point and counterpoint

Transforming lives: introducing

critical pedagogy into E LT
classrooms
Ramin Akbari

Downloaded from eltj.oxfordjournals.org at The University of Edinburgh on April 6, 2011

Critical pedagogy (CP) in E LT is an attitude to language teaching which relates the
classroom context to the wider social context and aims at social transformation
through education. In spite of its great potential, however, the practical
implications of CP have not been well appreciated and most of the references to
the term have been limited to its conceptual dimensions. The present paper
highlights the applications of CP for L2 classrooms and provides hints as to how L2
teaching can result in the improvement of the lives of those who are normally not
considered in E LT discussions.

Introduction The concept of critical pedagogy (CP) has been around in the E LT profession
for almost two decades (Canagarajah 2005), but it has only been relatively
recently that we have seen heightened interest in its principles and practical
implications. Most of the discussion on CP has been limited to its rationale
and not much has been done to bring it down to the actual world of
classroom practice, for which it was originally intended. The present paper
seeks to present a snapshot of CP by delineating its principles and
suggesting some areas of application for L2 practitioners.

What is CP? Unlike most of the other concepts and ideas one encounters in the literature
on L2 teaching, CP is not a theory, ‘but a way of ‘‘doing’’ learning and
teaching’ (Canagarajah op.cit.: 932), or borrowing Pennycook’s (2001)
terminology, it is teaching with an attitude. What critical pedagogues are
after is the transformation of society through education, including language
teaching.
CP deals with questions of social justice and social change through
education. Critical pedagogues argue that educational systems are
reflections of the societal systems within which they operate, and since in all
social systems we have discrimination and marginalization in terms of race,
social class, or gender (Giroux 1983), the same biases are reproduced in
educational systems. In other words, the same people who have the power to
make decisions in society at large are the ones who also have the power to
design and implement educational systems, and consequently, their ideas
and values get accepted and promoted while the values and ideas of others

276 E LT Journal Volume 62/3 July 2008; doi:10.1093/elt/ccn025

ª The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved.
are not given voice. Education, as a result, is a political activity in which the
rights of certain classes are systematically denied.
By viewing education as an intrinsically political, power-related activity
(Freire 1973), supporters of CP seek to expose the discriminatory
foundations of education and take steps towards social change in such a way
that there is more inclusion and representation of groups who are left out.
CP puts the classroom context into the wider social context with the belief
that ‘what happens in the classroom should end up making a difference
outside the classroom’ (Baynham 2006: 28). In language teaching, critical
practice is ‘about connecting the word with the world. It is about recognizing
language as ideology, not just system. It is about extending the educational
space to the social, cultural, and political dynamics of language use’
(Kumaravadivelu 2006: 70).

Downloaded from eltj.oxfordjournals.org at The University of Edinburgh on April 6, 2011

The political implications of education, in general, and L2 teaching in
particular, might not be completely evident to many professionals; teaching
English, they argue, is teaching a new system of communication and it does
not have much political/critical significance. The problem is, however, that
any language is part of the wider semiotic system within which it was
shaped and is infused with ideological, historical, and political symbols and
relations (Pennycook 2001). The identity of a language is shaped as a result
of what has happened to it, and what it has done to others; if we look back
upon the history of English and its close connection with the spread of
colonialism, we find ourselves pausing, pondering, and admitting that
English is not an innocent language. Exposing some of the values that
underlie the spread and promotion of English, and questioning some of the
assumptions based on which the profession currently operates are at the
heart of CP and discussions dealing with linguistic imperialism (Pennycook
1998).
The discourse of CP, however, is the discourse of liberation and hope; it is
the discourse of liberation since it questions the legitimacy of accepted
power relations and recognizes the necessity of going beyond arbitrary
social constraints; it is also the discourse of hope since it provides the
potential for marginalized groups to explore ways of changing the status
quo and improve their social conditions. In applied linguistics, CP is an
acknowledgement both of the socio-political implications of language
teaching and at the same time the possibility of change for both students
and teachers, two groups of people who are either left out of any serious
treatment of the profession or represented superficially detached from their
real-life experiences. For these people, CP is liberating in the sense that it
legitimizes the voices of practitioners and learners, and gives them scope to
exercise power in their local context. At the same time, it can be viewed as the
discourse of hope, since by taking the classroom as the point of departure, it
helps the marginalized to explore ways of changing society for a better, more
democratic life:
Critical education is not a unitary phenomenon. However, its major
variants in K-12 education in the US—critical literacy, critical pedagogy,
and critical whole language practice . . .—are united on at least the
following very general aim: to help students to read with and also to read
against . . . critical literacy is not just about interrogating texts; it is also

