Filipino English Teacher Identity: A Case Study at an ESL Academy … Filipino English Teacher Identity: A Case Study at an ESL Academy for Korean Students in the Philippines*1 2

http://dx.doi.org/10.21087/nsell.2021.02.78.137

『신 어 문학』, 78집 (2021. 2), 신 어 문학회, 137-165쪽

Filipino English Teacher Identity: A Case Study at an ESL Academy for Korean Students

in the Philippines*12

Choi, Yeachan**

(Hankuk University of Foreign Studies / Student)

Choe, Hohsung***

(Hankuk University of Foreign Studies / Professor)

Choi, Yeachan & Choe, Hohsung. Filipino English Teacher Identity: A Case Study at an ESL Academy for Korean Students in the Philippines. The New Studies of English Language & Literature 78 (2021): 137-165. In the current case study, the teacher identity of Filipino teachers working for an ESL academy in the Philippines targeting Korean students is investigated in order to enrich the underexplored area in the literature. Grounded on the sociolinguistic stratification of the Philippines as a norm-developing country, the study categorized the participants as either acrolect or mesolect speakers. Five themes emerged from semi-structured interviews, which are divided into positive and negative aspects. As positive outcomes, the teachers were found to have integrative motivation for pursuing their profession, pride in Philippine English as representing a neutral accent and in English acquisition as an intellectual asset, and adaptability to various conditions that emerge in teaching Korean students. As negative aspects, mesolectal teachers voiced apprehension about linguistic deficiency, and one acrolectal teacher raised salient concern over racism and skin color issues. (Hankuk University of Foreign Studies)

Key words: teacher identity, Filipino teachers, overseas English program, world Englishes

I. INTRODUCTION

A recent trend among Korean parents is to send their children to

* This paper was supported by the Hankuk University of Foreign Studies Research Fund.

** First author*** Corresponding author

Choi, Yeachan & Choe, Hohsung138

English as a second language (ESL) countries for learning English

(Choe, 2016). According to a governmental survey, the Philippines was

ranked as the eighth highest destination for Korean students to study

abroad in the year 2017, with more than 13,000 studying there

(Ministry of Education, 2019). The Philippines is often regarded as

either a preliminary short-term site to study English before going to

inner circle countries where English is a native language (ENL) (Choe,

2016; Choe & Son, 2017), or an economical though less preferred

alternative to these countries (Satake, 2015).

Despite the substantial number of Korean students visiting the

Philippines for learning English, scholarly reports in Korean publications

concerning Filipino teachers and/or ESL academies in the Philippines

seem remarkably deficient. Also, the existing domestic literature related

to Filipino ESL academies focuses primarily on the experiences of

students (e.g. Jo, 2017; Jung & Noh, 2019; Lee & Park, 2012). Research

on Filipino teachers of English to Korean students has appeared mainly

in international journals. For instance, Choe (2016) discussed negative,

positive, and neutral identities of Filipino teachers as non-native English

speaking teachers who taught Korean students in the Philippines; and

Bernardo and Malakolunthu (2013) extracted four themes of Filipino

teachers as cultural and linguistic mediators from the interviews with

six teachers working in an international school in the Philippines.

The scarcity of research on Filipino English teachers by Korean

scholars is discordant with the large number of Korean students studying

in the Philippines. This case study aims to augment the literature by

examining the self-defined identity of Filipino English teachers of

Korean students. Moreover, the first author’s insider perspective as a

member of the English teaching profession may enrich the case in

comparison to studies conducted by researchers who are outside

observers of teaching practices. The study is guided by the following

Filipino English Teacher Identity: A Case Study at an ESL Academy for Korean Students in the Philippines

139

overarching question: “How do Filipino teachers of Korean students in

an ESL academy describe their own teacher identity?”

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Sociolinguistic Background of Philippine English

English was introduced to the Philippines through American colonial

control and it has developed as a distinguishable variety that has

remained widespread even after national independence. The American

colonization, which lasted for 48 years (from 1898 to 1946), enforced

rapid dissemination of English in the Philippines, as evidenced by a

1919 report indicating that, after only 20 years of American

colonization, 47% of the population spoke and 55.6% read and wrote

English (Bolton & Bautista, 2008). Compared to the experience of

other colonized nations, the researchers deemed the extent to which

English penetrated in the Philippines “remarkable” (p. 4).

The tongue of colonizers remained prominent even after the end of

American colonization following World War II. Having been

established as an official national language, the utility of English for

intranational communications was a multi-ethnic/linguistic reality in

the Philippines. Also, and most relevant to the current paper, under

American colonialism English was systematically promoted as the sole

medium of instruction (MOI) in education as stipulated in the Letter

of Instruction declared in 1900 (Bernardo, 2008). The English-only

policy continued until the introduction of Tagalog in the senior year

of high school in 1940 (Gonzalez, 2008). However, as a response to

numerous studies since the 1920s showing that choosing English over

vernaculars as the MOI resulted in learning deficits for elementary level

students, the Revised Philippine Education Program in 1957 mandated


that English should be gradually introduced as the MOI in upper level

classrooms. While this measure mitigated the dominance of English, it

did not curtail its role as a medium of instruction, an issue that recurred

at a later time. After the rise of nationalism and anti-colonialism in

the late 1960s and 1970s, the Bilingual Education Policy of 1974

divided instructional domains so that mathematics, science, and English

communication arts were to be taught in English and all the other

subjects in Filipino (Bernardo, 2008). Subsequently, the Filipino

government has continuously worked towards enhancing English

communicative proficiency by introducing English for specific purposes

in the 1980s and English as the medium for some content-based

instruction in the 2000s (Gonzales, 2008).

