NNEST Newsletter

NNEST News, Volume 11:2 (March 2010)

by User Not Found | 10/27/2011
In This Issue...
  • Leadership Updates
    • Editor's Remarks
    • Letter From the Chair
  • Articles
    • To Be Proud, or Not to Be Proud: That Is the Question
    • Teaching English Through Korean: A Discussion of NNEST Classroom Code-Switching
  • Announcements and Information
    • TESOL Awards and Grants
    • NNEST Resources
  • About This Community
    • About the Nonnative English Speakers in TESOL IS (NNESTIS)
    • NNEST Newsletter Call for Submissions
    • NNEST Newsletter Mission Statement

Leadership Updates Editor's Remarks

Kyung-Hee Bae, University of Houston Writing Center, kbae@uh.edu (Editor)


Lisya Seloni, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, lisyaseloni@gmail.com (Editorial Staff)

Rashi Jain, University of Maryland at College Park, jainrashi@yahoo.com (Editorial Staff)


Kyung-Hee Bae, University of Houston Writing Center, kbae@uh.edu (Editor)

As we prepare this issue, the year draws closer to the end. It is time for many of us to think about the year soon to be gone and contemplate on the upcoming year. What better way to end one year and start another than reading thought-provoking articles on which to reflect? Articles featured in this issue remind us that there are still many issues to be considered (and perhaps studied) and resolved.

In her farewell message as our chair, Ana Wu reflects on the year and urges the membership to be more actively involved in our organization. Our IS has benefited tremendously from her passion and commitment in the past year and has accomplished quite a bit under her leadership, and we wish her all the best.

Those of us who work with nonnative English-speaking students in predominantly English-speaking settings may appreciate and probably relate well to the first article, written by Pisarn Bee Chamcharatsri. In his personal account of an incident in which he was misperceived as a native English speaker by an NNES student while working as a writing tutor, Bee ponders on the issues such as NNES-NES dichotomy and the status of English and its ramification that have perhaps frustrated and confounded many of our members. He then contends that discussing and reflecting on the issues may not be enough.

In turn John McGaughey reports findings from a case study of an EFL teacher’s use of code-switching in class. His observation indicates that the code-switching, when used purposefully, can be quite effective. Drawing on his own findings and literature, he then strongly argues against the English-only-in-class policy that some governments plan to implement.

This is the last issue we will edit. We sincerely hope that you have enjoyed all the articles featured in the past year and thank all our contributors for sharing their insights with us and for being patient with us through the often long editing procedure. It has been a true pleasure for all of us to read all the contributions and work with the authors. Our new editor and his or her team will soon be appointed and announced. In the meantime, should you have any comments or feedback you would like to share, please contact either the authors or us.

Letter From the Chair

Ana Wu, City College of San Francisco, anawu@ymail.com

Dear NNESTIS members,

This will be my last message as your chair, since my 1-year chairmanship in our NNESTIS ends in April 2010, after the 44th Annual TESOL Convention. As I write this message, I cannot help reflecting on my 6-year involvement in the IS, how much I have learned from our past leaders, and how much I have been inspired by the experience of our EFL/ESL teachers and the enthusiasm of our graduate student members. I would therefore like to express my appreciation for your support in the past year and also for your collaboration and participation in our IS.

As part of my responsibilities as chair, I have been preparing and organizing various InterSections and Academic Sessions for the 2010 TESOL Convention, which will take place in Boston from March 24 to 27. Thanks to the help of our chair-elect, Aiden Yeh, I am happy to announce that our NNESTIS received more invitations and collaborations from other interest sections than originally expected. In our Academic Session, we will have six presenters in the topic “NNEST in the K-12: Issues and Practices.” Together with the EFLIS, we will present “NNESTs and Teaching English Around the World: Issues and Measures.” We will also collaborate with the IEPIS in the InterSection “Challenges and Triumphs for Non-Native English Speaking Teachers in IEP.” Finally, with EFLIS and SLWIS, we will cosponsor an InterSection titled “Re-envisioning EFL in Digital Age: Challenges, Options and Opportunities.” Though we were honored to be approached by other interest sessions, we were unable to accept all the invitations this year. We definitely look forward to working in the near future with different interest sections as well as those who courteously invited us.

