The role of social class in English language learning and teaching

1

THE ROLE OF THE SOCIAL CLASS IN THE ENGLISH

LANGUAGE LEARNING AT SECONDARY LEVEL

Submitted by Supervisor

FAIQA RAFIQUE MISS. MUSHARRAF AZIZ

ROLL NO. MET 01123022

M.A. ELTL

THE UNIVERSITY OF LAHORE

RAIWIND ROAD CAMPUS LAHORE

2012 – 2014

2

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Thanks to Allah Almighty Who enabled me to research

on such a hot issue of these days. I revere the patronage

and moral support extended with love, by my parents

whose financial support and passionate encouragement

made it possible for me to complete this project.

I submit my heartiest gratitude to my respected teacher

Miss. Mushasharraf Aziz Kaifi, the lecturer of English,

for his sincere guidance and help for completing this

project.

I am deeply indebted to my respected teachers and other

members of English department for their invaluable help

in preparing this thesis.

My joy knows no bounds in expressing my cordial

gratitude to my life partner MUHAMMAD ASIF. Her

keen interest and encouragement were a great help

throughout the course of this research work.

I humbly extend my thanks to all concerned persons who

co-operated with me in this regard.

Faiqa Rafique

3

DEDICATION

I dedicate this to my parents, teachers, friends, my life

partner and fellow members without whom it was almost

impossible for me to complete my thesis work.

4

ABSTRACT

This research work analyzes the relationship between language learning and

social class in Pakistani institutions at secondary level in light of

implications for performance in the national school system. It is argued that

though Pakistan equitably distributes the linguistic capital of English

through its bilingual language in education policy, children from low income

homes are disadvantaged. For the social groups there is a correlation

between dominant home language and social class. Correspondence analysis

shows that social class is correlated to English test scores. Multilevel

analysis shows that social class is related to aspects of linguistic capital like

language choice in reading, watching TV, choosing types of friends and

learning about religion.

5

Table of Contents:

Acknowledgement …………………………………………………………….. 2

Dedication…………………………………………………................................ 3

Abstract …………………………………………………………………………4

1. Introduction

1.1 Status of English in Pakistan: ………………….………………………...8

1.2. Pakistani English: ……………...……………………………………..9

1.3 Number of people speaking English in Pakistan: ……………………...10

1.4 Access to the global market with English: …………………………….11

1.5 State policies favoring English: ……………………………………… 12

1.6 English in the educational system: …………………………………….13

1.6.1 Teaching and learning of English in Pakistan: …………….…13

1.7 Relationship between medium of instruction and social class…………16

1.7.1 Medium of instruction in Pakistan’s schools …………………17

1.8 Aims of the Study ……………………………………………………...19

1.9 Purpose Statement: ………………………………………………...…..19

1.10 Research Means and Procedure ……………………………………....19

2. Reviews of the Related Literature: ……………………………………....21

2.1 Social Class and Sociolinguistics ……………………………………...21

2.1.1 Social Class in Variationist Sociolinguistics………………….23

2.1.2Social Class: Other Sociological Frameworks…………………26

2.2 Language and Social Class……………………………………………..30

2.3 Beginnings of Sociolinguistics and Language learning………….34

3. Research Methodology ……………………………………………………34

3.1. Population………………………………………………………………34

3.2. Sampling ……………………………………………………….............34

3.3. Instrument ……………………………………………………………...34

4. Data Analysis ………………………………………………………………35

4.1. Questionnaire for the students ………………………………………....36

5. Findings ………………………………………………………………….....63

6

6.1. Suggestions and recommendations …………………………………….69

6.1.1. The role of government ……………………………………………..71

6.1.2. The Professional Development of Teachers ………………………. 72

6.1.3. Dealing with the Learners …………………………………………..76

6.2. Conclusion ………………………………………………………………77

Bibliography ………………………………………………………………….80

Appendix A …………………………………………………………………..84

Appendix B …………………………………………………………………...87

7

CHAPTER 1

1. Introduction

English is a dominant language. Being an international language its

importance cannot be denied and therefore it is spoken everywhere in the

world. So, it has the greatest number of speakers. English is the Lingua

Franca of the world. There are more jobs available to people who speak

English along with their mother tongue. English is so widespread because of

the British Empire. They have spread English to so many countries.

Likewise in Pakistan, the role of English has become more pronounced in

the recent years because the elites of Pakistan especially the armed forces

and the bureaucracy have appropriated English for themselves contrary to

the states declared policies of curtailing its role and replacing it with Urdu,

the national language as the official language. The English language has

been an integral part of Pakistani official, economic, educational,

and (in certain contexts) social life since its creation in 1947. In fact, as

mentioned, the use of English in the region pre-dates the creation of

the state of Pakistan.

8

1.1 Status of English in Pakistan:

The status of English language in Pakistan is as clear as daylight. A

Professionals inadequate grasp of English language would keep him

reminding of his inferior status. An overview of the history of English in

sub-continent will help understand present day attitudes towards English

language learning in Pakistan.

Table: Pakistani Languages

Languages Percentage of

speakers

Punjabi 44.15

Pashto 15.42

Sindhi 14.10

Saraiki 10.53

Urdu 7.57

Balochi 3.57

Others 4.66

9

English enjoys the high status as the language of education, law,

government, science and technology. Advocates of English argue for its

retention as language for international communication as Lingua Franca.

