When myth and reality meet: Reflections on ESP in Brazil

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

English for Specific Purposes 27 (2008) 412–423

ENGLISH FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES www.elsevier.com/locate/esp

When myth and reality meet: Reflections on ESP in Brazil Maria Antonieta Alba Celani * Pontifical Catholic University of Sa˜o Paulo, Post-graduate Programme in Applied Linguistics, Rua Monte Alegre, 984, 05014-001 Sa˜o Paulo, SP, Brazil

Abstract Within the broad background of English language education in Brazil, this paper intends to discuss two questions. Firstly, where and why a common misconception about ESP being identified as the teaching of reading only originated, and secondly, given the social role of English in the Brazilian context, whether an ESP approach can be seen as more suitable than a General English (GE) approach as a theoretical background for curriculum planning and classroom practice in English general education. How can these two questions be related? This paper will discuss how and why what started as a misconception in relation to a specific context might be seen as a possible solution for making the teaching–learning of English more meaningful in general education. For the discussion, data will be drawn both from the National ESP Project and from teachers’ reactions to the proposal in the National Parameters. Ó 2008 The American University. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

‘‘[In Latin America] . . . English is seen very much as a ‘library language”. Swales (1985, p. 45) ‘‘. . .learning English has become one of the major tools of contemporary education. As in most parts of the world, learning English is one of the most valued symbolic assets in Brazil in view of the role of English in worldwide communication media.” Moita Lopes (2005, p. 2) *

Tel.: +55 11 3826 0910; fax: +55 11 3826 1480. E-mail address: [email protected]

0889-4906/$34.00 Ó 2008 The American University. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.esp.2008.07.001

M.A.A. Celani / English for Specific Purposes 27 (2008) 412–423

413

1. Introduction In the new world order, discourses are grounded on one and only consideration – globalisation. These discourses are mostly in English and the media plays its role in making them available throughout the world. In periphery and expanding circle contexts (Wenger, 1998), having no access to English may mean not only difficulty of access, but also total impossibility of participation, with exclusion as a result (Moita Lopes, 2005). If we adopt a reflective approach to education, we will take advantage of wider opportunities of choice and will certainly accept and adapt to the limitations and contradictions of the new contemporary order (Giddens, Beck, & Lash, 1997). Within this educational framework the English language teacher has a very special role to play as a mediator in enabling learners to become full participants in the international discourses and social practices circulating in the wider world outside the classroom. For this to become an educational experience for both the learner and the teacher, neither exacerbated chauvinism nor tacit submission (Rajagopalan, 2005b) is recommended. The well-balanced construction of critical social awareness regarding language and particularly regarding the role of English in the contemporary world should be the major aim to be achieved (Appadurai, 1996; Holliday, 2005). To what extent this construction affects the teaching–learning situation in terms of capabilities to be developed will depend on local conditions and mostly also on the social role of the particular language in question. Although for different reasons, ‘What for?’ is a fundamental question to be asked by educational policy makers, curriculum planners and practitioners. Purpose is the key word here and not exclusively within an ESP context. A redefinition of the role of English in the post-colonial world and in general education is called for and more specifically in TESOL (Fabricio & Santos, 2006, p. 67). In this paper, I will first present and discuss a common Brazilian misconception in relation to ESP, that is, its identification with the teaching of reading. After dealing with the particular Brazilian situation as to what is regarded as teaching–learning English as part of general education, I will argue that one might maintain that the main principles underlying an ESP approach are to a large extent the most suitable to be proposed as a theoretical basis for the Brazilian educational context in general. I will also indicate how some of these principles are to be found in the National Curricular Parameters – Foreign Languages (Paraˆmetros Curriculares Nacionais – Lı´ngua Estrangeira (Brasil, 1998)), PCNLE hereafter, particularly in relation to what is regarded as a pedagogy of possibility (Freire, 1970; Freire, 2001; Giroux, 1988), while I also discuss some strong reactions to the proposal in the PCN-LE that in some contexts, a focus on reading should be seen as the most effective decision. After broadly sketching what to my mind seems to be the panorama emerging in the future, both in GE as well as in strict ESP contexts, I will finally elaborate on the paradox of how and why what in a certain context is a misconception, that is, ESP equals teaching reading, may be proposed as a more sensible option in the much wider National context regarding teaching English in the general Brazilian school context. As a conclusion to the argument, surprise is expressed at how objections from some areas, which exclude learners from learning the ‘‘full” language, can become self-defeating, because the result of trying to teach the ‘‘full” language frequently ends up in not teaching any language at all. For things to be put in perspective, however, a brief sketch of the Brazilian ESP Project is in order.

