Heather VaraleauEDUC 824December 8th, 2012Using English as an International Language: Textbooks and Culture PortfoliosIntroductionThe use of English today by approximately 25% of the worlds population, and the realization that the ratio of native-speakers to non-native speakers is 1:3 (Crystal, 2006) increases the need for English language speakers and learners to greater develop intercultural awareness and subsequent skills in interacting meaningfully in the myriad contexts in which they do and will find themselves.This requires a critical examination of what culture is, the cultural self and the cultural other, and diversity within cultures.Likewise, notions of the target culture(s) connected with English need to be addressed.With respect to English as an International Language, pedagogy requires different approaches to the teaching of language and culture than those which have been employed traditionally.Textbooks often take a limited view of culture and have yet to fully reflect the current use of English today. Thus, they cannot be relied upon to foster the necessary skills required to interact successfully.One means by which educators can pick up the slack is to bring culture portfolio projects into the classroom.English as an International LanguageScholarship in English as an International language has contributed greatly to understanding English language use in todays world. Likewise, reorientation to the English languages connection to culture has been explored. McKay (2002) revised Smiths relationship between an international language and culture to the following:1) English is used in a global sense for international communication, and in a local sense for intranational communication in multilingual societies.2) English is no longer fastened to the cultures of Inner Circle countries.3) In a local sense, English becomes imbedded in the culture of the country in which it is used.4) In a global sense, a primary function of English is to enable speakers to share culture and ideas. (p. 12)Under the current circumstances, it would be nave to continue to associate the target language of English with the target culture of only a small number of the worlds mother tongue English speakers residing in Inner Circle countries, or more specifically the United States or Britain.McKay (2003) explains that the disassociation of the English language from Inner Circle countries calls for a new EIL pedagogy. She claims that such a pedagogy needs to contest a number of assumptions that have been made previously in English Language Teaching (ELT), and one of these assumptions is that the cultural content of ELT should be devised from the cultures of native English speakers. McKay cites the work of Cortazzi and Jin, who propose that three types of cultural information should be used in English language textbooks: that of learners own culture, those of Inner Circle cultures, and those within English and non-English speaking countries worldwide (p. 10). Sufficient attention to each of these myriad types of culture would provide students with opportunities to gain insight into the diverse range of peoples who use English meaningfully in their lives, as well as enable them to better relate to their materials and further reflect on their own cultures. Yet, ELT textbooks have not fully caught up the demands of EIL.The Trouble with TextbooksTextbooks are certainly useful tools to mediate and facilitate learning in the English language classroom. Without these artifacts, many educators would be at a loss. But, despite the many valuable qualities of well-made and well-suited textbooks, teachers and students alike need to view their content through a more critical lens, especially with regards to culture and how it is represented. In particular, an awareness of what culture is, how cultures are typecast, and whose cultures are depicted.What appears under the guise of culture in language textbooks is often limited to the tip of the cultural iceberg (Figure 1), those superficial characteristics which are easily identifiable. Yet, what lies below the more visible surface, the deep cultural norms that

Figure 1: The Iceberg Concept of Culture (Source: http://www.echospace.org/assets/1843)each individual has been socialized into, are what regulate our social interactions and the making of meaning in everyday life (Sensoy & DiAngelo, 2011, p. 15). Shin, Eslami, and Chen sampled seven internationally distributed English language teaching (ELT) textbook series, 25 books in total, and found that the emphasis was heavily bias towards the traditional knowledge-oriented level of cultural presentation and that none were found to have a balance between the knowledge-oriented level and communication-oriented level of cultural presentation (2011, p. 263). This imbalance was particularly prominent at the lower levels. By neglecting to view culture as more multifaceted in nature, students are being ill prepared to engage in meaningful intercultural interactions. Furthermore, by showcasing a received view of culture, one that Atkinson (1999) describes as a notion of culture(s) that sees them in their most typical form as geographically (and quite often nationally) distinct entities, as relatively unchanging and homogeneous, and as all encompassing systems of rules or norms that substantially determine personal behaviour (p. 626), we lose sight of the