (although) it accounts for 9% of all emotion word tokens in the Russian corpus’ (Pavlenko, 2005: 127). In translation from Russian, some of the English definitions of the verb переживать (pereživat) are: to experience, to survive, to be anxious, to be upset, to endure and, finally, to express a deep feeling of concern for someone, which in respect to this chapter is an essential concept. Just as all the definitions of the verb pereživat’ reflect real, authentic ways of living, which also adds to the conceptualisation of authenticity in this work. Mahn and John-Steiner (2002) suggest that ‘teacher’s awareness of students’ ways of perceiving, processing and reacting to classroom interactions – their perezhivanie – contributes significantly to the teacher’s ability to engage the students in meaningful, engaging education’ (Mahn & John-Steiner, 2002: 53). According to Noddings (1992), caring relationships cannot be completed if the genuine form of reciprocity is not achieved. Thus, if we want to build an FL class by way of a meaningful and engaging learning experience, both parties – teacher and students – should be able to perceive and process each other’s pereživanie as a

Authenticity Beyond Teaching Materials  73

subjective lived experience, and to experience pereživanie in the form of concern for each other. The reciprocal caring relationship in FL class also resonates with Freire’s (1993) process of humanisation, or ‘becoming more fully human’ (Freire, 1993: 44), as ‘humans pursue their vocation of becoming more fully human when they engage in authentic praxis, through dialogue with others, in a critically conscious way’ (Roberts, 2000: 41). Teaching FL is a process of meaningful interaction/dialogue between individuals, in which both sides – teacher and learner – are one engaging living system, having a direct impact on each other’s ways of being, that is, their pereživanie. As it was mentioned earlier, the concept of care is a complex phenomenon in the educational discourse, yet it is grounded in the main works of the most significant educational thinkers of the 20th century. Viewing caring through these essential concepts and exploring the connections among them can provide a new perspective on implementing caring pedagogy into the FL classes and perhaps will encourage teachers to better understand this elusive concept. Teacher’s Authentic Care in the FL Classroom 

The concept of authenticity is a popular concept in the field of FL; however, the term remains vague due to the various meanings that are associated with this term (Gilmore, 2007: 98). According to Will (2018), the most common concept of authenticity in EFL (English as Foreign Language) is textual authenticity as in authentic materials; thus, the existing research on the concept of authenticity in FL classrooms has mainly focused on tasks and teaching materials (Guariento & Morley, 2001; Van Lier, 1996). The use of authentic materials in FL classrooms provides various advantages that stimulate language learning. For instance, Gilmore (2007) emphasised that authentic materials provide a wider input for learners and have the potential to be used in various ways in order to develop learners’ communicative competence, student motivation and autonomy. The study by Davis (2020) that used Self-Determination Theory as a theoretical framework also viewed the importance of authenticity on language competence and investigated various motivational orientations in order to understand the decrease of enrolments in FL courses. The study suggests that teachers should emphasise the communicative meaning of language through the facilitation of authentic learning experiences over the language form (e.g. planning the class around grammar). Contrary to the most used form of authenticity – textual authenticity – the role of teacher’s authenticity in language teaching contexts is still poorly understood. This is an especially intriguing topic, as we cannot expect the language class to be authentic, unless it is by means of the use

74  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

of authentic materials. All elements of the classroom, including individual behaviour, emotions and attitudes should be authentic, and thus, meaningful. According to Will (2018), the concept of authenticity of individual behaviour is philosophical in its origin and ‘is achieved by the individual if he or she is free to be himself or herself – or if a given design caters to the inclinations of the individual’ (Will, 2018: 60). Bringing this point into the classroom context, it is also important to investigate through what means (such as verbal or nonverbal communication) the teacher’s authentic individual behaviour is perceived by students, and how. The study on teacher’s authenticity by Johnson and LaBelle (2017) suggested that the authenticity of the message itself and medium of this message delivery impact students’ perceptions of teachers, and therefore influence the teacher–student relationship. Thus, it is not the particular trait of a given teacher’s character or behaviour that affects students’ positive learning outcomes, but rather the way teachers convey their authenticity into the class routine and the instructional communication with students. Gilmore (2007) offers eight meanings of authenticity that exist in the field of FL literature. Among these eight meanings there is one meaning in particular that resonates with the goal of this chapter: authenticity is operationalised through the lens of teacher–student interaction, the definition of authenticity that was originally proposed by Van Lier (1996). Van Lier viewed authenticity as a ‘basic principle of language education’ (Van Lier, 1996: 122) and identified the definitions of the term that are relevant to language education. For instance, the author argues that the concept of authenticity goes beyond authentic materials and tasks and, rather, that we need to consider it ‘as the process of engagement in the learning situation and as a characteristic of the persons engaged in learning … [authenticity] relates to who teachers and learners are and what they do as they interact with one another for the purpose of learning’ (Van Lier, 1996: 125). Therefore, Van Lier also prioritised the quality of relations between a teacher and a student rather than the specific behaviour of a teacher. According to the study by Johnson and LaBelle (2017), there are five sets of authentic teacher behaviours: ‘teachers are approachable, passionate, attentive, capable and knowledgeable’ (Johnson & LaBelle, 2017: 429). The authors, however, suggest that being an authentic teacher and also being perceived as an authentic teacher by students does not precisely mean to be an effective teacher, but rather the aforementioned indicators of authenticity ‘reflected [students’] perceptions that teachers were acting out of genuine concern, respect, and care for the students. In their actions and words, authentic teachers communicated to students that they were valued and important parts of the learning process’ (Johnson & LaBelle, 2017: 434). These five authentic teacher behaviours resonate with caring behaviours mentioned earlier in this chapter, and thus, the concepts of

Authenticity Beyond Teaching Materials  75

care and authenticity could also be viewed as an inseparable practice of authentic care. There are several scholars who look at the concept of authentic care as a joint activity in one way or another (Noddings, 2013; Rivera Maulucci, 2010; Valenzuela, 1999). Another way of looking at these two concepts as inseparable ones comes from Van Lier’s discourse of authenticity in conjunction with the German philosopher Martin Heidegger (1962). Van Lier stressed that it is not the particular teaching method that can bring authenticity into the FL classroom, but rather the authentic relationship with self, with one’s own being, as well as the authentic negotiation with one another. The German philosopher Martin Heidegger (1962) also viewed the concept of authenticity from the perspective of one’s being, but from the caring perspective. In his Dasein, which denotes ‘being-there’ or ‘relation of being’ (Heidegger, 1962: 12), being is inseparable from the state of care, as ‘to conceive Dasein as relational means that in living out our lives, we always already care: for each of us, our being is always at issue and this is made concrete in the specific actions we undertake and the roles we enact’ (Somogy & Guignon, 2020). Thus, the concepts of care and authenticity are mutually complementary, where authenticity cannot exist without care and care cannot be inauthentic as a basic human need in life. There is limited research on authentic caring pedagogy available in the field of education (Wilde, 2012), and absolutely no data on teacher’s authentic-care pedagogy in the field of FL instruction and learning. Also, there is room for a much deeper understanding of the nexus between a pedagogy of care and FL instruction. In respect to the overview of the literature earlier, and, given the exploratory nature of this chapter’s questions, a continuum of authenticcaring pedagogy was identified at the US University on the relevance of certain teacher’s personal attributes and related behaviours displayed by students and their interaction with teachers at the beginner level of FL. The sample consisted of 38 first-year students studying FL during one semester of instruction. The questionnaires were conducted at the end of the semester. The requirement questions were: first, the students had to rate the instructor’s overall teaching effectiveness; and second, students had to indicate how comfortable they felt approaching the instructor with questions or comments. For the last part of the questionnaire, students had an optional field where they indicated the teacher’s contribution to their learning. The data gathered from the last optional question have helped to identify the key personal attributes and behaviours that contributed to students’ success. Among the most common teacher’s personal attributes and behaviours that added to students’ success were the following characteristics: enthusiastic, passionate, encouraging, understanding, friendly, helpful, motivated, kind, patient, personable, energetic, considerate, genuine and attentive. In addition to teacher’s characteristics, the

76  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

students also indicated the successful strategies and methods employed in the classroom that most contributed to their learning: • • • •

Constant repetition of the learned material. Gradual introduction of the new material (scaffolding). Meaningful individual and partnership activities. Positive feedback from the teacher and peers.

The data indicated that, among all foreign languages taught at this ­university the target FL programme showed an exceptional growth in ­student enrolment and demonstrated increasing persistence towards ­learning the target FL. Overall, participants’ views reflected within this study resonate with the literature review given earlier in respect to the definition of teacher’s authentic care. In the further discussion, I will ­formulate three essential components of authentic caring pedagogy that are drawn from my critical reflections on my relationships with students, their feedback, their persistence to continue learning FL and, finally, my own teaching experience. Belonging to the community

According to Rivera Maulucci (2010), ‘authentic caring pedagogy is responsive to individual and collective student needs’ (Rivera Maulucci, 2010: 629). Probably, one of the most important components of authentic caring pedagogy is a teacher’s willingness to create a classroom community from day one. The teacher should emphasise that everyone, including the teacher, are ‘on the same boat’, where students support each other and enjoy the learning experience together. In the FL context, the established community plays an essential role, as the aim of any language is the meaningful interaction between people. Establishing trust

Trust also plays an essential role in authentic caring pedagogy. There are two ways of establishing trust in the FL classroom. First, it is important to stress effort over the grades and to be actively and sincerely engaged in students’ beliefs on learning FL. According to Shell et al. (2010), ‘teachers can support the idea that success is possible through verbally assuring students that they can succeed in learning’ (Shell et al., 2010: 121); however, many students are told (in explicit or implicit ways) that they do not have an ‘ear’ or talent towards FL, and research shows that personal beliefs about intelligence and knowledge are not strongly related to abilities but affect the way people reason (Bruning et al., 2011). Thus, if students are convinced that they do not have a language aptitude, they may come to the conclusion that learning an FL is beyond their capability.

Authenticity Beyond Teaching Materials  77

The second way of establishing trust in a language classroom is the acceptance of students’ vulnerability and expression of the teacher’s own vulnerability. Teachers have to care about students’ vulnerability towards FL and realise that for the majority of the students, learning an FL leads to stepping out of their comfort zone, where they have to experience not only how to acquire a new language but also how to get accustomed to an unfamiliar culture. Hence, many students are afraid to express themselves in an ‘alien’ language, since they feel anxious about their proficiency in the target language (Tallon, 2008: 2). Expressing the teacher’s vulnerability in or out of the classroom plays a no-less important role. When students perceive teachers as vulnerable (and therefore authentic), they realise that the learning experience is not perfect in its essence, and making mistakes is a part of positive learning outcomes, especially in the FL context. Expressing the sense of plausibility about teaching

The concept of teachers’ sense of plausibility about teaching comes from the work of Prabhu (1990), who examined the absence of the best teaching method in the context of FL instruction. The author argued, if teachers follow a certain method in their practice, their teaching becomes frozen and inactive, which the author defined as ‘overroutinisation’ (Prabhu, 1990: 174). In order to omit such practices in the classroom, Prabhu (1990) proposes a different concept (or, as the author also calls it, ‘a pedagogical intuition’) of a teacher’s sense of plausibility about teaching, where a teacher is engaged in the teaching operation … involved, and (his/her) teaching not ... mechanical. ... when the sense of plausibility is engaged, the activity of teaching is productive: There is then a basis for the teacher to be satisfied or dissatisfied about the activity, and each instance of such satisfaction or dissatisfaction is itself a further influence on the sense of plausibility, confirming or disconfirming or revising it in some small measure, and generally contributing to its growth or change. ... the greater the teacher’s involvement in teaching in this sense, the more likely it is that the sense of involvement will convey itself to learners, getting them involved as well and helping to create that elusive but highly regarded condition in the classroom: teacher-learner rapport. (Prabhu, 1990: 172–173)

I believe the last component here is the essence of authentic caring ­pedagogy, where the nature of traditional teaching transforms from ­inauthentic to authentic, and from careless to caring. The engagement of authentic caring pedagogy is not a specific list that teachers need to apply in their classroom in order to increase students’ persistence in FL. In my perspective, it is the key to the teaching philosophy that is able to reach students’ fears, doubts and lack of self-confidence in FL.

78  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

Conclusion

The review of the literature on a caring and authentic approach to teaching supports the idea that we need to shift the consideration of authentic caring beyond research into the real classroom. As it was shown earlier, the pedagogy of teacher’s authentic care is not investigated enough to be considered as an essential aspect of teaching, and the FL classroom is not an exception. The findings from the study by Awad (2014) indicate that the role of the instructor influences students’ decision to continue their language study. Also, the results in the most recent study by Davis (2020) have shown that if ‘university students … feel effective, cared for, respected and intrinsically, personally and altruistically motivated … they are much more likely to continue language study in the next semester even when it is not required of them’ (Davis, 2020: 11). Both of these studies indicate that the teacher plays an essential role in students’ persistence. Considering the currently claimed high dropout rate of students from language classes (Looney & Lusin, 2018: 2), authentic caring can be viewed as an individual choice of the teacher, rather than a particular philosophy or set of recommendations. In this chapter, three distinct components emerged which encompassed the authentic caring pedagogy: belonging to the community, establishing trust and expressing the sense of plausibility about teaching. These components of authentic caring are not intended to provide a new turn in FL pedagogy but rather to expand the notion of the concepts of care and authenticity as a conjoined activity in the FL classroom. Finally, I hope this chapter will provide a potential framework from which FL teachers might reflect on their own authentic caring pedagogy in their teaching role. If teachers employ the authentic caring pedagogy into their teaching philosophy, it may create such learning environments that can help students to reach the learning outcomes. Besides learning outcomes, which is a central focus of FL programmes, these outcomes should help institutions to increase persistence of students learning FL. References Awad, G. (2014) Motivation, persistence, and cross-cultural awareness: A study of college students learning foreign languages. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal 18 (4), 97–117. Bartram, B. (2010) Attitudes to Modern Foreign Language Learning: Insights from Comparative Education. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/unm/detail.action?docID=592424. Berman, R.A. (2011) The real language crisis. Academe 97 (5), 30–34. Brubaker, C.L. (2005) An instrument to measure ethical caring in clinical encounters between student nurses and patients. Doctoral dissertation, Illinois State University. Retrieved from ProQuest. Bruning, R.H., Schraw, G.J. and Norby, M.M. (2011) Cognitive Psychology and Instruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

Authenticity Beyond Teaching Materials  79

Davis, W.S. (2020) Encouraging continued university foreign language study: A self-determination theory perspective on programme growth. The Language Learning Journal 50(1), 29–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2020.1740768. Dörnyei, Z. (1994) Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom. The Modern Language Journal (3), 273 -284. https://doi.org/10.2307/330107. Dörnyei, Z. and Al-Hoorie, A.H. (2017) The motivational foundation of learning languages other than global English: Theoretical issues and research directions. Modern Language Journal 101 (3), 455–468. Farr, M. (2001) In Los Dos Idiomas: Literacy practices among Chicago Mexicanos. In E. Cushman (ed.) Literacy: A Critical Sourcebook (pp. 475–476). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s. Freire, P. (1993) Pedagogy of the Oppressed (rev. edn). (M.B. Ramos, Trans.). New York: The Continuum Publishing Company. (Original work published 1970). Gardner, R.C. and Lambert, W.E. (1972) Attitudes and Motivation in Second-language Learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers. Gibson, H. and Shutt, J. (2002) Tuning in, turning on and dropping out: An investigation into the reasons for non-completion of adult foreign language courses in colleges of FE. Language Learning Journal 25 (1), 59–64. Gilmore, A. (2007) Authentic materials and authenticity in foreign language learning. Language Teaching 40 (2), 97–118. Graham, S. (2006) A study of students’ metacognitive beliefs about foreign language study and their impact on learning. Foreign Language Annals 39 (2), 296–309. Guariento, W. and Morley, J. (2001) Text and task authenticity in the EFL classroom. ELT Journal 55 (4), 347–353. Guilloteaux, M.J. and Dörnyei, Z. (2008) Motivating language learners: A classroomoriented investigation of the effects of motivational strategies on student motivation. TESOL Quarterly 42 (1), 55–77. Hachey, A.C. (2012) Care from a cognitive perspective. Knowledge Quest 40 (5), 38–44. Heidegger, M. (1962) Being and Time. New York: Harper & Row. Johnson, Z.D. and LaBelle, S. (2017) An examination of teacher authenticity in the college classroom. Communication and Education 66 (4), 423–439. Lightbown, P.M. and Spada, N. (2012) How Languages Are Learned. New York: Oxford University Press. Looney, D. and Lusin, N. (2018) Enrollments in Languages Other than English in United States Institutions of Higher Education. New York: Modern Language Association. Mahn, H. and John-Steiner, V. (2002) The gift of confidence: A Vygotskian view of emotions. In G. Wells and G. Claxton (eds) Learning for Life in the 21st Century: Sociocultural Perspectives on the Future of Education (pp. 46–58). Oxford: Blackwell. Mayseless, O. (2016) The Caring Motivation: An Integrated Try (1st edn). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Merriam-Webster (n.d.) Care. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. See https://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/citation. Nieto, S. (2015) Why We Teach Now. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Noddings, N. (1988) An ethic of caring and its implications for instructional arrangements. American Journal of Education 96 (3), 251–230. Noddings, N. (1992) The Challenge to Care in Schools: An Alternative Approach to Education. New York: Teachers College Press. Noddings, N. (2013) Caring: A Relational Approach to Ethics & Moral Education (2nd edn, updated). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.  Nowak-Fabrykowski, D.K. (2007) Developing caring dispositions in pre-service teachers: Pilot project. Teacher Education and Practice 20 (4), 444–463. O’Connor, K.E. (2008) “You choose to care”: Teachers, emotions and professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (1), 117–126.

80  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

Pavlenko, A. (2005) Emotions and Multilingualism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Prabhu, N.S. (1990) There is no best method - why? TESOL Quarterly 24 (2), 161–178. Prillaman, A.R., Eaker, D.J. and Kendrick, D.M. (1994) The Tapestry of Caring: Education as Nurturance. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Prillaman, R. and Eaker, D. (1994) The Weave and The Weaver: A tapestry begun. In R. Prillaman, D. Eaker and D. Kendrick (eds) The Tapestry of Caring: Education as Nurturance. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation, 1–11. Rivera Maulucci, M.S. (2010) Navigating role forces and the aesthetic / authentic caring dialectic: A novice urban science teacher’s developmental trajectory. Cultural Studies of Science Education 5 (3), 625–647. Roberts, P. (2000) Education, Literacy, and Humanization: Exploring the Work of Paulo Freire. Greenwood Publishing Group, ProQuest Ebook Central. See http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/unm/detail.action?docID=282740. Shell, D.F., Brooks, D.W., Trainin, G., Wilson, K., Kauffman D.F. and Lynne Herr, L. (2010) The Unified Learning Model: How Motivational, Cognitive, and Neurobiological Sciences Inform Best Teaching Practices. Netherlands: Springer. Somogy, V. and Guignon, C. (2020) Authenticity. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. See https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/authenticity.  Tappan, M.B. (1998) Sociocultural psychology and caring pedagogy: Exploring Vygotsky’s “hidden curriculum.” Educational Psychologist 1, 23–33. Tallon, M. (2008) A Culture of Caring: Reducing Anxiety and Increasing Engagement in First-Year Foreign Language Courses. Paper presented at the collaborating for Student Success: Building Engagement in Learning, University of Incarnate Word, San Antonio, TX. Valenzuela, A. (1999) Subtractive Schooling: U.S.–Mexican Youth and the Politics of Caring. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Van Lier, L. (1996) Interaction in the Language Curriculum: Awareness, Autonomy and Authenticity. London: Longman. Velasquez, A., West, R., Graham, C. and Osguthorpe, R. (2013) Developing caring relationships in schools: A review of the research on caring and nurturing pedagogies. Review of Education 1 (2), 162–190. Vygotsky, L.S. (1994) The problem of the environment. In R. van der Veer and J. Vlasiner (eds) The Vygotsky Reader (pp. 338–354). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Wilde, S. (2012) Care in Education: Teaching with Understanding and Compassion (Ist edn). Abingdon: Routledge. Will, L. (2018) Authenticity in English Language Teaching: An Analysis of Academic Discourse. Münster: Waxmann Verlag GmbH.

6 Designing for Authenticity: Making Sense of an English Pedagogical Grammar Course Wendy M. Whitehead Martelle

The pedagogical grammar course that is the focus of this chapter was originally designed for undergraduate students who are considering a career in teaching English as a Second Language (ESL) and is a requirement for the minor course of study in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) at my university. The general content in previous iterations of the course involved issues relating to World Englishes, the role of the native speaker in language teaching, and a variety of grammarrelated topics such as prepositions, articles, tense/aspect, etc. The format of the class tended to be a mixture of lectures and discussion activities, and nearly all of the conversations were hypothetical, often starting with the prompt ‘If you were to explain this to an ESL student, how would you do it’? While our conversations were interesting, there was something inherently missing. For me, the course lacked authenticity. Background

Discussions and debates regarding the nature and role of ‘authenticity’ within language teaching and learning have become more widespread and complex over the years (Gilmore, 2007). In this section, I outline the definition of authenticity I am adopting for the purposes of my inquiry and summarise relevant literature related to authenticity in the language learning classroom. Authenticity: Definition

I adopt an existentialist view of authenticity, in which, generally speaking, an individual’s actions align with their values and beliefs. In an 81

82  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

existentialist approach to authenticity, freedom and liberty are core notions: ‘one cannot imagine the existence of authenticity where some sort of liberty does not exist, in idea even if not in fact’ (Grene, 1952: 272), and an individual has the freedom to take action according to their values, regardless of external influences or pressures. Van Lier (1996) further explains: An action is authentic when it realizes a free choice and is an expression of what a person genuinely feels and believes. An authentic action is intrinsically motivated. Inauthentic actions, on the other hand, are undertaken because everyone else is doing them, they ‘ought’ to be done, or in general they are motivated by external forces. (Van Lier, 1996: 13)

Although it appears that authenticity is defined as an individual notion, interaction with others plays a key role. As Grene (1952: 268) notes, ‘personal authenticity is a significant ethical concept [...] but it is not an aspect which can stand alone […]. If nothing else, some relation to others in their authenticity, some living communication or the attempt at it, must play a part’ (emphasis in original). Pennycook (2007: 3) goes further to explain that authenticity can be known ‘not so much as an individualist obsession with the self but rather as a dialogical engagement with community’. Authenticity, therefore, is not only an individual acting in alignment with their beliefs and values, but also groups acting in accordance with their ideals: ‘authenticity is something that manifests itself through interactions, through engagement and as a product of meaningful exchanges where people speak as themselves’ (Pinner, 2016: 14). As authenticity can be viewed as both an individual and a social concept, it has received much attention in the literature regarding language learning pedagogy. Authenticity in the language learning classroom

Authenticity has been examined from a variety of angles within language learning: from the perspective of texts, materials, tasks and participants in communicative situations (Gilmore, 2007). In relation to texts and participants in communicative situations, authenticity involves ‘language produced by native speakers for native speakers in a particular language community’ (Gilmore, 2007: 98). However, this privileging of the native speaker has been met with criticism (see the first chapter in this volume) and thus it appears more appropriate to conceive of authentic language as ‘language produced by a real speaker/writer for a real audience, conveying a real message’ (Gilmore, 2007: 98). Adopting Will’s (2018) definition of text to include both written and oral language production, common examples of authentic texts might include literature, poetry, newspapers, advertisements, magazines, television shows, films and songs.

Designing for Authenticity  83

Mishan (2005), whose volume introduces an authenticity-centred approach to materials design, draws a connection between the authenticity of texts and language learning tasks and views authentic texts as a necessary but insufficient requirement for an authentic task. In other words, a task that makes use of an authentic text does not automatically make the task authentic in and of itself. So a question then arises: what is a task and what makes it authentic? The nature of tasks and the implementation of task-based language teaching (TBLT) have received a significant amount of attention within the literature on second language acquisition and pedagogy. Ellis’s (2003) comprehensive overview of tasks highlights the lack of complete agreement on defining a task. Similar to defining authenticity, defining ‘task’ has become less straightforward and more complex over time. However, there are common characteristics among the various definitions for a language activity to be considered a task: • There is a primary focus on meaning (both semantic and pragmatic) over grammatical form; in other words, any focus on form is in the service of meaning. • There is some kind of ‘gap’ that needs to be filled (i.e. obtaining information, expressing an opinion, etc.). • Learners rely on their own resources to complete the task. • There is a clearly defined outcome other than the use of language (that is, learners do not produce language for the sake of producing language) (Ellis, 2009: 223). In relation to authenticity, Ellis (2003: 6) also highlights the distinction between situational authenticity and interactional authenticity in tasks. Situationally authentic activities (or what Will (2018: 59) classifies as ‘real-world authenticity’ in his conceptual taxonomy) refer to activities that are done in the ‘real world’, such as buying a train ticket, asking for directions, making a shopping list, renting a car, etc. Interactional authentic activities, on the other hand, are activities done in the classroom as opposed to in the ‘real world’. Examples of interactional authentic tasks might include a story sequencing activity, or an information gap activity where one person has information that another needs. Although the activities in and of themselves are not likely to occur in the ‘real world’, they can be considered to have interactional authenticity (similar to Will’s (2018: 59–60) ‘classroom authenticity)’, which ‘instigate the same kind of interactional processes (such as the negotiation of meaning, scaffolding, inferencing, and monitoring) that arise in naturally occurring language use’ (Ellis, 2009: 227). In summarising authenticity in the language classroom, Figure 6.1 shows how I view authenticity as a relationship between texts/materials, tasks and the communication that can arise within and as a result of using texts/materials and implementing tasks.

84  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

Figure 6.1  Authenticity and language learning

The triangle in the figure represents how the texts, materials and language tasks can lead to communication, both within and outside of the classroom. Authenticity, both from an individual and social standpoint, is situated in the centre, representing the glue that binds these elements together. The following quote summarises the connection between materials, tasks and communication: …authenticity is more than just the materials we use. Authenticity also means using language for real purposes. It means engaging students in collaborative learning, involving discussions, negotiations, and decisionmaking. (Rilling & Dantas-Whitney, 2009: 8)

I was curious about the potential outcomes of intentionally placing collaborative conversations in a more central part in my teaching practice, and as a first step in the course redesign, I decided to bring in a second population of students to the classroom: ESL exchange students, who would share their questions about how English works, which would then serve as a foundation for conversations with the undergraduate students who were learning about how to teach English. My intention to bring these two populations of students together in one classroom, and to centre their conversations throughout the course, has led me to my overall teacher action research inquiry. Teacher Action Research

Throughout the course redesign and implementation, I adopted a teacher action research (TAR) stance, which is research done by educators with the goals ‘of gaining insight, developing reflective practice, effecting positive changes in the school environment (and educational practices in general), and improving student outcomes and the lives of those involved’ (Mills, 2018: 10). TAR is an intentional and systematic inquiry that allows educators the opportunity to reflect on their own practice and on their students’ learning. Herr and Anderson (2015: 150) add ‘authentic collaborations’ to this definition by stating ‘the goals of action research deliberately blur the lines of terms such as expert, participant, and researcher. We seek authentic collaborations with others invested in constructing knowledge’…. However, Kemmis and Wilkinson (1998: 22) raise the point that not all action research theorists emphasise it as a collaborative process,

Designing for Authenticity  85

but that ‘it is frequently a solitary process of systematic self-reflection’. Kemmis and Wilkinson acknowledge that although this may often be the case, they argue that action research is best conceptualised in terms of collaboration because ‘action research is itself a social and educational process. A second and more compelling reason is that action research is directed towards studying, reframing, and reconstructing practices which are, by their very nature, social’ (1998: 22). TAR is a good fit for exploring the concept of authenticity in the language classroom because within both TAR and authenticity, the concepts of reflection and action, and the individual and social perspectives, are intertwined. The process of action research itself generally involves a preparation or planning stage, an implementation stage and a reflection stage. Kemmis and Wilkinson (1998: 21) characterise the action research process as spiralised cycles of ‘planning a change, acting and observing the process and consequences of the change, reflecting on these processes and consequences, and then re-planning, and so forth’. Burns (2010) also adopts the terminology Plan – Act – Observe – Reflect to describe TAR, and for the remainder of this chapter, I will use these terms to illustrate the TAR process during my course redesign and implementation. All observations and reflections in the following sections come from a variety of data sources: audio and video recordings of class sessions, my teacher research journal (both a written journal and audio recordings), artefacts of student work and student course evaluations. Planning and Designing the Course

The collaborative elements in both the concept of authenticity and in TAR played a large role in informing my course design. In this course, native speakers of English interested in becoming English teachers (designated as TESOL minors for the rest of the chapter) and international exchange students who are studying ESL (who will be called ESL students for the remainder of the chapter) were brought together in the classroom to engage in joint conversations about the English language. The learners

Through two iterations of the new course design, the students were 15 TESOL minors enrolled in the course LING 315 The English Language for Second Language Teaching, and 15 ESL students enrolled in the newly developed course LING 293 ESL Grammar Workshop. The great majority of the ESL students spoke Japanese as their first language and were studying abroad in the United States for either a semester or academic year. All of the TESOL minors had studied a foreign language – about a third had studied Japanese, and at least half expressed a sincere interest in pursuing opportunities to teach English after graduation. Three of the TESOL

86  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

minors spoke a language other than English as their first language and had the professional goal of becoming high school English teachers in their home country. The other participant in this study was me, the instructor. I taught three different iterations of LING 315 before making substantial changes to the course design. Throughout the past several years, I had become more aware of my evolving values and principles in teaching, and not until very recently have I been able to explicitly state them. I have always had intuitions about my values and about what ‘makes sense’ for me in the classroom, but often have had difficulty expressing those thoughts in words. As I approached the redesign of this course, my thoughts and feelings frequently turned to the concept of authenticity – not only to authenticity in terms of materials and tasks, but also to my intention that the course be aligned with my beliefs and values. I was also inspired by the following sentiment as I approached my inquiry: Since all teachers have a theory of teaching, at least an implicit one, the first task of curricular renewal is to invite interested teachers to examine their own theory, making it explicit if it has hitherto remained implicit, and determine options for pedagogical action on its basis. (Van Lier, 1996: 26)

Although my own theories and values related to pedagogy had been more implicit, I had the intention to use TAR to examine my own theory to make them more explicit. As I approached my goals and learning outcomes for the class, I began with the concepts of collaboration and authenticity. Goals and learning outcomes

As I thought about how I wanted to bring both groups of students together, my goals revolved around an idea put forth by Pinner (2016) that relates to authenticity and motivation: ‘the connection between authenticity and motivation is hinged on the idea that language is about expressing the authentic self, and that good teaching therefore allows learners the chance to express themselves in an authentic way’ (Pinner, 2016: 17). In Instructor Reflection #1 (audio recording), I consider the TESOL minors’ motivations in becoming English teachers, as well as my intention for the ESL students to express themselves in an authentic way through asking the questions they are most curious about. Instructor Reflection #1

Basically, I wanted the TESOL minors to gain more real-world experience. My goal was to create the conditions within the classroom that had both classroom authenticity and real-world authenticity. Or maybe more real-world authenticity for the TESOL minors, if they were someday

Designing for Authenticity  87

going to be teaching English either abroad or teaching ESL. Would this be real-world authentic or classroom authentic? I’m not sure, maybe both, but what it comes down to, I wanted to create the conditions where they can have meaningful preparation in doing that. For the ESL learners themselves, I also wanted to give them more realworld authenticity. So, more situational authenticity. I wanted to offer them an opportunity to meet and interact with more native speakers of English, where they can ask their questions freely. This is the place for them to ask any questions they want. After considering my goals for the shift in course design, I addressed the learning outcomes for both the TESOL minors (LING 315) and the ESL students (LING 293). For LING 315, a number of the intended learning outcomes remained the same, namely: to understand the difference between prescriptive and descriptive grammar; to appreciate how English has evolved over time; to recognise that there are many varieties of English, and to discuss their implications on the teaching of ESL; to identify and analyse how certain pronunciation, grammatical and discourse features of English may be challenging for ESL learners; and to critically evaluate teaching materials on English grammar and pronunciation. There were two additional intended learning outcomes that changed in reaction to the shift in goals, shown in Table 6.1. Rather than simply identify and hypothesise how certain features of English might be difficult for ESL learners, the TESOL minors now had the intended learning outcome of actually teaching and explaining some of these points of difficulty to actual learners. Additionally, rather than create teaching materials and develop a class activity as a hypothetical exercise, the TESOL minors now had the opportunity to ‘test out’ their activity and get feedback from real learners. For the ESL students in LING 293, I articulated their intended learning outcomes as follows: to ask questions on how English is used in everyday life; to recognise that there are many varieties of English; to evaluate teaching materials on English grammar and pronunciation; to provide feedback on activities that future ESL instructors have designed; and to reflect on and express what they have learned about how English is used in everyday life. Table 6.1  LING 315 intended learning outcomes Intended Learning Outcomes – Before

Intended Learning Outcomes – After

Articulate how these (pronunciation, grammatical and discourse) points of difficulty might be taught/ explained to ESL learners

Teach/explain these points of difficulty to ESL learners

Create teaching materials and develop a class activity that is relevant to your own teaching/learning context

Create teaching materials, develop and implement a class activity for ESL learners

88  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

After establishing the intended learning outcomes, I turned my attention to the schedule of topics within the syllabus, which I discuss in the following section on acting and observing during the course implementation. Acting and Observing During Course Implementation

Although the design of the syllabus might fit better within the planning stage of TAR, I include it under the acting and observing phases because as Kemmis and Wilkinson note: In reality, the process may not be as neat as this spiral of self-contained cycles of planning, acting and observing, and reflecting suggests. The stages overlap and initial plans quickly become obsolete in the light of learning from experience. In reality, the process is likely to be more fluid, open and responsive. (Kemmis & Wilkinson, 1998: 21)

This reflects my experience exactly – my syllabus changed significantly once I saw the ESL students’ questions. In Instructor Reflection #2 (audio recording), I describe the initial assumption I had related to the topics that would be covered in the class. Instructor Reflection #2

I looked at my syllabus. I had initially intended to keep the original topics and the timeframe for each topic. I thought it would match up pretty well because when I first started teaching the class primarily with TESOL minors, it seemed to be interesting for them to talk about these kinds of topics. I think maybe I assumed that the ESL students would have similar questions based on the textbooks that we read for the class, Explaining English Grammar (Yule, 1998) and Teaching American English Pronunciation (Avery & Ehrlich, 1992). And based on how they (the textbooks) expressed what ESL learners have difficulty with, I think my initial assumption was, well, they’re probably going to have questions relating to these topics. After two cycles of the new course design, the ESL students asked a total of 241 questions. The breakdown of the question topics and their distribution is illustrated in Figure 6.2. Questions related to pragmatics, culture, vocabulary and idioms comprised more than 50% of the total questions asked. Some sample questions on vocabulary and idioms related to distinguishing between vocabulary items such as geek/nerd, ashamed/embarrassed; understanding how to use certain idioms such as to go nuts, break a leg; or asking how native speakers of English express themselves when they are feeling sick.

Designing for Authenticity  89

Figure 6.2  Question topics from the ESL students

Questions on pragmatics and culture focused on the appropriateness of certain phrases such as that sucks; when and how to use swear words; and how to greet people appropriately. There were also questions comparing cultures, such as confusion in ordering a coffee size because SI (the international system of units) is not used in the United States. Pronunciation, general sentence formation, and spelling were the next most asked-about topics. Pronunciation questions usually involved requesting advice on how to pronounce certain sounds or words that the students found difficult, e.g. the [l] / [r] or [f] / [v] distinction, words such as year and ear; or asking why the same word might have different pronunciations, as in have and have to. Sentence formation and spelling questions showed the ESL students’ curiosities on why and how contractions are used; how linking words such as but and and are used; why you can refer to one person and multiple people; and questions on silent letters and why they are spelled but not pronounced, such as receipt and knight. The three most popular grammatical topics the ESL students asked about were articles and nouns, prepositions and particles, and tense and aspect. Questions on articles and nouns asked how to differentiate between a and one, one and the; why the is used before names of musical instruments; and how to tell if a noun is countable or uncountable. Curiosities about prepositions and particles ranged from asking about the difference between jump over and jump across, to the distinction between in time and on time, and the difference between at school and in school.

90  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

Tense and aspect questions focused on distinguishing between the future tenses of will, be going to, be -ing and will be -ing when talking about future plans, and the distinction between the simple past (X-ed) and the present perfect (have X-ed). The ESL students also had general language learning questions, which primarily involved requesting advice related to overall language learning processes, like best practices to correctly pronounce English, how to read a book faster, the best way to memorise vocabulary, etc. The last remaining miscellaneous questions were related to modals, such as differentiating between could and would; and the distinction between gerunds and infinitives (-ing vs. to verb). In Instructor Reflection #3 (audio recording), I share my reaction to the questions and how I decided to take action in response (see Table 6.2 Reflection #3 for more detail on how I changed the course topics and schedule in response to the ESL students’ questions). Instructor Reflection #3

My initial syllabus of the class did not even take pragmatics into account. That wasn’t even a topic that I talked about in previous classes. And vocabulary in previous iterations of the class, I would have maybe half a class period introducing vocabulary and why vocabulary can be difficult for language learners. But I didn’t bring up with previous classes specifically what kinds of vocabulary-related questions that the students might have. So, when I saw that so many of the students had vocabulary and idiom-related questions, and they had these pragmatics-related questions, I adjusted the syllabus about a third of the way into the class. One of the original topics was relative clauses and quite frankly, hardly any of the students asked about relative clauses. They didn’t really care about relative clauses. I also had one week where I gave students the option where they can vote for a topic that they wanted to talk about, like if they wanted to talk about modals or infinitives and gerunds and there are really only a couple of questions related to those. So I didn’t do that when I created the new schedule. I ended up spending two full class periods on vocabulary and idioms and two full class periods on pragmatics and culture. There were a number of ‘moving parts’ during the implementation. In the first two and a half weeks after the first day of class, the ESL students did not attend the class with the TESOL minors but would submit their language-related questions to me based on their observations and experiences. During this time, the TESOL minor students and I used a variety of topics to set the stage for a descriptive grammar class (with a focus on how language is actually used). My intention for the class was not to have a class on prescriptive grammar (which would focus on how language ‘should’ be used), and some of the topics that we talked about in order to

Designing for Authenticity  91

Table 6.2  Course topics and schedule Timeframe

Topics Before Revised Topics, TESOL Minor Activities

ESL Student Activities

Weeks 1–3

What does it mean to ‘know’ a language?, a brief introduction to the history of the English language, World Englishes and “ownership” of the language, the role of the native speaker in ESL teaching What does it mean to ‘know’ a language?, a brief introduction to the history of the English language, World Englishes and “ownership” of the language, the role of the native speaker in ESL teaching, introducing learner-centred language teaching

Attendance of first class Weeks 2–3 optional attendance Submitting questions based on their observations and experiences, writing in language learning journal

Weeks 4–6

Introducing English pronunciation, introduction/review of English phonetics and phonology, working with specific pronunciation problems Introducing English pronunciation, introduction/review of English phonetics and phonology, working with specific pronunciation patterns

Combination of lecture attendance and group discussions Submitting questions, language learning journal

Week 7

Introducing English grammar Articles & Nouns

Group discussions + mini-lectures Submitting questions, language learning journal

Week 8

Articles & Nouns Tense & Aspect

Group discussions + mini-lectures Submitting questions, language learning journal

Week 9

Tense & Aspect Prepositions & Particles

Group discussions + mini-lectures Submitting questions, language learning journal

Week 10

Prepositions & Particles Sentence structure, modals, infinitives & gerunds

Group discussions + mini-lectures Submitting questions, language learning journal

Week 11

Relative Clauses Pragmatics

Group discussions Language learning journal

Week 12

Students vote for grammatical feature (possibilities include gerunds & infinitives, direct and indirect speech, modals, and conditionals) Introduction to task-based language teaching

Optional attendance

Week 13

Introduction to vocabulary Vocabulary & Idioms

Group discussions

Week 14

Workshop on activity development Workshop on activity development: designing the activity

No class

Week 15

Workshop on activity development Implementation of class activities

Participate in implementations and provide feedback

Week 16

Final presentations of activity projects Final presentations and debriefs of implementations

Final presentations on what they learned during the semester

92  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

set the stage for a more descriptive approach were related to different varieties of English, the history of English and that change is a natural process for languages, and the role of the native speaker in ESL teaching. Once the ESL students returned to the class, we engaged in a variety of discussion-based activities, and I used a number of strategies to bring the ESL students’ questions into the discussions. Most of the discussions were small-group based. As far as grouping, each group would have 3–4 students, and I rotated group members per topic to give the students an opportunity to work with and get to know new people each week. Regarding the questions, I generally did not introduce the ESL students’ questions to the TESOL minors before class, because I was trying to create a more authentic classroom situation for the TESOL minors in which they would encounter unexpected questions and respond to them in the moment. The groups would engage in discussions in a variety of ways. Sometimes I would show several questions on the projector, with each group discussing one of the questions amongst themselves, and then we would come together as a whole group with each small group sharing what they discussed. Sometimes I presented one question, and each group would discuss the same question and then come together as a whole class to compare different answers. Additionally, I would engage all the students in at least one language learning activity per topic, in order to (1) provide the ESL students with some practice on the various topics and (2) model different kinds of activities for the TESOL minors and give them ideas on what kind of activity they might want to design and implement at the end of the semester. My overall approach in designing the TESOL minors’ and ESL students’ learning activities aligns with Breen’s (1985) view on what is ‘authentic to the social situation of the classroom’: [T]he essential contribution of the classroom is that it is an almost unique social context where people meet for the explicit purpose of learning something – from others for themselves. […] The day-to-day procedures, the learning tasks, types of data and materials to be selected and worked on, the actual needs, interests, and preferred ways of working of all the people gathered in the classroom certainly provide sufficient authentic potential for communication. […] The authenticity of the classroom is that it is a rather special social event and environment wherein people share a primary communicative purpose: learning. The language classroom can exploit this social potential by expecting and encouraging learners to share their own learning processes and experiences. Perhaps one of the main authentic activities within a language classroom is communication about how best to learn to communicate. (Breen, 1985: 67–68)

Essentially, in the redesign of the course, my goal was for the ESL students to learn how to communicate their questions to English speakers, with the TESOL minors learning how to communicate their responses to the ESL

Designing for Authenticity  93

students’ questions. And my overarching intention was for the classroom to be a safe place for all of our conversations. During the first implementation of the new course design, I noticed several interesting patterns in the students’ meaning-making processes throughout their conversations, which are presented in more detail in Whitehead Martelle (2019). These patterns relate specifically to the idea that a communicative approach in the language classroom ‘has somehow to come to terms with the learners’ reality and somehow create contextual conditions that are appropriate to them and that will enable them to authenticate it as discourse on their terms’ (Widdowson, 1998: 712). What I observed during the class is that the learners themselves created the contextual conditions. When groups were faced with a question, the students would often offer sample situations from their lived experiences (such as ordering food in a restaurant or a drink in a bar) as a way to contextualise their discussions to facilitate meaning. Additionally, when the TESOL minors implemented their activities at the end of the semester, I noticed that most of them tended to design ­student-centred and task-based activities, such as information gaps and opinion gaps. This observation prompted me to add TBLT and learnercentred language teaching as additional topics to the course schedule for the following year, in order to provide more guidance and guidelines on designing and implementing tasks to future TESOL minors. Overall, what I noticed about the first implementation of the course was how ‘different’ it felt. Initially, it felt odd not being in front of the classroom all the time. I also felt new kinds of tensions throughout the implementation – a tension in trying to balance the needs between two different student populations, a tension between how much ‘lecturing’ I should do and what proportion ‘works’ best between lectures and discussions, and finally, a tension between being simultaneously fascinated by the meaning-making processes among the students yet always thinking in the back of my mind, ‘Is this what it’s supposed to look like’? Reflecting on Lessons Learned

Engaging in this inquiry has led me to a deeper understanding of authenticity and has resulted in the emergence of two additional concepts that I see as closely connected to authenticity. The first is intentionality. Throughout the redesign of the course, I found myself being more mindful of my intentions. In defining intentionality, I am currently adopting a more general and functional definition – that of being mindful, purposeful and deliberate in my instructional decisions. However, I am curious about further exploring connections between the philosophical notions of authenticity and the philosophical tradition behind intentionality, as in Brentano (1874/1973), Searle (1983), Dennett (1989), among others. One initial connection that I would like to share relates to the

94  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

biologist Walter Freeman’s ideas on the emotional nature of intention, that ‘most basically, emotion is outward movement. It is the “stretching forth” of intentionality’ (2000: 5), and that ‘all actions are emotional, and at the same time they have their reasons and explanations. This is the nature of intentional behaviour’ (2000: 2). Emotions arose during and as a result of my intentional behaviour, which connects to the second concept that I see as closely connected to authenticity – that of vulnerability. In Instructor Reflection #4 (audio recording), I share how my intentions (both to myself and to the students) brought out feelings of vulnerability both before and during the class implementation. Instructor Reflection #4

In the planning stages, I was thinking of how I wanted to do this class. And what I wanted the class to look like and what I was hoping for the class. I would get really excited but then I would second guess myself. So yeah, this could look really great, but it could also be a total mess in the classroom. I’ve never done this before, and how am I gonna be able to handle essentially two classes and manage two different groups of students with very different needs? Am I really going to be able to manage that? I remember the very first time I did this class. I told the students that it was my first time doing the class this way and I explained to them what my reasonings and intentions were. Doing that I felt very vulnerable because there was a part of me that thought, well, I’m the professor, I should know what I’m doing. The students shouldn’t see that I might be uncertain or that I may not be able to handle it. But, on the other hand, there was this knowing, like in my gut. I knew it was the right thing to do. I just had this instinct that it might lead to something really meaningful and interesting despite my fears. As a result of this inquiry, if I were to revise my visual representation of authenticity in the language classroom, I would change my initial image from Figure 6.1 to something like in Figure 6.3. In my revised conceptualisation, the original triangle from Figure 6.1 is now inverted, with intentionality and vulnerability laying the

Figure 6.3  Revised representation of authenticity and language learning

Designing for Authenticity  95

foundation for authenticity to be realised in the texts/materials, tasks and communication within the language classroom. The communication (which can occur both inside and outside of the classroom) then leads to further reflection, new intentions, new vulnerabilities, new texts/materials, tasks, communication, and the cycle of authenticity continues. What is currently not represented in the cycle, but which permeates throughout, is emotion. Returning to Van Lier’s invitation to ‘interested teachers to examine their own theory, making it explicit if it has hitherto remained implicit’ (1996: 26), to make my own theory more explicit, when it comes to the teaching and learning processes, I believe that teaching and learning are dynamic, tension-filled, complex, social, multimodal, cognitive and emotional activities. Through engaging in inquiry related to authenticity in the language classroom, I have come to view the teaching and learning processes as embodied – teaching is not separate from learning, and vice versa. Teaching/Learning is an embodied activity in which authenticity, intentionality, vulnerability and emotions are entangled. Although engaging in TAR has been (and continues to be) a transformative experience for my teaching practice, what about the students’ experiences? Although it is impossible to know for sure what the students thought or felt throughout the course, I will end the chapter with one of the TESOL minor’s course evaluation comments: I loved the integration with the other course, LING293. Their realtime ESL learning experience added a level of authenticity to the class that could not be mimicked without the integration. References Avery, P. and Ehrlich, S. (1992) Teaching American English Pronunciation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Breen, M.P. (1985) Authenticity in the language classroom. Applied Linguistics 6 (1), 60–70. Brentano, F. (1874/1973) Psychology from an Empirical Standpoint. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Burns, A. (2010) Doing Action Research in English Language Teaching: A Guide for Practitioners. New York: Routledge. Dennett, D.C. (1989) The Intentional Stance. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Ellis, R. (2003) Task-Based Language Learning and Teaching. New York: Oxford University Press. Ellis, R. (2009) Task-based language teaching: Sorting out the misunderstandings. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 19 (3), 221–246. Freeman, W.J. (2000) Emotion is essential to all intentional behaviors. UC Berkeley. See https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7t10x8mm Gilmore, A. (2007) Authentic materials and authenticity in foreign language learning. Language Teaching 40 (2), 97–118. Grene, M. (1952) Authenticity: An existential virtue. Ethics 62 (4), 266–274. Herr, K. and Anderson, G.L. (2015) The Action Research Dissertation: A Guide for Students and Faculty (2nd edn). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

96  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

Kemmis, S. and Wilkinson, M. (1998) Participatory action research and the study of practice. In B. Atweh, S. Kemmis and P. Weeks (eds) Action Research in Practice: Partnership for Social Justice in Education (pp. 21–36). New York: Routledge. Mills, G.E. (2018) Action Research: A Guide for the Teacher Researcher (6th edn). New York: Pearson. Mishan, F. (2005) Designing Authenticity into Language Learning Materials. Portland: Intellect Books. Pennycook, A. (2007) Language, localization, and the real: Hip-hop and the global spread of authenticity. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education 6 (2), 101–115. Pinner, R.S. (2016) Reconceptualising Authenticity for English as a Global Language. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Rilling, S. and Dantas-Whitney, M. (2009) Authenticity in the Language Classroom and Beyond: Adult Learners. Alexandria, VA: TESOL Publications. Searle, J. (1983) Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Van Lier, L. (1996) Interaction in the Language Curriculum. Awareness, Autonomy and Authenticity. New York: Longman. Whitehead Martelle, W. (2019) Learning English while teaching English: Collaborative conversations in a pedagogical grammar classroom. Proceedings of ICERI2019 Conference, 5777–5786. Widdowson, H.G. (1998) Context, community, and authentic language. TESOL Quarterly 32 (4), 705–716. Will, L. (2018) Authenticity in English Language Teaching. An Analysis of Academic Discourse. Münster: Waxmann Verlag GmbH. Yule, G. (1998) Explaining English Grammar. New York: Oxford University Press.

7 Rethinking Authenticity in SLA from the Perspective of L1 Use: A Concept of Cognitive Authenticity Maria Bondarenko

L1 Use and Authenticity in SLA (Introduction)

The term ‘first’ or ‘own language’ (L1) in second/foreign language (L2) acquisition, learning and teaching (SLA) refers to language students (and teachers) who may speak with varying levels of proficiency and ‘through which (if allowed) they will approach the new language’ (Cook, 2010: xxii). Many teaching methods originating in communicative and immersive paradigms and recognised as mainstream trends in SLA – such as natural, content-, task- and project-based language learning (Beckett & Miller, 2006; Ellis, 2003; Lightbown, 2014; Richards & Rodgers, 2001), the neurolinguistic approach (Germain, 2017) and computer-assisted language learning (Buendgens-Kosten, 2013) – have promoted an ‘authenticity claim’ (Buendgens-Kosten, 2013: 273; Mishan, 2005: 1–10) while simultaneously challenging the usage of the L1 (Hall & Cook, 2013: 8). The latter is often accepted as a last resort (Littlewood & Yu, 2011: 64) or is restricted to specific areas, such as explicit grammar instruction (particularly with beginners), conveying and checking the meaning of words, and classroom management (Cook, 2001: 410–211; Kerr, 2016). Despite the near-­consensus about ‘monolingual imperatives’ (Hall & Cook, 2013: 177), many L2 instructors make extensive use of L1 (Kerr, 2016: 517; Marsella, 2020: 22) and the interest in L1 use has been steadily increasing in SLA literature. On the other hand, recent research on authenticity in SLA comes very close to the issue of L1 use when it reveals a deep connection between the so-called ‘native-speakerism’ (Pinner, 2016: 44) and the dominant representation of authenticity (Lowe & Pinner, 2016) and suggests an innovative understanding of authenticity that covers not only traditional native-speaker-oriented textual authenticity, but also what Will (2018: chap. 3) encodes as the authenticity of individual behaviour. 97

98  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

However, the issue of L1 use has been rarely addressed in connection with authenticity. Studying a corpus of more than 80 publications in English from the late 1990s to 2020, I was able to find a few noteworthy instances of authentic/authenticity being used in discussions on L1 use. They can be divided into the following three groups of what is henceforth termed co-occurrence. (1) The first type of co-occurrence relates authenticity to the cognitive process of L2 acquisition which inherently involves L1. It can be traced back to Clanfield’s and Foord’s publication in a free online journal in 2000. In a short note presenting their ‘practical ideas kit’, the authors encourage teachers to use L1: ‘If you can do this, your classroom is likely to be more authentic in the sense that it reflects the natural interplay of L1 and L2 which is inherent in second language acquisition’ (Clanfield & Foord, 2000/2003). Independently of Clanfield and Foord (2000/2003), in the summary of her 2001 paper examining the theoretical cognitive premises of L1 use, Vivian Cook notes that L1 is ‘a useful element in creating authentic L2 users’ (Cook, 2001: 402). Thurbull and Arnett (2002: 207) explain Cook’s position by asserting that usage of L1 ‘creates particularly authentic learning environments as it acknowledges the influence of the L1 on the L2’. In the same vein, Butzkamm (2003) and later Butzkamm and Caldwell (2009) put forward a method for teaching grammar, which is based on systemic usage of L1 and respects the cognitive mechanism of L2 acquisition: learners ‘build upon existing skills and knowledge acquired in and through the mother tongue’ (Butzkamm, 2003: 31). The L1 use paradoxically reduces learners’ dependence on L1, promotes ‘authentic communication’ and ‘a genuine foreign language atmosphere’ as it allows to not interrupt the flow of the classroom conversation and keeps it focused on message (Butzkamm & Caldwell, 2009: 33, 40, 80). (2) The second type of co-occurrence is represented by Van Lier (2011) who considers ‘translanguaging’ to be an important factor in ‘authenticating learning’ (Van Lier, 2011: 14). (3) Finally, Kramsch (2012: 116) questions the established category of ‘authenticity’ as being incompatible with ‘multilingual SLA’. These co-occurrences, while not significant in volume terms, demonstrate that the issue of L1 in SLA is deeply connected to inquiries about authenticity. This chapter aims at situating the found co-occurrences in the context of current trends in SLA to reveal some emerging tendencies in the understanding of authenticity applied to SLA. Monolingual vs. Multilingual SLA: L1-only Policy and Its Rationale

L1-only policy, dating back to direct teaching (as exemplified by Berlitz, 1916), was introduced in the late 19th century and formed the

Rethinking Authenticity in SLA from the Perspective of L1 Use  99

basis of many popular oral approaches, such as situational l­anguage teaching, the audio-lingual method (Richards & Rodgers, 2001: 11–12,  chap. 3, 4), total physical response (Asher, 1986), and, since the  1980s,  the teaching methods included in the communicative paradigm. The L1-only policy takes as a model the way children acquire language skills through listening and imitation, and the functioning of L1 mechanisms in adults who speak correctly irrespective of their explicit knowledge (or lack thereof) of language rules. Yet monolingual teaching can be conceptualised through different psychological and languagelearning theories. Situational language teaching and the audio-lingual method have been supported by behaviourist psychology, which represents the process of learning a language as developing a spontaneous response to given stimuli through frequent repetition and corrective feedback (Richards & Rodgers, 2001: 56). Some authors (e.g. Hall & Cook, 2013: 9) relate these approaches to the coordinate bilingualism hypothesis (Weinreich, 1953) and contrastive analysis theory (Lado, 1957), which were dominant in the mid-20th century. These theories affirm that two languages coexist in the mind as distinct systems and that the major challenges in L2 acquisition stem from the L1, which should consequently be eliminated from the teaching/learning process. Within the communicative/immersive paradigm, one influential language learning theory in support of monolingual teaching is that of Krashen (1981). He argues that people acquire an L2 by being exposed to multiple inputs produced by different native speakers through ‘meaningful interaction in the target language – natural communication – in which speakers are concerned not with the form of their utterances but with the messages’ (Krashen, 1981: 1). Therefore, the major function of the L2 classroom is to provide comprehensive input. Although Krashen does not totally reject resorting to the L1, he strongly prioritises the natural approach, in which ‘class time essentially consists of communicative activity, with the teacher speaking only in the target language’ (Krashen, 1981: 101, 106). In light of cognitive psychology and neurolinguistics, this position has been supported by the assumption that the ability to communicate fluently in L2 is entirely grounded in implicit procedural cognitive mechanisms and that explicit knowledge of linguistic rules is not convertible into procedural skills, the so-called ‘­no-interface position’ (Richards & Schmidt, 2002: 225). This assumption underlies, among others, Paradis’ neurolinguistic theory of bilingualism (2004, 2009). Since knowledge of rules is associated with explicit instruction in L1, Paradis’ hypothesis has become a new ­‘neurolinguistic’ argument in support of the L2-only policy within the communicative/immersive paradigm, as exemplified by the neurolinguistic approach to SLA (Germain, 2017).

