Non-native English-speaking teachers

( NNESTs) and professional legitimacy:

a sociocultural theoretical perspective
on identity transformation

Davi S. Reis

Abstract

How do non-native English-speaking teachers ( NNESTs) establish their legiti-

macy as credible, qualified instructors in the contexts where they teach vis-à-
vis the native speaker ( NS) myth (Phillipson 1992)? Using Vygotskian Socio-
cultural Theory (Vygotsky and Cole 1978; Wertsch 1985), this paper traces the
development of an ESL writing teacher’s professional identity and explores
how his beliefs and attitudes in regards to the NS myth are connected with his
professional identity and instructional practices. Based primarily on class-
room observations, interviews, and a dialogic journal between the researcher
and the teacher, I argue that the process of challenging the NS myth and nego-
tiating a professional identity as a legitimate, qualified, and confident ESL
teacher, though complex, is largely understudied. In order to address this gap
in the literature, this study shows how the participant, the teacher of a g­raduate-
level writing course, went from being a “blind believer” in the native speaker
myth to challenging it, to attempting to empower his own students as expert
speakers and users of the language. Nonetheless, his beliefs and attitudes
t­oward the NS myth remained ambivalent and contradictory. Based on the
analysis presented, I offer some implications for second language teacher
e­ducation.

Keywords: NNESTs; non-native English-speaking teachers; ESL; EFL; non-

native language teachers.

1. Introduction

Although non-native English-speaking teachers ( NNESTs) comprise the ma-

jority of teachers of English to speakers of other languages (TESOL) world-
wide (Canagarajah 1999), many qualified NNESTs struggle to assert and nego-
tiate an identity as legitimate English-as-a-second / foreign-language (ESL/

0165–2516/11/0208–0139 Int’l. J. Soc. Lang. 208 (2011), pp. 139–160

© Walter de Gruyter DOI 10.1515/IJSL.2011.016
140  D. S. Reis

EFL) instructors in the contexts where they teach due to the native speaker myth
(Phillipson 1992). Underlying this myth is the assumption that native speakers
( NSs) are inherently better language teachers than non-native speakers ( NNSs).
This assumption has been challenged by applied linguists, several of whom
have proposed alternatives to the NS/NNS dichotomy (Cook 1999; Kirkpatrick
2007; Leung et al.1997; Rampton 1990). Additionally, the international asso-
ciation of Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) is-
sued a position statement as follows:

There has been a long-standing fallacy . . . that native English speakers are the preferred
teachers because they are perceived to speak “unaccented” English, understand and
use idiomatic expressions fluently, and completely navigate the culture of at least one
English-dominant society, and thus they will make better [ESL or EFL] teachers than
nonnative English speakers. As a result, nonnative English-speaking educators have
found themselves often implicitly, and sometimes explicitly, discriminated against.
(TESOL 2006)

The position statement also states that although “[a]ll English language edu-
cators should be proficient in English regardless of their native languages . . .
[t]eaching skills, teaching experience, and professional preparation should be
given as much weight as language proficiency.” That is, “[a]ll educators should
be evaluated within the same criteria” (TESOL 2006). Criteria for English
p­roficiency and assessment are still needed along with specificity as to what
language teachers should know and be able to do (Burns and Richards 2009).
Certainly, a reasonable and contextually-appropriate degree of declarative and
procedural linguistic, sociolinguistic, and pragmatic knowledge must be re-
quired of effective L2 teachers. But despite efforts to dispel the NS myth, it
continues to affect not only the careers and self-efficacy of many qualified
NNESTs (Brutt-Griffler and Samimy 1999; Golombek and Jordan 2005; Mo-
tha 2006; Pavlenko 2003; Simon-Maeda 2004), but also the TESOL profession
as a whole, as unqualified teachers are hired solely on the basis of their NS
status. Unfortunately, NNESTs’ chances of employment are likely to be influ-
enced more by their accent (and race) than their professional qualifications
(Clark and Paran 2007; Mahboob et al. 2004). Also, the NS myth contributes
to NNEST “anxiety” (Llurda 2005), that is, a sense of professional inadequacy
that prevents many qualified NNESTs from becoming confident instructors.
In educational research, the word critical has been used in reference to “how
dominant ideologies in society drive the construction of understandings and
meanings in ways that privilege certain groups of people while marginalizing
others” (Hawkins and Norton 2009: 31). Critical pedagogy, in turn, is charged
with empowering1 individuals, through education and critical reflection, to re-
alize how they are situated and situate themselves in the broader context of
 NNESTs  141

power relations and, more importantly, with giving them the tools with which
to escape and fight oppression (Freire 2000; Hawkins and Norton 2009). Thus,
this research is intended as a way to explore the processes through which
NNESTs can achieve a sense of professional identity and legitimacy (Kamhi-
Stein 2005) by being empowered to recognize, acknowledge, and contest ideo-
logical discourses that position them as second-rate professionals. It focuses on
how teacher education can help NNESTs to strive for professional legitimacy
while reshaping their instruction in response to more empowering conceptual-
izations of self.

2. Research questions

The research questions guiding this study are as follows:

1. What can critical reflection and dialogic narrative inquiry2 reveal about the
relationship between a NNEST’s identity, emotions, and his instructional
practice?
2. How can narrative inquiry, as a tool for professional development, support
a NNEST’s attempts to explore, conceive of, articulate, and internalize
identities with which to (re)position himself as a legitimate English teach-
ing professional?

3. Literature review

3.1. Narrative knowing and narrative inquiry

Narratives are a human way of making sense of otherwise random events

(Polkinghorne 1991). We understand our lives by narrating them (to others and
to ourselves) and by infusing our experiences with meaning. From a narrative
epistemology, we all live storied lives and build “storied selves” (Bruner 1996).
We discursively construct, through the stories we tell, our understandings of
our lives and of who we are in the world (Olson 1995). Likewise, teachers live
storied lives (Elbaz 1983). They understand their practice and continuously
weave their identities through the act of telling narratives. Despite the material
constraints under which teachers operate, they have a degree of agency to
shape their storied selves through the narratives they tell and live by. Narra-
tives are fundamentally intrinsic to the process of making sense of oneself and
to the shaping of one’s identity (Bucholtz and Hall 2005; Pavlenko and Black-
ledge 2004; Pavlenko and Lantolf 2000). Narrative inquiry enables teachers to
e­xplore and articulate the often tacit connections between their identities and
142  D. S. Reis

instructional practices (Simon-Maeda 2004). For the present study, narrative

inquiry is the mediational tool and process through which NNESTs are able to
re-story their experiences and seek to establish their professional legitimacy
(Golombek and Jordan 2005; Pavlenko 2003).