However, the continued prominence of English in education has

remained controversial. On one side, English is promoted due to its

utility for social integration and control, the historical establishment of

English as the MOI, and its elevation to the primary global language

(Bernardo, 2008). On the other side, the use of English for instruction

is resisted due to its association with colonization and damaging effects

on some students’ learning. As the tongue of foreign colonizers, the

widespread usage of English compels the Filipino people to reinforce

their own identity as the oppressed and causes an “English divide” that

reflects an individual’s access to education. For example, Bernardo found

that students who had not developed English proficiency exhibited

cognitive disadvantages in school learning.

In fact, the absorption of English brought a wide range of social

divisions. For instance, English and Filipino are dominant in different

areas. English-dominated domains are diplomacy, print media, higher

education, business transaction, while Filipino-dominated domains are

entertainment, radio, tabloid, movies (Gonzales, 2008). Lesho’s

sociolinguistic analysis found that one’s English linguistic repertoire was


141

contingent upon his or her social class:

The acrolectal group [here, speakers of “standard” English] included

educated professionals who use English both at work and home, the

mesolect [local variety of English] included educated professionals who

use English often at work but not at home, and the basilect

[marginalized English dialect] included working-class people who use

English only occasionally at work (Lesho, 2018, p. 357).

Gonzales (2008) used the term “edulect” (p. 20) to highlight

educational levels as the primary element in sociolinguistic

stratification. Moreover, Martin (2014) suggested that acrolect and

mesolect could be differentiated depending on the speakers’ attitudes

toward language. Acrolectal and mesolectal speakers “might both be

well educated”, but acrolectal speakers “proudly accept Philippine

English as a legitimate variety with internal norms”, whereas mesolectal

speakers “still tend to orient themselves toward external American or

international norms” (Lesho, 2018, p. 358).

2.2. Filipino English Teacher Identity

Only a handful of previous studies have focused specifically on

Filipino teachers in ESL academies. The one that most resonates with

the objectives of the current study is Choe’s (2016) study involving

interviews with 12 teachers exclusively teaching Koreans in ESL

academies located in the Philippines. Choe presents three broad themes

of teacher identity: negative identity, positive identity, and negotiated

identity. Each theme can be broken down into two or three sub-themes

respectively: (1) non-nativeness, lack of target culture knowledge, and

lack of TESOL training; (2) neutral accent [distinguishable from the

local vernaculars, systematic and accurate] and advantages of being


non-native English speaking teachers (non-NESTs); and (3) acceptance

of status as non-NESTs and the Philippines’ status as an

English-learning bridge rather than destination. It could be said that

such findings reflect the social stratification of Philippine English and

its unstable status as a yet-to-be established international variety.

Bernardo and Malakolunthu (2013) interviewed six Filipino teachers

at an international school in the Philippines in which the study body

was mainly composed of Koreans. They classified teachers’ pedagogical

implementations under four themes: accommodations to cultural

nuances, addressing the language barrier, fair treatment and provision,

and creating awareness and acceptance of cultural diversity. Worth

noting is their mention of the phenomenon of Korean students’

“superiority complex” (p. 61), which the Filipino teachers described as

displays of disregard for the teachers, such as sleeping, eating, or not

listening, which the researchers attributed to students’ view that

Filipinos, both students and teachers alike, are inferior to Koreans.

The scarcity of research on the identity of Filipino teachers

encountering Korean students required a broader review of literature to

include studies of Filipino teachers of students of expanding circle

nationalities other than Korean. Balgoa (2019) focused on the lived

experiences of Filipino teachers working in Japan as assistant language

teachers (ALTs). The theme of their unstable status as non-native

English speakers remerged in the teachers’ beliefs that a “native accent

is social capital” (p. 261) and feelings of superiority when told that they

“sound American” (p. 260). Filipino teachers endeavoured to

compensate for their disadvantage as non-NESTs, whose pronunciation

and grammar were occasionally corrected by their NEST colleagues, by

enhancing their linguistic competency and showing diligent working

attitudes. Thus Balgoa found that the prevalent native-speaker norm in

Japanese English language teaching (ELT) obligated Filipino teachers to


143

exert extra effort to compensate for their perceived inferior status.

In addition, Perez-Amuro and Sunanta (2020) found that Filipino

teachers teaching in Thailand faced discrimination as “second-class

teachers” in comparison to White native-speaking teachers. Although

Thailand did not undergo a colonial period, the country’s economic and

social subservience to Western powers led to the acceptance of colonial

aesthetics which is characterized by valuing farang (Thai word for

western foreigners) over Asian traits, which is deeply linked to a

preference for racial whiteness and linguistic nativeness within ELT. In

contrast, Filipino teachers, who constitute the third largest body of

foreign teachers in Thailand, face discrimination such as limited job

openings, pay gaps, a mandate on uniforms, and devaluation of the

profession as female.

