English language learning and learner empowerment: a mixed-method study of pre-service English teachers' narratives on language, power and identity

Journal of linguistics, philology and translation English language learning and learner empowerment: a mixed-method study of pre-service English teachers’ narratives on language, power and identity ONOMÁZEIN | Special Issue VI – Language Teaching Research from a Global Perspective: 23-43 DOI: 10.7764/onomazein.ne6.02 ISSN: 0718-5758 Universidad de Sevilla Yiyi López Gándara Yiyi López Gándara: Departamento de Didáctica de la Lengua y la Literatura y Filologías Integradas, Universidad de Sevilla | E-mail: [email protected] Received: July 29, 2018 Accepted: April 10, 2019 Special Issue – VI – Language Teaching Research from a Global Perspective 2020 ONOMÁZEIN – Special Issue VI | Language Teaching Research from a Global Perspective: 23 - 43 Yiyi López Gándara English language learning and learner empowerment: a mixed-method study of pre-service English ... 24 It is widely acknowledged that the expansion of English has had a democratising effect: knowledge is now accessible to a larger number of people worldwide. However, it is also contended that the uncritical and unreflective teaching of English is contributing to reproducing power structures, accentuating inequalities among speakers. This article presents the results of a study carried out with 86 final-year students in the Degree of Primary Education (English) at the University of Seville. Working within the framework of critical research, and combining both quantitative and qualitative methods, this study analyses learners’ perceptions on communicative competence, on the factors that bear upon successful communication, and their capacity to identify and understand power relations in communicative interactions. Results show that communicative competence does not necessarily entail learner empowerment; learners are too worried about linguistic aspects and accuracy when they speak English; they aspire to a model—the native speaker—that they can never reach; and they are not aware of power inequalities, their origin and how they transpire in communicative situations. This analysis points to the need to include a critical component in English language teaching to equip learners to identify and tackle power asymmetries in communicative interactions. Abstract Keywords: TEFL; learner empowerment; mixed-method research; pre-service teacher education. ONOMÁZEIN – Special Issue VI | Language Teaching Research from a Global Perspective: 23 - 43 Yiyi López Gándara English language learning and learner empowerment: a mixed-method study of pre-service English ... 25 1. Introduction As part of a TEFL module that I teach in the final year of the Degree in Primary Education (English) at the University of Seville, one of the issues raised is that of teacher identity, and how my students (mostly women who have studied English for most of their lives) see and construct themselves as teachers of English. When considering how they would like to be addressed, hardly anyone is ever aware of the asymmetries in forms of address (Mr vs. Miss/Mrs; Sir vs. Miss) or of egalitarian alternatives (Ms). As a teacher trainer, I contemplate with a mixture of dismay and astonishment that I am the first person to make them reflect on this as a linguistic issue that both shapes and is shaped by social inequality, and that affects the process by which they build their own identities as English speakers, as women and as teachers. This is one of the many examples that reveal that the way they have been taught English (in an uncritical and unreflective way), and presumably the way they will teach it too, does not contribute to distributing power more equally but to reproducing and perpetuating power structures. It is widely acknowledged that the expansion of English across the world has had a democratising effect: knowledge—in the form of cultural products, intercultural exchanges, scientific discoveries and technological advancements—is now accessible to a larger number of people worldwide. However, the sort of uncritical and unreflective teaching practices that I mention above are contributing to reproducing power structures: instead of making speakers more culturally and socially sensitive, more understanding of economic and political processes and more empathic towards others, all of which are necessary for a truly democratic society, English has become a tool for exercising power that further accentuates inequalities among its speakers (Phillipson, 1992; Deneire, 1993; Weydt, 2003; Macedo, Dendrinos and Gounari, 2005; Appleby, 2010). This article presents the results of a study carried out with 86 final-year students in the Degree of Primary Education (English) at the University of Seville. The aim of the study is to analyse: 1. Learners’ motivations for and gains from learning English, competences they think are needed to communicate successfully and what they worry about when they speak English. 2. Their reactions to language use, their perceptions on power, and sources of identification and rapport with other speakers. 3. Their beliefs on what an English speaker is and their perceptions on the factors that bear upon their own experiences of disempowerment. 