3.2. Teacher identity3

Few would disagree that teachers’ instructional practices are shaped not only
by the professional education they have experienced and accumulated, but also
by their own experiences as students (Lortie 1975) and by their identity and
emotions (Duff and Uchida 1997; Johnson 1992; Simon-Maeda 2004; Var-
ghese et al. 2005). Drawing from the work of authors such as Davies and Harré
(1990) and Lave and Wenger (1991), among others, Block (2007) conceptual-
ized identities as:

. . . socially constructed, self-conscious, ongoing narratives that individuals perform,

interpret and project in dress, bodily movements, actions and language. Identity work
occurs in the company of others . . . with whom to varying degrees individuals share
beliefs, motives, values, activities and practices. Identities are about negotiating new
subject positions at the crossroads of the past, present, and future. Individuals are
shaped by their sociohistories but they also shape their sociohistories as life goes on. . . .
There are unequal power relations to deal with, around the different capitals —
e­conomic, cultural and social — that both facilitate and constrain interactions with
others in the different communities of practice with which individuals engage in their
lifetimes. (Block 2007: 27)

Similarly, for the present paper, I take identity to be multiple, dynamic, rela-
tional, situated, embedded in relations of power, and yet negotiable ( Norton
2006). I focus on the use of linguistic resources and action as the key factors
involved in identity negotiation, allowing for emphasis on the discursive na-
ture of identity construction, its embeddedness in social and power relations
and practical activity, its negotiability and intentionality. In this post-structural
view of identity, language and discourse play a key role (Benwell and Stokoe
2006; Mantero 2007).
But how do NNESTs attempt to articulate and assert an identity as legitimate
professionals in the contexts where they teach and through what they think,
say, and do? Here, the notion of positioning (Davies and Harré 1990) is help-
ful. Because discourse is always embedded in relations of power, individuals
at times choose to willingly take on certain subject positions and freely reject
others but, conversely, are sometimes ascribed certain subject positions which
they do not value, claim, or desire. For NNESTs, to say that identities are ne-
gotiated within power relations means that NNESTs’ professional legitimacy is
 NNESTs  143

eroded to the extent that disempowering discourses remain unchallenged.

Thus, in many contexts, even qualified NNESTs are positioned as less able
professionals than native English-speaking teachers ( NESTs) by the public
discourse, the institutions where they work, their colleagues, their students,
and even their social acquaintances. But despite the expanding body of re-
search on NNESTs and on ways to empower them (Braine 1999; Kamhi-Stein
2004; Llurda 2005), it is less clear how this goal can be accomplished through
professional development.

3.3. Theoretical framework

Vygotskian sociocultural theory (SCT) can reveal what the processes of iden-
tity transformation look like for NNESTs and how potential changes in their
professional discourse and self-concept might impact their instructional prac-
tices (Golombek and Johnson 2004; Johnson 2007; Johnson and Golombek
2003). SCT argues that human cognition (e.g., memory, planning, and higher-
order thinking) is mediated by culturally-developed tools (Lantolf 2000). In
the context of teacher learning and development, a SCT perspective fore-
grounds the socially-mediated nature of learning and the dialectical interplay
between teachers’ cognitions and their sociocultural contexts and practices
(Ball 2000; Golombek and Johnson 2004; Lantolf and Johnson 2007). It takes
into account not only what teachers know and believe, but how their under-
standings of themselves and of their activity impact and are impacted by their
relationship to the contexts in which they teach. In this view, teacher learning
is primarily a matter of helping teachers to internalize4 new understandings
based on theory, reflection, and socially-mediated interactions and, based on
these new understandings, to commit to changes in their activity (i.e., instruc-
tional practices; Ball 2000; Johnson and Golombek 2003). In turn, a SCT per-
spective on identity development and transformation means that one’s identity
arises from and within one’s social relationships and sociocultural context (van
Huizen et al. 2005), from the dialectical relationship between the individual
and the social, in unique yet constrained ways (Valsiner 1998; Wetherell and
Maybin 1996). It draws from recognizable social types, yet infuses them
with one’s own idiosyncrasies as it is internalized (Holland and Lachicotte Jr.
2007). In addition, individuals construct, display, and manage their identities
in a process of constant becoming (Cross and Gearon 2007; Stetsenko and
Arievitch 2004). As members of communities of practice, individuals can po-
tentially re-story themselves into new subjectivities through both discourse
and action (Wertsch et al. 1993). Finally, one’s emotions are at the heart of
this process of re-storying oneself (DiPardo and Potter 2003; Mahn and John-
Steiner 2002).
144  D. S. Reis

In this light, supporting the development of NNESTs’ professional identities

involves promoting their awareness of how they position themselves profes-
sionally and are positioned by others (e.g., students, institutions, the public
discourse) in regards to their legitimacy and in relation to the contexts where
they work and live. It also entails the creation of mediational spaces (Golombek
and Johnson 2004) where, through critical reflection and collaborative inquiry,
they can challenge disempowering discourses and legitimize their professional
identities. Once internalized as higher-order psychological functions (Holland
and Lachicotte Jr. 2007), these renewed identities can potentially engender
significant changes in NNESTs’ sense of individual and group agency. Finally,
NNESTs’ identity development entails a commitment to change in both dis-
course practices and practical activity with the goal of empowering themselves
and others (Stetsenko and Arievitch 2004). Only then, as a community of prac-
tice, will NNESTs “escape from the tyranny of environmental stimuli” and
intentionally author “new selves and new cultural worlds and try to realize
them” (Holland and Lachicotte Jr. 2007: 116).

4. Methodology

The data analyzed here were collected in 2007 at a large northeastern univer-
sity in the U.S. Given its wide array of PhD programs in the sciences and engi-
neering, this university enlists the help of hundreds of teaching assistants from
many different countries to provide general education classes to undergraduate
and graduate students. This study was based on an ESL writing class regularly
offered to international graduate students (mostly at the doctoral level) who
wish to improve their academic writing skills in their fields of study.