Critical pedagogy in ELT 277

 about ‘real world realities’ and the role of language, power and
representation in injustice . . . education for a democracy should not
be about the development of products or even consumers, but about
preparation for public citizenship, for civic agreement.
(Edelsky and Johnson 2004: 121, quoted in Reagan 2006: 4)
The conservative forces that control education and society at large have tried
to keep critical ideas out of school curricula and classrooms. Coursebook
contents and teaching methods have been cautiously selected to make sure
that only socially refined topics are addressed. As a result, E LT has not been
completely responsive to the demands made by a CP, and still language
teaching is viewed mainly as a cognitive activity with few socio-political
implications. Even when the social dimensions of language are
acknowledged, the social reality of language learning and teaching is

Downloaded from eltj.oxfordjournals.org at The University of Edinburgh on April 6, 2011

represented from a narrow perspective where social context is only treated
as who is talking to whom about what. The complexity of the social
conditions students and teachers find themselves in is not given serious
consideration and some of the grim facts that are part of the human
condition, such as poverty, disease, domestic violence, racial, or ethnic
discrimination, are ignored. If education in general and E LT in particular
are going to make a difference, then the totality of the experiences of learners
needs to be addressed.
Language teachers can play a more active social role by including themes
from the wider society in their classes, and by drawing the attention of their
students to the way marginalized people feel or act, creating the context for
positive action and a heightened awareness of the plight of those who are not
us, but ‘them’ or ‘others’. They can also incorporate themes from students’
day-to-day lives to enable them to think about their situation and explore
possibilities for change. The following sections include some suggestions as
to how teachers can transform their classes into more critical settings.

Transforming classes Culture has always been treated as an indispensable part of any language
Base your teaching teaching/learning situation and in fact it has been used as a source of
on students’ local content for many language teaching coursebooks. Most cultural content,
culture however, has been from the target language, since the justification has been
that those who want to learn a new language want to communicate with the
users of that language, and successful communication would be impossible
without familiarity with the cultural norms of the society with whose
speakers the learner is trying to forge bonds. This assumption, of course,
holds true for those groups of learners who want to migrate to countries
such as the US or UK for work or study. The reality in which many other
language learners find themselves, nevertheless, is different (McKay 2003).
English has now turned into an international language, and due to the scope
of its application both geographically and communicatively, it has developed
certain features which are not part of any specific national character. In
other words, English has become de-nationalized and re-nationalized as
a result of its spread as the world lingua franca (Sridhar and Sridhar 1994;
Seidlhofer 2001). In this international situation, most of the
communication carried out in English is between people who are
themselves the so-called non-native speakers of English and with a distinct

278 Ramin Akbari

 cultural identity of their own. There is little need in this context for the
Anglo-American culture since neither party is a native with whom the other
interlocutor is going to identify.
In addition, in most communicative settings, people try to communicate
their own cultural values and conceptualizations, not those of the target
language. Typically, people involved in communication want to express who
they are and what kind of cultural background they represent, and as
a result, an emphasis on target language is misplaced; what is needed more
is for the learners to be able to develop the competence to talk about their
own culture and cultural identity.
From a critical perspective, reliance on one’s own local culture has the added
value of enabling learners to think about the different aspects of the culture
in which they live and find ways to bring about changes in the society where

Downloaded from eltj.oxfordjournals.org at The University of Edinburgh on April 6, 2011

change is needed. If students are going to transform the lives of themselves
and those of others, they cannot do so unless due attention is paid to their
own culture in the curriculum and opportunities are provided for critical
reflection on its features. It is here that both the negative and positive
features of their culture can be addressed and local cultural sore points (such
as the spread of A I D S, honour killings, etc.) brought to the attention of
learners. In addition, reliance on learners’ culture as the point of departure
for language teaching will make them critically aware and respectful of their
own culture and prevent the development of a sense of inferiority which
might result from a total reliance on the target language culture where only
the praiseworthy features of the culture are presented.

