My Presentation @ IATEFL 2021

The IATEFL Conference is this weekend!

I’d rather be back in Harrogate, soaking in all the Yorkshire vibes and re-living IATEFL 2014, the last IATEFL to be held in Harrogate (it was an action-packed conference). But online is the next best thing and I look forward to not having to overcome jet lag.

Check out the conference program(me) online here.

I present on Saturday at 3:35pm UK time / 11:35am Halifax time. Here’s my talk description; slides aren’t quite finished yet but I’ll put them up soon. 😉

Defining “Good Writing”: Ideology in Canadian University Language Policy

The textual characteristics of good academic writing are communicated via language policies at many Canadian universities. Correction keys, marking codes, grading criteria or rubrics at the course, departmental, faculty or institutional level guide the teaching and assessment of academic writing. These descriptions of good writing on the lexical, grammatical and organizational level are not neutral, however; in many cases they embody covert attitudes and ideologies around “writtenness” (Turner, 2018) that place value on a specific type of academic writing. In the plurality of Englishes thriving in the linguistically-diverse setting of the contemporary Anglophone Canadian university, these policies around “good writing” often centre certain Englishes while marginalizing others. In this session, participants will critically examine commonly-held definitions of “good writing”. We will unpack the covert attitudes and ideologies that influence how we teach and evaluate academic writing in linguistically-diverse higher education settings. After presenting the concept of “writtenness” and related ideologies, a case study of a discursive analysis of piece of language policy from a Canadian university will be presented. Then, the role of teachers in implementing, appropriating and resisting language policy will be discussed. Alternatives for teaching and policy-making around academic writing for practitioners in higher education contexts will be proposed.

Turner, J. (2018). On writtenness: The cultural politics of academic writing. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.

Here are the slides:

iatefl-2021-defining-good-writingDownload

Advertisement

Five things I learned in 2020

2020 was a wild one, wasn’t it? As I dealt with a tumultuous unpredictability both professionally and personally from March onward, I found myself withdrawing a bit from the digital world: tweeting less, blogging less. But after a bit of distance, now I’m getting back into my online life (though still trying to keep the doomscrolling in check).

Despite everything I was really busy last year with a lot of new projects. In these first months of 2021, I’ve been reflecting on the last year, and realizing that I learned so much! Here are five important takeaways for me.