4.1. Participants

The main participant, Kang5, is a Chinese male in his early thirties. When data
collection started, he had just completed his first year as a PhD student in Ap-
plied Linguistics while concurrently teaching writing courses in the ESL pro-
gram housed by his department. A native speaker of a minority language in
China, he started learning Mandarin at age seven and English during high school.
Prior to starting his PhD program, he completed a bachelor’s degree in English
Education and a master’s degree in translation while still in China. He then
taught EFL for a few years before coming to the U.S. to pursue a master’s degree
in Teaching English as a Second Language (TESL) at the University of Florida.6
As a doctoral student in Applied Linguistics and a teaching and research as-
sistant for his department, Kang spoke and used English fluently and appropri-
 NNESTs  145

ately in both departmental meetings and social functions (See ACTFL 1986,
1996). He would be considered a “superior” user of English in all four skills.
In fact, already in 2002, his TOEFL score was 667 (out of 677) and his GRE
verbal score was 640 ( placing around the 90th percentile). An informal anal­
ysis of a sample of his writing revealed that his written English was highly
developed, incorporating advanced vocabulary and syntax, as well as indicat-
ing a strong understanding of genre conventions and rhetorical purpose. His
feedback on his students’ work, both written and oral, was focused and de-
tailed. Regarding his master’s degree, his cumulative GPA was above 3.80 (out
of 4.0) and A- was the lowest grade he ever received. His coursework included
English syntax, sociolinguistics, L2 acquisition and learning, L2 writing, and
approaches to L2 use. His pronunciation of English (i.e., individual sounds,
rhythm, stress, and intonation) was highly intelligible and rarely a source of
any misunderstanding.
The other participants in the study were Kang’s students, most of whom
were also doctoral students from China (3), South Korea (3), Taiwan (2), Ma-
laysia (1) and Thailand (1). They ranged in age from early twenties to late
thirties.

4.2. Data collection

The data collection instruments in this study were: a dialogic journal between
the researcher and the participating teacher; eight weekly, videotaped class-
room observations; five audio-taped interviews with the teacher; two teaching
philosophy statements ( pre and post); two open-ended student surveys ( pre
and post); and ethnographic field notes. The dialogic journal was set up so that
the researcher could write follow-up comments or questions to the participant’s
reflections on his teaching. The interviews7 were semi-structured and focused
on the participant’s identity and emotions, specific classroom events, and what
such events meant to him. The classroom observations took place at least once
a week at the participant’s discretion. The teaching philosophy statements in-
cluded questions as prompts, but were fairly flexible. Finally, ethnographic
field notes consisted mainly of information about the institutional context of
the study and notes taken during classroom observations.

4.3. Data analysis

The written data (i.e., the dialogic journal, philosophy statements, and field
notes) were essentially ready for analysis. The audio and audiovisual data
were  first annotated for potentially relevant issues (i.e., data relating to the
146  D. S. Reis

participant’s non-native status and instances of identity work being done). I

then t­ranscribed these excerpts using a simplified transcription scheme.7 The
only exception was the fifth interview, which was transcribed in its entirety.
The student surveys were compiled and tabulated.
With all relevant data transcribed and prepped for analysis, I coded the
m­ajor themes as they emerged (about 40 categories). I then focused on the
themes I judged most relevant. Namely, non-nativeness, critical pedagogy,
collaboration, the nature of identity, self-perceptions, confidence, and English
skills/expertise, selecting the excerpts that best exemplified each of these cen-
tral themes. Next, I attempted to trace the participant’s identity development in
regards to being a NNEST. A conscious effort was made to triangulate the data
and avoid taking the participant’s narratives at face-value (Pavlenko 2007).

5. Results

Kang’s professional development as a NNEST, not surprisingly, has been filled

with emotional ups and downs, challenging work, and empowering r­ealizations.
The excerpts that follow were selected because they show Kang’s linguistic
instantiations of his understandings at different points during the study. They
reflect his self-concept, his perceived status as a NNEST, his attitudes, emo-
tions, and beliefs toward the NS myth, and his understanding of his instruc-
tional practice vis-à-vis his NNEST status. The italicized language in each
excerpt points to relevant linguistic instantiations that support the discussion
around the excerpt.

5.1. Going from “blind believer in the native speaker mode” to “expert
user”

In alluding to the NS myth, Kang told me he “was once a blind believer in the
native speaker mode in language learning” (Dialogic journal). However,
through critical reflection, engagement with academic readings, meaningful
discussions, and the modeling and support of expert others, Kang started to
challenge the NS myth and to consider alternative subjectivities for himself,
such as that of “expert user”:

My first exposure to the issue was in a sociolinguistics class I took back in [Florida].
The professor who taught the class is a non-native speaker and a highly competent user
of English herself. Through her stimulating lecture, I realized that non-native speakers
too can become “expert users” in an additional language. My understanding of the
i­ssue was deepened through more readings and through a seminar on the global spread
 NNESTs  147

of English, the instructor of which, though a native speaker of English herself, de-
bunked the native speakers’ claim of the ownership of English in an article she pub-
lished in the TESOL Quarterly. . . . Through my academic exposure and immersion, I
gradually came to realize that taking native speaker as model is not beneficial because
no matter how hard I work, I would never turn myself into a native speaker. (Dialogic
journal)

Indeed, as a doctoral student in Applied Linguistics and having taught ESL

courses in two major American universities, Kang claimed to have become
“keenly aware of the issue and the debate surrounding it” (Teaching philoso-
phy statement 1).

5.2. The relationship between identity and instructional practice

In Kang’s own words, “who I am does affect how I teach or how I look at my-
self  ” (Interview 1). His instructional practice seemed to have been impacted
by this realization. This happened in at least two ways. First, at times he drew
on his and his students’ status as NNSs and took advantage of the perceived
benefits of being a NNEST (Reves and Medgyes 1994) to build rapport with
his students and help them succeed in their own English acquisition. Specifi-
cally, he drew on his “L2 learner status” to emphasize to his students his valu-
able expertise as a learner.

I told my ESL students that because of my L2 learner status, I can understand their
difficulties in struggling to learn an additional language and I would share with them
my struggle as well as my successful learning experiences. (Dialogic Journal)
. . . academic writing takes time to learn, and then by that I don’t mean that native
speakers and non-native speakers have to face the same problem . . . for a non-native
speakers, there are other difficulties that we may have to face, for example gram_
grammar issue, word choice, etcetera, so we s_ we have some extra difficulties that we
have to face. (Observation 8)

Secondly, Kang’s attitudes toward the NS myth seemed to motivate him to

empower his NNES students as well and to weave a critical praxis perspective
into his classroom teaching. For example, in reference to his first day of class,
he made the connection between having been empowered by the notion of
“language expertise” and wanting to empower his own students.