Regard learners’ L1 The common practice in L2 professional literature has been the rejection of
as a resource to be learners’ L1 as a negative force which will slow down their progress by
utilized interfering with L2 development. Teachers have been advised to conduct
their classes in the target language to minimize this negative effect and give
students ample practice opportunities in gaining mastery over L2 features.
However, from a scientific perspective, there is not much evidence available
in support of the total banishment of learners’ L1, and in fact there might be
cases to the contrary. In other words, a learner’s first language can be
regarded as an asset that can facilitate communication in the L2 and as part
of her communicative experience on which to base her L2 learning. For
example, L1 can be successfully used to maintain discipline in the classroom
or to provide instruction for certain activities. It can also be used for
explaining delicate grammar points or abstract vocabulary items (Cook
2001). The rationale for the total exclusion of L1 from classes, therefore,
must be sought mostly in the political/economic dimensions of L2 teaching
and the inability of native English teachers to utilize the mother tongue
potential of their learners.
A note of caution, however. The call for the use of learners’ L1 in the
classroom does not necessarily mean that it can be used as the language
of instruction. An L2 class is primarily designed to provide a setting for
learners to be exposed to the features of the language they are trying to learn,
and an opportunity to practise the use of those features. The focus of
attention, therefore, must be on the L2, while allowing for a more liberal use
of the L1 to facilitate communication and comprehension.

Critical pedagogy in ELT 279

 From a critical perspective, it is undesirable and even impossible to deny
the significance of learners’ first languages. An individual’s L1 is part of
his or her identity and a force which has played a crucial role in the
formation of that identity. If people are supposed to become empowered and
their voices recognized and respected, then the first step needs to be
a respect for who they are and the values they represent. And when it comes
to marginalized groups, language becomes an important refuge, a badge of
honour, a safe haven, or ‘a stable point’ (Baynham op. cit.: 25) where one
would feel secure in being who he/she is. In addition, true respect for
human rights and the dignity of people should start with one of the most
basic rights they are entitled to, that is, their linguistic human rights
(Skutnabb-Kangas and Phillipson 1995).
By including more of the learners’ first language in L2 settings, and through

Downloaded from eltj.oxfordjournals.org at The University of Edinburgh on April 6, 2011

judicious use of the students’ L1 as a teaching aid, language teachers can
create the context where the first steps towards empowerment and positive
social change can be taken.

Include more of CP takes the ‘local’ as its point of departure, and local here includes the
students’ real-life overall actual life experiences and needs of learners. Learners’ needs in CP
concerns are defined not just linguistically or in terms of tasks, but in terms of the
purposes they serve in the social mobility and activism of students.
CP, in fact, would object to a blanket approach to syllabus design where all
students are assumed to have a common set of communicative goals. In CP
there is no separation between the communicative needs of learners and
who they are socially and politically, which means that what students are
taught will differ widely depending on their locale and linguistic, economic,
ethnic, as well as political affiliations. In other words, in a critically inspired
pedagogy, rural students’ needs are different from those of urban centres,
minorities have needs which diverge from those of the majority, and haves
and have-nots need different types of instructional material and approaches.
Commercially produced coursebooks, which form the backbone of
instruction in many mainstream language teaching contexts, lack the
required sensitivity to be able to address such concerns.
A problem of commercially produced coursebooks, in other words, is their
disregard for the localness of learning and learning needs. Most such books
make use of a language which is considered to be aspirational (Gray 2001),
where most of the language introduced deals with the needs and concerns
of middle and upper classes; in most of the dialogues of such books the
interlocutors talk about issues which are far removed from the lives of many
learners. While learners might have needs related to finding a part-time job,
extending their visa for another year or term, or negotiating their status as
a refugee (Baynham 2006), participants in coursebook dialogues worry
about where to spend their vacation, how people celebrate Mardi Gras, or
what to wear for a friend’s party. An example of how local concerns can be
incorporated in a typical English syllabus may clarify the issue further.
In Iran there are still regions that are contaminated by landmines; these
landmines are the leftovers of eight years of war with Iraq. Each year
hundreds of people get killed or are wounded by these landmines, and most
of the victims are children and adolescents. Iran’s Ministry of Education, in

