Seven limitations for the current study are presented in this section. Based on these limitations, suggestions are offered for future studies to investigate the cross-cultural communication between LETs and FETs.
First of all, the present study only discovered the sociopragmatic failures occurred among the interaction of participants but did not investigate how the problematic communication could actually be improved. Studies in the future can explore how learning different usages of language from different cultures may facilitate the cross-cultural communication between LETs and FETs. The
communication among team teachers can be examined before and after they learn cross-cultural pragmatic knowledge to see and prove if the communication is indeed improved because of team teachers’ mutual understanding of the different accustomed language styles from each other.
147
Second, although observed sociopragmatic failures among the interaction of team teachers were categorized into different dimensions of communication in this current study, they were not further compared and contrasted with each other for the frequency of their occurrence. Studies in the future can use a quantitative method to examine the percentage of occurrence of sociopragmatic failures in each dimension.
By discovering the dimensions that are more likely to induce frequent occurrence of sociopragmatic failures, future studies can better advise team teachers to beware of their different behaviors and perceptions toward some particular communication dimensions and prevent communication breakdown.
Third, the present study only examined the team teachers’ language behaviors when they performed directive acts in general. However, under this umbrella term
“directive acts,” there are various speech acts such as requesting, suggesting, challenging, rejecting, and etc. Future studies can further explore these detailed speech acts to see if there are markedly different language behaviors for different speech acts from various cultures.
Next, the source of discourse data obtained in this study was solely from meetings between LETs and FETs. Hence, while the present study showed that the LETs and FETs were most likely to misunderstand each other when discussing issues regarding teaching, findings from future studies may not be consistent with this study if they collect discourse data from a variety of contexts, such as during class or in the office, and look into communication breakdown that occurred in issues concerning administration or socializing. Relationship between contexts, common issues, and sociopragmatic failures may be more comprehensively investigated if contexts other than meetings are examined by future studies.
Fifth, the present study could not completely rule out the possibility that gender may also influence the communication among the participants since there were only
148
one female FET and one male LET in the study. Studies in the future can look into how different genders may affect people with the same cultural background, and also how other demographic variables such as age, teaching experience, or power
structures of the participants are played out in the interaction between LETs and FETs.
Sixth, this study, due to insufficient amount of time, was unable to fully answer the third part of the second research questions, i.e., how sociopragmatic failure changed throughout the time of team teachers’ collaboration, and could not detect emergent patterns regarding how common issues and sociopragmatic failures changed throughout time. Thus, studies in the future should be conducted for more than one semester in order to obtain sufficient data to fully discuss how common issues and sociopragmatic failures may change throughout the different stages of collaboration among team teachers.
Finally, although trying hard to inquire more perspectives to analyze the study, the researcher was still more familiar with the LETs’ culture when conducting the study due to her own cultural background. Studies conducted by researchers from cultural backgrounds more aligned with the FETs’ or a team of scholars from various cultural backgrounds may provide more insights on what and how miscommunication between LETs and FETs takes place.
Cultures is an important factor influencing communication between FETs and LETs, as being pointed out by the present study. Empirical studies in the future which continue exploring this issue can not only benefit the growing number of EFL team teaching projects in Taiwan but also contribute to the facilitation of cross-cultural communication between people from different cultures worldwide.
149
REFERENCES
Boxer, D. (2002). Discourse Issues in Cross-Cultural Pragmatics. Annual Review of
Applied Linguistics, 22, 150-167.Brown, P., & Levinson S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage.
Cambridge University Press.
Carless, D. R. (2006a). Collaborative EFL teaching in primary schools. ELT Journal,
60(4), 328-335.Carless, D. R. (2006b). Good practices in team teaching in Japan, South Korea and Hong Kong. System, 34(3), 341-351.
Carless, D., & Walker, E. (2006). Effective team teaching between local and native-speaking English teachers. Language and Education, 20(6), 463-477.
Chang, S. J. (2006). Incorporating culture into English conversation instruction for
EFL learners in Taiwan: A ground study of what and how. Taipei: CranePublishing Co., Ltd.