The teaching of English in Pakistan has been text based because of the

beginning as British government policy. In Pakistan, where the native

language is Urdu, English is taught as a compulsory subject in all schools

and colleges.

So English in Pakistan is official is secondary language. It is spoken and

used by relatively small but extremely influential portion of country’s

population in the domain of government administration, law, and the

military, the higher education, commerce and mass media.

Socially English is adopted as a second language and had a significant

impact both economically and educationally. It continues to play an

important role in the country’s commercial and industrial development and

outside the government sector.

1.2 Pakistani English:

The variety of English spoken and written by Pakistanis has been called

“Pakistani English” in sociolinguistic literatures.

10

(Baumgardner 1987; Rehman 1990)

This is non-native variety of English with its own rules. As it is created by

the interference of Pakistani languages, it is internally differentiated with

reference to the first language of the speaker like Punjabi English, Pashtun

English etc. Pakistani English differs from British and American English

most in pronunciation and accent but there are differences in grammar and

vocabulary (Rehman 1990). Pakistani English is used in media, in literature

and in advertising. (baumgardner1993)

1.3 Number of people speaking English in Pakistan:

The numbers of people in Pakistan who commonly speak English are less

than 4 or 5 % of the total population. According to the David crystal the

estimated figure of the English users come about 11 % (1997). If all those

who have passed the matriculation exams, in which English is the

compulsory subject, are assumed to be literate in English( if they write and

read it with understanding), then the figure would be 17.29 of the total

population (1998). But most of among them cannot use English in real life

situation.

English and the power structure in Pakistan: the role of English in Pakistan

has been studied by Anjum Riaz Ul Haq (1983), Shameem Abbas (1993),

11

Sabiha mansoor (1993-1995) and Tariq Rehman (1996-2002). The first two

writers merely touch upon the role of English in country. Mansoor has

conducted survey on the attitudes of students towards language learning and

he provided a detailed analysis on the role of English in higher education.

1.4 Access to the global market with English:

Colonialism is an important factor that helped to spread the English

language far and wide. English established itself on many parts of the globe

stretching from Australia, Southeast Asia, Hong Kong, India, Africa and

North America. The British government established schools in these

countries, which helped the language to expand. The governments of some

of the former British colonies later adopted English as their national

language. This eventually led to more varieties of English in the world. In

England, the so-called Standard English or 'national language' is used mostly

in formal contexts as represented by BBC newscasters and journalists.

In recent years, English has become the language of globalization and

therefore, dominates the world. Thus Pakistanis seeking access to the

international market also need English. Indeed, while state jobs in Pakistan

have become accessible for people who have average proficiency in English,

the most well paying NGOs, professionals teaching in the private

12

educational institutions, the corporate sector and the most fashionable

society all need very high proficiency in English. Thus, sixty five years

independence from the British rule, Pakistani finds themselves more in need

of English than ever before. It was, and remains, the modernizing Pakistanis

major hope for empowerment as long as the present policies, which favor

English, remain intact.

1.5 State policies favoring English:

From the earliest days of Pakistan the state seems to have followed

discrepant policies about English. The overt policy, which was enshrined in

the 1973 constitution, was as follows:

The national language of Pakistan is Urdu, and arrangements shall be made

for its being used for official and other purposes within fifteen years from

the commencing day.

Subject to clause 1) the English language should be used as the official

language until arrangements are made for its replacement by Urdu (article

251 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973).

The covert policy was to allow English to continue as the official language

of Pakistan regardless of what the Constitution might have declared.

Moreover, it was allowed to function as the medium of instruction in the

13

elitist schools. Indeed, the civil bureaucracy and the armed forces, both

institutions of the state, have invested heavily for the English medium

system of instruction to the declared policies of the constitutions of Pakistan.

1.6 English in the educational system:

1.6.1 Teaching and learning of English in Pakistan:

English is taught as a compulsory subject from the first grade in curricula.

English language teachers in Pakistan must approach teaching English as a

secondary language from the perspective of applied linguistics. Increase in

the number of language institutes and their students also increasing interest

of parents for their children to learn English can be good evidence for the

recent value of English language. Teaching of English language in Pakistan

has been a text based program

A Pakistani learner is motivated into learning English language for:

1. Studies abroad

2. Greater job opportunities outside his native area

3. Social missionary or military purposes.

4. Trade and commerce

14

5. Academic purposes

The educationist pleads for the teaching of English as a window on the

world. The politician wants English because of inter and intra

communicational needs with different linguistic regions needs of the country

as well as with the world outside. It is evident that it cannot take the place of

a national language but a language that has entered the blood stream of a

nation cannot by any canon of justice be given the status of just a foreign

language. The influence of English is on increase rather than the decrease.

The English newspaper and magazines have an extensive readership. The

number of books published in English is quite encouraging. The English is

still used in offices, High court and parliament, etc. More and more public

schools where the study of English starts right from the first grade are being

opened.