4. Their capacity to identify and understand power relations in communicative interactions. 2. Theoretical framework Communicative competence is a central concept in any study on language teaching and learning as it is at the basis of current competence-based models for language education, ONOMÁZEIN – Special Issue VI | Language Teaching Research from a Global Perspective: 23 - 43 Yiyi López Gándara English language learning and learner empowerment: a mixed-method study of pre-service English ... 26 theories on language teaching and learning, as well as TEFL methodologies. According to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) (Council of Europe, 2001), communicative competence is composed of three main subcompetences, namely: linguistic, sociolinguistic and pragmatic subcompetences. I will not delve further into these, as they are clearly delineated in the CEFR. For the purposes of this study, I consider communicative competence as being made up of six main components, including intercultural, emotional and critical subcompetences. I will focus on these as they are not so widely considered in the literature on communicative competence. 2.1. Intercultural competence Intercultural competence is not included in early configurations of communicative competence. Van Ek (1986) drew attention to sociocultural competence as central to communicative competence and, since then, it is generally acknowledged that culture and language are very much interrelated (Guijarro-Ojeda and Ruiz-Cecilia, 2011). However, the term “intercultural competence” would only gain momentum years later. In the CEFR, intercultural competence is presented as a “non-language-specific competence” (Council of Europe, 2001: 148) that encompasses: 1. Intercultural awareness: knowledge, awareness and understanding of “the world of origin” and “the world of the target community,” including “regional and social diversity in both” (Council of Europe, 2001: 103). 2. Intercultural skills: capacity to bring “the culture of origin” and “the foreign culture” into contact, to act as cultural mediators, to deal with “intercultural misunderstanding and conflict” and to overcome cultural stereotypes (Council of Europe, 2001: 104-105). In spite of this, failure to understand intercultural competence as an intrinsically language-re- lated competence in the context of language education, as opposed to Byram (1997) and Coperías Aguilar (2007), who use the term “intercultural communicative competence” to refer to speakers’ capacity to successfully establish solidary relationships between cultures, has had a series of consequences in classroom practice: 1. “Excessive focus on language form with detriment to intercultural communication” (Coperías Aguilar, 2007: 72). 2. Anecdotal, reductionist and/or clichéd inclusion of cultural contents in the classroom: two projects analysed by Coperías Aguilar show that cultural contents like traditions, customs, history or geography are privileged over aspects truly related to intercultural competence, such as “developing attitudes of openness and tolerance towards other peoples and cultures, promoting the ability to handle intercultural contact situations, promoting reflection on cultural differences or promoting increased understanding of the students’ own culture” (2007: 68). Similar conclusions are found in Sercu et al. (2005: 120, 159). ONOMÁZEIN – Special Issue VI | Language Teaching Research from a Global Perspective: 23 - 43 Yiyi López Gándara English language learning and learner empowerment: a mixed-method study of pre-service English ... 27 3. Ideological and prescriptive uses of cultural content in the classroom through processes of selection and generalisation (Bouchard, 2017: 72), especially due to an excessive Anglo-American focus of classroom materials (Coperías Aguilar, 2007: 72). 4. Lack of systematic teacher training in intercultural competence, which results in teachers’ incapacity to develop strategies to train their students’ intercultural competence (Aleksandrowicz-P˛edich et al., 2003: 10; Sercu et al., 2005: 169). 5. Misguided understanding that learners’ communicative competence can be developed independently from their intercultural competence, or that the latter may be developed later, which shows lack of awareness of the difficulties in deconstructing deep-set patterns, thoughts and beliefs, etc. (Sercu et al., 2005: 128). 2.2. Emotional competence Affective factors are included in some early configurations of communicative competence. For example, van Ek (1986) mentions values and emotions such as “self-confidence, self-reli- ance, analytical powers, stable value-systems, empathy [and] acceptance of others” (1986: 61) as part of sociocultural competence. Since then, the “affective turn” in language education (Pekrun and Linnenbrink-García, 2014; Uitto et al., 2015; Martínez Agudo, 2018: 2) has produced a considerable amount of literature on the affective factors that influence teaching and learning processes (Arnold, 1999; Council of Europe, 2001: 161; Rubio Alcalá, 2004). However, the idea that the competent speaker is also emotionally competent is, at best, only implicit in these. More recently, studies have focused on the connections between