It is clear that Filipino English teachers’ status with respect to

expanding circle countries has been unstable largely due to native

speaker/non-native speaker dichotomy. Whether referred to as

“compromising” or “resisting,” Filipino teachers were all subject to

investing extra effort into securing their authority as teachers. Perceived

social hierarchies demeaned Filipino teachers when they encountered

Korean students’ “superiority complex,” and stigmatized them as

second-class teachers in Thai institutions, and motivated them to seek

the praise of “sounding like an American” in Japan. These phenomena

all reflect the in-between position of Filipino teachers’ identity, in

which two conflicting powers are competing: while their role as teachers

requires them to project authority, their non-nativeness undermines the

authority. In other words, the Filipino teachers’ internal force, by which

they exert their power to consolidate their authority as teachers, is in

constant struggle with the external force, of the native speaker norm

and the destabilizing effects of the NEST/non-NEST dichotomy.


III. METHODOLOGY

3.1. Participants

To understand the professional identity of Filipino teachers teaching

Koreans in an ESL academy, it should be first and foremost

acknowledged that this body of teachers is less homogeneous than those

in the public education sector, which has established qualifications that

include having completed an accredited teacher training course, which

results a relatively stable shared foundation. Private education in

comparison is characterized by greater variance in their teacher profiles.

Therefore, as a group, Filipino teachers in ESL academy teaching

Korean students have diverse characteristics. The teachers may vary in

their levels of English proficiency. They may regard English as the

language of the educated and/or an instrument to access to economic

or social capital. As members of a norm-developing nation, they may

exhibit different attitudes toward their own language vis-à-vis the native

English-speaker norm. In the current study, based on their professional

(i.e. teacher) and educational (i.e. tertiary education and above) levels

and their divergent attitudes towards Philippine English, it was

determined that Filipino teachers in English camp represented either

acrolect or mesolect speakers.

Personal information of the participants is summarized in table 1:

Name(pseudonym)

Sex AgeEducation

levelTeaching

experienceSociolect

Alab Male 224 year college

2 years (3 camps)

Mesolect

Banoy Male 213 year college

2 years(1 camp)

Acrolect

<TABLE 1> Profiles of Filipino Teachers


145

Note. The number of camps represents the number of temporally discrete camps.

Alab and Banoy were novice teachers who had only two years of

teaching. Claudio was an intermediate teacher who had comparatively

long experience in teaching for his young age; he had had ample

opportunities to work in English camps as the son of a head teacher.

Diwa and Edgardo were advanced teachers whose teaching experience

ranged from eight to ten years. All of the teachers had education at

the tertiary level and pursued majors that were not related to English

education. The teachers interviewed were predominantly male perhaps

due to the nature of convenience sampling. None of the teachers’

English proficiency fell low enough to result in a communication

breakdown.

3.2. Data Collection and Analysis

The first author was a grammar teacher in an English winter camp

of the Apollo academy (pseudonym) in the Philippines during January

and February of 2020. He was among twelve Korean teachers responsible

for 104 elementary and middle school students, whose length of stay

in the Philippines varied among four, eight, and twelve weeks

depending on the programs for which they registered. He was primarily

responsible for the 24 students enrolled in the eight-week program. A

local cooperative company in the Philippines managed approximately

30 Filipino teachers at the academy.

The process of data collection and analysis proceeded progressively

Claudio Male 214 year college

4 years(8 camps)

Acrolect

Diwa Female 314 year college

8 years(16 camps)

Mesolect

Edgardo Male 382 year college

10 years(18 camps)

Acrolect


and flexibly (Merriam, 2009). The first author garnered knowledge

through daily interactions with Filipino teachers and built rapport with

them. He actively sought social interactions with Filipino teachers at

every opportunity between grammar classes, after work time, and during

meal times. Among the teachers who were available in terms of time

and willingness to provide their opinions, five agreed to be interviewed.

The semi-structured interviews, which lasted from 40 to 60 minutes

each, were conducted in English. The first author asked the teachers

specifically about their teacher identity. Further, documents such as

daily and weekly reports on students written by Filipino teachers were

reviewed as ancillary data to cross-check the claims made in the

interviews. All of the interview data were voice recorded by iPhone

eight plus and transcribed for content analysis. Follow-up interviews for

clarification and further investigation were also conducted via social

media.

Two types of analysis were employed for the study, “constant

comparative method” (Merriam, 2009, p. 175) and “direct interpretation”

(Stake, 1995, p. 74). Being inductive and comparative, the former

proceeds through a sequence of coding, category construction, and

conceptualizing or theorizing, which Merriam described “consolidating,

reducing, and interpreting” (p. 175). According to Stake, the latter

method relies on the researcher’s informed intuition to derive meaning

directly, even when a certain event or situation did not recur. The

process follows the order of repetitive reading, reflecting, triangulating,

and challenging the first impression by being skeptical.

The authors transcribed the recorded interviews and the interview data

were subsequently categorized into distinguishable themes. Following the

constant comparative method, the interview transcriptions were

repetitively read, manually marked in codes, and grouped into categories

in which idiosyncratic features were reduced. The organization of data


147

revealed that themes differed across occurrences. The authors condensed

meaning from repeated emerging themes by means of a subtractive

approach that pruned down less relevant data toward the end of

determining a consolidated theme. Themes that occurred with low

frequency were subject to the intuitive interpretation that required

recursive reflection on the data and triangulation involving a discussion

between the two authors until reaching an agreement. As a result of

these analyses, five themes, three positive and two negative, were derived

from the data.