280 Ramin Akbari

 collaboration with the Red Crescent Society, has decided to offer a special
crash course on landmines and safety measures needed in dealing with
them for students living in affected areas. This course is offered as an extra
to the curriculum and is not integrated in any subject area students study in
their regular programmes. From a CP perspective, it would have been
advisable and possible to include the landmine topic in the English lessons
or instruction students receive in their curriculum and in this way come up
with a content that is both relevant and transformative to the immediate
lives of the learners.
As an example, students in this situation can be exposed to a reading
passage which makes them familiar with landmines, places they are
planted, and cautionary measures that must be taken in contaminated
areas. As a follow-up communicative activity, the learners can be divided

Downloaded from eltj.oxfordjournals.org at The University of Edinburgh on April 6, 2011

into groups of two and, in an information gap exercise using maps, help
their partners get home safely while negotiating their way through farms
dotted with landmines and suspicious objects.

Make your learners The majority of students who come to English classes do so because most of
aware of issues faced their basic needs in Maslow’s hierarchy have been met and they are now
by marginalized aiming at more social respectability and higher levels of self-actualization.
groups In other words, they mostly belong to the middle or upper classes of their
society. Such learners, by virtue of their social position, are unaware of the
way the majority of their society’s citizens negotiate their day-to-day lives or
even their survival; CP can provide the needed insight for such learners so
that through social activism they can transform the lives of those who are
marginalized and help them attain better economic and social conditions.
The majority of coursebooks used for English instruction have been
anesthetized to make them politically and socially harmless for an
international audience. Most publishers advise coursebook writers to follow
a set of guidelines to make sure that controversial topics are kept out of their
books. One such set of guidelines is summarized as P A R S N IP (Gray 2001),
which stands for Politics, Alcohol, Religion, Sex, Narcotics, Isms, and
Pornography. As a result, most coursebooks deal with neutral, apparently
harmless topics such as food, shopping, or travel. However, there are many
groups in any society which are driven to the margins exactly because their
political, behavioural, or belief systems are in conflict with those of the
mainstream groups and they are consequently denied certain rights or
opportunities.
In addition to some guidelines (or maybe we can say ‘redlines’) provided by
publishers, some coursebook producers and writers either intentionally or
unintentionally set themselves restrictions in refusing to recognize and
represent certain groups of people who might not fit in exactly with the
expectations of their middle and upper class language learning clients. For
example, poverty in the learners’ immediate society is not normally treated,
and if poverty is dealt with in a coursebook, it is usually with respect to a far
away country or continent and groups of people with whom the learners
can hardly identify. Missing also in most coursebooks are people who are
invisible due to their psychological or physical abnormalities; one can hardly
find any lessons dealing with the plight of amputees or the disabled, and if

Critical pedagogy in ELT 281

 psychological problems are dealt with, only cases with which the public is
fascinated (such as autism or idiot savants) are represented. Old people are
also left out of English coursebook contents, and if old age is mentioned, it is
not normally associated with disabilities, frequent hospital visits, and the
frustrations of losing one’s strength.
The transformation of a society will be impossible unless trouble spots are
identified, space is provided for all citizens to make their voices heard, and
all members of the society come to the realization that there are multiple
perspectives on reality; by creating a sense of respect and tolerance the
first steps towards social change can be taken.