My aim, therefore, is to become an “expert user” of the language, most especially in

my own research domain. I have been empowered by such a reconceptualization of
linguistic competence, and so I believe my L2 students too would benefit from such a
148  D. S. Reis

renewed understanding. That’s why I wanted to bring up the issue in class. (Dialogic
journal)

Most notably, he decided to bring up and challenge the NS myth on the first
day of instruction.

I brought up the issue of native speaker and non-native speaker. I told them that there
is a commonly held misconception among L2 learners that native English speakers are
good readers and writers because they were brought up speaking the language. It is a
misconception because one is not automatically a good reader and writer by virtue of
one’s “native” status. Both reading and writing are literacy skills that one acquires
through schooling. Native speakers also have to learn to be able to read and write.
(Dialogic journal)

Finally, while providing a course summary during his last class session,
Kang again challenged the NS myth and provided students with an empower-
ing view of what it means to be a good writer.

. . . writing is a learned skill, everybody has to learn in order to know how to write,
right? and even native speakers have to learn how to write . . . being a native speaker
doesn’t mean that you are automatically a good writer, you have to learn how to write
and then I want you to walk out of this classroom being confident about yourself, uh if
you_ you practice a lot you can be a good writer, ok? (Observation 8)

Based on the discussion thus far we might be tempted to assume that Kang’s
professional development in regards to being a NNEST was smooth and linear.
However, as I explain in the following section, Kang’s beliefs and attitudes
toward the NS myth, as well as his perceptions of his teaching experiences as
an ESL teacher in the U.S., seem to point to a much more complex, contradic-
tory, and unresolved view of his identity and feelings.

5.3. Receiving a blow to his confidence

Whereas being a NNS was reportedly not a prominent issue for Kang while
teaching English in China, he had a different experience in the U.S. While
teaching ESL in Florida, his confidence in his ability to provide quality instruc-
tion to his students was severely threatened. In our journal, he spoke of a stu-
dent who recommended that the school only hire NS:

Throughout my short teaching career in the ESL context, there was only one time that I
was directly confronted with the native and non-native speaker issue. . . . [A] student
wrote as a concluding remark in his/her course evaluation that “the ELI [English Lan-
 NNESTs  149

guage Institute] should hire only native speakers as instructors”. This remark came as
surprise to me because he/she hadn’t said anything negative about me or the course in
the foregoing open-ended questions. I have to admit that it was a blow on my self-­
esteem as a teacher. (Dialogic journal)

Although Kang claimed that he did not take this student’s comment personally,
he referred to this incident in his first teaching philosophy statement and inter-
view. It made a strong impression on him, reinforcing the NS myth and adding
self-doubt regarding his practice:

However, I didn’t take it as a personal attack. It just shows how the native speaker myth
is deeply rooted in some of the L2 learners’ minds. Some other ESL students I have
taught/is teaching might have similar thoughts, but there is no way I could find out
since they never bring this up openly either in front of me or in the course evaluations.
(Dialogic journal)

As it turns out, Kang’s students participating in this study did not express
any negative reactions to him as an instructor. His official end-of-semester
course evaluations revealed that his students were extremely satisfied with his
instruction and delivery. His students ranked him very high on overall quality
of the course (6.67 out of 7); overall quality of the instructor (6.78); clarity of
the instructor’s presentations (6.67); clarity of the instructor’s explanations
(6.56); and adequacy of the instructor’s knowledge of the subject matter (6.67).
In answer to the question “Do you have any other comments about the course
in general?” from Kang’s own course evaluation form, students’ responses in-
cluded: “Nice class” and “Perfect! You are the best teacher I have ever meet
[sic] for my English course”. Likewise, for the question “What types of re-
sponses to your writing did you receive from the instructor?” students’ answers
included “Detailed response. He is a good instructor”; “Positive feedback and
encouragement” and “Feedback on grammatical error, revision guideline, and
comment”. Although these higher-than-average scores and comments might
have boosted Kang’s confidence, they were not made available to him ( per
university policy) until several months after the course had ended.

5.4. Feeling self-conscious and insecure as a NNEST

Kang’s reported confidence as a NNEST seemed to waver throughout his

teaching career and during the study itself. For example, in answer to the ques-
tion of whether or not he considered himself to be a legitimate, credible, and
qualified ESL teacher, Kang spoke of the nagging doubt that haunts many
NNESTs:
150  D. S. Reis

I think this is a complicated question, I wouldn’t say yes or not . . . when I was teaching
[freshman-level writing course] uh most of student were ok, but there were a few stu-
dents uh who challenged me, I mean, they didn’t say anything but they just didn’t be-
have themselves sometimes in class uh so and that could uh forc- force me to ask myself
what’s wrong, (xx) maybe they’ve challenged that I_ I don’t really have this rights to
teach them because I’m a non-native speaker of English and things like that so, when
things like that happen, like I can become not very confident sometimes . . . but then if
things like this you would think well maybe you know they question my qualification as
a teacher. (Interview 2)

Here, we start seeing Kang’s ambivalence towards the NS myth, as he seemed

hesitant to position himself as a qualified NNEST. Similarly, the excerpt below
suggests that being a NNEST teaching ESL may be an issue not only for his
students, but for himself as well.

. . . but here in this context before I walk in the classroom this non-native speaker iden-
tity would come out all the time so I would ask myself I’m a non-native speaker and the
students here are in the English as a second language context and would they question
my validity my ability as a teacher? That’s the question I ask myself when I uh walk into
the classroom. (Interview 1)

Kang was concerned that students would not welcome him as an instructor.
His fears were based not only on his status as a NNEST, but also on his race,
both of which seem to be conflated in the excerpt below:

I do feel conscious as a non-native speaker in the first class, because when you step into
a class, you stood there a student look at you and maybe like they’re uh how would I
say? they they they would believe that it should be a a white person, English-speaking
person who would teach the class so they would be a little surprised to find that an
Asian person, a non-native speaker stand there, so for the first class I might have this
kind of consciousness (Interview 3)

5.5. Internalizing the NS myth

Despite Kang’s awareness of the NS myth and of the challenges facing

NNESTs, at times he seemed to have internalized some of the precepts of the
NS myth. For him, there seemed to always be a nagging sense of inadequacy:
“Non-nativeness is probably another concept the [sic] creeps into my mind
when it comes to teaching in an ESL context” (Teaching philosophy statement
1).
In the excerpt below, for example, it seems that Kang had not committed to
positioning himself as an “expert speaker” just yet, even though he did ac-
 NNESTs  151

knowledge this subjectivity as being an empowering reconceptualization of

linguistic competence.