I am also pleased to announce that for adjudicated sessions, we also received 74 proposals, and 17 members volunteered to review the proposals. I would like to first thank all the readers for contributing their time: Their selfless service is very much appreciated. I would also like to thank all those who submitted their proposals for their interest and dedication to the IS. I hope to see everyone at the convention in Boston regardless of the result.

As I reflect on the preparations and on our success as an IS for our second year, there are two projects I would like to encourage you to participate in.

While browsing through titles of the submitted proposals, I noticed many proposals discussing NNEST issues within larger contexts of race, world Englishes, multilingualism and multiculturalism, advocacy, the digital age, and the applied linguistics field. We are gradually expanding beyond discussing the native/nonnative dichotomy and using first-hand observations (perception studies) and are extending our investigations to NNEST issues that cross teaching contexts and areas. In light of that, I sincerely hope that NNESTIS members will initiate more research in underrepresented contexts and promote discussions on our electronic list and that our NNESTIS will provide more support and opportunities for new collaborations and partnerships across levels. Also, please remember to submit any relevant references to Li-fen Li, our web manager, at lifen_lin@hotmail.com.

My second request is for your involvement in identifying and electing our next chair-elect by February 2010, when we will have online voting. Once the election is announced, I strongly urge you to read carefully each candidate’s bio and vote for the best candidate. This past election in February, only 44 members out of 497 primary members voted (as of August, we had 802 primary members). I understand that some may believe voting is an exercise in futility, and far from wanting to sound offensive, I would like to repeat that your vote does make a difference and that you can and should choose a representative consistent with your voice and concerns. When we in NNESTIS accomplish something great, it is in part because of the dedication and mentoring from the leaders chosen by you.

As I close this message, I am also extremely pleased to see that our IS will be in the more than capable hands of Aiden Yeh, whose unconditional commitment as a long-term member is unquestionable. Our community has an important role in my professional development and personal growth, and I have found my work really rewarding. This past year has been tremendously rewarding personally, and I only hope that my service has positively contributed to the organization’s mission and goals. It has been truly an honor to serve our NNESTIS.

Thank you all again for your support in the past year, and I wish you all a happy new year!

Articles To Be Proud, or Not to Be Proud: That Is the Question

Pisarn Bee Chamcharatsri, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, MTKN@iup.edu

I left Thailand a while ago and have been pursuing my doctorate in composition and TESOL in the United States since 2006. During this time I have been exposed to a wide range of readings about the native-nonnative dichotomy. This dichotomy was somewhat new for me because I had never heard about it prior coming to the United States. During the first semester of my coursework, I was introduced to world Englishes, native-nonnative dichotomy, critical thinking, and cultural and language learning issues. I also had informal discussions both in and outside classes regarding my colleagues’ personal preferences in learning English from native- and nonnative-English-speaking teachers. Though conversations around the dichotomy often turned into animated debates, we still relied on our personal preferences because many of us were relatively new to TESOL scholarship. Interestingly, I have noticed that though the native-nonnative dichotomy issue has been extensively discussed in inner-circle scholarship, it has been underplayed in the outer and extended circles because of political, economical, societal, and historical aspects. For example, the issue of native-nonnative dichotomy is not much discussed in the teaching circles in Thailand. Often native-Thai-speaking English teachers still believe that native-English-speaking speakers are better English teachers.

Before I share my personal experience relating to the native-nonnative binary, I believe it is important to understand some of the literature relating to the role of English language today. English is the most widely spoken and studied language in the world. Some scholars define English as “an international language” (McKay, 2002, p. 5; Seidlhofer, 1999, p. 235; Widdowson, 2003, p. 45) or as “a lingua franca” (Jenkins, 2007; Seidlhofer, 1999, p. 239). Despite the status of English being perceived as an international language or as a lingua franca, however, the ideology of “nativeness” or “symbolic violence” (Pennycook, 1999, pp. 332-333; Seidlhofer, 1999, p. 241) still prevails in English language teaching (ELT). For many nonnative speakers, it is logical to dream of acquiring the same level of language proficiency that their native counterparts have; however, this dream of becoming as competent as “them” might not be appropriate to pursue because this would mean that nonnative learners have marginalized themselves and devalued their cultures and their significant experiences (Kumaravadivelu, 2003; Seidlhofer, 1999; Widdowson, 2003).

