Ethnography in ESL

                                                                                                                                                     

                                                                                  Christykim
Defining the Essentials states what ethnography is and what ethnography can do for us in ESL.  It states that ethnography is a type of research that is holistic and studies people’s behavior in a natural setting over a long period of time with a focus on the influence of culture on behavior.  Watson-Gegeo emphasizes long-term because she wants to separate it from some ethnographic research that is impressionistic with short periods of observations called “blitzkrieg ethnography”.  She states these are very superficial and not true ethnography.

Watson-Gegeo goes over some principles of ethnographic research.  First, ethnography focuses on people’s behavior in groups and on cultural patterns in that behavior.  However she also states that ethnography can focus on an individual and in that case the individual is treated as representative of a group.  Second, ethnography is holistic and so any aspect of culture or behavior has to be explained in relation to the whole system in which it is a part so we must look at every type of interaction such as during the lesson, the organization of the classroom and even the influence of society and much more.  Third, ethnographic data collection begins with a theoretical framework to direct the researcher.  Watson-Gegeo states the role of theory seems to be poorly understood outside of anthropology so sometimes the research is guided only by the observer’s “implicit ontology”.  But this doesn’t mean that ethnographic observation and interpretation are determined by the theory.

Watson-Gegeo also discusses the role of ethnography in ESL.  Ethnography can answer questions such as what is going on from moment to moment in ESL settings and how culture influences the behavior of the participants.  Ethnography offers a way to systematically document interactions to develop a theory based on the collected data.  Ethnographic studies can assist ESL teachers by informing them of the influence of the local culture and the expectations from that culture.

           After reading the paper by Watson-Gegeo I have to agree with her on two things.  First, ethnography is useful for ESL since ethnographic research creates theory based on observations in natural settings and takes into account the influence of culture on behavior.  As mentioned before, this information could greatly assist teachers who are teaching in a foreign culture especially here in Korea.  A teacher who teaches adults ESL at companies has stated to me that sometimes the students don’t get participate actively.  Later one of the students told the teacher that many of the students don’t actively participate because they are in the class with a person who has a higher position than them.  The student said if they speak too much then it may seem like they are showing off so they just stay quiet.  After learning that information, the teacher got the student of higher position more involved and therefore increased the activity of the rest of the students.  Now, if the teacher had received some cultural training from some ethnographic research then that situation may have never occurred.  I wonder how many other classes have the same problem and how many teachers still don’t know the reason why. 

           Second, I agree that ethnography needs to have some theoretical framework to direct the researcher.  As Watson-Gegeo stated, if observation is not guided by an explicit theoretical framework then it will be guided by the observer’s “implicit ontology” so this just leads to the observers own opinion.  I know the observer has a lot of knowledge to base the opinion on but in the end it is still just opinion.  Also, without a theoretical framework then it would be difficult to compare the results of one study with that of another.  I think it is important to be able to reproduce a study in several locations to see the variations in the results.  The results could give information whether something is just a local, regional or global phenomenon.  That kind of information could help future observers create new theory.

Freire ( oppressor & oppressed )

                                                                                                       Christy Kim

This question came from my real concern/experiences :

While I was preparing this, I really wondered if what I prepared was the banking method or not. I think using a ppt might lean toward a banking method and I wanted to avoid that. So, I was wondering how to do this so it is critical pedagogy and not banking. Also, what is the best way to handle a situation when the audience is quiet and not participative? How long should the presenter wait before speaking?

I was reading some headlines and thinking about the recent news and it made me wonder.

The Libyan uprising, Tunisia & Egyptian protests. Syria, Bahrain and so on. Who is the oppressor?

Gadafi, Mubarak. Then what about Bill Gates?

20% of the population (Americans) got over 89% of the wealth. The next 20% has little over 10% but the second-lowest 20 %& the bottom 20% is too small so they are not even on here!

If this situation exists too long, what will happen? What would Frerie say? P26

He might say as on page 26, “sooner or later being less human leads the oppressed to struggle against those who made them so”. (After being treated so badly for such as long time then eventually the oppressed will revolt, like what is happening now and what has happened in the past.)

Oppressor – Oppressed  p.26 What is oppression? P37. third paragraph starting with “Any situation…” “sooner or later being less human leads the oppressed to struggle against those who made them so”

What is oppression? P37. third paragraph starting with “Any situation in which “A” objectively exploits “B” or hinders his/her pursuit of self-affirmation.”