100  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

Arguments Against L2-only Policy

The awareness about monolingual teaching that was raised in the 1980–1990s (e.g. Atkinson, 1987; Auerbach, 1993; Cook, 1997, 1999) has been reinforced over the past two decades from different perspectives. Empirical research on the benefits of L1 use

Numerous empirical studies of students’ and teachers’ attitudes towards L1 in the L2 classroom have shown that L1 fulfills various pedagogical and social functions facilitating L2 learning. It helps to reassure students, convey the meaning of words, check for comprehension and enhance intake through the explicit explanation of language rules (e.g. Almohaimeed & Almurshed, 2018; Manel et al., 2019; Sah, 2018). The particular usefulness of L1 has been discussed with regard to translationbased activities (e.g. Remírez & Ibarrola, 2011), learner-learner interaction within a task-based approach (e.g. Azkarai Garai & del Pilar García Mayo, 2017) and cross-linguistic referencing that helps students to notice new patterns (e.g. Ferrer, 2005). Authors advocate for a balanced, flexible and systematic usage of L1 in the L2 classroom and emphasise that L1 use is context-dependent (e.g. Kerr, 2016: 515). One of the most important contextual factors is the level of students’ proficiency: the more advanced students are, the less they rely on L1 (e.g. Hall & Cook, 2013: 45). The ‘cognitive reality’ of the L2 learner

Some authors (e.g. Cook, 2006; Cummins, 2007; de la Campa & Nassaji, 2009; Herdina & Jessner, 2002) explain the benefits of L1 use by moving the discussion toward the cognitive profile of the L2 learner. In debates on the nature of bilingualism, they advocate against the aforementioned coordinate bilingualism hypothesis and support the compound bilingualism hypothesis (Weinreich, 1953), which affirms that knowledge of two or more languages is integrated in learners’ minds rather than being kept separate (Cook, 2016: 2; Herdina & Jessner, 2002: chap. 2). Summarising this position, de la Campa and Nassaji (2009: 734) suggest recognising L2 learners as ‘sophisticated cognitive individuals, who invariably draw upon their L1 to make sense of the world, new concepts, and a new language’. Therefore, banning L1 from the language classroom means ignoring ‘the cognitive reality [of] connecting new concepts to preexisting knowledge’ (de la Campa & Nassaji, 2009: 734). Learning is more efficient if teachers draw students’ attention to the differences between their languages (Hall & Cook, 2013: 9) and use techniques (e.g. translation) promoting two-way cross-lingual transfer (Cummins, 2007: 231). The first type of co-occurrence (1) presents L1 use as ‘authentic’ in that it reflects and supports the inherent cognitive process of L1

Rethinking Authenticity in SLA from the Perspective of L1 Use  101

acquisition, thus refers to this cognitive trend in the understanding of the role of L1. ‘Authentic’ means recognition of the cognitive workings of L2 acquisition. L2-only policy as a discriminative monoglossic ideology

The third perspective feeding debates against L2-only policy is that of the awareness raised from a sociocultural and political point of view. It has been admitted that language teaching has always been a ‘highly political practice’ (Norton, 2000: 47) and that L2 learners have always been involved in an ‘asymmetrical relationship of power’ which ‘leads to different forms of discrimination’ (Pinner, 2018: 15). From this perspective, some authors have raised concerns regarding ‘monoglossic ideology’ and inaccurate monoglossic conceptualisations of language in the education of bilingual children. They call the continuing prevalence of monolingual instruction ‘separate’ or ‘subtractive bilingualism’, since this practice is based on the assumption that L2 acquisition necessarily entails the subtraction of existing language skills (Creese & Blackledge, 2010: 105; García & Torres-Guevara, 2009: 189). In L2 instruction for adults, the monolingual vision manifests itself in similar pedagogical settings, but also in many other subtler ways. One of these is ‘native-speaker-centrism’ in teaching materials (Pinner, 2018: 14), including monolingual L2 textbooks (Kerr, 2016: 415–416), the marginal presence of international speakers (Siegel, 2014) and the role model of a near-native user suggested to beginners (Shardakova & Pavlenko, 2004). In opposition to the discriminatory monoglossic ideology and practice, Cook (1995, 2016: 3) introduces the notion of ‘multi-competence’ applied both to the individual and to the community. The concept extends beyond ‘the psychological construct of the mind of the individual’ (see Compound Bilingualism Hypothesis) to become ‘a sociological construct’ (Cook, 2016: 4). Some authors also have been looking for an alternative terminology for code-switching practice in the L2 classroom to emphasise sociocultural aspects referring to learners’ bilingual social identity. For instance, languaging (Møller, 2019), translanguaging (Creese & Blackledge, 2015) or heteroglossia (Blackledge & Creese, 2014) have been suggested to denote the ‘multilingual discursive practice in which bilingual learners engage in order to make sense of their multilingual world’ (García, 2009: 45). Statement (2) by Van Lier (2011), as quoted earlier, on ‘translanguaging’ as an important factor in ‘authenticating learning’, refers to this alternative L2 classroom ideology and practice. Translanguaging contributes to ‘authenticating’ in the sense that it represents bilingual learners’ point of view and makes students fully engage with learning (Van Lier, 2011: 14).

102  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

Deconstructing the ‘monolingual native speaker’

Some researchers go further than criticising the dominant monolingual native-speaker-centrism. They challenge the legitimacy of traditional SLA’s core categories of ‘monolinguism’ and ‘nativeness’ from an epistemological perspective and advocate for a ‘bi/multilingual turn’ (Ortega, 2013), a ‘bilingual reform as a paradigm shift’ in SLA (Butzkamm & Caldwell, 2009: 243) or even for an alternative ‘multilingual SLA’ (Kramsch, 2012; May, 2013). Thus, Cook (1997, 1999) reveals a ‘monolingual bias’ in SLA research, which stems from the assumption that L2 learners never attain native-level proficiency in L2. The assumption creates a tacit association between ‘non-native speakerness’ and ‘bilingualism’, on the one hand, and ‘native-speakerness’ and ‘monolingualism’, on the other hand, which results in native speakers being portrayed as monolinguals (Cook, 1999: 187; Ellis, 2016: 597). In order to solve the problem of monolingual bias, Cook suggests replacing the traditional terms ‘L2 learner’, ‘non-native speaker’ and ‘bilingual’ with ‘multicompetent language user’ (Cook, 1999: 187, 190; Cook, 2016: 4), while Ortega (2013: 32) discusses the necessity of abandoning both ‘nativeness’ and ‘monolingualism’ as organising principles in SLA. Kramsch’s position quoted earlier (co-occurrence 3) exemplifies this emerging multilingual turn in SLA. What is innovative in her paper is the attempt to relate the established tandem ‘native-speakerness/monolinguism’ to the concept of ‘authenticity’ (Kramsch, 2012: 116). From the perspective of the ‘multilingual SLA’, Kramsch claims the necessity of reviewing these concepts as being incompatible with the reality of language acquisition: If authenticity means ‘with a recognizable origin’, then the monolingual NS [native speaker – M.B.] was that origin. If legitimacy means ‘authorized by a recognizable authority’, then the monolingual NS was that authority. […] Now […] authenticity and legitimacy become an issue […] Modern approaches to multilingualism see authenticity and legitimacy as issues of relationality between NS and NNS [non-native speaker – M.B.] and between mono- and multilinguals […] By problematizing established categories like ‘native/non-native speaker’, or linguistic and cultural ‘authenticity’, they seek to diversify the notion of communicative competence and empower multilingual speakers to use language in ways that might differ from those of monolingual speakers. (Kramsch, 2012: 215, 216) L1 use and the identity of L2 teachers

Another enriching perspective in the discussion on L1 use comes from research on L2 teachers’ identity and practice in light of the issue of native/ non-native speakers. Studies demonstrate that ‘native-speakerism’ is still

Rethinking Authenticity in SLA from the Perspective of L1 Use  103

common in academic communities (e.g. Lowe & Pinner, 2016; Walkinshaw & Duong, 2012). Based on a research of students’ perception, many authors from the volume edited by Llurda (2005) demonstrated that the most valuable characteristic of a native-speaker teacher is ‘authenticity’ concerning pronunciation, vocabulary and culture (2005: 219, 256, 228, 287). Therefore, non-native instructors often experience a lack of selfefficacy as a result of not being native speakers (e.g. Moussu & Llurda, 2008; Pinner, 2014a). Balabakgil and Mede (2016) show that both native and non-native English L2 teachers demonstrate a highly positive attitude towards L1 use as a teaching strategy in elementary-level classes. Yet based on surveys and in-classroom observations, Árva and Medgyes (2000: 357) prove that native and non-native teachers exhibit significantly different professional behaviour. Among other things, non-native English instructors use more L1 and resort more often to translation. However, this finding must be subject to cautious evaluation, because it fails to account for such an important factor as native-speaker teachers’ proficiency in students’ L1. This negligent attitude towards teachers’ linguistic profile owing to the existing monolingual bias (native speakers are presumed to be monolingual) has received some special attention from Ellis (2016). She argues that because of this attitude, the identity of the plurilingual teacher and its impact on teaching methods have been considered irrelevant (Ellis, 2016: 597–798). According to Ellis (2016: 606) and Morgan (2004), teachers’ identities, formed by their own life and language experiences, not only shape teaching approaches, but also constitute a powerful pedagogical tool in themselves. L1 Use and Research on Authenticity The monolingual nature of the dominant conception of authenticity

When it re-appeared in the 1970s within the communicative/immersive paradigm – at the same time as the L2–only policy – the concept of authenticity was initially both text-oriented and closely tied to nativespeakerism. It referred to introducing ‘authentic texts’ as learning materials designed by native speakers in a real-world context for purposes other than learning (Gilmore, 2007: 98; Will, 2018: chap. 5.2.1, 5.2.2). Researchers acknowledge that the dominant view on authenticity found today in academic discourse (Pinner, 2016: 68), textbooks (Pinner, 2014b: 22; Pinner, 2018: 14) and teachers’ (Pinner, 2014a: 15) and students’ beliefs (Lowe & Pinner, 2016) is still limited by the initial reductionist nativespeaker-centric perspective. In light of the previous discussion on monoglossic ideology in discourse on L1 use, the critical reflection on native-speakerism as an important component of the classic representation of authenticity (Pinner, 2016:

104  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

44–45, 66–68; Pinner & Lowe, 2016) should be supplemented with an additional feature: the dominant role model of the ‘authentic’ speaker widely promoted in SLA is not only native but also monolingual. Authenticity of L1 Use in Light of a Dynamic Model of Authenticity

Over the past decades, the understanding of authenticity has been moving towards acknowledging the diversity of its dimensions and presenting the classroom and its actors (teacher and students) as active agents in the production of authenticity (for in-depth discussion of the evolution of the concept of authenticity, see Will, 2018: chap. 5). The latest step in this evolution is a shift towards a dynamic multidimensional inclusive continuum-based model of authenticity as elaborated by Gilmore (2007) and Pinner (2016). This model includes different dimensions of authenticity (Gilmore, 2007: 98; Pinner, 2016: 69–70) and represents authenticity as a contextually situated process of negotiation between the self and society, and between the classroom and the real world (Pinner, 2016: 101– 103). Apart from parting with the binary opposition authentic versus non-authentic, the continuum-based model recognises the L2 classroom as an authentic social environment, and its actors – learners and the teacher – ‘as people’ (Pinner & Ushioda, 2020) with their own identities, needs, and motivations. Based on Gilmore (2007: 98) and on an independent conceptual ­analysis of more than 130 academic publications from 1970 to 2014, Will (2018: chap. 3) puts forward a conceptual taxonomy of authenticity in EFL, which can be extended to the general field of SLA. His taxonomy comprises six categories (see Chapter 1 in this book), and he states that the conceptual emergence of ‘authenticity of individual behaviour’ since Van Lier (1996) may be indicative of a ‘new trend’ in SLA (Will, 2018: 203, 213). Using Will’s taxonomy to examine the three types of co-occurrences of authenticity/L1-use that were found, I note the following: Co-occurrence (2), Van Lier’s statement about ‘translanguaging’ as a part of a specific ‘ecological’ teaching method which produces an effect of ‘authenticating learning’ corresponds to authenticity of text reception, classroom authenticity and authenticity of individual behaviour: Authenticating learning. When a learner engages fully and freely with an activity, then we can say that s/he authenticates that activity… Classroommade materials can also be authenticated, if students genuinely engage with them. (Van Lier, 2011: 14)

As for co-occurrences (3), the picture is more complex. Exploring ­authenticity beyond the question of monolingualism/bilingualism, Will (2018: 213) interprets Kramsch’s (2012) position as an attempt to extend

Rethinking Authenticity in SLA from the Perspective of L1 Use  105

traditional textual authenticity by including non-native speakers as ­potential producers of authentic texts. From our authenticity/L1-use ­perspective, it can be seen as a manifestation of an emerging trend towards a radical revision or even renouncement of the concept of authenticity itself as a part of the conceptual ‘toolkit’ of monolingualism-nativeness-­ authenticity, which is incompatible with ‘multilingual SLA’. It is also difficult to find an appropriate category for co-occurrence (1), where authentic refers to recognising a specific cognitive process of L2 acquisition. An ‘authentic learner’ is thus a learner who is recognised as a ‘sophisticated cognitive individual’, while an ‘authentic classroom’ is a classroom that is organised such as to enhance the cognitive mechanism of L2 acquisition and to acknowledge the bilingual identity of the classroom actors (students and teachers). I consider it possible to amend the existing taxonomy with an additional category: cognitive authenticity, that is, authenticity of the sociocognitive process of L2 acquisition and of the sociocognitive bilingual identity of L2 classroom actors. Conceptualising L1 Use and Authenticity as Parts of an L2-Students/Teachers-as-People Paradigm L2-learners/teachers-as-people paradigm

The new tendencies in the understanding of both L1 use and authenticity constitute parts of a large interdisciplinary research area known as poststructuralist applied linguistics (Norton & Morgan, 2021; Pavlenko, 2002). This trend has involved a reconceptualising of SLA from a sociocultural point of view. Using Lantolf and Pavlenko’s (2001) catchy expression ‘as people’, which has inspired a lot of the recent discourse on authenticity (Pinner, 2016: 15), I suggest calling this research area the L2-learners/teachers-as-people paradigm to emphasise its main lines of inquiry. The point of convergence between the different branches within this paradigm is in representing L2 learning/teaching as a process of the transformation of identity that concerns both students and teachers. General transformative pedagogy also calls it ‘identities in transition’ (Hung & Chen, 2007: 154), and it is related to an ‘immersion in authentic learning experiences’ (Ukpokodu, 2009: 43) and an ‘experience of [intercultural] being and becoming’ (MacDonald et al., 2006: 256). Transformation is connected to self-representation, motivation, personal engagement and autonomy (Ushioda, 2011; Van Lier, 1996). The emerging trend embraces both sociocultural, linguistic and cognitive mechanisms underlying the transformation of identities. These mechanisms are based on the notion of perception associated with awareness and consciousness, both metacognitive and metalinguistic (Jessner, 2006; Van Lier, 2009). Studies of awareness and consciousness related to multilingualism yield a dynamic model of bilingualism based on the key

106  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

concept of ‘crosslinguistic interaction’, i.e. interaction between fully developed (L1) and developing (L2) language systems that generates ‘dynamic effects determining the development of the systems themselves’ (Herdina & Jessner, 2002: 29). The sociocognitive transformation occurs through interaction with the environment and involves cognitive and social losses and gains (Pavlenko & Lantolf, 2000) as well as an adjustment of the relation of power that impacts learners’ identity and motivation (Norton, 2000: 46–49). The ‘ecological’ approach to L2 learning (Van Lier, 1996, 2009, 2011) conceptualises interaction with the environment as a key factor of ‘authenticity’ in L2 learning. The environment includes, among other things, classroom settings, but also the teacher. As mentioned earlier, some authors (e.g. Ellis, 2016; Morgan, 2004) promote the idea that the teacher’s identity in transition should be considered as an important pedagogical resource: Both teacher and student subjectivities become transformed when personal histories are used as teaching tools. (Simon-Maeda, 2004: 429)

Within the L2-learners/teachers-as-people paradigm, both the notion of L1 and the revised understanding of authenticity are thus incorporated into a common network of interrelated concepts, such as L2 user (learner) and teacher as people, transformation through interaction with the environment (metacognitive and metalinguistic) awareness, (self-)perception, the dynamic model of bilingualism based on L1/L2 interaction, multicompetence, translanguaging (heteroglossia), the self, identity, relation of power, motivation and autonomy. The paradox of authenticity applied to L2 learners/ teachers-as-people

Examining the revised concept of authenticity as a part of the conceptual networks of the L2-learners/teachers-as-people paradigm reveals an important change that the concept has undergone at the epistemological level. The ‘classic’ definition of authenticity, based on the binary opposition authentic/non-authentic, initially had an axiological power and purpose: to differentiate ‘authentic’ phenomena from ‘non-authentic’ ones. It was initially applied to tools, accessories (teaching material), activities, linguistic outputs and contexts related to the L2 learning and had intelligible selection criteria, such as references to the native speakers’ reality. The L2-learners/teachers-as-people paradigm has brought into sharp focus the actors of the L2 classroom. Once applied to the learner’s/teacher’s individual bilingual behaviour or identity, the concept of authenticity becomes a descriptive rather than a discriminatory tool, since authenticity constitutes an intrinsic quality of any act of self-representation. The

Rethinking Authenticity in SLA from the Perspective of L1 Use  107

existentialist notion of the authentic self underpinning the latest shift in the examination of authenticity (Pinner, 2016: 1–7) is provocatively tautological. Yacobi (2012) argues that the existentialist view on personal authenticity refers to ‘a dynamic process of endless becoming in a changing society and world, rather than a fixed state of being. And authenticity and inauthenticity should not be considered as mutually exclusive states’ (Yacobi, 2012: 29). The epithet ‘authentic’ constitutes a quality of the self and refers rather to the idea of the recognition and acceptance of this already existing quality. Cook’s (2001) expression ‘authentic learner’, referring to a cognitive reality of the L2 acquisition process, implies being recognised – by the community and by the learner herself – as a sophisticated cognitive bilingual individual. The most likely opposite of ‘authentic’ in its new non-binary sense would be ‘unrecognized’, ‘ignored’ or ‘discriminated against’. This epistemological change may explain the desire to question the concept of authenticity as applied to the actors of the SLA process (e.g. Kramsch, 2012). It also may shed light on the paradox of asymmetrical mutual impact between the discourse on authenticity and other fields of the L2-learners/teachers-as-people paradigm, including the L1 use. Despite the fact that many key concepts from these fields – ‘as people’, ‘motivation’, ‘self’, ‘identity’, ‘autonomy’, ‘dynamic system’ – have been inspiring the discourse on authenticity (e.g. Mishan, 2005; Pinner, 2016), the word authentic/authenticity has been used so far rather randomly across the L2-learners/teachers-as-people paradigm. Traditionally loaded with connotations of binary discrimination and tautological as applied to human identity and behaviour, the concept seems not to be a prospective conceptual tool for research on bilingual and bicultural identity, motivation, autonomy and so on. Neurolinguistic Aspects of the Cognitive Identity of L2 Learners

The discovery of a ‘cognitive’ dimension of authenticity tied to L1 use leads us to draw on data from neurolinguistics in order to develop its neurocognitive rationale. The connection between the L2-learners/teachersas-people paradigm and neurolinguistics is grounded in the concepts of transformation and awareness. Two neurocognitive mechanisms of L2 learning

Neurolinguistics conceptualises language learning through the idea of neuroplasticity, i.e. the capacity of the human brain to undergo a functional and biochemical transformation by developing connections between different groups of neurons in response to environmental stimuli or behavioural experience (e.g. Costa & Sebastián-Gallés, 2014; Witteman et al.,

108  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

2018). Neuroplasticity affirms the general human capacity to learn languages at any age, yet the specific language-learning mechanisms involved may differ. As was said previously, avoiding L1 in the L2 classroom has been supported by the neurocognitive hypothesis (see Paradis, 2009) that both L1 and L2 speakers’ proficiency owes itself to the development of spontaneous (procedural) skills related to a specific neuronal mechanism called ‘procedural memory’. However, Paradis (2009: 35) himself accepts two possibilities for explaining advanced L2 proficiency: the mechanism of procedural memory and that of enhanced declarative memory (explicit knowledge of language rules). In other words, linguistic processing that relies on declarative memory, as it becomes more efficient through multiple reproductions in authentic meaningful contexts, resembles procedural memory, yet still employs distinct neural pathways. The development of proficiency thus does not depend solely on the exclusion of teaching techniques based on the usage of L1; it is more likely that it depends on the consistent and meaningful reproduction of language patterns. This ‘duality’ of the mechanism of language acquisition has recently been conceptualised by Ullman (2001, 2015) in his declarative/procedural model of language. Ullman argues that the human brain has two competing and compensating mechanisms to acquire languages. Each of them is grounded in a specific type of memory – declarative or procedural – and each plays a different part in different learning contexts. Declarative memory is involved in the acquisition of vocabulary and explicit grammatical rules, whereas procedural memory is involved in the acquisition of grammatical patterns. The acquisition of L1 grammar by children is mostly supported by procedural memory, while L2 adult learners mostly rely on declarative memory and need further proceduralisation to acquire fluency. Language acquisition in adults: Awareness and inhibition

The L2-only policy is also supported by a desire to base L2 teaching on ‘natural’ mechanisms of acquisition available to young children. However, numerous cognitive and neurocognitive studies (among them Ullman’s) show that, due to cognitive maturation, language acquisition from mere exposure is severely limited in adults (DeKeyser & LarsonHall, 2005: 89). The conscious learning mechanisms, on which adults primarily rely (e.g. DeKeyser, 2008; N. Ellis, 1993; de Graaff, 1997), require awareness and conscious attention (e.g. Jessner, 2006; Tomlin & Villa, 1994) to ensure the noticing of new patterns (Schmidt, 1993) and successful form-meaning mapping (e.g. N. Ellis, 2007; Gardner, 2018). In addition, cognitive and neuronal studies of bilingual language processing point out that L2 acquisition occurs through interaction with the existing L1 system (Grosjean, 1989; Herdina & Jessner, 2002: chap. 3),

Rethinking Authenticity in SLA from the Perspective of L1 Use  109

which involves the development of specific mechanisms as a result of neurocognitive adaptation. For example, an inhibitory mechanism is required to stop spontaneous activation of the dominant L1 system in order to enhance activation of the L2 system (Bialystok, 2017; Darcy et al., 2016; Rossi et al., 2018). According to recommendations from the general neuroeducational theory of inhibition (Houdé, 2019), the development of inhibitory skills should be included in language instruction. In other words, we should be teaching not only a new L2 system, but strategies to help to inhibit the existing L1 system. Recommended ways to develop inhibition include awareness about potential difficulties, comparison between the two systems, self-control and self-correction. An inclusive sociocognitive model of L1/L2 interaction

Neurolinguistic data show that the shaping of sociocultural bilingual identity during SLA is accompanied by transformations at a deep neurocognitive level. That paves the way for establishing an inclusive sociocognitive model of L1/L2 interaction in SLA, which is based on the ‘cognitive authenticity’ of L2 learning/teaching, that is, on the recognition of both sociocultural and neurocognitive aspects of learner and teacher identities in transition in L2 learning/teaching. L1-as-Pedagogy

I suggest the notion of L1-as-pedagogy as a name for the ‘deliberate usage of L1’ (Cook, 2001: 418) going beyond the traditionally defined areas (explicit teaching, checking the meaning of words and classroom management). L1-as-pedagogy is based on the emerging concept of cognitive authenticity in SLA, the inclusive sociocognitive model of L1/L2 interaction, and principles of multilingual SLA. Integrating the notion of ‘teacher identity as pedagogy’ (Ellis, 2016; Morgan, 2004), L1-as-pedagogy invites us to consider teachers’ linguistic proficiency and language-learning experience as pedagogical resources. In becoming objects of classroom discussions, teachers’ language identities can enhance students’ positive image of the teacher-as-human and teacheras-language-learner, which could in turn reduce the distance in identities between the classroom actors and make students feel better about their own difficulties. Making use of students’ expertise in L1 within a metalinguistic discussion or a problem-solving task can invert the asymmetrical relation of power inherently involved in monolingual L2 learner-teacher interaction, especially since students can be invited to discuss the teacher’s accent, errors and experience in learning the students’ mother tongue.1 Based on previous suggestions (Butzkamm & Caldwell, 2009: chap. 5–11; Cook, 2001: 418–421; Deller & Rinvolucri, 2002; Kramsch, 2012: 122; Van Lier, 2011: 15–19), L1-as-pedagogy would include, among

110  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

others, contrastive analysis, translation, metalinguistic discussions and any similar activities that help to develop a linguistic awareness of the differences between L1 and L2. However, the comprehensive repertoire of activities of L1-as-pedagogy should be the subject of separate consideration. Conclusion

Exploring the conceptual nexus between two core notions of SLA – L1 and authenticity – as parts of the larger conceptual framework of an emerging students/teachers-as-people paradigm results in some adjustments to recent meta-discursive research on authenticity in SLA. First, there is a deep interdependence between the concepts monolingualism and nativeness-authenticity in traditional discourse on SLA. That also leads to the conclusion that the ‘authenticity claim’ underlying communicative approaches that promote L2-only practice is likely grounded in a monolingual representation of authenticity and a separate/subtractive model of bilingualism. Despite advocating for learner-centredness, these approaches overlook the fact that learners’ bilingualism and bilingual identity constitute the only possible output in SLA. Not only does bilingual L2 teaching not contradict the communicative and natural approaches, but it also supports their tenets, as it makes communication more genuine from the perspective of bilingual actors (Butzkamm & Caldwell, 2009: 80, 226). Second, the existing taxonomy of authenticity in SLA could be amended with an additional emerging category: cognitive authenticity, referring to the recognition of the sociocognitive bilingual identity of L2 classroom actors. In addition, since the concept of authenticity has been applied to the actors in the L2 classroom, it has gradually been losing its discriminatory power, receiving a new meaning instead: recognition, by the individual and by the community, of intrinsic characteristics proper to the individual or the community. Finally, the emerging concept of cognitive authenticity has made it possible to bring in data from neurolinguistics to reinforce theoretical arguments in favour of systematic L1 use in the L2 classroom and to put forward an inclusive sociocognitive model of L1/L2 interaction in SLA. This model supports, in turn, the notion of L1-as-pedagogy as deliberate usage of L1 in L2 classroom. Acknowledgements

This chapter would not have been possible without the encouragement of Dr Vita Kogan (Queen Mary University of London, UK) and valuable assistance with proofreading provided by PhD student Walker Thompson (Slavisches Institut, Universität Heidelberg, Germany).

Rethinking Authenticity in SLA from the Perspective of L1 Use  111

Note (1) One example of L1-as-pedagogy is a task-based foreign accent modelling activity initially designed for Russian L2 classes taught to French- and English-speaking students (Bondarenko, 2019). Students are invited to act as language experts in the production of a movie by advising a non-Russian-speaking actor who will play a role where he speaks students’ L1 with a strong Russian accent (students’ L2). To help the actor, students must conduct a contrastive analysis of L1/L2 phonetics to identify the differences, on which the forms of negative interference (alias accent features) will be based. The activity helps students to reinforce their phonological awareness and inhibitory control as well as their problem-solving skills. It provides the opportunity for using a teacher’s language identity and skills as a resource for the contrastive analysis and to discuss sociocultural and identity issues related to accent.

References Almohaimeed, M.S. and Almurshed, M. (2018) Foreign language learners’ attitudes and perceptions of L1 use in L2 classroom. Arab World English Journal 9 (4), 433–446. Árva, V. and Medgyes, P. (2000) Native and non-native teachers in the classroom. System 28 (3), 355–372. Asher, J.J. (1986) Learning Another Language Through Actions: The Complete Teachers’ Guide-hook (3rd edn). Los Gatos, CA: Sky Oaks Publications. Atkinson, D. (1987) The mother tongue in the classroom: A neglected resource? ETL Journal 41 (4), 241–427. Auerbach, E. (1993) Re-Examining English only in the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly 27 (1), 9–32. Azkarai Garai, A. and del Pilar García Mayo, M. (2017) Task repetition effects on L1 use in EFL child task-based interaction. Language Teaching Research 21 (4), 480–495. Balabakgil, B. and Mede, E. (2016) The use of L1 as a teaching strategy by native and non-native EFL instructors at a language preparatory program in Turkey. Advances in Language and Literary Studies 7 (6), 15–35. Beckett, G.H. and Miller, P.C. (eds) (2006) Project-based Second and Foreign Language Education: Past, Present, and Future. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Berlitz, M.D. (1916) Method for Teaching Modern Languages. New York: M.D. Berlitz. Bialystok, E. (2017) The bilingual adaptation: How minds accommodate experience. Psychological Bulletin 143 (3), 233–262. Blackledge, A. and Creese, A. (2014) Heteroglossia as practice and pedagogy. In A. Blackledge and A. Creese (eds) Heteroglossia as Practice and Pedagogy (pp. 1–20). Dordrecht: Springer Verlag. Bondarenko, M. (2019) Modélisation de l’accent: activité de développement de la métaconsicence phonético-phonologique. Talk at the 8th Meeting on Language Teaching (MeLT) (Université du Québec à Montréal (Canada), 21–22 May). Buendgens-Kosten, J. (2013) Authenticity in CALL: Three domains of ‘realness’. ReCALL 25 (2), 272–285. Butzkamm, W. (2003) We only learn language once. The role of the mother tongue in FL classrooms: Death of a dogma. Language Learning Journal 28, 29–39. Butzkamm, W. and Caldwell, J. (2009) The Bilingual Reform: A Paradigm Shift in Foreign Language Teaching. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag. Clanfield, L. and Foord, D. (2000/2003) Using L1 in the Classroom. Humanising Language Teaching 5 (1). See old.hltmag.co.uk/jan03/mart2.html (accessed August, 1, 2021) (republished from It’s for teachers, Issue 3, 2000). Cook, G. (2010) Translation in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cook, V. (1995) Multi-competence and learning of many languages. Language, Culture and Curriculum 8, 93–98.

112  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

Cook, V. (1997) Monolingual bias in second language acquisition research. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses 34, 35–50. Cook, V. (1999) Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly 33 (2), 185–209. Cook, V. (2001) Using the first language in the classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review 57 (3), 402–423. Cook, V. (2016) Premises of multi-competence. In V. Cook and W. Li (eds) The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistics Multi-Competence (pp. 1–25). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Costa, A. and Sebastián-Gallés, N. (2014) How does the bilingual experience sculpt the brain? Natural Reviews Neuroscience 15, 336–345. Creese, A. and Blackledge, A. (2015) Translanguaging and identity in educational settings? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 35, 29–35. Cummins, J. (2007) Rethinking monolingual instructional strategies in multilingual classrooms. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique appliquee 10 (2), 221–240. Darcy, I., Mora, J.C. and Daidone, D. (2016) The role of inhibitory control in second language phonological processing. Language Learning 66 (4), 741–773. de Graaff, R. (1997) The eXperanto experiment: Effects of explicit instruction on second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19, 249–276. de la Campa, J.C. and Nassaji, H. (2009) The amount, purpose, and reasons for using L1 in L2 classrooms. Foreign Language Annals 42 (4), 742–759. DeKeyser, R. (2008) Implicit and explicit learning. In C.J. Doughty and M.H. Long (eds) The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 312–348). Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. DeKeyser, R. and Larson-Hall, J. (2005) What does the critical period really mean? In J.F. Kroll and A. De Groot (eds) Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches (pp. 88–108). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Deller, S. and Rinvolucri, M. (2002) Using the Mother Tongue: Making the Most of the Learner’s Language. McHenry: Delta Publishing. Ellis, E. (2016) ‘I may be a native speaker but I’m not monolingual’: Reimagining all ­teachers’ linguistic identities in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly 50 (3), 597–630. Ellis, N. (1993) Rules and instances in foreign language learning: Interactions of explicit and implicit knowledge. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 5, 289–318. Ellis, N. (2007) The weak interface, consciousness, and form-focused instruction: Mind the doors. In S. Fotos and H. Nassaji (eds) Form Focused Instruction and Teacher Education: Studies in Honour of Rod Ellis (pp. 17–33). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ellis, R. (2003) Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ferrer, V. (2005) The use of the mother tongue in the classroom: Cross-linguistic comparisons, noticing and explicit knowledge. See www.scribd.com/document/336036647/ Ferrer-mother-tongue-in-the-classroom-pdf) (accessed 1 August 2021). Firth, A. and Wagner, J. (1997) On discourse, communication and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. Modern Language Journal 81, 285–300. García, O. (2009) Bilingual Education in the 21st Century: A Global Perspective. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell. García, O. and Torres-Guevara, R. (2009) Monoglossic ideologies and language policies in the education of U.S. Latinas/os. In E.G. Murillo Jr., S. Villenas, R. Trinidad Galván, J.S. Muñoz, C. Martínez and M. Machado-Casas (eds) Handbook of Latinos and Education (pp. 182–193). Abingdon: Routledge. Gardner, S. (2018) Teaching grammar: Form-meaning mapping. In J. Liontas (ed.) TESOL Encyclopaedia of English Language Teaching (pp. 1−7). MA: Wiley. Germain, C. (2017) The Neurolinguistic Approach (NLA) for Learning and Teaching Foreign Languages: Theory and Practice. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Rethinking Authenticity in SLA from the Perspective of L1 Use  113

Gilmore, A. (2007) Authentic materials and authenticity in foreign language learning. Language Teaching: The International Research Resource for Language Professionals 40 (2), 97–118. Grosjean, F. (1989) Neurolinguists, beware! The bilingual is not two monolinguals in one person. Brain and Language 36, 3–15. Hall, G. and Cook, G. (2013) Own-language Use in ELT: Exploring Global Practices and Attitudes. London: British Council. See http://englishagenda.britishcouncil.org/ research-papers (accessed 1 August 2021). Herdina, P. and Jessner, U. (2002) A Dynamic Model of Multilingualism: Perspectives of Change in Psycholinguistics. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Houdé, O. (2019) 3-System Theory of the Cognitive Brain: A Post-Piagetian Approach to Cognitive Development. London and New York: Routledge. Hung, D. and Chen, D.V. (2007) Context-process authenticity in learning: Implications for identity enculturation and boundary crossing. Educational Technology Research and Development 55 (2), 147–167. Jessner, U. (2006) Linguistic Awareness in Multilinguals: English as a Third Language. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Kerr, P. (2016) Questioning English-only classrooms. In G. Hall (ed.) The Routledge Handbook of English Language Teaching (pp. 513–526). Abingdon: Routledge. Kramsch, C. (2012) Authenticity and legitimacy in multilingual SLA. Critical Multilingualism Studies 1 (1), 107–128. Krashen, S. (1981) Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon. Lado, R. (1957) Linguistics Across Cultures. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Lantolf, J. and Pavlenko, A. (2001, 2014) (S)econd (L)anguage (A)ctivity theory: Understanding second language learners as people. In M. Breen (ed.) Learner Contributions to Language Learning: New Directions in Research (pp. 141–158). London: Longman. Lightbown P.M. (2014) Focus on Content-Based Language Teaching. Key Concepts for the Language Classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Littlewood, W. and Yu, B. (2011) First language and target language in the foreign language classroom. Language Teaching 44 (1), 64–77. Llurda, E. (ed.) (2005) Non-Native Language Teachers: Perceptions, Challenges and Contributions to the Profession. New York: Springer. Lowe, R. and Pinner, R.S. (2016) Finding the connections between native-speakerism and authenticity. Applied Linguistics Review 7 (1), 27–52. MacDonald, M., Badger, R. and Dasli, M. (2006) Authenticity, culture and language learning. Language and Intercultural Communication 6 (3–4), 250–261. Manel, M., Hassan, A. and Buriro, H.A. (2019) Learners’ attitudes towards teachers’ switching to the mother tongue. Indonesian TESOL Journal 1 (1), 9–27. Marsella, E. (2020) Exploring teacher’s use of first language (L1) in EFL classroom. Teknosastik 18 (1), 15–24. May, S. (ed.) (2013) The Multilingual Turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL and Bilingual Education. London and New York: Routledge. Mishan, F. (2005) Designing Authenticity into Language Learning Materials. Bristol: Intellect Books. Møller, J.S. (2019) Recognizing languages, practicing languaging. In J. Jaspers and L. Madsen (eds) Critical Perspectives on Linguistic Fixity and Fluidity: Languagised lives (pp. 29–52). Abingdon: Routledge. Morgan, B. (2004) Teacher identity as pedagogy: Towards a field-internal conceptualization in bilingual and second language education. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 7, 172–188. Moussu, L. and Llurda, E. (2008) Non-native English-speaking English language teachers: History and research. Language Teaching 41 (3), 315–348.

114  Part 1: Authenticity and Language Teaching

Norton, B. (2000) Identity and Language Learning: Gender, Ethnicity and Educational Change (1st edn). Essex: Pearson Educational. Norton, B. and Morgan, B. (2021) Poststructuralism. In C.A. Chapelle (ed.) The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics (pp. 1−7). Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell. Ortega, L. (2013) Ways forward for a bi/multilingual turn for SLA. In S. May (ed.) The Multilingual Turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL and Bilingual Education (pp. 32–52). Abingdon: Routledge. Paradis, M. (2004) A Neurolinguistic Theory of Bilingualism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Paradis, M. (2009) Declarative and Procedural Determinants of Second Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Pavlenko, A. (2002) Poststructuralist approaches to the study of social factors in second language learning and use. In V. Cook (ed.) Portraits of the L2 User (pp. 277–302). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Pavlenko, A. and Lantolf, J.P. (2000) Second language learning as participation and the (re)construction of selves. In  J.P. Lantolf (ed.) Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning (pp. 155–177). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pinner, R.S. (2014a) The authenticity continuum: Empowering international voices. English Language Teacher Education and Development 16 (1), 9–17. Pinner, R.S. (2014b) The authenticity continuum: Towards a definition incorporating international voices. English Today 30 (4), 22–27. Pinner, R.S. (2016) Reconceptualising Authenticity for English as a Global Language. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Pinner, R.S. (2018) Authenticity and ideology: Creating a culture of authenticity through reflecting on purposes for learning and teaching. Argentinian Journal of Applied Linguistics 6 (1), 7–24. Pinner, R.S. and Ushioda, E. (2020) Personalisation and professionalism: Managing the relationship between teacher and learner as people. In R.J. Lowe and L. Lawrence (eds) Duoethnography in English Language Teaching: Research, Reflection and Classroom Application. (pp. 71–88). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Remírez, S.A. and Ibarrola, A.L. (2011) Lost in translation? Translation as a valid tool for the EFL classroom. Huarte de San Juan. Filología y Didáctica de la Lengua 11, 103–114. Richards, J. and Schmidt, R. (2002) Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics (3rd edn). Edinburgh: Pearson Education. Richards, J. and Rodgers, T. (2001) Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rossi, E., Newman, S., Kroll, J.F. and Diaz, M. (2018) Neural signatures of inhibitory control in bilingual spoken production. Cortex 108, 50–66. Sah, P. (2018) Using first language (L1) as a resource in EFL classrooms: Nepalese university teachers’ and students’ perspectives. Journal of NELTA 22 (1–2), 26–38. Schmidt, R. (1993) Awareness and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 13, 206–226. Shardakova, M. and Pavlenko, A. (2004) Identity options in Russian textbooks. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education 3 (1), 25–46. Siegel, A. (2014) What should we talk about? The authenticity of textbook topics. ELT Journal 68 (4), 363–375. Simon-Maeda, A. (2004) The complex construction of professional identities: Female EFL educators in Japan speak out. TESOL Quarterly 38, 405–436. Thurbull, M. and Arnett, K. (2002) Teachers uses of the target and first languages in second and foreign language classroom. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 22, 204–218. Tomlin, R.S. and Villa, V. (1994) Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 16 (2), 183–203.

Rethinking Authenticity in SLA from the Perspective of L1 Use  115

Ukpokodu, O. (2009) The practice of transformative pedagogy. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching 20 (2), 43–67. Ullman, M.T. (2001) A neurocognitive perspective on language: The declarative/procedural model. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2, 717–726. Ullman, M.T. (2015) The declarative/procedural model: A neurobiological model of language learning, knowledge, and use. In G. Hickok and S.L. Small (eds) Neurobiology of Language (pp. 953–968). Cambridge, MA: Academic Press. Ushioda, E. (2011) Language learning motivation, self and identity: Current theoretical perspectives. Computer Assisted Language Learning 24 (3), 199–210. Van Lier, L. (1996) Interaction in the Language Curriculum. Awareness, Autonomy and Authenticity. London: Longman. Van Lier, L. (2009) Perception in language learning. In T. Yoshida et al. (eds) Researching Language Teaching and Learning: An Integration of Practice and Theory (pp. 275– 292). Oxford: Peter Lang Press. Van Lier, L. (2011) Green grammar: Ways of languaging. Taiwan Journal of TESOL 8 (2), 1–21. Walkinshaw, I. and Duong, O.T.H. (2012) Native- and non-native speaking English Teachers in Vietnam: Weighing the benefits. TESL-EJ 16 (3), 1–17. Weinreich, U. (1953) Languages in Contact. The Hague: Mouton. Widdowson, H.G. (1978) Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Will, L. (2018) Authenticity in English Language Teaching. An Analysis of Academic Discourse. Münster: Waxmann. Witteman, J., Chen, Y., Pablos-Robles, L., Parafita Couto, M.C., Wong, P. and Schiller, N.O. (2018) Editorial: (Pushing) the limits of neuroplasticity induced by adult language acquisition. Frontiers in Psychology 9, 1–2. Yacobi, B. (2012) The limits of authenticity. Philosophy Now 92, 28–30.

Part 2 Authenticity and Identity

8 Authenticity, Curricula and Authentic Education Grit Alter

Non scholae, sed vitae discimus. Non vitae, sed scholae discimus.

Introduction

Authenticity has entered foreign language teaching (FLT) and research in the 1970s and has since been gaining popularity. The discourse has most significantly been influenced by scholars such as Widdowson (1976, 1978), Breen (1985) and Gilmore (2007) (cf. Will, 2018). Most currently, Will’s (2018) disentanglement of the field within English language teaching (ELT) has contributed an important stepping stone for the tracing of its development. The fundamental idea grounding the concept of authenticity focuses on teaching a foreign language as closely to real-life situations as possible, i.e. by imitating and creating contexts that resemble actual communicative situations in which the language would and could be necessary to negotiate meaning. The underlying assumption is that pupils are more motivated for and engaged in learning a foreign language when their encounters therewith are as authentic as possible. This demand became manifest in the communicative turn that shifted language teaching and learning from grammar instructions and drills to creating real-life situations in which students use the language to meet communicative needs (Canale & Swain, 1980; Savignon & Berns, 1984). A further area in which authenticity has become paramount is cultural learning. Here, authenticity refers to the very texts and materials to be implemented in FLT. These should stem from the cultures in which the foreign language is an official language, promising first-hand insights into these cultures. Providing agency to members of these cultures to voice their own experiences, and to speak for themselves rather than being spoken about, such texts and materials are considered to have an increased merit in contrast to outside perspectives on these cultures. This shift became particularly relevant for postcolonial studies, e.g. in Said’s (1978) or Spivak’s (1990) scholarship.

119

120  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

Even though both of these understandings of authenticity in FLT are credible and deserve further critical attention, e.g. in how far these are recognisable by students and make a difference to them, a further investigation of the concept allows to discover more depth, particularly when taking its philosophical foundation into account (cf. introductory chapter of this book). Accordingly, my guidance in proposing a link between authenticity and curriculum studies put forward here is grounded in Van Lier’s (1996) understanding of authenticity. I engage with the question of how authentic learning as self-realisation is implemented in curricula for teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL). In order to do so, I gesture towards curricula research, and conjunct this with an existentialist notion of authenticity, supplemented by educational philosophical thoughts on the function of modern Bildung as formation (cf. in Schmenk, 2008). The analysis and discussion of selected curricula for TEFL reveal how far these provide incentives for authentic learning. The last section summarises how current research could benefit from the observations offered here. Curriculum Studies

As an academic discipline, curriculum studies is concerned with the development and design of curricula. Depending on cultural or academic contexts, the term curriculum as such can have different meanings. In the broadest sense, the curriculum describes a ‘design for learning, much like a blueprint for a house’ (Wiles, 2009: 3). It holds the experiences a child makes within educational contexts and represents ’a desired goal or set of values that can be activated through a development process, culminating in experiences for learners’ (Wiles & Bondi, 2011: 5; emphasis in original). In a narrower perspective, a curriculum entails the learning objectives and contents relevant for a specific subject for a specific school year. Such an understanding is closely related to the term syllabus, which denotes a more restrictive assembly of concrete topics, forms of assessments and projects included in a course of study. While the curriculum is usually developed and prescribed by the government, and is thus legally binding, syllabi can be created by colleagues who teach the same subject at a specific school. For each subject and school type, the curriculum specifies which competences, teaching objectives, contents and, in the case of foreign language curricula, elements of language the students are to master within a school year (Salden-Foerster, 2010: 168), thus defining the norms and standards for specific subjects. The German term Lehrplan can be translated as both curriculum and syllabus, which blurs the conceptual meanings and adds to the complexity of respective reflections. As Kerncurriculum (core curriculum) is often used as a synonym for the German term Lehrplan, curriculum shall also be the term used in this chapter.

Authenticity, Curricula and Authentic Education  121

In Germany and Austria,1 curricula are policy artefacts enacted by authorities and policymakers, including Ministries of Education, school authorities, teacher education institutes, and academics. As educational political documents, they are anchored in the school law and a society’s social norms and values. They emphasise the content and competences that a society considers essential to be passed on to young people who are growing up to re-create society and contribute to its economic and sociocultural prosperity accordingly. Curricula development witnessed two major shifts in the recent and not so recent past. The first shift regards teaching methodology; more specifically, the communicative turn in language teaching in the 1970s. It emphasised authentic interaction as a means and objective of learning a foreign language (e.g. Nunan, 1991). While the focus of FLT used to be on core-linguistic features, it is now on real-life situations that demand a communicative negotiation of meaning. A second shift regards European education and language policies. Since the beginning of the 21st century, OECD countries have regularly participated in international studies that compare students’ performances in different educational areas and subjects (OECD, 2004). The results revealed that 15-year-old German students performed close to the OECD average in their own learning efficacy and mathematical abilities, but below average in their reading ability (OECD, 2004: 38–39), which led to complex reform processes with concepts such as output- and competence orientation taking the centre stage (Klieme et al., 2003). Austrian students achieved above average in the confidence in their own learning efficacy, close to average in their reading ability and below average in their mathematical ability (Klieme et al., 2003: 24–25). Additionally, with the first publication of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR, Council of Europe, 2001), language education entered a discourse that surrounds intercultural competences and international standardisation to make students’ language proficiency comparable (Council of Europe, 2020b). When a student performs at the B1 level of English according to the CEFR, for example, teachers across Europe know what this student is able to do in the foreign language. Governments also use the CEFR as a ground upon which they define national standards for foreign language education. On the one hand, these national standards complement foreign language curricula which then define the functional communicative competences students are to master at the end of specific school years. On the other hand, curricula also specify these and add intercultural communicative competence as well as methodological competences to prescribe a complex competence model for education. The most recent publications of the Companion Volume to the CEFR in 2018 and 2020 indicate that language policy in Europe remains a dynamic field that acknowledges changing competence demands, e.g. in view of digital communication (Council of Europe, 2018, 2020a).

122  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

Apart from presenting a nation’s educational priorities in terms of content and competences, curricula have further functions. They offer teachers orientation for planning and conducting lessons, and they make didactic decisions transparent and achievements comparable between individual schools. Moreover, curricula constitute the foundation for developing textbooks and teaching materials. Only when textbooks meet official requirements set by educational politics, can they be added to a catalogue from which schools can choose them. As curricula are binding documents, they also prescribe the foci of teacher education as future teachers need to be prepared to implement curricula demands into practice. Additionally, curricula have a political function in that they legitimise educational-political programmes and subject-specific content to the public. In their choice of contents, competences and the way in which they address and implement norms and values, curricula present a holistic model of a (federal) country’s education (cf. Salden-Foerster, 2010: 169). These benefits shall not gloss over some of the more problematic issues pertaining to curricula, particularly regarding ideology. As indicated, curricula are developed in a complex process supervised by a nation’s government. Thus, only contents and competences this government considers worthy are included in these fundamental educational documents. Curricula are embedded in sociopolitical and cultural norms and values so that their inscription into educational foundations also re-implements these in young people. A close reading of the curricula reveals how powerful an impact such procedures can have on the construction of gender, for example, which which shall be exemplified in the section on the limitations of authenticity in curricula below. Authenticity as Self-Realisation

In order to conceptualise the focus with which I read curricula, this section opens a discussion of the term authenticity. I thereby leave aspects of authentic content, material and (cultural) representations aside, but, following Van Lier’s existentialist notion (1996), refer to authenticity as individual behaviour. To begin with, it is important to emphasise that in Germany and Austria, schooling is a process of institutional education set in a formal classroom within democratic societies. Next to the norms and values indicated earlier, this also inscribes education into fixed power structures of politics and economy. As for the central agents participating in this process – teachers and learners – one needs to be aware that both do so by performing roles that may differ from their private identities. Thus, when thinking about authenticity from an existentialist perspective, the extent to which authentic behaviour is even possible has to be explicated as both roles are determined by formal educational settings. There, teachers’ authentic behaviour certainly entails teaching, i.e. guiding learners in developing competences, inviting them to explore topics,

Authenticity, Curricula and Authentic Education  123

explaining complex issues and evaluating their performances. Comparably, learners’ authentic behaviour entails acting according to what is expected from them in such settings: paying attention in class, contributing to discussions, doing homework, studying for tests and spending time with and collaborating with peers – or in a nutshell, to do their student job (cf. Grein & Vernal Schmidt, 2020). While this may seem rather obvious, it adds a decisive twist to thinking about authenticity and curricula in terms of self-realisation and individual behaviour. In how far can curricula actually address authentic behaviour? How can formal and institutionalised education be brought into tune with an existentialist notion of authenticity? Van Lier’s existentialist definition of authenticity refers to: an action [as] authentic when it realises a free choice and is an expression of what a person genuinely feels and believes. An authentic action is intrinsically motivated. Inauthentic action is taken because everyone else is doing them, they ‘ought’ to be done, or in general they are motivated by external factors. (Van Lier, 1996: 13)

This reminds of Dewey’s (1897) notion of authentic education as the development of individuals in terms of unfolding one’s potential. Dewey proposes that to ‘prepare [learners] for the future life means to give him command of himself; it means so to train him that he will have the full and ready use of all his capacities’ (Dewey, 1897). Similarly, Eisner and Vallance argue in favour of education that supports self-actualisation in that ‘schooling is to become a means of personal fulfilment, to provide a context in which individuals discover and develop their unique identities’ (1974: 105). Hence, the ‘purpose of schooling [is to] creat[e] a personal commitment to learning’ (Vallance, 1986: 27–28, italics in original). Without anticipating any results of the following analysis, let me indicate that Van Lier’s and Dewey’s references to free choice or genuine feelings and behaviour only seem to apply to formal and institutionalised classroom education at the periphery, particularly so as education increasingly emphasises standardisation and output-orientation. Eisner and Vallance’s notion of personal fulfilment could also be challenged as students face a fixed canon of subjects, still based on Humboldt’s idea of developing knowledge in various areas. Even when students do have some choices to select subjects they like to take, Austria prescribes that all students have to take Maths, German and a modern foreign language (mostly English) as core subjects for their A-levels. It thus remains questionable in how far an educational system that is closely linked to output-orientation, standardisation and (inter)national competence comparisons on the one hand, and a 19th-century model of education on the other, leaves space for individual self-realisation.