Chang, W.C., Chen, C. L., &Luo, M. L. (2008). Evaluation of Taiwan’s Foreign English Teacher Recruitment Program. (In Chinese) 張武昌、陳秋蘭、羅美蘭
（民 97）。引進外籍教師協助英語教學之成效探討。教育資料與研究雙月 刊，83，201-226。
Chen, F. J. G. (2006). Interplay between forward and backward transfer in L2 and L1 writing: The case of Chinese ESL learners in the US. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, 32(1), 147-196.
Chen, H. P. (2009). The Role-Perception of Five Taiwanese English Teachers in NESTs and N-NESTs English Team Teaching Program. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chung Cheng University, Taiwan (R. O. C.). (In Chinese) 陳惠
150
萍（民98）。五位國小教師在中外籍教師英語協同教學方案中之角色知覺。
國立中正大學教學專業發展數位學習碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，嘉 義。
Chen, S. H. (2009). Intercultural team teaching: A study of local and foreign EFL
teachers in Taiwan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Durham University,England.
Chen, W. Y. (2008). A Case Study on the Professional Development of Local and
Foreign English Teachers in Team Teaching. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan (R. O. C.).
Chiang, L. C. (2006). When East Meets West—A Case Study of Team Teaching between Taiwanese and Foreign Teachers. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Hsinchu University of Education, Taiwan (R. O. C.). (In Chinese) 江
莉蓁（民95）。當東方遇上西方—中外師英語協同教學的故事。國立新竹
教育大學人資處語文教學研究所碩士論文，未出版，新竹。
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT press.
Clyne, M. G. (1994). Inter-cultural communication at work: Cultural values in
discourse. Cambridge university press.Department of Education of Hsinchu City (2011). (In Chinese) 新竹市教育網（民
100）
。100 年 10 月至 101 年 4 月重要工作報告。2014 年五月取自http://www.hc.edu.tw/edub/basic/doc/p03.pdf
Department of Education of Taipei City Government (2014). (In Chinese) 臺北市政
府教育局（民 103）。臺北市政府教育局 103 年施政重點及施政計畫。2014
年五月取自
http://www.edunet.taipei.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=72047374&ctNode=55350&mp=
104001
151
Education Bureau of Taichung City Government (2011). (In Chinese) 臺中市政府教
育局（民 100）。臺中市政府教育局施政白皮書（100 年度至 103 年度）。2014
年五月取自 http://www.tc.edu.tw/m/360
Education Department of New Taipei City (2014). (In Chinese) 新北市政府教育（民
103）
。新北市 2014 教育實踐年。 2014 年五月取自http://tedl.ntpc.edu.tw/master/2014 教育實踐年手冊.pdf
Fujimoto-Adamson, N. (2010). Voices from Team-Teaching Classrooms: A Case Study in Junior High Schools in Japan. Business Communication
Quarterly, 73(2), 200-205.
Fulbright Taiwan Foundation of Scholarly Exchanges (n.d. ). Fulbright English Teaching Assistantships (ETA). Retrieved May 11, 2014, from
http://www.fulbright.org.tw/dispPageBox/CtEn2.aspx?ddsPageID=FOSEENGB CE&
Gao, H., & Prime, P. (2010). Facilitators and obstacles of intercultural business communication for American companies in China: lessons learned from the UPS case. Global Business Languages, 15(1), 10.
Goffman, E. (1967). On face-work. Interaction ritual, 5-45.
Gudykunst, W. B., Ting-Toomey, S., & Chua, E. (1988). Culture and interpersonal
communication. Sage Publications, Inc.Gumperz, J. J. (1982). Discourse strategies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond Culture. Oxford, England: Anchor.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Sage.
Hu, H. C. (1944). The Chinese concepts of “face”. American anthropologist, 46(1), 45-64.
Hsu, J. L. (2006). An Analysis of Team Teaching in the English Schweitzer Program in
152
Nantou County. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chung Cheng University,
Taiwan (R. O. C.).
Hwang, M. C. (2005). A Study of the Cross-Cultural Communications and English Teaching of Two American Volunteer Teachers under the “English Schweitzer”
Project. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chiayi University, Taiwan (R. O.