1. Being an editor doesn’t necessarily involve much editing. Carole MacDiarmid and I are (first-time) co-editors of an academic volume entitled Pedagogies in English for Academic Purposes: Teaching and Learning in International Contexts (on shelves in August 2021!). With the proposal for the book accepted and the contributors lined up in 2019, in 2020 chapters were submitted to us, and we went through rounds of review and revision before submitting the full manuscript in December. Although the title “editor” for me had previously conjured up images of making a paper bleed with red ink, there was very little work directly on authors’ writing or texts involved! I would describe the role as being a project manager with lots of subject knowledge and expertise. I had of course worked with editors before as an author, but it was great to learn this first-hand.
2. The dark side of ELT is alive and well. I had a blast teaching a Master’s course called International Issues in English Language Teaching at Saint Mary’s University to a group of language teachers from different contexts around the world. We discussed critical issues in ELT—native speakerism, colonialism, racism, neoliberalism, etc.—and how these influence methods, materials, assessment, policies and instruction. And lest anyone think that these issues are not a big deal anymore (Canagarjah’s Resisting Linguistic Imperialism in English Language Teaching came out in 1999, that problem must now be solved, right????), my students would tell you differently. These nefarious forces are being battled every day, in ways big and small, in educators’ teaching practice the world over.
3. The need to move from a monolingual to a multilingual “default” student in teacher education. I taught a Master’s course on MSVU’s TESOL Program this summer (Technology in Language Education) where I had a group of keen and engaged teachers, most of whom were working in primary and secondary contexts here in Canada or abroad. The majority of the teachers weren’t language teachers–they taught various other subjects but were enrolled in the TESOL program and/or the course out of a desire to be able to better serve the multilingual students in their classes. Nowhere in their previous teacher training were they taught how to deal with linguistic diversity in their classes, be it with newcomers or EAL students in their classes in an Anglo Canadian context, or students in an immersion or CLIL setting here or elsewhere. As these teachers shared with me, and as discussed in this recent ACLA/CAAL talk, there is an urgent need to stop training teachers around the idea of the “default” student in their classes being a monolingual Anglophone, with multilingual students being some sort of anomaly. We should acknowledge the multilingual nature of our schools and communities across Canada (it’s not just in large cities!) and center multilingual students and multilingualism and, importantly, provide all teachers with the tools to support multilingual students.
4. Teaching in an additional language is hard. I mean, duh, I knew this long before 2020. But I led an online professional development course in the internationalization of teaching and learning for faculty in Latin America in Spanish called Innovación pedagógica en contextos de internacionalización. I designed, developed and taught the course alongside two colleagues. I’d done talks and presentations before in my additional languages, but never a whole course. It was great fun and I learned A TON (like the word for the little gear icon, or how to talk about outcomes and scaffolding and Universal Design in Spanish!). Most of all, it gave me tons of additional insight into teaching in an additional language that I’ll bring to Dalhousie’s Professional Development Certificate in English-Medium Instruction as we prepare to expand its offerings.
5. Everything takes so much longer online. Like practically everyone at every institution everywhere the “pivot to online” occupied a huge part of my year professionally. A major thing I (and many others) have learned is that every part of online education takes longer online: for teachers, it’s designing and building courses, prepping for and teaching synchronously, designing and correcting assessments and exams and delivering feedback. For students, it takes longer to get into breakout rooms for groupwork and carry out those tasks, student assignments take longer to complete online. Online education presents so many affordances—accessibility and flexibility top among them for me—but we’ve all had to adapt and adjust as we’ve come to the realization about how long things take.

Defending your Thesis Remotely

Despite #covid_19 , #socialdistancing and #travelrestrictions , I successfully defended my doctoral thesis @ioelondon on Friday via video conferencing from my home office. Thanks to family, friends and faculty who've supported me along the way! #phdchat #AcademicChatter pic.twitter.com/AXpjVf0Jxc

— Jennifer J. MacDonald (@Jen_Mac_Donald) March 23, 2020

I recently defended my doctoral thesis remotely! This was supposed to be a face-to-face defense (or viva, short for viva voce exam, as they call it in the UK) at the UCL Institute of Education in London, which suddenly had to be turned into a remote viva once travel restrictions prevented me from leaving the country.

I know there are a lot of others out there with defenses/vivas scheduled in the coming weeks and months that may end up having to do them online. Here are some of my tips for defending your thesis remotely.

Think of it as an event, and you’re the producer. With a face-to-face defense, you don’t have a lot of control over the physical aspects of the experience. You show up to a certain room at a certain time, do your defense, and go. But with a remote defense, you can be in control of almost everything–short of the questions that examiners ask you, of course! The room, facilities, technology, etc. are all within your control.

Pretend you’re filming a movie or staging a play and think about all elements of the experience from the point of view of the examiners. Think about every link in the chain, and what is needed for it to function smoothly. And similar to the performing arts, practice makes perfect–make sure you rehearse not just the answers to your viva questions, but rehearse using your whole technical set up. Here’s what I tried to think about before my viva:

• Staging and composition. I really think that if your image is coming through into the examiners’ computers clearly with minimal distractions, the examiners can better focus on what you’re saying. On the other hand, if the backdrop is chaotic, or you are looking into the camera at a weird angle, or if it’s hard to see or hear you, then it sets a negative tone for the session and will detract from your research. Set up your computer and do a video call to a friend or snap a few photos with your webcam to see the the angle of the camera and also what the backdrop is. Do you have to put your computer up on some books so that you can look straight into the camera rather than down or up your nose? Do you have to shift some furniture in the background or hang a sheet (no really!) to cover up a distracting or unprofessional background? I shifted a few pieces of furniture so a lovely oil painting of the Nova Scotia coast could be the background during my viva.
  