IV. FINDINGS

4.1. Positive Aspects

4.1.1. Integrative motivation

All the teachers except Banoy expressed their integrative motivation

to seek the teaching job. This attitude of valuing teaching for its own

sake over monetary gain and such benefits as social prestige is

considered an important quality of an educator’s identity. First, the

teachers found interacting and building rapport with students to be an

invaluable experience per se. For instance, Claudio effusively conveyed

his deep affection for the students:

Actually, my medicine is students... Even if [they’re] not obeying

you... I have a lot of patience with them. When I see their faces,

my heart is melting. I don’t know why. Maybe it’s because I like

children. (Claudio)

Claudio expressed that students are the source of his joy, even when

they are intractable. Diwa also revealed her strong attachment to


teaching young students and metaphorically described the fulfilling and

serendipitous aspects of teaching as a “reward for hard work.”

Another source of integrative motivation for teaching was the

gratifying experience of working with other teachers. The working

environment naturally provided ample time for Filipino teachers to be

together. It was observed that except when in their classrooms to teach

students, Filipino teachers shared space and time throughout the

program. They slept in group lodgings and ate packed meals together,

often in their own groups, apart from Korean teachers and students.

Alab pointed out the strong sense of bonding among Filipino teachers

by commenting that the camp was a “memorable and life-changing

experience” in which the teachers were “family.” Their shared physical

surroundings and profession laid grounds for creating a community of

practice within which they formed their identity as teachers.

Their integrative motivation was further highlighted by their decision

to teach rather than pursue better-paying occupations. For instance,

Diwa, who majored in computer science, explained her decision to

teach as follows:

[S]ome of the teachers asked me, “you’re a computer programmer,

so you could be working in a BPO industry, then why teach here?”

The salary is better there because if you compare ESL teaching and

a BPO company, the BPO companies [offer higher salary]. But when

you talk [about] passion and experience, I’d rather choose camp.

(Diwa)

Despite her software programming skill, Diwa chose to follow her

passion for teaching and forgo her opportunity to work in more lucrative

industries being led by fondness to teaching. Likewise, another

experienced teacher, Edgardo, expressed his willingness to teach for the

betterment of students and for their “parents to feel proud” even though


149

a teacher’s salary is “low, unlike other jobs.”

4.1.2. Pride in Philippine English

All the teachers except Alab expressed their pride and confidence in

Philippine English, although it should be noted that they were referring

not to all of the English varieties used throughout the isles of the

Philippines but only to their own English, which they considered to

have a neutral accent and therefore to be an intellectual asset.

For these teachers, as for societies around the world, accents

functioned as symbols of social status. According to this system of

appraisal, an accent perceived as neutral, that is, one that is not tied

to a region or indicative of the speaker’s place of birth or residence,

is most highly regarded. Having introduced himself as a well-educated

person, in the following Banoy highlights his membership in an

exclusive English-speaking community:

I think the Philippines has the least influenced accent compared to

some countries in Southeast Asia... The grammar’s still not the best.

But the accent rather, it’s the most neutral for me... But I would

say my grammar is not 100% but maybe 90% correct... at least my

English. But many Filipinos have an accent. Yeah. They have accents

but so far as in my group of friends, very neutral, very neutral. (Banoy)

Here Banoy projected both his national and his personal pride by

claiming that the English pronunciation of educated Filipinos is superior

to that of English speakers in other Southeast Asian countries as well

as his own grammatical correctness. However, by using phrases such as

“at least my English” and “so far as in my group of friends,” he was

explicitly rejecting identification with the Filipino masses. Edgardo

expressed similar sentiments:


I think my accent is quite neutral... I love watching movies.

Sometimes [when] I hear a British accent, I mimic it. And I think

my accent is sometimes better than other teachers because I don’t

have a dialect. Because here in the Philippines, there [are] a lot of

dialects... If you say you are neutral, it does not sound like Filipino,

but you also don’t sound like American. It’s like in the middle.

(Edgardo)

Edgardo cited his lack of a regional dialect and proximity to

Anglophone accents evidence his linguistic superiority over other

teachers. His acknowledgement, however, that his neutral accent is still

not native-like makes it comparable to and “interlanguage” (Selinker,

1972), which located somewhere along a continuum of which the lower

end is dialectical Filipino English and the higher end is American

English.

The teachers’ pride in their neutral Philippine English extended

beyond domestic boundaries to the North American and European

continents, suggesting that Koreans could understand them better than

native speakers, as Banoy stated:

Compared to Standard English, you could see that most Americans

and Europeans deviate from that. They use slangs often... I think the

younger Koreans who are still studying English at the basic level find

it hard to understand the British accent... What I speak, I think,

is easier for them to understand. Compared to the Korean accent,

the Filipino accent, I think, is more neutral. (Banoy)

Continuing this argument, Banoy gave the example of t-glottalization

(pronunciation of “t” as a glottal stop) in the British accent:

I think [Korean students] find [Philippine English] easier compared

to most accents. For example, the British accent, they don’t


151

pronounce “t” very often. So, I think students understand that they

have to spell the word with the “t.” Because they can hear the “t”

sound. (Banoy)

The t-glottalization in the British accent is construed as an ellipsis

or a letter that is not pronounced. According to Banoy, the Filipino

accent is more intelligible because there is greater correspondence

between pronunciation and orthography.