My aim, therefore, is to become an “expert user” of the language, most especially in my

own research domain. I have been empowered by such a reconceptualization of linguis-
tic competence (Dialogic journal)

Additionally, after a “protracted discussion” during one of his classes fol-

lowing questions by a few of his students about the different uses of “this” and
“it”, Kang felt as if “[his] explanation in class was not very clear”. He thus
decided to email his teaching supervisor and a colleague, both native speakers
from the same department, in order to “test [his] intuition against a native
speaker’s”:

I also email [NS colleague], because I want to uh uh test my intuition against a native
speaker’s intuition . . . yeah I just wanted to test my intuitions . . . just ask them whether
my intuitions were correct or not. (Interview 3)

Although clarifying one’s doubts with able colleagues seems a reasonable

course of action, the main issue here is that Kang felt the need to “test” his in-
tuition against that of NSs. This adds support to the notion that, for Kang, NSs
do “have” the language and NNSs are in a position of having to check their
understandings against an idealized NS intuition. Indeed, the argument that
linguistic intuition is a distinctive advantage of native speakers has been chal-
lenged by some researchers. Kramsch (1997), for example, argued that “Chom-
sky seems to conceive his ‘ideal speaker-listener’ as a monolingual individual
whose intuitions perfectly match the expectations of one homogeneous stan-
dard community. Such a standard community is increasingly difficult to find in
multiethnic industrialized urban societies” (Kramsch 1997: 368). Similarly,
Pacek (2005) argued that English “is no longer regarded as the property of NSs
only. . . . There has been a growing realization that NSs do not always have
accurate insights into all aspects of English” (Pacek 2005: 244). In addition,
language teachers, regardless of their native-speaking status, can increasingly
take advantage of technological tools such as language corpora, online com-
munications, and Internet content in order to expand their knowledge and
check their understanding of certain target language varieties, registers, and
genres. Where such tools are readily available, resorting to NS intuition is no
longer the only or necessarily the best alternative.
Another indication of Kang’s ambivalence toward the NS myth can be seen
by contrasting the excerpt above with the one that follows. Here, Kang ex-
pressed a view of language as being “in constant change” with users of the
language being the ones who “make changes” to it. His views suggesting that
152  D. S. Reis

NSs have the language and that NNSs must test their intuitions seem at odds
with the view of language he expressed below.

I mean these are prescribed rules, and language are in constant change, so language
changes all the time, and people are the one who use the language and they make
changes to the language . . . is in constant change. (Observation 8)

During one of our interviews, for example, Kang’s answer to the hypo­
thetical question of whether he would feel comfortable teaching an American
pronunciation course seemed to imply that he would not be a good model for
his students:

I don’t think I would be confident to teach American pronunciation in an ESL context

because I don’t think my pronunciation is American-like, so if it’s this course is called
American pronunciation, I don’t think I’m a good model in providing students with this
so-called American pronunciation so th_ I wouldn’t think this is a course for me, no
(Interview 2)

However, when asked the same question in regards to an EFL context, his an-
swer was more ambivalent, pointing to a possible tension between having (or
not having) a certain accent, his ability to teach, and students’ expectations.

. . . it’d be more comfortable, but I would in my teaching I would tell my students that I
don’t really have a so-called American accent, uh we wanna work on pronunciation- or
the purpose of working on pronunciation uh is for uh us to be able to speak clearly and
comprehensibly. It doesn’t have- I mean it doesn’t have to be a certain accent, I mean
everybody has an accent, so the purpose of learning how pronounce a certain language
is to be clear and comprehensible so I always tell my students this, “it’s perfectly ok for
you to have an accent but then try to be clear and comprehensible”. (Interview 2)

It is not surprising that Kang would still feel ambivalent about this issue him-
self. References to “native speakers” and “American English” are still widely
used in an attempt to appeal to prospective students. In fact, courses in Amer­
ican or British pronunciation, as well as accent reduction classes are widely
offered on the Internet. In addition, many job ads still list NS status as a re-
quirement. These excerpts seem to indicate that although Kang has been em-
powered as a learner by a reconceptualization of linguistic competence, he still
has some conflicting views.

5.6. Dealing with linguistic insecurity

Given Kang’s references to the NS intuition and to his perceived fossilized

command of English pronunciation and grammar, there was a tension in re-
 NNESTs  153

gards to just how much of an expert he can be or become as a self-identified

NNEST. This is especially thorny for NNESTs, as English is both the medium
and, to a large extent, the content of instruction. For Kang, the belief that
t­eachers “should know the stuff that [they] are doing” seems to be at odds with
his conceptualization of himself as an expert speaker. On the one hand he feels
as though he must know “a lot” to be deemed qualified, but on the other, he at
times appeared to suffer from “linguistic insecurity” (Labov 1972), as he put it
himself.
In the following excerpts, Kang implies that speaking “perfect English”,
having “native speaker accent, grammar” and otherwise passing for a NS are
goals he desires but cannot achieve. He indicates his English speaking ability
and his self-consciousness might also be sources of concern for him that affect
his speaking in class.

. . . my language is fossilized and sometimes I complained to my friends and said well
I have a lot of colleagues who who speak uh perfect English you can’t tell that they’re
not a native speaker. They have these native speaker accent, grammar and everything.
I just couldn’t do that. I couldn’t envision myself reaching that stage. (Interview 1)
I wish my English was better . . . especially in uh terms of speaking, sometimes I find
myself struggling in expressing a certain idea or putting ideas across and because I’m
too self-conscious and too timid, so very often I don’t speak up, so if I can be the normal
self or I can be very natural very relaxed I think I could express myself much better like
in classroom or things like that. (Interview 1)

In sum, we see Kang’s ambivalence toward the NS myth. Despite the work
he has done in reconceptualizing himself as an L2 learner in light of alternative
identity options (such as Rampton’s [1990] language expertise), he is not free
of a deficit metaphor as a NNEST.