C.). (In Chinese) 黃明智（民 94）。「英語史懷哲」跨文化溝通及英語教學之
研究。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義。
Hymes, D. (1966). On communicative competence. In A. Duranti (ed.) Linguistic
Anthropology: A Reader (2001). UK: Blackwell.Institute in Basic Life Principles (n. d.). Taiwan TESOL. Retrieved May 11, 2014, from http://iblp.org/programs/global-encounters/taiwan-tesol
Judd, E. L. (1999). Some issues in the teaching of pragmatic competence. Culture in
second language teaching and learning, 152-166.Kirkpatrick, A. (1991). Information sequencing in Mandarin letters of request.
Anthropological Linguistics, 183-203.
Kramsch, C. (1998). Language and culture. Oxford University Press.
Kuo. (2013, Oct., 28th). (In Chinese) 郭琇真（民 102，10 月 28 日）。「江翠國中獨 步新北」走進 9 又 3／4 月台情境體驗學英語。台灣立報。2014 年 5 月 30 日取自 http://www.lihpao.com/?action-viewnews-itemid-134599
K-12 Education Administration of Ministry of Education (n. d.). (In Chinese)教育部
國民及學前教育署（年代不詳）。教育部國民及學前教育署協助公立國民
中小學引進外籍英語教師計畫。2014 年五月取自
http://www.k12ea.gov.tw/ap/affair_view.aspx?sn=f943c82d-4372-4696-8b7b-fa2ad58fbb6d&sid=17
K-12 Education Administration of Ministry of Education (2013). (In Chinese) 教育
153
部國民及學前教育署（民 102）。教育部國民及學前教育署補助直轄市縣（市）
政府協助公立國民中小學引進外籍英語教師暨設立英語教學資源中心要 點。 2014 年五月取自 http://www.k12ea.gov.tw/ap/law_list.aspx
Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. New York: Longman.
Luo, W. H. (2007). A study of native English-speaking teacher programs in
elementary schools in Taiwan. Asia Pacific Education Review, 8(2), 311-320.
Luo, W. H. (2013). A Study of Discourse in Relation to Language Learning in English Classes Co-Taught by Native English-Speaking Teachers and Local Teachers in Taiwan. English Language Teaching, 6(7).
Lustig, M. W., & Koester, J. (2010). Intercultural competence: Interpersonal
communication across cultures. Boston, NJ: Allyn and bacon.New Taipei City English Wonderland - Xingfu Campus (2013). (In Chinese) 新北市
英速魔法學院興福校區（民 102）。新北市英速魔法學院 102 年度寒假冬令
營實施計畫。2014 年五月取自
http://ntcew.xingfu.ntpc.edu.tw/pdf/1356661374.pdf
Rose, K. R. (1999). Teachers and students learning about requests in Hong Kong. Culture in second language teaching and learning, 167-180.
Saito, M. (1982). Nemawashi: A Japanese form of interpersonal communication. ETC:
A Review of General Semantics, 205-214.
Searle, J. R. (1976). A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in society, 5(01), 1-23.
Taipei English Teaching Resource Website (2011). (In Chinese) 台北市英語教學資 源網（民 100）。臺北市政府教育局 100-103 年度國民小學全面實施英語教 學實施計畫。2014 年五月取自
http://english.whps.tp.edu.tw/files/13-1000-241.php
154
Taichung English Teaching Resource Center (2013). (In Chinese) 臺中市國民中小
學英語教學資源中心（民 102）。台中市 102 學年度國民中小學聘僱外籍英
語教師實施計畫。2014 年五月取自 http://eng.tc.edu.tw/about.php?id=18
Tajino, A., & Tajino, Y. (2000). Native and non-native: what can they offer? Lessons
from team-teaching in Japan. ELT journal, 54(1), 3-11.
Tan, A. (1990). The joy luck club. Random House LLC.
Tannen, D. (1989). Interpreting Interruption in Conversation. In B. Music, R. Graczyk,
& C. Wiltshire (Eds.), Papers from the 25th Annual Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Part Two: Parasession on Language in Context (266-87). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Tannen, D. (1991). You just don’t understand: Women and men in conversation.
London: Virago.