However, the level of competence is low and students are unable to

understand, speak and write. They learn to translate passages from English

to Urdu and vice versa. As the books are not changed for many years,

students study the old pattern and dead stuff, Students cram the lesson such

as essays and get passing grades without acquiring any real competence in

English. Passing percentage is very below in English.

15

Another fact is that majority of the students belong to lower middle class and

middle class or low class so as they are unable to send their child to a good

English medium private institute. Their child is poorly exposed to the

English language and that is why he gets the poor knowledge and fails to

acquire the English language patterns with the true sense. Such a child after

completing his/her education when steps into the practical or professional

field is very weak to speak effectively in English language and ultimately he

gets a low level job and unable to develop a strong career.

Pakistani educators are concerned that the English language is taught in that

country under conditions which are far from being satisfactory. English

plays a prominent role in Pakistan as a lingua franca – a common means of

communication – besides Urdu and a host of regional languages and

numerous dialects – as a global language, and an easy medium for science

and technology. However, it is a fact that despite studying English in schools

and colleges for about 6-8 years, students, especially coming from rural

backgrounds, are not able to communicate in English with relative ease and

success. Even in some areas where students use a regional language as a first

language (L1) besides Urdu – and in such areas English becomes a third

language (L3) – they lack all the four major linguistic skills – reading,

writing, listening, and speaking. Since acquiring a second language is a skill,

16

it should be approached in that light. It is clear that the methods of teaching

the English language in Pakistan have not yielded the desired objective, i.e.

communicative competence.

The process of any second or foreign language teaching includes ‘selection,’

‘grading,’ and ‘presentation’ as the major steps. Linguistics plays an

instrumental role in the teaching process. English in Pakistan has not yet

attained its level. Most of the students and are poor speakers of English

language and they face difficulty in communicating effectively the

meaningful information and also in producing words and sounds accurately.

Similarly many professionals feel hard to understand the exact meaning and

fail to get the core sense of understanding of what the person is talking him

about. The reason is because of fallowing the poor language learning

approach that is not close to natural process of learning a language.

1.7 Relationship between medium of instruction and social class:

Medium of instruction is an aspect of schooling, which is inextricably linked

with social class. Schools, which offer majority languages with global and

instrumental power, like Standard English, tend to service children from

advantaged homes. Thus, disadvantaged communities value a national

school system that provides the linguistic capital of a powerful language at

subsidized rates. However such schooling remains a challenge for children

17

who come from disadvantaged homes where the dominant home language is

not the medium of instruction. In fact Fishman has commented that what is

important to notice within the process of the spread of global English is that

“…regardless of location, the spread of English is closely linked to social

class, age, gender, and profession” (Fishman, p. 28). Thus in those societies

where the spread of English is palpable, this is likely to happen within the

elite classes.

1.7.1 Medium of instruction in Pakistan’s schools:

In Pakistan English has been the medium of instruction in the national

school system since 1987. Prior to this schools chose various mother tongues

as media of instruction.

These mother tongue medium schools, however, closed down due to low

enrollment and stiff competition from English medium schools (Gopinathan,

2003). Pakistan has two official languages: Urdu and English, all of which

are taught in the national schools. Pakistani children undergo English

medium education and learn one other language i.e. Urdu. The national

school system is highly subsidized. As such, Pakistan’s bilingual language in

education policy attempts to equitably distribute the linguistic capital of

English to students of all races and income groups.

18

At the same time the school is also an agent of cultural reproduction in that it

privileges students who come from English dominant homes and perpetuates

their success while disenfrachizing those who come from mother tongue

dominant homes. “The problems posed by situations of early bilingualism or

biculturalism give only a faint idea of the insurmountable contradictions

faced by a PA [pedagogic action] claiming to take as its practical didactic

principle the theoretical affirmation of the arbitrariness of linguistic or

cultural codes” (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977, p 12). We take this to mean

that the practical or instrumental nature of choosing English as medium of

instruction affirms that this choice of language is objective. Pakistanis firmly

believe in the objective nature of this language in the education policy and

are convinced that mother tongue is not an appropriate medium of

instruction.

In keeping above discussion the researcher, explore answers to the following

questions:

What is the relationship between ethnic group, dominant home

language and social class in Pakistan?

Do the main ethnic groups in Pakistan show the same relationship

between social class and dominant home language?

19

How are aspects of social class, like reading in English, watching TV

in English and learning about religion in English?

What are the implications of these relationships for the English

medium national school system?

1.8 Aims of the Study

Through this study, it is aimed at having a better understanding of social

class teaching within foreign language education. It is aimed in particular at

assessing the weight of the English language social component as

incorporated in the Pakistan’s social classes.

It is also aimed at investigating the teachers' understanding of social class,

and the way they actually deal with various social classes in their

classrooms. The information collected will serve to make recommendations

as to how best to teach about the target language social class dimension in

the Pakistani context.

1.9 Purpose Statement:

The purpose of this research is to identify “the role of the social class in the

English language learning in the Pakistani institutions at secondary level”.

1.10 Research Means and Procedure

20

The hypotheses enunciated above entail the resort to several means of data

collection. To begin with, this research work is led through a quantitative

analysis.

To inquire into the teachers' beliefs and viewpoints about the role of social

class, questionnaires are designed and adapted to the targeted levels.