Can anyone give me some examples of this? North Korea, China, Myanmar…how about Samsung group or corporate America, like Wall Street or Microsoft? Why are they? Each in their own way, exploits people for their profit and in combination with other corporations enslave people to work for them blindly trying to make ends meet. This is slavery but in another form, they see people as objects and even label them things such as “labor” so they can be dehumanized.

Now lets think about how this might have happened? And this lead me to think about some great historical figures who were oppressed and became oppressors. One of my heroes- Che Guevarra who with Castro were oppressed and they overthrew the Cuban government which was ruled by the dictator- Baptist, Castro becamse leader but Che left to help others. So, what went wrong in Cuba under Castro after Che left? Just as Freire warned against, “The oppressed became oppressor.” Why did the oppressed become oppressors? There are lots of reasons. Oppressed follow oppressor as a model, fear freedom, or didn’t think critically. They just replaced one oppressor for another without thinking how to prevent that from happening and making something better, safe feeling of conformity….so their act of humanization lead to dehumanization. (Why he is an oppressor? No free enterprise, people cannot leave the country, abuse of people)

Just as Freire warned against, “The oppressed became oppressor.” Humanization leads to Dehumanization They just replaced one oppressor for another without thinking how to prevent that from happening and making something better, safe feeling of conformity….so their act of humanization lead to dehumanization. Why did the oppressed become oppressors? How can this be a bigger problem? P29..”Moreover…”

How can this be a bigger problem? P29..”Moreover…” even Hilary Clinton mentioned this about Libya the other day. She said, “we don’t know what kind of government will arise from this but it couldn’t be worse than this”. (This is the concern, that it could be worse than now). I mean like North Korea, Kim Il Sung once considered a great man with a great philosophy but he created something worse than what they had because maybe he was fearful of taking risks that might take away his power and create something that he didn’t expect.

Like Catherine wrote about Margret Thatcher and how women thought she would be a champion for women’s causes but she actually made it worse for women by marginalizing them.

On another note, what do you think about these headlines

1.Saudi King orders $93 billion dollars in handouts – he ignores calls for political reform, gives out money http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/middle-east/saudi-arabia/110318/king-abdullah-political-reform-bahrain-yemen 2. Bill Gates, one of the richest men on Earth and the largest philanthropist. He donates billions every year.

**Saudi King orders $93 billion dollars in handouts**

 What would Freire say about this? “False charity” P26-27..the people are protesting for government reform but the king doesn’t want to have reforms so he gives away handouts such as new jobs and cheaper apartment to subdue the people and maintain the oppression.

**What would Freire think about Bill Gates? Why does he still charge $200 per copy of ms windows, why not $100 or for free. Why not for free, a ’t have enough money, I heard he got 40 billion dollars, it means he could spend a million dollars a day and never go broke in his lifetime. Doesn’t his never satisfied desire prevent others from living a better life? (He takes $10 but donates

Korean Dr

/Prof. at Kaist Ahn Chul Soo, created anti-virus software and gave it away free for the good of the people. But Bill Gates doesn

 $1 – false charity, plus people, charities get dependent on him so it creates a vicious cycle of oppression) I don’t think he is a bad person but I think there needs to be a better distribution of wealth and a way to prevent one person from getting way too much so it hinders other people.

Activity : Let’s say - You’ve just had a successful revolution and now you’re wanting to establish a framework for a new society , what would you create that allows people to be human and at the same time doesn’t oppress anyone?

Options : Let’s divide into 2 groups.

Group A Just overthrew North Korean government, Group B Just overthrew U.S government.(70% are living in poverty), You have to make government reforms / policies, so what kinds of reforms/policies you are going to make?

So, who can free the oppressed? …… before we can liberate the oppressed, many obstacles must be overcome. Lets talk about some of the obstacles. What are the obstacles?

Who can free the oppressed? Can the oppressor do it? Can the oppressed do it? What are some obstacles of the oppressed? 1.     Fear of freedom – the prescribed behavior of the oppressor becomes their own behavior, they fear doing something else that they are not familiar with p29 2.     Duality of their innermost being – they are themselves but at the same time, the oppressor whose consciousness they have internalized. The conflict is being just themselves or being divided. P30 3.     Fatalistic attitudes – “What can I do? I’m only a peasant, a single person, a teacher.” (feel powerless to change anything) p43 4.     Self-depreciation – the oppressed believe that they are what the oppressor believes of them, ex. You are worthless, you are lazy, you are dumb…so you believe you truly are. P45 5.     Passivity – accepting their situation “fatalistically” p46 The oppressed are always yearning for freedom but just yearning is not enough. Freedom is acquired by conquest, not by gift. It must be pursued constantly and responsibly. P29.