emotional intelligence and academic achievement in TEFL (Jahandar et al., 2012; Abdolrezapour, 2013; Fani, 2015; Vahedi and Fatemi, 2016). Emotions are defined as “subjective and conscious feelings that usually evoke certain spontaneous and involuntary responses or reactions in individuals to a particular event” (Ross, 2015; Martínez Agudo, 2018: 2). Thus, because these particular events that make us react in emotional ways are, for the most part, linguistic in nature (they occur in communicative situations), then the development of awareness and skills to deal with these through language is called for. Emotions are central to communicative processes; therefore, dealing effectively with them leads to successful communication, which is the main goal of language learning. Although a comprehensive definition of emotional competence in the realm of language education is yet to be provided, a working definition could include the following: 1. Emotional awareness: knowledge, awareness and understanding of emotions in oneself and others. 2. Emotional skills: ability to channel those emotions through linguistic means in the TL; to relate and respond to others’ emotions; to use a variety of strategies for interpersonal ONOMÁZEIN – Special Issue VI | Language Teaching Research from a Global Perspective: 23 - 43 Yiyi López Gándara English language learning and learner empowerment: a mixed-method study of pre-service English ... 28 contact that take into account one’s own emotions and those of others; to anticipate conflicts in which emotional factors intervene and deal effectively with them through language; to show willingness to communicate and to engage actively and enthusiastically in conversation; to be able to build positive relationships based on reassurance, bonding, empathy and respect; to be assertive, able to respond to criticism, to recognise one’s own mistakes and express joy at the success of others (based on Goleman, 1996; Dewaele, 2010; Council of Europe, 2001; Nieto Moreno de Diezmas, 2012; Vahedi and Fatemi, 2016; Martínez Agudo, 2018). There are several factors contributing to emotional competence not being considered as part of the subject matter of TEFL: 1. Scientific attention has only been drawn to it recently. 2. Emotional competence is seen, more often than not, as a cross-curricular competence rather than as a language-related one (Nieto Moreno de Diezmas, 2012: 67). 3. It is still understood that one can communicate competently and successfully in a language without being emotionally competent in it: “Communicating emotions in an LX, i.e. with limited communicative competence, is very hard” (Dewaele, 2010: 6). 4. Emotions have been traditionally studied as “internal to individuals, as psychological attributes of mind” (Martínez Agudo, 2018: 4) and only recently have researchers (Benesch, 2016, 2017) become interested in “what emotions do socially, how emotions are culturally and discursively constructed as they are intimately associated with social context” (Martínez Agudo, 2018: 4). 2.3. Critical competence Critical competence only appears tangentially in some early configurations of communicative competence. For example, van Ek’s sociocultural competence includes “the learner’s attitudes, opinions, value-systems and emotions” leading towards a general development of “human potential” (1986: 52, 51) through language learning. However, it falls short of incorporating a fully critical perspective: it encourages learners to adopt positive attitudes towards a reality that is already there, rather than encouraging them to use language to explore why and how such a reality came to be, who benefits from it and how language can be used to change it. It makes no reference to the relationship between power and language in real communication, how communicative interaction is affected by power struggles, or how learners may use language to become aware of and tackle these. Also, Celce-Murcia, Dörnyei and Thurrell (1995) describe some social contextual variables within “sociocultural competence” that need to be identified and tackled by competent speakers (1995: 23-24). Among these, they contemplate participants’ “age, gender, office and status, so- ONOMÁZEIN – Special Issue VI | Language Teaching Research from a Global Perspective: 23 - 43 Yiyi López Gándara English language learning and learner empowerment: a mixed-method study of pre-service English ... 29 cial distance, relations (power and affective)” (1995: 24). This model is the first one to incorporate explicitly the term “power.” In spite of this, critical competence has rarely been included in theoretical configurations of communicative competence, and it is completely absent from the CEFR. This is mainly because critical theories of language education tend to question the very power structures on which competence-based models for language teaching stand. Indeed, competence-based models pose one main problem in that they convey a view of language as a static and monolithic entity, a system of clearly delineated norms and uses that learners need to master. In this view, language is presented as something that is objectively and incontestably “out there,” waiting to be known. When mastery of the language is not achieved, the