Many second langauge (L2) learners wish to acquire a native-like accent because they think that their accents prevent them from being considered as successful language learners (Jenkins, 2006; Medgyes, 1994; Seidlhofer, 2006). When L2 learners acquire a native-like accent, they might sometimes be perceived as native speakers by others. In the following section, I describe an incident from my own experience that illustrates this phenomenon.

I have been working as a writing tutor at my university’s writing center since spring 2006. The writing center serves the entire university and hires both native- and nonnative-English-speaking tutors. One day a nonnative-English-speaking international student came to the center to get some help with his writing. I offered the student some feedback and comments on his paper, to which he nodded, and when I suggested that he consider revising his organization and a few awkward sentences in the paper, he followed my advice. At the conclusion of the session, he turned to me and asked, “Are you an ABC?” As I had never heard this acronym before, I asked him, “What do you mean, an ABC?” He told me that ABC stands for “American-born Chinese.” I laughed and told him, “I am not an ABC but an international student.” Upon hearing my answer, he looked puzzled and asked several questions regarding my English learning experiences: “How did you learn English?” “Did you learn English in a bilingual school in Thailand?” “How do you speak English with an American accent?” After I told him that I felt that my English was not so good. he questioned my working as a writing tutor: “If your English is not good, you cannot come to work at the writing center.” After this comment, he packed his belongings and left.

Reflecting on this experience, I wondered if I should have been proud to be perceived as an ABC. I felt ambivalent. I admit that for a few days after that incident, I was somewhat proud of being misperceived as being a native speaker. After more than 15 years of studying English, this was the best compliment I ever had as a language learner. However, the fact was that ABC is not a part of my identity as a nonnative speaker. I was born in Thailand and studied English as a foreign language. To be perceived as a native speaker is considered a success for an English language learner and user in Thailand. As a former English teacher, I felt that I should be a model for other international students who are acquiring academic experiences/proficiencies to reassure them that they too can be successful and fluent English speakers (Matsuda, 2003).

Matsuda (2003) discussed the issue of perceived inequality in native-nonnative positions regarding the “positive-native/negative-nonnative binary” (p. 15). The argument posits that native speakers or nonnative speakers with native-like fluency will be in a better position than nonnative speakers. With regard to my personal experience as a writing tutor, I think this specific student’s misperception of me as an ABC affected the tutoring session. He might have accepted my suggestions without hesitation if he had continued to think I was a native speaker. I might have been perceived as someone who has authority in giving feedback on international students’ writings. This might explain his reaction and puzzlement toward my nonnative identity as a writing tutor when I answered his questions.

At present, I still work at the writing center. From time to time, my native-English-speaking colleagues at the writing center ask me for a second opinion on linguistics and grammatical issues while they tutor students; as Medgyes (1994) pointed out, the advantage of being a nonnative speaker is that nonnative speakers have better metalinguistic awareness than do their native counterparts. This might be one of the reasons that some nonnative-English-speaking international students perceive me as a native English speaker. Since the incident, I always identify myself as a nonnative speaker of English to my nonnative-English-speaking international tutees. I was wondering how different our interaction might have been if that international student had known prior to the consultation that I was a nonnative English speaker. How would the tutoring session have gone differently? What made the student believe that I could be an ABC? Was it my “accent”? Was it my role as a writing tutor? Was it the way I responded to his writing? I am still left with lingering confusions and questions, which, I now realize, have not been answered after all this time.

As discussed earlier, English has gained its status as an international language, as a lingua franca, as a foreign language. A number of studies that recognized the issue have been published (Bamgbose, 1998; Bhatt, 2001; Bolton, 2006; Kachru, 1992; Medgyes, 1994). I believe that in order for us to overcome the native-nonnative dichotomy, however, publishing, conferencing, and presenting on the dichotomous issue alone might not be enough. I believe that actions that can help in solving this issue should start at the individual level; each of us needs to add our nonnative voices to everyday conversations by taking action such as correcting the nonnative stereotypes in conversation or creating awareness of the native-nonnative dichotomy among scholars.

Note: I would like to thank the NNESTIS editor team and John L. Reilly for their constructive comments to improve this article.

Pisarn Bee Chamcharatsri is a PhD candidate in composition and TESOL. His research interests include critical approach in ELT, world Englishes, creativity in multilingual writers, voice and identity in writing, and native-nonnative dichotomy.