The same research means is suitable when surveying the learners, to throw

light on their views and attitudes as regards learning English and learning

about English speaking classes.

21

CHAPTER 2

2. Reviews of the Related Literature:

In variationist sociolinguistics, the patterned nature of the relationship

between social class and language variation has been a longstanding focus,

with research questions that typically ask how social class, in relation with

other social and stylistic factors, affects language use. When including social

class variables in quantitative analyses, many variationists have followed A

set of empirical traditions from sociology that determine an individual’s

position in a discrete social class by using scales that draw upon factors like

income, education, and occupation. Yet, such measures and classification

schemas may not imply a particular theory of social structures and are often

more descriptive than analytical.

2.1 Social Class and Sociolinguistics

Perhaps due to the fact that variationist sociolinguists have employed

empirical approaches to class while remaining disengaged from theoretical

debates surrounding it, little consensus has been reached over how to

theorize or measure class, making it both a conceptual and methodological

hurdle.

Ash (2002:402) captures this consternation:

22

“Social class is a central concept in sociolinguistic research…. It is

ironic, then, that social class is often defined in an ad hoc way in studies

of linguistic variation and change, … and individuals are placed in a

social hierarchy despite the lack of a consensus as to what concrete,

quantifiable independent variables contribute to determining social class.

… Thus, this variable is universally used and extremely productive,

although linguists can lay little claim to understanding it.”

As Ash suggests, sociolinguists’ insecurities lie in how best to operationalize

class as a variable and accurately classify speakers along its dimensions, in

order to measure its correlation with language variation.

Similar critiques are issued by Rickford (1986, 2001), who recommends that

sociolinguists working with social class look to theoretical and

methodological advancements outside of linguistics:

“To adequately account for the quantitative distributions by social

class that we observe in local surveys of language use, we need to turn

to sociological and anthropological models of social stratification and

life mode, but these are quite unfamiliar to the average sociolinguist”

(Rickford 2001:220).

23

That is, new theoretical views on social class may provide better

interpretations of language variation by class or may help develop new or

refined empirical approaches to class— either of which could better

illuminate the social class/language variation relationship.

2.1.1 Social Class in Variationist Sociolinguistics

In variationist sociolinguistics, many early studies examined the relationship

between linguistic variation and major demographic categories within large

populations in the urban centers of the US and the UK. To conceptualize and

operationalize social class, variationists drew on one advancement in

sociology at that time: the socioeconomic index. In Labov’s (1966) study, A

respondent was given a score on a socioeconomic index constructed as part

of a sociological survey; it accounted for the person’s years of education, the

occupation of the family breadwinner, and family income. Wolfram’s (1969)

study employed Duncan’s (1961) Socioeconomic Index (SEI).

These and similar indices have found considerable utility in variationism

(Ash 2002, Kerswill 2007). Data on individuals’ occupations, income, etc.,

are easy to obtain. Once these data are transformed into a score that can be

used to measure individuals’ places in the occupational hierarchy (and

thereby approximate their social class), this information can be correlated

24

with data from other variables and tested statistically. For example, Labov

used respondents’ socioeconomic index scores to assign them to one of four

social classes and test patterns in the language use of these groups. Thus,

socioeconomic indices are useful in variationist sociolinguistics precisely

because they align with and are adaptable to our already established

orientation to categoricity and statistically driven methods.

Yet, the use of socioeconomic scales to determine individual’s class

backgrounds raises theoretical and methodological issues. Grusky (2001:

21–2) notes,

“[Despite] [t]he staying power of prestige and socioeconomic scales

… [t]his long run may nonetheless be coming to an end; indeed, while

a widely supported alternative to socioeconomic scales has yet to

appear, the socioeconomic tradition has been subjected to increasing

criticism on various fronts.”

One set of critiques focus on measurement issues pertaining to

socioeconomic indices, particularly their posited male and Eurocentric

biases. For example, in Duncan’s (1961) SEI, the man’s occupation is taken

to be that of the ‘head of household,’ while the focus on paid employment

disregards unpaid domestic labor. The validity of such scales may also be

25

confounded, due to the fact that women tend to have higher levels of

education than men in the same occupation, while the reverse is true for

earnings (Warren, Sheridan, and Hauser 1998). Also, for example, if

“middle class” is defined as all white-collar workers excluding service

workers, then in 2000, 53% of black workers were in the middle class.

However, if “middle class” is defined as those in high-income, white-collar

professions, then only 25% of black workers fall in this group (Fronzcek and

Johnson 2003).

Second, critiques center on how indices are used to locate individuals in

class schemas. Various sociologists have suggested class schemas (e.g.

Warner 1949, Wright 1997). But do they yield “purely nominal entities”?

As Grusky (2001:7) posits,

“If [class] categories are intended to be meaningful, one would expect

class members not only to be aware of their membership (i.e., ‘class

awareness’) but also to identify with their class (i.e. ‘class

identification’) and occasionally act on its behalf (i.e. ‘class action’).”

Yet, subjective class identification is highly variable as a dimension of social

stratification, particularly cross-culturally. For example, in 1996, 45% of

African and Americans identified as middle class, but in 1998, only 31% did

26

so (Tate 1996, Davis, Smith, and Marsden 1998) (see also Stricker 1980,

1982).

