using literature in preservice teacher education programs

TobepresentedasaplenarypresentationatUNSInternationalConference,18May2013

UsingliteratureinPreserviceTeacherEducationPrograms:What,WhyandHow?NugrahennyT.ZachariasFacultyofLanguageandLiteratureSatyaWacanaChristianUniversitySalatiga,Indonesia

Abstract

One of the important tasks of pre-service teacher education program is to instill a positive

teacher identity construction by tailoring pedagogy that centers the bilingual English

speakers (BESs), rather than the monolingual English speakers (MES). Through this

paper, I would share one attempt to center BESs with the use of literature with a small ‘l’

or specifically, bilingual narratives in English (BNE). In the paper, I share a unit that I

develop using BNE situated in a CCU course with the topic ‘the mother tongue.’ An

initial survey at the beginning of the course suggested that learners in the course have

simplistic and limited understandings of the concept ‘the mother tongue’ and how the

mother tongue is constituted through, and by, ethnicity, English and national identity.

Such limited and static understandings of the mother tongue has implications for the

development of pre-service learners’ emerging teacher identity. The article raises

concerns for pre-service teacher education including the need to provide opportunities to

understand learners’ evolving concepts of language, culture and identity through

bilingual narratives in English (BNE).

WHYUSINGLITERATUREINPRESERVICEEDUCATIONPROGRAMS?

In the English language classroom, literature has now become one of the preferred

media to facilitate language learning. Some of the cited reasons of using literature in the

language class, perhaps, are best summarized by Carter and Long (1991) through their

cultural, language, and personal growth models. In the cultural model, literature is

perceived as a means for learners to “understand and appreciate cultures and ideologies

different from their own in time and space and to come to perceive tradition of thought,


feeling, and artistic form within heritage the literature of such culture endows” (Carter

and Long, 1991, p.2). In a language class, learners not only learn the target language but

also how people of the target language use the language to interact with one another.

Literature also can be a model of language use and creativity (the language model).

Carter and Long (1991) further explain that by integrating literature in language classes,

learners can be exposed to some of the “more subtle and creative uses of the language”

(p.2). Finally, literature can encourage personal growth. Indeed, the test of a teacher’s

success in teaching literature, Carter and Long note, is the extent to which learners can

feel the “enjoyment and love for literature;” providing them with insights that make them

a better individual.

Despite the pedagogical wealth literature brings, the use of literature in content

courses has been scarce, if not non-existent. This is especially true in the pre-service

teacher education where I have been teaching for the last 15 years, which perhaps

corresponds to how literature has been dealt with elsewhere. Through this paper, I take

Carter and Long (1991) approach to the use of literature as a resource a step further to

include it uses as a resource in content courses. In particular, I am promoting the use of a

particular type of literature, that is literature with a small ‘l’ (McRae, 1991), in particular

what I label as ‘Bilingual Narrative in English’ or BNE, for short. Put it simply, BNE is

published language memoirs written by bilingual English speakers (hereafter, BESs)

addressing issues of language, culture and identity of being a bilingual English speaker.

In this paper, I share an example of a unit I developed using BNE in one of the content

courses, a Cross-cultural understanding (CCU) course, offered in a pre-service teacher

education.

WHAT LITERATURE IN PRE-SERVICE TEACHER EDUCATION?

McRae (1991) makes a broad distinction between literature with a small ‘l’ and

Literature with a big ‘L’. Literature with a big L (hereafter, ‘Literature’) includes texts

that are “sanctified by long familiarity and by academic authority” (Maley, 2012, p. 302)

or most often terms as “cannonical texts” (Maley, 2012, p. 303). These includes texts by

Shakespeare, Dickens, Hughes, and Frost, among others. These Literature is most often

discussed through a method or methods of reading such as Marxist, feminist or semiotic


or ‘Literature as Study’ (Carter and Long, 1991; Maley, 2012). In this approach, the

literary text is situated in specific historical, social, cultural and ideological contexts.