We have to keep these things in mind because just as we learn history “ Not to repeat the same mistakes”, we must keep these in mind to prevent their repetition.

How do we make change? - A pedagogy must be made “with” the oppressed not “for” them. p49 Because someone else can’t do it for them ex, America cannot free Libyans without them being involved) - The oppressed must have reflective participation as they are not objects. They must see themselves as men and women in the fight to become more fully human. P47,48 - This is important because true reflection leads to action not just an armchair revolution. P48 - Have to trust in the oppressed and their ability to reason. P48 - Revolutionary leadership must have dialogue with the oppressed p49 (because, if not, then countries the same as N.K. or Libya will be formed again which could be more oppressive)

All these are needed because revolutionary leaders start off with good intentions in the beginning but once they get power they can easily become an oppressor.

In Conclusion: The only effective instrument is a humanizing pedagogy in which the revolutionary leadership establishes a permanent relationship of dialogue with the oppressed. In this way the presence of the oppressed will be what it should be: Committed Involvement. P50,51 In other words, leadership (teacher) must always have a dialogue with the oppressed (students). This way, the students will have true committed involvement.

Discourse and Power

                                                                                 Christy kim
Major aspects of power/language relationships

 1. power in discourse – concerned with discourse as a place where relations of power are

    actually exercised

                      a . face to face discourse

 b. cross-cultural discourse

 c. ‘hidden power’ of discourse

2. power behind discourse – orders of discourse like social order

Power in Discourse

1. face to face in unequal encounter

a. powerful participants control and constrain the speech of non-powerful participants

                        

 1) 3 types of constraint

                          a) contents – on what is said or done

                               ex. medical student must do examination following a learned routine

                          b) relations – social relations people enter into a discourse

                               ex. professional relationship to audience & subordinate relationship to head doctor

                          c) subjects – the speakers social position(s) in a discourse

                               ex. aspiring doctor & student

Analysis

1.     what is happening is announced to the students including what they will do

2.     they way the S is explicitly told when to start talking & examining – “off you go” sounds like she is speaking to a kid

3.     equally explicit instructions to S for sequence of action

4.     the way S are evaluated – “very good” & “that’s right” again speaking to a subordinate

5.     S is ‘put on the spot’ – S is questioned followed by a pause which means S must answer while everyone is watching

6.     grammatical forms

a.     negative question (did we not, might we not) – the S should know they are wrong and the doctor is right (a way to make the S look stupid)

b.    reduced question (now what do we do? What is the next important thing?) – sounds abrupt and rude or brief

c.    declarative sentence instead of interrogative sentence with a question tag (don’t we?) – effect is like that of negative question

    

Directive speech acts (orders & questions) come from doctor

1.     seems doctor has right to give orders and ask questions

2.     seems like students can only follow orders and answer questions (follows subordinate position)

Discourse type (can indirectly control the discourse by choosing a certain discourse type)

*** note *** discourse type also self-constrains since everyone must now follow

 the discourse type

2. Power in cross-cultural encounters – unequal encounter – ‘gatekeeper encounters’

             a. socially dominant cultural group controls the encounter

                1) dominant group tend so to assume minority group is familiar with dominant groups ways so

interpretations of actions can be incorrect by the dominant group and cause miscommunication

2) native-like ability can even cause more miscommunication since it increases the chances the dominat group will assume things

3. Hidden power – in written language especially mass media (nature of power relationship is not clear)

             a. differences with face to face

                1) ‘one-sidedness’ – only the media communicates info

                2) no adaptation of language – face to face interactions adapt language type for the audience

                 all the time but media does not since it is for mass audiences

a)    media – uses language for an ideal audience (who is the ideal audience? – dominant

cultural group)

             b) what is the nature of power relations in media discourse?

                1) producers have sole producing rights over the consumer so they can determine the

 relationship

a)    ex. Headline – industrial disputes use “trouble” or “disruption” so side with employers

   2) in British media, power relations favor existing power-holders

     a) this becomes ‘hidden power’ since it is implicit in the practices of the media

Analysis

1. Stereotype ‘army wives’ and public figures - sexist

2. Shows Jenny is a ‘good wife’ without using the words directly

                       a) she expresses confidence in husband’s ability

                       b) she is concerned for his safety – she ‘prays’ he has ‘done enough’

                      c) she tries to act normally in front of the kids

                    3. photographs are not equal

                       a) eyes are looking straight ahead

                       b) serious expression

                       c) hint of a smile possibly cynical

       c. hidden power in face to face interactions

          1) close relationship between requests and power

                    a) direct – explicit power relationship

                                 1) imperatives – ex. types this for me by 5 oclock

                    b) indirect – implicit

                                 2) question form with different degrees of eloquence for effect

                                     ex. Can you type this letter.?