individual.Also of great concern is that cultures in textbooks are often reduced to stereotypes, which not only jeopardizes understanding unique individuals in culture, but also presents the value-laden views of the textbook writers as to what generalizations can be made about given cultural groups. Guest (2002) discusses how popular stereotypes of foreign cultures are reinforced and how this leads to constructing these cultures as monolithic, static Others, rather than as dynamic, fluid entities (p. 154). Similarly, Ndura (2004) closely examined 6 ESL textbooks used in the Western United States and identified three types of bias which dominated the textbooks, one of which was stereotyping (gender and cultural). She describes a story of a poverty-stricken African boy who was once chased by a lion while making his three-hour trek to school. This same boy improves his life by working hard and getting a Western education. Clearly, as Ndura states, this is a gross misrepresentation of the life of an African boy (p. 146). Such flagrant stereotyping may be more easily recognized than some of the more widely accepted generalizations made in todays adult English language textbooks. Such undetectability may pose an even greater risk. Stereotypes which go uncontested or unexplored do not broaden students perception of the diversity of individuals worldwide.Lastly, and especially pertinent to todays postmodern context of English language use, is the question of whose cultures are being represented. For a number of years now, it has been known that the number of persons speaking English as an additional language far outnumber those who speak it as a first language. At the same time, native speaker ownership of English has been highly contested and scrutinized. In light of this, the definition of the target culture associated with the target language of English is no longer cut and dried. It could now be said that the target culture encompasses any to all extant cultures worldwide. English users need to become culturally aware on a grand scale. Textbooks should serve as a tool to further this awareness. Yet, it has been found that cultural content associated with Inner Circle countries dominates textbooks when compared to Outer or Expanding Circle content (Shin et al., 2011, p. 261). Furthermore, Nault (2008) contended that the Inner Circle cultures presented are often of the UK or US, and that textbooks often conveniently downplay or ignore countries such as Canada, New Zealand, Australia and Ireland. He points out as well that textbook cultural presentations wrongly hint at a uniformity or homogeneity among native speakers that does not in fact exist; while they may share many things in common, native speakers are far from being identical in the way they think, speak, and act (Srdi, 2003: para. 14) (p. 315). Along similar lines, Ilieva (2000) explains that Inner Circle cultural content may be depicted as factual fixed national attributes which are in fact tied to only certain classes within an Inner Circle culture (p. 60). Such content does little in providing students with insight into the heterogeneity of cultures and individuals within Inner Circle countries or outside of their borders. This can only serve to disadvantage English language learners in the great many contexts in which they will be English users.Constructing Cross-cultural Awareness, Competence, and UnderstandingA classroom in which language is learned is undoubtedly a space in which culture is also purveyed, as the two are inseparable. The Bahktinian view sees all communication as cross-cultural; applicability in the ESL situation is even more appropriate (Schaub, 1995, p. 0). More specific to the sphere of English language teaching, there has been much exploration of a shift from the now outdated model of communicative competence to intercultural communicative competence, a view that is well articulated by Alptekin, who details why the model is outmoded:With its standardized native speaker norms, the model is found to be utopian, unrealistic, and constraining in relation to English as an International Language (EIL). It is utopian not only because native speakership is a linguistic myth, but also because it portrays a monolithic perception of the native speakers language and culture, by referring chiefly to mainstream ways of thinking and behaving. It is unrealistic because it fails to reflect the lingua franca status of English. It is constraining in that it circumscribes both teacher and learner autonomy by associating the concept of authenticity with the social milieu of the native speaker (2002, p. 57).Baker (2011) further elaborates that although Traditional conceptions of communicative competence and CA (cultural awareness) in ELT have focused on an understanding of particular cultures and countries such as the USA or UK and their associated sociocultural norms, English as a global lingua franca forces us to go beyond notions of teaching a fixed language and cultural context as adequate for successful communication (p. 68). Therefore, efforts need to be made in crafting individuals who are or will be competent across multiple cultural encounters. An article by Jackson summarises Byrams intercultural communicative competences as follows:1) The knowledge and skills required for individuals to mediate successfully between cultures and build