124  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

Authenticity in Curricula

Based on the elaborations on authenticity above, one could conclude that a curriculum should be a ‘pervasive and enriching experience with implications for many dimensions of personal development’ (Eisner & Vallance, 1974: 105). Van Lier’s notion of authenticity suggests that FLT is authentic when it supports learners in making free choices, invites them to express what they genuinely feel and believe, and is conducted in a way that addresses learners’ intrinsic motivation (cf. 1996: 13). This mirrors an approach to education that emphasises a holistic unfolding of one’s individual potential in terms of self-realisation. Students can thus unfold their individual potential when: • their interests are addressed: FLT contextualises topics that young learners are potentially interested in, e.g. family and friends, pets and hobbies, festivities and anglophone cultures; • their (individual) needs are considered: FLT makes use of individualisation and differentiation; • they are invited to express their creativity, can participate in creative tasks and make use of creative methods and material: FLT includes singing songs, reciting rhymes and chants, reading picture books and stories, performing role-plays and dialogues; • they can take responsibility for their own learning process: FLT allows learners to participate in decision-making, implements open learning scenarios, fosters learning strategies and techniques, refers to selfreliant and self-responsible didactic principles, and addresses learner autonomy2; and when • they can develop meaningful competences: FLT includes real-life situations in which learners can develop relevant and age-appropriate speech acts, e.g. expressing questions and wishes, offering and accepting help, phrasing greetings and gratulations. As to analyse in how far curricula for primary schools reflect this kind of authentic education, I read the general preamble, foundational didactic principles and ELT-specific sections of the respective documents for Austrian and German primary schools focusing on incidents that address an existentialist notion of authenticity. Prior to presenting results, I would like to share details on primary ELT in both countries. Austrian primary schools implement ELT as a so-called mandatory practice (Verbindliche Übung; AUS3, 2012). This means that in Grades 1 to 4, ELT is integrated in other subjects (cf. Content and Language Integrated Learning [CLIL]). It would be possible, for instance, to use Maths lessons to learn to count in English, to use Arts lessons to learn the colours, and Science lessons to learn the English words for certain animals. Only in Grades 3 and 4 can a whole lesson be dedicated to learning English, but each primary school can decide for itself whether it prefers

Authenticity, Curricula and Authentic Education  125

this to CLIL. Austria has one curriculum for all public primary schools in the federal states. The current version, which will also be used for the reflection at hand, was published in 2012, whereas the part of foreign languages is from 2005. In Germany, the federal states are responsible for educational policies. This means that the federal states can implement individual educational systems that still need to be based on the German law of education. Hence, there are various approaches to primary ELT. While North RhineWestphalia teaches English from Grade 1 on, Lower Saxony only has a curriculum for Grades 3 and 4. While North Rhine-Westphalia makes standards of language competences explicit, teachers in Bavaria do not grade students, but document the pupils’ competence developments. For the German context, I turn to the ELT primary school curricula from North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW, 2008) and Bavaria (BAV, 2014) as these are the two federal states in which I used to work and hence am most familiar with. To begin with, I would like to point out that despite my focus on authenticity in terms of self-realisation, the term itself does not feature in the Austrian curriculum for primary schools but appears repeatedly in both of the German counterparts. There, authenticity is mentioned in the context of selecting media and material (e.g. BAV, 2014: 59; NRW, 2008: 9, 15). North Rhine-Westphalia additionally emphasises that the language that is taught needs to be authentic in itself (NRW, 2008: 11), taught in authentic situations (NRW, 2008: 23), and that the tasks and options for using the language need to be authentic (NRW, 2008: 6). Particularly for cultural learning, authenticity is highly relevant, and topics, materials and situations are to be assessed according to their authenticity. While the curriculum mentions picture books, journals and e-zines, songs and rhymes as examples for authentic texts (NRW, 2008: 9, 10), it does not qualify what exactly it means by authenticity. One could derive from the given contexts that the term refers to material that stems from anglophone cultures and has not been specifically created for foreign language learners. As stated earlier, being creative, expressing oneself in creative ways and engaging with creative texts are dimensions of self-realisation. This implies making choices, expressing content and thoughts one genuinely feels, and is often based on intrinsic motivation (cf. Van Lier, 1996). All three curricula refer to using creative texts and genres in primary ELT, e.g. rhymes, songs, stories, sketches, role-plays and dances (AUS, 2012: 245, 247; BAV, 2014: 59; NRW, 2008: 15, 16, 18). Moreover, the Austrian primary curriculum explicitly mentions engaging in creative tasks when using computers (AUS, 2012: 16). Creativity is also an explicit objective of Austrian all-day schools: These are to provide options for pupils to unfold their creativity, e.g. in terms of joining a choir or drama group, or gamebased learning (AUS, 2012: 22–23). Only in the NRW curriculum for

126  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

primary ELT are pupils expected to engage in creative writing. Supported by detailed scaffolding, they may write short birthday and Christmas cards, poems, invitations, profiles or mini-stories (NRW, 2008: 16). All of the curricula analysed for this chapter pay tribute to pupils’ individual needs by demanding differentiated and individualised teaching; in all three curricula, individualisation is part of the foundational principles upon which ELT is based (AUS, 2012: 28; BAV, 2014: 60; NRW, 2008: 8, 9). Furthermore, the curricula address the development of learning strategies and techniques that enable pupils to plan their own learning (AUS, 2012: 15; BAV, 2014: 62; NRW, 2008: 11). Teaching such strategies and techniques fosters in pupils a sense of ownership of their learning and a feeling of responsibility for their progress, both of which are part of an existentialist notion of authenticity. The Austrian curriculum explicitly mentions that already in primary school, pupils should participate in decision-making, planning and conducting lessons (AUS, 2012: 15, 25) which leads to a simultaneous reduction of teachers’ guidance (AUS, 2012: 11). The German curricula for primary ELT address learner autonomy in terms of self-assessment and self-reliant learning (e.g. NRW, 2008: 22, 23). The curricula offer incentives for unfolding pupils’ potential. This can be realised by addressing topics they are interested in or by addressing communicative situations they are likely to encounter. All three curricula refer to this, either through: • explicit references to everyday and concrete situations in which the new language should be put to practice (AUS, 2012: 17, 244; BAV, 2014: 59; NRW, 2008: 6, 7, 10); • the imitation of such situations in the foreign language classroom and action orientation (AUS, 2012: 17; BAV, 2014: 60); • the inclusion of meaningful speech acts, e.g. greeting, introducing oneself, asking, offering help, inviting someone, thanking someone, excusing oneself and expressing needs (AUS, 2012: 244; NRW, 2008: 15); or • picking up pupils’ interests that mirror their real-life experiences (AUS, 2012: 17, 26), such as ‘me, my family, and friends’, ‘school’, ‘free time’, ‘my body’, ‘nature’, ‘fantasy’ and ‘preferences’ (AUS, 2012: 245; NRW, 2008: 15). In general, primary school education as a whole should contribute to self-actualisation in that the development of skills and competences supports pupils in realising their aspirations as holistic individuals, but also as members of democratic regional and global societies. Therefore, the curricula address aspects such as life-long learning (e.g. BAV, 2014: 59, 60; NRW, 2008: 5) and the importance of balancing the social, emotional, intellectual and physical dimension of the pupils’ personality (AUS, 2012: 9, 18) as well as language, methodological and intercultural learning (BAV, 2014: 61–63; NRW, 2008: 5). Primary education explicitly aims at

Authenticity, Curricula and Authentic Education  127

supporting the development of pupils’ personalities, self-esteem, trust in themselves and emotional well-being (AUS, 2012: 10, 14, 26). Learning foreign languages is an integral part of holistic education because it enables people to engage with others and negotiate meaning beyond language borders. As primary ELT focuses on intercultural communicative competences, developing language and social competences in meaningful contexts and with age-appropriate and relevant content, it can certainly be seen as a central building block of self-realisation. Apart from individuality and self-reliance, humans are also social beings who are interconnected with their social, natural and cultural environment. Although the social dimension is not explicitly included in an existentialist notion of authenticity, I believe it is important to point out that the curricula for primary ELT also aim at fostering social learning and acting in social contexts. This becomes prevalent when the curricula prescribe social agency (AUS, 2012: 9; BAV, 2014: 64), develop an understanding of self and other (AUS, 2012: 26) as well as engage pupils in group and partner work (AUS, 2012: 247; BAV, 2014: 64) and cooperative learning (BAV, 2014: 64; NRW, 2008: 21). This analysis reveals that primary education in all three regions indeed tries to follow an existentialist notion of authentic education as suggested by Van Lier (1996). The general foundations and principles for primary education as well as the specifics for primary ELT support young learners in unfolding their individual potential. References to aspects such as differentiation and individualisation, addressing pupils’ needs and interests, engaging them in meaningful competence development and contexts, and fostering their creativity allow to draw such a conclusion. While most of the elements are also part of other subjects taught at primary level in both countries, it is the reference to other cultural contexts, mainly anglophone cultures, that stand out as these invite learners to perceive themselves from an outside perspective and compare their own norms, values and cultural practices to those of others. Learning a foreign language, and thus experiencing a disruption of the way in which other people label and apprehend their environment, allows pupils to recognise that their way of thinking is only one way of perceiving the world. Speaking a foreign language enables them to broaden their horizons beyond elements they are familiar with. These changes of perspective that are eminent in FLT and are inseparably linked to cultural learning, contribute to developing one’s personality and unfolding one’s potential as members of local and global societies. Limitations of Authenticity in Curricula

For this discussion, I need to prepend that the curriculum is but one element that determines ELT. To say that specific ideas are not implemented in classrooms simply because they are not mentioned in

128  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

curricula would be a severe underestimation of creative and individual teachers’ agency. Certainly, curricula are legal documents that are binding for teachers, but that does not mean that they may not read genderdisruptive picture books, for example, and thus extend the notion of gender roles addressed in curricula (see below). In a similar sense, teachers in North Rhine-Westphalia and Bavaria may be very well aware of a holistic education of the child (AUS, 2012: 27) even if this is not explicitly stated in the respective curricula, and frame their teaching practice accordingly. Despite the positive conclusions from the analysis earlier, what cannot be ignored is that such an existentialist perspective on education is but one on primary school curricula. Developments such as standardisation and output-orientation render foreign language competences commodities within efficiency-based and economised educational landscapes. Despite the holistic approach to educating the child, already primary school curricula emphasise that (foreign language) education aims at efficient communicative competence (NRW, 2008: 7, 11) and efficiency (NRW, 2008: 7), thus making use of economic vocabulary and pushing primary education into a specific ideological corner. North Rhine-Westphalia, for example, defines precise standards young learners have to meet in primary ELT. By the end of Grade 4, pupils are to perform at the A1-level identified in the CEFR (2001); for understanding listening and speaking they should perform at a level A1+ (NRW 2008: 14). While the other curricula for primary schools included here do not refer to such standards, these do appear in curricula for other regions in Germany and in the curricula for middle and high schools in both countries. Being multilingual contributes to one’s personality and is part of modern and holistic education, especially in Europe which offers such rich cultural encounters within a comparably small area. Yet, the Council of Europe’s language policy emphasises that one of the political objectives of its actions in the field of modern languages [is] to equip all Europeans for the challenges of intensified international mobility and closer cooperation not only in education, culture and science but also in trade and industry. (Council of Europe, 2001: 3, similar sections are included in the Companion Volume of 2020) Thus, the sociocultural and economic values of learning and speaking multiple languages technically share a similar stance. Even so, the discourse surrounding the CEFR – standardisation, comparative assessment – even if not initially intended, indicates a rather neoliberal agenda, i.e. speaking foreign languages well increases one’s options on the labour market and thus carries strong notions of economic power. With repeated international tests that compare students’ competences and hence their readiness to participate, and in fact compete, in global economies, one may even challenge which aspect of speaking multiple languages dominates: Is it really an enhancement of personalities, a contribution to

Authenticity, Curricula and Authentic Education  129

self-realisation and living a fulfilled life, or rather an investment in enabling people to successfully participate in neoliberal systems? This line of thought could also be supported by recognising that primary ELT is a rather new development. Be it as an independent subject starting in Grade 1 or 3 (Germany), or included through CLIL approaches in all subjects (Austria), governments consider the English language to be of such importance that even pupils who are only becoming literate in their first language already need to learn English. One way of interpreting such pedagogical programmes could be that governments do not want the youngest members of their societies to fall behind their international peers and to risk not having equal economic opportunities. Yet, such thoughts mirror Steinberg’s statement that ‘any changes to [the curriculum] have been politically motivated’ (Steinberg, 2016: 719); this critical perspective of ‘a capitalist intervention, a neoliberal hijacking of school curriculum’ (Steinberg, 2016: 720) supports my reading of curricula as political texts. As the legal basis of education, curricula reflect ‘a political and societal agreement about the what, why, and how of education for the desired society of the future’ (Tedesco et al., 2013: 2). Standardisation and the neoliberal frame seem to diminish the curricula’s incentives for students’ self-realisation. The extent to which self-realisation is supported and possible finds further limitations. These can certainly be discovered in the underlying normative foundation of education in a democratic system. Young learners are to be educated so as to be willing and able to enter the labour market and practice a profession of their choice, but to contribute to and participate in democratic societies. References in curricula that address these basic principles reflect the characteristics of the respective understanding of education (cf. Salden-Foerster, 2010: 171; cf. AUS, 2012: 9; BAV, 2014: 59; NRW, 2008: 5). In terms of an existentialist notion of authenticity as foregrounded in this chapter, one could pose that any unfolding of individual potential should, and only, take place within this frame. The attentive reader may have recognised that being encouraged to make free choices, identified as one dimension of Van Lier’s ­understanding of authenticity above, is not addressed in any of the primary school curricula included here. Justifying this with the pupils’ young age is only partially convincing, as the Montessori approach to education has shown. Rather, young learners should be made fit for institutionalised education by installing in them a rather strong orientation towards teachers and authorities. They are to grow into the society and processes of formal schooling, abiding to the rules established there. The odd reference to game-based learning is not able to blur this authoritative notion. A further limitation of authenticity and self-realisation becomes apparent in the way in which the Austrian primary curriculum addresses gender and sexuality as central markers of identity that play into self-realisation. It appears to be highly challenging to develop as a person when such

130  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

central elements as gender identity and one’s sexuality cannot be sufficiently developed. Therefore, gender development is also part of curricula, and, using the example of the Austrian curriculum for primary schools, included as one of its general didactic principles. Even so, the way it is included needs to be scrutinised, as it is phrased as sensitising pupils for gender roles (AUS, 2012: 26). In a section on nature-based experiences and learning (AUS, 2012: 88–89), this is specified: students are to develop a basic knowledge of and a positive attitude towards sexuality explicated as ‘gender differences between girls and boys, women and men; love and relationships between women and men; [and] facts of parenthood (motherhood and fatherhood)’.4 Primary pupils are to be prepared for the ‘gender-specific development’ (AUS, 2012: 96) they are facing. These sections reveal a very traditional understanding of gender and sexuality. The dichotomy of male and female and the exclusively heteronormative ­perspective on sexuality limits young learners’ gendered and sexual selfrealisations. Respective teaching runs the risk of reflecting an inauthentic education in view of this aspect of learners’ identities. While the primary curriculum for North Rhine-Westphalia does not refer to gender at all, the primary curriculum in Bavaria offers a different approach. Although it remains within a dichotomous differentiation of boys and girls, it follows a gender-sensitive pedagogy that enables both to explore various interests, experiences and talent, explicitly so beyond the traditional gender roles (BAV, 2014: 25, 45). Such references are essential because these welcome diverse forms of ‘doing gender’ (West & Zimmerman, 1987) beyond a male–female dichotomy and expressions of sexuality beyond heteronormativity. This short interlude exemplifies how legally binding documents not only prescribe contents and competences, objectives and standards of (language) teaching but also, and to a large extent, produce and reproduce existing norms and values, as well as possible aspirations and self-­ realisations for young people. The continuation and reestablishment of a male–female dichotomy which neglects gender diversity and the p ­ erception of gender as social constructs exemplifies education as a form of ‘social regulation not freedom of inquiry’ (Kincheloe, 2016: 612). Yet, what is paramount here is the creativity with which teachers may plan and conduct their lessons in order to pay tribute to their learners’ gender identities beyond the binary of male and female. König (2016), Merse (2017) and Fuchs (2018) suggest how teachers can implement gender-sensitive approaches in their secondary ELT classrooms; Derichsweiler (2020a, 2020b) offers ideas how primary ELT can address gender diversity. So, all is not lost: Next to teachers’ individual and creative interpretation and reading of the curricula indicated earlier, also students are left with some agency. They could make suggestions and use partner- and group work to further include their personal interests. Individualisation could provide a loophole, e.g. in free reading phases, in which learners’

Authenticity, Curricula and Authentic Education  131

choices of texts could mirror their personalities in their learning. Furthermore, they could authenticate their education by making it their own, by acknowledging standardisation and output-orientation as essential elements of ELT, and by creating ownership of the economisation of education. When authenticity is understood as the ‘degree to which students, not teachers or curriculum designers, map their learning activities to the external world’ (Heath & McLaughlin, 1994 in Radinsky et al., 2001: 407), and pupils develop an awareness of the rules necessary for being successful players in neoliberal societies, it is likely that their mapping meets high test results, because they acknowledge that these are their tickets to the labour market. Then, their individual authentication strongly diverges from Van Lier’s (1996) idea of authentic education, stemming simply from the socioeconomic design into which they grow. The way in which curricula are designed, it seems as if this is one of their intentions. Conclusion

I initially asked how authentic learners and teachers can actually be and which measures we use to declare a curriculum as authentic. Certainly, these are complex questions that demand even more complex answers. I conclude from my discussion in front of Van Lier’s concept of authenticity that governments attempt to address holistic education to invite pupils to unfold their potential. Simultaneously, educational politics signed up for standardisation and output-orientation and jumped on the bandwagon of (inter)national comparisons of students’ performances. It is now surely challenging to find a compromise between these two diverging perspectives on education. Additionally, we should not forget that we speak about formalised education that is organised in institutional structures which are in turn woven into a legal and economic network founded on democratic principles. Education is determined by curricula that manifest in subjects and are delivered through teachers (Dewey, 1902). Pupils’ pathways through education depend on their performance in reliable and valid tests based on contents for which a clear construct is usually available. This rather functional design of education seems to be contrary to Van Lier’s concept of authenticity. While creativity, self-realisation, agency and motivation are referenced in the curricula or at least shine through between the lines, output-orientation, achievement and standards simultaneously diminish these central elements of young people’s education. One limitation to self-realisation given by curricula is exemplified with a short reflection on how gender is referenced in curricula. This interlude suggests that curricula not only determine the content of young peoples’ education, but could also constrain their personality development. Critical voices could emphasise that curricula capture the idea of

132  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

forming young people in tune with what they have to be able to do and believe in order to function in and become valuable members of society; as people who contribute to the existing system rather than being ignited and enabled to critically reflect and to potentially change it. Thus, rather than regarding them as educational, I understand curricula as political texts that codify a particular concept of education. As such texts, curricula mirror a society’s specific ideological make-up, i.e. ‘ideas and culture associated with the dominant class […] argued to be the ideas and content of schooling’ (Pinar et al., 1995: 246). Reading curricula through an authenticity lens, thus perceiving the concept as referring to what a person genuinely feels and believes, and describing an action that is intrinsically motivated and based on the inner self, gender diversity is an essential case in point that needs to be critically considered. As a final remark, I would like to emphasise the important role teachers play, particularly at primary school level. They are the ones who put the curricula into practice and who are able to identify sections in which curricula leave space for interpretations, for how they would like their classrooms to look like and how they like to educate, to form, their pupils. Certainly, this offers great power to contribute to an authentication of curricula. ‘When free from technical constraints, brilliant and dedicated teachers work tirelessly to connect disciplinary and counter-disciplinary information with the desires, questions, dreams, aspirations, and interpersonal relationships of their students’ (Kincheloe, 2016: 615). Teacher education is paramount in supporting future teachers to discover creative means of freeing themselves from the technical constraints Kincheloe indicates here. Despite the central position curricula hold in determining education and their legal and political importance, it is surprising that curriculum studies is – to my knowledge and at least in Germany and Austria – rarely part of teacher education. When curricula are mentioned, they are often sold as ‘truth’ (cf. Kincheloe, 2016). The discussion above, which extends authenticity and curricula to questions of how we would like to perceive education, as education, pedagogy, schooling or formation, questions of how we perceive teachers and pupils and their interaction, and questions of the extent to which politics and economy shall influence, if not interfere with, educational politics, indicates that the complex issue of authentic education and curricula has not been solved yet. However, I believe that I was able to contribute to untangling some of the knots and show that curricula should certainly not simply be taken as ‘truth’. Notes (1) Having taught and researched at German and Austrian universities for the past 11 years, I use both as frames of reference for this short study. (2) Learner autonomy is a complex and challengeable concept. Yet, considerations of space prevent this chapter from engaging in its critical discussion. It shall therefore

Authenticity, Curricula and Authentic Education  133

suffice to say that particularly at primary school, learner autonomy needs to be scrutinised from a theoretical and practical perspective. The interested reader shall turn to Schmenk’s insightful contributions, e.g. 2008 and 2018. (3) I abbreviate the curriculum from Austria with AUS, from Bavaria with BAV and the one from North Rhine-Westphalia with NRW. (4) The curricula are published in German. These and the following translations are my own.

References AUS = Bundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft und Forschung (2012) Lehrplan der Volksschule. See https://www.bmbwf.gv.at/Themen/schule/schulpraxis/lp/lp_ vs.html (accessed June 2020). BAV = Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Bildung und Kultus, Wissenschaft und Kunst (2014) LehrplanPlus Grundschule. Lehrplan für die bayerische Grundschule. See https://www.lehrplanplus.bayern.de/schulart/grundschule (accessed June 2020). Breen, M.P. (1985) Authenticity in the language classroom. Applied Linguistics 6 (1), 60–70. Canale, M. and Swain, M. (1980) Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics 1 (1), 1–47. Council of Europe (2001) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Council of Europe (2018) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Companion Volume with new Descriptors. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Council of Europe (2020a) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Companion Volume. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Council of Europe (2020b) Historical Overview of the Development of the CEFR. Council of Europe. See https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-frameworkreference-languages/history (accessed February 2021). Derichsweiler, S. (2020a) Doing Gender. Gendersensibler Englischunterricht der Grundschule. Grundschulmagazin Englisch 1, 38–39. Derichsweiler, S. (2020b) Princess Smartypants. (Gender)Vielfalt im Englischunterricht der Primarstufe. Geht das überhaupt? Grundschulmagazin Englisch 1, 32–35. Dewey, J. (1897) My Pedagogical Creed. New York: E.L. Kellog. Dewey, J. (1902) The Child and the Curriculum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Eisner, E. and Vallance, E. (eds) (1974) Conflicting Conceptions of Curriculum. Berkeley: McCutchan. Fuchs, S. (2018) Divers(ity) pragmatisch kommunizieren? Praxis Fremdsprachenunterricht Englisch 1, 4–7. Gilmore, A. (2007) Authentic material and authenticity in foreign language learning. Language Teaching 40 (2), 97–118. Grein, M., and Vernal Schmidt, J.M. (2020) Der Schülerjob im Fremdsprachenunterricht? Zu einer schulpädagogischen Metapher und deren Übertrag auf den Fremdsprachenunterricht. Zeitschrift für Rekonstruktive Fremdsprachenforschung 1 (1), 19–38. Kincheloe, J.L. (2016) The curriculum and the classroom. Counterpoints 491, 611–632. Klieme, E., Avenarius, H., Blum, W., Döbrich, P., Gruber, H., Prenzel, M., Reiss, K., Riquarts, K., Rost, J., Tenorth, H.-E. and Vollmer, H. (2003) Zur Entwicklung nationaler Bildungsstandards. Eine Expertise. Berlin: Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung. König, L. (2016) Gender-Reflexionen mit Literatur im Englischunterricht. Fremdsprachdidaktische Theorie und Unterrichtsbeispiele. Wiesbaden: Metzler.

134  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

Merse, T. (2017) Other Others, Different Differences: Queer Perspectives on Teaching English as a Foreign Language. PhD thesis, Munich University. See https://edoc. ub.uni-muenchen.de/20597/1/Merse_Thorsten.pdf (accessed February 2021). NRW = Ministerium für Schule und Weiterbildung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen (2008) Lehrplan Englisch für die Grundschulen des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. See https:// www.schulentwicklung.nrw.de/lehrplaene/upload/klp_gs/GS_LP_E.pdf (accessed June 2020). Nunan, D. (1991) Communicative tasks and the language curriculum. TESOL Quarterly 25 (2), 279–295. OECD (2004) Messages from PISA. See https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/9789264018761en. pdf?expires=1611142443&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=2B97C8A0AFEF70CB0042 583365D92A17 (accessed January 2021). Pinar, W., Reynolds, W., Slattery, P. and Taubman, P. (1995) Chapter 5: Understanding curriculum as political text. Counterpoints 17, 243–314. Radinsky, J., Bouillion, L., Lento, E.M. and Gomez, L.M. (2001) Mutual benefit partnership: A curricular design for authenticity. Journal of Curriculum Studies 33 (4), 405–430. Said, E. (1978) Orientalism. New York: Pantheon. Salden-Foerster, N. (2010) Lehrplan. In C. Surkamp (ed.) Metzler Lexikon Fremdsprachendidaktik: Ansätze-Methoden-Grundbegriffe (pp. 168–171). Stuttgart: Metzler. Savignon, S. and Berns, M.S. (1984) Initiatives in Communicative Language Teaching. Reading: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. Schmenk, B. (2008) Visions of autonomy as a core concept in language education. In S. Doff, W. Hüllen and F. Klippel (eds) Visions of Languages in Education (pp. 101–117). München: Langenscheidt. Schmenk, B. (2018) Aporien des Lern- und Bildungsziels Autonomie im Kontext des institutionalisierten Fremdsprachenunterrichts. FLuL 47 (1), 10–24. Spivak, G.C. (1990) Can the subaltern speak? In C. Nelson and L. Grossberg (eds) Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture (pp. 271–313). London: Macmillan. Steinberg, S.R. (2016) Afterword: Curriculum? Tentative, at best. Canon? Ain’t no such thing. Counterpoints 491, 719–721. Tedesco, J.C., Opertii, R. and Amadio, M. (2013) The curriculum debate: Why it is important today. IBE Working Paper on Curriculum Issues, No. 10. UNESCO International Bureau of Education. See http://www.ibe.unesco.org/en/document/ curriculum-debate-why-it-important-today-ibe-working-papers-curriculum-issuesn%C2%B0-10 (accessed June 2020). Vallance, E. (1986) A second look at conflicting conceptions of curriculum. Theory into Practice 15, 24–30. Van Lier, L. (1996) Interaction in the Language Curriculum. Awareness, Autonomy and Authenticity. New York: Longman. West, C. and Zimmerman, D.H. (1987) Doing gender. Gender & Society 1, 125–151. Widdowson, H. (1976) The authenticity of language data. In J.F. Fanselow and R.H. Crymes (eds) On TESOL ’76. Selections based on Teaching Done at the Tenth Annual TESOL Convention (pp. 261–270). Washington: TESOL. Widdowson, H. (1978) Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wiles, J. (2009) Leading Curriculum Development. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press. Wiles, J. and Bondi, J.C. (2007) Curriculum Development: A Guide to Practice. London: Pearson. Will, L. (2018) Authenticity in English Language Teaching. An Analysis of Academic Discourse. Münster: Waxmann.

9 Authenticity and the Psychology of Language and Learning during Early Childhood Education Wietske Boon and Irma Eloff

Introduction

Authenticity has become a central construct in the theories, research and practice of language learning in recent years. Within this field, the initial focus on the use of authentic texts, generated by native speakers, has since been expanded to also include wider notions such as collaboration, problem-solving, critical analysis and cognitive processes. Authenticity is now viewed on a continuum of conceptualisations. However, the study of the psychological aspects of authenticity in language learning has often been neglected. Rather, the central process of the learning of a language is emphasised most frequently when authenticity is explored. Furthermore, studies of language and learning (and literacy) in African contexts have predominantly relied on large-scale studies that provide statistical insights at the systemic level. In today’s flexible, hyperdiversified learning environments, the psychological dynamics of language learning at the individual level, particularly during the early years, is critical to understanding language learning. This study examines the psychological dynamics within a learning environment during the early years in South Africa, as it explores language, learning and authenticity at the individual level. The study uses vignette research as a tool of both data collection and analysis to present several layers of the complexities present. The psychology of early language learning, and the concurrent development of authenticity, is explored by presenting vignettes of learning moments of young children. How does authenticity present psychologically during early learning? These vignettes might offer some insights into the psychological dynamics at play. The vignettes have been member checked by participants and retailored according to the iterative processes

135

136  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

that followed. Comprehensively, the chapter bridles together a triple narrative of authenticity, psychology and early learning. Language Learning

Second language learning, especially English, has, according to Murphy and Evangelou (2016: 6), become an international trend for children under the age of seven. Learning an additional language has several advantages, even from a young age, but formal learning processes in a new language can frequently cause various learning barriers and even result in ineffective learning processes. As such, confusion between the concepts of ‘learning a language’ and ‘language-of-instruction’ is not uncommon. A clear distinction should therefore be made between ‘learning a language’ and ‘language-of-teaching’, which has been stated to be the most difficult way to learn a language (Goldenberg et al., 2013: 27). As children grow older, they tend to identify with a specific language or culture. The language they speak is instrumental in shaping their identity. Bialystok (2001: 240) argues that ‘man is what he speaks’; in other words, since our early years of learning, speech is fundamental to our complex identities. The language/s that a child speaks are therefore intricately linked to a child’s construction of self. Even though variations may be nuanced, a child who communicates in two (or more) languages needs to negotiate between two (or more) sets of cultural expectations that may have different goals for behaviour, which are relevant to their social and emotional development (Halle et al., 2014). In the light of identity formation during the early years and the social reality of young learners, Bailey (2009: 342) emphasises the value of mother tongue learning and teaching, especially during early childhood. Authentic language learning is critical, since children’s identities form implicitly and explicitly when they are socially interacting. Auer and Li (2007) state that the more children become part of a peer group that speaks the majority language (for example English), the more the children will adapt to the language. Bialystok (2001: 241) notes that second language users may sometimes react inappropriately to culture-specific humour and find it difficult to express themselves in a second language. This may lead to frustration and even a misinterpretation of a child’s individuality. Due to limited knowledge of the second language, these children may run the risk of feeling excluded from the group which could potentially lead to reactive behavioural patterns such as social withdrawal or even aggression. Because social personalities are often expressed through verbal interactions, limited language proficiency may potentially interfere with the representation of a child’s image to the peer group. Denham et al. (2003: 251) and Ornaghi et al. (2017: 4) state that selfregulation and acceptable social behaviour contribute to children’s ability to adapt to their social environment. The relationships that develop

Authenticity and the Psychology of Language and Learning  137

between children and parents, educators and the peer group provide a basis for later patterns of social interactions. It is therefore important to understand the social and emotional development of bilingual (and multilingual) children because it occurs within the unique and authentic context in which more than one language is learned (Halle et al., 2014: 735). The early childhood period is critical for children’s intensive social, emotional, linguistic and cognitive development, and the nursery school serves as the first step from home to the wider social environment and the socialisation of children (Schwartz & Palviainen, 2016: 603). Grazzani et al. (2016: 567) argue strongly that two- and three-year-olds’ language ability contributes to the development of other important skills. Young children’s language and communication skills lead them to be able to predict their own emotions in different situations and to regulate them verbally and non-verbally. It also aligns with the formation of healthy relationships and problem-solving skills (Denham, 2006). Psychologically, Buchan (2013: 80) comments that children who cannot verbalise their emotions may experience anxiety which can put social and emotional pressure on them. When children have learned communication skills, they have the ability to convey meaning and language and can express their emotional state, which serves a preventative function in terms of the presence of anxiety. Although children’s behaviour indicates how they feel, authentic spoken language is critical for them to learn how to deal with their emotions effectively and age-appropriately. Even though high-diversity linguistic environments are eminent in the African context, the introduction of additional languages may still insert additional layers of complexity into the learning environment of a young child. Children, who are not emotionally ready, may find it difficult to make academic progress, even if they are academically strong. As such, the importance of emotional skills for successful physical and cognitive development is often underestimated (Dowling, 2005: 60–61), when ­decisions on language of learning and instruction during the early years are made. Authenticity in language learning during the early years is therefore crucial. This study aligns with the views expressed by Mishan (2004: 1), who distinguishes three groups of approaches to authenticity in the context of language pedagogy as follows: ‘“communicative approaches” in which communication is both the objective of language learning and the means through which the language is taught, “materials focused” approaches in which learning is centred principally round the text, and “humanistic approaches” which address the “whole” learner and emphasise the value of individual development’. It is within the humanistic approaches which emphasise the whole learner that the current study finds resonance. Mishan (2004: 11) refers to the ‘tortuous search for a finite definition of the authentic text’. She then also includes a view where authenticity is applied to language use, ‘in the sense of learner interactions

138  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

with, and interpretations of the text’ (Mishan, 2004: 11). Within the current study, the assumption is that during the early years, learner interactions with texts may include pictorial texts and situationally the interactions may also be positioned outside the classroom. This study therefore gleans from the position taken by Breen (1985: 61) when he views authenticity both in terms of tasks that are conducive to language learning, as well as the actual social situation. In this regard, Mishan (2004: 18) sets out ‘criteria for authenticity’ by indicating authenticity as a factor of: ‘1. Provenance and authorship of the text, 2. Original communicative and socio-cultural purpose of the text, 3. Original context (e.g. its source, socio-cultural context) of the text, 4. Learning activity engendered by the text, and 5. Learners’ perceptions of and attitudes to the text and the activity pertaining to it’. This study will focus on the latter two criteria by focusing on the learning activities engendered by texts in the early years and a learner’s perceptions, attitudes and activities pertaining to the text. This is also in line with Mishan’s (2004: 18) description of ‘authenticity of language use’ as in relation to the language user’s response to the activities or tasks. In addition, a broad view of language learning will be taken by expanding the notion of a language classroom outside the physical structures of a formal classroom for young learners. Research Methodology Purpose of the study

The purpose of the study is to elucidate authentic language learning experiences of three-year-olds in an African context. The study seeks to capture micro-moments of the social and emotional development of Afrikaans mother tongue three-year-olds, who respectively receive mother tongue-, dual medium- or second language education. In contexts of high diversity, granular understandings of authentic language learning are often under-represented. This study seeks to contribute to the knowledge base of authenticity and language learning by accounting for social-­ emotional learning, the complexities of language learning during the early years and the underpinning psychological dynamics at play. Research approach

The study is based on phenomenological principles to describe the three-year-olds’ experience of their learning environment via vignette research. Phenomenology determines the reality of our existence (Husserl, 1980: 149) and exposes the sources of the basic concepts and laws, from which logic is formed, to make it clearly understandable (Husserl & Findlay, 1970: 249–250). A phenomenon is not reasoned out, according to

Authenticity and the Psychology of Language and Learning  139

Husserl, but ‘is an object in its true sense, as we live and experience it in our conscious state’. We experience phenomena everywhere in our living world which is in a changing state and can best be described in terms of personal experiences (Vagle, 2018: 7). Our reality and living world are therefore connected to our awareness of it. We are aware and experience a world with endless space and time – even during the early years. We experience, think, feel, and are, at a given time, to a greater or lesser extent connected to our environment and our experiences, thoughts and emotions in it (Husserl, 1980: 54). Consistent with Husserl’s theory, the three-year-olds’ experience of their learning environment therefore also arises from their social and emotional interaction with peers and educators. In this sense, a member of the research team became part of the three-year-olds’ lifeworld (Lebenswelt) during the process of vignette research. Vignette research captured children’s authentic language learning experiences in terms of learner interaction and interpretation of text (Mishan, 2004) in three distinct learning environments: one Afrikaans language, one Afrikaans-English dual medium and one English language nursery school environment. The vignette process was adopted due to its inherent ‘ability’ to capture nuance and tone in language learning. It also potentially provides insight into educational processes and learning within the school environment that are often omitted in other research methodologies with broader foci. In vignette research, both the learner and the researcher are affected by the experience during the research events. While the children go to school, learn and socialise, the researcher ‘experiences the students’ experiences’. Neither the educator nor the child can reflect on it in the moment while it is happening (Schratz et al., 2014), as they are both involved in the learning moment. The vignette researcher thus has a ‘co-experience’ of the learning moment. The researcher takes a phenomenological point of view – his/her phenomenological text is called a vignette. In this study, the children’s experiences were captured by a vignette researcher as ‘co-experiences’. This provided experimental information that can be examined with the aim of understanding the experience (Schratz et al., 2014: 126). In each instance, the vignette researcher ‘lived’ with the experiences in the field and sought to capture the details and empirical data, which included elements of the experience, through in-depth observation notes. The vignettes point out certain experiences and then a narrative of these experiences was written. Vignettes are thus a form of literary non-fiction that can be easily read (Westfall-Greiter & Schwarz, 2013: 123) and used in this study for scientific, empirical purposes. Although no adult can see through the eyes of a child, phenomenologically oriented methodologies, such as vignette research, can shed light on the educational world and the experiences that take place there. By focusing on the learners’ lived experiences, the vignette researcher portrays the

140  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

learners’ experiences of the learning environment to highlight the implications of the experiences for teaching systems (Schratz et al., 2014: 129). In this study, the vignette researcher noticed what was present – or absent – in an event and reacted to moments that struck her or bothered her such as a conflict situation, moments of withdrawal or exaggerated operations. The vignette isolates single moments of experience, marks them as important, exposes them and draws attention to them. What has not been seen before is seen or it is seen in a new light. Experiences are explored, and new possibilities are added. The vignette describes the child’s world in a specific moment that stands out. The researcher seeks to relive the experience by ensuring that the vignette stays accurate and honest to the experience (Westfall-Greiter & Schwarz, 2013). Background to the Study

To capture young children’s authentic experiences of their learning environment, three Afrikaans mother tongue three-year-old boys were identified. Variables such as birth order, various stressors and the parents’ marital status were also considered. Each child received Afrikaans mother tongue-, Afrikaans-English dual medium- and English second language education, respectively. Other selection criteria included that: (1) The children must have attended the relevant nursery school between the ages of 18 months and three years. To collect valid data, the child had to be exposed to the language or languages of instruction for at least 18 months. Eighteen months is an important age for language development, as babies start speaking their first words between 12 and 18 months. (2) The children’s mother tongue had to be Afrikaans. This study focuses on Afrikaans mother tongue three-year-olds, partially due to the level of access that one researcher had to Afrikaans learners, as well as familiarity of both research team members to the Afrikaans language and culture. (3) The children had to live in the South African province Gauteng, and the nursery school also had to be there. The study is area-bound, as one researcher had access to nursery schools in this province and the use and culture of Afrikaans is regional, for example, the Afrikaans commonly spoken in Gauteng differs from Western Cape Afrikaans or Kaaps. (4) The children had to come from a middle to high economic class family as the development and experiences of the participating three-yearolds should not be affected by socioeconomic factors or a lack of stimulation. All three participating children were male, three years old and attended a class with 20 to 24 children. They all lived with their

Authenticity and the Psychology of Language and Learning  141

biological parents, both parents’ mother tongue and home language being Afrikaans. Each initial observation lasted approximately twoand-a-half hours per participant. All three nursery schools were within a radius of 45 kilometres from each other. The classroom sizes in the nursery schools ranged from 15 up to 30 learners, and outdoor spaces were an integral part of the comprehensive learning environment in all three schools. All the nursery schools were information-rich environments, including books, posters, toys with letters, songs and poems. Authentic texts included ample texts for language learning in both Afrikaans and English at all schools. Ryan, the participant in Vignette 1, was three years, six to eight months. He attends a nursery school where the formal language of instruction is Afrikaans. He is the first child in the family. His mother indicated that he had been hospitalised for one or more nights, that they had moved and that there was a younger sibling in the family. He is exposed to Afrikaans and English storybooks and television programmes one to five hours a week, respectively. Christopher, the participant in Vignette 2, was three years, three to five months. He attends a nursery school where the formal language of instruction is English and Afrikaans. The mother tongue of less than a quarter of the children in the class is Afrikaans, and most of the lesson was presented in English. He is the first child in the family. He was hospitalised for one or more nights, and a younger sibling in the family was born shortly before the study. He is exposed to Afrikaans storybooks 6 to 10 hours a week and to English storybooks and television programmes 1 to 5 hours a week. The recent birth of a sibling could have had a direct effect on the child’s behaviour during the observation, and this variable is taken into account when drawing conclusions. Steven, the participant in Vignette 3, was three years, six to eight months. The formal language of instruction is English. The mother tongue of less than a quarter of the children in the class is Afrikaans. He is the second child in the family. He was hospitalised one or more nights, and the family had previously moved. He is not exposed to Afrikaans storybooks or television programmes. He is exposed to English storybooks 1 to 5 hours a week and to English television programmes 11 to 15 hours a week. Data Collection

The vignette notes, which were made during the observations, were written as comprehensively and thoroughly as possible. Vignette notes are descriptive in nature, and interpretations during the observation are deliberately avoided. From the vignette notes, a set of raw vignettes were drafted. All the first drafts of the raw vignettes were written in Afrikaans (Boon, 2021). The final drafts of the vignettes, presented for

142  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

the purpose of this chapter, were translated into English by one research team member and further refined by a second research team member. Prior to translations, the first drafts of the raw vignettes were personally taken to the participating educators to read through and comment on in writing. The vignettes were purposefully written to communicate each child’s experience of his learning environment by highlighting important details to draw the reader’s attention to the child’s actions and reactions. The vignettes were communicated to other researchers to describe the true experiences as authentic as possible. Three of the English translated vignettes were then selected and presented to an international vignette research group to reflect on their resonance with the vignettes. The co-analysis within this international group of vignette researchers foregrounded the intricacies of authentic language learning in the early years. The international vignette researcher group consisted of researchers from Austria, Singapore, South Africa, Liberia and Italy. Based on the feedback from this group, the vignettes were further revised and finalised. This process corresponds with Widdowson’s concept of ‘authentication’ in that ‘[T]he learner may simply not feel himself in any way engaged by the text being presented to him and so may refuse to authenticate it by taking an interest. This means, among other things, that the topic of the discourse has to be one which will appeal to the learner in some way’ (Widdowson, 1978: 80–81). In this instance, authentication was sought within a diverse, global group of education researchers. van Lier later adopted Widdowson’s concept, as reflected in the suggestion that ‘authenticity is the result of a process of “authentication”, a validation of classroom events and language, and an endorsement of the “relevance of the things said and done”, and of the “ways” in which they are said and done’ (Van Lier, 1996: 133). Data Analysis: Vignettes

For the purpose of this chapter, the vignettes are presented as two sets of vignettes. First, three vignettes are presented to illustrate the comprehensive learning environments of the three participants and the psychological dynamics that are at play for three-year-olds in mother tongue, dual language and second language modes. As stated earlier, the depiction of the learning environments accounts for the complexities of early learning, social emotional learning and the concurrent psychological dynamics that are present. Second, a set of vignettes that captures micro-moments of authentic learning and interactivity with texts for a mother tongue learner is presented. Both sets of vignettes then lead into the discussion of authenticity (Mishan, 2004), and the psychology of language and learning during early childhood education. In the vignettes, the Afrikaans dialogue was translated into English.

Authenticity and the Psychology of Language and Learning  143

First Set of Vignettes Learning environments in the early years Vignette 1 (Afrikaans mother tongue)1

Outside on the playground, in the shade of a canopy, is a sandpit. John and Dean dig in the sand with small toy spades. Ryan, with a large plastic shovel in his hand, stands near them. He watches them dig a hole. They do not allow Ryan to join them. Mrs Ellie notices this. ‘Why is Ryan not allowed to play with you?’ she asks in a kind voice. Ryan walks quietly to the other side of John and Dean and looks at them from a different angle. ‘He can play with us, but with a small spade’, they say. Ryan, Mrs Ellie and Dean search everywhere in the sandpit for a small spade. Eventually they get one, but John quickly sits down on it. Ryan tries with force to pull the spade out from under John when Mrs Ellie firmly asks John to stand up. John starts to cry with tears rolling down his cheeks. The teacher tries to distract them: ‘What are you digging a hole for?’ Ryan carefully tries to make eye contact with John who is crying. He gently touches John’s arm. Ryan has soft features on his face and his eyes are friendly. The children quietly continue digging. A little girl joins them digging in the sand. Ryan watches silently as she digs. Then his body slowly comes into motion as he starts to dig with John. ‘I help him dig’, he says. Vignette 2 (Afrikaans-English dual language)2

The floor of the playground consists of a cement floor with synthetic grass covering some places. The playground is partly under the trees. In the shadow there are two swings. There is a dollhouse, a yo-yo tank and various climbing equipment. The sandpit is largely surrounded by blue shade net. Christopher peeks through a hole in the net to watch some children play in the sandpit. He walks away slowly. He stands by the teacher, Mrs Haley. ‘Where are you going?’ he wants to know, sounding worried. ‘We have a meeting’, she says kindly. Christopher looks like he wants to burst into tears. He climbs on the climbing frame. His sadness seems almost tangible. His frown makes deep wrinkles between his eyes. Then he slides slowly down the slide. He wanders aimlessly around. He sits down quietly on Mrs Haley’s chair. A friend, Elijah, comes to stand by him. Christopher pushes Elijah away with purpose. Christopher tries to stop Elijah with his hands, but Elijah touches the back of the chair. Christopher starts to cry. Big tears roll down his cheeks. He gets up. Elijah quickly sits down on the chair. Christopher wipes the tears with the hem of his shirt. Then he walks away with arched shoulders. Vignette 3 (English second language)3

On the playground, under a canopy, is a large sandpit with a climbing frame and three swings. Miss Helen empties a bucket of water into the sand. The children play excitedly in the wet sand. Steven plays aside,

144  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

alone. He throws dry sand through a funnel into a bucket. Tracy takes his bucket and walks away with it. Steven jumps up. He exclaims: ‘Teacher, teacher!’ Miss Helen intervenes. Steven sits down again, alone with his bucket and funnel. He scoops up sand and throws it in the bucket. Miss Helen pours more water on the already wet sand. She notices that Steven is playing in the dry sand. She kindly asks him: ‘Do you also want to come and play in the wet sand?’ Steven nods and shakes his head. He moves closer to the wet sand, but still plays alone with the funnels and buckets. Miss Helen brings another bucket of water. He gestures with his arms to Ann that she should move so Miss Helen can pour out the water. Second Set of Vignettes Authenticity and mother tongue language learning in the early years

The following three vignettes focus on mother tongue language learning exclusively. Ryan’s, the participant who received mother tongue education, experiences of his learning environment will be presented in this section to bring forward the learning dynamics during textual engagement in a context of mother tongue instruction. Vignette 14

Ryan looks curiously at his teacher, Miss Sarah. Then he focuses intensely on the dinosaur pictures in the book that Miss Sarah has in her hand. Miss Sarah asks a question. Ryan shouts clearly: ‘Fast!’ His mouth stays wide open. He does not move. He stares at Miss Sarah and the book in her hand. His eyes follow keenly as she turns the pages. Miss Sarah asks another question. Ryan says with a loud voice: ‘Four!’ He leans on one hand while he plays with his shoe with the other. His eyes are still fixed on the pictures. He picks up the hand he was leaning on and rubs his wrist as if it hurts. He rubs with his fingers over one eye. Ryan looks at Miss Sarah and the book while she talks about dinosaurs. Then he suddenly comments: ‘Giraffes have long necks’. Miss Sarah puts the book down. He shouts excited: ‘Another one!’ Vignette 2

Miss Sarah picks up a bible booklet. She pages to a story and slowly shows the pictures to the children in front of her. ‘I cannot see’, Ryan says sadly. She adjusts the book for Ryan to see. He focuses intensely on Miss Sarah’s face and then on the pictures in the book. He unconsciously plays with his hand against his leg, but his attention is fixed intently on the picture book from which Miss Sarah is telling them the story.

Authenticity and the Psychology of Language and Learning  145

Vignette 3

Mrs Ellie introduces the theme discussion: chicks. Ryan does not hesitate to share his own experiences about tractors and chicks. Other children also share their stories and experiences excitedly. He sits with his feet folded under him, and he leans slightly forward. While other friends talk and share their thoughts, he focuses on Mrs Ellie, the book in her hand and the pictures of chicks hatching on the theme board behind her. Mrs Ellie asks the children a question. He does not lose his focus and earnestly follows what she says. He stretches his arms as far as he can to show how big the egg is. Streeeeeeetch. ‘Miss! … tell us about the eggs we buy in the store!’, he says. Discussion

The two sets of vignettes that are outlined in this chapter present the opportunity to argue for the conceptual expansion of ‘authenticity’ in the context of language learning during the early years. This conceptual expansion should (and could) include learning environments outside of traditional classrooms, and it could also include the use of pictorial texts during the early years. In the first set of three vignettes, micro-moments of language learning in three-year-olds are presented – micro-moments that manifest outside the confines of the formal classroom. It presents the layers of social-emotional learning that takes place in the lives of these three-year-olds, and it offers some insights into the psychological dynamics that extends beyond the formal texts that are available for language learning during the early years. Their language learning in these moments is real and complex. In the first vignette (First set, Vignette 1), Ryan is confronted with what Stadler (2015: 149) calls ‘sociopragmatic skills’ to use language in an effort to be included in a play activity. It is now that the authenticity and complexity of high-diversity, multilingual contexts are evident. Ryan is desperate to participate, but he has to exert multiple strategies (including his language skills and those of others) for it to come to fruition. In the second vignette (First set, Vignette 2), Christopher remains excluded from the learning context, despite numerous attempts to engage from his side. He retreats from the learning context defeated. This is in line with Bialystok’s (2001) view that children might feel excluded from the peer group as a result of inadequate skills in the second language. According to Denham et al. (2009: 142), three-year-olds still need a lot of support from adults, but they should also have the ability to change or suppress emotional expressions depending on what the situation requires (Denham, 1998: 27). In this instance, the barriers presented within a dual language environment may have suppressed the available repertoire of this threeyear-old to deal with the social emotional dynamics of a dual language environment. In the third vignette (First set, Vignette 3), we witness

146  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

Steven’s contentment in his (almost) solitary learning experience. His primary engagement here is with his educator, and he distinctly partitions his space when another young learner enters. Yet again this resonates with Bialystok (2001) that children might experience difficulties in expressing themselves in a second language, which might have led Steven to engage with the educator and withdraw himself from the other learner. In the second set of vignettes, the gaze of the researchers zooms in on the learning dynamics during textual engagement of a three-year-old in a context of mother tongue instruction. In the first vignette (Second set, Vignette 1), we see Ryan being captivated by the pictorial text that his teacher is presenting. He is completely enamoured by the text, the pictures and the questions his teacher is asking. He engages in learning enthusiastically, energetically and to the exclusion of all other distractions. This is ‘optimal’ learning in action. In the second vignette (Second set, Vignette 2), we continue to see Ryan’s deep engagement with a pictorial text. He expresses sadness when he cannot fully view it. He alternates his attention between the text and the facial expressions of his teacher. Even though he fiddles, his attention remains completely fixed. Pictures are an important part of the story being read. At the same time, the pictures provide visual stimulation, reinforces the story and helps to pique the interest of the children. When Ryan cannot see the pictures and he misses out on valuable information, he does not move in his seat, but he also does not remain silent about it. He tells his teacher that he cannot see the pictures. The teacher responds by making sure that he can see them. She makes sure he feels included in the activity. She makes provision to meet his needs and promote this specific educational opportunity. The ‘communicative and socio-cultural purpose of the text’ (Mishan, 2004: 18) is evident, even though it is predominantly pictorial. Engaging in this teaching and learning, Ryan does not let himself be lost even for a moment. He is intensely interested in the pictures in the book. There is the need for movement, as with most three-year-olds, but that does not stop him from paying attention to the story. In the third vignette (Second set, Vignette 3), we are afforded another opportunity to observe how experiences shape language development during the early years (D’Souza et al., 2017). Heugh (1999) notes the importance of educators to be proficient in the language they teach, since she views language as a resource that includes various domains (such as social and educational) within which language serves both a cooperative as well as a communicative function – as illustrated in this vignette. A mother tongue learning environment is loaded with experiences (Cummins, 2001), it lays the foundation for second language development and it promotes education performance in the long term for learners of minority languages (MacKenzie, 2009). The second set of vignettes brings to mind the argument by Stadler (2015: 149) within the context of higher education that ‘[i]t is acceptable to use adapted or stylised material besides authentic texts in class in order to generate authentic

Authenticity and the Psychology of Language and Learning  147

performances in which students can demonstrate an understanding of sociopragmatic skills’. This may be relevant in the context of early learning too. Limitations

The study focused on psychological dynamics to elucidate authentic language learning experiences of three-year-olds in an African context. It is, however, acknowledged that several dynamics are at play within this context, e.g. teacher gender, participant gender, child temperaments, family dynamics and so forth. Stronger focus on gender, for instance, could possibly have added to the complexity of social-emotional learning as the participating three-year-olds in the vignettes were boys while all the educators were female. Conclusion

This chapter engages the notion of authenticity in language learning in the context of the early years (Mishan, 2004), and it contributes to the expanding body of knowledge on multilingual environments, specifically in the African context. The study also foregrounds the importance of the social-emotional aspects of language learning in early learning. It argues for an expansive definition of authenticity by presenting micro-moments of learning of Afrikaans-speaking three-year-olds and portraying the inherent complexities of language in early learning contexts. These micromoments simultaneously illustrate the need to acknowledge flexibility in learning environments, as well as an inclusive definition of what constitutes a text in language learning. Acknowledgements

The South African Academy for Science and Arts (‘Suid Afrikaanse Akademie vir Wetenskap en Kuns’) in South Africa contributed financially to this study. Some selected vignettes (i.e. data) analysed in the current chapter have been published in Afrikaans in the PhD-study conducted by the first author. Notes First set of vignettes (1) The dialogue that is presented in this vignette originally took place in Afrikaans but was translated to English for the purpose of this chapter. Mrs Ellie: Hoekom kan Ryan nie saam met julle speel nie? Children: Hy kan met ons speel, maar met ‘n klein grafie. Mrs Ellie: Waarvoor grawe julle ‘n gat? Ryan: Ek help hom grou!

148  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

(2) Most of the dialogue in this vignette took place in Afrikaans and was translated to English for the purpose of this chapter. The original dialogue went as follows: Christopher: Waar gaan jy heen? Mrs Haley: Ons het ‘n meeting. (3) Miss Helen’s dialogue was translated from Afrikaans to English for the purpose of this chapter. Steven: Juffrou, juffrou! Miss Helen: Wil jy ook in die nat sand kom speel? Second set of vignettes (4) The dialogue presented in the second set of vignettes originally took place in Afrikaans. The dialogue was translated to English for the purpose of this chapter. Ryan: Vinnig! ... Vier! ... Kameelperde het lang nekke … Nog een! Ryan: Ek kan nie sien nie. Ryan: Juffrou…vertel ons van die eiers wat ons in die winkel koop.

References Auer, P. and Li, W. (2007) Introduction: Multilingualism as a problem? Monolingualism as a problem? In P. Auer and W. Li (eds) Handbook of Multilingualism and Multilingual Communication (pp. 1–12). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Bailey, B. (ed.) (2009) Multilingual Forms of Talk and Identity Work. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Bialystok, E. (2001) Bilingualism in Development: Language, Literacy and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Boon, W. (2021) Moedertaal-, dubbelmedium- en tweedetaalonderrig: ’n Verkennendvergelykende studie van driejariges se sosiale en emosionele ontwikkeling. Unpublished PhD study, University of Pretoria. https://repository.up.ac.za/handle/2263/80157 Breen. M. (1985) Authenticity in the language classroom. Applied Linguistics 6 (1), 60–70. Buchan, T. (2013) The Social Child: Laying the Foundations of Relationships and Language (dual edn). Abingdon: Routledge. Cummins, J. (2001) Bilingual children’s mother tongue: Why is it important for education. Sprogforum 7 (19), 15–20. D’Souza, D., D’Souza, H. and Karmiloff-Smith, A. (2017) Precursors to language development in typically and atypically developing infants and toddlers: The importance of embracing complexity. Journal of Child Language 44 (3), 591–627. https://doi. org/10.1017/S030500091700006X Denham, S.A. (1998) Emotional Development in Young Children. New York: Guilford Press. Denham, S.A. (2006) Social-emotional competence as support for school readiness: What is it and how do we assess it? Early Education and Development 17 (1), 57–89. Denham, S.A., Blair, K.A., DeMulder, E., Levitas, J., Sawyer, K., Auerbach–Major, S. and Queenan, P. (2003) Preschool emotional competence: Pathway to social competence? Child Development 74 (1), 238–256. Denham, S.A., Wyatt, T.M., Bassett, H.H., Echeverria, D. and Knox, S.S. (2009) Assessing social-emotional development in children from a longitudinal perspective. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 63 (1), i37–i52. Dowling, M. (2005) Young Children’s Personal, Social and Emotional Development (2nd edn). London: Paul Chapman Pub. Goldenberg, C., Hicks, J. and Lit, I. (2013) Dual language learners: Effective instruction in early childhood. American Educator 37 (2), 26–29. Grazzani, I., Brockmeier, J. and Ornaghi, V. (2016) Conversation on mental states at nursery: Promoting social cognition in early childhood. European Journal of Developmental Psychology 13 (5), 563–581.