learner is accountable for it, which further deepens the gap between competent and non-competent speakers. This does not seem the correct theoretical (and ideological) stance from which language teaching and learning should be approached, as learners who fail to become competent speakers in these terms are perpetuated in their disempowered position. Furthermore, in these models, communicative competence is considered, presented and used as a purportedly neutral parameter that allows us to objectively know and predict communicative success (Terborg and García Landa, 2006: 163). As a consequence, several authors have already pointed to the deficiencies of competence as a parameter to establish how successful a communicative interaction may be. For example, Terborg and Velázquez Vilchis (2005) argue that “when communicative success is made entirely dependent upon speakers’ competence, then the power relations between interlocutors are emphasised” (2005: 47) and that “competence, which represents an ideology, gives rise to interests that displace attention from content to form. In this way, the verisimilitude of an utterance may be questioned because its form does not respond to the ideological criteria of competence” (2005: 47). This reveals that competence is not a neutral term, but rather an ideological construct that contributes to the maintenance of power by those who are already competent speakers of the language (i.e. those who do not question or challenge those rules and uses). For the purposes of this study, I draw on Critical Language Awareness (Fairclough, 1989, 1992) and Critical Applied Linguistics (Pennycook, 1990, 2001) to develop a working definition of critical competence that tries to negotiate the tensions between the structuralist conception of communicative competence on which current competence-based models are based and a poststructuralist and critical approach to language teaching, learning and use. For Fairclough (1989), language teaching and learning should “help increase consciousness of how language contributes to the domination of some people by others, because consciousness is the first step towards emancipation” (1989: 1). Indeed, as Fairclough states, developing critical awareness in language learning, that is, using language to become aware of and eventually subvert the power structures that underlie communicative interactions, has become a “prerequisite for effective democratic citizenship” (1989: 3). In this scenario, ONOMÁZEIN – Special Issue VI | Language Teaching Research from a Global Perspective: 23 - 43 Yiyi López Gándara English language learning and learner empowerment: a mixed-method study of pre-service English ... 30 [a] linguistics which contents itself with describing language practices without trying to explain them, and relate them to the social and power relations which underlie them, seems to be missing an important point. And a language education focused upon training in language skills, without a critical component, would seem to be failing in its responsibility to learners (1989: 6). More recently, several studies already focus on the need to incorporate a critical component in language education (Archakis and Tsakona, 2012; Curdt-Christiansen and Weninger, 2015; Peña Dix, Bruskewitz and Truscott de Mejía, 2016; Yazan and Rudolph, 2018). Based on these ideas, a working definition of critical competence could include the following: 1. Critical awareness: knowledge, awareness and understanding of power relations between individuals, languages and cultures as they transpire through language use; of the power asymmetries that characterise communicative interactions on account of factors such as age, academic/professional status, social class, gender, religious beliefs, ethnicity/origin, sexual orientation (Barozzi and Guijarro-Ojeda, 2014), disability, etc.; and of how linguistic issues shape and are shaped by social inequalities. 2. Critical skills: ability to question the givens of social realities and practices (how such realities and practices came to be, who benefits from them and how language can be used to question, resist and transform them) and the givens of language (language models, conventions and norms learners are exposed to and told to comply with); to question the reasons underlying linguistic choices, how these became institutionalised and the ideologies that they sustain; to make responsible choices regarding the use or transgression of those models, conventions and norms; to use language to challenge, resist, negotiate and transform models, conventions and norms that contribute to perpetuating inequality; to be able to tackle power asymmetries in communicative interactions and to develop agency to neutralise these by reclaiming, giving and redistributing power; to use language to defend their position and that of other oppressed subjects; to participate as active members of the TL community aware of their responsibilities as English speakers in the world. 