intercultural relationships in a foreign language.2) Intercultural attitudes curiosity and openness, readiness to suspend disbelief about others cultures and belief about ones own intercultural attitudes3) Knowledge of social groups and their products and practices in ones own and interlocutors country.4) Skills of interpreting and relating ability to interpret a document or event from another culture, to explain it, and relate it to documents or events from ones own.5) Skills of discovery and interaction - ability to acquire new knowledge of a culture and to operate this knowledge in real-time communication.6) Critical cultural awareness - an ability to evaluate critically and on the basis of explicit criteria, perspectives, practices, and products in ones own and other cultures and countries (2011, p81-82). Kramsch (1993) puts a somewhat different spin on things, and although she is not condoning the notion of a static and objective native culture (C1) and target culture (C2), she makes good use of these simplifications to outline how cross-cultural understanding can be achieved. In her words:The only way to start building a more complete and less partial understanding of both C1 and C2 is to develop a third perspective, that would enable learners to take both an insiders and an outsiders view on C1 and C2. It is precisely that third place that cross-cultural education should seek to establish (p. 210).Kramsch goes on to detail how this third perspective can be developed through careful analysis of and reflection on ones own and a target culture. Gaining such perspective is by no means a simple task, and one that could be made even more complex when the language being learned is English for international use. When the target language culture of English becomes that of every individual who speaks it the world over, it can be surmised that in order for English language learners to interact meaningfully with other English language users, gaining an understanding of numerous cultures as well as ones own is required. Furthermore, a sensitivity to individuals as being unique in their embodiment of culture due to other factors which define them, such as gender, class and personal histories, needs to be fostered in the English language classroom. There have been numerous suggestions on how cross-cultural understanding could be constructed in the language classroom. One of these suggestions is culture portfolios.Culture PortfoliosA number of studies have been done on the use of culture portfolios in the classroom. Interest in their use has mainly stemmed from an understanding that cultural awareness is related to successful communication, discontent over how culture is taught in current curriculums and materials, and the view that a constructivist approach creates interested and autonomous learners. Lee (1997) explains that if the ultimate goal of acquiring a foreign language is genuine interaction with different cultures then cultural competence is integral to language learning (p. 355), and that the process of teaching L2 culture should focus on helping learners understand and appreciate the target culture so they feel comfortable to interact with native speakers (p. 356). She also laments that little attention has been paid to how cultural knowledge is assessed, with knowledge traditionally being measured by discrete-point formats in which recounted fragments of information are tested, but the actual awareness and ability of one to align and use ones experience and cultural knowledge is not (p. 357). Abrams (2002) points out that not enough time is spent on exploring cultures which are different from our own, that cultural facts and figures allow us to revel in the status quo of cultural awareness where our well-being and identity go unthreatened, and that our prejudices then negatively influence our interactions with people of other cultures (p. 142). She also rightly highlights that no one teacher or textbook can possibly cover all cultural bases, and that as such a more realistic goal is to provide learners with the opportunity to recognize their own cultural complexity and develop the skills and curiosity to investigate the cultural complexity of others (p.142), with attention to within-culture diversity (p.143). Numerous scholars have suggested a constructivist approach to creating and assessing cultural awareness. According to Wright (2000) a constructivist approach emphasizes the ongoing social process of learning and intersubjectivity which enables learners to function and adapt within their individual interpersonal contexts (p. 331). Allens (2004) review of literature on constructivism suggests that within a constructivist paradigm individuals construct their own knowledge. Learning is a personal process; the learners developmental level, interests, concerns, personal involvement, and current knowledge directly relate to what is learned (p. 233). Most research studied the use of culture portfolios in German (Wright, 2000; Abrams 2002), French (Allen, 2004), Spanish (Lee, 1997; Byrd & Wall 2009), or English (Su 2011a & 2011b) language classrooms, while some research focused on their use in culture classes (Byon, 2007) and teacher education (Lea, 2004). The participants in such studies were generally college or university students, and the portfolios were constructed over the course of a 13 to 15 week