Therefore, Maley (2012) views this kind of approach as “teaching about literature”

(Maley, 2012, pp. 303, italics in the original) or Literature as a study.

The second kind of literature is those with a small ‘l’. Texts included in literature

are much wider and not included in the traditional cannon. In ELT, the purpose of using

these kinds of literatures is to illustrate the ways English is used and manipulated to

convey particular meanings. They are used as a pedagogical resource to learn about the

target language. Thus, this approach is often labeled as ‘literature as resource’ (Carter and

Long, 1991; Maley, 2012). If literature as study places the literature at the center, in

literature as resource, the literary texts are secondary to the language learning aims and

objectives (Widdowson, 1997) or “teaching with literature” (Maley, 2012, pp. 303, italics

in the original).

Now that the distinction between Literature and literature has been discussed, the present

paper suggests for the inclusion of the use of a particular kinds of literature with a small

‘l’ which is ‘bilingual narratives in English’ or BNE for short, in course contents such as

Cross Cultural Understanding (CCU).

WHAT ARE BILINGUAL NARRATIVES IN ENGLISH (BNE)?

If we use McRae’s broad distinction of literature, BNE is literature with a small

‘l’. Kramsch (2009) terms these literatures as “published testimonies and language

memoirs” (p.3) of former language learners and immigrants. In the present paper, BNE

refers to “written testimonies of English speaking multilinguals narrating in English their

experiences of learning and living with several languages, one of which is English”

(Zacharias, 2012, p. 235). They address issues related to language, culture and identities.

Put it simply, BNE is published language memoires written by BESs and discussed issues

related to language, culture and identity of being a BES. These literatures are not part of

the traditional canon or what McRae terms ‘literature with a big L.’


WHY THE USE OF BILINGUAL LITERATURE IN ENGLISH?

In 1990, Rampton wrote a groundbreaking article published in ELT journal

challenging the prevalent and continued practices in ELT academia that places the native

speakers and/or monolingual English speakers at the center of ELT pedagogy, regardless

their credentials. He strongly argues for the displacement of monolingual models in

TESOL/Applied Linguistics. Throughout the years, various attempts to decenter MESs

have been suggested. One of the most successful attempts to decenter the MES is put

forward by Cook (1992). He suggests to replace the monolingual perspective of ELT to a

multicompetent perspective. A multicompetent perspective acknowledges that BESs are

someone who knows two or more languages and those person are different from

monolinguals and thus, need to be looked at in their own right rather than in comparison

with monolingual English speakers. These comparative fallacy, most often, results in

viewing BESs as deficient monolinguals (Cook, 2012). If a monolingual perspective is

based on the MES model, a multicompetent perspective to ELT places BESs at the

centre.

Then, how do teachers center BESs in their pedagogy? One way is by using

literatures whose focus on BESs’ experiences, gains, and struggles of living with two or

more languages. Through exposing learners with BNE, teachers can address the

“neglected dimension in language learning” (Kramsch, 2009) continued to be pervasive

in SLA research and language teaching. As pointed out succinctly by Kramsch (2009):

…many researchers and teachers still consider language learners as talking heads

that have to be taught from the neck up, so to speak. […] From most of the

descriptions given in SLA research, one would think that learning a language was

predominantly an intellectual, disembodied exercise in problem-solving and

strategic thinking, accomplished inside the head or between two or several heads

in concert with one another.

(Kramsch, 2009, pp. 28)

For Kramsch, language learning is not a matter of acquiring the linguistic aspect of the

target language. When ones are exposed to a language, either through learning, exposure

and/or acquisition, they develop what Kramsch labels as ‘third place’. Learners undergo


an appropriation process where they infer, compare, interpret, discuss and negotiate

(Liddicoat et al., 2003) the “new” culture/identities brought about by the new language

with the “old” or preexisting culture/identities and in the process establish their own

understandings of the two cultures/identities.