Bamgbose, A. (1998). Torn between the norms: Innovations in world Englishes. World Englishes, 17, 1-14.

Bhatt, R. M. (2001). World Englishes. Annual Review of Anthropology, 30, 527-550.

Bolton, K. (2006). World Englishes today. In B. B. Kachru, Y. Kachru, & C. L. Nelson (Eds.), The handbook of world Englishes (pp. 240-269). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Jenkins, J. (2006). Global intelligibility and local diversity: Possibility or paradox? In R. Rubdy & M. Saraceni (Eds.), English in the world: Global rules, global roles (pp. 32-39). London: Continuum.

Jenkins, J. (2007). English as a lingua franca: Attitude and identity. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Kachru, B. B. (1992). Models for non-native Englishes. In B. B. Kachru (Ed.), The other tongue: English across cultures (2nd ed., pp. 48-74). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Kumaravadivelu, B. (2003). Critical language pedagogy: A postmethod perspective on English language teaching. World Englishes, 22, 539-550.

Matsuda, P. K. (2003). Proud to be a nonnative English speaker. TESOL Matters, 13(4), 15.

McKay, S. L. (2002). Teaching English as an international language. New York: Oxford University Press.

Medgyes, P. (1994). The non-native teacher. London: Macmillan.

Pennycook, A. (1999). Introduction: Critical approaches to TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 33, 329-348.

Seidlhofer, B. (1999). Double standards: Teacher education in the Expanding Circle. World Englishes, 18, 233-245.

Seidlhofer, B. (2006). English as a lingual franca in the expanding circle: What it isn't. In R. Rubdy & M. Saraceni (Eds.), English in the world: Global rules, global roles (pp. 40-50). London: Continuum.

Widdowson, H. G. (2003). Defining issues in English language teaching. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Teaching English Through Korean: A Discussion of NNEST Classroom Code-Switching

John McGaughey, York University, Canada.

The use of the learner’s first language (L1) in the language classroom remains a contentious issue to this day. Auerbach (1993) argued that the notion of English-only ESL classes stems from an underlying language ideology that reflects a monolingual bias, reproduces dominant power structures, and has resulted in unempirically proven convictions that it is the “right” way to teach. She further argued that English-only policies do not help learners and that the L1 should be a part of adult ESL classes. More recently, Cummins (2009) has argued that TESOL should establish a set of principles that encourage language teaching that includes the learners’ first languages in instruction and challenges the monolingual principle. The monolingual principle is the belief that languages are best taught solely through the target language (TL) while excluding the L1. This may be reflected in pedagogical approaches such as the direct method or the natural approach, which argue that language learning can be achieved solely through the TL, and though more current approaches such as communicative language teaching and task-based learning do not ban the L1, they do not recognize it either (Cook, 2001). Research indicates that these pedagogical approaches may be far removed from actual practice in language classrooms. An instance of this is Ferguson’s (2003) meta-analysis of 14 different studies investigating the varying functions of teacher code-switching in postcolonial contexts. The analysis shows that NNES teachers would code-switch, with the teacher switching from speaking English to the learners’ L1, for numerous functions. Ferguson (2003) argued that the functions of teacher code-switching may be classified into three general categories: (a) curriculum access, (b) management of classroom discourse, and (c) interpersonal relations. These general categories appear to facilitate learning in the language classroom, and yet government policies are still attempting to eliminate the L1 from many language classrooms, such as those existing in South Korea.

Presently, South Korea’s revised seventh curriculum suggests that teachers maximize the use of English in the EFL classroom while minimizing the use of the L1. However, the government has mandated that by 2012 all elementary and secondary school English teachers make the shift to teaching English only in English (Min, 2009). Though the intention of policymakers may be to improve English language proficiency through English-only EFL classes, one possible outcome could be the removal of a valuable resource, the L1.

In this article, I discuss how a Korean middle school teacher uses Korean in her middle school classroom. The analysis and discussion show that the L1 is used out of necessity, ensuring that all of her students have access to lesson and off-lesson content.


The data for this article come from a case study that I conducted while I was living in Korea, prior to coming back to Canada to embark on my PhD studies. The case study looked at Minji (pseudonym), whom I met while I was teaching EFL at a university. Minji is a Korean middle school EFL teacher who had been teaching English full time at a public middle school for over 3 years at the time of the study. Minji had completed her degree in English education in South Korea and also had experience living and studying abroad. She had studied English in Australia for 10 months and had also lived in Canada for 2 months where she obtained TESOL certification. Furthermore, on the basis of her paper-based TOEFL test score of more than 600, her English language proficiency can be considered advanced and she is able to comfortably communicate in both English and Korean.