414

M.A.A. Celani / English for Specific Purposes 27 (2008) 412–423

2. A national ESP Project and a misconception Recent developments in the ESP Project, now a programme, have been dealt with elsewhere (Ramos, 2004, and the ongoing research of the ESP CNPq Certified Research Group): new pedagogical proposals triggered by new computer-mediated contexts; teacher development online and face-to-face; oral comprehension at post-graduate level in the area of medicine, and at undergraduate level in the area of tourism and materials design for groups with new emerging needs, are some of the more recent developments in the Project, as well as a genre-based view used for theoretical support. The original Brazilian national ESP Project has also been widely described and discussed (Celani, 1994, 1998; Celani & Collins, 2003; Celani, Deyes, Holmes, & Scott, 2005; Celani, Ramos, Holmes, & Scott, 1988; Holmes & Celani, 2006). It is worthwhile restating, however, that it was essentially a grassroots project that resulted from close contact between planners and participants after judicious consideration of the results of faceto-face interviews with both teachers and learners at different levels in twenty Brazilian Universities in 1978. In the initial needs analysis survey, it was found that of the twenty universities visited, in only two there were activities involving the spoken language, and this only in two specific courses at post-graduate level which were being taught by foreign lecturers. Consistent with ESP practice, a programme focusing on the development of reading skills was set as a priority for the Project. As time went by, institutions which were not part of the National Project started to attend regional or national seminars and to read the Project publications, which, because of the aims established for the Project, dealt mostly with aspects relating to reading. This gradually created a general belief that an ESP approach was a more effective way of teaching reading. In spite of the efforts made by those responsible for the Project at a national level to change that misleading belief, newcomers to the Project when asked to say what ESP meant to them would frequently and until recently produce statements like the following, collected at various seminars in different parts of the country during the period 1990–2000 (my translation from Portuguese, for all excerpts). ‘‘. . .an easy (a special) technique to teach reading” ‘‘. . .a method to teach reading” ‘‘. . .a practical way of reading without worrying about vocabulary and without understanding the context” ‘‘. . .developing comprehension of main structures of a text” ‘‘. . .a kind of reading-oriented method, deals with students’ needs” ‘‘. . .a communicative course through reading” ‘‘. . .facilitating and innovating in the teaching of reading” The collection, however, revealed other beliefs as well, as shown below: ‘‘. . .authentic materials” ‘‘. . .texts dealing with other subjects (history, geography)” ‘‘. . .technical terms” ‘‘. . .knowledge required in each profession” ‘‘. . .teaching grammar and vocabulary through the students’ subject of interest” ‘‘. . .more motivation” ‘‘. . .useful for entrance exams” ‘‘. . .there’s no conversation”

M.A.A. Celani / English for Specific Purposes 27 (2008) 412–423

415

Dealing with the implications of the latter beliefs would require a full discussion, which is beyond the scope of this paper. The examples were meant just to illustrate that there might be reasons to suspect that the misrepresentation connected with reading might not have been simply the result of what was going on in the Project, but it might also indicate that it takes time, direct involvement and effort to develop new concepts and new ways to look at new proposals. Whatever the reasons might be, however, this myth – ESP is teaching–learning to read in English – still haunts those who work in the area in Brazil. 3. Teaching–learning English in general education in Brazil Discussing the teaching–learning of foreign languages in Brazil, English in particular, has been the preoccupation of many Brazilian teachers and educators (Bohn, 2001; Celani, 2000a; Celani, 2000b; Leffa, 2001; Rajagopalan, 2005a; Rajagopalan & Rajagopalan, 2005). After a period of relative prestige in educational policy,1 the enforcement of a national education law (‘‘Lei de Diretrizes e Bases da Educacßa˜o Nacional”) in 1961 reduced foreign languages to the position of activities in the curriculum, leaving the option to individual schools to offer them or not. A new law, in 1971, however, brought them back to the curriculum as disciplines, although not as part of the nuclear component. There was, however, an important restriction. Only one foreign language, unspecified in the law, was to be taught in the lower levels (5th to 8th grades) and preferably two in high school.2 Needless to say, this situation created several problems in terms of foreign language teachers’ self-esteem and status in the schools (Celani & Magalha˜es, 2002). It also contributed to the lowering of standards in pre-service education courses, which generally concentrate on mother tongue future teachers’ preparation. In the public school sector particularly, the situation can be even more serious, as the new teachers, apart from not being well prepared professionally, are not familiar with the new type of student that they have to deal with and in most cases do not find institutional support. This very often leads teachers to resort to their life history as language learners and repeat in the classroom the way they were taught by their own teachers, so closing the circle of a traditional, not soundly theory-based methodology (Lima, 2002; Mello 2005; Sousa, 2006). Lack of confidence in the command of the language that they are supposed to teach makes the task even more difficult. To help in this particular aspect, some English teacher education projects have been devised, bringing together the private sector and the university.3 4. National Curricular Parameters – Foreign Language (PCN-LE) The PCN-LE (Brasil Ministe´rio da Educacßa˜o e do Desporto, Secretaria de Educacßa˜o Fundamental, 1998) commissioned by the Brazilian Ministry of Education to a team of professionals had as their aim to contribute to professional development by offering guide1 Since 1809 English and French were compulsory throughout secondary school education, as was Latin (Celani, 2000b). 2 In 2006, with no participation of the academic community, Spanish was made compulsory in all schools, but voluntary to students. 3 See, for one such projects, Celani (2003) and Barbara and Ramos (2003).