Authenticity and the Psychology of Language and Learning  149

Halle, T.G., Whittaker, J.V., Zepeda, M., Rothenberg, L., Anderson, R., Daneri, P., Wessel, J. and Buysse, V. (2014). The social-emotional development of dual language learners: Looking back at existing research and moving forward with purpose. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 29 (4), 734–749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2013.12.002. Heugh, K. (1999) Languages, development and reconstructing education in South Africa. International Journal of Educational Development 19 (4), 301–313. https://doi. org/10.1016/S0738-0593(99)00030-9. Husserl, E. (1980) Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Husserl, E. and Findlay, J.N. (1970) Logical Investigations. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul; Humanities Press, Inc. MacKenzie, P.J. (2009) Mother tongue first multilingual education among the tribal communities in India. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 12 (4), 369–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050902935797. Mishan, F. (2004) Designing Authenticity into Language Learning Materials. Bristol: Intellect Books. See https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.uplib.idm.oclc.org/lib/pretoria-ebooks/detail.action?docID=282992. Murphy, V.A. and Evangelou, M. (eds) (2016) Introduction. In Early Childhood Education in English for Speakers of Other Languages (pp. 256–257). London: British Council. Ornaghi, V., Brazzelli, E., Grazzani, I.G., Agliati, A. and Lucarelli, M. (2017) Does training toddlers in emotion knowledge lead to changes in their Prosocial and aggressive behavior toward peers at nursery? Early Education and Development 28 (4), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2016.1238674. Schratz, M., Westfall-Greiter, T. and Schwarz, J.F. (2014) Beyond the reach of teaching and measurement: Methodology and initial findings of the Innsbruck Vignette Research. Pensamiento Educativo. Revista de Investigación Educacional Latinoamericana 51 (1), 123–134. Schwartz, M. and Palviainen, A. (2016) Twenty-first-century preschool bilingual education: Facing advantages and challenges in cross-cultural contexts. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 19 (6), 603–613. Stadler, W. (2015) Teaching and testing sociopragmatics in the Russian language classroom. Athens Journal of Philology 2 (3), 149–162. Vagle, M.D. (2018) Crafting Phenomenological Research. New York: Routledge. Van Lier, L. (1996) Interaction in the Language Curriculum: Awareness, Autonomy, and Authenticity. (Ser. Applied Linguistics and Language Study). New York: Longman. Westfall-Greiter, T. and Schwarz, J.F. (2013) Planning for the unplannable: Responding to (un) articulated calls in the classroom. Phenomenology & Practice 6 (2), 121–135. Widdowson, H.G. (1978) Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

10 Authenticity in Language Teaching: An African Language Perspective Elsabé Taljard

Introduction

South Africa is a multilingual country with approximately 25 different languages, of which 11 have been granted official status in terms of Section 6 of the Constitution Act No. 108 of 1996. Nine of these languages belong to the Bantu language family, the other two being English and Afrikaans.1 Consequently, equipping individuals with communicative skills in multiple languages is an exercise in empowerment and a key element of the language teaching landscape. Societal and individual multilingualism is actively promoted by various official policy documents, cf. the Language in Education Policy (1997) and the National Language Policy Framework (2002); therefore, the teaching of additional languages is key in education. This is especially pertinent to the African languages of South Africa, these languages being historically disadvantaged due to the policies of the previous regime. Although having a relatively long tradition of being taught at universities – the University of Pretoria, for example, established a Department of African languages (then called Bantu studies) in 1924 – the teaching of these languages has been stuck in a formalist, structuralist approach, or, veering towards the other end of the continuum, i.e. teaching of so-called communicative or conversational competence. The structuralist approach is largely paradigmatic in nature, whereas the application of the communicative approach in the teaching of the African languages tends to focus on the teaching of (often decontextualised) vocabulary and what is commonly termed ‘everyday phrases’. The notion of textual authenticity (cf. Gilmore, 2007) in the pedagogy of language teaching has never featured explicitly in either curriculum design, or in the academic literature on African language teaching; consequently, this chapter is an attempt to fill this gap. For its purpose, I take as my starting point the statement by Gilmore (2007: 98) that ‘rather than chasing our tails in pointless debate over authenticity versus contrivance, we should focus instead on LEARNING AIMS, or 150

Authenticity in Language Teaching: An African Language Perspective  151

as Hutchinson and Waters (1987: 159) call it, “fitness to the learning purpose”’. Such an approach implies a pragmatic interpretation of ‘authenticity’, asking what role the text can play in the learning process. ‘Text’ is interpreted as referring to both language teaching materials and electronic text corpora. In this chapter, I argue that the use of electronic corpora could contribute towards the goal of authenticity in the teaching of the African languages – specifically within the context of tertiary education – even though the link between authenticity and the use of corpora is not an uncontested notion. Furthermore, using corpora for the teaching of lesser-resourced languages could add at least an element of authenticity, even though the corpora may not be pedagogically appropriate, balanced and/or representative. Contextualisation

In the curricula for the teaching of African languages in South Africa, a basic distinction is usually made between teaching home language speakers and teaching beginner learners of an African language. The focus of this discussion is the latter group, specifically those in tertiary education. The term ‘beginner learner’ is used to refer to students who have no knowledge of an African language, and these students constitute a heterogeneous group. The majority is usually home language speakers of English or Afrikaans, but due to the changing educational landscape, speakers of other African languages increasingly form part of this group. Apart from the general promotion of multilingualism amongst its graduates at tertiary institutions, the Language Proficiency Requirements as stipulated in the National Qualifications Framework Act 67/2008 (https:// tinyurl.com/bhdrbwsn) furthermore requires all education students who do not have an African language as home language to include one such language as language of conversational competence in their degree programmes. Consequently, the majority of students who register for African language modules are from the faculties of Education. The stated outcome of these modules is therefore to produce students, and eventually school teachers, who are able to communicate effectively in the target language of a specific speech community. Conversational competence also encompasses the ability to comprehend and produce conversation based on one’s knowledge of  conversational conventions and being sensitive to social context, speaker relations and cultural practices. These aspects, especially the latter three, are of particular importance in the teaching of African languages to a cohort of prospective teachers. South African school classrooms are socially, linguistically and culturally diverse, and being competent in an African language empowers teachers to negotiate a complex teaching and learning space. It is against this background that the notion of authenticity and specifically the role of corpora in language teaching on tertiary level is investigated.

152  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

Brief Theoretical Conspectus

In this chapter, African language learning and teaching is viewed within the context of two notions of authenticity. This brief paragraph serves to draw the outside perimeters of the discussion that follows. Theoretical differences between the two conceptualisations of authenticity and the practical implications thereof for language learning and teaching are referred to throughout the discussion; a detailed discussion is therefore not provided here. For the purposes of this discussion, a basic distinction is made between the conceptualisation of authenticity within (corpus) linguistics, and its conceptualisation in applied linguistics. In the context of (corpus) linguistics, authenticity is defined in terms of ‘real-life language use’ (cf. McEnery & Wilson, 2001; Sinclair, 2004b; Stefanowitsch, 2020: 23; Tognini-Bonelli, 2001). Authentic language constitutes the genuine communication of people and is not produced for linguistic analysis ‘or even with the knowledge that it might be used for such a purpose’ (Stefanowitsch, 2020: 23). The corpus linguistics-based approach to language study therefore views authenticity as an inherent feature of the text, where authenticity is equated with ‘realness’ or ‘genuineness’ of language material. Authenticity is therefore vested in the genesis of texts. Any text that has its origin in the ‘real world’ qualifies as an authentic text. When applied to the language teaching and learning context, this implies that any text produced outside of the language classroom for the sole purpose of communication is authentic. Within the context of applied linguistics, authenticity is viewed not as an inherent feature of the text, but rather as a ‘characteristic of the relationship between the passage and the reader and it has to do with appropriate response’ (Widdowson, 1978: 80). Authenticity therefore does not reside in instances of language, but rather it is something that is bestowed on a text by the response of its reader. Within the pedagogical context, authenticity is related to the learning activity and not to the origin of the material in question (Mishan, 2004: 221). What corpus linguists refer to as ‘authenticity’, Widdowson (1978: 80) calls ‘genuineness’: ‘Genuineness is a characteristic of the [text] passage itself and is an absolute quality’. Despite the distinction made by Widdowson, Buendgens-Kosten (2014: 458) points out that the use of the term ‘authenticity’ for both cases has remained common practice in English Language Teaching (ELT) discourse, and ‘texts written by a native speaker, or for native speakers, or for non-language learning purposes tend to continue to be referred to as “authentic” rather than genuine’. In view of Buendgens-Kosten’s remark, both notions of authenticity, i.e. authenticity as a feature of text, and authenticity as a reaction to text, will be utilised in the discussion of current practices in African language teaching. According to MacDonald et al. (2006: 251), four types of authenticity have been proposed in the literature of applied linguistics, i.e. text

Authenticity in Language Teaching: An African Language Perspective  153

authenticity, competence authenticity, learner authenticity and classroom authenticity. The current discussion will focus on text authenticity, with the notion of text being interpreted as including written language learning materials and corpus. Special attention is paid to the corpus and its potential use as a pedagogical tool in the teaching of African languages to adult beginner learners in a tertiary context. Authenticity of Text: African Language Learning Material

According to MacDonald et al. (2006: 251, 252), when used within the context of language learning, authenticity refers to a correspondence between ‘pedagogic’ language, text or materials and ‘real world’ language, texts or artefacts, and implies bringing the world into the classroom. The move away from artificiality to authenticity with regard to language materials is the result of the advent of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) in the late 70s. Developers of language material were encouraged to use texts such as recipes, newspaper reports, advertisements and web resources ‘with a view to linking the language classroom to the reality of the outside world’ (Joy, 2011: 6). The perception is that the closer the texts inside the classroom mirror those in the outside world, the more effective the learning process will be. The assumption is that familiarising students with authentic texts in the classroom will provide them with the necessary confidence and motivation to communicate in the target language in the outside world. Other stated advantages of using authentic material include the possibility to select materials that are relevant, appropriate and interesting to specific groups of learners, and the cultural and linguistic richness of authentic texts (Mishan, 2004: 219). An approach that emphasises the importance of authentic language material has direct implications for the African language lecturer. Scarcity of resources such as those mentioned by Joy (2011) has hampered serious attempts to incorporate authentic material in the teaching of these languages. For any lecturer of especially English as Foreign Language (EFL) it may be unthinkable not to have access to, for example, a myriad of newspaper texts, advertisements, greeting cards and application forms; this is however the reality with which the African language lecturer is confronted. To give but a few examples: South African government websites are solely in English: application forms, notices and announcements are in English only; the online presence of the African languages is extremely low. Of the nine indigenous African languages, newspapers are published only in Zulu, i.e. Ilanga and Isolezwe. The only magazine published in any of the African languages, i.e. Bona magazine, published in Southern Sotho, Xhosa and Zulu, has recently closed its doors. Furthermore, even if language lecturers had access to these magazines, the appropriateness of the content for beginner learners is questionable. The target readers of Bona magazine are adult, upper middle-class individuals,

154  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

and it is doubtful whether these texts – both content-wise and ­language-wise – would be appropriate for the language classroom. In short: the African language lecturer would be hard-pressed to find reallife texts that can link the classroom with the reality of the outside world. The foregoing discussion does however not imply that African language lecturers and designers of learning materials are oblivious to the advantages of including real-life examples in the language learning process. There are intuitive and honest attempts to introduce real-life language use into learning materials. Care is also taken to use material that is properly contextualised, with the need for communicative competence of the language learner, as described earlier, being of primary importance. These attempts are however introspective, i.e. based on the lecturer’s intuition and perception as to what constitutes real-life examples. These introspective efforts are the result of the limited availability of authentic African language resources and as such, represent ‘contrived texts’. However, following Gilmore (2007: 98), ‘contrived’ does not necessarily mean ‘bad’, provided that the texts are fit for the learning purpose. In Evans (2016), a textbook used for students in the Education faculty of the University of Pretoria, the content for students learning Northern-Sotho, Tswana, Xhosa and Zulu is selected in such a way as to mirror language use in the school classroom as closely as possible, since this is where candidate teachers would need to utilise their African language competence. Selection of real-life language use was done not only with regard to lexis in the form of dedicated vocabulary and typical expressions used in the school classroom, but also with regard to discourse pragmatic functions of utterances. Language structures to be taught were selected in such a way as to enable student teachers to perform speech acts that are typical in a school classroom setting, such as giving simple instructions, making requests and giving warnings. Being aware of the multicultural nature of the South African school classroom, the authors have taken care to include content that is culturally appropriate for communication in the classroom, paying attention to speaker relations, e.g. modes of address and other linguistic forms that are sensitive to social and cultural context. For a detailed description of the design and development of content, the reader is referred to Evans (2011). It is difficult to gauge to what extent practices like these contribute to textual authenticity. A narrow interpretation of the notion of authenticity would surely argue against such texts being labelled as authentic. However, one could rightly ask whether intuition and introspection on the one hand and authenticity on the other are mutually exclusive, especially if the former are based on extensive experience in the teaching environment and profound knowledge of the African ­language to be taught, as is the case in Evans (2016) referred to previously. Gilmore (2007: 98) makes an interesting point in this regard. He regards the debate over authenticity and contrivance as pointless, taking a very pragmatic stance in this regard – he states that the key issue is rather what

Authenticity in Language Teaching: An African Language Perspective  155

the aim of learning materials is. If the function of the text is to produce prospective teachers who are communicatively competent in the target language within a school classroom context (as is the case with regard to the textbook referred to earlier), designers of learning materials and textbooks should have free range to utilise any means at their disposal to reach this goal (Gilmore, 2007: 98). Relative authenticity of the material, their provenance or their contrivance are irrelevant in such contexts. For languages that are lesser-resourced, such an approach offers a practical solution to the problem of pedagogically sound learning materials. Gilmore is not alone in his defence of contrived material; O’Keefe et al. (2007: 26) also make a case for ‘contrived texts’. They point out that authentic texts may be embedded in particular cultures and may consequently be culturally opaque to those outside that culture. In the process of creating these ‘contrived’ texts, the language teacher can mediate this cultural gap between text and learner by selecting texts that are culturally neutral: ‘Consequently, there is among many a preference for contrivance and the deliberate use of culturally “neutral” examples as a more solid basis for a pedagogy that is sensitive to learners’ needs’ (O’Keefe et al., 2007: 26). They also point out that contrived texts allow easy grading for learners at different levels of competence. Gilmore (2007: 113) also questions the notion that authentic texts are automatically superior to contrived ones, cautioning that a curriculum based on authentic texts may become a random selection of whatever features happen to appear in the selected texts. Such a text-driven approach could result in loss of control over language learning goals. Furthermore, there is a distinct possibility that authentic language may be too difficult for learners (Breyer, 2011: 61), and once again, this is particularly relevant for beginner learners of an African language. African language lecturers have a responsibility to decide when and how to introduce authentic material (if available) into the classroom. Exposing beginner learners to authentic texts that are above their level of competence may very well have a demotivating effect, especially if learners ‘believe or have been led to believe that to understand anything they should understand everything’ (Johns, 1988: 10 as quoted in Breyer, 2011: 61). Lastly, Badger and Macdonald (2010) raise an important point regarding the notion of bringing a text into the language classroom as an attempt to attain the ideal of authenticity. Their contention is that authenticity as moral imperative has been imposed on language teachers and, in a sense, disempowered them. In view of the scarcity of ‘authentic’ African language texts, this statement may be particularly relevant with regard to the African language lecturer. Not being able to use real-life texts may very well lead to feelings of inadequacy amongst teachers. For the African language lecturer caught between the limited availability of appropriate reallife texts and the perceived undesirability of contrived texts, the use of corpora can provide a solution.

156  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

Corpora in (African) Language Teaching

The use of corpora in language teaching has its roots in corpus linguistics, more specifically in the way in which the concept ‘corpus’ is defined by corpus linguists. Although there is a myriad of definitions, a common thread that runs through these definitions is some reference to the ‘genuineness’ of the language data contained in the corpus. Corpora contain ‘the real language data’ (Bernardini, 2004: 15), they are ‘huge bodies of naturally occurring texts’ (Tsui, 2004: 39), they are ‘gathered from the genuine communications of people going about their normal business’ (Sinclair, 1996) and contain ‘authentic language material’ (Römer, 2004: 190). Corpora therefore provide linguists and potentially language teachers with empirical evidence on language and its use – an element lacking in the intuition and introspective approach to language study and teaching. Access to corpora affords designers of learning material the opportunity to use (excerpts from) real-life texts as illustrative material, the argument being that such illustrations are more appropriate than so-called contrived examples. Corpora also provide authentic texts for the creation of exercise materials, (Breyer, 2011: 59); authenticity of text therefore implies authenticity of both corpus and corpus-based learning materials. Furthermore, students can in a direct way be exposed to real-life language usage and exploit the corpus for their own purposes, and once they have mastered the techniques of corpus-based language study, language learning can become student centred and the result of data-driven learning (DDL). It can truly be stated that access to electronic text corpora can potentially revolutionise language learning. It seems however, that the corpus revolution has passed largely unnoticed through the South African educational landscape, especially as far as teaching of the African languages is concerned. No reference in scholarly literature is made to the use of corpora in African language teaching, bar a single article by Taljard (2012). The extent to which the use of corpora in African language teaching has been neglected is further highlighted by McEnery and Xiao’s (2011) reference to 25 authored or edited volumes that have been published since the early 1990s on the use of corpora in language teaching – in none of these is any reference made to African languages. With reference to the teaching of English, Gabrielatos (2005) remarks that ‘“Corpus” has now become one of the new language teaching catchphrases, and both teachers and learners alike are increasingly becoming consumers of corpus-based educational products, such as dictionaries and grammars’. This sadly, is not true for African language lecturers. Not only are corpora not freely available, but corpus-based African language dictionaries are the exception rather than the rule, and no corpus-based grammars for any of these languages exist. In short, corpora are largely absent from the educational scene as far as the teaching of African languages is concerned. The notion that corpora can provide lecturers and curriculum designers and

Authenticity in Language Teaching: An African Language Perspective  157

developers with access to large volumes of language data and that they can lend at least an element of authenticity to the teaching of these languages has not yet taken a foothold. On the Authenticity of Corpora

Corpus linguists do not seem to take criticism with regard to the use of corpora in language teaching very seriously: Sinclair (2004a: 2) refers to a ‘flurry of resistance [that] is now largely behind us’, and Xiao and McEnery (2008) regard the debate on the use of corpora in language education as a non-issue. Even so, a number of issues concerning specifically the authenticity of corpora are raised that warrant some discussion. The main point of criticism against the authenticity of corpora (Widdowson, 2000; Mishan, 2004) is that authenticity is not an inherent feature of text, based on its genuine origin, it is rather a feature bestowed on the text by the users by their willingness and ability to re-contextualise them. Language learners need to re-contextualise texts in order for them to be authentic; they need to create a relationship to the text. Authenticity is therefore viewed as an activity, arising from learners’ involvement of the learning task. The origin of a corpus may be vested in authentic texts, but because of the form and nature of the corpus, in the transition from source to electronic format, the texts lose what Mishan (2004: 219) calls a crucial criterion for authenticity, namely context. When becoming part of a corpus, the original form of the texts is obscured and they become part of an indistinguishable whole – the original contextual conditions of the text is lost. As Widdowson (1998: 711–712) points out, ‘Reality […] does not travel with the text’ and therefore argues that what is present in the corpus is only a reflected reality. The format in which texts appear in a corpus is a great leveller of texts with regard to their appearance. Front-page headlines in a newspaper text have exactly the same appearance as a heading in the obituary section of the newspaper, the colourful font of an advertisement for a job in a design company becomes similar to that of a funeral letter. The position of the text on the page and the tactile properties of the paper are removed (Stefanowitsch, 2020: 24). The physical features that are an indication of the origin and often of the communicative function of the texts are lost. Apart from the physical alteration of the text, the social context is also lost or at least hidden (Ädel, 2010: 48). Social context includes the communicative context, the typical reader-writer roles, cultural values and intertextual knowledge – all elements that are relevant to language learners. What is clear from the discussion above is that much of the responsibility for re-contextualising corpus data falls on the language learner: learners must authenticate the corpus data through some kind of engagement with it (Mishan, 2004: 222). Braun (2005: 52) understandably raises some concern in this regard. She points out, as Widdowson (2003) does,

158  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

that the learners as users of the corpus are not the original addressees of the texts in the corpus and are thus not part of the original discourse. In order to interpret the text correctly, the original discourse that initiated the text has to be reconstructed. Such reconstruction includes the social and cultural context. If learners are unfamiliar with cultural context as is mostly the case with, e.g. Afrikaans and English-speaking learners learning an African language, re-contextualisation becomes a difficult undertaking for them. It may alienate learners from text and become a hindrance to effective re-contextualisation and consequent engagement with the text. Mishan (2004: 221) and Mauranen (2004: 93) both question the notion of re-contextualisation by language learners, arguing that contextual conditions cannot be replicated in the classroom, or any place different from the original context of production. If this argument is taken to its logical conclusion, it implies that a text is only authentic in the original context in which it was created and using any text that was not created for the language is not authentic and should not be used. This is however a very extreme view, since it is agreed that exposure to authentic texts can make a valuable contribution to the language learning experience. Ädel (2010: 48) makes an important point in this regard, stating that the corpus should not be required to provide the communicative purpose of a text, or the social context of the discourse. Contextualisation should be ensured by bringing in other methods as complements to corpus-based methodology. In order to address the issues of corpus authenticity, scholars suggest two possible solutions, i.e. a methodology that enables learners to authenticate the corpus by engaging with it (Mishan, 2004), and second, the creation of a corpus that is pedagogically relevant (Braun, 2005). With regard to the methodology, Mishan (2004) suggests a DDL approach where the learner becomes the researcher and engages directly with the corpus, inter alia by examining concordance lines, or Key Word In Context (KWIC) lines. This methodology is well known and forms the basis of any corpus linguistic investigation. According to Breyer (2011: 90), pedagogically relevant corpora are designed with learner needs and classroom requirements as primary foci. They should be relevant to the specific learning context, taking the level of competence of the learner into consideration as well as cultural and social contexts within the learning situation. Braun (2005: 53) indicates that texts contained in such a corpus should be coherent, i.e. they should contain a common overall theme that links all texts in the corpus. Such corpora should furthermore be of manageable size, and they should also ideally contain audio-visual materials since they give a sense of the overall communicative situation in which the material was produced (Braun, 2005: 55). The importance of including audio(-visual) materials in a corpus is linked to the fact that certain features of spoken language directly impact on meaning and interpretation. This makes the inclusion

Authenticity in Language Teaching: An African Language Perspective  159

of audio-visual material in African language corpora especially relevant, regardless of whether it is a specially compiled corpus for pedagogical purposes, or a general corpus. African languages are tone languages, whereas Afrikaans and English are not. It is notoriously difficult for learners speaking languages in which tone is not a phonological feature to learn a language in which it is semantically distinctive. Including spoken language in a corpus can represent a significant contribution to the internalisation of tonal patterns. Unfortunately, audio-visual material has hitherto not been in included in African language corpora, a shortcoming that will hopefully be addressed in the current corpus compilation endeavour. Corpora and Frequency

While frequency is considered as one of the important advantages of using corpora in language teaching, it is also often the focus of criticism by language pedagogy researchers (McEnery & Xiao, 2011: 373). The main point of criticism is that frequency does not necessarily imply saliency; frequency on its own is not a sound guide to importance. Perhaps the most stringent criticism on the use of frequency in language teaching comes from Widdowson (1991: 21), who is of the opinion that any reference to real discourse as contained in a corpus (to which he refers rather disparagingly as a ‘database’) in the classroom is superfluous, since the classroom creates its own reality. He indicates that frequency is not an indication of pedagogic relevance: ‘Language descriptions […] cannot be modelled on the description of externalised language, the frequency profiles of text analysis. Such analysis provides us with facts, hitherto unknown, or ignored, but they do not of themselves carry any guarantee of pedagogic relevance’. It is further argued that the language teacher who relies on frequency alone runs the risk of giving undue prominence to forms that are frequent, but at the expense of rarer but more salient or effective linguistic forms (Cook, 1998: 61), or those that carry a heavy discourse-pragmatic load. Hunston (2002: 195) indicates that some aspects of language may be important even though they are not frequent – they are important because they carry a lot of information or because they resonate with a particular cultural group. Their cultural saliency rather than their frequency would warrant attention in the language classroom. A good example here would be African language proverbs that have a high cultural saliency for mother tongue speakers of these languages, but display a relatively low frequency of occurrence in corpora. On the other hand, items may be frequent, but of unequal dispersion throughout the corpus, or they may be limited to specific genres, which may not be appropriate or relevant for the language learning classroom. Kaltenböck and Mehlmauer-Larcher (2005: 78) do not regard frequency as particularly important, arguing that learners will automatically pick up what is ­frequent, precisely because it is frequent, thus there is no need to teach

160  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

what is frequent. The validity of this claim for beginner learners of an African language is questionable. Because of the multilingual nature of the South African society, non-African language speaking individuals are exposed to African languages on a daily basis, and it could reasonably be expected that frequently used expressions would be picked up ‘automatically’. Personal experience indicates that this is not the case. The reason for speakers’ of especially Afrikaans and English inability to automatically internalise basic, frequent expressions despite daily exposure to African languages is unclear and falls outside the scope of the chapter, but a probable reason may be the disparate power relations between Afrikaans and English on the one hand and the African languages on the other. McEnery and Xiao (2011: 373) point out that no corpus linguist has ever argued that most frequent is most important. A much more nuanced approach is needed when frequency is used as a consideration for selection of learning material. Frequency data need to be evaluated and interpreted by the language teacher, which implies that teachers should be trained not only in retrieving data from the corpus, but also in relating corpus data to the pedagogical needs of the language learner. As Sinclair (2004a: 2) so succinctly remarks: ‘A corpus is not a simple object, and it is just as easy to derive nonsensical conclusions from the evidence as insightful ones’. Therefore, frequency should be only one of the criteria used to influence instruction and a balance should be struck between frequency and pedagogical relevance, ‘facts about language and language use which emerge from corpus analyses should never be allowed to become a burden for pedagogy’ (Kennedy, 1998: 290). To conclude: frequency information becoming available from corpora represents an important element of empirical input that can be utilised by language lecturers in the development of learning material. That being said, frequency does not automatically translate into pedagogical relevance. Only when frequency data is considered together with other factors such as relative easiness and learning context, e.g. learner’s proficiency level and teaching objectives, can it contribute to increased effectiveness in language teaching and development of language material (Lee, 2011: 163). African Language Corpora: Fit for Purpose?

A theoretical discussion on authenticity of corpora and their use in the teaching of African languages would not be complete without an overview of existing corpora in these languages, and a comment on their fitness for pedagogical purposes. When corpus compilation for these languages was initiated in the early 1990s, the stated purpose was to compile corpora specifically for application in lexicographic practice (De Schryver & Prinsloo, 2000). These were therefore general or reference corpora, aimed at having the full scope of each respective language covered in the corpus. Due to data

Authenticity in Language Teaching: An African Language Perspective  161

scarcity of especially languages such as Ndebele, Swati and Tsonga, building sizeable corpora poses a challenge to corpus compilers. Consequently, these corpora are rather small, ranging from 1 million words for Ndebele to 7.4 million words for Northern Sotho. 2 They are general corpora and include a wide array of genres and text types. They are not a 100% balanced since none of these corpora, for example, includes spoken material. They do, however, give good coverage of standardised, general language use. The corpora are currently housed in the resource centre of the Department of African languages at the University of Pretoria, but due to copyright issues, they are only available for onsite querying and cannot be downloaded or disseminated. Despite the perceived shortcoming of these corpora with regard to size, content, balance and representivity, the contention of the author is that these corpora nevertheless represent an important resource for the African languages. As illustrated by Taljard (2012), they can successfully be used as an aid to selection and sequencing of learning material, and following Hunston (2002: 189) and Mindt (1996: 245), exposure to corpora may lead to a different view of syllabus design. They can be used for DDL in the classroom, but in the specific context of beginner learners’ needs and competences, only with careful mediation by the language teacher. The African languages do not have the luxury of access to specially compiled corpora that are pedagogically relevant; therefore, a pragmatic approach to the use of corpora in the classroom is needed: does the use of corpora play a significant role in the language learning process? An overwhelming volume of scholarly literature confirms that it does, and there is no reason to believe that it would be different for African languages. Conclusion

In this chapter, the concept of authenticity was viewed from two perspectives, contextualised within the realm of teaching African languages. Special attention was paid to the use of corpora by language teachers. Criticism on the use of corpora as authentic texts was considered, and it can be concluded that regardless of whether a corpus contains authentic texts, its use represents a practical solution for teachers of lesser-resourced languages. Corpora can be used, provided that their fitness for purpose is continuously monitored by lecturers and designers and developers of learning materials. It is once again ironic that strong support for using corpora in language teaching comes from one of its severest critics: Widdowson’s (1996: 97) remark that corpus descriptions of English make facts about authentic usage available of which linguists were previously unaware, is equally true for the African languages. He states that the ‘appropriate English for the classroom is the real English that is appropriately used outside it. We now

162  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

know what real English looks like, so we no longer have an excuse for not teaching it’. 3 Having access to corpora would ensure that African language teachers know what real Northern Sotho/Xhosa/Zulu looks like and nothing should prevent them from teaching it. Notes (1) As a result of the political history of South African, the term Bantu carries a severely negative connotation, due to its apartheid legacy. The term ‘Bantu languages’ is therefore generally avoided, and the linguistically less correct term ‘African languages’ is used to refer to these languages instead. (2) A digitisation project for African languages is currently underway under the auspices of SADiLaR (https://sadilar.org/index.php/en/), a government-funded initiative. This will hopefully result in larger and better quality corpora than the ones that are currently available. These corpora will also be freely available. (3) The author is aware that the reference to ‘real English’ is a contentious one in view of the commonly recognised existence of many Englishes, but a debate about this falls outside the scope of this chapter.

References Ädel, A. (2010) Using corpora to teach academic writing: Challenges for the direct approach. In M.C. Campoy-Cubillo, B. Bellés-Fortuño and M.L. Gea-Valor (eds) Corpus-based Approaches to English Language Teaching (pp. 39–56). London: Continuum International Publishing Group. Badger, R. and MacDonald, M. (2010) Making it real: Authenticity, process and pedagogy. Applied Linguistics 31 (4), 578–582. Bernardini, S. (2004) Corpora in the classroom An overview and some reflections on future developments. In J. McH. Sinclair (ed.) How to Use Corpora in Language Teaching. Studies in Corpus Linguistics, Vol 12. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Braun, S. (2005) From pedagogically relevant corpora to authentic language learning contents. ReCALL 17 (1), 47–64. Breyer, Y.A. (2011) Corpora in Language Teaching and Learning: Potential, Evaluation, Challenges. Frankfurt Am Main: Peter Lang. Buendgens-Kosten, J. (2014) Key concepts in ELT Authenticity. ELT Journal 68 (4), 457–459. Cook, G. (1998) The uses of reality: A reply to Ronald Cater. ELT Journal 52 (1), 57–64. De Schryver, G.-M. and Prinsloo, D.J. (2000) The compilation of electronic corpora, with special reference to the African languages. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 18 (1–4), 89–106. Evans, R. (2011) Preparing pre-service teachers for multilingual classroom – Designing a multiple African language module. Journal for Language Teaching 45 (2), 69–82. Evans, R. (2016) Communication, Culture and the Multilingual Classroom. Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers. Gabrielatos, C. (2005) Corpora and language teaching: Just a fling or wedding bells? Teaching English as a Second Language E-Journal (TESL-EJ) 8 (4), A1, 1-84. See www.tesl-ej.org/ej32/a1.html (accessed 1 August 2020). Gilmore, A. (2007) Authentic materials and authenticity in foreign language learning. Language Teaching 40 (2), 97–118. Hunston, S. (2002) Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Authenticity in Language Teaching: An African Language Perspective  163

Hutchinson, T. and Waters, A. (1987) English for specific purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Joy, J.J.L. (2011) The duality of authenticity in ELT. The Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies 7 (2), 7–23. Kaltenböck, G. and Mehlmauer-Larcher, B. (2005) Computer corpora and the language classroom: On the potential and limitations of computer corpora in language teaching. ReCALL 17, 65–84. Kennedy, G. (1998) An Introduction to Corpus Linguistics. London: Longman. Lee, S. (2011) Challenges of using corpora in language teaching and learning. Linguistic Research 28 (1), 159–178. MacDonald, M., Badger, R. and Dasli, M. (2006) Authenticity, culture and language learning. Language and Intercultural Communication 6 (3 and 4), 250–261. Mauranen, A. (2004) Spoken corpus for an ordinary learner. In J. McH. Sinclair (ed.) How to Use Corpora in Language Teaching. Studies in Corpus Linguistics, Vol 12. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. McEnery, T. and Wilson, A. (2001) Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. McEnery, T. and Xiao, R. (2011) What corpora can offer in language teaching and learning. In E. Hinkel (ed.) Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning Volume II (pp. 364–380). New York: Routledge. Mindt, D. (1996) English corpus linguistics and the foreign language teaching syllabus. In J. Thomas and M. Short (eds) Using Corpora for Language Research (pp. 232–247). London: Longman. Mishan, F. (2004) Authenticating corpora for language learning: A problem and its resolution. ELT Journal 58 (3), 219–227. O’Keefe, A., McCarthy, M. and Carter, R. (2007) From Corpus to Classroom: Language Use and Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press. Römer, U. (2004) A corpus-driven approach to modal auxiliaries and their didactics. In J. McH. Sinclair (ed.) How to Use Corpora in Language Teaching. Studies in Corpus Linguistics, Vol 12. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Sinclair, J. (1996) EAGLES Preliminary recommendations on corpus typology. Tech. rep. EAG–TCWG–CTYP/P. Pisa: Expert Advisory Group on Language Engineering Standards. Sinclair, J. (2004a) How to Use Corpora in Language Teaching. Studies in Corpus Linguistics, Vol 12. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Sinclair, J. (2004b) Trust the Text: Language, Corpus and Discourse. London: Routledge. Stefanowitsch, A. (2020) Corpus Linguistics: A Guide to the Methodology. Berlin: Language Science Press. Taljard, E. (2012) Corpus-based language teaching: An African language perspective. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 30 (3), 377–393. Tognini-Bonelli, E. (2001) Corpus Linguistics at Work  (Vol. 6). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. Tsui, A.B.M. (2004) What teachers have always wanted to know – and how corpora can help. In J. McH. Sinclair (ed.) How to Use Corpora in Language Teaching. Studies in Corpus Linguistics, Vol 12. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Widdowson, H.G. (1978) Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Widdowson, H.G (1991) The description and prescription of language. In J. Alatis (ed.) Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1991 (pp. 11–24). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Widdowson, H.G. (1996) Comment: Authenticity and autonomy in ELT. ELT Journal 50 (1), 67–68. Widdowson, H.G. (1998) Context, community and authentic language. TESOL Quarterly 32 (4), 705–716.

164  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

Widdowson, H.G. (2000) On the limitations of linguistics applied. Applied Linguistics 21 (1), 3–25. Widdowson, H.G. (2003) Defining Issues in English Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Xiao, Z. and McEnery, T. (2008) Corpora and language education. Foreign Language Education in China 1 (2), 50–60.

11 When Moral Authority Speaks: Empirical Insights into Issues of Authenticity and Identity in Multilingual Educational Settings Irene Heidt

Introduction

In second and foreign language education (S/FLE), authenticity was initially predicated upon the authority of the native speaker (NS) who has a command of a given standard language, thus indexing cultural values, conventions and belonging to an identifiable speech community. As a logical extension, the second language learner has been viewed as ‘a deficient communicator struggling to overcome an underdeveloped L2 competence, striving to reach the “target” competence of an idealized native speaker’ (Firth & Wagner, 1997: 285). In an effort to tackle the authority and legitimacy of the NS, Widdowson (1994: 384) questioned the ‘ownership’ of language and redefined authenticity as non-conformity, authorial creativity, and subjective appropriation of the language to be learned: ‘You are proficient in a language to the extent that you possess it, make it your own, bend it to your will, assert yourself through it rather than simply submit to the dictates of its form’. In effect, this resignification of authenticity prompted a paradigm shift in the research field of S/FLE: from placing the focus on authentic and standardised language that expresses the identity of somebody else to the authorial freedom of language learners articulating their ‘true’ sense of self by infusing the second/foreign language with their subjective voice, memories and past experiences (e.g. Kramsch, 2009, 2012; Norton, 2000). By drawing on a longitudinal ethnographic study, this chapter examines the discontinuities and ethical dilemmas Samira1, an L2 German 165

166  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

student, encounters when expressing her genuine religious sense of self in a German ninth-grade ethics class. While the ethics class focuses primarily on national citizenship education, preparing students to become democratic and morally good citizens through (intercultural) communicative abilities such as public debating, developing a reasoned argument, reflecting on one’s own and others’ values in an attempt to come to a consensus based on human rights values, to Samira religious values of Islam are non-negotiable and are thus not up for rational discussion. The present chapter brings to the fore the current political, cultural and religious tensions, particularly within increasingly multilingual and multicultural classrooms in the German Bildungssystem (educational system), where students reveal different imaginations and interpretations of the social world. Multilingualism is not understood in this context as knowledge of separated linguistic systems, but as ‘multiple ways of viewing the world’ (Kramsch, 2018: 19); knowing another language means being exposed to different moral discourses and meanings that structure our social reality, provide (moral) orientation in the world and constitute ‘normal’ or ‘authentic’ modes of being. Since, as Li (2018: 18) writes, ‘multilinguals do not think unilingually in a politically named linguistic entity, even when they are in a “monolingual mode”’. Instead, they might index entirely different meanings and draw on different norms, values and historicities, even though they speak the same ‘language’. This chapter gives insights into the issues of legitimacy and identity the multilingual student Samira encounters when expressing her ‘authentic’ religious sense of self through the secular and rational moral discourses, privileged by the German Bildungssystem. I shall first engage with existential philosophy on authenticity, which will be complemented by poststructuralist theories of ethical self-formation in an effort to explore the discontinuous relation between the ethical self, involving subjective values and truths, and the dominant moral discourses that constitute recognisable, ‘normal’ or ‘authentic’ ways of being. This is followed by an ecological discourse analysis (Kramsch & Whiteside, 2008; Uryu et al., 2014) of an in-class interaction on the question ‘Is an Imam allowed to be homosexual’? as discussed in the ethics class. Authenticity: Existential, Ethical and Philosophical Perspectives

Broadly speaking, existential philosophy emphasises an authentic existence that is not given but requires risk-taking and courage while constructing an authentic self from within social, cultural or political conditions which the self was ‘thrown into’ (Heidegger, 1962). This struggle with being thrown into unchosen and even unbearable conditions is exemplified by Jean-Paul Sartre in Anti-Semite and Jew (1948/1995). Here, the

When Moral Authority Speaks  167

French philosopher reflects on the ethical dilemmas individuals of Jewish heritage encounter in post-war France when grappling with and rejecting the identity the anti-Semite has constructed and imposed upon the Jewish self. In this context, Sartre (1948/1995: 65) defines authenticity as ‘having a true and lucid consciousness of the situation, in assuming the responsibilities and risks that it involves, in claiming it in pride or humiliation, sometimes in horror and hate’. In other words, authenticity involves courage to remain true to the self, despite the social or political risks. By contrast, an inauthentic self is concerned with ‘bad faith’, that is, ‘not-being-what-one-is’ which causes ‘an inner disintegration in the heart of being’ (Sartre, 1956/1992: 70). Friedrich Nietzsche (1882/1974: 232), another advocate of existential philosophy, asserted that an authentic self has to ‘“give style” to one’s character’ through continuous and enduring ‘practice and daily work’. Nietzsche goes on to write that: Such spirits … are always out to shape and interpret their environment as free nature: wild, arbitrary, fantastic, disorderly, and surprising. And they are well advised because it is only in this way that they can give pleasure to themselves. (1882/1974: 233, emphasis in original)

In other words, giving ‘style’ to the authentic self is a practice of creativity, closely tied to the feeling of ‘pleasure’ resulting from the freedom to ‘shape and interpret’ one’s social reality in a way that goes against the grain, as indicated by the adjectives ‘wild’, ‘arbitrary’ and ‘disorderly’. Because of its narrow focus on individual freedom, choice and the concomitant dismissal of workings of symbolic power, i.e. the way the subject is implicated in discursive value systems, existential philosophy was criticised for isolating ‘part of a complex situation which in fact cannot be isolated. It is true that it is I who have-always-already-chosen the values by which I live. But I have chosen, not created them’ (Grene, 1952: 271, my emphasis). In other words, while the authentic self, as conceptualised in existential philosophy, is agentive in the process of selfcreation, s/he is not sovereign in the sense that discursive knowledge and value systems of a particular historical period precede the subject and constitute rules of behaviour, ways of being and perceiving social reality as transmitted through educational, medical or juridical institutions (see, e.g. Foucault, 1975; Weedon, 1987). Briefly, the individual is not merely free in its choice of being but is necessarily constrained and limited. In the subsequent sections, I shall expand the existentialist view on authenticity by drawing on poststructuralist theories of ethical self-construction, as formulated by Foucault (1984a, 1984b, 2001) and Butler (2005). In his earlier works (1975), Foucault was largely concerned with the workings of discursive power-knowledge systems which discipline the subject into normative ways of being and thus constitute a recognisable

168  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

and socially acceptable self. In his later works, however, the French philosopher complemented this line of thought with the subjective dimension of experience and existence by studying Greco-Roman philosophy of ethics. More precisely, he examined the complexity of individual existence (bios) in relation to given discursive moral regimes (logos) which enable and constrain the subject in its being by legitimising what is appropriate, recognisable, ‘normal’ or ‘authentic’ behaviour (Foucault, 2001). Finding relationality between the self (bios) and the moral-epistemological discourses (logos) is realised through ethical self-care (askesis), that is, a long and enduring process of self-formation so as to transform oneself into an ethical being. This ethical self-formation is defined by Foucault (1984a: 348) as ‘aesthetics of existence’, ‘aesthetic piece of art’, ‘very strong structure of existence’ and is characterised by the constant tension between disciplinary moral discourses governing the subject’s conduct and the ‘strategic games’ (Foucault, 1984b: 338) that s/he chooses to play in an attempt to reverse, modify or even transform the normative rules of behaviour and modes of being, operating within a particular social field (e.g. educational institution). This moment of freedom, realised through the ‘strategic’ side of ­ethical self-care, allows going beyond the moral-epistemological norms through the practice of criticism, questioning and reflecting upon these norms. However, criticism of given moral order also means to risk social recognition since the subject is socially accepted as long as s/he conforms to the moral values, discourses and norms of a given social context. In that sense, a moment of freedom is, paradoxically, closely tied to a moment of identity crisis. In answering an interview question on the difference between Sartrean authenticity and his theory of ethical self-formation, Foucault (1984a: 351) asserted that: ‘the only acceptable practical consequence of what Sartre has said is to link his theoretical insight to the practice of creativity – and not of authenticity. […] we have to create ourselves as a work of art’. In other words, Foucault reframed the notion of authenticity into ‘practice of creativity’ in form of ethical self-work which is a creative ‘work of art’ of fitting oneself out of given moral-epistemological norms. To Foucault, the self is not merely free in her/his choices as in Sartre or Nietzsche but is equally constrained in that process by given moral-epistemological value systems. Even though Butler (2005) concurs with Foucault’s understanding of ethical self-work in relation to the moral norms which constitute recognisability, she criticises that Foucault has not given enough attention to the other in that process. To Butler, giving an account to someone else always involves dispossession of the self since I have to narrate myself through a language that is not simply a linguistic but, ultimately, a normative and discursive system with a particular sedimented historicity. In that sense, Butler (2005: 30) writes: ‘There is a language that frames the encounter,

When Moral Authority Speaks  169

and embedded in that language is a set of norms concerning what will and will not constitute recognisability’. As we shall see below, even though the secular moral discourses on the notion of ‘Imam’ as embedded in the German Bildungssprache (standardised national language) allow Samira to narrate a subject position, involving her embodied religious truths, she is not granted recognisability since the liberal-humanist morality exceeds and, in fact, contests her experiential historicity (bios). To Butler, we will never be able to narrate a ‘true’ or ‘authentic’ version of ourselves since we are never self-same due to the prevailing discourses that dispossess the narrating self of her/his embodied history. Rather than demanding ‘self-identity’ or a ‘complete coherence’ (2005: 42), Butler argues that these moments of discursive disorientation – which she also terms as ‘linguistic vulnerability’ (2016) – involve performative agency, that is, the possibility to resignify normative meanings and conventions and, accordingly, to make room for a different self-perception. What Butler adds to the discussion on the notion of authenticity is the contingent and disruptive nature of language which both enables and disables ‘authentic’ self-narration. Giving a genuine account of the self is predicated upon vulnerability which is a precondition for self-awareness and resistance. In that sense, language has an existential transformative power, i.e. it is through language and communication with others that we are enabled to give an account of ourselves by either submitting to or resignifying the normative ways of being. Authenticity is understood from Butler’s perspective as subjectivity which is a site of symbolic struggle to be recognised, believed and listened to. Autonomy is reframed in this perspective to performative agency, that is, the ability to construct an ethical self from the discursive limits of ourselves. In sum, the theoretical insights point to an understanding of authenticity as a construction of a self between creativity and (discursive) normativity which can be approached through courageous risk-taking (Sartre), self-stylisation (Nietzsche), an enduring process of ethical selfwork (Foucault) and performative agency which results from linguistic vulnerability (Butler). In that sense, authenticity does not refer to a clearly recognisable authority of the NS, but to a process of self-creation in which the self is agentive but not sovereign (cf. Weedon, 1987). The subsequent sections explore the question as to how Samira contests and possibly resignifies secular moral discourses on the notion of ‘Imam’ in an effort to narrate her ‘true’ or ‘authentic’ religious sense of self and to take up a subject position that gives her a feeling of being in the proper place. Research Context, Participants and Data Analysis

This chapter draws on a larger longitudinal ethnographic study, 2 conducted during a period of 15 months (May 2016–July 2017) in a secondary school in Berlin, Germany. More than 80% of the students attending the

170  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

focal school have a so-called ‘migration background’, i.e. the students were born in Germany to at least one foreign parent (Statistisches Bundesamt, 2019). This culturally and linguistically heterogeneous classroom constitution compelled the teachers not only to impart the subject matter but also to teach standard academic language (Bildungssprache) across the curriculum (Gogolin, 2009). Primary data sources involve ethnographic observation, field notes, audio-recordings and semi-structured interviews with focal teachers, students and the principal. The data I draw upon in the present chapter were collected in Mrs Ahmadi’s ninth-grade ethics class which is part of Germany’s national citizenship education. It places the focus on mainly four competences (LISUM, 2018: 28): (1) Perception and interpretation ‘includes the ability to take a step back from one’s own emotions, needs, and interests’ in an effort to achieve ‘an unbiased point of view’, necessary to (2) adopt other perspectives and to (3) communicate them through dialogue. This ‘rationally oriented dialogue’ (Vernunft orientierter Verständigungsprozess, LISUM, 2015) is to be achieved through (4) reasoning and judgement, involving the ability ‘to argue consistently with sound reasoning, being able to assess positions from different angles’. These competences, as formulated in the curriculum of ethics instruction, are reminiscent of Byram’s (1997) intercultural communicative competence (ICC) and its central dimension critical cultural awareness (savoir s’engager), based on the German tradition of politische Bildung. Political education in the German historical and cultural context evolved after World War II and is highly based on Jürgen Habermas’ (1970) theory of communicative action which, among others, involves the ability to contest the validity of one’s own and others’ beliefs and truths in a rational, objective and justified argumentation. This secular morality has its roots in the age of Enlightenment and constitutes a rational and autonomous subject, expressing her/his truths through reasoned argument and the rational questioning of authority (e.g. Kant, 1784/1992). Constructing a subject position in relation to this liberalhumanist morality is seen to have moral, symbolic and cultural benefits since it signifies the ability to think and argue critically, to discuss and negotiate one’s truths through a reasoned argument and democratic debate, thus indexing one’s belonging to the German ‘imagined’ speech community (Anderson, 1983). The subsequent sections illustrate how this secular morality of Bildung clashes with the multicultural and multilingual student Samira who aligns with religious moral discourses, transmitted to her through primary socialisation. Samira, born in Germany to parents from North Africa, speaks Arabic at home and has acquired L2 German in elementary school. Her ethics teacher Mrs Ahmadi, born in Germany to parents who emigrated from the Middle East, understands all too well, as she explained in a semi-structured interview, the ethical dilemmas her Muslim students

When Moral Authority Speaks  171

encounter when being confronted with conflicting moral discourses of Bildung and Islam. I employ an ecological approach to analysing data (e.g. Kramsch & Whiteside, 2008; Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008) and complement it with Bourdieu’s (1991) theory of symbolic power which will enable me to identify how Samira deals with the imbalance of symbolic power when narrating her ‘true’ religious self through the rational norms of expression as valued by the Bildungssystem in general and by the educational standards of ethics instruction in particular (LISUM, 2018). Between Authenticity and Normativity in a Multilingual Ethics Class: Examples Narrating the ‘authentic’ self through the voices of others

The subsequent excerpts come from a discussion in the ethics class on 16 January 2017 and revolve around the question ‘Is an Imam allowed to be homosexual’? as posed by the teacher Mrs Ahmadi (T): Excerpt 1

1 T: Jetzt frage ich euch darf ein Imam homosexuell sein? Wer sagt nein, der meldet sich 2 jetzt (0.5) neunzehn sagen NO wer sagt, ja darf er (0.8) sehr interessant eine Person sagt ja 3 ((…)) psch:::t ((Schüler*innen werden laut)) ARGUMENTE ARGUMENTE ihr müsst lernen zu 4 argumentieren, einer von den neunzehn traut sich mal bitte jetzt zu erklären, warum ein Imam 5 nicht schwul sein darf? 1a T: Now I am asking you is an Imam allowed to be homosexual? Who says no, please raise your 2a hand (0.5) nineteen ((students)) say NO who says yes, he is allowed (0.8) very interesting one 3a person says yes ((…)) ssh::: ((students are getting loud)) ARGUMENTS ARGUMENTS you 4a have to learn to argue, one of the nineteen please has the courage to explain why an Imam is not 5a allowed to be gay?

In asking the students to position themselves argumentatively vis-à-vis the discussion question ‘Is an Imam allowed to be homosexual’? Mrs Ahmadi initiates a ‘rationally oriented dialogue’ (LISUM, 2015) by tallying a vote through which she transforms the students’ religious values into d ­ ifferences of opinion which can be debated and negotiated, as indexed by her ­exclamation ‘ARGUMENTS ARGUMENTS’ (Line 3a) and her concomitant remark that the students ‘have to learn to argue’ (Line 4a), that is, to

172  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

justify their subjective values and truths in an objective and rational pro and con argumentation. Since the vast majority of the students positioned themselves against the possibility of a homosexual Imam, the objective of the (intercultural) communicative assignment seems obvious: to take distance from one’s emotions and needs and to dialogically negotiate contradictory perspectives in a justified and argumentative manner so as to potentially take the perspective of the other (Byram, 1997; LISUM, 2018). However, Mrs Ahmadi seems to be aware of the fact that such a debate necessarily involves risk-taking and ‘courage’ (Line 4a) to expose one’s subjective truths which contradict the secular moral discourses of equality and non-discrimination as based on human rights values and privileged by the Bildungssystem. Since the students kept refusing to take the perspective of the other, Mrs Ahmadi reframed the question by arguing that society is changing in today’s globalised world, so do attitudes towards cultural and religious traditions. The subsequent excerpt 3 illustrates how the discussion unfolds between Mrs Ahmadi (T), Samira (S) and Faizah (F). Excerpt 2

1 F: ok, jetzt frage ich euch was (.) die 2 Gesellschaft ist ja immer im Wandel 3 haben wir ja gelernt, ne? Wie wars den 4 mit den Kopftüchern eigentlich? Warum 5 (0.2) hat sich- da gabs doch auch ne 6 Entwicklung es gibt Muslime, die tragen 7 Kopftuch und es gibt welche, die tragen 8 kein Kopftuch (0.2) warum gibts da ne 9 Veränderung? Warum kanns nicht hier, (.) 10 was die Homosexualität angeht auch ne 11 Veränderung geben? Samira? ((…)) 12 S: es ist so wir sind alle sehr beeinflussbar, darum 13 sag ich zu einem “Bruder, isch möschte 14 Moschee gehen” (.) “nein, lass Diskothek 15 gehen” ok, dann geht er mit ihm halt, weil wir 16 beeinflussbar sind 17 F: du verstehst ihre Frage nicht 18 S: ja, ok lass mich doch mal reden BIN ICH 19 FERTIG [GEWORDEN? 20 T: [nein, Samira [aber 21 S: [BIN ICH FERTIG GEWESEN ((schreiend))? 22 Warten [Sie 23 T: [Samira, 24 du hast Recht, gerade muss ich dich aber mal 25 unterbrechen [du sagst 26 S: [nein 1a F: Now I am asking you (.) the 2a society has always been changing

When Moral Authority Speaks  173

3a as we have learned, right? How was it actually 4a with scarfs? Why 5a (0.2) has it- there was also 6a a development, there are Muslims who wear 7a a scarf and others who do not 8a wear a scarf (0.2) why is there a 9a change? Why is it here not possible (.) 10a in terms of homosexuality? 11a Samira? ((…)) 12a S: it is the case that we all are very influenceable, therefore 13a I say ‘brother, I want to 14a go to a mosque’ (.) ‘no, let’s go 15a to a club’ ok, he then goes with him because we 16a are influenceable 17a F: you don’t understand her question 18a S: Yes, ok just let me talk HAVE I 19a [FINISHED ((talking))? 20a T: [no, Samira [but 21a S: WAS I FINISHED ((screaming))? 22a [Wait 23a T: [Samira, 24a you are right but right now I 25a have to interrupt you [you say 26a S: [no

While the ‘rationally oriented dialogue’, as practised in the ethics class, is characterised by the ‘institutional discourse mode’ requiring a response in a logical, rational and argumentative way based on facts, reliable sources and justified by valid examples, Samira casts her response in a ‘personal experience discourse’ (Sarangi & Roberts, 2002: 203) which takes the form of a narrative, involving a multi-voiced discourse. This multivoicedness, or heteroglossia as Bakhtin (1981) terms it, reveals conflicting voices through which Samira seeks to make the point that even staunch religious individuals (‘I want to go to a mosque’, Line 13a–14a) are constantly influenced by others (‘no, let’s go to a club’, Line 14a–15a), leading to a divergence in religious practices and truths. However, according to Samira, there is one legitimate and ‘authentic’ truth concerning the meaning of ‘Imam’ which is based on the moral authority of the Quran (see subsequent excerpt). Samira’s multi-voiced discourse allows her to position herself in opposition to the secular moral discourses based on human rights values, as practised in the German educational system, according to which an ‘Imam’ can be defined as being female, male, homosexual, etc. Additionally, her narrative style to provide her subjective view on the issue of ‘homosexual Imam’ does not follow the rational and linear way of making an argument. In fact, it is reminiscent of Nietzsche’s concept of performative ‘style’ to shape social reality in a ‘disorderly’ way, which is understood here in dialogic terms: by playfully narrating her subject

174  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

position through the voices of others, Samira manages to resist the institutional authority, thus transgressing normative ways of arguing and being which constrain her individual authenticity and creativity. At the same time, by not submitting to the ‘rationally oriented dialogue’ Samira risks social recognisability since her multi-voiced ‘argument’ seems not to be understood, as Faizah’s reaction shows: ‘you don’t understand her question’ (Line 17a). As a reaction, Samira takes an affective stance (Ochs, 2002) by revealing a high degree of emotional involvement, as indexed by her loud voice (Lines 19a, 21a). By screaming that she had not finished her ‘argument’ yet (Lines 18a–19a), she reveals her feeling of not being heard, believed or understood. In other words, her subjective ‘authentic’ stance was not given legitimacy by others, which is additionally illustrated by Mrs Ahmadi’s interruption (Line 25a) in an attempt to reinstate the initial question, as illustrated in the subsequent excerpt. Narrating the ‘authentic’ self through cultural translation Excerpt 3

1 T: nein, pass mal auf das sind 2 Modeerscheinungen und ja man- es 3 verändert sich, weil Leute aus 4 anderen Kulturen herkommen, dann 5 vermischt es sich, verschiedene Traditionen 6 (.) jetzt frag ich dich (0.2), ist es denn nicht 7 mit der Homosexualität auch möglich? 8 S: nein, ist nicht möglisch ((…)) es ist allgemein 9 nicht möglisch, dass- (.) bei uns gibts sowas 10 nicht im Koran- der Koran widerspricht sich 11 nicht (.) verstehen Sie? Es gibt´s nicht wo man 12 sagt “ja, aber das ist doch so oder er meinte 13 das doch so” oder was weiß ich (.) natürlich 14 wir unterscheiden uns von verschiedenen ähm 15 (0.2) Splitter-(.) ähm-(.) gruppen zum Beispiel 16 die Sunniten, Schiiten, Aleviten, die Jesiden 17 und was weiß ich noch, [aber man 18 T: [wie ist es möglich, 19 dass es so::: viele Gruppierungen gibt, wenn 20 des ein Buch ist und du sagst es widerspricht 21 sich gar nicht ((…)) wie kann es sein, dass es 22 viele Gruppen überhaupt [entstanden sind? 23 S: [man muss sagen, 24 es ist einfach nur so wie- wie zum Beispiel 25 (0.2) hier Amerikawahl ja, äh (.) Donald 26 Trump hat hier irgendwas reingeschmuggelt 27 und ähm (.) hier ist genau das Gleische es 28 kommen irgendwelche Imame und die sagen 29 es ist so und so

When Moral Authority Speaks  175

1a T: no, wait these are 2a fashion trends and yes- it 3a changes, because people from 4a other cultures arrive and then 5a different traditions merge 6a (.) now I am asking you (0.2) is it then 7a also possible in terms of homosexuality? 8a S: no, it is not possible ((…)) it is in general 9a not possible that- (.) in our religion 10a there is no such thing- the Quran does not contradict 11a itself (.) you know? There is no such thing 12a that one says “yes, but it is like this or he meant 13a it like this” or whatever (.) of course 14a we differ from different uhm 15a (0.2) splinter-(.)uhm-(.) groups for example 16a the Sunnis, Shiites, Alevi, Yazidi 17a and what else [but 18a T: [how is it 19a possible that there are so::: many groups if 20a there is one book which you say does not contradict 21a itself ((…)) how is it possible that 22a many groups have [developed at all? 23a S: [one has to say 24a that it is just as with- with for example 25a (0.2) the presidential election in America yes, uhm (.) Donald 26a Trump has smuggled in something 27a and uhm (.) here it is the same 28a some Imams are coming ((from other countries)) and they say 29a it is like this and this

In her turn, Mrs Ahmadi, once again, asks if the religious meaning on the notion of ‘Imam’ can change over time through globalisation processes and cultural hybridity, as was the case with head scarfs. As such, the teacher points to a preferred answer, that is, there are multiple legitimate versions of an Imam, which is not picked up by Samira. Instead, the student rejects Mrs Ahmadi’s suggestion with a high degree of epistemic certainty (Ochs, 2002): ‘no, it is not possible’ (Line 8a). She then provides a response by switching to the first-person plural pronoun (‘our’, Line 9a; ‘we’, Line 14a), thus positioning herself as a faith ­community member. She makes the case that, since the Quran does not ‘contradict’ (Line 10a) itself, there can be no divergent or multiple understandings on the topic of discussion (‘There is no such thing that one says “yes, but it is like this or he meant it like this”’, Lines 11a–13a). However, Mrs Ahmadi interrupts the student and puts her point of view into question by pointing to different Islamic denominations which have developed despite the existence of ‘one book’ (Line 20a), that is, one legitimate ‘truth’.