Third are critiques of the lack of theory behind how socioeconomic indices

are conceived. The occupational structure and the class structure are often

referred to as being virtually synonymous, but does occupation determine

class, or does class determine occupation (and what processes are involved)?

To what extent should education and occupation be taken to assess social

standing? Do they have additive and independent effects—and if so, how do

they exercise these effects on class orientations? How might class also be

multidimensional in ways that include subjective components (attitudes,

lifestyle, culture) that still have material and economic effects

2.1.2Social Class: Other Sociological Frameworks

In the entry on social class in the (2003) Encyclopedia of Social Theory, Erik

Olin Wright proclaims that few concepts are more contested in sociological

theory than the concept of “class,” and confusion exists over what class

means. In general, “class” invokes understandings of economic inequality.

Yet, different theoretical approaches to class as economic inequality entail

different agendas of class analysis. Wright reviews five such approaches: (1)

class as subjective location, (2) class as objective position within

27

distributions, (3) class as the relational explanation of economic life chance,

(4) class as a dimension of historical variation in systems of inequality, and

(5) class as a foundation of economic oppression and exploitation. Space

constraints preclude a discussion of each approach, but the first three

agendas have found relevance within variationist sociolinguistic research. I

summarize Wright’s (2003) synopsis of each, below.

In the first agenda, class as subjective location entails an examination of

how people locate themselves and others in a social structure of inequality.

In this formulation, Wright explains, classes are social categories sharing

subjectively salient attributes. As such, class groups are like other status

groups, and class is one salient dimension along which to evaluate other

people (in both economic and non-economic terms). In this regard, attributes

of class vary contextually; class subjectivities may also be highly influenced

by perception and even at odds with people’s economic standing.

In the second agenda, class as objective position within distributions refers

to how people are objectively located in distributions of material inequality,

typically indexed by income. In this framework, class is A gradational

concept, meaning that classes are defined as continuous sets of discrete

categories, like rungs on a ladder, with names like “lower class” and “upper

28

class” to designate various locations. Class conceptualized this way relates

to other ways people are defined in relation to social structures (e.g. by

citizenship or racial status). But it is difficult to construct universalistic class

schemes, and objective distinctions focus little on the actual social relations

that determine people’s access to economic and material resources.

In the third agenda, class as the relational explanation of economic life

chance, class is defined by people’s relationships to various

incomegenerating resources or assets. While these locations may relate to

people’s subjective class-related tastes and lifestyles (as in the first agenda),

it is the relationship to resources that is seen as defining classes and affecting

people’s life chances—just like gender, race, citizenship, etc. In sociology,

this agenda is taken up by Weber and Bourdieu, who (like Marx) reject

gradational definitions of class and instead prefer relational approaches.

Different theoretical and empirical approaches to social class have

implications for variationists looking to ascertain which approaches are most

productive in studying language variation and how to incorporate them into

new research. While the first two approaches have been used in

sociolinguistic research, the third agenda may provide a clearer vision of the

social processes through which social class affects language variation—

29

namely, how the competitive hierarchy differentially allocates capitals and

access to resources, including linguistic resources. This line of thinking is in

keeping with variationist tradition, as Labovian sociolinguistics has long

contended that language use is shaped by social forces. For example, Labov

(forthcoming) theorizes how dialect divergence between black and white

vernaculars is structured by residential segregation, which shapes and

constrains access to the valued resource of Standard English.

As noted earlier, the theories of Weber and Bourdieu are two possibilities.

Yet, Weber has been criticized for focusing more narrowly on economic life

chances (Wright 2003) and for being limited in the extent to which gender

and race/ethnicity are taken into account. In contrast, Bourdieu (1997)

extends his focus to both cultural and social capital, and also recognizes

gender oppression as symbolic violence; yet he pays little substantial

attention to the role of race/ethnicity in structuring social inequalities (Acker

2006:35).

In an approach typical of a current trend in sociology toward integrationist

and intersectional theory, feminist sociologist Joan Acker builds on Marx,

Bourdieu, and Weber, while also theorizing more specifically how class is

constructed in ways that are bound with race and gender. In Acker’s (2006)

30

theoretical framework, “‘Class’ stands for practices and relations that

provide differential access to and control over the means of provisioning and

survival,” to which gender and race affect access (68). Acker’s (2006:45–46)

four-pronged conceptual and analytical approach to class entails:

“first, thinking about social relations and structures as active practices,

occurring in specific historical and geographic places; second,

beginning the exploration of class from the standpoints of women and

men located differently from white male class actors; third, clarifying

the meaning of gendering and racializing; and fourth, broadening the

understanding of the economic relations that constitute class and

extending the analysis of gendering and racializing processes beyond

production”.

2.2 Language and Social Class

Linguists have known for some time that differences in language are tied to

social class. Ross (1954) suggested that certain lexical and phonological

differences in English could be classified as U(upper class) or non-U (lower

class), e.g., serviette (non-U) vs. table-napkin (U), one of the best known of

all linguistic class indicators of England at the time.