My own research exploring how learners conceptualized their identities while

learning English illustrates that learning English includes negotiations of a range of

identities, often times conflicting with one another (Zacharias, 2012). While many

learners loved to use English outside the classroom as an opportunity to practice English,

they were all aware that English use in public spaces projected undesirable personal and

national identities such as arrogant and not a Indonesian national. Ironically, such

important issues are not addressed in many course contents in pre-service teacher

education. As a result, learners struggle negotiating this crucial process themselves and in

isolation from one another.

Exposing learners to BNE provides pre-service English teachers with the

necessary platform to foreground issues of identities, language and cultures that have

long been submerged. Palmer (1998) notes that,

Teaching … emerges from one’s inwardness, for better of worse. […] and

knowing myself is as crucial as good teaching as knowing my students […] In

fact, knowing my students … depends heavily on self knowledge. When I do not

know myself, I cannot know who my students are. I will see them through a glass

darkly, in the shadows of my unexamined life—and when, I cannot see them

clearly, I cannot teach them well. […] whatever self-knowledge we attain as

teachers will serve our students and our scholarship well. Good teacher requires

self-knowledge: it is a secret hidden in plain sight.

(Palmer, 1998, p.3)

The process of knowing oneself or what Palmer terms ‘self-knowledge’, thus, is an

inseparable part of good teaching and should be an integral part in the curriculum of pre-

service teacher education.


Since all the bilingual narrators in BNE, to my knowledge, are immigrants, one

might argue that such texts are not suitable for EFL learners who might have different

needs for learning English. Certainly, BNE with narrators taken from the learners’

contexts might be the most ideal since learners might relate to the characters more and

have similar cultural conceptualization with the narrators. However, such local BNE

should not be taken as the only feasible media. Rather, exposing BNE with immigrant

narrators can create a distance where learners can compare and contrast the experiences

of the narrators with their own.

Palmer (1998) once wrote that “what we [teachers] teach will never “take” unless

it connects with the inward, living core of our students’ lives” (p.31). So, what is more

“inward” and relates to the “living core of …students’ lives” than the mother tongue?

Therefore, I decided to use BNE as a platform to discuss the students’ mother tongue.’

HOW TO USE LITERATURE IN CONTENT COURSES?

In what follows, I share a unit that I developed using BNE situated in a CCU course; a

content course offered at the 3rd year. The CCU course is a three-hour credit course and

runs for 14 weeks. The overall purpose of the course is to develop students’ intercultural

competence when shuttling between different communities of English speakers. The

course consists of two broad topics: ‘understanding self’ and ‘understanding others.’ The

unit that I developed in the present paper is used in the section ‘understanding self,’

which includes topics such as ‘my name,’ ‘my hair,’ and ‘the mother tongue.’ Not all the

topics are designed with the use of BNE.

Overall purpose of the unit

Kramsch (2009) notes that one way to make the learners’ aware of their bilingual nature

is to give opportunity to construct themselves narratively. Therefore, at the end of ‘the

mother tongue’ unit, learners were expected to write narratively about their mother

tongue and how English affects the mother tongue.


The following is the task instruction:

In the narrative you need to share about your mother tongue and especially how learning/using English, if any, has changed your mother tongue. The narrative can include two sections. The first section discusses about ‘my mother tongue’ in which you can answer questions such as: ‘What is your mother tongue(s)?’ ‘What is the meaning of your mother tongue to you?’ and ‘Who do you use it with? For what purpose?’

In the second section, you can talk about how you aquire English and how does it affect your mother tongue. Some questions you can address in this section: ‘Do you think English affect your mother tongue? Why or why not?’ ‘Since knowing English do you think you use your mother tongue less?’ ‘Does English ‘threaten’ your mother tongue maintenance? Why or why not?’

The expected length of the narrative is one page of approximately 500 words although

there were several learners who wrote more than one page. In the CCU course, the

mother tongue unit was covered in 4 weeks.