416

M.A.A. Celani / English for Specific Purposes 27 (2008) 412–423

lines and by indicating quality aims so as to prepare learners to face the world as participatory, reflective, autonomous citizens aware of their duties and rights. They were meant to be an open and flexible proposal, linked to the classroom and open to discussion and reelaboration to be reflected upon in terms of local circumstances, leaving decisions in implementation to regional and local settings. This was particularly important because of the diversity in a country the size of Brazil. The axis for the PCN in general is the development of capabilities, content subjects, such as history, geography, mathematics, being understood not as ends in themselves, but as the means to the acquisition and development of capabilities.4 A socio-interactional view of language and of learning (Vygotsky, 1930/1980) is the theoretical support for the PCN-LE, implying, thus, that engaging in discourse is different from learning bits of language by heart and that learning how language is used in the social world is not necessarily acquiring knowledge about the language being learnt. Emphasis on building up critical awareness was not only a particular feature in relation to learners’ construction of a sense of citizenship, but also in terms of teachers becoming more critical of imported models which might have no connection with the social context. The PCN-LE also emphasised the need to have realistic objectives, given the restraints of the social context for teaching–learning English in Brazil. One cause for the Parameters not totally fulfilling their purpose in terms of change in classroom practices was perhaps the lack of involvement by local administrations in the actual educational work required in terms of the preparation needed for teachers to make good use of the Parameters. As it very often happens in Brazil, once again there was no effective local support for making official documents meaningful to teachers, in spite of the clear recommendation in the document dealing with foreign languages that teacher education was essential for the Parameters to be of any use. The lack of clearly perceived purposes for teaching–learning English at school is still what pervades most of the teaching that takes place. And this is true of both teachers and learners. One might say that it is a clear example of what Abbott (1981) referred to as TENOR – Teaching English for No Obvious Reasons. It is my opinion that it is time for English language teaching–learning in general education to be viewed in a new light. This is particularly so given the role of English in the new world order (Moita Lopes, 2005). This position has been made clear in the Brazilian National Parameters – Foreign Language (Brasil Ministe´rio da Educacßa˜o e do Desporto, 1998), which propound the teaching–learning of foreign languages within a framework that emphasises discourse and the development of critical awareness in relation to language and the world. In other words, the Parameters reflect a view of learning English in order to take part in the world and not just to recognise sentence patterns or individual vocabulary items (cf. Fabricio & Santos, 2006). So, the objective is learning English for a purpose. Here is how the main principles underlying an ESP approach can be seen as the most suitable to be proposed as a theoretical basis for the Brazilian general education context. But this must be made part of the English language teacher education system, ideally before teachers start acting in the field, and certainly as part of continuing education. The general negative reaction to the PCN-LE – that in many situations in the Brazilian educational context the best methodological policy could be emphasizing the development

4

Understood as faculties capable of development and not as mere skills (‘‘habilidades”).