For the study, I wanted to look at how Minji used the L1 while teaching classes based on the required first-year middle school English textbook. The textbook classes were chosen because the content would be most representative of the government-mandated curriculum. The data came from three 45-minute classes that were audio-recorded and transcribed. All instances of code-switching to the L1 were then analyzed to determine their general function (Ferguson, 2003) and then further analyzed to determine their specific functions. The recorded data were also supplemented by interviews with the teacher prior to the recorded classes as well as after. The teacher’s education and teaching background as well as her attitudes toward code-switching were discussed in the initial interview. A stimulated recall format was used in the postobservation interview to determine why Minji code-switched when she did, to assess whether or not she felt would be able to use English instead of code-switching, and her reasoning. In the postobservation interview, Minji also verified the functions assigned in the analysis.


Curriculum Access

Code-switching for curriculum access, which is when Minji used Korean to “talk around the written text and in teacher’s commentary on, and annotation of, the meaning of these texts” (Ferguson, 2003, p. 39), was Minji’s most common form of code-switching. A common example may be seen in Excerpt 1[1]where Minji is clarifying the lesson content.

Excerpt 1. you might think we have black eyes but if you look at them closely they are not 100% pure black

This part of the lesson focuses on eye color and Minji is describing the English distinction between brown eyes and black eyes; Koreans do not make such a distinction, instead referring to dark brown eyes as black. She explained in the interview that it was very important for the students to understand the distinction between brown and black eyes as it would be on an upcoming test. When asked if she could do the same commentary in English she referred to the students’ varied English language proficiencies, stating that a small number of advanced students would understand an English explanation but the majority of the students would have difficulty with the English content.

Management of Classroom Discourse

Management of classroom discourse refers to code-switching that is for off-lesson functions such as to provide instructions or to discipline a student.

Instructions. In Excerpt 2 Minji provides instructions on how to play a game that would help students with the English r/l phonemic distinction. In the game, students would listen to a word and then raise the hand assigned for that word.

Excerpt 2. okay, this is a kind of game, okay? ok, for correct right hand, right hand. correct means correct, right?

In the interview Minji highlighted that her students were still beginner learners and many of her students did not yet know the English words right andleft. When asked if she could have provided the same instructions in English, she said she wanted to keep her students on task and did not want to distract them with new vocabulary. She further reiterated that it was a game and she wanted her students to have fun rather than become confused with instructions that they did not understand.

Discipline. Minji consistently used Korean when disciplining students as can be seen in Excerpt 3.

Excerpt 3. No excuses. Those who didn’t do their homework today will have to stay after class. Understand?

Excerpt 3 is Minji’s response to students who did not do their homework. She said that in this case she wanted to make sure that every student was aware of the consequences of not doing the homework. She said that if she gave this explanation only in English, only the advanced students in her class would understand. Furthermore, she argued that she would lose most of her students’ attention if she were to discipline students in English because they would not understand or follow her instructions.

Interpersonal Relations

Code-switching for interpersonal relations is typically used to build rapport with students in the classroom (Ferguson, 2003). Minji believes that her classroom should be a warm and comfortable place for her students to learn English. Excerpt 4 shows Minji’s response to a student’s new haircut and she then finds out that one of the student’s classmates cut his hair.

Excerpt 4 really cute, with your hair cut really! ooh; you got a gift you are talented wow really talented

Minji complimented the students using both English and Korean although what was most interesting was her response as to why she used Korean. She said that the students she was complimenting would understand what she was saying because they were advanced students; however, she wanted to make certain that everyone in the class would understand her comments. This is apparent in the audio-recording: When she complimented the students in English, only a few students could be heard laughing or giggling, whereas when she translated into Korean, the entire class could be heard laughing and giggling. Therefore, by complimenting the students in both languages, it appears she helped reduce the distance between the students and the teacher by encouraging a warm atmosphere that is inclusive of all of her students regardless of their language proficiency.