Reasons for choosing the theme ‘the mother tongue’

At the beginning of the CCU class, I designed a questionnaire to capture and

document learners’ initial understandings of language, culture and identity. Among all

the questionnaire items, the questions pertinent to the present paper are number 4, 5, and

6:

4. Mention the language you consider yours.

5. What is your definition of mother tongue?

6. What is your mother tongue?

Table 1, 2, and 3 below document learners’ responses to those questions. Table 1 below

shows learners’ definitions of the mother tongue.

Table 1: Learners’ definitions of the mother tongue

Learners’ word association Number Percentage

Commonly used 11 20%

Use since birth 13 23.6%

Learn in the family/society 9 16.4%


For communication 4 7.3%

First language 14 25.5%

Accent 1 1.8%

Expression of identity 2 3.6%

Master well 1 1.8%

From Table 1, we can see that most common descriptors associated with the mother

tongue is the language that is learned in the family/society’ (16.4%), ‘commonly used’

(20%), ‘use since birth’ (23.6%), and ‘first language’ (25.5%). When asked to list the

language they considered their mother tongue, the majority of the learners see the mother

tongue consisting of only one language as Table 2 below illustrates:

Table 2: Learners’ views of the mother tongue

The mother tongue Number Percentage

One language 24 85.7%

Two languages 4 16.7%

From Table 2, it can be inferred that for many of these learners, the mother tongue

constitutes of only one language, illustrating learners’ relatively static view of the mother

tongue. In my view, it is not coincidence that the majority’s learners’ understanding of

one mother tongue is in accordance with those of the MESs who only has one mother

tongue. This general and shared understanding might be a result of their previous

education although in Indonesia, it is not uncommon for a person to have more than one

mother tongue.

This activity was then followed by asking the learners to list the language they

consider as ‘my language(s).’ Table 3 below shows the languages they considered as their

languages:

Table 3: The language learners’ consider as ‘my language’

The mother tongue Number Percentage

Indonesian 27 42.9%

Menadonese 1 1.5%

Javanese 21 33.3%

English 12 19.04%


Chinese 1 1.5%

Betawinese 1 1.5%

Since many of the learners are Javanese, it is expected that many of the learners consider

‘Javanese’ (33.3%) as their languages. Interestingly, only 42% of the learners considered

‘Indonesian’ as their languages regardless its role as the national lingua franca. What I

found most interesting from Table 3 above is a small number of learners (19.04%) were

brave enough to claim English as their languages.

The initial survey suggests that learners have simplistic understandings of the

concept ‘the mother tongue’ and limited understandings of how the mother tongue are

constituted through, and by, ethnicity, English, and national identity. Such limited and

static understandings of the mother tongue needs to be addressed, especially because the

learners will graduate as English teachers. Understanding the complexity and dynamic

nature of the mother tongue have implications for the ways mother tongue is addressed

when teaching English in the classroom.

The framework for developing the unit

In developing the unit, I adapt the model for developing intercultural competence

proposed by Liddicoat (2002). The model consists of four stages constituting input,

noticing, class reflection and output. Each of the BNE is dealt using the same framework.

The framework is illustrated in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1:The framework for using BNE


Input

The input stage of the framework is drawn from the extensive reading philosophy.

Through the Extensive Reading approach, we learn that it is beneficial for learners to

read an extensive amount of accessible texts. When discussing the mother tongue unit, I

exposed learners to six BNE:

1. A mother’s tongue by Kouritzin

2. Mother tongue by Amy Tan

3. Search for my tongue by Sujata Bhatt

4. Returning to my mother tongue: Veronica’s journey continues by Zhengdao

(Veronica) Ye

5. Strangers at home by Kim Scott

6. Foster mother tongue by Eva Sallis

Each BNE shows the various nuances and versatility of the mother tongue. In Tan’s

Mother tongue, for example, she uses the term ‘mother tongue’ in a literal sense to refer

to her mother’s non-standard English even though it is unique and emotionally-ladden;

the English she shares with her mother. For Kim Scott in Strangers at home, the term

‘mother tongue’ refers to the language of his ancestor that he relearns giving a voice to

his non-verbal sense of self. In Kouritzin’s A mother’s tongue, she, a mother of a

Japanese and English bilinguals, shares her own uses and feelings of Japanese, which is

her additional language. Both Bhatt and Ye argue for the need to consciously maintain

one’s mother tongue.