M.A.A. Celani / English for Specific Purposes 27 (2008) 412–423

417

of reading ability – might be interpreted as a realistic but not necessarily limiting recommendation, derived from old established beliefs among practitioners that oral ability should be given priority (a remnant of the until recently prevailing audio-lingual method, perhaps). It can also be seen as an ideological position, given the reasons offered for the objections5: ‘‘It’s part of a policy of exclusion. Why should some be excluded from learning the four skills?” ‘‘It’s elitist. Only those schools (mostly private ones) with a small number of students in each class or with homogeneous groups will be in a position to offer the oral skills.” ‘‘It’s undemocratic. There won’t be equal opportunities for all.” ‘‘The students expect it as their right.” The interesting thing is that it is exactly because those responsible for the PCN-LE wanted to offer a democratic, non-elitist and all-inclusive proposal that there was a recommendation for reading to be seen as the focus in the planning and implementation of teaching–learning activities. The PCN-LE make that very clear, as can be seen from the extracts below: ‘‘. . .considering the development of the oral skills as central in foreign language teaching in Brazil does not take into account the criterion of social relevance in learning. Except for the specific situation of some tourist areas or of a few multilingual communities, the use of foreign languages seems to be more connected with reading of technical matter or for leisure. It should be also noted that the only formal exams in a foreign language (University entrance and admission to post-graduate courses) require a good command of reading.6 So, reading on the one hand satisfies the needs of formal education and on the other, it is the skill that the learner can use in her immediate social context. . .” It must also be taken into account that classroom conditions in the vast majority of Brazilian schools may make the teaching of the four communicative skills unviable. So, a focus on reading may be justified because of the foreign language social function in the country and also because of what is feasible to accomplish as objectives given the prevailing conditions. This does not mean, however, that depending on those conditions the objectives could not include other skills as well. ‘‘What is important is to formulate and implement socially justifiable objectives, feasible in the existing conditions in the school and which will guarantee discursive engagement by means of a foreign language. So, a focus on reading is neither understood here as an easier alternative nor should it jeopardise future decisions as to the teaching of other skills. . .” (Brasil, 1998, pp. 20–21)7

5 Data collected in various academic occasions and also from practitioners themselves. My translation from Portuguese. 6 Research has actually shown that need for English increases as academics rise in their careers (Holmes, Celani, Scott, & Ramos, 1994). 7 My translation from the original in Portuguese.

418

M.A.A. Celani / English for Specific Purposes 27 (2008) 412–423

So, what is being recommended is along the lines of a pedagogy of possibility (Freire, 1970; Freire, 2001; Giroux, 1988) and certainly not of exclusion from citizenship building. It is also in line with an ESP approach – making best use of what is feasible. No doubt there is the question of learners’ expectations in relation to which skills to learn first, but concentrating on reading does not necessarily mean excluding oral language completely. In order to make things clear, it is perhaps useful to elaborate on what is meant by ‘‘an ESP approach”. This is dealt with in the following section. 5. English teaching–learning from an ESP perspective To what extent can the basic principles of ESP practice be incorporated into the classroom realities of the more typical general English teaching–learning Brazilian situation? I am particularly concerned with the public school system. Here, in general, the immediate need is more difficult to be felt by both parents and learners; hence the importance of learners being able to see a purpose, to see meaning in relation to what goes on in the English classroom. Let us first see what is meant by an ESP perspective by looking at some of the basic tenets of an ESP approach. They could briefly be described as involving one or more of the following features: (1) considering learners’ reasons for learning and their learning necessities; (2) building basic capabilities and abilities for defined purposes; (3) using previous knowledge, or what the learners bring with them to the learning situation, i.e. what learners have, do and can do in the learning process; (4) allowing learners a voice; making language use meaningful; enabling students to see reasons for learning; (5) helping students develop sound individual strategies for learning; changing unhealthy study habits; breaking the old tradition of memorisation and repetition of teacher-transmitted knowledge. In short, an ESP perspective means learning for a purpose and learning within a framework which makes reasons for learning not only clear, but also meaningful at the outset both for learners and teachers. All these features of an ESP approach have wider educational implications, as they are concerned with the learning process (Allwright, 1982; Dudley-Evans & St. John, 1998; Hutchinson & Waters, 1987; Robinson, 1991). Making the teaching–learning of English meaningful in the school context is of primary importance in a rapidly ‘‘glocalising” world (Canagarajah, 2005). One of the main implications as far as teachers are concerned is the possibility of acting in a framework in which needs are not dictated by the textbook, as they very often are, but are dictated by the social context. In this panorama, content, teaching materials and methodology are determined by the interests, the social context and the previous knowledge of the learners. In this way, the language is not the object of learning, but the result, the product of mutual interaction between the learner and the outside world, which in the case of English is a really wide world full of challenges and unforeseen demands and constraints. In sum, it is possible to state that the basis of an ESP approach can also be the basis of sound general pedagogy and also of modern thinking in relation to foreign language learn-