3. Methodology This study belongs in the tradition of the critical school. According to Troudi (2015), this research approach is based “on a general view of society and social realities as shaped by the hegemony of powerful economic and political structures, social and educational institutions, and discursive practices” and aims to be “emancipatory, seeking action and change in order to alleviate pain in society and redress forms of alienation, discrimination, injustice, exploitation, and marginalisation” (2015: 90). In order to do so, I carry out a mixed-method study that combines both quantitative and qualitative methods. The sample is composed of 86 final-year students in the BA Primary Education (English) at the University of Seville (Spain), of whom 88.4% are 25 or younger, 84.9% are women, 86.1% ONOMÁZEIN – Special Issue VI | Language Teaching Research from a Global Perspective: 23 - 43 Yiyi López Gándara English language learning and learner empowerment: a mixed-method study of pre-service English ... 31 have studied English for over ten years and 73.2% are in the B levels of proficiency in English (considered to be the “independent user” levels according to the CEFR). Data collection was carried out using four different questionnaires: 1. One questionnaire with closed-ended questions (dichotomous, multiple choice and scaled questions) on learners’ motivations for and gains from learning English, the competences needed to communicate and what learners worry about when they speak English. 2. One questionnaire based on two videos with both closed-ended and open-ended questions on learners’ reactions to language use, their perceptions on power, and sources of identification/rapport with other speakers. 3. One questionnaire with both closed-ended and open-ended questions on learners’ beliefs on what an English speaker is and their perceptions on the factors that bear upon their own experiences of disempowerment. 4. One questionnaire based on two texts with both closed-ended and open-ended questions to gauge their capacity to identify and understand power relations in communicative interactions. The analysis of quantitative data was carried out using a deductive approach based on the categories established in the theoretical framework: linguistic, sociolinguistic, pragmatic, intercultural, emotional and critical competence. The analysis of qualitative data was carried out using a mixed approach, both deductive and inductive in nature, combining those categories with others created ad hoc from learners’ own narratives. 4. Results and discussion The results and discussion are presented in different blocks that correspond to the different aims of the study. 4.1. Learners’ motivations for and gains from learning English, competences they think are needed to communicate successfully and what they worry about when they speak English A clear correlation has been found between learners’ motivations and what they think people gain from learning English. Both educational and professional status score high: between 79.07% and 97.67% of students are motivated by these or think that people gain these from learning English. To a lesser degree, the capacity to influence people and access information and cultural products are motivations or gains for 59.3% to 75.58% of students. Finally, only 2.32% consider open-mindedness or tolerance a motivation or a gain. This is already indica- ONOMÁZEIN – Special Issue VI | Language Teaching Research from a Global Perspective: 23 - 43 Yiyi López Gándara English language learning and learner empowerment: a mixed-method study of pre-service English ... 38 When asked about their perceptions on power and language use, respondents’ answers are rather inconclusive: 22.1% of them think that the ticket seller is more powerful; 33.7% consider that the customer is more powerful; 16.3% think that neither of them is powerful; and 27.9% think that both of them are powerful. It is when they qualify their answers that their ideas on language, power and identity are made explicit. Figure 4 shows a classification of respondents’ answers: FIGURE 4 Cross matrix showing respondents’ answers regarding power and language use. Source: author The matrix shows that respondents who consider only one or neither of the speakers powerful (i.e. learners who are less aware of power relations) tend to focus on linguistic, sociolinguistic and pragmatic aspects. At the same time, learners who consider that both interlocutors have power (i.e. learners who are more aware of power relations) pay more attention to identity factors such as the social and/or professional role of each speaker, the social constraints of the interaction (both interlocutors needing something from each other) and even one student claims to need more information to be able to answer. Whereas it is true that linguistic, sociolinguistic and pragmatic aspects have some bearing in power building, these are fairly neutralised in the conversation. At the same time, the identity factors that contribute to the establishment of power relations are deliberately left out: we do ONOMÁZEIN – Special Issue VI | Language Teaching Research from a Global Perspective: 23 - 43 Yiyi López Gándara English language learning and learner empowerment: a mixed-method study of pre-service English ... 