semester. Participants linguistic skills varied by study, and this determined to what extent the portfolios were researched for and constructed in the L2 being studied. In Wrights study, with students of beginner German, much of the work was done in the students L1, English, but in cohorts with higher linguistic knowledge, for example those in Lees and Abrams study, use of the L2 was more prevalent. Students proficiency in the L2 being studied was mentioned in more than one study as an obstacle to portfolio work. As Allen points out in her study, students level of proficiency in French limited their ability to use the language effectively in chat room and in understanding some authentic materials (p. 238). How culture portfolio projects were managed and assessed, as well as what was being assessed, differed among scholars. Lee (1997) focused on developing and assessing both linguistic and cultural competence and attitudes, whereas most other researchers focused more fully on the development of intercultural awareness and assessment of cultural competence. In some studies, portfolios starting points were either a chosen cultural topic in the C2 such as food, holidays, art, music, gender roles, housing, immigration, and sports (Lee, p. 1997), or an artifact such as an involved picture, short story, novel, film, advertisement, or piece of art (Byrd & Wall, 2009, p. 775). Other studies asked students to form hypotheses based on their current perceptions or stereotypes of the C2, and go about discovering the truth of these. Allen, 2004, crafts the project as follows:Step 1: Students are guided in discovering how they perceive culture by exploring what they believe culture is, discussing stereotypes, and learning to recognize how personal experiences color perception. Step 2: Students create a stereotype statement about the C2 as a result of their perception, which becomes the hypothesis on which their portfolio is based.Step 3: Students seek multiple sources of information related to their generalization in the form of media, realia, and native-speaker informants.Step 4: Students questions and compare their sources, examine them for limitations, and describe, analyze, and report their findings.Step 5: Students modify their original statement to reflect what theyve learned, and continue to seek additional information that will aid them in refining this statement.Step 6: Students examine a related feature of their own culture using the same process by rewriting their hypotheses with their C1 substituted into the statement.Step 7: Students compare their refined statements for their C1 and the C2, and describe the similarities and differences they have found.Following 2004, researchers, such as Byon and Su, implemented similar hypothesis style portfolio designs. Schultz (2007), likewise has students critically investigating notions of culture and specific aspects of others as well as ones own culture, but also has them examining specifically how each language and culture has culture-conditioned images and culture-specific connotations of some words, phrases, proverbs, idiomatic formulations, gestures, symbols, etc. (p. 25), and how linguistic and nonlinguistic features of communication can cause cultural misunderstanding. As well as starting points and objectives varying, portfolio content differed somewhat from study to study, and came in forms such as written tasks like journal entries in response to class discussions, presentations or thought processes, compositions and rewrites of drafts, written rationales for sources used or hypotheses modified, notes of talks with native speaker informants, mini-presentations throughout the semester, and final oral or poster presentations. Also included were sources of information either in the form of written texts, audio, video, or reference/source lists.The results of studies in the use of culture portfolios have shown very positive results in their use as a learning tool, with those promoting the exploration of notions of culture, validity of stereotypes, reflections on ones own culture, and attention to within culture diversity being the most lucrative. Su (2011a) found that students developed an understanding of numerous and diverse aspects of the target culture, developed cultural curiosity, and became more cognizant and critical of misconceptions and stereotypes. Many participants in her study concluded that, textbooks and media do not always represent English-speaking cultures and people accurately (p. 80). Moreover, Sus participants became more interested in learning English culture and language, recognized how their own perspectives influenced their understanding, became more aware of and positive toward their own self-discovery learning process, drew connections between culture and language, and realized that culture is dynamic and heterogeneous. Byons (2007) study had drawn similar conclusions. Similarly positive results were exhibited in Abrams (2002) and Allens (2004) studies. Abrams stated that students were better able to perceive culture from an emic perspective, were more sensitive to within culture diversity, and developed an awareness that political boundaries were not adequate determiners of cultural membership (p. 151). Allen concluded that, as a result of completing the project, students are better prepared to try to understand other cultures perspectives and arrive