M.A.A. Celani / English for Specific Purposes 27 (2008) 412–423

419

ing. Perhaps only what Dudley-Evans and St John (1998, p. 9) describe as position 5 in their continuum for a typology of English as a foreign language courses would not fit the general education English classroom, that is, English as academic support for a specific discipline or as a support for a very specific skill, such as, for example, oral presentation of a project. As far as teacher preparation is concerned, if we believe that ‘‘glocal” knowledge (Canagarajah, 2005) is becoming more and more important in education, what used to be recommended as an ESP teacher’s profile is also needed for GE teachers. It is generally recognised, and not necessarily only within an ESP context, that teachers should be researchers of their own practice, materials producers, evaluators, experimenters of new approaches, explorers of reality, syllabus builders, teachers of not only language but also of strategies, builders of social contexts inside and outside the classroom, open to change, adaptable, ready to continuously review their own practice (Celani, 2003; Freeman, 1992; Freeman, 1998/1999). In spite of that, many would perhaps counter argue by saying that the basic feature of an ESP approach, however, cannot be contemplated in a general education situation, because in this context it is difficult – perhaps impossible – to define the purpose and the needs. It is true that it is not possible to define specific needs in the general education context, but it is not true that it is impossible to define the purpose in terms of general education objectives and of the specific position of English in the world today and in the Brazilian socio-historical context. It is the language that will open doors to the world of science, technology and the arts. So, while purpose has to be understood in educational terms, that is, learning English as part of general education, going through the experience of learning another language, needs have to be understood in terms of ‘‘imagined futures” (Belcher, 2006, p. 133). Here is where a change, or perhaps a distinction, in the definition of needs is required. 6. Redefining needs for a new context I would like to propose a redefinition of needs for the purpose of the present discussion. ‘‘Needs” has been a key word in the area of ESP since the first studies began. The best known proposals which are relevant to the present discussion are those referred to as situation analysis (Richterich & Chancerel, 1980), target-situation analysis (Munby, 1978), strategy analysis (Allwright, 1982), learning needs analysis (Hutchinson & Waters, 1987) and means analysis (Holliday & Cooke, 1982). Although a landmark in the development of needs analysis, Munby’s model would be of little interest here, as it focuses on the students’ needs at the end of a course. In the general educational context that would be impossible to state, except in very general terms, such as sensitising to the multilingual and multicultural world, developing general comprehension (oral and written), concentrating on negotiation of meaning and not on accuracy, offering a stimulating experience not a disappointing one, relating with the social world according to individual limitations, discovering preferred skills (Brasil, 1998). It is only at the end of high school, when a still relatively small number of students prepare to face the university entrance exam that reading comprehension becomes a need. Richterich & Chancerel’s (1980) present-situation analysis, although not at the same level of detail, is usually part of the procedures in the course planning activities of a still

