The impact of ideologies – "constellation of fundamental or commonsensical, and often normative, beliefs and ideas related to some aspect(s) of 'reality'" (Verschueren, J., 1996) - on the experience of foreign language learners has been discussed through research in various domains, including studies of instructional material (Matsumoto & Okamoto 2003; Brown 2010; McConachy and Hata 2013, McConachy 2018), discourses produced in conversations with a host family (Cook 2006) or with peers (Suzuki 2009; Pizziconi & Iwasaki 2022). Ideologies surrounding the target language - e.g. its typical characteristics and their cultural – and hence cross-cultural and intercultural – significance, and who has legitimate competence over them (Doerr 2009, citing Pennycook 1994) are entwined with the ideology of "native-speakerism" (Holliday 2015). This ideology ascribes indiscriminately superior capabilities to teachers who have a language as their mother tongue, and underpins pedagogical practices as well as expectations (Swan et. al 2015). Takeuchi (2021) adds to the discussion of language ideologies and native-speakerism by focusing on a formally conspicuous and culturally iconic feature of Japanese, keigo or honorifics (Wetzel 2004), views and opinions around which she explores through a survey of teachers of Japanese as a Foreign Language at universities in the US. She is able to show that standards for keigo use differ for L1 and L2 speakers, and that teachers' ideologies have a potential to deny L2 speakers' legitimacy. She finds evidence of bias regarding conceptualizations of the language ("essentialized connection between language, culture, and native speakers") on one hand, and expectations vis-à-vis learners needs and abilities on the other ("relegating the speech of L2 speakers to information transmission", 2021:602).
I plan to carry out a replication of this study in the UK context. Despite likely differences in the pedagogical context in the scholarly discourses and infrastructure (including the size of the professional body of teachers of Japanese), anecdotical evidence of common discourses surrounding keigo (e.g. that keigo is a particularly challenging item of cultural and linguistic instruction, or the strong concern with the standard and correctness) suggest that native-speakerist ideologies could also be at play in this context. Adding to the replication of that survey, I propose to also investigate through follow up interviews of practitioners in the UK the question of teacher legitimacy. 'NS superiority' is shown to be non-absolute and intersecting with multiple contexts and social categories which complicate power relations, and should not be taken for granted (Kubota, R. 2009). Given the emergence of more positive views of the contributions of non-native teachers (Doerr 2009) current views about native advantage deserve an empirical investigation.
The focus on notions of native-speakerness and the potentially differential legitimacy of different actors (teachers and learners alike) in the language classroom contributes to the panel's concern around (cultural) biases which may constrain the development of an inclusive language education. The survey and interviews can probe how diversity is articulated in the (intercultural) encounter between teachers and learners, and in relationships between teachers with different background and different power positions.