Another important aspect was the degree of conformity to Standard

English. As a result of the extended time they spent learning English,

the teachers perceived their own variety to be of high quality, which

led to their notion of it as an intellectual asset and symbol of cognitive

authority characterized by grammatical correctness and the ability to

analyse the language as illustrated in Diwa’s comments:

Normally Filipinos, we study English since first grade; sometimes

kindergarten. So, we study English [extensively]. We’ve followed the

subject, the English rules. So, we follow the grammar rules, the verb

rules, the tenses. (Diwa)

Labeling English as a school subject and underscoring its rules, Diwa

sheds light on Cummins (1981) distinction between “Cognitive/

Academic Language Proficiency” (CALP) and “Basic Interpersonal

Communication Skills” (BICS). Adherence to CALP can lead to

regarding Western varieties of English as digressions from “proper”

Standard English:

Filipinos have subject-verb agreement; but when you try to talk to

[native speakers] and try to analyze what they’re saying, you will

find out that they did not follow the English grammar. You will

find sometimes ‘there’s something wrong with that.’ They just talk.

But they don’t usually use the proper English rules. (Diwa, italics by


the authors)

Unlike native speakers who naturally and effortlessly acquire the

language and “just talk,” the Filipino teachers regarded themselves as

members of an educated elite, whose English was an intellectual asset.

Thus Diwa was claiming a higher status for Filipino teachers over native

English speakers based on their cognitive and analytic capabilities. A

similar perspective was present in Edgardo’s criticism of the sentence

construction of native-speaking teachers based on his prior experiences

in other camps.

4.1.3. Advantages as Filipino English Teacher: Adaptability

Filipino teachers presented ‘adaptability’ as their unique quality,

which can be divided into linguistic, circumstantial, and affective

aspects. First, due to their experience of learning English, they especially

emphasized their ability to feel connections to the students and to adjust

to each student’s learning level, as expressed by Banoy:

[A]s someone who teaches, or someone who grew up with two

languages, you can connect with the students more [profoundly]. You

know their trials, their difficulties compared to native speakers who

can only speak... one language. (Banoy)

Banoy stressed his shared experience with Korean students as a

learner of English and familiarity with possible frustrations during the

learning progress, an advantage held non-NESTs that is often cited.

However, it should be noted that teachers categorized as acrolect

speakers (i.e. Banoy, Claudio, and Edgardo) often identify themselves

as NESTs if not superior to them. For example, Diwa stressed native

speakers’ lack of adaptability compared to Filipino speakers of English:


153

The difference between native speakers and Filipino teachers is that

they can adjust to the level of the student. Native speakers, it’s hard

for them to adjust because the way they speak is natural English.

But Filipino teachers, they can adjust to the level of the student.

(Diwa)

Diwa’s comment ascribes the adaptability of Filipino teachers to their

having undergone the lengthy and onerous process of learning the

language in contrast with the effortless acquisition of native speakers,

which gives them insights into their students’ needs and engenders their

capacity to adjust to students. Thus, Diwa is suggesting their experience

as learners of English empowers them to successfully accommodate to

each student’s need.

Second, the claim of adaptability applied not only to their

relationships with students but also to their particular circumstances as

camp instructors, which gave them the latitude to make their class fun.

It was understood that Filipino teachers intently sought ways for classes

to be fun. For example, Claudio revealed his goal of managing classes

so they were enjoyable within boundaries:

Don’t treat them just as a student. Treat them as your friend and

also a student... There’s a limit between a teacher and a student.

You’re a friend but in a teacher and student relationship like that.

(Claudio)

Claudio’s phrase, “just as a student,” suggests he had a default norm

of the conventional student-teacher relationship in mind but

purposefully chose to veer away from it in favour of a special, or marked,

status for students as friends to the extent possible without violating

the norm. A similar point was made by Diwa when she offered the

opportunity for students to become her friends but only under a specific


condition, “outside the classroom.” In addition, Edgardo argues that he

is willing to “make fun of himself” to ensure students’ enjoyment in

classes.

Filipino teachers’ decision to prioritize having fun to the point that

they would risk their authority by breaking established rules (i.e., Diwa’s

offer a friendship outside the classroom) and make fun of themselves

(i.e. Edgardo) could be seen as part of their adjustment to their roles

as camp instructors, which they perceived as different from their roles

in regular classroom. That is, their efforts to make learning English in

camp enjoyable were not so much grounded on their beliefs about

typical teacher and student relationships as on the particular

circumstance that they were working in an English camp during

vacation. However, to secure their authority to maintain discipline and

compel students to study, the Filipino teachers all drew a line between

inside the classroom, where they were teacher and students, and outside,

where they could be friends.

The third aspect of their adaptability was their emotional sensitivity.

All the teachers except Banoy explicitly referred to feeling sympathy

for their students, which they claimed was an inherent characteristic

of Filipinos. For instance, Alab asserted that “we Filipino always put

ourselves in the shoes of others,” a tendency Diwa articulated as follows:

So, for example, what if I’m Korean? So, Filipinos usually think about

that. They think that if I am in his place, what will happen to me?

So that’s why. Empathy and sympathy... I tried to learn Korean to

be able to understand them because they don’t have skills with

English. (Diwa)

Diwa imagines a point of view from Korean students because Filipinos

in general think in such a manner. As these excerpts show, the teachers

did not claim sensitivity to the feelings and perspectives of others as


155

a personal trait but as their inheritance as Filipinos.

While Alab and Diwa did not imply any comparison between

Filipinos’ and other cultures’ natural tendency to be sympathetic,

Claudio explicitly contrasted Filipino’s and NESTs’ emotional

sensitivity:

Filipino teachers are better than native speakers because we can adjust

every time, whether it is a hard or normal situation. But for native

speakers, they’re just like teaching, teaching, teaching. They’re not

forming relationships with others. They’re just doing their jobs... I

think the Filipinos are very generous and we have a lot of patience.