This article gives an indication of the functions of a teacher’s code-switching and her beliefs regarding why using Korean is effective in her classroom. It should, however, be recognized that the analysis reflects only the teacher and her perspectives because at the time of the study it was not possible to obtain student data that could be contrasted and compared with the teacher’s perceptions of L1 use. Future researchers may want to look at student perceptions of the L1 in addition to teacher’s perceptions, which will provide a fuller picture. With this caveat in mind, it appears that the L1 has an important role in the classroom. Code-switching by Minji was used to ensure that all of her students had access to lesson and off-lesson content in a warm, fun learning environment.

The plan to switch to English-only classes in 2012 is a plan that both Auerbach (1993) and Cummins (2009) argue against. The changes may reproduce dominant power structures. As discussed, Minji used the L1 so that all of her students, regardless of language proficiency, would have access to the curriculum. If the L1 is removed, assuming the curriculum content remains the same, the classes will favor the advanced students who are typically able to afford private English education. This may then further empower those students who have financial resources whereas the students from lower income families may be left behind. Furthermore, the plan appears to reinforce the monolingual principle. The teachers will no longer be able to rely on the L1 and instead be forced to use English for all functions in the classroom. Instead of being accomplished bilingual speakers and at the same bilingual models who are able to switch seamlessly between languages, the teachers will be mandated to become monolingual speakers and models and may as a result be viewed as deficient when compared with NES teachers. Therefore, the policy, by supporting the monolingual principle, “reinforces the empirically unsupported and socially problematic assumption that native speakers are superior English language teachers as compared with nonnative teachers” (Cummins, 2009, pp. 319-320). In this light, policymakers, rather than banning the L1, should recognize that the L1 can facilitate learning and that bilingual and multilingual nonnative teachers can serve as realistic learning models for their students.


[1] English glosses have been provided. Italicized words are Korean translations.

John McGaughey is a PhD student in linguistics and applied linguistics at York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Prior to beginning his doctoral studies, he spent five years teaching English at a university in South Korea.


Auerbach, E. R. (1993). Reexamining English only in the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 27(1), 9-32.

Cook, V. (2001). Using the first language in the classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 57(3), 402-423.

Cummins, J. (2009). Multilingualism in the English-language classroom: Pedagogical considerations. TESOL Quarterly, 43(2), 317-321.

Ferguson, G. (2003). Classroom code-switching in post-colonial contexts: Functions, attitudes and policies. AILA Review, 16, 38-51.

Min, I. (2009, August 12). Teachers learning to teach English only in English. The Korea Times. Retrieved fromhttp://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/special/2009/09/181_50023.html

Announcements and Information TESOL Awards and Grants

TESOL recognizes its exceptional members by offering various awards, many of which are available to our IS members. For information on TESOL awards and grants for which you might consider applying, visit http://www.tesol.org/s_tesol/seccss.asp?CID=125&DID=1595.

NNEST Resources

Are you looking for interesting resources for nonnative English-speaking teachers? If so, you should visit the “Resources” section of our NNESTIS Web site: http://nnest.asu.edu/NewResource.html

Don’t forget to check out the bibliography on NNES teachers! http://nnest.asu.edu/NewBibliography1.html

Also, if you know about other relevant resources (e.g., Web sites, publications, press releases, tips) that could be posted in this section, we encourage you to share this information with us by contacting the Web manager, Li-Fen Lin, at lifen_lin@hotmail.com. Help us keep this section up-to-date with useful and comprehensive information.

About This Community About the Nonnative English Speakers in TESOL IS (NNESTIS)

The Nonnative English Speakers in TESOL IS was first established as a caucus in October 1998 to strengthen effective teaching and learning of English around the world while respecting individuals’ language rights. A decade later in July 2008, it became an interest section.

The major goals are

  • to create a nondiscriminatory professional environment for all TESOL members regardless of native language and place of birth,
  • to encourage the formal and informal gatherings of nonnative speakers at TESOL and affiliate conferences, and
  • to encourage research and publications on the role of nonnative speaker teachers in ESL and EFL contexts, and to promote the role of nonnative speaker members in TESOL and affiliate leadership positions.

Membership is open to all interested TESOL members, both native and nonnative speakers of English alike.

Web Site: http://nnest.asu.edu/index.html

Discussion E-List

Visit http://www.tesol.org/getconnected to join NNEST-L, the open discussion list for NNESTIS members, or visit http://lists.tesol.org/read/?forum=nnest-l if you are already an e-list subscriber.