31

Similarly, in the United States, some surveys of regional dialect recognized

the importance of social status in geographical variation, and distinguished

three categories of subjects based on the fieldworker's classification: Type

IÐ little formal education, little reading and restricted social contacts; Type

IIÐ better formal education (usually high school) and}or wider reading and

social contacts; and Type IIIÐ superior education (usually college), cultured

background, wide reading and}or extensive social contacts. These types

correspond roughly to social status.

Until the 1960s, however, most studies of variability were concerned

primarily with regional variation or dialectology, following a tradition

established in the nineteenth century. These studies concentrated their efforts

on documenting the rural dialects which it was believed would soon

disappear. Only during the latter half of the twentieth century would the

concern for status-based differences in language become a primary rather

than a secondary focus, when sociolinguists turned their attention to the

language of cities, where an increasing proportion of the world's population

lives in modern times. The rise of urbanization is connected with an increase

in social stratification rejected in linguistic variation.

2.3 Beginnings of Sociolinguistics and Language learning

32

Research focusing on social dialects is sometimes referred to as social

dialectology, and occupies a central place in quantitative sociolinguistic

research on urban speech varieties, beginning with William Labov's (1966)

work in New York City. He was the first to introduce a systematic

methodology for investigating social dialects and the first large-scale

sociolinguistic survey of an urban community. Unlike previous

dialectological studies, which generally chose one person (usually an older

male) as representative of a particular area, this survey was based on

taperecorded interviews with 103 people who had been chosen by random

sample as being representative of the various social classes, ages, ethnic

groups, etc., to be found in New York City. This approach solved the

problem of how any one person's speech could be thought of as representing

a large urban area.

Previous investigations had concluded that the speech of New Yorkers

appeared to vary in a random and unpredictable manner. Sometimes they

pronounced the names Ian and Ann alike and sometimes they pronounced

post-vocalic /r/ (i.e., r following a vowel) in words such as car, while at

other times they did not. This actuation was termed `free variation' because

there did not seem to be any explanation for it.

33

Labov's study and subsequent ones modeled after it, however, showed that

when such free variation in the speech of and between individuals was

viewed against the background of the community as a whole, it was not free,

but rather conditioned by social factors such as social class, age, sex, and

style in predictable ways.

Thus, while idiolects (or the speech of individuals) considered in isolation

might seem random, the speech community as a whole behaved regularly.

Using these methods, one could predict that a person of a particular social

class, age, sex, etc., would pronounce post-vocalic /r/ a certain percent of the

time in certain situations.

Through the introduction of these new methods for investigating social

dialects by correlating sociolinguistic variables with social factors,

sociolinguists have been able to build up a comprehensive picture of social

dialect differentiation in the United States and Britain in particular, and other

places, where these studies have since been replicated.

34

CHAPTER 3

3. Research Methodology:

3.1. Population:

All the students of English at the secondary level of both government and

private institutions were considered to be the population for the study.

3.2. Sampling:

100 students were selected from a government and a private institutions as

sample by using simple random technique as using questionnaires.

3.3. Instrument:

Following instruments were used to get information about the impact of

social class on the English language learning in the Pakistani institutions.

A questionnaire was distributed among the students.

This questionnaire was developed to investigate from the students whether

they had concept of the impact of the social class on the English language

learning or not, whether the social class could effect on the English language

learning or not.

35

CHAPTER 4

4. Data Analysis:

The researcher conducted this study to find out the impact and role of the

social class in the English language learning. For this purpose, a

questionnaire was prepare for the students at the various levels. The

questionnaire consisted of fifteen questions in the questionnaires for the

students. These questionnaires were given to the students of secondary level.

The results of the questionnaires are shown on the tables and the bar charts.

Data was collected by the researcher and then that was statistically analyzed

and presented in the table form.

That analysis and interpretation of the data is given.

Data was collected by the researcher and then that was statistically analyzed

and presented in the table form.

That analysis and interpretation of the data is given.

36

4.1. Questionnaire for the students:

Table No.1 showing the responses about the occupation of the student’s

father.

What is the occupation of your father?

Business

Job holder

Agriculture

Other (please specify)

occupation Business Jobholder Agriculture Other

Percentage 33% 36% 28% 3%

The table indicates that

33 percent of the students said that their father’s occupation is business,

while 36 percent informed that their fathers are jobholders. Similarly, 28

percent of the students are from agricultural setup and only 3 percent said

that their father’s occupation is other i.e. labours.

37

Diagram No. 1 Responses showing about the occupation of the students’

fathers’.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Business Jobholders Agriculture Other

Students fathers' occupation

38

Table No.2: Showing the responses about education of the students’

fathers.

What is your father’s education?

M.Phil

Master

Graduation

Under graduation

Education M.Phil Master Graduation Under graduation

Percentage 3% 43% 21 33%


Only 3% students response that their fathers’ education is M.Phil. While 43%

said that their fathers’ education is master. 21% of them said that their fathers

are graduated. 33% showed that their fathers are under graduated.

39

Diagram 2 showing the responses about the students’ fathers’ education.

Table 3 showing the responses of the students about their mothers’

occupations.

What is your mother’s occupation?

Business

Job holder

House wife


occupation Business Jobholder House wife Other

Percentage 12% 39% 49% 0%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

M.Phil Master Graduation Under graduation

Students fathers' education

40


12% students’ mothers run the business and 39% are jobholders, while 49% are

housewives.