176  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

In answering Mrs Ahmadi’s question, Samira creates a third space of cultural translation from which she articulates her cultural difference (Bhabha, 1994) by making links between different, seemingly unrelated events and seeking symbolic meaning of those events on a higher plane: The influence of fake news in 2016 US presidential election and the Imams coming from different countries and ‘smuggling in’ (Line 26a) information that they represent as legitimate truths (‘they say it is like this’, Lines 28a– 29a). This cultural translation does not simply refer to linguistic translation that aims at equivalence in meaning but is rather understood in a ‘metaphorical, non-linguistic sense, the negotiation of meaning between people with different value systems and different communication cultures’ (Kramsch & Hua, 2020: 2). In other words, Samira seeks to translate her incommensurable embodied values through secular, moral discourses that exceed her subjective timescale and thus constrain her translation (see Butler, 2005). In her cultural translation, she makes meaning by evoking events operating on different timescales (Blommaert, 2005) in an effort to bring across the message that those in power are prone to abuse their power such as her example of Trump or externally recruited Imams. She thus creates a third space so as to resignify the secular meaning of ‘Imam’ and to regain control of the communicative situation. Samira’s rhetorical manoeuvre is reminiscent of symbolic competence which Kramsch and Whiteside (2008: 667) define as ‘the ability to shape the multilingual game in which one invests – the ability to manipulate the conventional categories and societal norms of truthfulness, legitimacy, seriousness, originality – and to reframe human thought and action’. In that sense, Samira does not simply approximate the idealised NS who is able to use Bildungssprache in a rational, argumentative and linear way and to abide by the secular knowledge and value systems, thus indexing belonging to the German ‘imagined’ community. Rather, she permeates Bildungssprache with her embodied memories, truths and values afforded by her religious experiences which she narrates by way of a cultural translation (Excerpt 3) and the voices of others (Excerpt 2). Discussion and Conclusion

The excerpts presented in this chapter illustrate the discontinuities and ethical dilemmas Samira encounters when narrating her ‘authentic’ subject position across cultures and ‘languages’ – in the sense of moral discourses. There seems to be a lack of fit between Samira’s sense of self, involving her religious embodied truths (bios) and the discursive morality (logos) which determines appropriate and socially recognisable behaviour (Foucault, 2001). This misalignment has apparently caused a sense of vulnerability (Butler, 2005) on Samira’s part, indexed by her interruptions, loud voice and resistance to occupy the subject position offered to her within the ethics class. In other words, feelings of vulnerability,

When Moral Authority Speaks  177

illegitimacy or ‘bad faith’, that is ‘an inner disintegration in the heart of being’ (Sartre, 1956/1992: 70), enabled Samira to establish performative agency by resignifying conventionalised ways of making meaning and the secular understanding of ‘Imam’. Accordingly, to ‘own’ somebody’s language (Widdowson, 1994), i.e. to reaccentuate the words of others according to one’s own intentions, does not come without symbolic power struggles as to whose ‘truth’ will be accepted as being legitimate and, accordingly, who will be granted social recognisability. In that sense, the feeling of inauthenticity or illegitimacy is an existential issue as it is played out on the level of subjectivity and one’s embodied moral values. However, the ability to mediate between incommensurable worldviews is not included in the ‘rationally oriented dialogue’ as practised in the ethics class which rather places the focus on the ability to take distance to one’s values, emotions and truths so as to achieve ‘an unbiased’ subject position, ‘to assess positions from different angles’ and to articulate one’s subject position in a consistent manner ‘with sound reasoning’ (LISUM, 2018: 28). The attitude of and ‘willingness to suspend belief in one’s own meanings and behaviours, and to analyse them from the viewpoint of the others’ (Byram, 1997: 34) is equally part of Byram’s conceptualisation of savoir-être. In this respect, Antier (2017) criticises that Byram’s notion of savoirêtre interferes with individual dispositions as it touches upon personal desires and embodied visions of the world. To Antier, the moral ways of being as formulated in Byram’s concept of savoir-être have only meaning if they are freely accepted by the multilingual learners. Otherwise, it is a ‘considerable limitation of plurilingual and intercultural education … with an exclusive focus on assimilation, sharing and consensus … partly ignoring differentiation and dissent’ (Antier, 2017, my translation). In this respect, Antier concludes that the statement ‘Thou shalt be a plurilingual democratic or else!’ (Antier, 2017, my translation) is inherently contradictory (see also criticism in Bartosch et al., in press). In today’s age of globalisation, where people have to mediate between conflicting and incompatible moral discourses that structure social, cultural and religious reality in differential ways, it seems not enough to acquire and submit to the rational, argumentative and consensus-oriented norms of expression as imposed by the educational institution. Rather, language learners seem to require the ability to deal with incompatible worldviews, to interpret and culturally translate signs such as ‘Imam’ in conflicting multilingual situations and to give voice to their ethical selves. In that sense, the notion of authenticity has to be reframed in today’s age of globalisation: from appropriating the language of the NS to the critical and creative ‘work of art’ (Foucault, 1984a) which allows to give meaning to the self from within normative discursive knowledge systems, operating in a given social context. Since such practise of ‘authenticity’ requires the ability to deal with imbalance of symbolic power by playing ‘strategic

178  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

games’ (Foucault, 1984b: 338) in an effort to reverse, modify or even transform the dominant normative rules of behaviour, it has to be complemented with the teaching for symbolic competence, as put forward by Kramsch (2009). In fact, teaching for symbolic competence goes beyond dualism (legitimate vs. illegitimate stance; us vs. them) and aims at exploring and understanding the contradicting timescales and discursive moralities simultaneously operating in the ethics class, thus generating conflicting ethical stances. Acknowledgements

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the German Stiftung der Deutschen Wirtschaft for generously funding this research project throughout three years (2015–2017). I also wish to express my deepest gratitude to my PhD supervisor Claire Kramsch, whose inspiration, support and friendship have guided my personal and intellectual journey. Notes (1) All names are pseudonyms. (2) This study is part of an unpublished dissertation titled Conflicting Worldviews, Ethical Dilemmas, and Symbolic Power: An Ethnographic Study of Teaching Multilingual Students in the German ‘Bildungssystem’. It explores the ethical dilemmas and the concomitant issues of identity and legitimacy two teachers of politics and ethics and their respective students with ‘migration background’ encounter and deal with in the German educational system. (3) Some parts of the data used in excerpts two and three will appear in Bartosch, R., Derichsweiler, S. and Heidt, I. (in press) Against “Values”? Komplexe Konflikte, symbolic power und die Aushandlung von Widerstreit. In L. König, B. Schädlich and C. Surkamp (eds.) unterricht_ kultur_ theorie – Kulturelles Lernen im Fremdsprachenunterricht gemeinsam anders denken. Stuttgart: Metzler.

References Anderson, B. (1983) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso. Antier, E. (2017) La problématique éthique du «savoir-être» en didactique des languescultures: quelques réflexions autour du CARAP et autres productions du Conseil de l’Europe. See http://revue-tdfle.fr/les-numeros/numero-70/25-la-problematiqueethique-du-savoir-etre-en-didactique-des-langues-cultures-quelques-reflexions-autour-du-carap-et-autres-productions-du-conseil-de-l-europe#_ftn1 (accessed November 2018). Bakhtin, M.M. (1981) The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Austin: University of Texas Press. Bartosch, R., Derichsweiler, S. and Heidt, I. (in press) Against “Values”? Komplexe Konflikte, symbolic power und die Aushandlung von Widerstreit. In L. König, B. Schädlich and C. Surkamp (eds) unterricht_kultur_theorie – Kulturelles Lernen im Fremdsprachenunterricht gemeinsam anders denken. Stuttgart: Metzler. Bhabha, H.K. (1994) The Location of Culture. London: Routledge.

When Moral Authority Speaks  179

Blommaert, J. (2005) Discourse: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bourdieu, P. (ed.) (1991) Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity Press. Butler, J. (2005) Giving an Account of Oneself. New York: Fordham University Press. Butler, J. (2016) Rethinking vulnerability and resistance. In J. Butler, Z. Gambetti and L. Sabsay (eds) Vulnerability in Resistance (pp. 12–27). Durham: Duke University Press. Byram, M. (1997) Teaching and Assessing Intercultural Communicative Competence (1st edn). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Firth, A. and Wagner, J. (1997) On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. The Modern Language Journal 81 (iii), 285–300. Foucault, M. (1975) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York, NY: Vintage Books. Foucault, M. (1984a) On the genealogy of ethics: An overview of work in progress. In M.  Foucault and P. Rabinow (eds) The Foucault Reader. An Introduction to Foucault’s Thought, with Major New Unpublished Material (1st edn, pp. 340–372). New York: Pantheon Books. Foucault, M. (1984b) Preface to the history of sexuality, volume II. In M. Foucault and P. Rabinow (eds) The Foucault Reader. An Introduction to Foucault’s Thought, with Major New Unpublished Material (pp. 333–339). New York: Pantheon Books. Foucault, M. (2001) Fearless Speech. Los Angeles, CA: Semiotext(e). Gogolin, I. (2009) “Bildungssprache” – The importance of teaching language in every school subject. In T. Tajmel and K. Starl (eds) Science Education Unlimited. Approaches to Equal Opportunities in Learning Science (pp.  91–102). Münster: Waxmann. Grene, M. (1952) Authenticity: An existential virtue. Ethics 62 (4), 266–274. Habermas, J. (1970) Towards a theory of communicative competence. Inquiry 13 (1–4), 360–375. Heidegger, M. (1962) Being and Time. Malden: Blackwell. Kant, I. (1784/1992) An answer to the question: What is Enlightenment? See https://www.stmarys-ca.edu/sites/default/files/attachments/files/Kant--What%20Is%20 Enlightenment_.pdf (accessed March 2020). Kramsch, C. (2009) The Multilingual Subject: What Foreign Language Learners Say About Their Experience and Why It Matters. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kramsch, C. (2012) Imposture: A late modern notion in poststructuralist SLA research. Applied Linguistics 33 (5), 483–502. Kramsch, C. (2018) Is there still a place for culture in a multilingual FL education? Language Education and Multilingualism 1, 16–33. Kramsch, C. and Hua, Z. (2020) Translating culture in global times: An introduction. Applied Linguistics 41 (1), 1–9. Kramsch, C. and Whiteside, A. (2008) Language ecology in multilingual settings. Towards a theory of symbolic competence. Applied Linguistics 29 (4), 645–671. Larsen-Freeman, D. and Cameron, L. (2008) Research methodology on language development from a complex systems perspective. The Modern Language Journal 92 (2), 200–213. LISUM (2015) Teil C – Ethik: Jahrgangsstufen 7–10. See https://bildungsserver.berlinbrandenburg.de/fileadmin/bbb/unterricht/rahmenlehrplaene/ Rahmenlehrplanprojekt/amtliche_Fassung/Teil_C_Ethik_2015_11_10_WEB.pdf (accessed March 2019). LISUM (2018) Framework curriculum 1–10 compact: An overview of the subjects and content taught in Berlin. See https://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:109-1-15409081 (accessed August 2020). Nietzsche, F. (1882/1974) The Gay Science: With a Prelude in Rhymes and an Appendix of Songs. New York: Vintage Books.

180  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

Norton, B. (2000) Identity and Language Learning: Gender, Ethnicity and Educational Change (1st edn). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. Ochs, E. (2002) Becoming a speaker of culture. In C. Kramsch (ed.) Language Acquisition and Language Socialization. Ecological Perspectives (pp.  99–120). London: Continuum. Sarangi, S. and Roberts, C. (2002) Discoursal (mis)alignments in professional gatekeeping encounters. In C. Kramsch (ed.) Language Acquisition and Language Socialization. Ecological Perspectives (pp. 197–227). London: Continuum. Sartre, J.-P. (1948/1995) Anti-Semite and Jew: The Exploration of the Etiology of Hate. New York: Schocken Books. Sartre, J.-P. (1956/1992) Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology. New York: Washington Square Press. Statistisches Bundesamt (2019) Persons with a migration background. See https://www. destatis.de/EN/FactsFigures/SocietyState/Population/MigrationIntegration/Methods/ MigrationBackground.html (accessed March 2019). Uryu, M., Steffensen, S.V. and Kramsch, C. (2014) The ecology of intercultural interaction: Timescales, temporal ranges and identity dynamics. Language Sciences 41, 41–59. Weedon, C. (1987) Feminist Practice and Poststructuralist Theory. Oxford: Blackwell. Wei, L. (2018) Translanguaging as a practical theory of language. Applied Linguistics 39 (1), 9–30. Widdowson, H.G. (1994) The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly 28 (2), 377–389.

12 Exploring Authenticity for an Endangered Heritage Language Context: Canadian Doukhobor Russian Veronika Makarova

Introduction: Canadian Doukhobors (Spirit Wrestlers)

This chapter engages in the discussion of authenticity as it applies to developing a Russian language course for the Doukhobor community. The Doukhobors (Spirit Wrestlers) are a religious, ethnic and cultural minority who originated in Russia around the late 18th century (Tarasoff, 1982). They were agrarians and pacifists, who did not recognise church institutions and refused to serve in the army. Their beliefs were expressed in the form of ‘psalms’ or prayers known as ‘The Living Book’. Because of persecution in Russia in 1899, about 7500 Doukhobors immigrated to Canada. They toiled the land communally and became highly prosperous after just a few years in Saskatchewan. However, in 1907, communal Doukhobors were pushed off their lands for refusing to adopt individual homesteads and swear the oath of allegiance, both of which violated their beliefs. Some Doukhobors preferred to accept homesteads and become individual farmers. The majority of Doukhobors moved to British Columbia (BC), where they bought some land and continued communal farming and industrial activities. In 1938, the Doukhobor commune was made bankrupt, causing a dispersion of Doukhobor settlements. In Canada, Doukhobors faced discrimination including imprisonment for refusal of military or alternative service. If parents objected to sending their children to English schools for fear of military indoctrination, these children were taken away and placed in a juvenile detention centre until age 15 (Tarasoff, 1982). Since the 1960s–1970s, despite improved relations with the government, Doukhobors have been decreasing in number for demographic reasons (Makarova, 2012). 181

182  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

Currently about 2000 Canadian citizens identify as Doukhobors, and 30,000–40,000 individuals have ancestral Doukhobor roots. Their language variety (Doukhobor Russian (DR) or Doukhoborese) is now spoken fluently by about 200 Doukhobors over 70 years old and by only a few of middle age (40–60). Some DR features have been described in a few earlier studies (Makarova, 2019; Schaarschmidt, 2012), but no comprehensive picture of a complete DR grammar has emerged. Sound features of DR include the use of [ɦ] alternating with [x] in place of Standard Russian (StR) [ɡ/k] as in gurt-drug (crowd-friend): StR [ɡurt - druk], DR [ɦurt drux]. Stress placement and sound forms of some words may differ from StR, as in the past tense of the verb ‘to be’, which is buˈlo in DR as compared to ˈbylo in StR; xfaˈsolja (beans) in place of StR faˈsol’ (Makarova, 2012). Grammar features special to DR include the erosion of neuter gender in nouns and its replacement mostly with feminine gender declension forms (Makarova, 2019). Some verbal morphophonological forms also differ from StR, e.g. DR čiˈtae, poniˈmae (reads, understands) equivalents of StR čiˈtaet, ponimˈaet (third person Sg, present). Some of these features have been attested in Russian dialects (Matthews, 1950). One notable difference from StR is Doukhobor vocabulary that includes, first, archaic vocabulary use, e.g. DR Rosˈseja (Russia) versus StR Rosˈsija. Second, DR has dialectal and colloquial forms such as djuže (very) for StR očen’; tutači and tamoči (here and there) for StR zdes’/tut and tam. Finally, DR borrowed vocabulary from English, whereas StR borrowed words to denote the same objects from other languages or in a different form. For example, ‘a car’ in DR is ˈkara and in StR – maˈšina or avtomoˈbil’. DR vocabulary reflects some specifics of life in Canada, such as kaˈbuz (for caboose, a train car). Thus, while DR and StR are mutually intelligible, with the exception of a few vocabulary items as described earlier, DR exhibits differences from StR at all linguistic levels, which makes it at least a distinct variety of Russian, or possibly an entirely different language. However, a language status is determined by group identities and politics rather than by linguistic measures (Holmes, 2013). Doukhobors associate their language with Russian (as will be shown later in the Results section); therefore, it appears appropriate to describe it as a variety of Russian. Standard Russian was taught in some schools in the Kootenay region of BC (a region with the highest number of Doukhobors). However, Russian language courses in the area are being eliminated, and the only primary school offering Russian immersion is reducing Russian teaching hours. High schools discontinued Russian teaching a few years ago (except for an online course). The USCC (Union of the Spiritual Communities of Christ), a Doukhobor organisation in BC, offers some StR language teaching in its kindergarten. StR as a Foreign Language is taught at the University of British Columbia and the University of Victoria. In Saskatchewan, no Russian language courses have been offered in the past decade by any institution (except for a StR language course taught by

Exploring Authenticity for an Endangered Heritage Language Context  183

the author in 2014 to the Doukhobor community). No courses employing DR have been offered in Canada in the past few decades, although Doukhobor community Russian language courses taught by the DR speakers in the 20th century could have included some elements of DR based on a variety spoken by the teachers. As the DR language is gradually falling into disuse, at least two major questions face the Doukhobor community. Should Russian be entirely discontinued and all the psalms and hymns translated into English, or is it possible to bring Russian back? If Russian were to be reintroduced, which Russian (StD or DR) should this be? Together with community representatives, the author is working on developing a community Russian language summer course. From both theoretical and methodological perspectives, a few important questions emerge. These are also the research questions of this chapter: (1) How does the concept of authenticity play out in this unique context? (2) What are the essential features of Doukhobor identity and how can they be reflected in language teaching? (3) Due to the idiosyncrasies of Doukhobor history, culture, identity, language characteristics and language status, what would constitute authentic materials that learners could engage with in a meaningful way? Authenticity Contexts Foreign language teaching and learning

The concept of authenticity in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning (FLTL) is multi-faceted and can be understood in many competing ways. In narrower specific interpretations, it may relate to texts (Wagner, 2016; Widdowson, 1979), language competence (Canale & Swain, 1980), the learner (Widdowson, 1979), and learning environment and tasks (Breen, 1985; MacDonald et al., 2006). In a broader sense, authenticity may involve a native speaker model (Alptekin, 2002); the hegemony of some prestigious varieties; and cultural and transcultural aspects of language learning (Wernicke, 2016). It could also focus on an expression of a group or individual identity (Sandkühler & Lim, 2004). Authenticity is also seen as an overarching philosophical concept related to existential interpretations of freedom (Pinner, 2015; Van Lier, 1996; Will, 2018). Most works on authenticity address EFL/ESL (e.g. Guariento & Morley, 2001; Pinner, 2016; Trabelsi, 2016; Will, 2018) and major languages such as French (Wernicke, 2016), German (Andon & Wingate, 2013), Russian (Stadler, 2015) and Spanish (Polio, 2014). Some research emphasises the role of local contexts in authenticity constructs (Trabelsi, 2016). Fewer authenticity studies involve indigenous language revitalisation and heritage language learning contexts.

184  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

Text authenticity in FLTL

Developing a new language course requires workable authentic materials (texts, audios, etc.). The use of authentic texts is sometimes seen as a ‘way of maintaining or increasing students’ motivation for learning’ (Guariento & Morley, 2001: 347). Among four types of authenticity identified in Breen (1985), two relate to materials: authenticity of texts and authenticity of learners’ interpretations of these texts. Simply defined, authentic materials are ‘real and not produced for teaching and learning purposes’ (Trabelsi, 2016: 146). Hutchinson and Waters (1987: 159) point out that authenticity refers to the fitness of a text to a particular learning purpose. Our understanding of textual authenticity is rooted in Widdowson (1979: 165–166), who describes authenticity not as an embedded feature of a text, but as an interactional feature: it arises from an interpretation of a text by a reader/listener. Thus, a key to authenticity is in the reader’s/listener’s perception, personality and identity. Widdowson also distinguishes between genuine (an absolute property of a text, such as a newspaper from a target language country) and authentic (a learner’s engagement) materials use (Pinner, 2015; Widdowson, 1979). Inspired by Widdowson’s (1979) interactive authenticity model, I explore authenticity as it may apply to materials in a Russian language community class for Doukhobors. My approach is guided by an investigation of Doukhobor identity and language attitudes expressed by Doukhobor informants. I see authenticity as not being bound by either ‘correspondence’ or ‘genesis’ of texts (as suggested in FLTL literature, e.g. MacDonald et al., 2006), but as an identity-expressing and identity-shaping process. Language, identity and authenticity

Language and identity are closely intertwined (Bucholtz & Hall, 2008). We identify with the language(s) we speak; language is part of a person’s cultural, ethnic and individual identity (Lanehart, 1996). Language has been called ‘the soul of a nation, the supreme manifestation of its cultural identity, the foundation of its true spiritual life’ (Brown, 2013: 247). The concept of transculturality (e.g. Sandkühler & Lim, 2004) highlights the transient and fluid nature of cultures and their change over time. Students of FL are known to negotiate their cultural identities and linguistic affiliations in the process of language learning (e.g. Pedersen, 2010). Multilingual individuals sometimes experience difficulties defining their identity (Kramsch, 2011). Language, identity and culture are also ‘building blocks’ of ethnicity (Nagel, 2014: 152). Ethnicity can be understood as a ‘dynamic, consistently evolving property of … individual identity and group organizations’; ethnic groups (re)shape their identity and culture, but they are also a product of ‘external social, economic, and political processes and actors’ (Nagel, 2014: 152). In this chapter, we

Exploring Authenticity for an Endangered Heritage Language Context  185

understand identity and ethnicity as an interaction between and evolution of individual and group features, and authenticity in language learning and use as arising from these processes. Authenticity in indigenous language revitalisation

The concept of authenticity is of high relevance to Indigenous Language Revitalisation (ILR) projects around the world (Faudree, 2015; Henze & Davis, 1999; Jones & Ogilvie, 2013). These projects attempt to prevent language loss or a shift from an ancestral mother tongue to a majority language (Hermes, 2012). Some general authenticity problems arising in the ILR process relate to: (1) language modernisation (new words for new technologies, concepts and phenomena); (2) standard versus dialects (variety authenticity), and (3) cultural authenticity. (Henze & Davis, 1999: 14–15) Linguists may focus on creating orthographies as tools for converting ‘dialects’ into ‘written languages’, and on engaging in micro-level ‘alphabet authenticity’ (letter-sound correspondences), but this is of little concern to communities (Faudree, 2015: 180). Dialectal variability constitutes a challenge in ILR even for not immediately threatened languages – for example, varieties of Cree in Canada or Quechua in Peru. Creating grammars and dictionaries for each individual variety in dozens of locations is impossible, so community scholars, linguists and language planners artificially standardise dialects, selecting and prescribing some forms over others (Hornberger & King, 1998), which can be seen as authenticity violation. For indigenous communities and individuals, language loss is very personal and traumatic, since language disappearance leads to ‘the loss of the intricacy of culture, worldview and the indigenous identity’, i.e. many indigenous communities prioritise cultural authenticity (Henze & Davis, 1999: 3). Indigenous communities highly favour authenticity through ownership of their languages and revitalisation projects; community representatives are thus getting engaged in revitalisation and teaching (Grenoble & Whaley, 2006; Henze & Davis, 1999). Materials are expected to reflect values relevant to indigenous communities (Henze & Davis, 1999). Faudree (2015: 184) notes that more fluid, dynamic, emergent models of authenticity are needed to account for indigenous languages. Authenticity in heritage language learning

The term ‘heritage language’ (HL) is most often used in immigrant contexts to describe bi/multilingualism in the home and host country’s language(s): ‘the language that early bilinguals grew up exposed to at home before becoming dominant in the main language of their society’ (Polinsky,

186  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

2018: 547). HL speakers exhibit a wide range of proficiencies, from being fully bilingual to having HL as their ‘weak’ language and the majority language as ‘dominant’ (Meir, 2018). Some studies demonstrate the importance of HL for individual identity and diaspora connections (e.g. Belz, 2003; Fishman, 1991). Parental attitude studies show that Russian-speaking immigrant parents in many contexts want to pass their language and culture to their children and that retention rates in conversational Russian are high (Otwinowska-Kasztelanic et al., 2019; Schwartz, 2008). Low-proficiency HL speakers may face challenges to their own language use authenticity (i.e. not being perceived as the legitimate ‘real language’ speakers/users) from teachers, peers and the community, and special attention must be paid to choosing language class materials (Armstrong, 2013). In the teaching of HL, the course developer is expected to consider ‘what counts as authentic and legitimate’ in community language use (Greese et al., 2014: 938). An analysis of discourses of identity-as-heritage has been suggested as a tool to identify ‘authentic’ emblematic features of a cultural group (Greese et al., 2014: 939). Approaching authenticity in a Russian course for Doukhobor community

Minority heritage languages and vernaculars do not often enjoy government support, but they can still survive through social networks of family and friends (Milroy & Milroy, 1991: 58). In the case of a strongly endangered variety (such as DR), continued natural survival appears impossible due to its use by a small demographic. Therefore, revitalisation intervention may be an alternative. Authenticity in the teaching/learning of endangered minority heritage languages is not often addressed but is known to present special challenges (Armstrong, 2013). Some general authenticity questions in this context may remain the same (e.g. what it means to be authentic in a particular setting and according to which norms, and what are the authenticating practices; Gill, 2011), but it is extremely hard to provide answers to them. Grenoble and Whaley (2006) suggest that common themes emerge in different types of language learning. From the literature survey above, recurring themes arguably include identity/ language interactions, learner identity, culture, ownership of process, and text/materials design. Interestingly, the same themes emerge in even more contexts, e.g. learning a regional minority language such as Lombard in Italy (Coliuzzi, 2019) or even learning an official regional majority language, such as Irish in Gaeltacht, Ireland (Fhlannchadha & Hickey, 2019). Each individual language teaching/learning situation also presents idiosyncrasies. In the case of Doukhobors, some ESL concepts of authenticity appear to bear no particular relevance, such as ‘outer/inner circle’ (MacDonald et al., 2006). On the other hand, ‘hierarchization of language varieties in terms of their proximity to a so-called authentic norm’ (Wernicke, 2016: 2) is of the highest priority to determine which Russian (DR or StR) needs to be taught. Text

Exploring Authenticity for an Endangered Heritage Language Context  187

authenticity (Widdowson, 1979) is also crucial in designing community courses. Like some indigenous languages, DR has no orthography to represent its features (DR was written with StR orthography and partly or fully converted into StR in the process). If DR were to be taught at all, ‘alphabet authenticity’ would be relevant. A Russian course for the Doukhobor community would need to contribute to individual identity and cultural authenticity – the latter referring to ‘the creation of collective meaning’ and the ‘construction of community’ – by passing on symbolic values (Nagel, 2014: 152), which is another similarity with indigenous and heritage language teaching. However, the Doukhobor community needs to pass on a radically different system of religious beliefs, values, way of life and worldview (similarly to ILR) than that possessed by the dominant Russian (and thus mainstream Heritage Russian) culture. With these issues in mind, the author investigated the features of Doukhobor identity, the Doukhobors’ most important beliefs, and prevailing attitudes to the Russian language. Materials and Methods

In order to establish identity features, beliefs and language attitudes in the Doukhobor community, we analysed transcripts of 70 semi-­ structured interviews conducted by the author between 2012 and 2018 with Doukhobor community members. The average length of the interviews was 43 minutes. There was a total of 70 participants (15 from Saskatchewan and 55 from BC; 45 women and 25 men); the average age was 77 (with a range between 10 and 96 years old). The interviews were originally conducted with two purposes: to obtain samples of Doukhobor Russian and to explore community values. Interview questions (1)–(6) are provided in the Appendix. Only responses to Questions (1), (3) and (6) relevant for the current study are analysed in this chapter. Transcripts of responses to these questions were manually coded (employing Discourse Analysis thematic coding techniques) by the researcher for the themes of identity features, most important beliefs, and Russian language attitudes (e.g. Waring, 2017). Since interviews were semi-structured, participants did not always answer all questions and could discuss anything they were interested in sharing (from vegetables in backyard gardens to philosophy and Leo Tolstoy’s works). The interviews were conducted in the preferred language of the participants – Russian (52) or English (18). Results Individual identity

The results are summarised in Table 12.1. Out of 28 responses produced by 26 participants in answer to Q2, the most frequently named identity was ‘Doukhobor/Doukhoborets’ (16), followed by ‘Doukhobor Canadian’ (8) or ‘Canadian of Russian descent’ (4) (Example 1).

188  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

Table 12.1  A summary of responses Interview questions

categories of responses

N responses

N total responses

N participants

identity

Doukhobor

16

28

26

Doukhobor Canadian

8

Canadian of Russ descent

4

 

 

 

 

 

beliefs

pacifism

24

92

42

sobranie

18

psalms

15

hard work

6

Christ’s teaching

6

way of life

5

love thy neighbour

4

toil & peaceful life

4

D history

4

vegetarianism, abstinence

4

a life of one child

2

cuisine

 

13

13

42

 

 

 

 

 

RL importance

emotional connection

56

99

56

parents taught RL

43

 

 

 

 

 

Passing RL

taught RL to children

38

66

39

56

children spoke no R

28

 

 

 

 

38  

RL maintenance

regret the loss of RL

47

104

56

bullying

11

 

56

historic significance

1

 

56

can be maintained

37

 

46

cannot be maintained

8

 

46

 

 

 

 

 

RL functions

travel to R

19

91

38

D singing

17

family, community

11 (Continue)

Exploring Authenticity for an Endangered Heritage Language Context  189

Table 12.1  (continued) Interview questions

categories of responses

N responses

psalms, beliefs

10

studying in R

6

economic

3

literature

12

Russ TV

5

R performances

4

being ridiculed

4

N total responses

N participants

Example 1

Perua-naperua, Duxaborec, kanadec s ruskaj praisxaždenija. No duxaborec pervyj. First of all, a Doukhobor, a Canadian of Russian descent. But Doukhobor [comes] first. (SK3) The features of Doukhobor beliefs

A total of 42 participants answered Q3, producing 92 responses. The most frequently identified feature of Doukhobor belief was pacifism (24 responses) (Example 2). The second most frequently named element was sobranie/molenie (Doukhobor prayer service) named by 18 participants, followed by psalms (15) (Example 3). Example 2

Nu sama hlauna ja dumaju, što uajna èta nixarašo. Ėta tol’ki što ubiustua, ničauo im ne dastihneš. Nu èta samy sil’ny naš stolp, naša vera, i nikada my at ètaua ne atxodim. Well, the most important I think is that war is not good. This is just murder, one can’t achieve anything with it. This is our strongest foundation, our belief, and we never digress from it. (SK5) Example 3

Pasalomy čitat’, pasalomy pet’, stixi, da tak malenija dalžna byt’. Reading psalms, singing psalms and hymns, and this is how prayer [service] should be. (BC34)

Working hard was mentioned by six participants (Example 4). Doukhobor mottos displayed in every Doukhobor prayer home were also named: ‘Toil and peaceful life’ (4) and ‘The bounties of the whole world are not worth

190  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

the life of one child’ (2). The teaching of Jesus Christ was identified as one of the most important components of Doukhoborism by six participants, and ‘Love thy neighbor’ by four. Doukhobor history was mentioned by four respondents (Example 5). Example 4

Žyt’ xarašo i rabotat’, esli ty xočiš ist’, idi šukaj sibe rabotu, i karmi sibe. Live well and work, if you want to eat, go and look for a job, and feed yourself. (SK1) Example 5

I maja babuška mne raskazyvala pra istoriju, kak hde ani žili u Rasei. And my grandmother told me about the history, how and where they lived in Russia. (BC19)

There were five references to the Doukhobor way of life in general (Example 6), and four to vegetarianism and abstention from alcohol and tobacco (Example 7). Example 6

DR missing We still practiced our way of life, which included prayer meetings, celebrations, the way we conducted our funerals, our weddings, and we did not give that up. (BC 18) Example 7

Duxabor ne est’ mjasu, patamu što eё nado ubit’, my verim ne ubej. I ni pit’ vodku, vino ili čevo, patamu čto tady mysli ne xarošie dlja ščelaveka, i kurit’ tože ne hadica. A Doukhobor does not eat meat, because it needs to be killed, and we believe in ‘thou shall not kill’. And not drink vodka or wine or whatever, because then [a person gets] bad thoughts, and smoking is also not acceptable. (BC20)

Additionally, a highly popular topic mentioned by 13 respondents that fits into the framework of ‘lifestyle’ but not ‘beliefs’ was Doukhobor traditional cuisine. Russian language attitudes

Doukhobor participants (a total of 56) who addressed the language attitudes question (Q6a) expressed their love of and emotional connection with the Russian language (Example 8). Of these, 43 interviewees said that their parents taught them Russian (Example 9). In turn, when the participants had their own children (Q6b), they also spoke Russian to them (38 responses out of 39 total). However, of these 38 participants who tried

Exploring Authenticity for an Endangered Heritage Language Context  191

teaching Russian to their children, 28 admitted that their children could not speak Russian well or at all. They explained that as soon as their children grew up, they left, no longer communicating in Russian. Many participants (47 of 56 total) regard Russian language loss as damaging to the community and regret it (Example 10). One interviewee said that the Doukhobor connection to Russian was only historical; the message passed on was more important than the language. Eleven participants (of 56) recalled having problems at school and being bullied or punished because they did not speak English at first. Example 8

Russkaj jazyk prekrasnyj, krasivyj, soft, mjaxkij. The Russian language is wonderful, beautiful, soft (E), soft (R). (BC35) Example 9

Mama učila nas pasalomčiki, a papa učil nas pa ruski bukuar’. Mother taught us psalms, and father taught us the Russian alphabet. (BC 34) Example 10

Ja pomnju, kada naši s”ezdy byli na ruskom jazyke. Teper’ redka uslyšiš’ slova pa-russki. I remember when we had our meetings, they were in Russian. Now you can rarely hear a word in Russian. (BC70)

In considering the possibility of preserving Russian in the community, 37 out 45 participants who answered Q6c suggested that it should be maintained (Example 11), whereas eight expressed scepticism about the possibility and suggested translating all the psalms and songs into English (Example 12). According to one participant, considerable interest in learning Russian in the community persists, but no resources to offer courses exist. According to another interviewee, community members need persuasion to talk in Russian (Example 13). Notably, one 16-year-old Doukhobor man said that he needs Russian so that he can talk to his children when he has them. Example 11

Saxranjat’. Vsё. Bezuslovna. Preserve [Russian] That’s it. Definitely. (BC70) Example 12

DR missing When it is translated, I at least understand it. I don’t know what they are saying because it is stylised Biblical language that nobody speaks anymore. And we don’t have standardised Russian as our language, right? It’s Doukhoborese, and it’s a valuable language, but it’s old language.

192  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

Example 13

Kak možna dakazatʹ ljudjam što nam nužna havaritʹ pa-russki, nam nužna saxranitʹ naš jazyk? How can one prove to people that we need to talk in Russian, that we need to preserve our language? (BCG28)

In distinguishing between DR and StR, 53 out of 56 participants referred to Russian generically, but three participants expressed a preference for StR (Example 14). These results could probably be explained by the research question that did not specify ‘which Russian’ was being discussed, to leave the participants some room for talking about either. The results could also mean that the participants associate their variety with Russian, be it StR or not. Example 14

Ja izučala s semʹëju Duxaborčeskava ruskava jazyka, no v školi Maskovnaju, i xatela bolʹši Maskovnaju štoby usex ix ghavaritʹ, i panimaem drux druha. I learned with my family Doukhobor Russian language, but at school – the Moscow one, and I wanted more the Moscow one, to talk with them and understand each other. (BC58)

While discussing the function of Russian (Q6d), of 38 total respondents (each producing more than one response), 19 identified travelling to Russia (the most frequent response) (Example 15) where many of them have extended family; 17 respondents identified Doukhobor singing (Example 16); 11 – family and community life (Example 17); 10 – understanding psalms and beliefs; 3 outlined economic goals (transactions with Russian companies); 6 named studying in Russia; 12 pointed out that they enjoy reading classical and contemporary Russian literature; 5 participants watched Russian TV; and 4 participants attended Russian choirs, dance groups and other performances. Example 15

Vot pabyvali v Rasii, a usё ravno u Rasiju tjanica. We have been to Russia, and still we are drawn to Russia. (BC, 64) Example 16

A my byli malin’kii ditiški, djužè rady kada havorjut’ u nas budut sabiraca pennja. I tady sabirutsa, pajut, lunch delajut’, a my ihraimsi. We were small kids, and we were very glad when we heard there will be a singing gathering at our place. And then people get together, sing, make lunch, and we play around. (SK 4) Example 17

Kammunal’naja zhizn’ končilas’, no sëly astalis’. I mne ochen’ harašo bylo žit’ u ètaj sele, tam babushka i dedushka, i mama i papa, a na druhom

Exploring Authenticity for an Endangered Heritage Language Context  193

baku druhije familija žyli, maja tëta … My xadili na sabranija, Čistjakov sazdal raznyje gruppy – dramatičeskaja, literaturnaja. Očen’ interesna bylo. The communal life was over, but the villages remained. And it was so wonderful to live in that village, there was grandmother and grandfather, and mother and father, and on the other side, there were other families [and] my aunt. We attended prayer services. Chistjakov [A Doukhobor leader 1927–1939] created different groups – drama, literature. It was very interesting. (BC63)

Four participants (in total) described negative experiences with StR speakers. One participant shared a story about a university Russian instructor who asked her to talk in DR, only to ridicule her: ‘Kara is a punishment, not a car’. In a Russian language class at school, Doukhobor children were told that what they said was wrong: ‘not djuže, but očen’ (very), not brjuxa, but život (stomach). Upon arriving at a Russian university, one participant was greeted by ‘What far away village did you come from?’ presumably because her DR sounded to Russians old-fashioned and dialectal. Discussion: Conceptualising a Russian Course for the Doukhobors

The major goals of a Russian course for Doukhobors are conceptualised as not just learning a language, but also revisiting their own identity and Doukhobor community values. The approach follows Phinney’s (2003: 63) definition of ethnic identity as ‘a dynamic, multidimensional construct that refers to one’s identity or sense of self as a member of an ethnic group’. Which Russian?

Speaking from a linguistic perspective, DR is a unique variety since it reflects the way people spoke in central and South-Eastern Russia in the late 19th century with English as a lexifier. A discussion of authenticity requires considering not just ‘establishment’ varieties (national, standard, official, etc.), but also ‘vernaculars’, and multiple languages interacting in a given ethnographic setting (DR, StR, Canadian English) (Faudree, 2015: 184). However, in terms of the goals of learning Russian (travel, studies abroad) identified by participants, StR appears preferable, since speakers of DR are ridiculed by Russians for their old-fashioned dialectal speech. Many DR speakers have more esteem for StR than DR. Speakers of one variety may prefer another hegemonic prestigious variety, e.g. professional teachers of French from Quebec considered Canadian French to be less authentic than continental French (Wernicke, 2016). On the other hand, as expressed in the interviews, connections to Doukhobor heritage,

194  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

psalms and singing, as well as a desire to communicate across generations, calls for some competence in DR as well. Thus, perhaps the best solution for meeting community goals (and consequently more authentic) would be to offer a hybrid StR/DR course with a stronger StR and an additional DR component. In the context of ILR, Faudree (2015: 182) remarks that ‘although authenticity is an important guiding principle, measuring it depends on a complicated calculus that must accommodate not only continuity with the past but also resilience and adaptation’. Multiculturality

In light of debates about cultural aspects in FLTL (Delanoy & Volkmann, 2006; Freitag-Hild, 2018; Sandkühler & Lim, 2004), it appears that the cultural orientation of the Doukhobor community course needs to be binary: such a course should build learners’ awareness of and confidence in representing both Doukhobor and Canadian cultures and should increase knowledge of Russian culture. In other words, the suggested solution is multiculturality. Working with a community organisation on course planning serves as an authenticity compass that would prevent a ‘linguistics missionary’ approach (proselytising a particular language/ variety in disregard of the community preferences) criticised in Henze and Davis (1999). Which materials?

The question of what is ‘authentic’ in language, text and materials (Guariento & Morley, 2001; Richards & Rodgers, 2001) in the Doukhobor context is problematised by the presence of both StR and DR: authentic in which culture and which language variety? Finding answers to these questions is essential for the author who is currently working on developing a Russian language course for the Doukhobor community and selecting materials for it. In alignment with the Doukhobor beliefs expressed in the interviews, the topics relevant to the community will be selected for lesson planning in both StR and DR (food, studying abroad, visiting Russia, Doukhobor beliefs, Doukhobor lifestyle, peace, holidays in Russia and Doukhobor holidays). In terms of the authenticity of DR component materials, excerpts from the DR corpus will be employed as much as possible to reflect the themes related to Doukhobor beliefs and lifestyle (with differences from StR highlighted and explained). Recorded Doukhobor speakers occupy a wide range on an authenticity continuum from highly fluent DR or StR to low proficiency in Russian on par with ‘weak’ Heritage Russian (Meir, 2018). To create the DR teaching materials for the course, we will select speakers of DR who are

Exploring Authenticity for an Endangered Heritage Language Context  195

highly fluent and highly proficient either in DR or in StR based on a scale with three parameters (fluency, DR proficiency and StR proficiency). In addition, Russian texts from Iskra magazine (a Doukhobor journal) will also be employed. A DR-StR-English dictionary under development will be piloted in the course along with Cyrillic-based and English transliteration-based orthographies. The selection of Doukhobor-produced texts will hopefully allow the learners to interact with them, as well as to capitalise on affective factors to ‘maintain or increase students’ motivation’ (Guariento & Morley, 2001: 347). Conclusion

‘Authenticity is clearly a relative matter’ (Taylor, 1994). Some concepts of authenticity (e.g. hegemony of prestigious varieties) developed in other contexts are applicable to the ‘special case’ of the Doukhobor community at least in modified forms. These themes include identity/language interactions, learner identity, culture, ownership of process and text/materials design. However, the emerging paradigm for Doukhobor community ­language learning appears to be ‘multi-culturality’ (as opposed to inter- or trans-culturality): this paradigm encourages supporting Doukhobor values while learning Russian ones. A hybrid StR/DR course will hopefully reflect Doukhobor community values and individual learning goals. Features of Doukhobor identity and beliefs will be reflected in the topics and materials of the planned course. The limitations of the study and of the course design originate, first, in the participant demographics (only three participants were in their teens, and the rest were mostly senior citizens). As the course is piloted (currently on hold due to COVID-19), language needs analysis of the younger generation will be undertaken and the results will be reflected in subsequent course offerings. Second, the study initially was not designed directly for learning purposes. Finally, there is no manual on how to teach a heritage language in a small community under specific circumstances, so problems will likely be solved through trial and error. The major question ‘Which Russian?’ can also be clarified over time. Establishing connections with the Russian émigré diasporas in BC and with university students of Russian may be another productive direction of course planning. Hopefully, works from other contexts expanding the notion of authenticity and applying course design to non-traditional language learning situations will benefit researchers, language teachers and communities. Acknowledgements

This chapter draws on research supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, Canada.

196  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

References Alptekin, C. (2002) Towards intercultural communicative competence in ELT. ELT Journal 56 (1), 57–64. Andon, N. and Wingate, U. (2013) Motivation, authenticity and challenge in German textbooks for Key Stage 3. In J. Gray (ed.) Critical Perspectives on Language Teaching Materials (pp. 182–203). London: Palgrave Macmillan. Armstrong, T.C. (2013) ‘Why won’t you speak to me in Gaelic?’ Authenticity, integration, and the Heritage Language learning project. Journal of Language, Identity & Education 12 (5), 340–356. Belz, J.A. (2003) Identity, deficiency and first language use in foreign language education. In C. Blyth (ed.) The Sociolinguistics of Foreign-language Classrooms: Contributions of the Native, the Near-native and the Non-native Speaker (pp. 209–250). Boston: Heinle Thomson. Breen, M.P. (1985) Authenticity in the language classroom. Applied Linguistics 6 (1), 60–70. Brown, T. (2013) Key indications of language impact on identity formation in Belarus. Russian Language Journal 63, 247–288. Bucholtz, M. and Hall, K. (2008) Language and identity. In A. Duranti (ed.) A Companion to Linguistic Anthropology (pp. 369–394). New York: Wiley-Blackwell. Canale, M. and Swain, M. (1980) Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics 1 (1), 1–47. Coliuzzi, P. (2019) The new speakers of Lombard. Multilingua 38 (2), 187–211. Delanoy, W. and Volkmann, L. (eds) (2006) Cultural Studies in the EFL Classroom. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag C. Winter. Faudree, P. (2015) Why X doesn’t always mark the spot: Contested authenticity in Mexican indigenous language politics. Semiotica 203, 179 – 2 01. Fhlannchadha S.N. and Hickey, T.M. (2019) Assessing children’s proficiency in a minority language: Exploring the relationships between home language exposure, test performance and teacher and parent ratings of school-age Irish-English bilinguals. Language and Education 33 (4), 340–362. Fishman, J. (1991) Reversing Language Shift. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Freitag-Hild, B. (2018) Teaching culture – intercultural competence, transcultural learning, global education. In C. Surkamp and B. Viebrock (eds) Teaching English as a Foreign Language (pp. 159–175). Stuttgart: J. B. Metzler. Gill, M. (2011) Authenticity. In J.-O. Östman and J. Verschueren (eds) Pragmatics in Practice: Handbook of Pragmatics Highlights (pp. 46–65). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Greese, A., Blackledge, A. and Takhi, J.K. (2014) The ideal ‘native speaker’ teacher: Negotiating authenticity and legitimacy in the language classroom. The Modern Language Journal 98 (4), 937–951. Grenoble, L.A. and Whaley, L.J. (2006) Saving Languages: An Introduction to Language Revitalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Guariento, W. and Morley, J. (2001) Text and task authenticity in the EFL classroom. ELT Journal 55 (4), 347–353. Henze, R. and Davis, K.A. (1999) Authenticity and identity: Lessons from indigenous language education. Anthropology and Education Quarterly 30 (1), 3–21. Hermes, M. (2012) Indigenous language revitalization and documentation in the United States: Collaboration despite colonialism. Language and Linguistics Compass 6 (3), 131–142. Holmes, J. (2013) An Introduction to Sociolinguistics (4th edn). Abingdon: Routledge. Hornberger, N.H. and King, K.A. (1998) Authenticity and unification in Quechua language planning. Language, Culture and Curriculum 11 (3), 390–410.

Exploring Authenticity for an Endangered Heritage Language Context  197

Hutchinson, T. and Waters, A. (1987) English for Specific Purposes: A Learner-Centered Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jones, M.C. and Ogilvie, S. (eds) (2013) Keeping Languages Alive: Documentation, Pedagogy and Revitalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kramsch, C. (2011) The symbolic dimensions of the intercultural. Language Teaching 44 (3), 354–367. Lanehart, S.L. (1996) The language of identity. Journal of English Linguistics 24 (4), 322–331. MacDonald, M., Badger, R. and Dasli, M. (2006) Authenticity, culture and language learning. Language and Intercultural Communication 6 (3–4), 250–261. Makarova, V. (2012) Saskatchewan Doukhobor Russian: A disappearing language. The Open Journal of Modern Linguistics (OJML) 2 (3), 90–96. Makarova, V. (2019) Ex-neuter-gender nouns in Canadian Doukhobor Russian. Russian Linguistics 43, 273–287. Matthews, W.K. (1950) Modern Russian dialects. Transactions of the Philological Society 49 (1), 112–148. Meir, N. (2018) Morpho-syntactic abilities of unbalanced bilingual children: A closer look at the Weaker Language. Frontiers in Psychology 9, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2018.01318. Milroy, J. and Milroy, L. (1991) Authority in Language: Investigating Language Prescription and Standardization (2nd edn). London: Routledge. Nagel, J. (2014) Constructing ethnicity: creating and recreating ethnic identity and culture. Social Problems 41 (1), 152–176. Otwinowska-Kasztelanic, A., Meir, N., Ringblom, N., Karpava, S. and La Morgia, F. (2019) Language and literacy transmission in heritage language: evidence from Russian-speaking families in Cyprus, Ireland, Israel and Sweden. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 42 (4), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/0 1434632.2019.1695807. Pedersen, A.-M. (2010) Negotiating cultural identities through language: Academic English in Jordan. College Composition and Communication 62 (2), 283–310. Phinney, J.S. (2003) Ethnic identity and acculturation. In K.M. Chun, P.B. Organista and G. Marin (eds)  Acculturation: Advances in Theory, Measurement, and Applied Research (pp. 63–81). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Pinner, R.S. (2015) What we talk about when we talk about authenticity. See https://www. academia.edu/11042909/What_We_Talk_About_When_We_Talk_About_Authenticity (accessed August 2020). Pinner, R.S. (2016) Reconceptualising Authenticity for English as a Global Language. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Polinsky, M. (2018) Bilingual children and adult language speakers: The range of comparison. International Journal of Bilingualism 22 (5), 547–563. Polio, C. (2014) Using authentic materials in the beginning language classroom. Clear 18 (1), 1–5. Richards, J.C. and Rodgers, T.S. (2001) Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (2nd edn). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sandkühler, H.J and Lim, H.B. (2004) Transculturality – Epistemology, Ethics and Politics. Bern: Peter Lang. Schaarschmidt, G. (2012) Russian language history in Canada: Doukhobor internal and external migrations. Effects on language development and structure. In V. Makarova (ed.) Russian Studies in North America (pp. 235–260). London: Anthem Press. Schwartz, M. (2008) Exploring the relationship between family language policy and heritage language knowledge among second generation Russian-Jewish immigrants in Israel. Journal of Multilingual & Multicultural Development 29 (5), 400–418. Stadler, W. (2015) Teaching and testing sociopragmatics in the Russian language classroom. Athens Journal of Philology 2 (3), 149–162.

198  Part 2: Authenticity and Identity

Tarasoff, K.J. (1982) Plakun Trava: The Doukhobors. Grand Forks: Mir. Taylor, D. (1994) Inauthentic authenticity or authentic inauthenticity? TESL-EJ 1 (2), 1–11. See https://tesl-ej.org/~teslejor/ej02/a.1.html (accessed January 2021). Trabelsi S. (2016) Authenticity in materials development. In M. Azarnoosh, M. Zeraatpishe, A. Faravani and H.R. Kargozari (eds) Issues in Materials Development (pp. 145–158). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Van Lier, L. (1996) Interaction in the Language Curriculum. Awareness, Autonomy and Authenticity. New York: Harper and Row. Wagner, E. (2016) Authentic texts in the assessment of L2 listening ability. In J.V. Banerjee and D. Tsagari (eds) Contemporary Second Language Assessment (pp. 103–123). London: Bloomsbury Academic. Waring, H.Z. (2017) Discourse Analysis: The Questions Discourse Analysts Ask and How They Answer Them. New York: Routledge. Wernicke, M. (2016) Hierarchies of authenticity in study abroad: French from Canada versus French from France. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 19 (2), 1–21. Widdowson, H.G. (1979) The authenticity of language data. In H.G. Widdowson (ed.) Explorations in Applied Linguistics (Vol. 1, pp. 163–172). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Will, L. (2018) Authenticity in English Language Teaching. An Analysis of Academic Discourse. (Münchener Arbeiten zur Fremdsprachen-Forschung). Münster, New York: Waxmann.