  
  And the best part of a viva via webcam is that you can have all sorts of notes, cheat sheets, motivational posters, luck charms, photos of celebrities–whatever you need–around and with you during the viva, just out of frame of the webcam. Even more than what you would take into a F2F defense. So make sure you have a good set up with enough space to spread out what you need.
• Lighting. Lighting really influences the quality of the image your examiners will be speaking to during the defense. The goal should be a clear image so that the examiners don’t have to strain to see, and therefore focus on you. Don’t have a light source behind you because your face will be dark. Place a light outside the frame of the webcam, perhaps behind your computer, so you’ll be looking into it and it will illuminate your face. The important thing is to test it out beforehand and adjust as needed.
• Sound. Sound is really important because it’s how you will hear the questions, and how the examiners will hear your responses to them! In most situations you have two options for your microphone: the microphone built into the webcam, or an external microphone, for example, on a headset or cellphone earbuds. (I use something like this.) If you’re in a large, echo-y room, I would recommend using an external mic as it will be closer to your mouth and will make the sound quality better. For the in-coming sound, it’s the same–you can either use your computer speakers, or connect headphones or earbuds to the computer. It’s a good idea to always have headphones/earbuds on hand in case the in-coming sound on your computer is so loud it’s being picked up by the microphone, and will cause the examiners to hear your voice in echo. This is very distracting and unpleasant, so if this starts to happen, you’ll want to plug in your headphones to stop it. Like the camera image, you’ll want to test out the sound aspect of your set up with a friend beforehand.
• Eye Contact. Remember that you have to look into the webcam to make eye contact with the people on the other end of the video conference, rather than looking at their eyes as they appear in their images on your screen. This is one I always forget, so during my viva I put a bright post-it note with the two examiners’ names right above my webcam, so I’d be reminded to look at it instead of my screen. Others put a pair of googly eyes or some other thing by their webcam lens as a reminder. Just make sure it’s not blocking the camera!

The Tech!

This is the aspect of the remote defense that strikes fear in the heart of most! There are three aspects of the tech related to a remote defense that you have to think about, set up, troubleshoot, and make several back-up plans for: the hardware (your device), the software (the program you’ll be using to make the call) and the internet connection. If you’re less than confident about tech, try to find someone who will help you get a primary set up and a backup ready, and who might be on hand during your defense just in case you need some tech help. That’s another advantage of the remote viva–you can have your whole entourage waiting in the wings to support you and no one will know!

• For hardware, be it a desktop computer, laptop or phone, make sure it’s all up to date so that it doesn’t randomly shut off to install an update in the middle of your defense. Make sure there aren’t any embarrassing or weird files on your desktop if you’re planning to share your screen. And make sure you know the password to get back into the computer if it does restart just before or during the defense. Make sure you know how to silence or shut off all alerts and notifications for the duration of the viva so that you (and the examiners) aren’t being distracted or interrupted by dings and beeps or notification pop-ups. Have a backup device on hand that you could use in a pinch to do the exam if your primary device dies at the last minute–for example having your phone ready to use if your laptop stops working.
• For software, the choice of video conferencing program is a big decision. In some cases, the university might dictate which program to use. If personal video-calling software such as Skype is suggested, push back on it. Try to get a more professional option that is made for meetings or online education (Zoom, Microsoft Teams, Skype for Business, Blackboard Collaborate, Adobe Connect, etc.). They have a more professional interface, and functionality such as screen sharing, the ability to present a Powerpoint, etc. that you will need for your defense. Install the software on your primary device as well as your backup in advance, and have any logins saved in the device (so you’re not scrambling on the day of trying to remember passwords under pressure). It’s important to rehearse using whichever program in advance so you get used to where all the controls and buttons are so that when you’re nervous during the viva, you can still do what you need to do, and don’t accidentally disconnect the call while trying to raise the volume or put your PPT on the screen.
• For the internet, if you can, connect to your modem via a cable, rather than relying on Wifi. It’s definitely worth buying an inexpensive ethernet cable (and any necessary adapters for your laptop) to do this if possible as it will make your connection much faster. If not, try to find a spot where the Wifi is strong, and be aware that if others are using the internet connection to do bandwidth-heavy tasks such as gaming, streaming videos or making video calls, it will slow down the connection for you. As for backup, if the Wifi gave out, or was inexplicably slow and causing an unreliable video connection, would you consider switching to your phone and using cellphone data for the defense? Video conferencing uses between 270-600MB/hour, depending on the program used. So if you have a good data plan, it might be worth considering it as a backup.