Diagram 3 showing the responses of the students about their mothers’

occupations.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Business Jobholders Housewife Other

Students mothers' occupation

41

Table 4 showing the responses of the students about the monthly income of

their fathers.

What is your father’s monthly income?

10000 to 20000

20000 to 30000

30000 to 50000

More than 50000

Income 10000 to 20000

20000 to 30000

30000 to 50000

More than 50000

Percentage 12% 17% 29% 42%


12% of the parents have monthly income in between 10,000 to 20,000. 17% are

earning 20,000 to 30,000 per month. While 29% of them have income from

30,000 to 50,000 and 42% are earning more than 50,000 per month.

42

Diagram 4 showing the monthly income of the students’ parents.

Table 5 showing the responses of the students about the medium of

instruction used at their schools according with different social set up.

Which medium of instruction is used in your school?

English

Urdu

Social class Business class Jobholders class

Agricultural class

Others

Medium of

instruction

English Urdu English Urdu English Urdu English Urdu

Percentage 100% 0% 98% 02% 84% 16% 75% 25%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

10000 to 20000 20000 to 30000 30000 to 50000 more than 50000

Student parents' income

43


The students who are from the business class are studying in the English

medium schools and the students whose parents are jobholders, 98% are getting

education from the English medium schools, while only 2% are attending the

Urdu medium schools. The students from the agricultural families, 84% of them

are studying in those schools where medium of instruction is English and 16%

are getting education from the Urdu medium institutions. While the students

from the other classes (labour) 75% are getting education from the Urdu

medium schools and only 25% are attending the English medium schools.

Diagram 5 showing the responses of the students about the medium of

instruction.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Business class Jobholders agricultural class other

Medium of instruction used at the schools

English

Urdu

44

Table 6 showing the responses of the students about the English TV

channels, which they watch at their homes.

Do you watch English channels at your home?

Yes

No

Social class Business

class

Jobholders

class

Agricultural

class

others

TV channel response

Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No

Percentage 100% 0% 100% 00% 63% 37% 12% 88%


100% business class and jobholders families watch the English TV channels.

While 63% of the agricultural families watch the English TV channels and only

12% from other classes watch English the TV channels.

45

Diagram 6 showing the responses of the students about the English TV

channels

Table 7 showing the responses about the movies

Which movies do you prefer?

English movies (Hollywood)

Urdu (Hindi) movies

Punjabi

Other (Please specify)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120


Responses about the English TV channels

Yes

No

46

Social

class Business class

Jobholders class Agricultural class others

Movie Eng

lish

Urdu/

Hindi

Bot

h

Ot

her

Eng

lish

Urdu/

Hindi

Bot

h

Ot

her

Eng

lish

Urdu/

Hindi

Bot

h

Ot

her

Eng

lish

Urdu/

Hindi

Bo

th

ot

he

r

Perce

ntage

2 5 93 00 3 27 70 00 6 53 41 00 01 74 25 00

The table shows that

2% from the business class society watches only English movies, while 5%

watches Urdu/Hindi movies and 93% watches both English and Urdu/Hindi

movies. Only 3% from the jobholder families watches the English movies and

27% Urdu/Hindi movies, while 70% watches movies from both languages.

From the agricultural class only 6% prefers the English language movies and

53% Urdu/Hindi movies, while 41% prefers both. The students from the other

classes, only 1% of them watches English movies and 74% Urdu/Hindi movies,

while 25% watches movies from both languages.

47

Diagram 7 showing the responses about the movies

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Business class Jobholders Agricultural class other

English

Urdu/Hindi

Both

other

48

Table 8 showing the responses about the TV channels

Which TV channel(s) mostly you watch at your home?

English

Urdu

Both


Social

class Business class Jobholders class Agricultural

class others

TV

channel

s

English

Urdu

Both

Other

English

Urdu

Both

Other

English

Urdu

Both

Other

English

Urdu

Both

other

Percent

age

00 7 93 00 00 27 73 00 00 53 47 00 00 83 17 00


No one from the business class watches the English TV channels. 7% of them

watches just the Urdu TV channels, while 93% watches both English and Urdu

languages channels. Similarly 0% students from the jobholders class watches

only English TV channels and 27% prefers Urdu TV channels, while 73%

watches both channels. The students from the agriculture background do not

watch the English TV channels and 53% prefers only channels in the Urdu

language, while 47% prefers in both languages. The students from other classes

49

do not prefer the English TV channels, while 83% of them watches channel in

the Urdu language and 17% prefers both.

Diagram 8 showing the responses about the TV channels

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


English

Urdu

Both

other

50

Table 9 showing the responses about the native language

Which is your native language?

Urdu

Punjabi

Saraiki


Social


class others

Native

langua

ge

Urdu

Punjabi

Saraiki

Other

Urdu

Punjabi

Saraiki

Other

Urdu

Punjabi

Saraiki

Other

Urdu

Punjabi

Saraiki

other

Percent

age

9 69 11 11 8 63 12 17 00 63 27 10 00 21 11 68


9% students from the business class has Urdu as native language and 69% have

Punjabi, 11% have Saraiki and 11% have other native languages. 8% from the

jobholders families have Urdu native language, 63% have Punjabi and 12%

have Saraiki native language while 17% have others native languages. The

students from the other classes, 0% have Urdu native language, 21% have

Punjabi, 11% have Saraiki and 68% have other native languages.