(Claudio)

In this description, Claudio depicts native speakers almost as

automatons who lecture relentlessly without forming any social

affiliation with students. Similarly, Edgardo reported being highly

regarded by students who had experience learning in the inner circle

nations:

Based on my experience, I have a lot of students who actually studied

abroad, like they actually had joined the camp in like Australia, U.K.,

U.S., and always tell me that Filipino teachers are very kind and

caring. (Edgardo)

Edgardo’s account of the experiences of students who had attended

camps in the inner circle nations and found Filipino teachers more

concerned about their students goes a step beyond Claudio’s subjective

perspective by bringing in the evaluations of students. At least for

Claudio and Edgardo, Filipino teachers, whom they portray as generous,

patient, kind, and caring, occupy the high ground in the affective

dimension compared to native speakers.


4.2. Negative Aspects

4.2.1. Perceived Deficiencies as Non-NESTs

Alab and Diwa notably raised their concerns regarding their grammar

accuracy, lack of TESOL certification, and relatively low fluency, which

threatened their status as English teachers. In the course of discussing

their issues, the concept of nativeness inevitably loomed as the cloud

over their non-standard varieties of English. Among all the teachers

interviewed, Alab had the least confidence by far in his variety of

English:

[A Filipino accent is] not really good... [Native-speaking teachers are]

perfect... when it comes to teaching English... Maybe Korean students

want more native speakers. Also, most Filipinos, especially education

[majors], they really study hard to become a teacher, to become a

native speaker. (Alab)

From Alab’s perspective, native teachers are unquestionably the best

qualified for teaching English and the models with whom Filipinos strive

to identify. Because of his insecurity in English, Alab identified external

models as ideal, unlike the acrolectal teachers, who as Claudio stated,

considered themselves to be “the perfect model.” Alab’s acceptance of

the native-speaker norm as superior, compelled him to view himself as

a second-class teacher.

Alab’s teacher identity was destabilized not only internally by his

self-doubts but also externally by his lack of formal training in

education:

I am not a native speaker to English... I did not graduate as a[n]

education [major], as a teacher. People who graduated as a teacher,

it’s a big factor... [M]y grammar is my weakness. I can speak, I can


157

respond, but the grammar is [a weakness]. I always use [a] dictionary.

I’m careful, especially when I’m teaching students. (Alab)

His concern about grammatical accuracy despite his ability to “speak

and respond” was reflected in his distinction between BICS and CALP.

Whereas the acrolectal teachers expressed confidence in their language

varieties by claiming ownership of English as intellectual asset, Alab was

anxious about his perceived lack of linguistic competence, suggesting

that for him the sense of ownership of English depended on one’s

linguistic competence.

The other mesolectal teacher, Diwa, had a different perspective on

native English speakers, whom she did not consider to be ideal models.

Her description of native speakers focused on their origins:

[N]ative speakers are people who usually talk in English, like the U.S

people... I’m not a native speaker, [which] ... is different. They already

speak English fluently. They grew up in an English country. That

is a native speaker. So, their first language is English. (Diwa)

As far as Diwa is concerned, being a native English speaker is an

accident of birth in an inner circle nation, as exemplified by Americans.

As a speakers of English as a second language after Tagalog and having

been raised in an outer circle country, Diwa identified herself as

non-native speaker. Nonetheless, such positioning did not lead to

idealizing native speakers as model English teachers as revealed in her

comment, “native speakers just talk.”

While she was not entrenched in a mindset of inferiority, Diwa still

experienced external pressure to achieve a high level fluency, as

illustrated in her experience of being censured by high-level students:

Normally, Filipino teachers try to speak in very slow English for the


student to learn... [But some students] try [to] make me speak English

faster... especially those students who went abroad like [to] America,

Canada, and U.K... [High-level students] challenge you [in] the way

of speaking; they challenge you [in] the way you think; they challenge

[you in] the way you learn. So, you need to make sure to show them

that I can do it, because if not, they will just put you down. So,

you should try to study more, show them that I can do it. I’m the

teacher that you should respect. (Diwa)

By referring specifically to inner circle nations, Diwa identifies the

native speaker norm as the source of Korean students’ questioning of

Filipino teachers’ authority, which, if not rebutted, threatens the

foundations of their teacher identity, so providing their competence to

students is profoundly significant for Filipino teachers.

Given their deficiencies as perceived either by themselves or by

students, both teachers exerted extra efforts to prove their competence.

Alab tried his best to maintain his identity as a hard working and

trustworthy teacher. Diwa shared that she usually stayed up until

midnight to prepare for the following day’s class and tried to interact

with native speakers as often as possible.

4.2.2. Racism and Color Issue

One salient theme that emerged from Edgardo’s interview was racism

and the issue of color in valuing teachers. Edgardo discussed differences

in salary and treatment between NESTs and non-NESTs based on

attributes such as skin color, facial features, nationality, and accent,

which he had experienced in other camps:

The reason why sometimes, [native speaking teachers] like Americans

or British are paid higher than the other non-native teachers is

because of their color. So, they’re white, and their nationality, they’re


159

Americans. So, if you are a non-native speaker, you are not going

to get the same treatment... [My skin color is] like brown, which

is not the Americans’ color and probably my looks. I think there’s

racism or something. (Edgardo)

He perceives the discriminatory treatment stemming from

unreasonable criteria, ‘whiteness.’ He further recognizes the distance

between himself and the beneficiary of discrimination (i.e. American)

by defining himself to be ‘brown’. He concludes his remark with a

critical notion on the egregious prejudice (i.e. racism) at work.