                                             Do you think you could type this letter…?

                                              Could I possible ask you to type this letter…?

Debate Critique

The debate was a cross-cultural encounter between peers which is an unequal encounter. The reason for this is because of the language used during the discussion. The discussion was primarily controlled but those whose native language is English. It seemed as though the dominant group assumed the minority group understood everything as they did.

-      Dominant group controlled the tempo and the flow of the debate.

-      Although there were 4 members, the discussion occurred between the two native members primarily and seldom asked input from non-natives. This easily shows the unequal power distribution between the natives and non-natives.

-      There was one male in the group and he took the lead and the females followed. It seems as natural gender roles of male dominance was as work.

-      Sometimes one member of the dominant group spoke about something irrelevant and then an exchange occurred between the two dominant members.

-      Over-talking occurred between members, specifically the native male over-talked a non-native female and made her stop speaking.

Book critique

                                                                                                                                  Christy Kim                                                                                                                                  

Book Name: What Do You Think 1 – 30 Controversial Issues                      

Level: Very Advanced

Book Type: Topic Discussion Textbook

This book is a two-book series, both of which have 30 controversial issues ranging from Surrogate Mothers to Euthanasia. Many of the issues are classic debate issues such as Euthanasia and Gun Control. However, there are some that are not as popular such as Free Cigarettes for Soldiers which discusses how cigarette companies give free cigarettes to soldiers stationed in the Persian Gulf or The Rights of the Dead which discusses using cadavers as crash-test dummies.

The layout is fairly standard following this order:

1.     Issue - the article

2.     What Does it Mean? - vocabulary, idiom and expression check

3.     Comprehension Check-up – comprehension questions

4.     What Do You Think? – questions asking Ss opinions

5.     Opinion Samples – a few samples usually pro and con for the issue

6.     Humorous expression on the last page of each issue

The book has several good points. It has a diverse range of controversial topics that should appeal to a wide range of learners as well as allowing learners to express their opinions. Although the level is for very-advanced learners, having a vocabulary and comprehension check is very helpful to ensure that learners fully understand the material. The discussion questions are very handy since they allow the teacher to focus on other things for the lesson. The opinion samples are also very helpful since they give diverse points of views about a particular subject. Finally the humorous expression can provide a bit of laughter to the class after a serious discussion.

While this book is good for a discussion type class, there are several things that need to be improved to used for critical pedagogy. On the most basic level, the design and layout of the book is very dull and boring. The pages are a dull yellow color and the only color is the black of the font which is sometimes in bold to emphasize a statement. Although color or pictures are not needed to do critical pedagogy, interesting pictures might help students activate thought processes in there brain. Or at least, grab their interest or attention.

Gist questions or questions to active critical thinking in students would be nice before doing the reading. In this way, students could be engaged before the reading so they would be more interested in the reading. If not gist questions, then at least some type of warm-up activity to engage the students.

While pre-made discussion questions are very handy for discussion, they are not as useful for critical pedagogy. For example, an article titled Hunting: Sport or Atrocity debates the issue of animal rights and the right to hunt. One of the questions that is asked is, “What do you say to making all kinds of hunting illegal?” While this asks students their opinion about making hunting illegal it does not go into the deeper issues at work such as: How does the right to hunt hide the fact that firearms are used for criminal purposes? Why isn’t hunting illegal? Why aren’t weapons such as rifles and pistols illegal? Who or what prevents making ownership of firearms illegal? What would society be like without firearms owned by people? So, for these pre-made discussion questions need to be changed and supplemented to allow students to think deeply beyond the first level of reasoning. Students need to see the hidden agenda which can only be seen using critical pedagogy to look beyond the first level of reasoning.

In addition, there need to be some activity after the reading besides discussion for this to become truly critical pedagogy. For example, there could be debates, presentations, students could be allowed to create material to express their views or any number of things. The book should offer a variety of activities that could be used with any article at the end of each chapter or in the appendix. While activities are not necessary, they are very useful in ESL settings.

In conclusion, this book is good to use for a discussion based class. The topics are diverse enough and plenty are provided so students should be interested enough to want to participate. However for critical pedagogy, major changes need to be done as mentioned previously. Overall, the book could be used as a foundation for building critical pedagogical lessons.