Remember, for the remote viva, you’re in control! Good luck and break a leg, everyone!

Thesis Submitted!

I haven’t been posting on this blog as frequently over the last year as I would have liked. That’s because all my free time was being spent on my doctoral research. The good news is, I just submitted my thesis yesterday! I realized I haven’t really posted much about my research, but now’s as good a time as any to start. This will be the first in a series of posts linking my research to practice for those of us who are language workers in a higher education context.

But first, the asbtract:

Monolingualism, Neoliberalism and Language-as-Problem:   
Discourse Itineraries in Canadian University Language Policy

Internationalization policies to promote international student enrolment at many Canadian universities have led to increased levels of linguistic diversity in the student body. However, institutional language policy responses to this diversity may be lacking, may centre a monolingual mindset or may discursively position the issue of the English language proficiency and development of students from non-English-speaking backgrounds in a framing of deficit. This study maps changing and conflicting “discourse itineraries” (Scollon, 2008:234), the taken-for-granted ideas, constraints and allowances at play discursively in institutional language policy. This was done via a multiple case study of three Canadian universities, where critical discourse analysis (CDA) was carried out on a variety of policy documents related to language, academic literacy and internationalization at the provincial (macro) and institutional and faculty (meso) levels and stakeholders at these institutions were interviewed.

This analysis revealed, first, that much language policy at these three institutions is covert, implicit and de facto. Two prominent discourses were also found: Language-as-Problem (Ruiz, 1984) and Neoliberalism and Language, each with pervasive sub-discourses—notably the Monolingual Mindset—that shape the creation of language policy at these universities. Discursive change is underway, however, as conflicting discourses were found at all institutions. In certain cases, there is a shift away from Language-as-Problem, influenced by a neoliberal focus on the English language as economic instrument. Building on Ruiz’s (1984) orientations toward language planning, this thesis proposes a new policy analytic heuristic to further describe the extent to which institutions ignore, blame, support or embrace language at different policy levels. As well, suggestions are made for Canadian higher education (HE) language stakeholders about how to realign discourses and bring about social change via critical language awareness-raising and policy-making. The ultimate goal is to provide a more equitable academic experience within Canadian HE for students from non-English-speaking backgrounds.

References:

Scollon, R. (2008). Discourse itineraries: Nine processes of resemiotization. In V.K. Bhatia, J. Flowerdew, & R.H. Jones (Eds.), Advances in discourse studies (pp. 233–244). London: Routledge.

Ruiz, R. (1984). Orientations in language planning. NABE Journal, 8, 15–34

Slides from IATEFL 2017

ELT conference season has begun! I’m currently in Glasgow, taking in the 51st IATEFL Conference. I’ll have write ups on some of the sessions I’m seeing in a blog post to come.

My presentation, Diverse Approaches to Academic Writing at a Canadian University, is Wednesday, April 5, at 17:25, in the Lomond Hall. Here’s the description:

This talk details an original research project exploring L1 and L2 approaches to academic writing instruction at a Canadian university through accounts from students and instructors. Results reveal how both experience the differing epistemologies, pedagogies and language norms of these two approaches. Implications for curriculum, methodology and professional development are discussed.