Noticing

I divided the noticing stage into two: language-focus and content-focus

Language-focus noticing strategies

Since the purpose of the unit is to reconstruct learners’ understanding of ‘the mother

tongue,’ they need to be equipped with linguistic means to talk about ‘the mother

tongue’. This includes the word choice to narrate the mother tongue, the self and their


language repertoire. Table 4 provides an example of word-specific vocabulary from each

BNE.

Table 4: Language focus for each BNE

No Author Language-focus

1. Kouritzin Familiar heritage language, familial language shift, culturally dominant language, language of the heart

2. Tan Linguistic authority

3. Scott Non-verbal sense of self

4. Sallis Foster mother tongue

5. Ye My sense of self is Chinese, be bathed in one’s mother tongue, a silent mother-tongue speaker.

6. Bhatt Lost of my tongue

The word-list above is examples for the noticing section. When they were asked to write

narratively about their mother tongue, they could refer to the words listed in the

language-focus activity.

Content-focus noticing strategies

In Extensive Reading materials, the texts have been made accessible to

accommodate learners’ various language proficiency. Due to the limited availability of

BNE, teacher faces challenges to ensure that the chosen texts are accessible. For the unit,

I decided to give scaffolding activities to make the chosen BNE accessible. I use the term

‘scaffolding’ in the same ways as Vygotsky (1987). Scaffolding provides collaborative

interaction where the teacher guides learners to solve a problem or to complete a task

which they otherwise cannot solve or complete by themselves. For the activity, I created

a series of question called DONNAT:

D (define)—How does each author define the mother tongue?

O (opinion)—What are their opinions about their mother tongue?

N (nature)—What are the nature of the mother tongue?


N (number)—How many languages do they speak?

A (affective)—What are their feelings (affect) of their mother tongue?

T (time)—How long have they used English?

The purpose of the DONNAT questions is to create a distance where learners can

deconstruct the text by analyzing each author’s view and experiences about the mother

tongue.

The DONNAT questions, unfortunately, cannot accommodate learners’ personal

response to the texts, and thus, I followed them up with the series of questions called

QUAD adapted from Barkhuisten’s (2002) QUEST questions. The questions are:

Q(question)—What kinds of questions do you have after reading the text?

U (unhappy)—Which parts of the text that you unhappy about?

A (agree)—Which parts of the text that you agree with?

D (disagree)—Which parts of the text that you disagree with?

The Q and U questions are taken from Barkhuisten (2002). If the DONNAT question

focuses on exploring the content of each text, the QUAD questions allow learners to

explore their personal responses to the BNE. Together the questions provide learners with

an analytical means to be “objective, academic, and detached” (p. 23) and at the same

time, a personal means to respond to the BNE. It is important to note that the DONNAT

and QUAD questions are not the final destination; it should not be treated as a fixed

model approach to be used with all BNE. Instead, they are scaffolding to direct and

refocus learners’ reading towards a dynamic view of the mother tongue.

LEARNERS’ RESPONSES TO THE MOTHER TONGUE UNIT

In addition to the class reflection and learners’ narratives, the following learners’

responses are taken from end-of-the-semester portfolio. At the end of the course, learners

were assigned to reflect on their journey in the CCU course and wrote what they have

learned in the form of a learning portfolio.