Appendix Interview Questions

(1) Could you please tell me about your childhood, and how you lived then? (2) How do you self-identify? (3) What are the most important features of Doukhobor beliefs, in your opinion? (4) Could you please describe which festivities and events your family celebrated when you were young? (5) (5a) Do you feel any connection to Russia? (5b) Have you been to Russia? (6) (6a) Is the Russian language important for you? (6b) Have you tried to pass it over to your children? (6c) Do you think that Russian can be maintained in the community? (6d) What is the functional role (purpose) of Russian for you?

Part 3 Authenticity and Aesthetics

13 Autobiographical Fairy Tales for Authenticity in the English Classroom: A South African Higher Education Case Study Candice Livingston and Hanlie Dippenaar

Introduction

The higher education landscape of South Africa has been under pressure since 2016 to rethink the Eurocentric slant of tertiary curricula in light of calls for decolonisation and the advent of #FeesMustFall. The calls for the upheaval of embedded European power relations in higher education (Fomunyam, 2017: 6797) have led to many discussions between lecturers and students, on how this is to be accomplished. This chapter reports on the implementation of decolonisation efforts within an English language curriculum for pre-service teachers at a University of Technology in the Western Cape Province of South Africa and the efforts of faculty’s pursuit of authenticity in the curriculum. The biggest criticism lodged against the Eurocentric curriculum is the lack of authentic African voices (Livingston, 2018: 2) as language teaching and second language teaching, specifically, have long been influenced by Western voices and ideals (Blommaert & Rampton, 2012; Kumaravadivelu, 2016: 74). Stan (2015: 459) states that an English language curriculum should provide cultural information and develop critical thinking skills, but the question that has plagued our thinking is: whose cultural information is being projected in our curriculum and is it authentic? The introduction of an Afrocentric model called Africology and the use of autobiographical storytelling as the medium for transmission of authenticity in learning are the theoretical underpinnings of this research. We have coined the moniker – ‘The 3 As’ – which refers to ‘Africology’, ‘Autobiographical storytelling’ and ‘Authenticity’. This chapter takes two views on the question posed above: the first is that authenticity can only 201

202  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

be ensured by the inculcation of authentic African voices and cultural information in the curriculum and second, that the students be given a voice in the curriculum, which is in itself, a central tenet of autobiographical learning and decolonisation in particular (Laenui, 2000). A sample of students’ autobiographical fairy tales was analysed to show how, when given agency, students were able to give traditional Western fairy tales an African contextualisation, use translanguaging to inculcate authenticity in the language use and were able to highlight social justice issues within a unique Cape Town oeuvre. This project was rooted in what Nabudere (2012: 3) calls the Afrocentric paradigm, and he argues that all knowledge production or study of theory should integrate the liberating consequences of contextual analysis which is validated and challenged by ‘unlearning’ the Western way of interpreting knowledge. This perspective dovetails with the idea espoused by Hyland (2015: 35), who states that local knowledge should always stand in opposition to that of the West. Context

In order to become a teacher in South Africa, pre-service teachers can complete a Bachelor of Education degree. These students can then choose to qualify as teachers in the Foundation phase (Grades R–3), Intermediate phase (Grades 4–6), Senior phase (Grades 7–9) or Further Education and Training phase (Grades 10–12). Students who opt to study to become Intermediate phase teachers at our institution choose an elective subject speciality. English language teaching is one such elective. Our study is rooted in this elective, and an assignment was designed for the fourth-year cohort, keeping in mind the principles of authentic language use, the use of authentic texts and the implementation of authentic tasks. In previous years, an assignment was designed based on research into the history of the fairy tale, the Eurocentric categorisation systems and the archetypes and motifs that are identified in the fairy tale. The assignment has now been changed in order to reflect the autobiographical learning principle of what is called ‘storytelling’ (Rossiter, 1999) the content, where the curriculum is linked with learning experience, all the while keeping in mind the principles of Afrocentric thinking and authenticity. The manner in which this is done, is by asking the students to rewrite any fairy tale of their choice, using fairy tale archetypes but also to contextualise the rewritten story within their own cultures and storylines (Le Grange, 2016: 9). Clark and Rossiter (2002: 19) state that ‘storytelling’ the curriculum gives adult learners an increased insight into their own learning, which is why we think it is an appropriate approach to use in this context. Students were given autonomy in the design of their retelling, and this included incorporating translanguaging aspects of the story into a familiar vernacular. It should be noted that this assignment is not linked to any

Autobiographical Fairy Tales for Authenticity in the English Classroom  203

assessment criteria, as it is seen as an opportunity to engage in discussion, provide students with a voice and link personal experiences to the curriculum. We felt it would be unethical to attach marks to a creative endeavour such as this. Theoretical Underpinnings

The theoretical underpinning of this study lies in what we have dubbed ‘The 3 As’ and can be seen as the adoption of an Afrocentric paradigm called Africology and the use of autobiographical storytelling as the vehicle for delivery of authenticity in learning. Africology

This study is embedded in the paradigm of Africology, and we suggest it as a feasible paradigm with which to guide our pedagogical practices in post-apartheid South Africa (Pitsoe & Letseka, 2018: 37) in order to ensure the authenticity of learning experiences in our curriculum. The reason for this is that Africology places the agency of the African experience at the core of epistemological knowledge and centres the historical experiences of individuals (Asante & Mazama, 2005: 22). Our study is grounded in the Afrocentric domains of ukweli and uhaki. Ukweli is the Swahili term for authenticity and groundedness in the experiences of the community (Pitsoe & Letseka, 2018: 42), and this presupposes that personal experience should be placed as the ultimate authority where knowledge creation takes place within the context of personal experience (Van Wyk, 2014: 293). A further Swahili term that is promoted by the epistemology of Africology is that of uhaki, which is about promoting social justice (Pitsoe & Letseka, 2018: 43). Uhaki also decrees that it is impossible to ignore the context, specifically social and historical, when interpreting or reacting to any element in the learning process (Van Wyk, 2014: 293). Authenticity and autobiographical storytelling

Pinner (2016: 14) states that authenticity as a concept is difficult to define, but notes that the concept relates to the individual’s ability to socially contextualise the use of language for the construction of meaning. For the purposes of our study, this ‘socially contextualised’ authenticity is the delineation we aim to adhere to. Pinner goes on to say that authenticity is the manner in which a person is able to see him- or herself in relation to these social contexts. The idea that Afrocentric principles promote the ideals of unity of community and the voice of the community dovetails with the idea of authentic language learning and autobiographical storytelling. Gilmore (2007: 98) states that the authenticity of language and learning lies in the type of language that is produced by first language

204  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

speakers for speakers of the same language, an idea that was propagated by Morrow (1977: 13). Gunn et al. (2013: 15) agree with this approach and state that pre-service teachers should be encouraged to reflect on their own culture and prior knowledge in order to teach in a culturally responsive manner, using the vehicle of autobiographical learning. This autobiographical perspective is in agreement with Morrow’s approach (1977: 13) as authentic texts use real language produced by real writers for a real audience in order to convey real information. The centrality of identity and how we understand diversity comes to the fore when narratives are constructed in order to position ourselves and to gain access to and understand the stories of others (Bullough, 2001: 21; Clandinin & Connelly, 1994: 415). For the purpose of this study, authenticity was also framed using the three domains of authenticity as proposed by Pinner (2013) where the first domain refers to authentic language in use, the second to the use of authentic texts and the final domain to authentic tasks. The first domain of authenticity which alludes to authentic language usage links well with autobiographical storytelling. According to Habermas (2011), autobiographical thinking relies on the ability to link the past, present and future into a ‘thematically coherent life story’, a story that is embedded in cultural and chronological aspects of an individual’s life and language. The purpose of this study keeps in mind what Coyle et al. (2010: 5) call ‘authenticity of purpose’ and lean on the notion that Pinner (2013: 65) expounds, when he states that in order to ensure authenticity of purpose, one needs to use authentic materials in authentic ways. Pinner (2013: 59) further argues that authenticity needs to be conceptualised in a way that considers the degrees of involvement and levels of personal engagement that will result from the task used. This will preferably also feature some form of local contextualisation and what Ushioda (2009) calls the ‘person-in-context’. The purpose of this study is to keep the notion of ‘authenticity of purpose’ in the forefront, taking into account the pre-service teachers’ own identities in order to ensure authenticity in learning and language usage. The authenticity of purpose is echoed by Tomlinson and Masuhara (2010: 400), who say that experience of language in use will provide authenticity by allowing the participants to use translanguaging in their retellings of fairy tales. Translanguaging is a very specific strategy used in multilingual settings. García and Li (2014) state that translanguaging allows learners to decode texts and rewrite them in their dominant language in order to better understand them. It is important to note that translanguaging is different from code-­ switching, which occurs when a speaker switches between languages in a spoken repertoire, and mere translation. Translanguaging as a strategy is flexible, and learners select features of their own language repertoire in order to demonstrate what they know so as to communicate effectively (Velasco & García, 2014).

Autobiographical Fairy Tales for Authenticity in the English Classroom  205

Methodology

The methodology employed in this study is qualitative in nature and relies on the narrative analysis (Sandelowski, 1991: 165) of 23 fairy tales written by the fourth-year cohort in the Bachelor of Education degree. In these fairy tales, thematic threads were identified and reported for the purpose of this chapter. The participants were encouraged to tell the stories from their own cultural point of view, to contextualise the fairy tales in local contexts and to retell the stories in a manner that allows them to engage with real language usage, which often includes examples of translanguaging. For the sake of clarity, the translanguaged quotes are translated in brackets behind the foreign words, and there are instances where explanations of expressions or terms are also provided in brackets, for the edification of the reader. Findings

The themes identified from the narrative analysis of the stories fall into three broad tropes: translanguaging as authentic language use, person-in-context authenticity and authenticity of setting. These are now discussed below. Translanguaging as authentic language in use

We argue that authenticity of language use is shown in this study as when given the opportunity to contextualise the stories within their own milieu, many students chose to translanguage. Lopez et al. (2017: 1) define translanguaging as the ‘flexible use of a bilingual repertoire’, while García and Li (2014: 3) describes translanguaging as a vehicle by which ‘new sociopolitical realities’ are given a voice and students are able to develop new language practices by interrogating linguistic inequalities. It has also been found that translanguaging practices allow students to feel that their personal languages are valued (Hurst & Mona, 2017: 144). Translanguaging has been successfully used before in the study of fairy tales (Livingston, 2018), and unique hybrids of African expressions have been created in other studies. In this study, translanguaging is seen as a positive trend as Childs (2016: 22) states that it reduces the dehumanising effect of traditional language practices, on the one hand, and is transforming for the individuals who experience it, on the other. What this study specifically brings to the fore though, is the unique use of Kaaps with many of the students translanguaging their fairy tale of choice into this unique South African vernacular. Kaaps is a dialectal ­mixture of English and Afrikaans, and as such is seen as an instantly recognisable identity marker (Roman, 2019: 8) of a subset of the South African population. Translanguaging using Kaaps has been used

206  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

successfully in the study of Shakespeare (Hibbert, 2018) before, which bodes well for the analysis of this study. The quotes featured below highlight how Kaaps is used to convey the archetypes present in the fairy tales, but it also allows the students to use the sociocultural resources that are at their disposal (Salazar, 2013: 138) when engaging in translanguaging. Archetypes in fairy tales represent cross-cultural motifs and are stored as collective symbolic dreams (Zipes, 2015: 326). It is evident that the students were able to tap into these archetypes when retelling the stories. The archetypes of the prince, the mother and the heroine in distress feature in many of the stories. When the ‘prince’ starts berating himself for falling in love with Snow White, he says: ‘He knew she was beautiful, but did not know how good-looking she is with those sweet rosy lips of hers. “Come on ou (man), don’t koppel (catch) feelings. You have one mission dan het jhy mahala (then you have nothing) for the weekend”, he thought to himself’. Kaaps is also used in describing the situational archetype of the reality of the mother’s death in Cinderella: Cindy (Cinderella) was a beautiful and smart motjie (young girl). All the ouens (guys) said she was kak reg (really pretty) and had a bright future ahead of her. She was smart and kind and didn’t give her parentals (parents) any grief. But you see the zali (mother) was very sieklik (sickly). She had thyroid cancer, aaklige (terrible) stuff. Cindy’s zali (mother) passed away during her matric year; everyone in Beepstad was devastated over the death of the Antie (Aunty). In another version of the retelling of Cinderella, the princess finds herself in the Namaqualand: I am a kallit (coloured) girl from the small town of Nababeep in the Namaqualand district in the Northern Cape. We are known for our blommeprag (beautiful flowers) and rowwe slang (dangerous snakes). Other instances of translanguaging were also found, and these centred on the use of South Africanisms like ‘Joh’ (sometimes spelt ‘yoh’), which indicates surprise (Collins, 2020). An example of this can be seen when a character states ‘Joh, joh, joh Jabulani thought. What now?’ The word thula, which means to be quiet or still (WordHippo, 2020), is used in the story of Rapunzel, when ‘Every night her mother would stroke over her long ebony dreads and sing “Thula Thula” before she fell asleep’. The use of translanguaging in the rewriting of fairy tales as shown above, allows what Lopez et al. (2017: 10) call ‘multiple discursive practices’, which acknowledges that students make use of their entire linguistic repertoire to make sense of what they are learning. Person-in-context authenticity

The rewriting of fairy tales also provides an opportunity for the students to tap into their own contexts and use their voices to highlight social injustices in their communities, all the while using the practice of

Autobiographical Fairy Tales for Authenticity in the English Classroom  207

translanguaging to keep it authentic. Specific in-context examples refer to the history of racism in South Africa and the effect this has had on the future generations. Specific references are made to the loss of identity experienced by people of colour in South Africa, land ownership issues and the effects of forced removals, the effects of societal abuse of alcohol and sexual violence against women. Specific examples from the fairy tales are provided below. Revisiting the landscape of Apartheid

Social injustices of the past are still very much alive in the psyche of the students rewriting the fairy tales, as is seen in the following example where the student discusses the Apartheid practice of racial segregation and the illegality of mixed marriages in South Africa, by contextualising the story of Cinderella in this era: ‘I have seen the old black and white photos next to the ominous “COLOUREDS ONLY” signs on the beaches, the petite little girl with the red and white polka dot bathing suit, hair bigger than the camera lens … my Oupie (grandfather) posing proudly next to her, oblivious to the cultural sin shadowing their beauty as couple’. This is a recurring theme in another of the retellings, when the evil step mother in another version of Cinderella, expresses her disgust at the idea of mixed marriages: Sies (Yuck!)! A white and coloured! Who ever heard such a thing!? Loss of identity during this time is also a feature of the retold stories, with Cinderella losing her identity in Apartheid South Africa: ‘Cinders … the name I adopted when Pappa and I came to live with his new wife. Pappa’s family were Indian, they arrived in Cape Town a few years ago, I am the first South African to be born here. My name is Gaija, an Indian name, the name Mamma gave before she passed … but I have lost everything, Pappa and my identity’. Loss of land in South Africa

Issues of land redistribution are a relevant talking point in South Africa today, and in Cape Town, the area known as District Six, has a rich place in the imaginations of South Africans (Jeppie & Soudien, 1990), specifically because of the horrific forced removals that occurred there. Some of the retellings are set in District Six specifically and recall the vibrancy of the pre-forced removals era. Furthermore, the issue of the ownership of farmland and the hardships faced by farm workers and people of colour in South Africa is a central story line in some of the stories and the tale of Rumpelstiltskin below illustrates this: ‘Hy gat ôs retrench! En wat dan? Wat word dan va ôs en die kinnes? Wa gan ôs brood en wyn innie hanne kry? Wa gan ôs kinnes iendag werk as onse hele familie nog net oppie plaas gewerk het? Daai whitie dink hy’s beter as ôs! Hy dink hy kan sommer beslyt wie op die plaas mag woon en wie nie! Djy wiet net so goed soes ek dat ôs ancestors eerste hier was! Nou dink hy dis

208  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

sy grond’! This is translated as follows: He has retrenched us! Now what? What is going to happen to us and the children? Where are we going to get bread and wine? Where are our children going to work one day as our whole family has only ever worked on this farm? That white man thinks he is better than us! He thinks he can just make decisions about who can or can’t live on the farm! You know just as well as I do that our ancestors were here first! Now he thinks this ground is his ground! The scourge of alcohol abuse

Many of the students use this opportunity of storytelling to present the social issues that are extant in their communities. One of the problems that comes forward is that of the scourge of alcohol abuse. A student uses the character of Tiekie Plaatjies to contextualise alcoholism in the community and states ‘He is so upset, that he immediately takes out the papsak (soft sack/cheap wine) from the cupboard and starts drinking’. Another story adds that ‘Beer fumes filling the kitchen as she speaks. It is ten o’clock in the morning for goodness’ sake. Stepmother snickers and takes the half pint of Lion Lager (South African brand of beer) out of the cooling box’. The reality of alcohol-induced violence is also a theme that has been identified in the retellings of many of the fairy tales: The grownups dragged the case of Lion quarts (South African beer) out from the garage, which by the sound of the garage door opening and shrieking and the yelling from the neighbour was certain to start an event everyone dreaded. And in many cases, explicit violence is indicated: this was an event dreaded, since the mixing of alcohol and loud voices normally leads to unpleasantries and flying fists. Sexual abuse of women

Students also contextualise the dangers faced by many women in South African society today in their stories. So, sexual abuse is a recurring trope in the retelling of fairy tales in an African context (Livingston, 2018: 8), and it is evident that the reality of sexual violence against women is an aspect of daily life and lived experiences of the storytellers in this study. Sexual abuse is highlighted in a retelling of Little Red Riding Hood where the wolf is portrayed as a sexual predator: ‘The man, seeing her come in, said to her, hiding himself under the bedclothes, “Put the scones and the proteas (type of flower) on the table dear, and get into bed with me”’. The horrors of date rape are also stressed in some of the contextualised tales. Sleeping Beauty is drugged into submission, and this retelling leaves you feeling haunted by the disregard for female dignity which is on display: ‘“Just one drop of these eye drops dan is sy patty in jho hanne (then she will be putty in your hands). Then you simply need to rape her and ditch in the alley at the Waterfront. Snow White no longer eats a poisoned apple, but is given a date rape drug: He recognised it by the reason

Autobiographical Fairy Tales for Authenticity in the English Classroom  209

of he knew it come from a common vicious poison that is known as the Sweet Apple or Appeltjies in the township”’. What is evident from the restated fairy tale depictions in this study, is that although the ‘new’ South Africa post-1994 is a vibrant melting pot, the horrors of the iniquities of the Apartheid past still grip the psyches of the students in this study and are justly part of their cultural memory. It is also evident that many of the students have been exposed to the horrors of alcohol and sexual abuse, once again echoing their very real and lived experiences. Authenticity of setting

Just as many of the stories draw on the cultural history of South Africa, many of them are set in the unique localities of Cape Town, with backdrops extending from the Cape Flats to the Inner-City environs of the Company Gardens and Long Street. The Beast from Beauty and the Beast swaps his castle for the gang-infested Cape Flats, where he is a gang kingpin, ‘He was known as the Beast of the Cape Flats. He tried to attack the leader of the 26s (the name of a local gang) and almost killed him’. Rapunzel’s mother is to be found picking herbs in the Company Gardens of Cape Town, and many famous streets in Cape Town, such as Long Street and Seapoint Main Road, become the backdrop for a more authentic retelling of the original stories. An example of this is found in the Snow White retelling, ‘One evening Snow White decided to go out the evening with some friends to a music concert in Long Street’ and the introduction to Cinderella, pointedly places her in Sea Point, Cape Town, ‘When this story gets old, then we can say “once upon a time”. But like the main character in this “fairy” tale, we do not like to talk about ageing or getting old. The place is Seapoint Main Road and the year is 2019’. Heritage sites in Cape Town, such as Table Mountain, the Bo Kaap and District Six, also feature as authentic settings for fairy tales, as seen in the following quotes, ‘The sun is setting behind the majestic Table Mountain, coloured and black men are walking home from the train station’ and ‘You see, before Oumie (grandma) gets going on her riveting narrative, we live in the Bo Kaap, we are a Muslim family that has seen five generations in Cape Town, a Cape Town in the midst of change and revolution’. Mentions of District Six bring to mind the echoes of the forced removals of the Apartheid era, and these can be heard in some of the stories, ‘Oumie (Grandma) moved here from District Six after she met Oupie (Grandpa), they didn’t have much choice’. There were also allusions to the cosmopolitan nature of Cape Town when the fairy godmother from Cinderella becomes contextualised within the multicultural melting pot as Cecile. ‘“Salaam my child, do you have any extra candles, my dear?” asks Cecile as I attentively open the door. It’s dark but the street is alive. Cecile is from Mozambique, skin as dark as ebony, that glistens in the hot Captonian sun’.

210  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

Allusions to African motifs

In the retellings, many of the students contextualise the story by inserting African motifs. An example of this is the change of character names: Little Red Riding Hood becomes Little Red Beads or Little Red Doek (head scarf). Sleeping beauty becomes Sindiswa, who instead of pricking her finger on a spinning wheel, is bitten by a Cape Cobra and falls into a 100-year sleep and Goldilocks becomes Thandi, who meets with three warthogs instead of three bears. The insertion of uniquely African fauna and flora also helps to contextualise these stories and to make the autobiographical retellings authentic experiences. Examples of fauna from Africa include Snow White’s red lips being compared to red diser lilies (a South African orchid known as the Pride of Table Mountain) (Trinder-Smith, 2006: 104), the 12 Dancing Princesses being compared to beautiful proteas (local flower) and to the replacement of the beanstalk with a giant mealie stalk (corn stalk) in Jack and the Beanstalk, these stories take on a distinctive South African ambiance. There is also an example of traditional and well-known South African foods on show in one of the stories, with Jabulani (Jack) finding a feast on display in the giant’s kingdom once he has clambered up the giant mealie stalk (instead of the beanstalk) in Jack and the Beanstalk, ‘There was koeksisters (syrupy doughnuts), melktert (milk tart), hertzoggies (baked cookie with coconut and jam), malva pudding, peppermint crisp tart and a big bowl of pumpkin fritters! Jabulani had never seen so many delicacies and without even thinking about it, he started to eat’. The richness of African wildlife and vegetation, together with the descriptions of people and food, all add to the authenticity of the settings in the stories told. Contemporaneity as a trope

The restating of these well-known fairy tales in modern or contemporary terms is something that reflects the lived experiences of the students in the modern era. There are overt references to Facebook, Instagram, Skype and WhatsApp in the stories, echoing how the younger generation communicates today. The falsity of Snow White’s stepmother and her attempts to ingratiate herself with her Facebook fans is shown when it is stated that, ‘Although she thought that to like a couple of photos of Snow White on Facebook would help, but her heart did not want to turn to like her better’. While the queen in Rumpelstiltskin Skypes her sister to ask for advice on his name, ‘She quickly went out and Skyped her cousin in New Zealand’. The Snow Queen also receives the modern treatment, and while looking for her sister, she receives a tip on her whereabouts on WhatsApp, ‘Gerda received a WhatsApp telling her where she would find Kay. The message told her that he was in Lesotho’. There are also references to popular television programmes that only fellow South Africans would know. Examples of this are the inclusion of

Autobiographical Fairy Tales for Authenticity in the English Classroom  211

the following, ‘The Top Billing team filmed the wedding’ and a popular South African retail outlet is referenced when the evil queen in Sleeping Beauty receives her magic mirror, ‘As a wedding gift from her husband, she received a beautiful mirror closet/ table that were designed by the best designer, Carol Boyes in Cape Town’. What is evident from the settings of these stories is that students are able to tap into the unique locales of Cape Town’s cosmopolitan and heritage sites, while drawing on distinctive African names, fauna, flora and foods to further substantiate their lived experiences. Also reflected in the stories are the practices of the students as they live in the 21st century and are subjected to the use of social media, hereby mirroring the modern settings and frames of reference with which they navigate the modern world today. Conclusion

In this chapter, we argued for a dual approach to instilling authenticity in our curriculum. We maintain that using the principles of Africology in our curriculum and assignment design allows us to give the students a voice, which also happens to be a central tenet of the decolonisation movement. The three domains of authenticity that we focused on are authentic language in use, the use of authentic texts and authentic tasks. Our findings indicate that there is authenticity in language use, due to the fact that students engage in translanguaging practices. These translanguaging practices centre on the use of the unique Cape patois of Kaaps and the use of South Africanisms in the stories that are told. Authentic texts are produced in the form of the retold fairy tales, which embrace the authentic setting of Cape Town and its surroundings, and we also believe that this study shows that an authentic task has been given to the students, a task that requires them to rewrite fairy tales within their own cultural context, drawing on tropes with which they can identify. This task allows them to engage in person-in-context authenticity, drawing on their cultural experiences of Apartheid and the social justice issues that affect their lives today. This resonates with the Afrocentric ideal of uhaki, which promotes the epistemological idea that it is impossible to ignore context and social justice issues when interpreting knowledge. What makes the person-in-context authenticity even more relevant is that the Afrocentric canon of ukweli, which expounds the idea that personal experiences should be contextualised within the community and as such should lead to individualised knowledge creation in the form of contextualised fairy tales. And finally, what this study has shown is that the introduction of an authentic task enables students to access their lived experiences and to produce authentic autobiographical fairy tales that become authentic texts within their own context and reality.

212  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

References Asante, M. (2014) Afrocentricity: Toward a new understanding of African thought in the world. In M.K. Asante, Y. Miike and J. Yin (eds) The Global Intercultural Communication Reader (pp.101–110). New York: Routledge. Asante, M. and Mazama, A. (2005) The Encyclopaedia of Black Studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Blommaert, J. and Rampton, B. (2012) Language and superdiversity. MMG Working Paper 12–09. Gottingen: Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity. See https://pure.mpg.de/rest/items/item_161514 4_ 3/component/ file_1615143/content www.mmg.mpg.de/workingpapers (accessed June 2019). Bullough, R.V. (2001) Guidelines for quality in autobiographical forms of self-study research. Educational Researcher 30 (3), 13–21. Childs, M. (2016) Reflecting on translanguaging in multilingual classrooms: harnessing the power of poetry and photography. Educational Research for Social Change (ERSC) 5 (1), 22–40. Clandinin, D.J. and Connelly, F.M. (1994) Narrative Inquiry: Experience and Story in Qualitative Research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Clark, M.C. and Rossiter, M. (2002) Narrative learning in adulthood. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education 119, 61–71. Collins. (2020) Yoh. Collins English Dictionary. See www.collinsdictionary.com (accessed August 2020). Coyle, D., Hood, P. and Marsh, D. (2010) Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fomunyam, K.G. (2017) Decolonising the Engineering Curriculum in a South African University of Technology. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research 12 (17), 6797–6805. García, O. and Li, W. (2014) Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Gilmore, A. (2007) Authentic materials and authenticity in foreign language learning. Language Teaching 40, 97–118. Gunn, A.A., Bennett, S.B., Evans, L.S., Peterson, B.J. and Welsh, J.L. (2013) Autobiographies in pre-service teacher education: a snapshot tool as a building block to culturally responsive pedagogy. International Journal of Multicultural Education 15 (1), 1–20. Habermas, T. (2011) Autobiographical reasoning: arguing and narrating from a biographical perspective. New Directions in Child and Adolescent Development 131, 1–17. Hibbert, L. (2018) Critical language awareness as decolonising tool for a unifying ecology in teacher education in South Africa. Journal for Language Teaching 52 (2), 78–98. Hurst, E. and Mona, M. (2017) ‘Translanguaging’ as a socially just pedagogy. Education as Change 21 (2), 126–148. Hyland, K. (2015) Academic Publishing: Issues and Challenges in the Construction of Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jeppie, S. and Soudien, C. (eds) (1990) The struggle for District Six: Past and present. Cape Town History. See http://www.capetownhistory.com (accessed August 2020). Kumaravadivelu, B. (2016) The decolonial option in English teaching: Can the subaltern act? TESOL Quarterly 50 (1), 66–85 (original work published in 2014). Laenui, P. (2000) Processes of decolonization. In M. Batista (ed.) Reclaiming Indigenous Voice and Vision (pp. 86–100). Vancouver: UBC Press. Le Grange, L. (2016) Decolonizing the university curriculum. South African Journal of Higher Education 30 (2), 1–12. Livingston, C. (2018) Transplanting the fairy tale: An Afrocentric perspective. Education as Change 22 (3), 1–17.

Autobiographical Fairy Tales for Authenticity in the English Classroom  213

Lopez, A.A., Turkan, S. and Guzman-Orth, D. (2017) Conceptualising the Use of Translanguaging in Initial Content Assessments for Newly Arrived Emergent Bilingual Students (Research Report No. RR-17-07). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Morrow, K. (1977) Authentic texts and ESP. In S. Holden (ed.) English for Specific Purposes (pp. 13–17). London: Modern English Publications. Nabudere, D.W. (2012) Africology and Transdisciplinarity: A Restorative Epistemology. Pretoria: Africa Institute of South Africa. Pinner, R. (2013) Authenticity of purpose: CLIL as a way to bring meaning and motivation into EFL contexts. Asian EFL Journal Research Articles 15 (4), 1–21. Pinner, R.S. (2016) Reconceptualising Authenticity for English as a Global Language. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Pitsoe, V.J. and Letseka, M.M. (2018) An Afrocentric paradigm in education and research. In M.M. Sefotho (ed.) Philosophy in Education and Research: African Perspectives (pp. 37–49). Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers. Roman, S. (2019) What Kaaps brings to the table: a sociolinguistic analysis of the intersection between language, food and identity in Vannie Kaap memes. Master’s thesis in General linguistics, Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch University. Rossiter, M. (1999) A narrative approach to development: Implications for adult ­education. Adult Education Quarterly 50 (1), 56–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/07417139922086911 Salazar, M. (2013) A humanizing pedagogy. Reinventing the principles and practice of education as a journey toward liberation. Review of Research in Education 37, 121–148. Sandelowski, M. (1991) Telling stories: Narrative approaches in qualitative research. Journal of Nursing Scholarship 23 (3), 161–166. Stan, R.V. (2015) The importance of literature in primary school pupils’ development and personal growth. Social and Behavioral Sciences 180, 454–459. Tomlinson, B. and Masuhara, H. (2010) Research for Materials Development in Language Learning. London: Continuum. Trinder-Smith, T. (2006) ‘Orchidaceae’. Wild Flowers of the Table Mountain National Park. Kirstenbosch. Claremont: Botanical Society of South Africa. Ushioda, E. (2009) A person-in-context relational view of emergent motivation, self and identity. In Z. Dörnyei and E. Ushioda (eds) Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self (pp. 215–228). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Van Wyk, M.M. (2014) Conceptualizing an Afrocentric-indigenous pedagogy for an inclusive classroom environment. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences 5 (4), 292–299. Velasco, P. and García, O. (2014) Translanguaging and writing of bilingual learners. Bilingual Research Journal 37 (1), 6–23. WordHippo. (2020) What does ‘thula’ mean in Zulu? See http://www.wordhippo.com (accessed August 2020). Zipes, J. (ed.) (2015) The Oxford Companion to Fairy Tales (2nd edn). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

14 Indie-Folk Music and the Quest for First-Person Authenticity Håvard Haugland Bamle

Introduction

The meaning of the term authenticity has been the subject of much debate. The multitude of different denotations that circulate in the academic discourse has obfuscated the term to the point where it is in dire need of rehabilitation. Will (2018) has made an important contribution to this by thoroughly surveying the academic discourse in English as a Foreign Language. The current dominant notions in this field involve viewing authenticity as the correspondence of language to a largely essentialist understanding of culture. Authenticity is used to describe a property inherent in an object (‘an authentic text’) or an ‘essential feature of language (‘authentic English’). These meanings, however, are far removed from both the philosophical origins of the term and its usage in many areas of popular culture. As demonstrated by Grene (1952), Van Lier (1996) and Will and Pinner (see Chapter 1 in this volume), the ­concept of authenticity has its roots in the idea of individual freedom that we find in existential philosophy. In this context, authenticity is connected to the practice of freely shaping ourselves and our world (Grene, 1952: 266). Restoring this understanding of the term could benefit not only pedagogical approaches in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning (FLTL); it also has potential application across discourse boundaries. This chapter places authenticity in the context of popular music. Its main aim is to unpack the existential contents of the term with insights from the field of song studies that demonstrate the personal aspect of authentic practices. This will involve a preliminary discussion of the status of the term in popular music studies, and a detailed discussion of how authenticity is approached in the generic context of indie-folk music. Subsequently, I want to show how this study can benefit our understanding of the challenge that authenticity poses to young language learners. The study of music reveals how authenticity is claimed through the 214

Indie-Folk Music and the Quest for First-Person Authenticity  215

subjective engagement of individuals in the act of self-creation. By examining how existential themes are approached in popular music, we can better appreciate what it means to be a person searching for authenticity in all areas of life. Authenticity in Popular Music Studies

The problem of authenticity extends to the field of popular music studies. In the popular music discourse, authenticity is a necessary critical value, yet it does not have a single clear denotation (Frith, 1996a: 88–89). Many scholars agree with Pickering (1986: 213) that authenticity is a relative concept generally used in absolutist terms, and on this basis several musicologists have tried to sort out the relative distinctions operating within the term (key texts include Barker & Taylor, 2007; Frith, 1996a, 1996b; Grossberg, 1992; Keightley, 2001; Middleton, 1990, 2006; Moore, 2002; Rubidge, 1996; Walser, 1993). One of the most influential commentators is Moore (2002), who distinguishes three ways in which music can be said to be authentic: authenticity in the ‘first-person’ sense applies when music aligns with the personal truth of the artist or performer. This means that music is a genuine expression of the personal thoughts or feelings of a musician. In the ‘second-person’ sense, authenticity applies when music is in line with a particular culture or musical tradition. Choosing to play a traditional folk song on the original instrument is an example of how a folk musician could be aiming for authenticity in this sense. In the ‘thirdperson’ sense, authenticity applies when music aligns with the socio-­ cultural identity of the listener. This means that the authenticity of a performance is dependent on how well it resonates with the sentiments and preoccupations of the listener. Moore states that authenticity is not inscribed in music but ascribed by people on these three levels (2002: 220). He references Rubidge (1996), who argues that authenticity is first and foremost a matter of perception and is therefore not a property of music itself but rather a result of how listeners ‘authenticate’ music (Moore, 2002: 210). This approach to authenticity is well on the way towards reaffirming the philosophical meaning of authenticity as tied to action. There is, however, need for supplementation here. Moore does not entirely do away with the conception of authenticity as correspondence of music to an essential notion of either culture or community. He simply shifts the focus from musical objects to the listening act. The basis for authenticity lies still in the evaluation of how music (or the listener’s interpretation of music) corresponds to the standards of a community or individual listeners. This omits the personal sense in which people engage with music in search of authenticity. In fact, authenticity is both ascribed to and inscribed in music, by virtue of the personal engagement of individuals on the first-person level (Middleton, 2006: 205).

216  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

In the informal discourse on rock music, ‘authenticity is understood as “unmediated expression”; i.e. a communication of emotional content [or identity/cultural experience] that is unfiltered by the production of the musical expression’ (Middleton, 1990 in Moore, 2002: 212). In other words, authenticity is understood as the direct communication of firstperson experience. Moore writes that it would be naïve to view authenticity in this manner (Moore, 2002: 214). Since there is no neutral ground from whence such unmediated expression can be determined (cf. Grossberg, 1992), Moore argues, authenticity in the first-person sense is merely the perceived unmediated expression of a performance, filtered through interpretation from a third-person perspective. Middleton (2006) argues against this, calling for a recognition in academic discourse of the way first-person authenticity is evoked in popular music culture (Middleton, 2006: 205). Moore is headed in the right direction, but he might be asking the wrong question: Authenticity is a quality of selves and of cultures; and they construct each other: which is another way of saying that the question here is not so much what or where authenticity is, but how it is produced. (Middleton, 2006: 206)

According to Middleton, authenticity is tied to self-identity and its construction through interaction with music. This process occurs on the first-person level, by exploring the self, using music to express one’s sentiments in a more genuine, personal or urgent way than they could otherwise be expressed. In this way, first-person authenticity could be seen as the process of personal engagement in the construction of self through music. Authenticity in this sense can be regarded as analogous to the meaning of authenticity advocated by Van Lier. In Will’s study, the concept is called ‘authenticity of individual behaviour’ (2018: 60). Its main advantage is an emphasis on the personal aspect of authenticity: an action is authentic when it realises a free choice and is an expression of what a person genuinely feels and believes. An authentic action is intrinsically motivated. Inauthentic action is taken because everyone else is doing them, they ‘ought’ to be done, or in general they are motivated by external factors. (Van Lier, 1996: 13)

Applying this meaning to the context of FLTL, language is authentic when students are actively engaged in its use. What matters is not whether or not one engages with activities that correspond to the essentialist notions of a given culture, but that students actively engage themselves in a setting and the actions in that setting. Their active participation authenticates the learning process and the language used in it (Van Lier, 1996: 128). Applying the same meaning to the context of popular music, music

Indie-Folk Music and the Quest for First-Person Authenticity  217

is authentic when people freely engage with it on a personal level. It is not a question of whether or not music corresponds to anyone’s idea of what music should be, but whether a person engages with it in a process of selfrealisation. The point of reference is the self as opposed to a musical tradition or community which an artist is expected to cater to. In both FLTL and popular music, this notion of authenticity is in line with the central tenet of existential philosophy; the moral ideal of being personally engaged in one’s existence in the world (Cooper, 2012: 43–44; Grene, 1952: 266; Hannay, 2012: 91). Popular music is both influential and accessible to students and can be used as a constructive example of authentic self-expression. In the following, I will illustrate how first-person authenticity is explored in music by taking a closer look at the genre of indie-folk. This genre is uniquely suited to the study of authenticity, as it draws inspiration from the distinct ideologies of authenticity that we find in indie and contemporary folk music. The artists Bon Iver and Fleet Foxes will be used as examples of how indie-folk musicians fuse indie and folk music elements to explore the ambiguities of self in relation to time, belonging and faith. Together, these themes indicate a preoccupation and effort to come to terms with the ambiguities of being. What we see is an engagement with music in the interest of self-realisation – in other words, a quest for first-person authenticity. Authenticity and Indie-Folk Music(king)

Music is not an object, but an activity. It is something we do, according to Small (1998), who coins the term ‘musicking’ to accommodate this proclamation. ‘Musicking’ is to engage with music in whatever way: producing it, consuming it, or otherwise participating in a musical event (Small, 1998: 9). When people ‘musick’, they establish a network of relationships with other people who ‘musick’. We can refer to this as forming a ‘musicking culture’. This should not be taken as a stable and unchanging structure, but as a pragmatic one that is defined by all those who participate and invest their efforts in a shared act, or ritual, of musicking. Genre reflects the aesthetic patterns of a musicking culture. Small (1998: 102–103) argues that all music(king) serves as a ‘metaphor’ for concepts beyond the concrete conditions of the musicking body. That is to say that the way music is done (what is valued, created and consumed) corresponds to the underlying conditions of the musicking culture (by translating abstract concepts, the metaphysics of a culture, into the ‘concrete, bodily’ language of music). A musical genre can thus indicate common sentiments in the culture of said genre, no matter whether these sentiments are commonly expressed or even understood by the participants of the culture. Put differently, the ritual (of musicking) makes immanent, through performance, what is unspoken, assumed (a priori) within a

218  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

culture. The process here is not automatic, however, as participation in the ritual involves the free choice to form relationships that are suited to one’s own personal interests. All genres come with ideological implications constituted by the conventions of a musicking culture (see also Fabbri, 1981: 53). Indie, for example, derived from ‘independent’, has connotations of being an ‘outsider’ to mainstream popular culture. It carries the implication that authentic music is produced outside the corporate music industry. Contemporary folk music similarly marks a rejection of the alienation of the individual in modern society, and also largely eschews the corporate music industry. However, instead of cultivating an ‘outsider’ identity, folk music seeks authenticity in tradition, finding community in pre-modern roots (Eckstein, 2010: 54–55). Authenticity as it is usually understood in the context of indie and folk easily fits Moore’s categories of second- and third-person authenticity. Music is said to be authentic if the music corresponds to the notion of proper music as dictated by the practices and ideologies of the respective musicking cultures. That is not to say that one cannot engage with these genres of music on a first-person level. One operates at a first-person level when one establishes a relationship to others in a musicking culture, thereby contributing to the development of a genre. By infusing indie rock with folk music elements, this is what many ‘indie-folk’ artists have done. Artists like Bon Iver and Fleet Foxes have drawn inspiration from both indie and folk music in the pursuit of a musical expression that authentically reflects their own musicking ideals. The identification of their music as part of a genre marked off from both indie and folk reflects a distinct cultural base with distinctive preoccupations. The hyphenated label ‘indie-folk’ implies both a fusion of musical styles and ambiguity in the ideology of the genre. Indie-folk is characterised by an atmospheric rock sound highlighting vocal harmonies. The strumming of acoustic guitars and human vocals inspired by folk music are most central to the genre, but artists may also utilise other instruments, such as strings and woodwinds (Fleet Foxes) or autotune (Bon Iver), to achieve the desired atmospheric sound. Indie-folk does not claim authenticity in the sense of having cultural ties to traditional folk music. On the contrary, Robin Pecknold of Fleet Foxes has referred to his own music as ‘fauxlk’ music (Eells, 2011: 76), indicating an element of imitation rather than being ‘true’ folk music. By doing so, Pecknold evokes the indie ideal of being independently outside established music culture. At the same time, however, the connotations of folk in Fleet Foxes’ music work against the indie precept of being outsiders. While indie-folk songs often underscore the indie feeling of not belonging, the feeling is consoled by the folk-tinted musical environment. In the quest for authentic self-­ expression, artists create a new musical environment, a space where firstperson authenticity is made possible. The effect of this conflation of

Indie-Folk Music and the Quest for First-Person Authenticity  219

ideologies is that authenticity in the new generic context becomes a matter of ambiguity. Ambiguity is at the core of authentic expression in indie-folk. Demonstrating the importance of ambiguity in his music, Pecknold refers to F. Scott Fitzgerald, who once declared that ‘the test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time’ (Weiner, 2017: 18). Dolan (2017: 54) mentions how this comes to expression in music when he writes that Pecknold’s ‘lyrics reveal a divided mind to match the music’s fragmented flow’. These statements hint at an intentional musical strategy of ambiguity on the part of Fleet Foxes, towards the cultural concerns of indie-folk. Fonarow (2006: 12) found that the indie community is a predominantly young adult, white, middleclass community. Although journalistic sources (e.g. Cohen, 2009: 24) claim that indie-folk has cross-generational appeal, the most popular artists remain young white males from the middle class. Accordingly, the music is meant to resonate with the concerns of middle-class young adults going through what Pecknold calls a ‘quarter-life crisis’ (Eells, 2011), a crisis of settling into a social identity; for the first time being on one’s own with big questions but no authority to answer them. This ‘crisis’ in the cultural foundation of the genre is the basis from which the central motifs and themes in the music emerge. Key Themes in Indie-Folk Song Lyrics

Central motifs in indie-folk lyrics include simplicity, nature imagery, seasons changing, travel, memory of better times, falling from grace or glory, shaken belief in God and other authorities, aging, and changing relationships to family and friends. Many of these motifs come together in a few themes, and in the following, I will examine three of them more closely: time (present/past), place (belonging/displacement) and belief (faith/doubt). Each theme is represented as a conceptual pair to illustrate an area in which characters question the ontological unity of self. In the process of self-examination, identity is troubled by ambiguity, being torn between different times, places and beliefs. These themes emerge as part of a larger quest to achieve first-person authenticity in indie-folk, a quest in which thought is engaged through music in a process of self-exploration and self-realisation. Time (present/past)

On being asked about their unexpected popularity, the president of Sub Pop (Fleet Foxes’ record label) said that the band ‘collided with the zeitgeist’ (Cohen, 2009: 23–24). This may well be said about the entire genre of indie-folk. The fusion of indie and folk music is a junction where the present and past meet, addressing the conflicts that arise in transition.

220  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

For example, Fleet Foxes’ song ‘Montezuma’ is a lamentation on the transience of life. As the speaker in the song meditates on his current age, he bemoans decline in all its forms. His lament reflects an assumption that his authentic condition is an idealised past. But a psychological conflict arises from the realisation that life does not adhere to static ideals. Although the title of the song hints at a person to have fallen from great stature (the Aztec emperor Montezuma), the lyrics could be uttered by anyone who feels that they cannot keep up with the movement of time. The personal lamentation of the speaker is further generalised as the inevitable decline of all people and things, as all life eventually returns to the earth. Ambiguity in this song is evident in two ways. First, the lamentation of life’s inevitable decline is carried by strum guitar and vocal harmony. The tranquil instrumentation undermines the fatalistic language of the lyrics. Second, the imagery signifies circularity. The speaker laments the fact that life is changing. Yet, like in the changing of the seasons, there is something egalitarian about how everyone is subject to the same movement of time through decline, return and ultimately renewal. Similar reflections on the circularity of time through seasonal motifs can be found in other indie-folk songs. Fleet Foxes’ ‘White Winter Hymnal’ and Bon Iver’s ‘Woods’ are two examples of songs that each have only a single verse, which is repeated in a circular structure. The songs are increasingly layered each time a verse is repeated. Fleet Foxes adds instrumentation, while Bon Iver adds an electronic double of his own voice, each time tuned to a different pitch. Playing with time through repetition and layering, music can explore not only nostalgia for the past, but also trauma and anaesthesia. Fleet Foxes’ ‘White Winter Hymnal’ is a play on memory using the juxtaposition of seasons as a symbol of time standing still. The circular song structure and alternating mention of colours (red and white) in relation to a ‘fall’ indicate a sense of trauma: a moment frozen in time. Bon Iver’s ‘Woods’ declares in the lyrics an effort to stop time, an effort that is then reinforced both through repetition of the words and a period of silence between each repetition. The sparsity of lyrics in this song gives extra weight to every word. The word ‘still’ describes the effort to make time stand still, but is also an image that could refer either to a photography still in which a moment in time is entirely frozen, or to the folkloric traditional practice of making ‘moonshine’ in the woods, inducing the melancholic daze of alcohol consumption, reflecting a dulling of the speaker’s sense of time. The ‘loop aesthetic’ structures in these songs synergise to create an atmosphere of feeling detached from the movement of time. Bon Iver and Fleet Foxes approach this with slight variations in their music. Danielsen and Brøvig-Hanssen (2016) among others have pointed out Justin Vernon’s (of Bon Iver) inspiration from hip hop in his use of autotune technology.

Indie-Folk Music and the Quest for First-Person Authenticity  221

In hip-hop, autotune is often used to convey a sense of alienation, and by using digital technology to clean up the vocal as well as doubling his voice, Vernon creates an alienated alter-ego, at the same time evoking a sense of perfection in the song’s vocal. In this way, he is detached not only from time but also from himself, allowing him to get in touch with his pure self, and thus achieving a sense of authenticity. ‘White Winter Hymnal’, on the other hand, places the natural human voice in the foreground, accompanied by traditional instruments. It is the human voice (and its gradual intensification) that is best suited to explore the very personal sense of time that is linked with trauma, as it creates an effect of direct connection between speaker and listener. Time is often evoked when the self is explored in the context of transition. Nostalgia for times past and the freezing of time are both lyrical explorations that speak to disillusioned youth on the threshold of adulthood. This is a theme that teachers should take particular note of. After all, students are always in a process of transition. Place (belonging/displacement)

The sense of not belonging is a central theme in indie rock. Indie-folk also explores a sense of displacement, but while indie has usually been understood to deal with the theme in a social sense, I want to emphasise that the displacement theme in indie-folk can also be read as ontological. Motifs like travel, going away and descriptions of locations either close to home or far away in foreign climates serve the thematic explorations of the self in relationship to place. In some cases, a sense of ontological displacement can arise from a more immediate sense of social displacement. In Fleet Foxes’ song ‘Mykonos’, there is a reference to some event that has caused the speaker to fall out socially. A door has closed, and a relationship has been upended. With an optimistic turn of the voice, the speaker suggests that going away to a sunny and comfortable place may ease the conflict surrounding him. The song indicates, however, that travel will not help the speaker escape the conflict that is tied essentially to the self. The song ends with the repetition of an ambiguous statement, emphasising that the solution is not a true resolution to the sense of displacement. The true conflict does not lie in a situation that can simply be escaped. Bon Iver’s ‘Holocene’ also deals with the ambivalence of escape as a solution to displacement. As in ‘Mykonos’, the speaker in this song meditates on some mistake done in the past. The ontological struggle here is expressed in the first sentence, which suggests that this mistake is both ‘a part of’ and ‘apart from’ what the speaker is willing to identify with. The song evokes imagery of a wanderer in desolate landscapes, walking astray (like a lost cat), with a sense of cold emptiness inside. The scene is set in Milwaukee around the time of Halloween. This setting signals a cold

222  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

urban landscape in the US Midwest during fall, but also that the psychological sense of alienation is greater than the geographic distance to home. Images of desolate landscapes are juxtaposed with positive winter imagery in a memory of Christmas with the family, marking a contrast between the sense of fulfilment felt at two different stages of life. At one time the sense of belonging is real, immediate, while at the other, it is distant, only a memory. Home is a state that is at once both ‘a part of’ and ‘apart from’ the speaker in his current negotiations with identity. He is neither fully inside nor fully outside the place where he belongs. All of these songs feature lyrical motifs from folk music, like in the references to nature and idealised places, to remedy the sense of belonging momentarily. But although many ways are suggested of restoring community with others, these are not ultimately able solutions to the lingering sense of ontological displacement of the self. Belief (faith/doubt)

Related to the displacement of the self, a significant amount of indiefolk songs deals with ambiguity in the context of faith and doubt. Fleet Foxes’ ‘Helplessness Blues’ reveals a struggle to deal with identity in existential terms. The speaker in this song is searching for his proper place in life. At first, he consults unnamed authorities to tell him what to do, but immediately afterwards he resists the idea that his life be determined by anyone outside of himself. This leaves the speaker at a loss for a concrete identity that he can adopt. He does not know which authorities to trust, nor, consequently, what to believe about himself. The refrain ending each verse summarises the speaker’s struggle and shows that he is determined to resolve his identity crisis. The end of the song indicates a romantic idea that the speaker could find authenticity in labouring close to the earth. The speaker’s quest itself, however, to freely decide what to make of himself, is an indicator of the quest for first-person authenticity operating in this song. Bon Iver approaches the exploration of faith and doubt in a different manner. Instead of lyrically juxtaposing different ideas and linking them sequentially, ‘33 “GOD”’ utilises sampling technology in order to create a counter voice to the main speaker. This allows two different perspectives to be performed simultaneously, creating an ambiguous expression of faith and doubt in relation to a religious context. Using the sampled voices of Jim Ed Brown and Paolo Nutini as a lyrical foundation, Justin Vernon overlays his own voice to express hesitation. For example, when Nutini calls out the word God, Vernon questions God. Varnado (2019) points to this use of samples in ‘33 “GOD”’ as ‘performative quotations’: they are part of the song, directed by Vernon to serve as distinct voices in a unified expression of self. The exchange between Vernon’s vocal and the sampled vocals leave the impression of an internal conflict of faith contributing to

Indie-Folk Music and the Quest for First-Person Authenticity  223

a sense of ontological displacement. After all, ambiguity in matters of faith can be particularly disillusioning, especially in periods of transition where many feel they have to commit to an identity once and for all. In the quest for authenticity, one is well served by recognising this conflict as a matter of great personal concern. Indie-Folk and Authentic Self-Expression

To Fleet Foxes, first-person authenticity is a matter of consoling the ambiguities that create personal conflict. Their music can be said to be authentic if it successfully reflects the personal struggle to resolve the feeling of ambiguity. Other indie-folk artists strike similar chords with their audiences, although their musical strategies may be different. Vernon does not approach music with Pecknold’s strategy towards the resolution of ambiguity. Authenticity to Bon Iver means not to resolve the ambiguities, but rather to sustain them musically. Vernon employs word association techniques and abstract lyrics with open-ended meanings. Most of his songs end without any narrative resolution. Interpretation of abstract lyrics is guided by the artist, either through the creation of an entire ‘mythology of Bon Iver’, as was the case when Vernon released a 400-word essay on the exceptional circumstances around the creation of his first album (Lipshutz, 2011), or through the creative use of digital technology. These means always serve to intensify the feelings of ambiguity rather than to resolve them. Each artist’s unique approach towards the ambiguities of being reveals the particular and personal concerns present in their quests for first-­ person authenticity. In this regard, indie-folk lyrics exhibit many similarities to confessional poetry. This type of poetry obscures the distinction between the poet and the lyrical ‘I’ (Roessner, 2012: 203–205). The confessional approach relies on the revelation of deeply personal truths, and through these ‘confessions’ poetry can be seen as lyrical self-portraits (Yezzi, 1998). Similarly, indie-folk lyrics evoke sincerity and autobiography in the service of first-person authenticity. Fleet Foxes’ and Bon Iver’s stories are well known by fans of their music. Fleet Foxes’ seven-year hiatus and Vernon’s 2006 break-up that made him go to an isolated cabin for several months to record his first album are both myths that lend credence to the first-person lyrics of their songs. The myths of the performing artists work in tandem with their respective musical expression to create an interpretive framework highlighting first-person authenticity. The staging of myth is obviously not necessary for the achievement of authenticity in a first-person sense. What matters is ultimately free engagement in a process of self-realisation. Staging the self in music can contribute to this, however, through what Frith calls ‘double enactment’ (1996a: 212). It is the idea that in music, artist and persona become inseparable because in both cases identity is ritual. Identity is constituted through

224  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

ritual performances; one is defined by what one does rather than by what one essentially is. The identity of an artist is constituted by the songs they perform, and artistic personas are embedded with meaning through their performance. Bon Iver is the musical persona of Justin Vernon, but while his music is performed through an act, the persona is also the way Vernon engages himself in the music. If both identities are mutually constituted through this ritual, then the two will to a certain extent coincide at the moment of the performance. This is not to say that a lyrical persona is identical to the artist, but that by engaging with the persona, the artist can achieve first-person authenticity. Neither the people behind the music nor their musical expressions should be forgotten in discussions about authenticity. It is not any one of these but the intertwined relationship between them that is the very foundation of authenticity. Indie-Folk as a Model for Authenticity in FLTL

The analysis above is intended to highlight the presence and meaning of first-person authenticity in popular music. My present goal is to suggest how teachers can tap into the potential of songs to discover some principles of authenticity that are transferrable to FLTL. I want to emphasise two ways in which the study of songs is especially relevant to this context. First, popular music speaks to the condition of young students. The overarching themes of indie-folk are resonant to the challenges faced by students of foreign languages in the quest for authenticity. Language learning is a formative practice, and students are always in a transitional phase, looking to find their place in the world, and gradually coming to terms with their autonomy. In order to claim authenticity in a foreign language setting, learners are forced to realise that although they are taught the rules and conventions of a language system, they are ultimately free to engage themselves creatively in its use. Take the example of ‘Helplessness Blues’. The speaker in this song is coming to terms with himself after losing faith in the authorities of his past. How he should live, in a general sense, is now entirely open, and he is forced to decide for himself what to do with his life. To achieve authenticity in the existential sense requires a realisation of the kind reflected in this song, the realisation that one is ultimately free to create oneself despite influence from external authorities. Bringing this lesson into FLTL, students may realise that in the ­pursuit of authenticity, they are free to defy many linguistic prescriptions. Although using a foreign language at a time when the sense of personal identity is still developing, authenticity may seem an impossible ideal. Unlike students of foreign languages, musicians control the medium of their own expression. As an act of musicking, artists have the freedom to innovate and transcend the boundaries of genre in the pursuit of

Indie-Folk Music and the Quest for First-Person Authenticity  225

authenticity. Students, on the other hand, may be of the impression that language must be mastered before it can be used to express oneself. However, language learning, like identity in general, is not something to be concluded. It is imperative to remember that authenticity means engaging oneself in self-creation, being always in a process of change and development. By taking inspiration from music and musicking artists, for example, the way indie-folk artists have created a space for self-expression in-between the boundaries of previous genres, language learners could be given similar freedom to engage with language, to make a foreign language their own. Second, teachers can take inspiration from indie-folk to create a new learning environment in which students are given the freedom to create themselves in a foreign language setting. The generic innovations made by artists like Fleet Foxes and Bon Iver address the underlying ontological tension of the self not by counteracting the friction, but by creating a musical space in which the tension is momentarily relieved. It is the personal engagement with music that enables the possibility of authentic selfexpression. Like artists engaging with music in order to come to terms with these issues, students can engage with language learning in a similar process of self-creation. Following this connection, teachers can use some of the principles of indie-folk songs in their teaching practice. Teachers can create the conditions that allow students to engage in authentic language practice. One approach to this could involve a higher emphasis on creative writing rather than on writing to fit established generic forms. In order to accommodate the process of self-exploration through creative writing, teachers should not demand conventionally coherent narrative structures. Instead, the focus should be on free expression, polyphony and language play. The creative process could even embrace multimodality, embracing music or other artforms in conjunction with written text. This does not make the language learning process entirely relative to the creative fancies of students. It rather allows them to realise the freedom to engage with language on their own terms. The most important thing is that teachers help students to establish the conditions of their own language practice, creating a new learning environment, the way indie-folk artists carved a new musical environment to reflect the ambiguities of their inner selves. A different way in which students can engage in creative self-exploration and language play is through role-playing. Taking inspiration from the way indie-folk artists like Bon Iver use personas to explore themselves in song, students can be asked to create characters, and by creatively engaging with these they discover how they can use language to reflect emotions as well as to explore themselves through alter-egos. Role-playing is often utilised in classrooms, in settings such as history re-enactments or mock trials. Usually in these activities, roles are predetermined by the teacher, and if a class is new to the concept of role playing, the teacher may

226  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

provide character models to get the students started. It is also usually a good idea to establish a fictional situation in order to get students to interact with one another. However, as soon as the premise of the role-playing activity is established, it is important that students themselves are asked to imbue the characters with personality and emotional contents, creating in effect their own personas. Performing a character means adopting aspects that are not identified with the self. The creation of a persona is therefore a reflection of who one is and who one is not. This allows students to approach language use as a playful exploration of their own selves. And in the ritual of performance, they can momentarily realise the authentic engagement of their own subjectivity. Importantly, role-playing allows students to see themselves from an outside perspective, an effect that is enhanced in a social setting. This effect of social performance points to Widdowson’s concept of authenticity, which is to be viewed ‘not as a quality residing in instances of language but as a quality which is bestowed upon them, created by the response of the receiver. Authenticity in this view is a function of the interaction between the reader/hearer and the discourse as incorporating the intentions of the writer/speaker’ (Widdowson, 1976: 263). In a social setting like the classroom, authenticity arises in the interaction between students, each creating themselves in performance. Conclusion

Authenticity in music is an identity project, but it is not a simple matter of encoding identity into a musical expression. Instead, music is a ritual through which identity is created. First-person authenticity is not a matter of authentication on the part of a community or essentialist standard of music, but a matter of engaging with music on the part of free individuals in a ‘musicking’ culture. The measure of authenticity is not a measure of correspondence to any fixed cultural essence, but of the genuine involvement of people in a musical event. When engagement with music happens in the service of personal self-realisation, music can be considered authentic in the first-person sense of the word. Genres reflect the musical engagements of distinct musicking cultures. Some genres may be strongly linked with specific social identities, while others explore the ambiguities of existence within the mainstream of society. Indie-folk reflects a culture facing a crisis of identity that occurs in the transitional life phases of people growing up with an increasing sense of alienation. The conflict that we encounter in many indie-folk songs has to do with the lack of a satisfactory ontology of the self. The self is stuck in a time-loop, torn between inside and outside, not sure what or whom to believe. Authenticity in the context of this genre means engaging with music in the interest of coming to terms with the ambiguity of one’s situation. Indie-folk artists employ a variety of strategies to deal with this

Indie-Folk Music and the Quest for First-Person Authenticity  227

ontological challenge. Bon Iver’s use of persona and abstract/word associative lyrics are ways in which the artist explores self-expression, allowing the ultimate meaning of songs to remain open, while guiding listeners’ interpretations towards himself. Fleet Foxes’ encouragement that the listener ‘strive for the ability to hold two ideas in the mind at once’ is another strategy, one that avoids reducing the expression to an unsustainable commitment to any single essential definition of identity. Middleton (2006: 219) writes that ‘the crisis of authenticity represents both a cultural crisis – which needless to say runs through all forms of signifying practice, including music – and also a crisis of subjectivity’. The term authenticity has gradually been detached from the existentialist notion of intrinsically motivated subjective agency. Simultaneously, the subject itself has become detached from the meaning of its activities. In order to reconnect authenticity to the tenets of existential philosophy, we must recognise it is people in the act of creating themselves that are ultimately authenticated. This is a valuable perspective whether you are a teacher or a musician. No matter the context, the disillusionment of self is prevalent in youth. Some students might find it difficult to engage themselves authentically in learning activities, making this entire debate around the concept of authenticity irrelevant. Consider then, the ubiquity and influence of popular music among students all around the world. Take inspiration from the way many of them invariably engage with music through the act of musicking. Use songs as examples and allow students the freedom to carve new spaces for genuine linguistic exploration, even if it means breaking some codes. Let students in a learning process create themselves by role-playing, and through the free engagement in language play they will approach the ideal of authenticity. References Barker, H. and Taylor, Y. (2007) Faking It: The Quest for Authenticity in Popular Music. New York and London: W. W. Norton & Company. Brøvig-Hanssen, R. and Danielsen, A. (2016) Digital Signatures: The Impact of Digitization on Popular Music Sound, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Cohen, J. (2009) ‘American Pastoral’. Billboard 2/7/2009, Vol. 121, Issue 5, pp .22–24. Cooper, D.E. (2012) ‘Existentialism as a philosophical movement’. In S. Crowell (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Existentialism (pp. 27–49). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dolan, J. (2017) Fleet Foxes Go on a Prog-Folk Odyssey. Rolling Stone, 6/29/2017, Issue 1290, p. 54. Eckstein, L. (2010) Reading Song Lyrics. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Eells, J. (2011) Best Breakout Band: Fleet Foxes. Rolling Stone, 4/28/2011, Issue 1129, pp. 74–78. Fabbri, F. (1981) A theory of musical genres: Two applications. In D. Horn and P. Tagg (eds) Popular Music Perspectives, International Association for the Study of Popular Music (pp. 52–81). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fonarow, W. (2006) Empire of Dirt: The Aesthetics and Rituals of British Indie Music. Middletown: Wesleyan University Press.