The reconceptualization of linguistic competence . . . has empowered me as a L2

learner. However, this doesn’t mean that a revolution has taken place and the native-non
native issue is solved once and for all. It is, and will continue to be, an issue that I have
to face. The discussion as well as the call for a reconceptualization of linguistic compe-
tence has been restricted to a small circle of scholarship within applied linguistics and
sociolinguistics. (Dialogic journal)

6. Discussion

The analysis above suggests that issues of professional expertise, confidence,

and self-esteem were all involved in Kang’s professional identity as a NNEST.
His beliefs, attitudes, and feelings toward the NS myth seemed ambiguous and
154  D. S. Reis

incongruous. Although at times he seemed to think of himself as an effective

teacher, he also seemed to believe that he must “make up” for what he presum-
ably lacks (i.e., “perfect English”, “language intuition” and “cultural insights”,
Interview 5). Despite his reconceptualization of linguistic competence as an
“L2 learner”, his professional and personal subjectivities appeared ambivalent
toward the NS myth. Though he seemed to know that NNESTs can become
expert users of English in their own right, he did not seem to feel as though he
is an expert or believe that he can become one. As with the participants in
Golombek and Jordan’s (2005) study, Kang’s professional identity as a legiti-
mate NNEST is filled with tensions and contradictions. Such tensions are
­understandable, given his belief that his students would expect to see a white,
NS teacher in front of the class.
Reportedly, Kang’s self-concept or instructional practices did not signifi-
cantly change as a result of participating in this study. However, keeping a dia-
logic journal seemed to help him reflect critically on his teaching.

. . . having this dialogic journal gives me the opportunity to, to reflect my_ on my own
teaching in depth because when you, try to write something up, you_ you’re kind of ex-
ploring with your ideas, and uh, v_ reflecting in_ at a much deeper level uh with what
you have done. So I think that’s really helpful. (Interview 2)

Our exchanges through the dialogic journal enabled Kang to delve into
­ therwise unexamined beliefs, feelings, and attitudes. Our mutual sharing of
o
our experiences seemed helpful to Kang as well. As he “learn[s] from other
people’s experiences” (Interview 4), my sharing of my own experiences and
occasional insights seemed to open a mediational space in which we were able
to address some of the issues that he might not have wanted to discuss (i.e., had
I not shared my own feelings and experiences as a NNEST). Through the relat-
ing of our own personal experiences, beliefs, and feelings about the NS myth,
we were able to construct a mediational space through which to explore our
own self-concepts. More importantly, my interactions with Kang, especially
through the dialogic blog, supported him as we dealt with the sometimes emo-
tional issue of professional legitimacy.
In sum, Kang went from being a “blind believer” in the NS myth to chal-
lenging it, to attempting to empower his students as expert speakers and users
of the language. His instructional practice reflected a deep understanding of the
NS myth and of its broader implications, as well as a desire to empower his
students to resist it. By finding ways, both overt (e.g., bringing up the NS myth
in class) and subtle (e.g., his discussion on linguistic imperialism), to challenge
the NS myth in his teaching, Kang attempted to proactively address an issue
that for him was a source of emotional dissonance and professional tension.
Rather than shying away from it, he took a stand and encouraged his students
 NNESTs  155

to do the same. He went beyond the claiming of an identity as an L2 learner to

helping his students to gain more confidence in their skills. In the context of
critical pedagogy, teachers are encouraged to “work with their students to de-
construct language, texts, and discourses, in order to investigate whose inter-
ests they serve and what messages are both explicitly and implicitly conveyed”
(Hawkins and Norton 2009: 32). Kang certainly did.

7. Limitations

Admittedly, this study explored one NNEST’s professional context and experi-
ences for a relatively short amount of time. In addition, it did not provide an
in-depth exploration of the participating students’ expectations. Although they
were asked to fill out a survey at the beginning and end of the study, they did
not provide a full picture of the student participants’ views on the NS/NNS
dichotomy or NS myth. Finally, it is not my intention here to make sweeping
generalizations about NNESTs or to essentialize their multiple experiences.
Clearly, one’s professional development journey and experiences are unique.
However, I believe that many NNESTs can relate to Kang’s experiences and
feelings as an NNEST and take solace in the fact that they are not alone.

8. Implications and conclusion

This study has implications for L2 teacher education. First, systematic oppor-
tunities should be created for all TESOL professionals to collaboratively in-
quire about their beliefs, attitudes, and feelings in regards to the NS myth and
how they might want to position themselves in both their local contexts of
practice and in the larger sociocultural structures constraining their teaching.
In particular, NNESTs can benefit from social mediation and collaboration in
conceiving of and internalizing identity options that lead to more professional
agency and empowerment. As argued by Simon-Maeda, “both teacher and stu-
dent subjectivities become transformed when personal histories are used as
teaching tools to explore both how prevailing discourses shape our identities
and what alternative discourses are available to reinvent ourselves in more
empowering ways” (Simon-Maeda 2004: 429). Through narrative inquiry,
NNESTs can start to make sense of their professional landscape, challenge
disempowering ideologies, and identify as legitimate TESOL professionals. As
argued by Hawkins and Norton (2009), “[b]ecause language, culture, and iden-
tity are integrally related, language teachers are in a key position to address
educational inequality, both because of the particular learners they serve, many
of whom are marginalized members of the wider community, and because of
156  D. S. Reis

the subject matter they teach — language — which can itself serve to both
empower and marginalize” (Hawkins and Norton 2009: 32). Through critical
pedagogy (Pennycook 2001) and praxis (i.e., the “integrating [of ] theory and
practice in the interests of educational and social change”), teachers can help
learners situate themselves in broader relationships of power and attempt to
resist oppression (Hawkins and Norton 2009: 36). Teachers can “make changes
within these institutions as they engage with new disciplinary ideas and learn
from the expertise of others” (Kramsch and Ware 2004: 37). Thus, despite the
institutional constraints that bear upon teacher’s work in the classroom, what
they choose to do in and through their practice can reverberate to the broader
sociocultural context and start a ripple effect (Pennycook 2001).
The NS myth has serious implications for NNESTs’ employment prospects
and instructional practices. However, while identities are often imposed, they
can also be disputed, negotiated, and asserted. The need to support NNESTs as
they enter the TESOL profession should be clear. As language teacher educa-
tors, we must create systematic opportunities for TESOL professionals to criti-
cally reflect on their practice.

