From Globalization to Glocalization: An Investigation of EFL Teachers’ Perceptions of Glocalized Language Education

Authors
E. Salimi 1
M. M. Safarzadeh 2
1 Assistant Professor of English Language Teaching- Allame Tabatabaei University, Tehran-Iran.
2 Ph.D. Candidate in English Language Teaching- Allame Tabatabaei University – Tehran-Iran.
Abstract
The study aimed at developing a hypothesized model and questionnaire of language glocalization for the first time to accomplish systematic data generation and collection of the teachers’ perceptions regarding the glocalization of language education (LEG) in Iran. Hence, a model was initially hypothesized and the researchers went through scientific phases to generate a reliable and validated LEG questionnaire to test the model. Face validity, content validity and construct validity of the questionnaire were investigated. For exploratory factor analysis, the criterions for the data factorability being met, the researchers ran factor analysis employing Principle Components Analysis (PCA) method resulting in identification of five factors. Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient was used to measure the questionnaire internal consistency. The Cronbach’s Alpha results indicated that the internal consistency was 0.96 for the whole questionnaire, and 0.89, 0.92, 0.88, 0.89, and 0.87 respectively for the five components of LEG as the subscales in the questionnaire. After running exploratory factor analysis, to check whether the questionnaire data fits the hypothesized model of LEG introduced at the beginning of the study, a confirmatory factor analysis was done. Then, the final version of the questionnaire was administered to 270 language teachers to gather the data to feed it to the model to see the extent to which the model fit the data. The results of the study revealed that although the model has been the first one of its kind, it displayed a reasonable degree of reliability and validity as confirmed by the statistical procedures. The developed and validated model and the questionnaire of this study can have many practical applications for Iranian EFL teachers as well as future researches in other contexts.

Keywords

Subjects

• Alderson, C. J. & J. Banerjee, (1996), How Might Impact Study Instruments Be Validated? Unpublished manuscript commissioned by UCLES.
• Alsagoff, L. (2010). “Hybridity in ways of speaking: The glocalization of English in Singapore”. In L. Lim, A. Pakir, and L. Wee (Eds.), English in Singapore: Modernity and management (Pp. 109-130). Hong Kong, China: Hong Kong University Press.
• Bamgbose, A. (2001). “World Englishes and globalization”. World Englishes, 20, Pp.357-363.
• Bax, S. (2003). “The end of CLT: A context approach to language teaching”. ELT Journal 57 (3).Pp. 278–287.
• Brown, J. D. (2001). Using Surveys in Language Programs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Converse, J. M. & S. Presser (1986). Survey Questions: Handcrafting the Standardized Questionnaire. London: Sage.
• Dordi-nezhad, F. (2015). “Construction, Validation and Reliability of the Foreign Language Attitude and Motivation Questionnaire”. Language Related Research. 6(No.2 (Tome 23)).Pp. 107-128. [In Persian].
• Dornyei, Z. (2010). Questionnaires in Second Language Research: Construction, Administration, and Processing. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.
• Graddol, D. (1997). The future of English. London: The British Council.
• Graddol, D. (2006). English next: Why global English may mean the end of “English as a foreign language”. London, UK: British Council.
• Holliday, A. (1994). “The House of TESEP and the Communicative Approach: The Special Needs of State English Language Education”. ELT Journal 48 (1).Pp.3–11.
• Li, W. (1993). “China English and Chinglish”. Foreign Language Teaching and Research 4. Pp. 18–24.
• Mauranen, A. (2007). English as a lingua franca: Speakers not learner. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/1858131/
• Modiano, M. (2001). “Ideology and the ELT practitioner”. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11. Pp. 159-173.
• Murata, K. & J. Jenkins (2009). Global Englishes in Asian contexts: Current and Future Debates. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS Survival Manual: A Step-by-step Guide to Data Analysis Using SPSS for Windows. 3rd ed. McGraw Hill: Open University Press.
• Robertson, R. (1995). “Glocalization: Time-space and homogeneity-heterogeneity”. In M. Featherstone, S. Lash, & R. Robertson (Eds.), Global modernities (Pp. 25-44). London, UK: Sage.
• Seidlhofer, B. (2001). “Closing a conceptual gap: The case for a description of English as a lingua franca”. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 11.Pp. 133–158.
• Seidlhofer, B. (2004). “Research perspectives on teaching English as a lingua franca”. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 209–239.
• Seidlhofer, B. (2009). “World Englishes and English as a lingua franca: Two frameworks or one? ” In T. Hoffmann and L. Siebers (Eds.), World Englishes—Problems, properties and prospects. (Pp. 376–379). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Sharifian, F. (2010). “Glocalization of English in world Englishes: An emerging variety among Persian speakers of English”. In M. Saxena & T. Omoniyi (Eds.), Contending with globalization in world Englishes (Pp. 137-158). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
• Shi, X. (2013). “The glocalization of English: A Chinese case study”. Journal of Developing Societies, 29.Pp. 89-122.
• Sung, K.Y. (2010). “Promoting Communicative Language Learning Through Communicative Tasks.” Journal of Language Teaching and Research 1 (5).Pp.704–713.
• Swales, J. (2004). Research genres. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Trudgill, P. & J. Hannah (2002). International English: A guide to varieties of standard English. London, UK: Arnold.
Language Related Research
Volume 9, Issue 4 - Serial Number 46
September and October 2018
Pages 157-180