Although the camp in which Edgardo was presently teaching did not

have any teachers from the inner circle countries, the issue of color was

still present, in this case to his advantage because his relatively light

skin color led some Korean students to perceive him to be less Filipino:

Sometimes [Korean students] thought that I’m not a Filipino. I don’t

know why, [but] maybe because most Filipinos have like darker skin?

Even Filipinos tell me my skin is lighter than them. Maybe that’s

why. (Edgardo)

While it was possible that students had other reasons for their

judgment, his lighter skin color was an obvious reason for Edgardo,

reaffirmed by the perceptions of others in his in-group. He could assume

that Korean students associated darker skin with Filipino nationality.

Looking at the issue from the consumer’s perspective, he said:

[If] you’re a parent [who] wants your kids [to] join a camp, you expect

or want a native speaker for your kids. So the company will hire

someone who is a native speaker. But of course, if we are going to

hire legitimate native speakers [with] background in teaching, the

salary must be very, very high. So what they usually do is they look

for native speakers even though they don’t have any [educational]


background as long as they look [like a native]. (Edgardo)

It should be noted that Edgardo pointed out parents, not students,

as the primary agents seeking native speakers, which might have

indicated his understanding of Korean education fever as a result of his

long experience teaching Koreans. The comment resonates with Jung

and Noh (2019), who also observed that the fervor for education

generally springs from parents. Edgardo also referred to the practice of

hiring less-than-ideal teachers as long as they were native speakers as

English as a wage-saving strategy, as the limited budgets of the language

education institutes filtered out “legitimate” native speakers with

professional teaching careers.

Despite feeling that Filipino teachers were hounded by such

immutable traits as race and color, Edgardo maintained a positive

outlook on their linguistic competency despite not being native English

speakers, which may be discernible mainly in some difference of accent,

which is easily altered in different environments:

I would say [the part that I differ from native speakers is], maybe,

accent? Because they’re used to speaking English; it’s their first

language. But you can learn different accents. Like, if you live in

the U.S. for a long [period], you can adapt to the accent. But

knowledge-wise, I think we are equal. (Edgardo)

Dissimilarity of accents did not, in Edgardo’s view, keep Filipino

teachers from standing on par with native speakers. He considered

accent as a malleable feature that reflected the influence of the

immediate environment and could be adjusted as an outcome of

extended residence.


161

V. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

In this study, five themes regarding the experience of Filipino English

teachers of Koreans students emerged. Three positive aspects were the

teachers’ integrative motivation for teaching, their pride in Philippine

English as representing a “neutral” accent and as an intellectual asset,

and their adaptability to different linguistic, circumstantial, and

affective situations. On the other hand, two negative aspects were the

mesolectal teachers’ perceived English deficiencies and an experienced

teacher’s testimony of prejudices related to racism and color issues.

Diverse aspects of the current study were in agreement with findings

of previous studies of the teacher identity of Filipino teachers who teach

Korean students. Choe’s (2016) findings of positive aspects such as the

neutral accent of Philippine English and advantages of being

non-NESTs, and negative aspects such as non-nativeness and lack of

TESOL training, particularly resonate with the current study’s findings.

Further, themes such as accommodation to cultural nuances and

addressing the language barrier (Bernardo & Malakolunthu, 2013) were

similar to “adaptability” in the current study.

The attitude of the mesolectal teachers in the current study toward

their variety of English as inferior to the American variety echoes

Balgoa’s (2019) findings involving Filipino teachers of students of other

nationalities. Moreover, the problem of Filipino teachers being treated

as second-rate in comparison to native speaking teachers found by

Perez-Amuro and Sunanta (2020) was explained by Edgardo in the

current study.

One distinctive finding of the study is the difference between

acrolectal and mesolectal teachers in their self-perception of nativeness.

In the teacher’s background survey, Banoy, Claudio, and Edgardo

regarded Philippine English as a legitimate English variety, whereas


Alab and Diwa did not. In alignment with Martin (2014), it was also

found in the current study that mesolectal speakers oriented themselves

toward external norms (i.e. the inner circle varieties). Tentative as it

is due to the small number of participants, which precludes

generalization, there may be a negative correlation between confidence

in the Filipino variety of English as a mainstream variety and the

authority accorded to an external model (i.e., inner circle native

speaker’s English) as shown in Table 2 below.

NameAttitude toward the

Filipino varietyAttitude toward inner circle native English

Self-perceived nativeness

Alab Negative PositiveNon-native (Mesolect)

Banoy Positive NegativeNative

(Acrolect)

Claudio Positive NegativeNative

(Acrolect)

DiwaPositive and

negativePositive and

negativeNon-native (Mesolect)

Edgardo Positive NegativeNative

(Acrolect)

<TABLE 2> Filipino Teachers’ Perceptions of Self and Natives

The results above show that each Filipino teacher’s different

self-perception of linguistic competency in English and whether s/he was

acrolectal or mesolectal led to different degrees of submission to the

authority of inner circle native-speaking norms. On one hand, the

teachers who self-identified as acrolectal were equipped with a firm

structure that allowed them to perceive their English as an intellectual

asset and commensurate with native-speaker norms, not subservient to

them, and Edgardo went further to criticize the unequal treatment given

Filipino teachers as racially motivated. On the other hand, the teachers

who self-identified as mesolectal doubted their linguistic competency


163

and were susceptible to the domination of native-speaker norms, which

strongly influenced their teacher identity. Thus, it could be said that

one’s perception of and confidence in his/her linguistic competency

determined his/her resilience to the dictates of native-speaker norms.