Duquesnse University

Correspondence address: reisd@duq.edu

Notes

1. I echo Brutt-Griffler and Samimy (1999) and Lather’s (cited in Brutt-Griffler and Samimy
1999: 419) view of empowerment as the “analyzing [of ] ideas about the causes of powerless-
ness, recognizing systemic oppressive forces, and acting both individually and collectively to
change the conditions of our lives”.
2. I take narrative inquiry to be the “systematic exploration that is conducted by teachers and for
teachers through their own stories and language. . . . Such inquiry is driven by teachers’ inner
desire to understand that experience, to reconcile what is know with that which is hidden, to
confirm and affirm, and to construct and reconstruct understandings of themselves as teachers
and of their own teaching” (Johnson and Golombek 2002a: 6 — emphasis in original).
3. Unless otherwise noted, I have chosen to use the terms identity, self, and self-concept and
subjectivity somewhat interchangeably in reference to one’s understanding of oneself in rela-
tion to one’s sociocultural context, social relationships, and activity in the world.
4. I take internalization to be “the process through which developing teachers move beyond posi-
tions of cognitive internalization of theory and practices toward transformative positions of
reflective commitment needed to guide them in their generative development as (. . .) t­eachers”
(Ball 2007: 229).
5. All names used here are pseudonyms chosen by the participants themselves.
6. A pseudonym, though comparable in size to the actual university attended by the participant.
7. The fifth interview was conducted as a follow-up, approximately six months after the course
had ended.
 NNESTs  157

References

ACTFL. 1986. American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages’ (ACTFL) Proficiency
Guidelines.
ACTFL. 1996. American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages’ (ACTFL) standards for
foreign language learning: preparing for the 21st century. http://www.actfl.org/files/public/
S­tandardsforFLLexecsumm_rev.pdf (accessed 20 July 2009).
Ball, Arnetha F. 2000. Teachers’ developing philosophies on literacy and their use in urban schools:
a Vygotskian perspective on internal activity and teacher change. In Carol D. Lee & Peter
­Smagorinsky (rds.), Vygotskian perspectives on literacy research: constructing meaning
through collaborative inquiry, 226 –255. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Benwell, Bethan & Elizabeth Stokoe. 2006. Discourse and identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Uni-
versity Press.
Block, David. 2007. Second language identities. London: Continuum.
Braine, George. 1999. Non-native educators in English language teaching. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum.
Bruner, Jerome. 1996. The culture of education. Boston: Harvard University Press.
Brutt-Griffler, Janina & Keiko K. Samimy. 1999. Revisiting the colonial in the postcolonial: crit­
ical praxis for nonnative-English-speaking teachers in a TESOL program. TESOL Quarterly 33.
413– 431.
Bucholtz, Mary & Kira Hall. 2005. Identity and interaction: a sociocultural linguistic approach.
Discourse Studies 7(4 –5). 585– 614.
Burns, Anne & Jack C. Richards (eds.). 2009. The Cambridge guide to second language teacher
education. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Canagarajah, Athelstan Suresh. 1999. Interrogating the “native speaker fallacy”: non-linguistic
roots, non-pedagogical results. In George Braine (ed.), Non-native educators in English lan-
guage teaching, 77–92. London: Lawrence Earlbum.
Clark, Elizabeth & Amos Paran. 2007. The employability of non-native speaker teachers of EFL:
a UK survey. Science Direct 35. 407– 430.
Cook, Vivian. 1999. Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly 33.
185–209.
Cross, Russell & Margaret Gearon. 2007. The confluence of doing, thinking, and knowing: class-
room practice as the confluence of foreign language teacher identity. In Amanda Berry, Allie
Clemans & Alexander Kostogriz (eds.), Dimensions of professional learning: professionalism,
practice and identity, 53– 67. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
Davies, Bronwyn & Rom Harré. 1990. Positioning: the discursive production of selves. Journal
for the Theory of Social Behavior 20(1). 43– 63.
DiPardo, Anne & Christine Potter. 2003. Beyond cognition: a Vygostkian perspective on emotion-
ality and teachers’ professional lives. In Alex Kozulin, Boris Gindis, Vladimir Ageyev & Su-
zanne Miller (eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context, 317–345. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Duff, Patricia A. & Yuko Uchida. 1997. The negotiation of teachers’ sociocultural identities and
practices in postsecondary EFL classrooms. TESOL Quarterly 31. 451– 486.
Elbaz, Freema. 1983. Teacher thinking: a study of practical knowledge. London: Croom Helm;
Nichols.
Freire, Paulo. 2000. Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary edn.). New York: Continuum.
Golombek, Paula R. & Karen E. Johnson. 2004. Narrative inquiry as a mediational space: examin-
ing emotional and cognitive dissonance in second-language teachers’ development. Teachers
and Teaching: Theory and Practice 10(3). 307–327.
Golombek, Paula R. & Stephanie R. Jordan. 2005. Becoming “Black Lambs” not “Parrots”: a
poststructuralist orientation to intelligibility and identity. TESOL Quarterly 39. 513–533.
158  D. S. Reis