It is interesting to note that learners could not relate to all the BNE chosen

although all of them were addressed in a similar way following the framework mentioned


earlier. The BNE resonating well with the learners are those that challenged the learners’

previous assumption about the mother tongue. Learners cited Bhatt’s and Ye’s the most

because they never thought that the mother tongue can be lost and need to be maintained.

Figure 2 and 3 below illustrate the mind-changing perception of the mother tongue

experienced by Nika and Boni as written in their portfolios.

Before the course: After the course:

Source of data: Nika, Portfolio, 12 April 2013

Figure 2: Nika’s changing perception of the mother tongue

Figure 3: Boni’s changing perception of the mother tongue

Figure 2 and 3 show Nika’s and Boy’s surprise knowing the fact that one can loose the

mother tongue as in the case of Bhatt and Ye. Although these learners were aware of the

potential of loosing the mother tongue, during the class discussion many of them were

confident that such a condition would never happen in Indonesia because English is not

the dominant language, despite scholars’s concerns about the sustenance of local

languages in Indonesia (Lamb and Coleman, 2008). An observation made by Onishi

Don’t worry. I will never lose my Javanese…

I could actually lose my mother tongue?!?!?!??


(2010) found that there is a growing trend among middle and upper classes parents in big

cities to raise their children in English.

Some of the BNE, such as those of Scott’s Stranger at home, led to a sharing or

discussion of a personal nature. Odlas (a pseudonym) shares his own personal struggle of

finding his “true identity.” He was born to parents of different ethnicities; her mother is

from Batak and her father is from Java. He has been silently in search for his “true

identity” especially because her mother constantly imposed Bataknese identity on him. In

his portfolio, he admitted that he never felt he was Bataknese especially because he did

not speak the language. Thus, Scott’s narrative helps him to understand his struggle to

find his true identity. Scott is an aboriginal desendant but he grew up without speaking

Noongar, his heritage language. His narrative Stranger at Home narrates his journey of

relearning the language and culture of his ancestor. Another BNE contributing to Odlas’

search for his identity is Ye’s Returning to my mother tongue. Ye is a Shanghainese who

immigrated to Australia where she now lives with her husband, an Australian. In the

narrative, she shared her experience of returning back to Shanghai and in a way, being

reimmersed into her mother tongue, Shanghainese. It was then she realized the

importance of maintaining the mother tongue. For Odlas, both of these narratives help

him to regain his identity as Bataknese:

Related to my search of my true identity, the narrative of Kim Scott and Veronica

Ye help me a lot in the process. In the narratives and questions related to the

readings, I shared a lot about my Bataknese culture and the process contributes to

build my identity as Bataknese. At the end of the class, I felt more confident and

proud of being Bataknese. Now when someone asked me “Who are you?” I can

proudly answer “I am Bataknese.”

(Odlas, porfolio, 14 April 2013)

Not only BNE contributes to the learners’ knowledge of the mother tongue and

their understanding of their cultural identity, it also helps them to gain linguistic authority

toward English. Ani (a pseudonym), for example, learnt the term ‘foster mother tongue’

from reading Sallis’ narrative Foster mother tongue. Sallis is an English speaker who has

been learning and studying Arabic. The narrative tells her story of how she struggled to


claim ownership and authority toward Arabic; the language she has been studying and

using for years. For Yani, Sallis’ story resonantes a lot with her and many other learners

who have been learning English for years but failed to claim ownership of it due to the

continued pervasiveness of the MES fallacy in Indonesia (Zacharias, 2006; 2011). She

wrote in her portfolio:

In CCU class, I read Sallis’ story. She narrated her journey fostering a new

language as her mother tongue. “Can I do the same thing?” was the question I

have in my mind when I filled in the [DONNAT] questions. […] At the end, I

decided to foster English as my mother tongue just as Sallis did.

(Ani, portfolio, 14 April 2013).

Ani’s conscious decision to develop English to be her ‘foster mother tongue’ somewhat

gives a sense of authority toward a language she has been using more than other

languages in the academic arena. She also realizes the need to maintain her other

languages, Indonesian and Javanese, or else they will be ‘eaten up’ by English.