228  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

Frith, S. (1996a) Performing Rites: On the Value of Popular Music. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Frith, S. (1996b) Music and identity. In St. Hall and P. du Gay (eds) Questions of Cultural Identity (pp. 108–127). London: Sage. Grene, M. (1952) Authenticity: An existential virtue. Ethics 62 (4), 266–274. Grossberg, L. (1992) We Gotta Get Out of This Place: Popular Conservatism and Postmodern Culture. New York and London: Routledge. Hannay, A. (2012) Kierkegaard’s single individual and the point of indirect communication. In S. Crowell (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Existentialism (pp. 73–95). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Keightley, K. (2001) Reconsidering Rock. In S. Frith, W. Straw and J. Street (eds) The Cambridge Companion to Pop and Rock (pp. 109–142). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lipshutz, J. (2011) ‘Summer Comes: A seductive creation mythology, a creative kinship with Kanye West, an authentic indie-folk sensibility and a muted marketing strategy – Bon Iver, aka Wisconsin’s own Justin Vernon is ready for the world’ in Billboard Vol. 123, Issue 18, pp. 18–21. Middleton, R. (1990) Studying Popular Music. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Middleton, R. (2006) Voicing the Popular: On the Subjects of Popular Music. New York: Routledge. Moore, A. (May 2002) Authenticity as authentication. Popular Music 21 (2), 209–223. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pattison, R. (1987) The Triumph if Vulgarity. Rock Music in the Mirror of Romanticism. Cary: Oxford University Press. Pickering, M. (1986) The dogma of authenticity in the experience of popular music. In G. McGregor and R.S. White (eds) The Art of Listening (pp. 201–220). London: Croom Helm. Roessner, J. (2012) Laughing in tune: R.E.M. and the post-confessional lyric. In C. Pence (ed.) The Poetics of American Song Lyrics (pp. 203–211). Jackson, MS: University Press of Mississippi. Rubidge, S. (1996) Does authenticity matter? The case for and against authenticity in the performing arts. in P. Campbell (ed.) Analysing Performance (pp. 219–233). Manchester: Manchester University Press. Small, C. (1998) Musicking. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press. Van Lier, L. (1996) Interaction in the Language Curriculum. Awareness, Autonomy and Authenticity. London: Longman. Varnado, N.E. (2019) The sampling aesthetic of Bon Iver’s “33 ‘God’”. In J.-O. Gullö (ed.) Proceedings of the 12th Art of Record Production Conference Mono: Stereo: Multi (pp. 303–318), Stockholm: Royal College of Music (KMH) & Art of Record Production. Walser, R. (1993) Forging masculinity: Heavy metal sounds and images of gender. In Running with the Devil: Power, Gender and Madness in Heavy Metal Music (pp.131–158). Middleton, CN: Wesleyan University Press. Weiner, J. (2017) Fleet Foxes. New Harmony. Rolling Stone 6/15/2017, Issue 1289, p. 18. Widdowson, H.G. (1976) The authenticity of language data. In J.F. Fanselow and R.H. Crymes (eds) On TESOL ‘76. Selections Based on Teaching Done at the Tenth Annual TESOL Convention [in New York, NY March 2–7, 1976] (pp. 261–270). Washington, DC: TESOL. Will, L. (2018) Authenticity in English Language Teaching. An Analysis of Academic Discourse. Münster: Waxmann. Yezzi, D. (1998) ‘Confessional Poetry and the Artifice of Honesty’ in New Criterion 16/10/98. See https://newcriterion.com/issues/1998/6/confessional-poetry-the-artifice-of-honesty (accessed July 2020).

Indie-Folk Music and the Quest for First-Person Authenticity  229

Songs Nutini, Paolo and Nelson, David (2014) ‘Iron Sky’, performed by Paolo Nutini, on Caustic Love, Atlantic, 2014. Pecknold, Robert Noel (2008) ‘Mykonos’, performed by Fleet foxes, on Fleet Foxes, Sub Pop, 2008. Pecknold, Robert Noel (2008) ‘White Winter Hymnal’, performed by Fleet foxes, on Fleet Foxes, Sub Pop, 2008. Pecknold, Robert Noel (2011) ‘Montezuma’, performed by Fleet Foxes, on Helplessness Blues, Bella Union, 2011. Pecknold, Robert Noel (2011) ‘Helplessness Blues’, performed by Fleet Foxes, on Helplessness Blues, Bella Union, 2011. Vernon, Justin (2009) ‘Woods’, performed by Bon Iver, on Blood Bank, Jagjaguwar, 2009. Vernon, Justin (2011) ‘Holocene’, performed by Bon Iver, on Bon Iver, Jagjaguwar, 2011. Vernon, Justin (2016) ‘33 “God”’, performed by Bon Iver, on 22, A Million, Jagjaguwar, 2016.

15 Authenticity and Literature(s) in Teacher Education: Bildung in Jigalong and Bárbmo Annelise Brox Larsen

Introduction

How can we teach literature in teacher education to make it authentic and stimulating for more students and thus facilitate the development of their affinity for reading? To adhere to the notion of authenticity (Van Lier, 1996; Will, 2018) in the literature courses of English as a foreign/second language, EFL/ESL, this chapter proposes a rethinking of the literary canon to reflect a variety of texts that may encourage modern readers to engage actively in literary discussions. In this project, a qualitative inquiry into the professional practices of reading in Norwegian teacher education focuses on suggesting a tentative teaching sequence on novels of formation. The Australian writer Margaret Balderson’s 1968 novel, When Jays Fly to Bárbmo, set in World War II (WWII) transcultural Northern Norway, and Doris Pilkington Garimara’s 1996 novel, Follow the RabbitProof Fence, are studied and compared with subtle reference to the traditional Bildungsroman (Hirsch, 1979: 294), here exemplified by Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre (1847) and Charles Dickens’ Oliver Twist (1839). The outlined teaching sequence is inspired by the ideal of free voluntary reading (Krashen, 2004), and student teachers are invited to include other relevant texts of their own choice. This provides possibilities for differentiation, according to the readers’ competence levels and preferences, in which individuals and groups can choose between different texts with similar thematic content. Perceiving reading as the interaction between the reader and the text and incorporating the intentions of the writer (Widdowson, 1976: 263) may presuppose that reading lists take students’ multifaceted backgrounds and interests into account. By creating thematic links between the readers’ 230

Authenticity and Literature(s) in Teacher Education  231

local culture – in this case, the ethnic Norwegian majority culture and the Sami and Kven minority cultures – and the situation of the Aborigines in Australia, the texts in this chapter are approached to cohere with the notions of authenticity (Van Lier, 1996; Will, 2018). Replacing a p ­ rescribed text on the reading list with a self-selected text and studying recognisable settings in which literary characters are developing and negotiating their identity may provide circumstances in which individual students may experience reading as an authentic action. Background

In a national study of the English subject curricula in five representative teacher education institutions in Norway, Moi et al. (2014: 15–16) maintain that the reading lists for literature in Norwegian teacher education may be dominated by British and American canonical children’s and young adults’ literature. One normally teaches according to the period, setting or nationality of the work or author. What is suggested in this chapter is to put less emphasis on those traditional geographical categories and appurtenant synchronous notions of literary history and focus on, for example, theme and genre when designing a teaching sequence. Formally speaking, each teacher education institution constructs its own reading lists for its literary courses. Each institution is entitled to include texts it views as suitable, as long as the texts adhere to the regulations regarding the framework plans for teacher education for Grades 5–10 (Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, 2016) or Grades 8–10 (Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, 2013), respectively. It has not been common to provide reading lists in the curricula for either teacher education or secondary schooling. However, one of the preceding curricula for lower secondary school may give us an idea of the kind of literature with which Norwegian students are supposed to be familiar. In the previous national curriculum for the lower secondary level (Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, 1997a), texts and writers are listed as examples. For eighth graders, Gulliver’s Travels, Mark Twain, Roald Dahl and Nina Bawden are listed, and for ninth graders, Ernest Hemingway, W. Somerset Maugham, Charles Dickens, J.R.R. Tolkien, William Blake, William Carlos Williams and Pygmalion. For the tenth grade, Emily Dickinson, Rupert Brooke, Langston Hughes, John Steinbeck, Charlotte Brontë, Lewis Carroll, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and Agatha Christie – all of English and American heritage – are suggested. In the Sami version of the national curriculum (Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, 1997b), poetry by Ken Jackson (Grey Eagle) is suggested as a supplement to the texts already cited. William Shakespeare and Tennessee Williams are the final writers listed in both curricula. In the subject plan for English in the current national curriculum for primary and secondary education, specific texts are not suggested. Pupils

232  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

should read, interpret and reflect on Anglophone literature, including young adult literature and self-selected texts, and they are to explore and reflect on the situation for indigenous peoples in the English-speaking world and Norway (Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, 2020). The implementation of national curricula in Norway includes local curriculum development and concerns adapting the curriculum to local circumstances. Introducing local content in education became an important matter in the 1970s as part of decentralisation processes taking place within the national education system at the time (Rød & Bæck, 2020: 219). The overall intention from the 1990s onwards has been to incorporate the cultures of indigenous populations in all subjects, including English and the other language subjects (Larsen, 2009: 82). The national curriculum for teacher education for secondary education states that the programme should enable student teachers to ‘safeguard Sami pupils’ right to education. Thus, in accordance with the Education Act and the current national curriculum for primary and secondary education and training, the programme should qualify the student teachers to provide instruction in Sami affairs and give student teachers knowledge of the status of indigenous peoples internationally (Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, 2013: 1). However, there is no such specification regarding the English subject per se, and one may find that reading lists do not adequately reflect this specific aspect. According to Røkenes (2016: 3), the terms ‘English as a foreign language, EFL’ and ‘English as a second language, ESL’ are used interchangeably to account for first foreign language English teaching in Norway. International migration increases the number of first languages represented in the population, and in addition to Norwegian, Norway has the official languages of the minority Sami and Kven populations, which influences the status of the first foreign language, English, in educational matters (Larsen, 2009: 82). English is L3 to a considerable number of pupils. In the course of the 1850s, the Norwegian government decided that L1 Norwegian was to be used in all Norwegian schools, including those in areas populated by the Sami, coercing Sami children to speak Norwegian during school hours (Minde, 2003: 122). Many Sami children were nomads who went to boarding school part-time, and this turned out to be a highly effective assimilation measure. This practice continued for more than a century. However, from the 1980s, the government attained a more reflective idea of the Sami people’s rights as an indigenous population (Andresen et al., 2021: 387). This was partly due to the activist movements against power plant developments in the Northern town Alta (Andresen et al., 2021: 370). The current teacher education programme for years 5–10 states in one of its five areas regarding ‘Scope and objective’ that the programme ‘should qualify the students to provide instruction in Sami affairs,

Authenticity and Literature(s) in Teacher Education  233

including knowledge of the status of indigenous peoples globally’ (Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, 2016: 1). Many approaches to literature teaching, as shown in Clanfield (2017) for instance, concern literature as a means for teaching language and culture in the target language. However, literature is also seen as a tool for understanding one’s own culture better through comparison with target language cultures (Lütge, 2013) and for understanding transcultural practices and developing intercultural communicative competence (Kramsch, 2013; Reichl, 2013). As the title ‘Bildung in Jigalong and Bárbmo’ suggests, the literature dealt with in this chapter is culturally diverse. Balderson’s novel, When Jays Fly to Bárbmo (1968), illustrated by Victor Ambrus, and Pilkington Garimara’s novel, Follow the Rabbit-Proof Fence (1996), are compared and discussed, with emphasis placed on Balderson’s novel and with reference to the genre of Bildungsroman, here exemplified by Jane Eyre and Oliver Twist. The Bildungsroman or ‘novel of formation’ constitutes an important genre of children’s and young adults’ literature, portraying a young character’s identity quest (Docker, 2010; Hirsch, 1979). In the present context, texts from different epochs, representing different geographical settings and by authors of different national backgrounds, are compared. By studying thematic links between them, such different texts are collated and discussed. The rationale for approaching literature in this way is to suggest answers to the underlying question: How can we work with literature in the classroom to make reading more authentic, worthwhile and stimulating for a culturally diverse population of student teachers, and facilitate the development of their affinity for reading? Authenticating the Reading of Bildungsromane

Ibsen and Wiland (2000: 12) claim that literature should be taught as ‘a true form of art and with due respect to its literary value and the students’ responses’. In Langer’s envisionment theory, for example, literature teachers are provided with instructions in four stages for facilitating the reading process in class. The stages involve discussing: (1) what you expect before you start reading, (2) the formation of envisionments and reflection during the actual reading, (3) stepping out of the actual reading activity and thinking about what you know and (4) seeing the text in light of the authorship, oeuvre, literary history or other texts that one has read (Langer, 2011: 21). In the research field of literature teaching, the terms ‘extensive reading’, ‘free reading’ and ‘free voluntary reading’ seem to be used interchangeably (Bland, 2013: 9). The degree of freedom for students to choose when and what to read is greatest in what Krashen (2004) calls free voluntary reading, in which the act of reading literary texts is primarily seen

234  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

as an individual activity (Mason & Krashen, 1997). Krashen (2013: 15–16) emphasises that extensive reading should include free voluntary reading; teachers could provide a selection of texts from which individual students could choose (Williams, 2013: 68). As Van Lier (1996: 13) stated, ‘an action is authentic when it realizes a free choice’. Widdowson (1976: 270) claims ‘there is no such thing as authentic language data. Authenticity is realized by appropriate response’. He sees reading as the interaction between the reader and the text ‘incorporating the intentions of the writer’ (Widdowson, 1976: 263). Thus, when readers are exposed to fiction, they are given opportunities to interpret the literary content (Mackey, 2011: 58). Their response is part of the communication that takes place in literature (Iser, 1978: 168–169). Widdowson (1978: 81) argues ‘the topic of the discourse has to be one which will appeal to the learner in some way’. The reader ‘may simply not feel himself in any way engaged by the text being presented to him and so may refuse to authenticate it by taking an interest’ (Widdowson, 1978: 81). An authentic action is intrinsically motivated, and Van Lier (1996: 13) says that ‘inauthentic action is taken because everyone else is doing them, they “ought” to be done, or in general they are motivated by external factors’. The reading lists of university courses may thus run the risk of including literature that could lead to an inauthentic reading process for some students. Krashen (2013: 15–16) emphasises the importance of free voluntary reading. To facilitate literature teaching in line with the ideal of free voluntary reading may presuppose a paradigmatic shift in the way in which we commonly encounter literature in educational institutions. The novel of formation or Bildungsroman genre has been singled out in this context, mainly because of its relevance in both school and teacher education (Larsen, 2018: 5). The novels adhere to the archetypal quest plot (Frye, 1957) with exposition, complication, climax and resolution. The main characters of Bildungsromane are often orphaned, like Jane Eyre, victims of parental neglect, or one of the parents has died, like Oliver Twist’s mother. In some Bildungsromane, there is a surprise element of identity, as is the case for Oliver, who discovers that one of the villains he encounters in London is, in fact, his half-brother. The main characters are confronted with negative experiences; other characters function as helpers, supporting the protagonist’s quest (Hirsch, 1979: 294). This quest generally involves several dramatic events, from which the main characters might learn, and, in the end, their situation has improved. Oliver is adopted by his kind benefactor; Jane inherits money and ends up happily married. The somewhat hegemonic favouring (Engelbrecht, 2017: 105) of such classical texts is evident in their prominent positioning, for instance, on reading lists in educational institutions. This factuality may be seen as juxtaposed with transculturation (Ortiz, 1995: 98), a phenomenon that may be perceived as a characteristic of the contemporary literary practices in a culturally diverse teacher education,

Authenticity and Literature(s) in Teacher Education  235

in which student teachers and lecturers work collaboratively (Vygotsky, 1978: 86) to make sense of literature (Susegg, 2003: 11) on a personal and collective level. Four Novels

The four texts comprise the novels, When Jays Fly to Bárbmo (1968), Follow the Rabbit-Proof Fence (1996), Jane Eyre (1847) and Oliver Twist (1839). The contemporary Australian writer Margaret Balderson (born 1935) stayed in Norway for two years in the early 1960s, ‘and this experience supplied the background’ for her debut novel, When Jays Fly to Bárbmo (Meadowcroft, 1969: 16). The title may reflect the movement pattern of birds; in the Arctic, ordinary birds fly to warmer continents for the winter, whereas the Siberian jay stays put (Larsen, 2018: 5). As stated in the glossary appended to the novel, Bárbmo ‘has two meanings: (1) the place where migratory birds live in winter, (2) a place of fictitious delights’ (Balderson, 1968: 201). Ingeborg, the novel’s main character, is 14 years old in 1940 when Germany invades Norway. ‘The Dark Time of the long Arctic winter became for her symbolic of an oppression of spirit which evaporates with the miracle of each spring’ (Saxby, 1978: 73). Balderson’s novel is set in WWII multicultural Northern Norway and involves dual ethnic ancestry in an Arctic setting (Saxby, 1989). The tension between the Norwegian and the Sami cultures, where both pride and shame are connected with belonging to either ethnic group, is foregrounded. In Larsen (2018), the Bildung aspect of Balderson’s novel has been analysed in comparison with Jane Eyre. Ingeborg can hardly evade the question of a possible resemblance to Jane Eyre ‘as an intellectual female protagonist in an English novel of formation’ (Larsen, 2018: 3). For instance, devastating fires change the lives of both protagonists, and they are both orphaned, independent young women. The formation aspect is also invoked by intertextual references to Bildungsromane such as Kristin Lavransdatter (Undset, 1920), set in 14th-century Norway (Larsen, 2018: 3). The Australian writer Doris Pilkington Garimara’s semi-­ autobiographical novel, Follow the Rabbit-Proof Fence (1996), is the second book of a trilogy, starting with Caprice, A Stockman’s Daughter (1991) and ending with Under the Wintamarra Tree (2002). Pilkington Garimara (1937–2014) ‘belonged to the stolen generation’ (Woo, 2014), the term assigned to the estimated 100,000 Australian children who were snatched from their homes and reared in desolate settlements. Her life story is the backbone of her oeuvre. In Follow the Rabbit-Proof Fence, she tells the story of her mother, Molly, her sister and their cousin. The three girls, of mixed aboriginal and white ancestry, are seized from their home in Jigalong by government agents and forcibly moved 1000 miles to the Moore River Native Settlement, in line with government policy, which

236  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

aimed to assimilate so-called mixed raced children into white society. The novel focuses on the status of the inappropriately named ‘half-caste’ or mudi-mudi – in the Mardujara language. Fourteen-year-old Molly, together with her sister and their cousin, succeeds in escaping the settlement in 1931, by following the State Barrier Fence built across Western Australia in the early 1900s to protect farmland from pests. Molly is forcefully removed from her family. After a strenuous crossing of the rough terrain, and being pursued by trackers, the girls find the fence. More than two months later, the two sisters arrive in their hometown; their cousin is misled by the authorities and turns ­herself in. The sisters go into hiding together with their mother and ­g randmother. In another Bildungsroman, Oliver Twist, the poor and orphaned main character is forced to live with a gang of criminals and  is thus separated from the people who look after him in the workhouse. The two well-known English canonical texts, Jane Eyre and Oliver Twist, have the theme of formation in common with the two lesserknown texts, while belonging to an earlier century and an all-English setting far away from Jigalong and Bárbmo. The former is set in Yorkshire and was published in 1847, and the latter, set in London and its vicinity, was published in 1839. In settings with a time span of more than 100 years, the young protagonists of the four texts are developing and negotiating their identity in their otherwise very different circumstances. Teaching Sequence in Teacher Education on Novels of Formation

The following teaching sequence, using the four aforementioned Bildungsromane, is intended for students taking English specialisation in teacher education aimed at school Grades 5–10 (Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, 2016) or 8–13 (Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, 2013). The group size is approximately 25 students, but the sequence could be adjusted to suit smaller or larger groups. Classes in Norwegian teacher education have access to a digital classroom containing course plan, reading list and other resources in the internet software platform used by the individual teacher education institution. The sequence consists of 12 lessons during three weeks with four 45 minutes’ consecutive lessons per week. Pre-reading activities are seen as ‘efficient ways into the readers’ schematized world of previous knowledge’ (Wiland, 2016: 38), and the students have been encouraged to search for self-selected texts within the genre and discuss whether they should concentrate on literature that would be relevant for their future work in school. Wiland (2016: 68) suggests ways to bridge the gaps between literary reading in English in teacher

Authenticity and Literature(s) in Teacher Education  237

education and in school. In the present research context, the four example texts are also suitable for lower- and upper-secondary learners. • In the first lesson, the teacher asks the students to debate briefly in pairs what they expect the sequence to be about, based on the headline ‘Novels of Formation’ in their course plan. Then follows an introductory 30 minutes’ lecture in the form of dialogue, in which students who have found possible self-selected texts are allowed circa two minutes each to present their choice. The teacher’s lecture focus is on generic traits. And by creating thematic links between the four texts and the student teacher readerships’ local culture, in this case, the ethnic Norwegian majority culture and the Sami and Kven minority cultures, the discussion in class would be based on the identity quests represented in these Bildung texts. ‘Reading a story is unique yet repetitive’ (Bland & Lütge, 2013: 2), especially when reading novels within the genre of Bildungsroman. The 19th-century settings of orphaned children in the English countryside in Jane Eyre and Oliver Twist are juxtaposed with the situation of the Aborigines in Australia. In the local context, the focus is on Balderson’s novel, because of its local setting, but also because it is little researched and rare, in the sense that few other English novels portray this setting focalising a young female protagonist (Larsen, 2018). In other local teaching settings, there might be other texts better suited to creating closeness to local readers. • In the second lesson of the first week, students choose to specialise on one text and are organised into corresponding groups whose size would be dependent on their choice. In this teaching sequence, students can replace one of the four compulsory novels with a self-selected text that will subsequently be part of their individual reading list. Thus, formally speaking, the teacher needs to consider the quality of the text before approving such replacements. The discussion between teacher and students would focus on qualitative criteria for the inclusion of self-selected texts. Both parties should agree that the text in question has a Bildung motif and that its language is acceptable for inclusion on individual students’ reading lists. • Lessons three to eight are used for teacher-supervised group/individual work with the texts, for example, inspired by the envisionment theory (Langer, 1997, 2011) referred to earlier in this chapter. In addition to reading and discussing the texts, the students prepare a plenary presentation for the third week. They are encouraged to consult relevant scholarly papers, book reviews and film adaptations. They should design a variety of activities involving multimodal assignments suitable for the different texts, for instance, related to David Noyce’s 2002 film based on Pilkington Garimara’s novel, or Victor Ambrus’ illustrations in Balderson’s novel or clips from various film adaptations of the

238  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

two classical novels and other multimodal representations that could potentially appeal to a culturally diverse student population. Providing a variety of approaches to literature, by presenting different modes of texts in various multimodal representations (Stein, 2007), may increase the availability of literature to a culturally diverse readership. • In the first two lessons of the final week, groups of students or individual students present their work and give peer response. Based on such presentations, the students are encouraged to suggest topics for plenary discussion. • In the last two lessons of the final week, the teacher and students discuss, sum up and evaluate the sequence. The teacher would focus on the complexity of the identity formation process (Erikson, 1959) which is dealt with in the four texts. The construction and negotiation of identity involves contact with other people as interpersonal relationships develop and comprise the process in which the individual person is a ‘member of a family, originates from a particular region or country, is educated within a specific sphere of life, at a certain time in history’ (Larsen, 2005: 124). Additionally, the student teachers might choose to focus on different motifs in the texts. This would influence the plenary discussions both before, during and after the actual reading. Discussion

A teaching sequence like the one sketched above does not necessarily make the act of reading authentic to the individual student. The text in itself does not ensure that an authentic reading experience will take place (Widdowson, 1976: 270). Everything relies on the response. In this case, the response has not been examined. So why would a teaching sequence such as the one suggested above contribute to authenticating reading? As Widdowson (1976: 270) stated, ‘the language teacher is responsible for designing a methodology which will establish the conditions whereby this authenticity can ultimately be achieved’. Widdowson’s concept of authentication is not an arbitrary, unpredictable process. It stands to reason that the text selection lends itself to being authenticated by the target group described, given the possibilities for incorporating self-selected texts on the reading list. Krashen (2013: 15–16) emphasises that extensive reading should include free voluntary reading. Yet this does not mean everything we read must be self-selected, although some of the texts should be the students’ own choice. As maintained by Van Lier (1996: 13), ‘an action is authentic when it realizes a free choice’. To exclude an element of choice in the reading list is therefore inadvisable; still, to include compulsory texts that everyone in class has to read simultaneously would facilitate the sharing

Authenticity and Literature(s) in Teacher Education  239

of a literary experience and facilitate informed discussions and collaboration (Vygotsky, 1978: 86). Secondary education has, according to Williams (2013: 68), ‘steadily moved away from recommending specific literary texts towards exciting and advantageous flexibility’. Such practices are not necessarily reflected in the teacher education programmes for the English subject (Moi et al., 2014: 15–16); however, this may gradually change as the practice in school changes. English teachers are ‘required to make informed choices of texts to use in the classroom throughout their entire teaching careers’ (Williams, 2013: 68), and the ability to find suitable literature and to design creative approaches to literary texts is an important qualification for teachers (Hoewisch, 2000). Student teachers of English are future teachers of literature; the texts they read and the ways in which they work with literature in their teacher education should have some transfer value for their future work in school (Wiland, 2016: 68). Still, teachers need to decide on some criteria, preferably in collaboration with their students. Another means of supporting authentication among students would be to include texts with a local or contemporary, more familiar setting in which the possibilities for identification and recognition would be greater. Knowing the setting well could help in foreign language reading, by serving as scaffolding (Bruner, 1978: 242). In this case, the students’ local culture contains aspects that could be compared to the situation for indigenous people in a post-colonial setting. Sami nomads can be seen as colonised by Norwegian settlers. According to Ortiz (1995: 98), the concept of transculturation defines these ‘extremely complex transmutations of cultures’. In When Jays Fly to Bárbmo, issues of borders and the crossing of borders are frequently referred to: geographically speaking, for instance, in the crossing the indigenous Sami population made between the plateau and the village; and culturally speaking, between, for example, living in tents as the Sami did and in houses as the Norwegians and Kvens did. The students’ local culture contains aspects that could be compared to the situation for aboriginal people in an English-speaking country. This does not make any text authentic per se, but the actual reading of texts that depict potentially little known or even shameful events in the local culture may create engagement and motivate students to want to learn more. In a recent study of student teachers’ orientation towards cultural diversity in schools, it appears that Norwegian student teachers are uncomfortable talking about race and colour (Thomassen & Munthe, 2020). Facilitating discussions based on literary texts that concern sensitive matters may be one of many ways of approaching such discomfort. Thus, facilitating dialogue among student teachers about fictionalised circumstances may turn attention away from discomfiting social realities and make it feasible for more students to engage in discussions on

240  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

topical and important issues. To discuss and compare character portrayal, settings, themes and plots in literature could serve as a starting point for such discussions. There are, for instance, similarities between the four texts in the portrayal of identity quests. The protagonists are developing from childhood into maturity. When Jays Fly to Bárbmo and Follow the Rabbit-Proof Fence portray 14-year-old girls of so-called mixed race, Norwegian and Australian, respectively. Although in different circumstances, they both try to get to grips with their dual ethnic backgrounds. Drawing on comparisons of these texts with the canonical Bildungsroman genre, one finds similarities that are of interest in an educational setting to widen the canon and the relevance of the canon to a culturally diverse readership. In the four texts, for example, the loss of parents is something Oliver, Jane, Ingeborg and Molly share. To facilitate literary courses by collating a variety of texts and open up the way for self-selected texts may contribute to making the reading experience authentic to more readers. Concluding Remarks

The status of English as a world language influences the status of the literary canon in literature courses in teacher education. Diversifying our approaches to teaching literature, to adhere to the culturally diverse readership, could make reading more authentic to more students. As stated earlier, there is no such thing as authentic language data (Widdowson, 1976: 270); the text itself is not authentic, but readers might experience the text as authentic when they make sense of it and when it feels meaningful to read it. To include in the reading list for English student teachers a novel by an Australian writer, portraying an Australian setting, is not unusual. To include a text by an Australian writer with a Norwegian setting is more unusual, although reading such a text may become more authentic to a locally based readership. This does not mean that we should throw away the established canon but perhaps extend it and supplement it with a greater variety and with students’ self-selected texts. A literary canon that reflects the language’s global affinity could cause literature to make even more sense to a wider readership. To adhere to student preferences, students could be invited to include other relevant texts of their own choice. The different local cultures represented in the literary texts could be studied and compared. Literature courses could facilitate possibilities for differentiation, according to the readers’ competence level and preferences. Instead of everyone being routinely taught the same text simultaneously, individuals and groups of student teachers could choose between different texts with similar thematic content within the same genre of young adult novels, inspired by the ideal of free voluntary reading (Krashen, 2004).

Authenticity and Literature(s) in Teacher Education  241

In addition to presenting received interpretations, and the literature teacher presenting the most acclaimed interpretations of the text in question, one could try to ensure that student teachers feel a sense of ownership of the literary piece. By allowing the literary experience to be made personal and genuine for everyone (Williams, 2013), one should facilitate an atmosphere for meaning-making on an individual level (Susegg, 2003: 11). If one, for instance, focuses on protagonists’ development, the students would be provided with opportunities for comparison to their own lives and to other literary texts. Thus, literature may become even more relevant and make students even more appreciative of the potential of reading, in their personal development as human beings. In this context, the novel When Jays Fly to Bárbmo has been foregrounded because of its affinity with a local readership of Norwegian student teachers. Reading outside the traditional literary canon gives us an opportunity to get to know other texts, in this case, Australian texts that illuminate thematic aspects regarding formation and maturation in different settings reflecting the historic and current status of English as a world language and its colonial legacy. References Andresen, A., Evjen, B. and Ryymin, T. (2021) Samenes historie fra 1751 til 2010 [Sami history from 1751 to 2010 (my translation)]. Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Balderson, M. (1968) When Jays Fly to Bárbmo. London: Oxford University Press. Bland, J. (2013) Introduction. In J. Bland and C. Lütge (eds) Children’s Literature in Second Language Education (pp. 1–11). London: Bloomsbury. Bland, J. and Lütge, C. (2013) Children’s Literature in Second Language Education. London: Bloomsbury. Brontë, C. (1847) Jane Eyre. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bruner, J.S. (1978) The role of dialogue in language acquisition. In A. Sinclair, R. Jarvelle and W.J.M. Levelt (eds) The Child’s Conception of Language (pp. 241–256). New York: Springer-Verlag. Clanfield, L. (2017) Teaching materials: Using literature in the EFL/ESL classroom. One Stop English. See http://www.ones topenglish.com/methodology/methodology/teaching-materials/teaching-materials-using-literature-in-the-efl/-esl-classroom/146508. article (accessed November 2020). Dickens, C. (1839) Oliver Twist. Herefordshire: Wordsworth Classics. Docker, J. (2010) Epistemological vertigo and allegory. In F. Peters-Little, A. Curthoys and J. Dockler (eds) Passionate Histories: Myth, Memory and Indigenous Australia. Canberra: ANU E Press and Aboriginal History Incorporated. See https://epdf.pub/ passionate-histories-myth-memory-and-indigenous-australia.html (accessed November 2020). Engelbrecht, A. (2017) Reading between the lines: Hegemonic favouring within languagerelated communities. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 35 (1), 105–120. https://doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2017.1302352. Erikson, E.H. (1959) Identity and the Life Cycle. London: Norton. Frye, N. (1957) Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Hirsch, M. (1979) The novel of formation as genre: Between great expectations and lost illusions. Genre 12 (3), 293–311.

242  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

Hoewisch, A. (2000) Children’s literature in teacher-preparation programs. Reading Online. See https://fu-ctge-5245.wikispaces.com/file/view/Hoewisch.pdf (accessed November 2020). Ibsen, E. and Wiland, S.M. (2000) Encounters with Literature. The Didactics of English Literature in the Context of the Foreign Language Classroom in Norway. Kristiansand: Norwegian Academic Press. Iser, W. (1978) The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press. Kramsch, C. (2013) Culture in foreign language teaching. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research 1 (1), 57–78. See https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1127430.pdf (accessed November 2020). Krashen, S. (2004) The Power of Reading. Portsmouth: Heinemann and Westport: Libraries Unlimited. Krashen, S. (2013) Free reading: Still a great idea. In J. Bland and C. Lütge (eds) Children’s Literature in Second Language Education (pp. 13–24). London: Bloomsbury. Langer, J. (1997) Literacy acquisition through literature. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 40 (8), 606–614. Langer, J. (2011) Envisioning Literature: Literary Understanding and Literature Instruction (2nd edn). New York: New York Teachers College Press. Larsen, A.B. (2005) English as a foreign language: Content in pupils’ narratives. In T. Hansson, R. Kjartansson, A.B. Larsen and H. Lassen (eds) Tales on the Screen Narrative Competence in Teacher Education (pp. 121–133). Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark. Larsen, A.B. (2009) Content in Nordic pupil narratives in instructed EFL: A Norwegian perspective. PhD thesis, University of Tromsø, Tromsø. See https://munin.uit.no/bitstream/handle/10037/11035/thesis.pdf?sequence=3andisAllowed=y (accessed November 2020). Larsen, A.B. (2018) An intertextual approach to reading literary texts in English in teacher education. Acta Didactica Norway 12 (2), 1–17. See https://journals.uio.no/adno/ article/view/5578 (accessed November 2020). Lütge, C. (2013) Otherness in children’s literature: Perspectives for the EFL classroom. In J. Bland and C. Lütge (eds) Children’s Literature in Second Language Education (pp. 95–105). London: Bloomsbury. Mackey, M. (2011) Narrative Pleasures in Young Adult Novels, Films and Video Games. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Mason, B. and Krashen, S. (1997) Extensive reading in English as a foreign language. System 25 (1), 153–158. Meadowcroft, F. (1969) Book Council award winners. The Canberra Times, 12 July, p. 16. See http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/136943729 (accessed November 2020). Minde, H. (2003) Assimilation of the Sami – implementation and consequences. Acta Borealia 20 (2), 121–146. Moi, R., Bjørhovde, G., Guldal, T., Jakobsen, I. and Larsen, A.B. (2014) Evaluering av engelskfaget i GLU 1-7 og GLU 5-10 [Evaluation of English Studies in Primary- and Lower Secondary Teacher Education in Norway (my translation)]. I Lærerutdanningsfagene norsk engelsk, naturfag og kroppsøving. See http://www.uis.no/getfile.php/13139370/ F%C3%B8lgegruppen%20for%20l%C3%A6rerutdanningen%20%28FFL%29/ Delrapport%201%202014%20fra%20F%C3%B8lgegruppen.pdf (accessed November 2020). Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research (1997a) Core Curriculum for Primary, Secondary and Adult Education in Norway. Oslo: Nasjonalt læremiddelsenter. Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research (1997b) The Sami Curriculum for the 10-Year Compulsory School. Oslo: Nasjonalt læremiddelsenter.

Authenticity and Literature(s) in Teacher Education  243

Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research (2013) Forskrift om rammeplan for lektorutdanning for trinn 8–13 [Regulation relating to the framework plan for lower and upper secondary teacher education years 8–13 (my translation)]. Oslo: Lovdata. See https://lovdata.no/dokument/SF/forskrift/2013-03-18-288 (accessed November 2020). Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research (2016) Regulations Relating to the Framework Plan for Primary and Lower Secondary Teacher Education for Years 5–10. Oslo: Ministry of Education and Research. Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research (2020) English Subject Curriculum. Oslo: The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. See https://www.udir. no/lk20/eng01-04 (accessed November 2020). Noyce, P. (2002) Rabbit-Proof Fence. London: R. P. Company. Ortiz, F. (1995) Cuban Counterpoint: Tobacco and Sugar. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Pilkington, D.G.N. (1991) Caprice, A Stockman’s Daughter. Brisbane: University of Queensland Press. Pilkington, D.G.N. (1996) Follow the Rabbit-Proof Fence. St. Lucia: University of Queensland Press. Pilkington, D.G.N. (2002) Under the Wintamarra Tree. Brisbane: University of Queensland. Reichl, S. (2013) Doing identity, doing culture: Transcultural learning through young adult fiction. In J. Bland and C. Lütge (eds) Children’s Literature in Second Language Education (pp. 107–117). London: Bloomsbury. Rød, D.A.V. and Bæck, U.-D.K. (2020) Structural enablements and constraints in the creation and enactment of local content in Norwegian education. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy 6 (3), 219–230. Røkenes, F. (2016) Preparing future teachers to teach with ICT: An investigation of digital competence in ESL student teachers in a Norwegian teacher education program. Unpublished PhD thesis, Trondheim: Norwegian University of Science and Technology. Saxby, H.M. (1978) Balderson, Margaret. In D.L. Kirkpatrick (ed.) Twentieth Century Children’s Writers (p. 73). London: The Macmillan Press Ltd. Saxby, H.M. (1989) Twentieth-century children’s writers. In D.L. Kirkpatrick and T. Chevalier (eds) Twentieth-Century Children’s Writers (3rd edn). Chicago, IL: St. James Press. Stein, P. (2007) Multimodal Pedagogies in Diverse Classrooms: Representation, Rights and Resources. Milton Park: Routledge. Susegg, B.A. (2003) Verket – leseren – livet: En ny litteraturdidaktikk [Text – Reader – Life: New didactics for literature (my translation)]. Olso: J.W. Cappelens Forlag as. Thomassen, W.E. and Munthe, E. (2020) A Norwegian perspective: Student teachers’ orientations towards cultural and linguistic diversity in schools. Teaching and Teacher Education 96 (November). See https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103151 (accessed November 2020). Undset, S. (1920) The Wreath. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Van Lier, L. (1996) Interaction in the Language Curriculum. Awareness, Autonomy and Authenticity. New York: Longman. Vygotsky, L. (1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Widdowson, H.G. (1976, 2–7 March). The authenticity of language data. Lecture presented at the TESOL, New York. Widdowson, H.G. (1978) Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wiland, S.M. (2016) Reading and Teaching English Literature. Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademisk.

244  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

Will, L. (2018) Authenticity in English Language Teaching. An Analysis of Academic Discourse. Münster: Waxmann. Williams, G. (2013) Novels for teenage readers. In A. Birketveit and G. Williams (eds) Literature for the English Classroom. Theory into Practice (pp. 163–189). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget. Woo, E. (2014) Doris Pilkington Garimara dies; wrote of Australia’s stolen generations. Los Angeles Times, 19 April. See https://www.latimes.com/local/obituaries/la-medoris-pilkington-garimara-20140420-story.html#:~:text=Doris (accessed November 2020).

16 Authenticity and Authentic Voices in the Literature Curriculum of Pre-Service Teachers of English Hanlie Dippenaar, Cheryl Logan and Candice Livingston

Background and Rationale

In language teaching, one of the many understandings of authenticity implies that learners are exposed to real-life language learning experiences and language in context. Authenticity became an important part of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) in the 1970s with a strong focus on ‘realism’ in teaching materials and activities. Nunan (1999) defines authentic materials as real-life examples of spoken or written language used in real communication in the target language, and not created for purposes of language teaching, similar to Wee (2008) who describes the notion of authenticity in English Language Teaching (ELT) as a ‘key concept’. The rationale is to expose learners to ‘real’ language, which would include examples of language that is used to communicate outside the classroom. Authentic learning activities that simulate or replicate realworld use of language provide opportunities for learners to respond to language in context and resemble real-life situations (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). Buendgens-Kosten (2013) describes authenticity as ‘real’ or ‘true to origin’ and explains that authenticity has been used to describe texts (written and spoken), learning materials, tasks, assessment and even audience. However, as pointed out by Will (2018), authenticity in itself is a contentious term that needs to be explored further. Harmer (1983) sees authentic texts as designed or written for native speakers in real-life contexts and not texts designed for a classroom setting. This is similar to the ideas of Widdowson (1978) who distinguished between the authenticity of 245

246  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

‘genuine’ texts viewed in isolation and texts in the classroom, which relate to learners’ responses to them, and would include classroom activities; and Nunan (1988: 324) who describes authentic texts as those written not for teaching purposes but for real-life communication purposes. Widdowson points out that it is not necessarily meaningful to talk about authentic language at all. He sees authenticity as a quality created by the response of the receiver (Widdowson, 1976: 263), the way the learner is engaged by the text being presented to him and whether the topic of the discussion appeals to the learner (Widdowson, 1978: 81). According to Widdowson (1978: 80), ‘genuineness’ is seen as different from authenticity, as texts can in themselves be genuine, whereas authenticity is seen as a social construct created through the interaction between users, situations and texts (Tatsuki, 2006: 1), and the interaction between the passage and the reader’s response (Widdowson, 1978: 80). Widdowson goes further to discuss authenticity of the reader’s response, which relates to this study when he remarks that authenticity is achieved ‘when the reader realizes the intentions of the writer by reference to a set of shared conventions’ (Widdowson, 1976: 263). The overarching objective of this chapter is to explore the notion of authenticity, specifically in relation to the selection of prescribed literary works, the perceptions of pre-service teachers in relation to the selected readings and the extent to which the selection of literary works enhances critical reading. Wallace (1992: 61) argues that critical reading is more than a critical response to the text itself but involves a critical awareness of what reading is, and cross-cultural aspects regarding who reads what and why. Critical language awareness (CLA) is a way to read texts ‘critically and differently’ (Granville, 2003: 15), focusing on the relation between language and power. CLA is a pedagogical approach that foregrounds the relationship between language and power and encourages language learners to consider the different choices they make and the consequences of those choices. As pointed out by Taylor et al. (2017: 17), CLA is an essential part of teacher education requirements as pre-service teachers are made aware of sociocultural capital and knowledge, which would enable their future learners to challenge linguistic ideologies presupposing superiority of language varieties. Janks points out that reading the word cannot be separated from reading the world (Janks, 2010: 238). It is not a question of whether to teach literature, but which literature and how (Petersen, 2014: 14). Janks (2010: 22) argues that in ‘the interrogation of texts, reading against the text is tied to critical literacy’ which implies that readers recognise texts as selective versions of the world to which they are not subjected. It is thus not only authenticity of the language used in the text, but the authenticity of the text itself, being that from a specific cultural group or a specific author that the reader identifies with, in contrast to what was often taught as the traditional Western canon (Haslem, 1998). This implies that the choice of

Authenticity and Authentic Voices in the Literature Curriculum  247

literature students are required to read and engage with will shape their response to the world in which they live (Skerrett, 2010). In this chapter, the authors discuss how literary works and related film studies in a BEd undergraduate curriculum develops CLA, and in particular the students’ experiences of literature as ‘mirrors, windows and sliding doors’ as illustrated by Bishop (1990: 2). Literature as ‘mirrors’ are texts in which readers see reflections of themselves or their lived experiences within the reading. ‘Windows’ provide readers with knowledge and insights about cultures and people different from their own. Bishop notes that readers not only need literature that mirrors their experiences and provides windows to the worlds of others, but they also need the opportunity to step through ‘sliding doors’ and experience these worlds. As such, texts could provide real-world experiences for readers in their evoked response. The authors analysed students’ responses to selected literature which were mirrors, windows or sliding doors to their own experiences of reading literature in the English classroom. This was done to establish whether the experiences and contexts of characters in selected literature enhanced the language learning experience for students and developed critical language awareness. The Place of Literature in the Curriculum

Literature has always been an important part of the teaching of a language and gives the learner insight in the context and background of the target language. Through literature, teachers share relevant information on the culture of the target language, which helps the learner to understand customs, beliefs and values associated with the language. It provides authentic examples of language register, dialects and idiolects (Finocchiaro & Brumfit, 1983: 131) and stimulates discussion. As pointed out by Widdowson: It’s not easy to see how learners at any level can get interested in and therefore motivated by a dialogue about buying stamps at a post office. There is no plot, no mystery, there is no character; everything proceeds as if communication never created a problem. There is no misunderstanding, there’s no possibility of any kind of interaction. (Widdowson, 1983: 33)

Pinker states that realistic fiction may expand readers’ empathy and may even lead to ‘creating a hothouse for new ideas about moral values and social order’ (Pinker, 2011: 176). Daskalovska and Dimova (2012: 1186) point out that the use of literary texts in the language classroom helps learners to develop skills they can apply in different situations and ­contexts; it increases their motivation and makes language learning a worthwhile experience.

248  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

The focus of teaching literature is not only on the literary canon or the study of literary genres and criticism, but could also include linguistic aspects such as grammar, vocabulary and discourse embedded in the literary text (White, 1988: 67). Reading and analysing literature encourages vocabulary expansion and provides examples of language use in real life (Van der Walt, 1990) which has the advantage that the same work can be studied for literary appreciation as well as language study. Van der Walt et al. (2009: 153) point out that the incorporation of literature in the planning of a course provides an opportunity for several additional activities and presents the chance to foster enjoyment and appreciation. Literature is a vehicle for language enrichment and vocabulary acquisition and provides the reader with new insights on diverse issues (Greenbaum, 2006; Van der Walt et al., 2009). The readers’ response to literature could kindle deliberate debate on developmental and societal issues (Arya, 2015). Arya (2015) emphasises that society will flourish dynamically and attain mature culmination with the aid of intellectual criticism. She indicates that the English novel was a social protest movement, and its aim was to ‘acquaint middle-class people with the realism of various social ills, in a way that would engross genuine vision and emotion’ (Arya, 2015: 28). Her examples of Dickens, who wrote about child labour, Trollope on the disgrace of illegitimacy, and Hardy about seduction and class segregation, are, however, still bound to one voice and one legitimacy, often seen from a Western or Eurocentric perspective. New voices are to be added in the selection of topics that are relevant to the challenges facing society, such as slavery, minority rights, poverty and racial discrimination. In addition, Kandaswamy (2007) discusses students’ diverse responses to difference and how these can be addressed in the curriculum. The selection of literature needs careful consideration, considering Barnard’s (2009) claims that merely including apolitical and essentialist readings of non-Western cultures and of global power relations is inadequate to expose and redress social inequities. The likely benefits of teaching literature can be analysed in relation to Carter and Long’s (1991) three models of why teachers include literature in the curriculum: the cultural model, the language model, and the personal growth model. Carter and Long (1991) categorised models for selection of literature in the classroom, as follows: (a) the cultural model, where students are introduced to well-known canonical works produced by authors from a ‘particular nation over a historical period as a token of the moral and ideological values of that culture’; (b) the language model, where literature is used as a vehicle to teach examples of specific vocabulary and structures in context and (c) the personal growth model, which describes reading literature as an ‘engaging process that will generate lasting pleasure and deep satisfaction well beyond the literature course and throughout the students’ lives’. The personal growth model adheres to a

Authenticity and Authentic Voices in the Literature Curriculum  249

student-centred approach to literature study where literature is a vehicle to provoke discussions on issues within the text. Thus, three axioms can be distinguished when considering the selection of literary works: students’ interests and background, exposure to diverse perspectives that challenge the Western canon and thirdly, opportunities for personal growth when engaging in texts. The selection of literary content that pre-service teachers are exposed to could contribute to preparing beginner teachers for a ‘changing world’ (Bransford et al., 2005; Giroux et al., 1988), and course designers need to consider the relevant skills, attitudes and activities to be incorporated in the curriculum. When literary texts are selected as part of the undergraduate curriculum of pre-service teachers of English, it is important to explore why this literature is relied upon, what resistance there might be towards it and how this might bring about change. As Shafak (2020) points out, change doesn’t start with concentration camps or genocide but with words. According to Kaşlıoğlu and Ersin (2018), teacher education programmes should tap into students’ core belief systems to determine how ideas and conceptions are formed and how to critically examine and reflect on those beliefs. Their research explores prior experiences and beliefs of pre-service teachers enrolled in a course in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) on the study of literature and compared them with experiences and beliefs formed after completing a two-semester course on teaching English through literature. Their findings showed that pre-­ service teachers had positive beliefs about literature integration although the course itself had limited impact on their prior beliefs (Kaşlıoğlu & Ersin, 2018). Kaşlıoğlu and Ersin (2018: 214) further show that literature functions as a ‘gateway to other cultures, their value systems, norms, and behaviours’. Students view the world from different perspectives, resulting in cultural awareness and knowledge. They point out that literature fosters personal involvement of the reader as students develop deeper connections with the text and are intellectually and emotionally involved. Literature creates opportunities for students to become more tolerant towards others and develop a better understanding of their own society, culture and their own belief systems in relation to others. Their own selfconcept is reinforced as they are challenged to investigate their own beliefs. As such, literature develops learners holistically and enhances personal growth (Carter & Long, 1991). In this chapter we argue that the real authenticity of literary works lies in the voices of characters who are to be heard, as well as in the exposure to authentic cultural experiences which might differ from the learners’ own experiences or that of the target language. Only 7% of the population in South Africa are home language speakers of English, which implies that more than 90% of all learners in schools in South Africa study through the medium of a language (English) which is not their mother

250  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

tongue. In an attempt to change to postcolonialism and address wrongs of the past, the English curriculum of students of English is often adapted to include African literature. The authenticity of these literary works that are read in classrooms is debatable, as it is not necessarily the authentic voices of the characters that are heard. A study by Işıklı and Tarakçıoğlu (2017), conducted in Turkey, has concluded that there is an urgent need to re-adjust English literature curricula in their context, so as to consider students’ interests. This is an important finding that is relevant in many countries where English is a second or foreign language, such as South Africa. Nicol (2008) argues that English teachers should constantly re-evaluate the suitability of prescribed texts to ensure these texts provide for students’ reading interests and allow students to discover their own sense of self and the world in which they live, through their reading. According to Vardell et al. (2006), selection of literature should be based on students’ interests. They point out that the learner’s response to a selected literary work or poem is an important criterion, as is reflected in the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching and Assessment (Council of Europe, 2018: 116). It is important that teachers explore which types of literature would interest learners by involving students themselves in discussions of book choices. However, it is the teacher’s responsibility to expose learners to new contexts and narratives, which would challenge their preferences and evoke critical thinking, as suggested by Bishop (1990). An examination of the canon itself, the reasons why certain texts appear on reading lists, and the manner in which lecturers provide for students’ reading interests, suggest that it is important to allow students to discover their own sense of self and the world in which they live, as seen through their interpretation of reading matter. The teaching of literature offers teachers possibilities for basing language learning activities on texts learners might find more interesting than other texts (Carter & Long, 1991: 3). Several studies (Flynn, 2012; Johnson, 2016; Williams, 2004) have shown the importance of relevant discussions on issues such as race and racism within the classroom, which illustrate the importance of creating this space for open and honest sharing and hearing of stories. Students use their own experiential lens to interpret text. When this lens is shared with other readers, it creates a window to bridge racial barriers prevalent in the society today. Bishop (1990: 1) posits that ‘windows are also sliding glass doors and readers have only to walk through to become part of whatever world has been created by the author’. Thus, the windows that help students overcome the racial barriers also act as sliding glass doors allowing them to step into a world of unrest that cries out for campaigns such as #BlackLivesMatter. Mustofa and Hill (2018: 113) argue that teachers and the students ‘gain the ability to develop their communicative competence as they respond to contextual issues in the texts they are reading’.