39 not know, for example, about the age, academic, professional or social status, gender, religion, origin, etc., of the interlocutors. This is, for the most part, what happens in teaching materials (Archakis and Tsakona, 2012; Curdt-Christiansen and Weninger, 2015), in which we encounter: 1. Unreal and oddly equitable interactions in which speakers not only have the same command of English, but they also comply to the same degree with Grice’s cooperative principle (the maxims of quantity, quality, relevance and manner). This does not prepare students to face interactions in real communicative contexts. 2. Unreal speakers who are presented as ahistorical and apolitical entities. By obfuscating differences in age, academic, professional or social status, gender, religion, origin, etc. (generally neutralised under the label of the “British/American/Western middle class speaker,” with whom learners are made to identify), these representations contribute to reproducing social, historical, economic and political inequalities, and disempower learners who are therefore unable to reflect and act on these. 5. Conclusions From this study, the following conclusions may be drawn: 1. Communicative competence does not necessarily entail learner empowerment. 2. Learners are too worried about linguistic aspects and accuracy when they speak English. 3. They aspire to, and are intimidated by, a model that they can never reach: the native speaker. 4. They are not aware of power inequalities, their origin and how they affect and transpire in communicative situations. In this scenario, the following changes are called for: 1. Critical competence ought to be considered an integral part of communicative competence and needs to enter the English language classroom so learners may become empowered speakers of English. 2. The native speaker construct must stop being a point of reference in language teaching and learning, both in theory and in practice. 3. Materials used in the English language classroom need to reflect real uses of language in real communicative interactions in which power relations and their origin are not obfuscated. Only in so doing may the redistribution of power that is presented as the natural outcome of English language learning become a more realistic prospect. ONOMÁZEIN – Special Issue VI | Language Teaching Research from a Global Perspective: 23 - 43 Yiyi López Gándara English language learning and learner empowerment: a mixed-method study of pre-service English ... 40 6. References AbdolrezApour, Parisa, 2013: “The relationship between emotional intelligence and EFL learners’ writing performance”, Procedia, Social and Behavioral Sciences 70, 331-339. AleksAndrowicz-p˛edich, Lucyna, Janeta drAghicescu, Dora issAiAss and Nada ŠAbec, 2003: “The views of teachers of English and French on intercultural communicative competence in language teaching” in Ildikó lázár (ed.): Incorporating intercultural communicative competence in language teaching education, Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 7-37. Appleby, Roslyn, 2010: ELT, Gender and International Development: Myths of progress in a neo-colonial world, Bristol: Multilingual Matters. ArchAkis, Argiris, and Villy TsAkonA, 2012: The narrative construction of identities in critical education, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Arnold, Jane, 1999: Affect in Language Learning, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. bArozzi, Stefano, and Juan Ramón guijArro-ojedA, 2014: “Discussing sexual identities with pre-ser- vice primary school English-language teachers from a Spanish context”, Perspectives in Education 32 (3), 131-145. benesch, Sarah, 2016: “Critical approaches to the study of emotions in English language teaching and learning” in Carol chApelle (ed.): The Encyclopedia of applied linguistics, Hoboken: Wiley, 1-6. benesch, Sarah, 2017: Emotions and English language teaching: Exploring teachers’ emotion labor, New York: Routledge. bouchArd, Jeremie, 2017: Ideology, Agency and Intercultural Communicative Competence: A stratified look into EFL education in Japan, New York: Springer. brAine, George, 1999: Non-native educators in language teaching, New York: Routledge. byrAm, Michael, 1997: Teaching and Assessing Intercultural Communicative Competence, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. celce-murciA, Marianne, Zoltán dörnyei and Sarah Thurrell, 1995: “Communicative competence: A pedagogically motivated model with content specifications”, Issues in Applied Linguistics 6 (2), 5-35. cook, Vivian, 1999: “Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching”, TESOL Quarterly 33 (2), 185-209. ONOMÁZEIN – Special Issue VI | Language Teaching Research from a Global Perspective: 23 - 43 Yiyi López Gándara English language learning and learner empowerment: a mixed-method study of pre-service English ... 