Tannen, D. (2000). “Don’t Just Sit There–Interrupt!” Pacing and Pausing in
Conversational Style. American Speech 75(4), 393-395.Tannen, D. (2005). Conversational style: Analyzing talk among friends. Oxford University Press.
Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 91-112.
Yang, S. M. (2010). A Study on the Impacts of Team Teaching on Taiwanese Elementary Children’s English Learning Interests and Attitudes. Spectrum:
Studies in Language, Literature, Translation, and Interpretation, (6), 181-204.
(In Chinese)
楊式美（民 99）。中外師協同教學對臺中市國小三年級與五年
級學童英語學習興趣與態度之影響。Spectrum: Studies in Language,
Literature, Translation, and Interpretation, 6, 181-204。Young, L. W. L. (1982). Inscrutability revisited. In J. J. Gumperz (Ed.), Language and social identity (pp. 72- 84). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Wolfson, N. (1989). Perspectives: sociolinguistics and TESOL. Cambridge: Newbury
House Publishers.
155
156
APPENDIX B
National Taiwan Normal University, Graduate Institute of English No. 162, Heping East Road Section 1, Taipei, 106
Advisor: Shau-Ju Chang, Ph.D.
Committee members: Vincent Wu-Chang Chang, Ph.D., Hsi-Yao Su, Ph.D.
Principal Investigator: Yi-Fan Lin Email: [email protected]
中小學英語協同教學現場的中西合璧
The Encounter of East and West in the EFL Team Teaching Programs in Taiwan
Research Introduction
You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Yi-Fan Lin under the supervision of Dr. Shau-Ju Chang to investigate how foreign English teachers and local English teachers prepare and conduct the English team teaching lessons in Taiwan. So far, little research has examined issues concerning the preparation process of English team teaching class in Taiwan; hence, this study aims to explore the
relationship between preparation and real conduction of the teaching, and hopes to provide some insightful implications to improve the English team teaching projects in Taiwan.
Research Method
1. Your participation will involve:
a. Observations for the weekly meeting/discussion among team teachers, and at least one team teaching class a week.
b. Individual interviews at least once a month (one on one, around 30 minutes each time).
c. The observations and interviews will be audio-taped, so as to analyze the transcribed data. The audio-taped data is only for research purpose, and the
researcher will not reveal it to other people.
2. Your participation is voluntary, and you may choose not to answer any
questions that you do not want to answer.
3. The researcher will do everything to protect your privacy. As part of this effort,
your identity will not be revealed in any publication or presentation that may result from this study.
4. The researcher will fully discuss with the participants before writing up the research, to make sure that their opinions will not be biased.
5. The researcher will do her best to avoid influencing the implementation of classes or meetings during her observations.
157
APPENDIX C
National Taiwan Normal University, Graduate Institute of English No. 162, Heping East Road Section 1, Taipei, 106
Advisor: Shau-Ju Chang, Ph.D.
Committee members: Vincent Wu-Chang Chang, Ph.D., Hsi-Yao Su, Ph.D.
Principal Investigator: Yi-Fan Lin Email: [email protected]
研究參與同意書/Consent Form for Participation in Research Activities
中小學英語協同教學現場的中西合璧
The Encounter of East and West in the EFL Team Teaching Programs in Taiwan
1. You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Yi-Fan Lin under the supervision of Dr. Shau-Ju Chang as a part of research for her thesis to investigate the preparation process of English team teaching lessons in Taiwan.
2. Your participation will involve:
a. Observations for the weekly meeting/discussion among team teachers, and at least one team teaching classes a week.
b. Individual interviews at least once a month (one on one, around 30 minutes each time).
c. The observations and interviews will be audio-taped, so as to analyze the transcribed data. The audio-taped data is only for research purpose, and the researcher will not reveal it to other people.
3. The researcher will do her best to avoid influencing the implementation of classes or meetings during her observations.
4. Your participation is voluntary, and you may choose not to answer any questions that you do not want to answer.
5. The researcher will do everything she can to protect your privacy. As part of this effort, your identity and the name of this school will not be revealed in any publication or presentation that may result from this study.
6. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this study, or if any problems arise, you may contact the investigator.
I have read this consent form and hereby I consent to my participation in the research described above:
Participant’s signature ______________________ Date __________________
158
APPENDIX D
Interview Questions
I. Participants’ background
Learning background 1. What was your major?