NNESTIS Community Leaders and Officers 2009-2010

Chair: Ana Wu (anawu@ymail.com)
Chair-Elect: Aiden Yeh (aidenyeh@hotmail.com)
Newsletter Editor: Kyung-Hee Bae (kbae@uh.edu)
Editorial Staff: Lisya Seloni(lisyaseloni@gmail.com) & Rashi Jain (jainrashi@yahoo.com)
Web Manager: Li-Fen Lin (lifen_lin@hotmail.com)
E-List Manager: Maribel Fernandez (summit@montevideo.com.uy)
Historian: George Braine (georgebraine@cuhk.edu.hk)
Members at Large: Ryuko Kubota (ryuko.kubota@ubc.ca) & Aya Matsuda (aya.matsuda@asu.edu)

NNEST Newsletter Call for Submissions

Do you have some thoughts on the status of nonnative English speakers in TESOL (NNEST)? Have you done some preliminary studies on any NNEST-related issues? Do you have personal stories to share that are related to NNEST issues? Do you have some helpful tips for other nonnative English speakers in TESOL? If you do, please consider submitting an article to the NNEST Newsletter for consideration. The deadline for submissions for the June 2010 issue is April 30, 2010.


The following types of submissions on topics related to NNEST (nonnative English speakers in TESOL) issues are welcome: Feature Articles (1200-1500 words) related to teacher education, research, professional development, program administration, and sociocultural issues. Brief Reports (600-900 words), such as book reviews, reports on conference presentations and papers. Personal Accounts (500-700 words) related to NNEST issues.Announcements (50-75 words) of forthcoming presentations and meetings on issues related to nonnative-English-speaking (NNES) teachers as well as forthcoming articles and books on issues related to NNES teachers. Readers’ Thoughts (500 words) gives you the opportunity to share your reactions to and thoughts about articles published in our newsletter.

All submissions should

  • be formatted using Microsoft Word (.doc),
  • be carefully edited and proofread and follow the style guidelines in the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, Fifth Edition (the APA manual), and
  • include a short abstract (no more than 50 words) and two-sentence author(s) biography.

For more details, please visit the “Newsletter” section of the NNESTIS Web site at http://nnest.asu.edu.

Please send any queries and/or your submissions to Kyung-Hee Bae, kbae@uh.edu.

NNEST Newsletter Mission Statement

The NNEST Newsletter is the official newsletter of the Nonnative English Speakers in TESOL Interest Section (NNESTIS). The purpose of the NNEST Newsletter is threefold: to inform, to inspire, and to invite. First, the newsletter informs NNESTIS members about issues, developments, and activities that are related to the professional status of nonnative English speakers in TESOL and related professions. Second, the newsletter inspires current and prospective NNESTIS members by providing stories of successes and struggles of NNEST professionals as well as of students, colleagues, and administrators who may be native or nonnative speakers of English. Third, the newsletter invites NNESTIS members to share information, insights, and experiences related to NNEST issues.

The primary audience of the NNEST Newsletter is the members of the NNESTIS. The IS members are native and nonnative speakers of English from various geographic and institutional contexts. They are teachers, researchers, and administrators as well as graduate students at various stages of professional development. All of them are interested in and concerned about issues surrounding the professional status of nonnative English speakers in TESOL. The audience also includes potential members of the NNESTIS who wish to gain insights into the NNESTIS and its activities.

The NNEST Newsletter contributes significantly to TESOL by addressing issues that affect a significant portion of TESOL members: nonnative English speakers. To native English speakers in TESOL, the newsletter offers resources for understanding and addressing NNEST issues in ethical, effective, and informed ways. In order to enhance its appeal to native-English-speaking (NES) members and to facilitate mutual understanding between native English speakers and nonnative English speakers, the newsletter seeks to increase submissions from native English speakers in the profession. It also seeks to further raise the awareness of the issue of diversity by encouraging submissions that address how NNEST issues interact with issues faced by other interest sections.

Because NNEST issues affect all members of TESOL directly or indirectly, the NNEST Newsletter will continue to contribute to the overall mission of TESOL by

  • promoting a better understanding of the status of nonnative English speakers in TESOL
  • prompting the discussion of NNEST issues among all TESOL members
  • providing resources to NNESTIS members as well as TESOL members in general