Critical pedagogies in ELT in South East Asia: My own experience

               Recently, I read a book titled Critical Pedagogies in English Language Teaching (ELT) & Learning in South East Asia. This is a book I had been eyeing since it was first introduced at one of the sessions during the MELTA conference I attended back in 2023. A few weeks ago, I approached one of the editors of the book for a copy and immediately purchased it from her (thank you, Dr. Joanna!). I was first exposed to ‘critical pedagogy’ in 2015, which was also my first year of teaching, when I read Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Ironically, this concept was never taught to me during my teacher training, a point that is also discussed toward the end of this book. I will elaborate more on this in one of the paragraphs below. In this piece, I am going to attempt to answer the question posed in the final paragraph of the last chapter: “We encourage you as the reader to share your insights on the critical pedagogy initiatives in this region. We then invite you to situate your practice along the continuum seen in the Critical Orientation Model. Where does your practice lie?” (p. 202).

My insights on the critical pedagogy initiatives in the South East Asian region

              Overall, based on the chapters I have read, there is a strong academic inclination to explore the concept of critical pedagogy through various dimensions. In this book, these dimensions include teacher beliefs, teacher-student relationships, ELT material design, curriculum and textbooks, digital spaces, and teaching practices. They encompass psychological, social, and pedagogical aspects that shape instructional decisions and classroom dynamics, examining how ELT educators question and transform traditional power structures embedded in language teaching. Although critical pedagogy has been attempted in English language teaching in this region, it “continues to be a minority activity in the classroom” (Joseph Jeyaraj et al., 2024, p. 188). This is evident in my social circle of educators, where the only practitioners I know include a teacher in Johor ([link to podcast]) and a teacher trainee who implemented some of my lesson plans (link to podcast). Therefore, in Malaysia, integrating critical pedagogy into the classroom is not yet a widespread practice. Furthermore, it is typically taken up by teachers with a strong sense of social responsibility and activism (p. 189). Coming from a youth activist background, I find myself among this minority. I have expanded my advocacy for youth civic engagement into my teaching practice to further empower young people toward civic awareness and action. 

Situating my practice along the continuum seen in Critical Orientation Model

              In 2019, the voting age in Malaysia was lowered from 21 to 18. This shift marked the beginning of my role as an ESL secondary school teacher, where I focused on educating my students about their civic responsibilities. In the Critical Orientation Model, the first stage is termed "critical attitude." I believe many of the lesson plans I developed (lesson plans from civically-ESL) leaned toward fostering students who view themselves as thoughtful individuals, not merely passive recipients of knowledge but as capable of critical thinking, self-reflection, and meaningful action. In numerous lessons, I introduced the topic initially and would always end with an open-ended question for them during the post-activity stage. Several of my lessons touched on issues like alcoholism and politics (issue-based rather than partisan), which are often seen as taboo, through debates that encouraged English language use. While conducting these lessons, I explained to my students that the purpose was to explore various perspectives. This provides the opportunity to nurture ‘critical attitude’. People often ask if I’ve encountered repercussions when implementing these lessons in the classroom. I explain that the goal is to help students become informed and engaged citizens, referencing the recent change in voting age to highlight the relevance. I avoid framing discussions in a partisan way, focusing instead on issues that matter to all citizens. To me, while every issue is inherently political, national discussions should be approached without partisanship. This isn't because I fear societal perceptions where society perceives discussing politics in the classroom as taboo but because, as a citizen, I believe national issues should unite us, not divide us along party lines.

The second stage is “critical being.” This stage requires teachers to prioritize student voices and collectively own knowledge with their students, rather than holding it as the sole property of the teacher—a concept known as “mutualism” (Shor, 1993, as cited in Joseph Jeyaraj et. al., 2024). In my own practice, I integrate civic engagement into ELT through a project-based learning (PBL) approach as one way of applying critical pedagogy. As Le Van Canh (2024) notes in the book, one way to implement PBL through a critical pedagogy lens is to guide students to become “critical ethnographers” who use their English skills to gather and analyze information on local issues, sharing their insights with both community members and wider audiences. The objective of my PBL innovation was for my students to expand their vocabulary (especially less common lexis) on the theme of “environment” and to develop community solutions within the context of sustainable city/town planning ([link to innovation]). I gave them the choice of how to present their community solutions (in any format) and provided a platform for them to voice their ideas about improving their town. Because they are natives of the town, they were uniquely positioned to offer insights on how to enhance their community in terms of town planning. Their solutions were then presented asynchronously to an NGO focusing on sustainable city planning. As both a teacher and a non-native to their town, I learned a great deal about its geographical and social structure through their projects. The outcomes of these projects allowed me to gain insights that enriched my teaching practice, which I, in turn, shared with other teachers—thus incorporating the knowledge my students had created into the reconstruction of my own understanding. In this way, the knowledge is not solely mine but also belongs to my students. Hence, embodying the principle of ‘mutualism’.