at shared meanings. Finally, because students became familiar with resources for cultural exploration they have the tools to become lifelong learners of the process of learning about another culture (p. 238). In addition to the aforementioned positive outcomes gained by participation in portfolio creation, participants responses to the project were generally encouraging. Students mentioned being engaged and enjoying their online searches for cultural information (Lee, 1997, p. 364), and liking that they could pick their own hypothesis to work on (Allen, p. 237). Students overall interest and investment in culture portfolios adds to their value as an instrument of learning.DiscussionWith the current state of English language use being what it is, creating intercultural awareness and a third perspective from which to make and share meaning in interaction is paramount in English language classrooms. Given the wide range of target cultures that are associated with English, and the biases still present in English language textbooks, they cannot be relied upon to generate this awareness or perspective. Instructors need pedagogically sound approaches to foster relevant cultural learning in the classroom. The culture portfolio is a very worthwhile tool for just such a purpose. Research has shown that such projects allow students to gain intercultural communicative competence as outlined by Byram, and develop a third perspective as described by Kramsch. Depending on textbook weaknesses and students needs, culture portfolios can address culture in the classroom in a meaningful and engaging way. Stereotypes presented in textbooks could be used to form hypotheses, Outer and Expanding Circle and local contexts absent or lacking in textbooks could be focused upon, or students could take the opportunity to explore the cultural context in which they expect to be using English most in their own futures. Portfolios can be adapted to the unique needs of particular classes and particular students based on individual needs and constraints, be they linguistic, technological, or administrative, and so forth. To put more attention to traditional concepts of language learning, which might better meet the expectations of interested parties, objectives and criteria could be designed to encourage both linguistic and cultural development. By having students collect information pertinent to their topics or hypotheses that require them to both read and listen, and to respond to these in writing, discuss them with classmates, or generate presentations on the information theyve gathered and conclusions theyve drawn, students would be practicing the four skills. Grammar and lexis would be encountered and used in meaningful interaction between students and texts they are reading, listening to, writing, or reporting on. Students could be encouraged or required to keep a record of linguistic features as well as cultural information they encounter. Instructors could provide feedback on aspects of language as well as make comments that compel students to further reflect on culturally relevant conclusions they have come to.Although the studies which have been done on culture portfolios have had students working on them mainly outside of class time, an aspect of the project commented upon unfavorably by some participants in the aforementioned studies, by adding more of a traditional language learning slant to the project, portfolios could more legitimately find in-class time in the eyes of students and administrative bodies. As well, many other valuable in-class lessons could be developed around the culture portfolios to give them more weight. Teacher or media presentations on notions of culture, stereotyping, and how ones own culture influences target culture perception can be developed into listening lessons. By reading media related to ones topic/hypothesis and having the teacher at hand to scaffold, students can work on expanding on both top-down and bottom-up reading processes. Speaking lessons related to opinion giving, turn-taking, holding the floor, negotiating meaning, accommodation skills, and so forth can be centered around sharing and discussing of finding. These lessons will help students during portfolio creation in their interactions with English-speaking informants as well as give them skills for their current classroom and lifelong English use. Lessons in writing rationales, short essays, emails to informants and summaries of statistical findings can be included. Presentation skills will need development, and online researching and how to identify reliable sources will be absolutely key to the success of the portfolio. With careful thought and planning, a culture portfolio could make up a very rewarding portion of a language-learning curriculum. The value of portfolios as a means of assessment also make them a great addition to any classroom. They can be used for both formative and summative assessment. According to Shultz, in the case of culture learning, portfolios may be one of the few appropriate alternatives to traditional classroom achievement assessment that lend themselves to both formative and summative assessment and are able to evaluate process as well as product (2007, p. 18). The same could be said for the evaluation of linguistic skills presented in the portfolios. When systematically designed and implemented in a