420

M.A.A. Celani / English for Specific Purposes 27 (2008) 412–423

relatively small number of teachers. Very often the textbook selected by the senior English teacher in the school is the basis of what is to be taught at the different levels. Strategy analysis and what it has in common with learning-centered needs analysis – taking into account needs, lacks and wants – is partly useful for my redefinition, but it is not sufficiently inclusive as it refers to language only, not taking into account the social context of teaching–learning, which, however, is a feature of means analysis. In this latter proposal an analysis of the social context is important, although more in terms of constraints in the teaching–learning situation, such as class size, appropriate materials and imported teaching methods. All these constraints are important in the Brazilian situation and have to be taken into account; but Brazil, as a member of the expanding circle, has to consider one more crucial aspect when setting the purpose for English language teaching– learning, namely, the social role of English in Brazil. It is interesting to see that as we move from the 1970’s to the 1980’s, the concept of ‘‘needs” begins to change, becoming more and more sensitive to the social context. This particular aspect is fully part of present-day preoccupations among those who work in the area (e.g. Belcher, 2006; Holliday, 2005) and adopt a critical stance in relation to language use and teaching. And it is within this framework that my proposal may make sense. In the particular Brazilian general education context, and given the social role of English in Brazil and in the world at present, it is the social role that determines the need. And the minimum perceived need for the vast majority of learners at school, and I am particularly thinking of the public school sector (Celani, 2005), will be the need to have access to the information society and to satisfy needs created by new technology. This certainly means learning to read in English. Swales (2007, p. 279) reasserts previous indications (1985, p. 45) that in South America reading plays a main role: . . .it would have been helpful to have some account of how and why EAP varies around the world; after all, South America stresses reading comprehension, Scandinavia specialized translation, Eastern Europe terminology, the US disciplinary teaching by international teaching assistants, France semiotics, and Spain genre analysis. (My emphasis underlined) It is the public school responsibility to offer literacies in various media in English (Benesch, 2006), which are crucial in the world today so as to enable learners to appropriate English for their own more clearly defined needs and purposes later in life. So, one might say that needs in Brazilian general education can be defined by the sociocultural purpose of particular school, area, region contexts, the aim being the construction of critical citizenship in a ‘‘glocalised” world (Canagarajah, 2005). The defining factor is the outside social context which is brought into the classroom and which also depends on the social role of English learning in Brazil as part of general education. 7. When myth and reality meet It may seem a paradox that a misconception created in Brazil in relation to the nature and purpose of ESP, that is, identification with reading only, would be here proposed as satisfying the basic needs for the vast majority of the school population, at least as part of the educational experience of learning another language. From the educational point of view, it will mean learning with a purpose and being able to see some results from learning. In the case of English, at present also the language of international communication, one

M.A.A. Celani / English for Specific Purposes 27 (2008) 412–423

421

might think in terms of also preparing the ground for the future in meeting ‘‘the needs of people hoping to more fully participate in school, work and [other] communities” (Belcher, 2006, p. 135). Furthermore, for the vast majority of public schools, attempting to teach the four skills or to concentrate primarily on the spoken language would be unfeasible given the general lack of infra-structure, class size, frequency of instruction, and in many schools also low prestige as a subject in the curriculum. It is also a paradox that the proposal in the PCN-LE was misinterpreted by a large section of the academic community. English language specialists, as well as language teachers, would be expected to know that learners are members of communities larger than just the classroom and the school; they would be expected to know that communities are part of larger socioeconomic and political systems, which would easily lead to the realization that at present we live in a world where English opens doors to educational and job opportunities, at all levels, to say nothing of access to research findings and technology. This, however, does not preclude a critical pedagogical stance (Benesch, 1999). Foreign language specialists also know that building a solid foundation for later development when more clearly needed might be more effective than making students go through the disappointing experience after eight years of English at school of not being able to act in English in any mode, written or spoken. We all know that reading is the skill that lends itself more easily to further development in other skills as well. An even greater paradox is the fact that those who objected to the suggestions in the PCN, in their objections used arguments that defeated themselves in terms of alignment with a policy of inclusion and empowerment, which the opponents to the proposal propounded. Closing your eyes to reality does not bring about change (Freire, 1970). Faithfulness to old beliefs (could it be to the now surpassed audio-lingual method?) not supported by a close and realistic scrutiny of context will only result in failure. In this case it also means excluding learners, and particularly those who have no other possibilities for learning a foreign language apart from what the public school system has to offer them. So, those who say ‘‘Students expect it [learning to speak] as their right”, might be directed to Benesch (2001, pp. 108, 109) and her suggestion for needs analysis to include rights analysis,8 with learning outcomes resulting from teachers discovering ‘‘what is possible, desirable, and beneficial at a certain moment with a particular group of students”. Teaching reading with some degree of success is possible in the conditions normally found in the majority of schools; it is desirable because, if properly put into practice by well prepared teachers, it can become both an enjoyable and a meaningful learning experience. Above all it is beneficial, because it can become the stepping stone for further development in the ‘‘imagined futures” for our students, thus allowing them to become full participants as citizens. So, in the case of Brazil, myth resulting from a misinterpretation of an approach to language teaching–learning, fits what reality clearly shows as perhaps a sensible solution for English language teaching in the school system, if we want to expose our students to a meaningful experience in learning a foreign language which, in this case, might make the difference between exclusion from and inclusion in the fast changing world of action. In sum, teaching ESP is not equal to teaching reading only, although it is still interpreted like that by many in Brazil. For reasons that still require further investigation, it

8

Italics in the original.