The final stage of the model is “critical action,” which takes place both within and beyond the classroom. During the final stages of the PBL project mentioned earlier, students were asked to identify the most pressing problem in their town, which turned out to be waste management. As part of this project, and while incorporating language-learning elements, the students collaboratively wrote a complaint letter to the District Council to inform them of the issue. Naturally, as the teacher and an adult, I was the one who sent the letter on their behalf. This decision was influenced by my sociocultural awareness that the District Council might not take my students’ complaints seriously; therefore, the letter needed to appear as though it was written by an adult, although the content was entirely the students’ work. I simply acted as an intermediary. Another necessary step was translating the letter into Malay, as all formal complaints to government agencies in Malaysia must be submitted in the national language. Although the final letter was in Malay, the students originally wrote it in English since it was part of their English class activity. Thus, the act of writing this complaint letter serves as an example of “critical action” conducted through classroom activities (p. 199).

As for the second space of the “critical action” stage, which involves encouraging students to step beyond classroom boundaries to address social issues and contribute actively to social change, my students have not yet had the opportunity to engage in this second space under my supervision. However, I hope that through the PBL experience, they will be able to apply what they’ve learned and engage in this stage later in life, whether in tertiary education or the workplace. The essential outcome is that their civic-mindedness was fostered through the project.

Challenges

    The PBL was implemented for intermediate to advanced students. However, with students of low English proficiency, I primarily focused on teaching the technical aspects of the language to help them pass exams. This approach required me, to some extent, to adhere to an exam-oriented culture. Although I attempted to implement one civic-integrated lesson with this group by adjusting the language level in the materials, it wasn’t sustainable due to time constraints, which led me to prioritize technical aspects over critical thinking. Therefore, in contrast to what is suggested in the book, my reason for organizing classroom activities focused on practical, straightforward language use was not due to limits on freedom of speech, but rather because of my students’ low English proficiency.

My socialization of critical pedagogy into my personal teaching practices

    The book noted that many teachers in the region hesitate to relinquish their control and role as “knowledge expert” in the classroom, due to concerns about making mistakes, losing control, or diminishing respect (p. 194). I believe the way to address this is by adopting a collective learning mindset with students. Personally, I embrace this approach as a teacher. After all, I think an entrepreneurial teacher, as outlined in Standard Guru Malaysia 2.0 - Element 4.3.4 (inculcating entrepreneurial values), should integrate critical pedagogy into their practice to embrace productive failure rather than fearing it (Davis, 2023).

The book also highlights how teachers’ experiences as learners often lead them to adopt similar practices when they eventually enter the teaching profession. Reflecting on my own experiences as a student from primary through secondary school, I don’t recall engaging in projects that required me to challenge the status quo or consider alternative solutions to specific problems. My focus was simply on passing exams. Although this type of learning shaped my formative years, my current identity as a teacher and my exposure to pedagogical ideas allow me to question these past experiences and explore ways to enhance current teaching practices, with critical pedagogy being one such approach.

When I was a teacher trainee, I was not exposed to the concept of "critical pedagogy," even though one of the textbooks for my undergraduate courses included a chapter on it. I only discovered this chapter ten years after graduating, when I revisited The Sociology of Education: A Systematic Analysis. Apparently, only certain topics in the book were covered during the course. I am unsure whether this omission was intentional or due to time constraints, but, as noted by Joseph Jeyaraj et al. (2024, p. 194), critical pedagogy often has a limited presence in teacher education programs. One way to address this gap is for education NGOs or social enterprises to conduct capacity-building programs for teachers that integrate critical pedagogy, either explicitly or implicitly. I have personally contributed to this effort through my NGO and at the district level, where I led a workshop introducing my PBL innovation to other teachers.

Final thoughts

I like that this book offered a framework for me to work with when reflecting on integrating critical pedagogy into my profession as a teacher. I do hope that whoever reads this piece feels inspired to pick up the book, incorporate critical pedagogy, and consciously reflect upon their own teaching practices. 



References

Davis, J. P. (2023). How to become an entrepreneurial teacher: Being innovative, leading change. Routledge.

Joseph Jeyara, J., Kiss, T., & Perrodin, D. D. (Eds.). (2024). Critical pedagogies in English language learning and teaching: Foundations, practices, and possibilities. MELTA-USM ELT in Southeast Asia Series. Malaysian English Language Teaching Association and Universiti Sains Malaysia. https://www.melta.org.my/book_publications.html

Le Van Canh. (2024). Is there a Southeast Asia way of practicing critical pedagogy in ELT? In J. Jeyaraj, T. Kiss, & D. D. Perrodin (Eds.), Critical pedagogies in English language learning and teaching: Foundations, practices, and possibilities (MELTA-USM ELT in Southeast Asia Series). Malaysian English Language Teaching Association and Universiti Sains Malaysia. Available at https://www.melta.org.my/book_publications.html

Shor, I., (1993). Empowering education: Critical teaching for social change (1st ed.). University of Chicago Press.


Comments