Hawkins, Margaret & Bonny Norton. 2009. Critical language teacher education. In Anne Burns &
Jack C. Richards (eds.), Cambridge guide to second language teacher education, 30 –39. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Holland, Dorothy & William Lachicotte, Jr. 2007. Vygotsky, Mead, and the new sociocultural
studies of identity. In Harry Daniels, Michael Cole & James V. Wertsch (eds.), The Cambridge
companion to Vygotsky, 101–135. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Johnson, Karen E. 1992. Learning to teach: instructional actions and decisions of preservice ESL
teachers. TESOL Quarterly 26. 507–535.
Johnson, Karen E. 2007. Tracing teacher and student learning in teacher-authored narratives.
Teacher Development 11(2). 175–188.
Johnson, Karen E. & P. R. Golombek. 2003. “Seeing” teacher learning. TESOL Quarterly 37.
729–738.
Kamhi-Stein, Lia D. 2005. Research perspectives on non-native English-speaking professionals.
In Paul Bruthiaux, Dwight Atkinson, Wwilliam G. Eggington, William Grabe & Vaidehi Ra-
manathan (eds.), Directions in applied linguistics: essays in honor of Robert B. Kaplan, 72–83.
Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
Kamhi-Stein, Lia D. (ed.). 2004. Learning and teaching from experience: perspectives on nonna-
tive English-speaking professionals. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Kirkpatrick, Andy. 2007. World Englishes: implications for international communication and
English language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kramsch, Claire. 1997. The Privilege of the nonnative speaker. Publications of the Modern Lan-
guage Association of America 112(3). 359–369.
Kramsch, Claire & Paige Ware. 2004. What language teachers need to know. In Martha Bigelow
& Constance Walker (eds.), Creating teacher community: selected papers from the third inter-
national conference on language teacher education, 27–50. Minneapolis, MN: Center for Ad-
vanced Research on Language Acquisition.
Labov, William. 1972. Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania
Press.
Lantolf, James P. 2000. Introducing sociocultural theory. In James P. Lantolf (ed.), Sociocultural
theory and second language learning, 1–26. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lantolf, James P. & Karen E. Johnson. 2007. Extending Firth and Wagner’s (1997) ontological
perspective to L2 classroom praxis and teacher education. The Modern Language Journal 91.
877–892.
Lave, Jean & Etienne Wenger. 1991. Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Leung, Constant, Roxy Harris & Ben Rampton. 1997. The idealised native speaker, reified eth-
nicities, and classroom realities. TESOL Quarterly 31. 543–558.
Llurda, Enric. 2005. Non-native language teachers: perceptions, challenges and contributions to
the profession. New York: Springer.
Lortie, Dan C. 1975. Schoolteacher: a sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Mahboob, Ahmar, Karl Uhrig, Karen L. Newman & Beverly Hartford. 2004. Children of a lesser
English: status of nonnative English speakers as college-level English as a second language
teachers in the United States. In Lia D. Kamhi-Stein (ed.), Learning and teaching from experi-
ence: perspectives on nonnative English-speaking professionals, 100 –120. Ann Arbor, MI: Uni-
versity of Michigan Press.
Mahn, Holbrook & Vera John-Steiner. 2002. The gift of confidence: a Vygotskian view of emo-
tions. In Gordon Wells & Guy Claxton (eds.), Learning for life in the 21st century: sociocultural
perspectives on the future of education, 46 –58. Oxford: Blackwell.
 NNESTs  159

Mantero, Miguel. 2007. Toward ecological pedagogy in language education. In Miguel Mantero
(ed.), Identity and second language learning: culture, inquiry, and dialogic activity in educa-
tional contexts, 1–11. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Motha, Suhanthie. 2006. Racializing ESOL teacher identities in U.S. K-12 public schools. TESOL
Quarterly 40. 495–518.
Norton, Bonny. 2006. Identity as a sociocultural construct in second language education. TESOL
in Context 16 [Special issue]. 22–33.
Olson, Margaret R. 1995. Conceptualizing narrative authority: implications for teacher education.
Teaching & Teacher Education 11(2). 119–135.
Pacek, D. (2005). ‘Personality Not Nationality’: Foreign Students’ Perceptions of a Non-Native
Speaker Lecturer Of English at a British University. In E. Llurda (Ed.), NonNative Language
Teachers: Perceptions, Challenges and Contributions to the Profession (pp. 243–262). NY:
Springer.
Pavlenko, Aneta. 2003. “I never knew I was a bilingual”: reimagining teacher identities in TESOL.
Journal of Language, Identity, and Education 2(4). 251–268.
Pavlenko, Aneta. 2007. Autobiographic narratives as data in applied linguistics. Applied Linguis-
tics 28(2). 163–188.
Pavlenko, Aneta & Adrian Blackledge. 2004. Introduction: New theoretical approaches to the
study of negotiation of identities in multilingual contexts. In Aneta Pavlenko & Adrian Black-
ledge (eds.), Negotiation of identities in multilingual contexts, 1–33. Clevedon, England: Multi-
lingual Matters.
Pavlenko, Aneta & James P. Lantolf. 2000. Second language learning as participation and the
(re)construction of selves. In James P. Lantolf (ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language
learning, 155–177. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pennycook, Alastair. 2001. Critical applied linguistics: a critical introduction. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum.
Phillipson, Richard. 1992. Linguistic imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Polkinghorne, Donald E. 1991. Narrative and self-concept. Journal of Narrative and Life History
1(2&3). 135–153.
Rampton, M. Ben H. 1990. Displacing the “native speaker”: expertise, affiliation, and inheritance.
ELT Journal 44(2). 97–101.
Reves, Thea & Peter Medgyes. 1994. The non-native English speaking ESL/EFL teacher’s self-
image: an international survey. System 22(3). 353–367.
Simon-Maeda, Andrea. 2004. The complex construction of professional identities: female EFL
educators in Japan speak out. TESOL Quarterly 38. 405– 436.
Stetsenko, Anna & Igor M. Arievitch. 2004. The self in cultural-historical activity theory: reclaim-
ing the unity of social and individual dimensions of human development. Theory & Psychology
14(4). 475–503.
TESOL. 2006. Position statement against discrimination of nonnative speakers of English in the
field of TESOL. http://www.tesol.org/s_tesol/bin.asp?CID=32&DID=5889&DOC=FILE.PDF
(accessed 11 November 2009).
Valsiner, Jaan. 1998. The guided mind: a sociogenetic approach to personality. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
van Huizen, Peter, Bert van Oers & Theo Wubbels. 2005. A Vygotskian perspective on teacher
education. Journal of Curriculum Studies 37(3). 267–290.
Varghese, Manka, Brian Morgan, Bill Johnston, & Johnson, Kimberly A. 2005. Theorizing lan-
guage teacher identity: three perspectives and beyond. Journal of Language, Identity, and Edu-
cation 4(1). 21– 44.
Vygotsky, Lev S. & Michael Cole. 1978. Mind in society: the development of higher psychological
processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
160  D. S. Reis

Wertsch, James V. 1985. Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press.
Wertsch, James V., Peter Tulviste, & Fran Hagstrom. 1993. A sociocultural approach to agency. In
Ellice A. Forman, Norris Minick & C. Addison Stone (eds.), Contexts for learning: sociocul-
tural dynamics in children’s development, 336 –356. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wetherell, Margaret, & Janet Maybin. 1996. The distributed self. In Richard Stevens (ed.), Under-
standing the self, 150 –175. London: Sage.
Copyright of International Journal of the Sociology of Language is the property of De Gruyter and its content
may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express
written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.