422

M.A.A. Celani / English for Specific Purposes 27 (2008) 412–423

is a spread belief, or myth, as many have referred to it. Coincidentally, a national document with guidelines for foreign language teaching – the PCN-LE recommends, in the light of the role of foreign languages, particularly English, in the country, that reading be the main skill to be developed in schools in general, as a priority. Myth has met reality. References Abbott, G. (1981). Encouraging communication in English: A paradox. ELT Journal, 35(3), 228–230. Allwright, R. (1982). Perceiving and pursuing learners’ needs. In M. Geddes & G. Sturtridge (Eds.), Individualisation (pp. 24–31). Oxford: Modern English Publications. Barbara, L., & Ramos, R. C. G. (Eds.). (2003). Reflexa˜o e Acßo˜es no Ensino-aprendizagem de Lı´nguas. Campinas: Mercado de Letras. Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at large. Cultural dimensions of globalization. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Belcher, D. D. (2006). English for specific purposes: Teaching to perceived needs and imagined futures in worlds of work, study and everyday life. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 133–156. Benesch, S. (1999). Thinking critically, thinking dialogically. TESOL Quarterly, 33, 573–580. Benesch, S. (2001). Critical English for academic purposes: Theory politics and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Benesch, S. (2006). Critical media awareness: Teaching resistance to interpellation. In J. Edge (Ed.), (Re)locating TESOL in an age of empire (pp. 49–64). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Bohn, H. (2001). Maneiras inovadoras de Ensinar e de Aprender: A necessidade de des(re)construcßa˜o de conceitos. In V. J. Leffa (Ed.), O Professor de Lı´nguas Estrangeiras. Construindo a Profissa˜o (pp. 115–123). Pelotas: EDUCAT. Brasil Ministe´rio da Educacßa˜o e do Desporto. Secretaria de Educacßa˜o Fundamental. (1998). Paraˆmetros Curriculares Nacionais – Lı´ngua Estrangeira. Brası´lia, DF. Canagarajah, A. S. (2005). Reconstructing local knowledge. Reconfiguring language studies. In A. S. Canagarajah (Ed.), Reclaiming the local in language policy and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Celani, M. A. A. (1994). Assessing the value of English for special purpose programmes in national development. In A. Waters & R. Allwright (Eds.), Language in aid projects: Towards the year 2000. Colloquium Proceedings (pp. 36–49). Lancaster: Centre for Research in Language Education. Celani, M. A. A. (1998). A retrospective view of an ESP teacher education programme. The ESPecialist, 19(2), 233–244. Celani, M. A. A. (2000a). Applied linguistics in 21st century language issues: Roles, relevance and redirections. In L. Koike et al. (Eds.), Selected Papers from AILA’99 Tokyo (pp. 39–43). Tokyo: Waseda University. Celani, M. A. A. (2000b). O ensino de lingua estrangeira no Impe´rio: o que mudou? In B. Brait & N. Bastos (Eds.), Imagens do Brasil: 500 Anos (pp. 223–252). Sa˜o Paulo: EDUC. Celani, M. A. A. (Ed.). (2003). Professores e formadores em Mudancßa. Relato de um Processo de Reflexa˜o e Transformacßa˜o da Pra´tica Docente. Campinas: Mercado de Letras. Celani, M. A. A. (2005). English for All . . . preservando o forro´. In C. A. Figueiredo & O. F. Jesus (Eds.), Aspectos da leitura e do ensino de lı´nguas (pp. 2–9). Uberlaˆndia: EDUFU. Celani, M. A. A., & Collins, H. (2003). Formacßa˜o contı´nua de professores em contexto presencial e a distaˆncia: Respondendo aos desafios. In L. Barbara & R. C. G. Ramos (Eds.), op.cit. (pp. 69–105). Celani, M. A. A., & Magalha˜es, M. C. C. (2002). Representacßo˜es de professores de ingleˆs como lı´ngua estrangeira sobre suas identidades profissionais: uma proposta de reconstrucßa˜o. In L. P. da Moita Lopes & L. C. Bastos (Eds.), Identidades e Recortes Multi e Interdisciplinares (pp. 319–338). Campinas: CNPq/Mercado de Letras. Celani, M. A. A., Deyes, A. F., Holmes, J. L., & Scott, M. R. (2005). ESP in Brazil: 25 years of evolution and reflection. Campinas: Mercado de Letras. Celani, M. A. A., Ramos, R. C. G., Holmes, J. L., & Scott, M. R. (1988). The Brazilian ESP project: An evaluation. Sa˜o Paulo: EDUC. Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M. J. (1998). Developments in English for Specific Purposes. A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fabricio, B., & Santos, D. (2006). The (re-)framing process as a collaborative locus for change. In J. Edge (Ed.), (Re)locating TESOL in an age of empire (pp. 65–83). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