manner such as the framework described by Delett, Barnhart, and Kevorkian, they can provide evidence of what students know how to do in a target language and how their abilities change over time (2001, p. 565). In-class tasks that do not appear in the portfolios could be assessed as well to provide a broader picture of students abilities to interact with classmates and texts. The possibilities are numerous.ConclusionTo conclude, English as an International Language requires a move to complementary pedagogies. Such a pedagogy must address both the linguistic and cultural learning needs of the English language learner. This necessitates a shift away from the perception that Inner Circle English speakers constitute the sole target culture of the English language, a view of cultures as static and homogeneous, and a blind acceptance of cultural generalizations. Students must be guided in developing a critical view of the cultural representations that they encounter in their textbooks and daily lives, and encouraged to reflect on their perceptions and how these perceptions have come about and influence their understanding of cultures and people. This cultural awareness, or third perspective, will contribute to their success as English language users. Culture portfolios are one manner in which this can be facilitated.

ReferencesAbrams, Z. I. (2002). Surfing to cross-cultural awareness: using internet-mediated projects to explore cultural stereotypes. Foreign Language Annals. 35(2), 141-160.Allen, L. Q. (2004). Implementing a cultural portfolio project within a constructivist paradigm. Foreign Language Annals, 37(2), 232-239.Alptekin, C. (2002). Towards intercultural communicative competence in ELT. ELT Journal, 56(1), 57-64.Atkinson, D. (1999). TESOL and culture. TESOL Quarterly, 33(4), 625-654.Baker, W. (2012). From cultural awareness to intercultural awareness: Culture in ELT. ELT Journal, 66(1), 62-70. Byon, A. S. (2007). The use of culture portfolio project in a Korean culture classroom: evaluating and enhancing cross-cultural awareness. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 20(1), 1-19.Byrd, D. R. & Wall, A. (2009). Long-Term Portfolio Projects to Teach and Assess Culture Learning in the Secondary Spanish Classroom: Shifting the Area of Expertise. Hispania, 92(4), 774-777.Crystal, D. (2006). English worldwide. In R. Hogg and D. Denison (eds),A History of the English Language(Cambridge: CUP), 420-439.Delett, J. S., Barnhardt, S., & Kevorkian, J. A. (2001). A framework for portfolio assessment. Foreign Language Annals, 34(6), 559-568.Guest, M. (2002). A critical "checkbook" for culture teaching and learning. ELT Journal, 56(2), 154-61. Ilieva, R. (2000). Exploring culture in texts designed for use in adult ESL classrooms. TESL Canada Journal, 17(2), 50-63.Jackson, J. (2011). Cultivating cosmopolitan, intercultural citizenship through critical reflection and international, experiential learning. Language and Intercultural Communication, 11(2), 80-96. Kramsch, C. (1993). Context and culture in language teaching. Oxford University Press.Lea, V. (2004). The reflective cultural portfolio: identifying public cultural scripts in the private voices of white student teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 55(2), 116-127.Lee, I. (2011). Teaching how to discriminate: Globalization, prejudice, and textbooks. Teacher Education Quarterly, 38(1), 47-63. Lee, L. (1997). Using portfolios to develop L2 cultural knowledge and awareness of students in intermediate Spanish. Hispania, 80(2), 355-367. McKay, S. (2002). Teaching English as an international language. Oxford University Press. McKay, S. (2003). Toward an appropriate EIL pedagogy: re-examining common ELT assumptions. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 1-22.Nault, D. (2006). Going global: rethinking culture teaching in ELT contexts. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 19(3), 314-328.Ndura, E. (2004). ESL and cultural bias: An analysis of elementary through high school textbooks in the western united states of america. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 17(2), 143-153.Schaub, M. (1995). Cross-cultural dialogics: Bakhtinian theory and second language audience Schultz, R. (2007). The Challenge of Assessing Cultural Understanding in the Context of Foreign Language Instruction. Foreign Language Annals, 4(1), 9-26.Sensoy, O. & DiAngelo, R. (2011). Is everyone really equal? An introduction to key concepts in social justice education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Shin, J., Eslami, Z. R., & Chen, W. (2011). Presentation of local and international culture in current international English-language teaching textbooks. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 24(3), 253-268. Su, Y. (2011a). Promoting intercultural understanding and reducing stereotypes: incorporating the cultural portfolio project into Taiwans EFL college classes. Educational Studies. 37(1), 73-88.Su, Y. (2011b). The effects of the cultural portfolio project on cultural and EFL learning in Taiwan's EFL college classes. Language Teaching Research, 15(2), 230-252. Wright, D. A. (2000). Culture as information and culture as affective process: a comparative study. Foreign Language Annals, 33(3), 330-341.Yuen, K. (2011). The representation of foreign cultures in English textbooks. ELT Journal, 65(4), 458-466.