41 coperíAs AguilAr, María José, 2007: “Dealing with intercultural communicative competence in the foreign language classroom” in Eva Alcón soler and María Pilar sAfonT jordá (eds.): Intercultural language use and language learning, New York: Springer, 59-78. council of europe, 2001: Common European framework of reference for languages: learning, teaching assessment, Strasbourg: Council of Europe. curdT-chrisTiAnsen, Xiao Lan, and Csilla weninger, 2015: Language, Ideology and Education: The politics of textbooks in language education, Abingdon: Routledge. dAvies, Alan, 2003: The native speaker: myth and reality, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. deneire, Marc, 1993: “Democratizing English as an international language”, World Englishes 12 (2), 169-178. dewAele, Jean Marc, 2010: Emotions in multiple languages, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. fAirclough, Norman, 1989: Language and power, Harlow: Longman. fAirclough, Norman (ed.), 1992: Critical language awareness, Harlow: Longman. fAni, Tayebeh, 2015: Emotional intelligence and English reading comprehension ability: A case study from Iran, Hamburg: Anchor. gArcíA lAndA, Laura Gabriela, 2003: “El estado actual de la lengua inglesa y española en académicos universitarios mexicanos en el marco de la globalización” in Gaëtan TremblAy (dir.): Cultural industries and dialogue between civilizations, Québec: Presses de l’Université Laval, 613-622. golemAn, Daniel, 1996: Emotional Intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ, London: Bloomsbury. guijArro-ojedA, Juan Ramón, and Raúl ruiz-ceciliA, 2011: “Los discursos del género en español como lengua extranjera: A propósito de Pedro Almodóvar”, Hispania 94 (1), 13-24. jAhAndAr, Shahrokh, Morteza khodAbAndehlou, Gohar seyedi and Reza mousAvi dolAT AbAdi, 2012: “The think-aloud method in EFL reading comprehension”, International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research 3 (9), 1-9. llurdA, Enric, 2005: Non-native language teachers: perceptions, challenges and contributions to the profession, New York: Springer. mAcedo, Donaldo, Bessie dendrinos and Panayota gounAri, 2005: Lengua, ideología y poder: la hegemonía del inglés, Barcelona: Graó. ONOMÁZEIN – Special Issue VI | Language Teaching Research from a Global Perspective: 23 - 43 Yiyi López Gándara English language learning and learner empowerment: a mixed-method study of pre-service English ... 42 mArTínez Agudo, Juan de Dios, 2018: Emotions in second language teaching: Theory, research and teacher education, New York: Springer. nieTo moreno de diezmAs, Esther, 2012: “CLIL and the development of emotional competence”, Miscelánea: A journal of English and American studies 45, 53-73. pekrun, Reinhard, and Lisa linnenbrink-gArciA, 2014: International Handbook of Emotions in Education, New York: Routledge. pennycook, Alastair, 1990: “Critical pedagogy and second language education”, System 18 (3), 303-314. pennycook, Alastair, 2001: Critical applied linguistics, Mahwah: Taylor & Francis. peñA dix, Beatriz, Nicole bruskewiTz and Anne-Marie TruscoTT de mejíA, 2016: Empoderamiento, autonomía y pensamiento crítico en las aulas de lenguas extranjeras, Bogotá: Ediciones Uniandes. pérez cAñAdo, María Luisa (ed.), 2013: Competency-based language teaching in higher education, London: Springer. phillipson, Robert, 1992: Linguistic imperialism, Oxford: Oxford University Press. ross, Andrew, 2015: “From motivation to emotion: A new chapter in applied linguistics research”, University of Sidney Papers in TESOL 10, 1-27. rubio AlcAlá, Fernando, 2004: La ansiedad en el aprendizaje de idiomas, Huelva: Publicaciones de la Universidad de Huelva. sercu, Lies, Ewa bAndurA, Paloma cAsTro, Leah dAvchevA, Chryssa lAskAridou, Ulla lundgren, María del Carmen méndez gArcíA and Phyllis ryAn, 2005: Foreign language teachers and intercultural competence, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Terborg, Roland, and Laura Gabriela gArcíA lAndA, 2006: “Cómo los conceptos pueden influir en la planificación del lenguaje: la competencia y su impacto en las relaciones de poder y la desigualdad” in Roland Terborg and Laura Gabriela gArcíA lAndA (coords.): Los retos de la planificación del lenguaje en el siglo XXI. Vol. 1, Mexico: UNAM, 163-182. Terborg, Roland, and Virna velázquez vilchis, 2005: “Enseñanza de lenguas y su impacto en la ecología lingüística”, Estudios de Lingüística Aplicada 23 (41), 39-54. Troudi, Salah, 2015: “Critical research in TESOL and language education” in James Dean brown and Christine coombe (eds.): The Cambridge guide to research in language teaching and learning, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 89-98. ONOMÁZEIN – Special Issue VI | Language Teaching Research from a Global Perspective: 23 - 43 Yiyi López Gándara English language learning and learner empowerment: a mixed-method study of pre-service English ... 43 uiTTo, Minna, Saara-Leena kAunisTo, Leena syrjälä and Eila esTolA, 2015: “Silenced truths: relational and emotional dimensions of a beginning teacher’s identity as part of the micropolitical context of school”, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 59 (2), 1-15. vAhedi, Vahideh Sadat, and Azar Hosseini fATemi, 2016: “The role of emotional intelligence and tolerance of ambiguity in academic Iranian EFL learners’ willingness to communicate”, Journal of Language Teaching and Research 7 (1), 178-184. vAn ek, Jean Ate, 1986: Objectives for foreign language learning. Vol. 1, Strasbourg: Council of Europe. weydT, Harald, 2003: “The inferiority of the non-native speaker and its political consequences” in Phyllis ryAn and Roland Terborg (eds.): Language: Issues of inequality, Mexico: UNAM, 173-188. yAzAn, Bedrettin, and Nathanael rudolph, 2018: Criticality, teacher identity, and (in)equity in English language teaching: Issues and implications, New York: Springer.