M.A.A. Celani / English for Specific Purposes 27 (2008) 412–423

423

Freeman, D. (1992). Three views of teachers’ knowledge. The newsletter of the IATEFL Teacher Development Group, 18, 1–3. Freeman, D. (1998/1999). Research in TESOL. Another view. TESOL matters, 8, 5–6. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogia do Oprimido. Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra. Freire, P. (2001). In A. M. A. Freire (Ed.), Pedagogia dos Sonhos Possı´veis. Sa˜o Paulo: Editora UNESP. Giddens, A., Beck, U., & Lash, S. (1997). Modernizacßa˜o Reflexiva. Sa˜o Paulo: EdUNESP. Giroux, H. A. (1988). Teachers as intellectuals. Toward a critical pedagogy of learning. New York: Bergin & Garvey. Holliday, A. (2005). The struggle to teach English as an international language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Holliday, A., & Cooke, T. (1982). An ecological approach to ESP. Lancaster Practical Papers in English Language Education (Issues in ESP). Lancaster: University of Lancaster (pp. 124–143). Holmes, J. L., & Celani, M. A. A. (2006). Sustainability and local knowledge: The case of the Brazilian ESP Project 1980–2005. English for Specific Purposes, 25(1), 109–122. Holmes, J. L., Celani, M. A. A., Scott, M. R., & Ramos, R. C. G. (1994). The use of English in Brazilian academic life: The main parameters. Les Cahiers de l’APLIUT, XIII(2), 28–42. Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A learning-centred approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Leffa, V. J. (Ed.). (2001). O Professor de Lı´nguas Estrangeiras. Construindo a Profissa˜o. Pelotas: EDUCAT. Lima, N. de (2002). Desconstruindo e reconstruindo conhecimentos pedago´gicos: uma experieˆncia de formacßa˜o/ transformacßa˜o em servicßo. Unpublished MA Dissertation. Post-graduate Programme in Applied Linguistics. Pontifical Catholic University of Sa˜o Paulo. Mello, D. M. (2005). Histo´rias de subversa˜o do currı´culo, conflitos e resisteˆncias: buscando espacßo para a formacßa˜o do professor da aula de lı´ngua inglesa do curso de Letras. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. Post-graduate Programme in Applied Linguistics. Pontifical Catholic University of Sa˜o Paulo. Moita Lopes, L. P. (2005). English in the contemporary world: Increasing social opportunities through education. Text presented for discussion at the International Symposium organized by the International Foundation for English Language Teaching Research (TIRF). Sa˜o Paulo: Brazil. Mimeo. Munby, J. (1978). Communicative syllabus design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rajagopalan, K. (2005a). Non-native speaker teachers of English and their anxieties: Ingredients for an experiment in action research. In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-native language teachers: Perceptions, challenges and contributions to the profession (pp. 283–303). New York: Springer. Rajagopalan, K. (2005b). The language issue in Brazil: When local knowledge clashes with expert knowledge. In A. Suresh Canagarajah (Ed.), Reclaiming the local in language policy and practice (pp. 99–122). Mahawah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Rajagopalan, K., & Rajagopalan, C. (2005). The language issue in Brazil – a Boon or a Bane? In G. Braine (Ed.), Teaching English to the world (pp. 1–10). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Ramos, R. C. G. (2004). Geˆneros textuais: uma proposta de aplicacßa˜o em cursos de ingleˆs para fins especı´ficos. The ESPecialist, 25(2), 107–129. Richterich, R., & Chancerel, J. L. (1977/1980). Identifying the needs of adults learning a foreign language. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Robinson, P. (1991). ESP today. New York: Prentice-Hall. Sousa, M. B. N. (2006). Na caravela da reflexa˜o. Unpublished MA Dissertation. Post-graduate Programme in Applied Linguistics. Pontifical Catholic University of Sa˜o Paulo. Swales, J. (1985). Episodes in ESP. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Swales, J. (2007). Book review. English for Academic Purposes: An Advanced Resource Book, Ken Hyland. Routledge, Abingdon, UK and New York (2006). Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(3), 278–280. Vygotsky, L. S. (1930/1980). Mind and society. The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice. Learning meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.