2. Did you receive relevant training in English language teaching?
Teaching background
3. What’s your teaching experience? For example, have you ever taught English before? Have you ever taught elementary/junior high school students? Or have you ever taught in other countries?
Cultural background
4. Have you been/taught in other countries? Any culture shock examples?
5. What’s the most challenging task for you as a teacher when working in a different culture?
6. When you are in Taiwan (or abroad), have you had any experiences that the communication between you and other people did not go very smooth?
Current teaching background in Taiwan and this school 7. Why did you choose to teach in this school/Taiwan?
8. How long have you taught in this school? Have you ever taught in other schools in Taiwan?
9. How are Taiwanese students and teachers different from those in other countries?
10. Can you briefly introduce all of your duties here?
II. Common issues that occur in the communication among team teachers
1. In this school, who do you have to communicate with concerning your job?
2. In what kind of situation would you communicate with your co-teachers? And why?
3. What do you usually talk about under those situations? What do the FETs/LETs say to you? And what do you say to them?
159
III. Sociopragmatic failures that occur in the communication among team teachers
1. What is the most challenging task for you to interact with your co-teachers and why? (Any examples?)
2. What kind of issues is the most difficult for you to communicate/explain with your co-teachers? And why do you think it happened?
3. Has any misunderstanding happened between you and your co-teachers? Or is there any example that you felt it’s hard to communication with the co-teachers?
Or is there any example that the interaction was not smooth? (Or other people who are from different cultures?)
4. Do you think your co-teachers have ever used different ways to express themselves from you or people who are from the same culture as you?
5. Do you agree that LET/FET talk more indirectly/directly? Why and any examples?
6. Regarding the interaction/communication between LETs and FETs, do you have any suggestions or advice?
160
APPENDIX E
A story of miscommunication told by an experienced FET
Part I. The miscommunication: What happened when the FET first arrived in Taiwan
Let’s go back 15 years. I’m with my first employer. We have a staff meeting.
The principal comes out and says we have a problem, and the principal says exactly how the problem needs to be dealt with. And then the principal said to each of the Chinese teachers, “What do you think?” And the first person said, almost exactly the same thing that the principal said. Person number 2, just change the order of the suggestion, but it was exactly what the principal said. And they all went around the table, more or less agreeing with everything that he said. Well I’m not from this culture, and he said, “What do you think?” As a westerner I think literally, “What do I think?” And so I looked at the principal, not understanding Chinese culture, and I said,
“I think this policy around behavior management is wrong. I think it’s a mistake. I think it’s a mistake for these reasons, and I have one suggestion, and here’s why I think it would work.” And I went through it.
And I started to look at people around me. And they were starting to move their seats. You can see people starting to sweat a little. And I could start to sense that people at the table were really really uncomfortable. And I sensed from the people at that table, that they thought I was absolutely one of two things, crazy, stupid, or incredibly rude, because I just insulted the principal and all his policies. I wasn’t trying to insult him, but he was insulted, and the people at the table were, were shocked and nervous and offended and scared...
161
APPENDIX F
A story of miscommunication told by an experienced FET
Part II. The adaptation: How the FET would do now after learning Taiwanese culture
Looking back on that event now, I would never have disagreed with my boss in front of his employees. And had I made a suggestion, I would only have made a suggestion after I was sure he liked me and respected me. And then when I made my suggestion, I wouldn’t say I think this is a mistake, and this is my way of fixing it. I would say to the principal, “I really liked what you said the other day at the meeting, but I was a little bit confused about one part of it. What do you think if a teacher did blablabla.” And in that question “what do you think if…,” I gave him my idea.
Remember I’m not telling him he’s wrong, I’m asking for him to give me his opinion on my idea, and I would now indirectly communicate with him and I said what do you think about, so he can respond with I don’t like it or I do like it, but I’m not telling that he’s wrong. I’m putting out an idea.
…I’ve had many experiences like that, so I almost don’t take notice of them now.
Because I anticipate the Chinese philosophy in my interaction with another person, so
Because I anticipate the Chinese philosophy in my interaction with another person, so