A related implication of this study is the generally detrimental effect

of native-speaker norms, which can cause users of English to feel

unstable and vulnerable to criticism (McKay, 2002). This phenomenon

may be related to the concept of “linguistic imperialism” (Phillipson,

1992), which includes the notion that English belongs solely to inner

circle speakers, who are entitled to judge the varieties of other speakers

of English as substandard. This view may also be adopted by

non-NESTs, who, like Alab and Diwa, may feel pressure to strive for

proficiency of native speakers. And while the teachers who accorded

their English acrolect status felt pride and confidence in their Filipino

variety as fully legitimate, as Edgardo’s comments revealed, they still

experienced discriminatory treatment due to the favouring of NESTs

without regard for their other qualifications. Thus, the current study

contributes to the literature by adding another case showing the effects

of the native-speaker norm (McKay, 2002) and perhaps of linguistic

imperialism (Phillipson, 1992) as well.

Works Cited

Balgoa, Nelia. “Filipino English Teachers in Japan: “Nonnativeness” and the Teaching and Learning of English.” Journal of Language Teaching and Research 10 (2019): 256-63.

Bernardo, Allan B. I. “English in Philippine Education: Solution or Problem?” Philippine English: Linguistic and Literary Perspectives. Eds. Maria Lourdes S. Bautista, and Kingsley Bolton. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2008. 29-48.

Bernardo, Maria Aurora Correa, and Malakolunthu, Suseela.


“Culturally-inclusive Behavior of Filipino Teachers in International Schools in the Philippines: Perspectives of International Education in a Developing Country.” International Journal of Educational Development 33 (2013): 59-64.

Bolton, Kingsley, and Bautista, Maria Lourdes S., eds. “Introduction: Philippine English: Linguistic and Literary Perspectives.” Philippine English: Linguistic and Literary Perspectives. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2008. 1-9.

Choe, Hohsung. “Identity Formation of Filipino ESL Teachers Teaching Korean Students in the Philippines.” English Today 32 (2016): 5-11.

Choe, Hohsung, and Eunmi Son. “Why Did They Choose There? Korean Parents’ Reasons for Sending Their Children to Southeast Asian ESL Countries.” The New Studies of English Language & Literature 66 (2017): 33-54.

Cummins, James. “The Role of Primary Language Development in Promoting Educational Success for Language Minority Students.” Schooling and Language Minority Students: A Theoretical Framework. Ed. California State Department of Education, Los Angeles, CA: Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center, California State University, 1981, 3-49.

Gonzales, Andrew. “A Favorable Climate and Soil: A Transplanted Language and Literature.” Philippine English: Linguistic and Literary Perspectives. Eds. Maria Lourdes S. Bautista, and Kingsley Bolton, Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2008. 13-27.

Jo, Inhee. “Educational Value and Improvement Plans of English Language Training Programs in the Philippines: Focusing on 1:1 Class.” Studies in Linguistics 44 (2017): 219-44.

Jung, Geun-Ha, and Younghee Noh. “A Study on Influencing Factors of Increase in Korean and Japanese Students on English Training in Philippine.” Korean Association for Local Government and Administration Studies 33 (2019): 131-50.

Lee, Hyungu, and Kwangchul Park. “The Effects of Short-term Language Learning in the Philippines on University Students’ TOEIC Score.” Journal of Linguistic Studies 17 (2012): 37-58.

Lesho, Marivic. “Philippine English (Metro Manila Acrolect).” Journal of


165

the International Phonetic Association 48 (2018): 357-70.Martin, Isabel Pefianco. “Beyond Nativization? Philippine English in

Schneider’s Dynamic Model.” The Evolution of Englishes: The Dynamic Model and Beyond. Eds. Sarah Buschfeld, Thomas Hoffman, Magnus Huber, and Alexander Kautzsch, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2014. 70-85.

McKay, Sandra Lee. Teaching English as an International Language: Rethinking Goals and Approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.

Merriam, Sharan. B. Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2009.

Ministry of Education. Survey on Korean Students in Overseas Higher Education Institution. Seoul, Korea: 2019. <https://www.moe.go.kr/boardCnts/view.do?boardID=350&lev=0&statusYN=W&s=moe&m=0309&opType=N&boardSeq=79010>.

Perez-Amurao, Analiza Liezl, and Sunanta, Sirijit. “They Are ‘Asians Just Like Us’: Filipino Teachers, Colonial Aesthetics and English Language Education in Thailand.” Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia 35 (2020): 108-37.

Phillipson, Robert. Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.

Selinker, Larry. “Interlanguage.” International Review of Applied Linguistics 10 (1972): 209-31.

Satake, Minoru. “English Students Flock to Philippines for Low Cost, Sunshine.” Nikkei Asian Review. 26 May, 2015. <https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/English-students-flock-to-Philippines-for-low-cost-sunshine>.

Stake, Robert E. The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1995.

[email protected] (Choi, Yeachan)

[email protected] (Choe, Hohsung)

논문접수일: 2021. 1. 9 / 수정완료일: 2021. 2. 21 / 게재확정일: 2021. 2. 25

NULL

Documents

Filipino English Teacher Identity: A Case Study at an ESL Academy … Filipino English Teacher Identity: A Case Study at an ESL Academy for Korean Students in the Philippines*1 2