CONCLUSION

The purpose of the paper is to introduce the use of BNE in content courses. The

use of BNE is particularly important considering the need for a continued attempt to

center BES in ELT, particularly in pre-service teacher education where learners will

graduate as teachers of English. The framework for using BNE is the outcome of my

personal reflection as the class instructor to find pedagogical strategies to use BNE as a

resource in content courses. My decision to develop a unit around the mother tongue

grew out of my concern of the deficit representation of learners’ mother tongue in general

ELT pedagogy and to give a more richer and dynamic view of the mother tongue. My

experience shows that the use of BNE asking learners’ to explore issues of the mother

tongue of the bilingual authors as well as their own was very successful in creating third

place where learners can reflect on their own mother tongue within their multilingual

situation. Ididnotembarkonthisproject,however,inthenaïveassumptionthat

BNEcanbetakenastheonlymediaor“bestmethod”tocultivateintercultural


competencebutcertainlyinthebeliefthatBNEhasnotbeensufficientlyutilizedasa

resourceincontentcourses.

REFERENCES

Barkhuizen,G.(2002).Thequestforanapproachtoguidedcriticalreadingandwriting.Prospect,17(3),19‐28.

Bhatt, S. Search for my tongue. www.lsp.open.ac.uk/.../tongue.htm Carter, R. and Long, M.N. (1991). Teaching Literature. New York: Longman. Cook, V. (1992). Monolingual bias in second language acquisition research. Revista

Canaria de Estudios, 34, 35-50. Kouritzin, S. G. (2000). A mother’s tongue. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 311-324. Kramsch, C. (2009). The Multilingual Subject. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lamb, M. and Coleman, H. (2008). Literacy in English and the transformation of self and

society in post-Soeharto Indonesia. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 11(2): 189-205.

Liddicoat, A.J. (2002). Static and dynamic views of culture and intercultural language acquisition. Babel, 36(3), 4-11.

Liddicoat, A.J., Papademetre, L., Scarino, A., and Kohler, M. (2003). Report on intercultural language learning. Canberra ACT: Commonwealth of Australia.

Maley, A. (2012). Literature in Language Teaching. In L. Alsagoff., S.L. McKay., G. Hu., and W.A. Renandya (Eds), Principles and Practices for Teaching English as an International Language (pp. 299-317). New York: Routledge.

McRae, J. (1991). Literature with a small ‘I’. London: Macmillan Publishers Limited. Onishi, N. (2010, July 25). As English spreads, Indonesians fear for their language. The

New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/26/world/asia/26indo.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Rampton, M.B.H. (1990). Displacing the ‘native speaker’: Expertise, affilication and inheritance. ELT Journal, 44(2), 97-101.

Sallis, E. (2007). Foster mother tongue. In M. Besemeres and A. Wierzbicka (Eds.), Translating lives: Living with two languages and cultures (pp. 150-159). Queensland: University Queesland Press.

Scott, Kim. (2007). Strangers at home. In M. Besemeres and A. Wierzbicka (Eds.), Translating lives: Living with two languages and cultures (pp. 1-11). Queensland: University Queesland Press.


Tan, A. Mother tongue. http://teachers.sduhsd.k12.ca.us/mcunningham/grapes/mother%20tounge.pdf.

Veronica, Y. (2007). Returning to my mother tongue: Veronica’s journey continues. In M. Besemeres and A. Wierzbicka (Eds.), Translating lives: Living with two languages and cultures (pp. 56-69). Queensland: University Queesland Press.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1987). The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky, vol. 1. New York: Plenum Press.

Widdowson, H. (1997). Practical stylistic. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Zacharias, N.T. (2012). EFL Students’ understanding of their multilingual English

identities. Electronic foreign language (eFL) journal, 9(2), 233-244.

using literature in preservice teacher education programs

Documents