Authenticity and Authentic Voices in the Literature Curriculum  251

Researchers such as Williams (2004) and Flynn (2012) show in their research how class discussions on literature can give a platform for students of colour to share their experiences with racism and lead to a more comprehensive understanding of white privilege, antiracism language and critical language awareness. These discussions are essential in a postapartheid South Africa, where many people still experience racism. Williams (2004: 167) illustrates how people can counter racism through sharing stories that are ‘windows’ to how others experience the world differently than themselves. He points out how important it is to ‘listen to the narratives outside the dominant culture, not only for what they tell us about individuals but also for how they help us understand’. Another study, conducted by Johnson (2016), focuses on race-based conversations on literature. The conversations are a ‘way to begin critical dialogue across different racial and age-groups’ (Johnson, 2016: 303). Discussions are centred around research-generated open-ended questions that focus on the related topics. Reflections on the data show changes in ‘perceptions and beliefs about race, racism, and power’ (Johnson, 2016: 309). From these studies several implications have emerged. First, having open, honest and safe conversations within the classroom that centre on race is essential. Second, using literature and stories to approach these conversations creates the opportunity for students to connect, share stories and view the world from multiple perspectives. As pointed out by Milazzo (2016: 130), ‘while much South African criticism has moved away from a concern with institutional racism and white supremacy, reading Serote’s (2010) Revelations and other recent novels by black writers through a critical race lens shows that post-apartheid literature continues to provide imaginative windows into racial inequality, racial ideology, and the struggle for freedom’. It is clear that the inclusion of literary texts has an effect on the holistic and professional development of student teachers and will thus impact their preparation for their future careers. Theoretical Framework

In this chapter, we apply the work by Bishop (1990) and her terms of ‘windows’, ‘mirrors’ and ‘sliding doors’ as discussed earlier. Bishop shows that literature transforms human experience and reflects it back to the reader so that the reader sees in that reflection his or her own life as part of the human experience. This relates to what Barthes (2001) refers to as a ‘writerly text’ where the reader takes an active role in constructing meaning; in contrast to ‘readerly’ texts, presenting classic ‘traditional’ texts, which do not open up multiple meanings. What Barthes (2001) describes as ‘ourselves writing’ is a self-conscious awareness of reality where meaning is not pre-determined by the author, but is an interactive activity in which the reader participates and is involved.

252  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

In this study, we investigate whether the choice of literature that students of English are exposed to provides the opportunity to experience all three perspectives of the mirrors, the windows and the sliding doors and whether through this process critical language awareness will be developed. More than just selecting literary works that expose students to multiculturalism and variety, we further argue that these voices the students are exposed to should be true to the origin of the culture described in the work. With the push to get diverse books into the classroom, it was believed that ‘one didn’t need to be a person of colour to tell these stories’ (Woodson, 1998: 43). Woodson believes that authors need to have ‘sat at the table’ with persons of that culture and experienced their language, laughter and tears in order to be able to write their story. Authors shouldn’t write stories about other cultures just because it is the ‘in’ thing to do (Woodson, 1998: 44). Bishop points out that when readers cannot find themselves reflected in the books they read, ‘or when the images they see are distorted, negative, or laughable, they learn a powerful lesson about how they are devalued in the society of which they are a part’ (Bishop, 1990: ix). In the books selected, students should be able to find their own identity (mirrors) and also the identity of ‘the other’ in a way that creates a window to look into a world different from their own. Through critical discussion and opening windows, they become a two-way street and a sliding door towards mutual understanding and acceptance. Bishop (1990) points out that children from dominant social groups have always found their mirrors in books but have been deprived of books where they learn ‘about others’. They need books as windows onto reality, not just on imaginary worlds, to help them understand ‘the multicultural nature of the world they live in, and their place as a member of just one group, as well as their connection to all other humans’ (Bishop, 1990: ix). Authentic voices about diverse cultures may help to alleviate racial and social problems that stem from feelings of isolation and insulation learners might experience. We used books to introduce readers to diverse contexts and traditions as well as their own, in the hope that this would invite comparisons to their own and create sliding doors into the world of ‘the other’. We concur with Nieto (1996) that learners from all backgrounds, languages and experiences need to be acknowledged and valued and their diversity should be recognised. Methodology

This study uses a phenomenological research design, as it pays attention to how participants make sense of their own experiences through dialogue between the participant’s own understanding of their experience and the researcher’s interpretation of it. Phenomenology focuses on ­individuals’ meaning-making as an element of the human experience

Authenticity and Authentic Voices in the Literature Curriculum  253

(Patton, 2002) and an understanding of a phenomenon as seen through the eyes of those who have experienced it. This method is appropriate for studying affective, emotional and often intense human experiences (Merriam, 2009: 26). The study was conducted at one campus of a university in the Western Cape, South Africa, and the participants were third year pre-service teachers enrolled for English as elective (55 students). The students were from diverse backgrounds and of different racial identities. All the students were expected to read the same prescribed novels as part of their English course. Their participation in the study, however, was voluntary. The data were collected through the lecturer’s observations and analysis of students’ online discussions via Microsoft Teams. Permission to conduct the study was obtained through the Ethics Committee of the institution. In addition, permission was requested from the students. After the discussions, students completed an online survey to indicate their book choices and perception of the prescribed literature. Questions included the following: (1) Do you think the study of literature is an important part of your preparation as a teacher of English? (2) Did the books you were required to read enhance critical language awareness? (3) Which of the books addressed current, real-life issues? (4) Have these books you were required to read prepared you better for your future classroom? (5) Did the prescribed books teach you about diversity? (6) With which books could you identify? (7) Which books did you find most valuable? (8) Which books did you not find relevant? After completing the module, the students wrote a reflection on the course, which was submitted as part of their final course portfolio. Their reflections were used to confirm the findings from the discussions and surveys. Findings and Discussion Class discussions

Due to face-to-face classes being cancelled in line with COVID-19 regulations, all class discussions were changed to an online platform. On average, 30 students from the class of 55 attended regularly. After each session, the recordings of the class were shared with the whole group via WhatsApp and on the institutional learning management system (Blackboard). The books and films they studied included The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas (2017) (portraying police profiling of black males in the

254  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

USA), Young Blood by Sifizo Mzobe (2010) (telling the story of a young African male growing up in a gangster context), The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger (1951) (Holden Caulfield’s search for truth in a phony adult world) and The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho (1988) (magical story of an Andalusian shepherd boy who travels in search of a treasure). These books all centred around the psychological and moral growth of a young, male protagonist from youth into adulthood and were each discussed as possible examples of a Bildungsroman. The first aspect debated was the authenticity of voice. Students were requested to comment on the ‘truthfulness’ of each novel, and how they experienced it. All the students felt that Young Blood was more ‘real’ as it was the authentic voice of Mzobe, who lives in Durban and who is familiar with the context he is writing about. Comments included ‘I like this book, as I feel the author’s pain and confusion’. Another student mentioned ‘You can see he knows what it is to grow up in gangster country’. Students felt the plot was real, and they were able to relate more to the novel. Even students who were not familiar with the context felt it was realistic. One student commented: ‘I can understand his reasons for doing what he did as the author is able to describe the context clearly’, in this case, the author’s voice becoming a window to see through. This experience is similar to what was discussed earlier when referring to what Barthes (2001) describes as an interactive activity in which the reader participates and is engaged. Students were asked to identify with the characters in the books and discuss the relevance of each book for the English classroom. Comments showed that students experienced some of the literary works as mirrors to their own worlds and windows into a world they were not familiar with. One participant felt that the life of the main character in Young Blood became a mirror, as it ‘was similar to people I know, and I know that is how it is in a gang’. Students who were not that familiar with the culture of gangsterism were able to see through the ‘window’ into the world they might encounter in their teaching careers: ‘I think my future learners will be able to identify with Sipho as a “Young Blood” as it shows what it means to grow up in a township’. After the books had been discussed, the students were requested to comment on their experiences of reading the books and identifying with the characters. In the discussions, students identified social problems that emanate from oppression and injustice and were able to argue and propose solutions to these problems, which inevitably lead to critical discourse in the classroom. Comments such as ‘this is the way it still is in this country’ and students relating racial instances of injustice that they themselves experienced created an honest space for discussion and interpretation. Using the theoretical framework of ‘mirrors, windows and sliding doors’, students identified similarities with their own lived experiences similar to the characters in The Hate U Give and Young Blood and

Authenticity and Authentic Voices in the Literature Curriculum  255

discussed their perspectives on how society discriminates against some and privileges others. Students were given space within the classroom to discuss the intricacies of language and power critically, in order to ‘imagine better and more socially just ways of being in the world’ (Gee, 2008: 221). Their comments included suggestions that the first step to change is to identify inequality and discrimination and that talking about these issues in a diverse group creates at least an awareness and a feeling of being heard. This is similar to what Will (2018) refers to as ‘authenticity of individual behaviour’ and what McKay (2013: 299) calls ‘authenticity of a community of learners’ who interact with their peers on topics that are important to them. In contrast, the students did not feel that a book like The Catcher in the Rye was suitable, and they suggested it be replaced by books more ‘relevant to our world and our issues in South Africa’. The general consensus was also that The Alchemist was too far removed from reality, and they struggled to finish the book. It was clear that students were much more engaged in the discussions on police profiling in The Hate U Give, and although not many experienced similar situations of police brutality in South Africa, they were very aware of the worldwide movement of #BlackLivesMatter and how it relates to post-apartheid South Africa. Out of the class of 55 students, 50 students rated The Hate U Give as their first choice and identified with the pain of racial exclusion portrayed by the protagonist. It became clear that lecturers need to include the voices of students when selecting prescribed literature for them as the right choices stimulate discussions and enhance critical thinking. The online discussions gave students the opportunity to speak out more freely which they did not do the year before when the same students were present in a face-to-face context. Based on personal observation and previous experience teaching this course for the last nine years, students were comfortable sharing and expressing their opinions and own voices by reflecting on the experience of reading the novels. It seemed that they felt more at liberty to express their opinions without pressure from their peers and were more genuine in what they expressed, and in sharing their own experiences, similar to sharing their own stories as opposed to their stories being shared by the dominant culture. This opportunity enhanced critical thinking and students seemed more empathetic towards one another. Surveys

Of the 55 participants, only 25 students completed the survey. This could be because the survey was voluntary and did not involve any peer interaction or online discussions. The results from the survey are discussed below. The majority of students (20 from the group of 25) felt that literature was an essential part of their training. No student felt it should be

256  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

excluded. What was worrying was that only 10 of the students felt that the books enhanced their critical language awareness. This might point to a lack of understanding of critical language awareness, and this would have to be addressed in the planning of the next year course. More attention to conceptual understanding might be necessary. Both The Hate U Give and Young Blood were identified by all 25 participants as addressing real-life issues. The Catcher in the Rye was identified by only 10 students as relevant to their own lives and The Alchemist by 8 students. A vast majority of the students (22) felt the books prepared them for their future classrooms, and the same number felt it taught them more about diversity. Four fifths of the students (20) identified with Young Blood, and three fifths identified with the characters in The Hate U Give. One student even commented that he/she preferred ‘reality books and non-fiction’ such as Young Blood, which was not a nonfiction book, but felt real to the student. Final reflections

All the students submitted a final reflection of their learning during the year, including challenges they experienced. Although it was clear from the reflections that students found the isolation during the pandemic and online learning challenging, their opinions confirmed the findings from the online discussions and surveys. They regarded the novels they discussed as a highlight. Students’ comments included phrases such as ‘the discussions online was something to look forward to’; ‘it was interesting to hear feedback from classmates and how they saw the book’; ‘I enjoyed the books we read as I could relate to the story and it made me think about #BlackLivesMatter’. Students’ responses to the readings reflected that they did not necessarily see the link with critical thinking, but they were able to identify with the characters and plot, which might point to the notion of mirrors, windows and sliding doors they experienced. For the majority of students, the storyline of #BlackLivesMatter as portrayed in The Hate U Give is not part of their own lived experiences but opened a sliding door to them to understand the characters and bring it closer to their own feelings of prejudice. In the same way, the students do not experience gang violence directly in the context of the rural town in which the university is situated, but they were able to comment on the experience of the main character who grew up in a violent area, thus opening a window into a different world. We conclude that Bishop’s concept of ‘mirrors’, ‘windows’ and ‘sliding doors’ provides one with a lens to select literature that will enhance critical discussion and critical thinking. Limitations of the Study

Due to time constraints, responses by students were not categorised by gender or previous experiences. It will be relevant to further explore

Authenticity and Authentic Voices in the Literature Curriculum  257

students’ own contexts in relation to ‘mirrors’, ‘windows’ and ‘sliding doors’ in their own lives. Since classes were all online due to COVID-19, it was important to create a personal relationship and safe space for students to discuss events and feelings that were very close to their hearts. Students responded well, but the risk of students feeling traumatised could not be managed as easily as in a face-to-face situation where debriefing would be possible. It would be useful to repeat this study in a face-to-face environment to determine whether the anonymity of the online environment enhanced participation. Conclusion

This study investigated how the selection of literature and film study developed critical language awareness of pre-service teachers. The reason why literary works were included in the undergraduate curriculum was to enhance critical thinking, reflective thought and ultimately strive to ensure authenticity in the choice of literature works in our curriculum. Writers like Chimamanda Adichie and Sisonke Msimang speak about the value of stories as part of our inheritance and culture in South Africa. The question was asked, however, whose stories were to be read and how would that benefit students? The authors explored the experiences of students who read a selection of literary works and films as part of their undergraduate curriculum and how this affected their critical thinking. The students read a diverse range of literary works, which included books on racial discrimination and diversity. From the findings it was clear that it was important to create opportunities for students and the teacher to reason actively and inquire together in the classroom to develop critical and independent thinking. The reading of literature created ‘mirrors’ or ‘windows’ into the ‘other’ through which students found their own authentic voices, therefore becoming the ‘sliding door’ to enter the world of the ‘other’ through reflection and critical dialogue, thereby safeguarding authenticity in a uniquely South African curriculum. This led to education that was not merely a transmission of knowledge, but transformation (Van Lier, 1996: 181) and involved an elicitation of authentic responses from learners who would be able to say what they thought and felt. This, according to Van Lier (1996: 128), was what a ‘good teacher’ should be able to achieve. References Arya, S. (2015) Literature as weapon of protest: A comparative approach. Global Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies 4 (3), 21–42. Barnard E. (2009) The difficulties of teaching non-western literature in the USA. Radical Teacher 87, 44–87. Barthes, R. (2001) From work to text. In V.B. Leitch et al. (eds) Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism (pp. 1470–1475). New York: Norton.

258  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

Bishop, R.S. (1990) Mirrors, windows, and sliding glass doors. Perspectives: Choosing and Using Books for the Classroom 6 (3), ix–xi. See https://scenicregional.org/wpcontent/uploads/2017/08/Mirrors-Windows-and-Sliding-Glass-Doors.pdf (accessed January 2021). Bransford, J., Darling-Hammond, L. and LePage, P. (2005) Introduction. In L. Darling-Hammond and J. Bransford (eds) Preparing Teachers for a Changing World: What Teachers Should Learn and be Able to Do (pp. 1–39). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Buendgens-Kosten, J. (2013) Authenticity in CALL: Three domains of ‘realness’. ReCAL 25 (2), 272–85. Carter, R. and Long, M. (1991) Teaching Literature. Harlow: Longman. Coelho, P. (1988) The Alchemist. New York: Harper Torch. Council of Europe. (2018) Common European Framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Companion volume with new descriptors. See https:// rm.coe.int/cefr-companion-volume-with-new-descriptors-2018/1680787989 (accessed January 2021). Daskalovska, N. and Dimova, V. (2012) Why should literature be used in the language classroom? Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 46, 1182–1186. Finocchiaro, M. and Brumfit, C. (1983) The Functional-notional Approach: From Theory to Practice. New York: Oxford University Press. Flynn, J. (2012) Critical pedagogy with the oppressed and the oppressors: Middle school students discuss racism and white privilege. Middle Grades Research Journal 7 (2), 95–110. Gee, J.P. (2008) Social Linguistics and Literacies. London: Routledge. Giroux, H., Freire, P. and McLaren, P. (1988) Teachers as Intellectuals; Towards a Critical Pedagogy of Learning. London: Bergin & Garvey. Granville, S. (2003) Contests over meaning in a South African Classroom: Introducing Critical Language Awareness in a climate of social change and Cultural diversity. Language and Education 17 (1), 1–20. Greenbaum, V. (2006) Expanding the Canon: Shaping inclusive reading lists. The English Journal 83 (8), 36–39. Harmer, J. (1983) The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman. Haslem, L. (1998) Is teaching the literature of Western culture inconsistent with valuing diversity? Profession 117–130. See http://www.jstor.org/stable/25595643 (accessed April 2021). Işıklı, C. and Tarakçıoğlu, A.O. (2017) Investigating problems of English literature teaching to EFL high school students in Turkey with focus on language proficiency. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies 13 (2), 82–95. Janks, H. (2010) Literacy and Power. London: Routledge. Johnson, L. (2016) Using critical race theory to explore race-based conversations through a critical family book club. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice 65 (1), 300–315. Kandaswamy, P. (2007) Beyond colour-blindness and multiculturalism. Radical Teacher 80, 6–11. Kaşlıoğlu, O. and Ersin, P. (2018) Pre-service teachers’ beliefs about literature integration in English language teaching classrooms. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies 14 (3), 213–232. McKay, S. (2013) Authenticity in the language teaching curriculum. In C.A. Chapelle (ed.) The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistic (pp. 1–6). New York: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Merriam, S.B. (2009) Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Milazzo, M. (2016) Reconciling racial revelations in post-apartheid. South African Literature Research in African Literatures 47 (1), 128–148.

Authenticity and Authentic Voices in the Literature Curriculum  259

Mustofa, A. and Hill, J.L. (2018) Understanding cultural context in responding to literature: Researching the teaching of literature in EFL classroom context. English Language Teaching 11 (6), 108–114. Mzobe, S. (2010) Young Blood. Johannesburg: Kwela Books. Nicol, J.C. (2008) Questioning the Canon: Issues surrounding the selection of literature for the high school English curriculum. English Quarterly Canada 38 (2/3), 22–28. Nieto, S. (1996) Affirming Diversity. White Plains, NY: Longman. Nunan, D. (1988) The Learner-centred Curriculum. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Nunan, D. (1999) Second Language Teaching & Learning. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle. Patton, M.Q. (2002) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Petersen, L. (2014) Teachers’ understanding of critical language awareness and their enactment of this understanding in the classroom. Unpublished MPhil(Ed) thesis, University of Cape Town. Pinker, S. (2011) The Better Angels of Our Nature: The Decline of Violence in History and Its Causes. London: Penguin. Salinger, D.G. (1951) Catcher in the Rye. Boston: Little, Brown and Company. Serote, M.W. (2010) Revelations. Johannesburg: Jacana Media. Shafak, E. (2020) We need to tell different stories, to humanise the other. The Guardian, 13 August (accessed March 2021). See https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2020/ aug/13/elif-shafak-we-need-to-tell-different-stories-to-humanise-the-other Skerrett, A. (2010) Of literary import: A case of cross-national similarities in the secondary English curriculum in the United States and Canada. Research in the Teaching of English 45 (1), 36–59. Tatsuki, D. (2006) Authentic Communication: Proceedings of the 5th Annual JALT PanSIG Conference. May 13–14, 2006. Shizuoka, Japan: Tokai University College of Marine Science. (pp. i–ii) See https://hosted.jalt.org/pansig/2006/PDF/Tatstuki.pdf (accessed March 2021). Taylor, S.K., Despagne, C. and Faez, F. (2017) Critical language awareness. In J.I. Liontas (ed.) The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching: Teaching Speaking and Pronunciation in TESOL (pp. 1–14). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Thomas, A. (2017) The Hate U Give. New York: Harper Collins. Van der Walt, J.L. (1990) The role of the teacher in communicative language teaching. Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig 24 (1), 28–40. Van der Walt, C., Evans, R. and Kilfoil, W. (2009) Learn 2 Teach. Pretoria: Academica. Van Lier, L. (1996) Interaction in the Language Curriculum: Awareness, Autonomy & Authenticity. London: Longman. Vardell, S.M., Hadaway, N.L. and Young, T. (2006) Selecting literature for English learners. The Reading Teacher 59, 73–741. Wallace, C. (1992) Critical literacy awareness in the EFL classroom. In N. Fairclough and N. Fairclough (eds) Critical Language Awareness (pp. 59–92). London: Longman. Wee, L. (2008) The technologization of discourse and authenticity in English language teaching. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 18 (3), 256–273. White, R.V. (1988) The ELT Curriculum: Design, Innovation and Management. Oxford: Blackwell. Widdowson, H.G. (1976) The authenticity of language data. In J.F. Fanselow and R.H. Crymes (eds) On TESOL ‘76. Selections Based on Teaching Done at the Tenth Annual TESOL Convention (pp. 261–270). Washington, DC: TESOL. Widdowson, H.G. (1978) Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Widdowson, H.G. (1983) Talking shop: Literature and ELT. ELT Journal 37, 30–35. Wiggins, G.P. and McTighe, J. (2005) Understanding by Design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

260  Part 3: Authenticity and Aesthetics

Will, L. (2018) Authenticity in English Language Teaching, An Analysis of Academic Discourse. Münster: Waxmann. Williams, B. (2004) The truth in the tale: Race and ‘counterstorytelling’ in the classroom. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 48 (2), 164–169. Woodson, J. (1998) Who can tell my story? The Horn Book Magazine 74 (1), 34–38.

Afterword: Taking Stock of the Authentic – Critical Synthesis and Timely Outlook Magdalena Kaltseis

Introduction

As Claire Kramsch notes in her Foreword to the current volume, authenticity – the ‘dream of every language learner’ – has undergone a tremendous change in the past decades. In today’s multicultural and multilingual world, the concept of authenticity is far from being a stable constant, but a multidimensional, ‘extremely malleable’ (Umbach & Humphrey, 2018: 126) and dynamic construct. The present publication does justice to this fluid construct of authenticity by highlighting its different aspects and interconnections with language teaching, identity and aesthetics. In this respect, the book aligns with previous research on authenticity in L2 contexts, notably with Van Compernolle and McGregor (2016), who identify agency, identity and culture as one of two principal themes in their dialectical view of authenticities of correspondence and genesis. By concentrating on authenticity of agency and building on the authenticity of individual behaviour (Will, 2018), the current volume, however, takes an identity-oriented perspective on the concept of authenticity in language teaching and learning. For this reason, the present volume, on the one hand, meets the general claim in L2 education by bringing the individual (learner) into focus (Dörnyei et al., 2015; Stadler, 2021; Ushioda, 2011). On the other hand, the book responds to one of the most important demands for future work put forward by Van Compernolle and McGregor (2016: 237), namely the examination and understanding of language as the learner’s own. In what follows, I will synthesise the main strengths of the present volume and outline how it helps to refine the concept of authenticity and its place in language teaching and learning. I will then critically reflect on the future of authenticity by focusing on the so-called ‘performance of authenticity’ (Kramsch, 2021: 147–148; Umbach & Humphrey, 2018: 98), which forms the nucleus of our modern consumerist and social media society. 261

262  Authenticity Across Languages and Cultures

Research on Authenticity – A Diversity of Contexts, Languages and Methods

The perception of authenticity as a multidimensional and dynamic construct necessitates considering and examining a wide range of different contexts, languages and research methods. The current publication attempts to meet this desideratum by including a multitude of voices and settings, which also reflect the diversity and dynamics inherent in the concept of authenticity. Accordingly, the present volume looks into issues of education policy, teacher cognition and academic discourses, and stresses that authenticity is an essential part in every domain of language teaching and learning. In contrast to previous publications that mainly focus on L2 pedagogy (Ockey & Wagner, 2018; Van Compernolle & McGregor, 2016) and material development (Maley & Tomlinson, 2017; Mishan, 2005), the current volume also includes minority language contexts and cultures (Chapters 12, 15) as well as bi- and multilingual language acquisition (Chapters 3, 9), ranging from very early years to adult learners and teacher education. Each chapter presents and synergises research on authenticity from different corners of the world, involving studies from researchers situated in Europe, Africa, Asia, the USA and Canada. In this regard, the authors provide evidence that the perception of authenticity in language teaching and learning very often remains conservative and traditional as it is still tightly bound to the concept of the native speaker. This holds true for job advertisements (Chapter 1) and, as the studies in Part 1 Authenticity and Language Teaching illustrate, also for academic literature (Chapter 2), the language classroom (Chapter 3) and language assessment (Chapter 4). For instance, Dame and Dame’s study (Chapter 3) demonstrates that native speakerism (Holliday, 2006) also affects heritage speakers who face ‘language shyness’ (Krashen, 1998) when speaking their heritage language. This is only one of the many reasons why scientists have time and again argued for abandoning or reconceptualising the notion of ‘native speaker’ (Cheng et al., 2021; Davies, 2003; Holliday, 2006; Kramsch, 1997; Slavkov et al., 2022). By revealing that the native speaker concept and the associated cultural essentialism are invariably prominent in today’s language pedagogy, the individual chapters of the present publication respond to the scholarly demand for a paradigm shift and critique of these problematic notions. This book can hence be seen as a further contribution to challenging and refraining from the predominance of the native speaker and essentialist views on language and culture. Furthermore, by presenting an agencybased perspective on authenticity, where the individual is responsible for his/her own performance, the current volume contributes to liberating authenticity from its close ties with the native speaker (Pinner, 2016). In this respect, the present publication connects with Van Compernolle and

Afterword: Taking Stock of the Authentic – Critical Synthesis and Timely Outlook  263

McGregor (2016: 241), who have argued that non-monolingual first-­ language speakers, including learners, can ‘authenticate their use of, and identities in, languacultures beyond their first’. Umbach and Humphrey (2018: 126) describe this ‘concept of “selfauthentication”’ as the democratisation of authenticity because now ‘anyone can create moments of authenticity for themselves through whatever means seem appropriate to them’. Authentication, as maintained by Bucholtz (2003: 408), does not focus on identity, but views it ‘as the outcome of constantly negotiated social practices’ and is something that is always (invisibly) achieved instead of being socially given. Bamle (Chapter 14) focuses on these social practices and argues that learners’ active participation can authenticate the language use and the learning process. Ultimately, this may also foster learners’ motivation (Pinner, 2014: 26). Thus, as stated in the Preface, it becomes evident that language itself is neither authentic nor inauthentic. By contrast, authenticity is always a process of (social) achievement, intertwined with culture and identity and ‘no longer a stable given’ (see Foreword). Examples of this interconnection can be found throughout the whole volume, especially in Chapters 8–12 in Part 2 Authenticity and Identity, as well as in Chapters 13–16 in Part 3 Authenticity and Aesthetics. Finally, it is worth mentioning the variety of methods provided in the present publication for examining authenticity, including discourse analysis, individual case studies, interview studies, vignette research, ethnographic studies and a phenomenological research design. As already acknowledged by Van Compernolle and McGregor (2016: 238), this mixture of research methods is essential when it comes to the examination of such complex, multifaceted and ‘slippery’ (Gilmore, 2007: 98) concepts as authenticity. Ranging from global and theory-based literature studies to individual case studies and practical examples, the current volume addresses not only applied linguists, specialised and interested in authenticity, but also curriculum developers and language teachers and instructors. This wide range of different viewpoints, contexts, methods, languages and addressees is one of the strengths of the current volume and sets it apart from previous publications on authenticity. Another characteristic of the current volume is its philosophical definition of authenticity that inspires and underpins its three parts on language learning, identity and aesthetics. Authenticity of Agency – A Dynamic and Philosophical Concept

As stated above, the present volume regards authenticity no longer as a stable constant, but as a dynamic concept that interrelates with identity and ‘culturally inherited norms and doxas’ (see Preface). It becomes clear within every single chapter that being ‘authentic’ is not, as in the essentialist view of native speakerism, a question of nationality, culture or

264  Authenticity Across Languages and Cultures

language proficiency. On the contrary, authenticity in language teaching and learning is an act of self-construction, self-expression and personal engagement of the individual. Here, authenticity is connected to autonomy, which, according to Steinvorth (2016: 149), is its ‘condition’, and to identity because, following Ushioda (2011), students need to express their own ideas and identities to be able to ‘speak as themselves’ and find their ‘authentic voice’. The current volume illustrates that self-expression and finding the ‘authentic voice’ includes personal engagement both with the target language and culture(s) as well as with translanguaging and transcultural activities. Furthermore, identity also requires considering local settings and conditions. Consequently, authenticity is something that develops and is constantly achieved within language users’ own experience, context and reality – and this is precisely what the authors subsume under ‘authenticity of agency’. With this existentialist view on a hitherto seemingly solid and selfevident concept such as that of authenticity, the current volume feeds into a larger trend where unquestioned and powerful categories of L2 pedagogy, including the native speaker, are no longer seen as something given, but as dynamic and multifaceted continua (Kaltseis, 2021; Liceras et al., 2017; Pinner, 2014, 2016; Slavkov et al., 2022). This ‘new’ perspective on authenticity provided here helps to refine authenticity for language teaching and learning: Authenticity of agency values every individual language user as authentic per se and intrinsically excludes the native speaker from the concept of authenticity because people in their act of self-expression, self-engagement and self-creation become ultimately authenticated. This conception of authenticity, which concentrates on the individual, is closely related to what Umbach and Humphrey (2018) as well as Kramsch (2021) call the ‘performance of authenticity’. It is this question of the ‘performance of authenticity’ and, consequently, of the future of authenticity in our consumer-oriented, mediatised society and communication via social networks in times of so-called ‘internetization’ (Passaris, 2017) that I will turn to in the final paragraph. Thereby, I will also flag a new aspect – the ‘dark side’ of authenticity, as it were. Future Directions: How Real is Real or the ‘Performance of Authenticity’

In her Foreword to the current volume, Kramsch considers that authenticity is ‘in crisis’. On the one hand, authenticity is itself in crisis because of the global mobility and the growing number of the so-called ‘new speakers’. On the other hand, authenticity is challenged by artificial intelligence and digital communication. It is this second challenge that this concluding paragraph focuses on, because in our fast-paced digital age, the question of how ‘real’ and ‘authentic’, for example, the images

Afterword: Taking Stock of the Authentic – Critical Synthesis and Timely Outlook  265

provided on social networks, or consumer products and goods are, seems as timely as ever. It is therefore not surprising that Passaris (2017) coined the term ‘internetization’ to describe the ‘contemporary face of [electronic] globalization’. Umbach and Humphrey (2018: 97), in contrast, speak of our modern area of capitalism and consumption as ‘the post-authentic age’. In doing so, they refer to Jean Baudrillard (1970/1998: 87), who identified in La Société de Consommation (The Consumer Society) the constant striving of finding one’s personality and of becoming ‘truly’ oneself, and hence, the creation of oneself, as one of the key concepts of consumerism. He calls this trend ‘personalization’ and compares it to ‘naturalization’ as the effect of ‘restoring nature as sign after it has been eliminated in reality’ (Baudrillard, 1970/1998: 89). Similarly, one may critically ask if ‘authentication’ means ‘restoring authenticity’ after it has been destroyed in real life. While this rhetorical question would presuppose that authenticity is measurable and there exists an ‘objective’ standard of authenticity, Umbach and Humphrey (2018: 115) argue that there is no ‘absolute measure’ for authenticity because it is a ‘process of democratic negotiation and competition’. They allude to consumers as being agents who actively produce and perform authenticity: ‘[I]n engaging, materially, aesthetically, or intellectually, with an object of consumption, we produce its meaning and import in our own minds. And it is this act that gives us the option to define, and perform, our own vision of authenticity qua the object’ (Umbach & Humphrey, 2018: 98). Likewise, if individual language users, including teachers and learners, are perceived as agents as in the current volume, they will be able to produce and perform authenticity and create authentic language (learning and teaching) experiences for themselves. One of today’s consumer goods or commodities is language itself. Heller (2010a: 103), for instance, points at the relation between authenticity and language in the globalised economy and speaks of the ‘commodification of language’, where language is on the one hand ‘a technical skill’, and ‘a sign of authenticity’ on the other. As Heller (2010b: 356) states, language in the globalised world is used ‘to authenticate a commodity, whether an object, an experience or a service’, and this is based ‘on (mainly national or nation-like) identities, and on their constitutive myths’. It is this connection between the process of (self-)authentication, language as a commodity and language teaching and learning that could serve as a (critical-philosophical) starting point for future research. In times of communication via social networks, it is also appropriate to consider Guy Debord’s work La Société du Spectacle (The Society of the Spectacle) (1967/2013). In his book, Debord (1967/2013) describes modern capitalist society as a ‘spectacle’, an illusionary world of images alienating us from the ‘real’ world. The spectacle, in which celebrities and people from the show business expose to others their ‘real’ life while ordinary people are watching and consuming their content, seems extremely

266  Authenticity Across Languages and Cultures

topical in our mediatised world of online communication via social media. In this context, Kramsch (2021: 147–148) speaks – similarly to Umbach and Humphrey (2018: 98) – of the ‘performance of authenticity’ as the ‘essence of our late modern disciplinary societies’. She describes this performance as the lust for self-exhibition and the confession of one’s intimate life in the digital environment (Kramsch, 2021: 147–148). For her, the ‘performance of authenticity’ is constituted by three characteristics: visibility, conformity/normativity and verdiction (Kramsch, 2021: 148). The latter feature was coined by Michel Foucault and is of particular interest because it means that people, by revealing and presenting themselves in social media, perform authenticity, which per se prevents authentic behaviour and is thus rather ‘a deeply inauthentic performance’ (Kramsch, 2021: 149). Consequently, this constant self-staging observed in social media calls into question the concept of authenticity because people in our modern society are, in fact, only ever performing, deluding authenticity. In this respect, the ‘performance of authenticity’ marks a consumerist excrescence where the individual is expected to ‘be different’ through selfactualisation, i.e. to constantly express themselves while subscribing to narratives of freedom and individualism. On its ‘dark side’, authenticity is thus a market-driven co-optation distorting the existentialist idea. However, the studies in the current volume and the reference to Baudrillard (1970/1998) and Debord (1967/2013) in this final paragraph can help to overcome what might also seem like a ‘dilemma of authenticity’. In the same way as one’s personality in our capitalist and consumerist society, authenticity in times of ‘internetization’ has to be found, constituted and elaborated by every individual him- or herself. As a matter of fact, this is the very essence and basic meaning of the term ‘authenticity’ itself, which relates to the Greek terms auto (self) and hentes (doer): ‘Authenticity is something that we do, or achieve, ourselves. Authenticity can never be prescribed, nor passively consumed. […] Authenticity is an invitation to all of us to discover and realise a mode of existence which we recognize ourselves, and our purpose in life’ (Umbach & Humphrey, 2018: 127–128). This definition of authenticity provided by Umbach and Humphrey (2018) also brings us back to the process of authentication and the conclusion drawn by Van Compernolle and McGregor (2016: 233) that ‘authenticity is constructed, reified and/or challenged in performance’. In this regard, the ‘performance of authenticity’ is probably one of the (future) key features in the concept of authenticity itself. The act of ‘being true to oneself’ (Steinvorth, 2016: 87) and to the (invisible) others is already practiced, performed and achieved in social networks all around the world. Accordingly, it is this performance that future research should focus on in language learning and teaching, by exploring and investigating performance(s) of authenticity in various contexts, languages, media and including different individuals and digital environments. Future research

Afterword: Taking Stock of the Authentic – Critical Synthesis and Timely Outlook  267

might also explore what multiplicities of identity as well as internetization mean for authenticity. Additionally, it would be intriguing to examine the performative and consumerist interpretations of authenticity as they threaten to infiltrate the field of language learning. Taken together, future research concentrating on the areas suggested in this final chapter may also deepen our insights into and understanding of the agency-based concept of authenticity, which is, as has been shown throughout the current volume, central to fostering individual (learner) identity and autonomy. References Baudrillard, J. (1970/1998) The Consumer Society: Myths and Structures. London: Sage. Bucholtz, M. (2003) Sociolinguistic nostalgia and the authentication of identity. Journal of Sociolinguistics 7, 398–416. Cheng, L.S.P., Burgess, D., Vernooij, N., Solis-Barroso, C., McDermott, A. and Namboodiripad, S. (2021) The problematic concept of native speaker in psycholinguistics: Replacing vague and harmful terminology with inclusive and accurate measures. Frontiers in Psychology 12, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.715843. Davies, A. (2003) The Native Speaker: Myth and Reality. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Debord, G. (1967/2013) Die Gesellschaft des Spektakels. Berlin: Klaus Bittermann. Dörnyei, Z., MacIntyre, P.D. and Henry, A. (eds) (2015) Motivational Dynamics in Language Learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Gilmore, A. (2007) Authentic materials and authenticity in foreign language learning. Language Teaching 40, 97–118. Heller, M. (2010a) The commodification of language. The Annual Review of Anthropology 39, 101–114. Heller, M. (2010b) Language as resource in the globalized new economy. In N. Coupland (ed.) The Handbook of Language and Globalization (pp. 349–365). Singapore: Wiley-Blackwell. Holliday, A. (2006) Native-speakerism. ELT Journal 60 (4), 385–387. Kaltseis, M. (2021) Is authentic equal to motivating? Authenticity and motivation in second language education. DiSlaw 1 (1), 16–29. https://doi.org/10.5296/elr.v1i2.8488. Kramsch, C. (1997) The privilege of the nonnative speaker. Modern Language Association 112 (3), 359–369. Kramsch, C. (2021) Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Krashen, S. (1998) Language shyness and heritage language development. In S. Krashen, L. Tse and J. McQuillan (eds) Heritage Language Development (pp. 41–49). Culver City: Language Education Associates. Liceras, J.M., Méndez, N. and Moreno Mancipe, L. (2017) Perspectives on L2 teacher’s near-nativeness: Linguistic, psycholinguistic, contact linguistics and pedagogical approaches. In J.D.D. Martínez Agudo (ed.) Native and Non-Native Teachers in English Language Classrooms (pp. 53–74). Berlin: De Gruyter. Maley, A. and Tomlinson, B. (eds) (2017) Authenticity in Materials Development for Language Learning. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars. Mishan, F. (2005) Designing Authenticity into Language Learning Materials. Portland: Intellect Books. Ockey, G.J. and Wagner, E. (2018) Assessing L2 Listening. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

268  Authenticity Across Languages and Cultures

Passaris, C. (2017) Internetization: A new word for our global economy. The Conversation, December 5. See https://tinyurl.com/22fmve27 (accessed April 2022). Pinner, R.S. (2014) The authenticity continuum: Towards a definition incorporating international voices. English Today 30 (4), 22–27. Pinner, R.S. (2016) Reconceptualising Authenticity for English as a Global Language. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Slavkov, N., Melo-Pfeifer, S. and Kerschhofer-Puhalo, N. (2022) The Changing Face of the “Native Speaker”. Perspectives from Multilingualism and Globalization. Berlin: De Gruyter. Stadler, W. (2021) Сближая культуры oder Sprachen lehren und lernen. Ein Beispiel forschungsgeleiteter Fachdidaktiklehre zur Bildung von Brücken im Unterrichtsfach Russisch. In J. Fuchsbauer, W. Stadler and A. Zink (eds) Kulturen verbinden – Connecting cultures – Сближая культуры (pp. 177–207). Innsbruck: iup. Steinvorth, U. (2016) Pride and Authenticity. [ebook]. Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan. Umbach, M. and Humphrey, M. (2018) Authenticity: The Cultural History of a Political Concept. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. Ushioda, E. (2011) Motivating learners to speak as themselves. In G. Murray, X. Gao and T. Lamb (eds) Identity, Motivation and Autonomy in Language Learning (pp. 11–24). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Van Compernolle, R. and McGregor, J. (eds) (2016) Authenticity, Language and Interaction in Second Language Contexts. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Will, L. (2018) Authenticity in English Language Teaching. An Analysis of Academic Discourse. Münster: Waxmann.

Index

academic discourse xxiii, 1, 24–25, 103, 214, 216, 262 African language(s) xi, xix, xxi, 150–156, 158–162 Afrikaans xix, 138–143, 147–148, 150, 151, 158–159, 205 agency xiv, 10, 40, 45, 60, 119, 127, 130–131, 169, 177, 202–203, 227, 261–262, 263–264, 267 apartheid 162, 203, 207, 209, 211, 251, 255 assessment viii–xi, xx, xxi, 17, 19, 25, 29, 31, 53–63, 120, 126, 128, 203, 245, 250, 262 Austrian [context] x, 20–22, 121, 124–126, 129, 130, 132 authentic education xxi, 119, 123–124, 127, 130–132 language 21, 32, 37, 44, 46, 60, 63, 82, 152, 153, 155–156, 204, 205, 211, 225, 234, 240, 246, 265 language learning xiv, 136, 138–139, 142, 147, 203 language use xiii, 202, 205 learning material 32, 103, 153 materials xiii, 22, 25–26, 32, 73–74, 183, 184, 204, 245 personality 29, 184, 226, 265, 266 self xv, xviii, 2–3, 10, 86, 107, 166–167, 169, 171, 217–218, 223, 225 test 29, 31–32, 56 text xiii, xx, 1–2, 32, 82–83, 103, 105, 125, 135, 137, 141, 146, 152–153, 155–157, 161, 184, 202, 204, 211, 214, 245 voice xxiii, 245, 250, 252, 254, 257, 264

authentication xviii, 2, 132, 142, 226, 238–239, 263, 265, 266 authenticity as mindset xiv as process xiv as relation xiv concept(s) of xiii–xv, xx–xxii, 1–4, 6, 8, 10, 17, 19–20, 22–26, 28–29, 31, 38, 73–75, 85, 86, 97, 102–107, 109–110, 119, 131, 161, 183, 185, 214, 226–227, 238, 261–262, 264, 266–267 first-person xxii, 22, 214–219, 222–224, 226 in crisis xv, 264 of individual behaviour 1, 2, 19, 20, 24, 26–27, 29, 37–38, 40, 49–50, 74, 97, 104, 123, 216, 255, 261 of learning tasks 29, 83, 157 text 153, 184, 239 textual 1, 2, 19–21, 23–24, 26, 29, 31, 54, 73, 97, 105, 150, 154, 184 third-person 218 bilingualism x, xiv, 99–102, 104–106, 110 Canadian [context] vii, ix–xi, xiv, xvii, xix, xxii, 181–183, 185, 187–189, 193–195 Common European Framework of Reference for Languages 20–22, 30–32, 59, 121, 128, 250 commodification of language 265 communication authentic 98 communicative language teaching 153, 245 communicative turn 119, 121 conceptual taxonomy of authenticity 1, 31, 83, 104 269

270  Authenticity across Languages and Cultures

(co-)construction of authenticity xiv, 6, 32, 135, 166, 169, 183, 261, 266 corpus/corpora xi, xxii, 19, 98, 151–153, 155–162, 194 creativity 71, 124–125, 127, 130–131, 165, 167–169, 174 critical language awareness 246, 247, 251–253, 256–257 cross-cultural reading 206, 246 cultural authenticity xiv, xv, 2, 19–20, 24, 26–27, 38, 40, 48, 185, 187 cultural learning vii, xiv, 119, 125–127 curriculum vii, ix, xxii–xxiii, 21, 22, 69, 71, 120, 124–127, 129–133, 150, 155–156, 170, 201–203, 211, 231–232, 245, 247–250, 257, 263 decolonisation 201, 202, 211 dialects xxii, 32, 42, 182, 185, 247 differentiation 124, 130, 177, 230, 240 digitalisation xx, 54, 58, 63 discourse analysis ix, xx, 25, 166, 187, 263 diverse backgrounds 47, 253 early childhood education vii, x, xxi, 135, 142 early learning 135–136, 142, 147 ecological authenticity xiv emotion 71–72, 74, 94, 95, 136–139, 170, 172, 177, 188, 225, 248 engagement viii, xxii–xxiii, 45, 69, 74, 77, 82, 105, 146, 158, 184, 204, 215–217, 223, 225–227, 239, 264 English as a foreign language (EFL) vii–ix, xxi, 24, 63, 73, 153, 214, 230, 232, 249 English language teaching (ELT) x, 3, 119, 124–131, 152, 202, 245 EPOSTL 20, 22, 31 essentialism xxiii, 4, 6, 9, 10, 31, 38, 40, 41, 44, 45, 48–50, 61, 214, 216, 226, 248, 262, 263 ethics ix, 7, 82, 165–171, 173, 176–178, 253 ethnicity 184, 185 eurocentric 201, 202, 248 existentialism xviii, xix, 5–10, 31, 62, 81, 82, 107, 120, 122–124,

126–129, 166, 167, 169, 177, 183, 214, 215, 217, 224, 227, 264, 266 fairy tales xxii, 201, 202, 204–211 folk music xxii, 214, 215, 217–219, 222 gender viii, x, 122, 128–132, 147, 182, 256 genres xxii, 55, 57–58, 125, 159, 161, 217–219, 225–226, 231, 233–234, 236–237, 240, 248 genuine(ness) xiii, xvii, 17, 31, 54, 60, 72, 74–75, 98, 110, 123, 152, 156–157, 166, 169, 184, 215–216, 226–227, 241, 246 German [context] x, xvii, xix, xxi, xxii, 20, 22, 75, 120, 121–126, 128, 129, 132–133, 165–166, 169–170, 173, 176, 178, 183, 235 globalisation xiii, xiv, xvii, xx, 54–55, 60–61, 63, 69, 175, 177, 265 group identities 182 heritage language viii, x, xx, xxii, 36–37, 39, 181, 183, 185–187, 195, 262 heteronormativity 130 identity ix, xiii, xiv, xv, xviii, xix–xxiii, 6, 8, 10, 17–18, 30–31, 40, 42–43, 61, 101–103, 105–107, 109–111, 117, 129–130, 136, 165–169, 178, 183–188, 193, 195, 204–205, 207, 215–216, 218–219, 222–227, 231, 233–234, 236–238, 240, 252, 261, 263–264, 267 identity and language ix, 42, 184 individual identity 31, 183–184, 186–187 individualisation 124, 126–127, 130 interaction x, xiv, 17, 21, 30–32, 42, 45–46, 48, 50, 53–55, 57–59, 69, 72–76, 82–83, 99–100, 106, 108–110, 121, 132, 136–139, 166, 184–186, 195, 216, 226, 230, 234, 246–247, 255 intercultural communicative competence 121, 127, 166, 170, 233

Index 271

internetization 264–267 interpretations of texts 56, 138, 139, 151, 154, 184, 241 intertextuality ix, 58, 157 language and power 246, 255 language learning vii, xiv, xv, xvii–xxiii, 1, 2, 7, 10, 17, 32, 37, 50, 54, 69, 70, 73, 81–84, 90–92, 94, 97, 107–109, 135–139, 141–142, 144–145, 147, 152–156, 158–159, 161, 183–186, 195, 203, 224–225, 245, 247, 250, 263, 266–267 loss 185, 191 model 9, 40, 248 revitalisation 183, 185–186 shyness 45–50 learning outcomes 43, 67, 74, 77, 78, 86–88 legitimacy 102, 165–166, 174, 176, 178, 248 lesser-resourced languages 151, 155, 161, 236 lingua franca xv, xx, 2, 4, 30, 47, 49, 50, 60 linguistic authenticity xiv–xv, 3 linguistic capital 37–38, 42, 49–50 listening ix, x, 22, 28, 56–57, 59–61, 99, 128, 215 local contexts 183, 204–205, 237 materials design 83, 186, 195 mediation 22, 59–60, 161 mobility xv, xx, 54, 63, 128, 264 monolingualism 38, 41, 102, 104, 110, 148 morality xxii, 169–170, 176 mother tongue instruction 144, 146 motivation x, xxi, xxiii, 28, 31–32, 41, 46, 50, 67, 69–71, 73, 86, 104–107, 124–125, 131, 153, 184, 195, 247, 263 multiculturality 194 multilingual ix, xiii–xv, xxii, 30, 36–38, 40–41, 45, 47, 48, 50, 55, 60, 98, 101–102, 105, 109, 128, 145, 147, 150, 160, 165–166, 170–171, 176–178, 184, 204, 262

multilingualism x, xiii, xx, 36–38, 49, 60, 62, 102, 150–151, 166, 185 musicking 217–218, 224–227 narrative analysis 205 national mentality of authenticity 28, 31 native speaker ix, xiii–xv, xx, 2–4, 10, 18–24, 26, 30–32, 37–38, 40, 42, 46, 48, 60–61, 81–82, 85, 87–88, 91–92, 99, 102–103, 105–106, 135, 152, 165, 183, 245, 262, 264 native speaker norm 30 native speaker sources 22 native-speakerism xx, xxiii, 4, 9, 18, 30, 36–38, 40–41, 43, 48, 50, 61, 97, 102–103, 262–263 new literacies 58, 60 non-native speakers xiv, 2, 18, 37, 60, 102, 105 normative 129, 167–169, 174, 177–178 Norwegian [context] vii, ix, xix, 230–233, 235–237, 239–241 notion of authenticity xv, xix, 4–5, 120, 123–124, 126–127, 129, 147, 151, 154, 168–169, 177, 195, 217, 230, 245–246 output-orientation 123, 128, 131 ownership xviii, 4, 61, 91, 126, 131, 165, 185–186, 195, 207, 241 pedagogical grammar xxi, 81 performance 19, 30, 53, 59, 69, 121, 123, 131, 146–147, 189, 192, 215–217, 224, 226, 261–262, 264, 266 performance of authenticity 261, 264, 266 personal growth model 248 personal identity xviii, xxii, 6, 8, 10, 224 phenomenology 138, 252 positioning theory 38, 42 psalms 181, 183, 188, 189, 191–192, 194 reactive authenticity 28, 32 real world xiii, 53, 56, 58–60, 62–63, 83, 104, 152, 153 real-life authenticity 19, 20, 24, 29

272  Authenticity across Languages and Cultures

communication xx, 18, 246 language use 61, 152, 154, 156 texts xiii, 155–156 real-world authenticity 2, 19, 24, 26, 28–29, 31, 54–55, 57, 60, 62, 83, 86–87 rock music 216 Russian as a foreign language (RFL) viii, xx, 17–20, 22, 24, 27–31 Russian as a foreign language (RFL) discourse xx, 17–20, 23, 25–26, 29–31 Russian language teaching xi, 17 Russian native speaker xx, 18–20, 23–24, 26, 30, 38, 42, 48 second language education ix, 138, 140 self-expression 45, 217–218, 223, 225, 227, 264 self-realisation 6, 9, 120, 122–125, 127, 129–131, 217, 219, 223, 226 sexuality 129, 130 situational authenticity 27–28, 53–54, 58, 61, 83, 87 skills x, 18, 22, 29–30, 39–40, 44, 46, 55–57, 59–61, 98–99, 101, 108–109, 111, 126, 137, 145, 147, 150, 201, 247, 249 social concept authenticity 82 social-emotional xxi, 138, 145, 147 sociocultural capital 246 South African [context] vii–ix, xi, xix, xxi–xxiii, 135, 140, 142, 147, 150–151, 153–154, 156, 160, 162, 201–203, 205–211, 249–251, 253, 255, 257 speaking ix, x, 3, 18, 22, 29, 37, 39, 43, 45, 47, 48, 50, 57, 61, 99, 111,

127, 128, 140, 147, 158–160, 186, 193, 232, 239, 262 speech authentic 24, 60 Spirit Wrestlers x, 181 Standard Russian xxii, 36, 38, 41–43, 46–50, 182 standardisation 121, 123, 128–129, 131 standards xxi, 62, 120–121, 125, 128, 130–131, 171, 215 student-centred learning 249 syllabus 21, 49, 88–90, 120, 161 symbolic competence ix, xiv, 176, 178 symbolic power 167, 171, 177–178 target language use (TLU) domains 53 task-based language teaching (TBLT) 19, 24, 83, 91, 93 taxonomy 1, 9, 17, 25, 31, 83, 104–105, 110 teacher action research (TAR) 84–86, 95 testing viii–xi, 31, 53–55, 57–60 transculturality xx, 54, 63, 183–184 transculturation 234, 239 transformation 105–107, 109, 257 translanguaging xiv, 62, 98, 101, 104, 106, 202, 204–207, 211, 264 use of language authentic xviii, 19 validation 44, 54, 142 validity 3, 40, 53–54, 62, 160, 170 vignette research xxi, 135, 138–140, 142, 263 vulnerability 72, 77, 94–95, 169, 176 washback 54 white privilege 251 writing viii–x, 22, 28, 43, 55, 57–59, 91, 126, 142, 225, 251, 254