Conclusion CP is about the relationship between the word and the world (Freire 1973), or
how the world of ideas in education relates to the world of reality in society.
In a sense, CP is about the messy, unpleasant aspects of social life and the

Downloaded from eltj.oxfordjournals.org at The University of Edinburgh on April 6, 2011

people for whom such aspects are part of their day-to-day reality. It is also the
pedagogy of hope and understanding, since without the possibility of
change and a willingness to change criticism does not make much sense.
Among other things, CP is about human dignity and respect. By basing
instruction on learners’ real-life worlds and identity, it provides a stable
reference point for the marginalized groups to legitimate their own
existence and claim what they are entitled to. It is, in a word, the true spirit of
a real democracy.
Implementation of a critical model in any local E LT context has a number of
requirements, among which decentralization of decision making (in terms
of content, teaching methodology, and testing) is of crucial importance. As
long as course contents and testing methods are decided upon by ministries
in capitals, E LT classes suffer from vague generalities and socio-political
numbness. The great potential CP has in curriculum development and
student empowerment will be actualized only when education, and by
extension E LT, develops the required attitude, starts at the local level, and
acknowledges the significance of learners’ experiences as legitimate
departure points in any meaningful learning enterprise.
Final revised version received August 2007

References Giroux, H. A. 1983. Theory and Resistance in

Baynham, M. 2006. ‘Agency and contingency in the
language learning of refugees and asylum seekers’.
Linguistics and Education 17/1: 24–39.
Canagarajah, S. 2005. ‘Critical pedagogy in L2
learning and teaching’ in E. Hinkel (ed.). Handbook
of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cook, V. 2001. ‘Using the first language in the
classroom’. Canadian Modern Language Review 57/3:
402–24.
Edelsky, C. and K. Johnson. 2004. ‘Critical whole
language practice in time and place’. Critical Inquiry
in Language Studies 1/3: 121–41.
Freire, P. 1973. Education: The Practice of Freedom.
London: Writers and Readers.
Education: A Pedagogy for the Opposition. South
Hadley, MA: Bergin.
Gray, J. 2001. ‘The global coursebook in English
language teaching’ in D. Block (ed.).
Globalization and Language Teaching. London:
Routledge.
Kumaravadivelu, B. 2006. ‘T E SO L methods:
changing tracks, challenging trends’. TE S O L
Quarterly 40/1: 59–81.
McKay, S. L. 2003. ‘Toward an appropriate E I L
pedagogy: re-examining common ELT
assumptions’. International Journal of Applied
Linguistics 13/1: 1–22.
Pennycook, A. 1998. English and the Discourse of
Colonialism. London: Routledge.

282 Ramin Akbari

Pennycook, A. 2001. Critical Applied Linguistics: A
Critical Introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Reagan, T. 2006. ‘The explanatory power of critical
language studies: linguistics with an attitude’.
Critical Inquiry in Language Studies 3/1: 1–22.
Seidlhofer, B. 2001. ‘Closing a conceptual gap: the
case for a description of English as a lingua franca’.
International Journal of Applied Linguistics 11/2:
133–58.
Skutnabb-Kangas, T. and R. Phillipson. (eds.). 1995.
Linguistic Human Rights: Overcoming Linguistic
Discrimination. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Sridhar, S. N. and K. K. Sridhar. 1994. ‘Indigenized
Englishes as second languages: Toward a functional
Critical pedagogy in ELT
theory of second language acquisition in
multilingual contexts’ in R. K. Agnihotri and
A. L. Khanna (eds.). Second Language Acquisition:
Socio-cultural and Linguistic Aspects of English in India.
London: Sage.
The author
Ramin Akbari is an Assistant Professor of T EF L at
Tarbiat Modares University in Tehran, where he
teaches practicum, language teaching methodology,
and applied linguistics to MA and PhD students. His
research is on teacher education and critical
pedagogy.
Email: akbari_ram@yahoo.com
Downloaded from eltj.oxfordjournals.org at The University of Edinburgh on April 6, 2011
283