51

Diagram 9 showing the responses about the native languages

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80


Urdu

Punjabi

Saraiki

other

52

Table 10 showing the responses about the language spoken at the home.

Which language is spoken at your home?

Urdu

Punjabi

English and Urdu


Social


class others

Langua

ge

spoken

at

home

Urdu

Punjabi

Urdu &

Engl

ish

Other

Urdu

Punjabi

Urdu &

Engl

ish

Other

Urdu

Punjabi

Urdu &

Engl

ish

Other

Urdu

Punjabi

Urdu &

Engl

ish

other

Percent

age

37 32 21 11 13 32 39 16 12 31 27 30 10 21 00 69


37% students from the business class speak Urdu and 32% speak Punjabi, 21%

speaks both Urdu and English and 11% speak other languages at the home. 13%

from the jobholders families speaks Urdu, 32% speaks Punjabi and 39% speaks

both Urdu and English language while 16% have other languages at the home.

The students from the agriculture families, 12% speak Urdu language, 31%

speak Punjabi, 27% speaks both English and Urdu in the home and 30% speak

53

other languages. 10% students from the other classes speak Urdu, 21% Punjabi

and 00% both English and Urdu while 69% speak other languages at the home.

Diagram 10 showing the responses about the language spoken at the home

Table 11 showing the responses about the language spoken with the

friends.

Which language you speak with your friends?

Urdu

English

Punjabi

English and Urdu

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80


Urdu

Punjabi

English and Urdu

other

54


Social


class

others

Langua

ge with

friends

Ur

du

Punj

abi

Urdu

& Engl

ish

Oth

er

Ur

du

Punj

abi

Urdu

& Engl

ish

Oth

er

Ur

du

Punj

abi

Urdu

& Engl

ish

Oth

er

Ur

du

Punj

abi

Urdu

& Engl

ish

oth

er

Percent

age

37 32 21 11 13 32 39 16 12 31 27 30 35 23 32 15



speaks both Urdu and English and 11% speak other languages with the friends.

13% from the jobholders families speaks Urdu, 32% speaks Punjabi and 39%

speaks both Urdu and English language while 16% have other languages with

the friends. The students from the agriculture families, 12% speak Urdu

language, 31% speak Punjabi, 27% speaks both English and Urdu and 30%

speak other languages with the friends. 35% students from the other classes

speak Urdu, 23% Punjabi and 32% both English and Urdu while 15% speak

other languages with the friends.

55

Diagram 11 showing the responses about the language spoken with the

friends

Table 12 showing the responses about the visit to abroad.

Have you visited abroad?

Yes

No

Social class Business class

Jobholders class

Agricultural class

others

Abroad

visit


Percentage 32% 68% 37% 63% 21% 79% 25% 75%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45


Urdu

Punjabi

English and Urdu

other

56


32% students from the business class have visited abroad and 68% have not.

37% students from the jobholders families have gone to abroad and 63% have

not yet got the chance. 21% students from the agriculture background have

enjoyed in abroad and 79% have not visited yet. 25% students from the other

classes have visited the abroad and 75% have not.

Diagram 12 showing the responses about the visit to abroad

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90


Responses about the visit to abroad

Yes

No

57

Table 13 showing the responses about the books read in various languages.

In which language do you prefer to read the books? (Novel, stories

etc)

English

Urdu

English and Urdu both


Social


class others

Langua

ge to

read

Engl

ish

Ur

du

Urdu

&

Engl

ish

Oth

er

Engl

ish

Ur

du

Urdu

&

Engl

ish

Oth

er

Engl

ish

Ur

du

Urdu

&

Engl

ish

Oth

er

Engl

ish

Ur

du

Urdu

&

Engl

ish

oth

er

Percent

age

27 21 52 00 32 17 51 00 12 41 47 00 10 62 28 00


27% students from the business class read English books and 21% Urdu books,

52% prefer both Urdu and English books. 32% from the jobholders families

read English books, 17% Urdu and 51% prefers both Urdu and English books.

The students from the agriculture families, 12% read English books, 41% Urdu,

47% prefers both English and Urdu books. 10% students from the other classes

read English books, 62% Urdu and 28% both English and Urdu books.

58

Diagram 13 showing the responses about the books in various languages.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80


Urdu

Punjabi

English and Urdu

other

59

Table 14 showing the responses about the relationship between language

and the social class.

Is there any relationship between the social class and the English

language learning?

Yes

No

Social class Business

class

Jobholders

class

Agricultural

class

others


Percentage 100% 0% 100% 00% 100% 00% 100% 00%


All the students from all classes agreed that there is relationship between

language and the social class.

60

Diagram 14 showing the responses about the relationship between language

and the social class

Table 15 showing the responses about the percentage in English subject.

What has been your percentage in English subject?

More than 90 %

70 to 90 %

50 to 70 %

Less than 50 %

0

20

40

60

80

100

120


Responses about the relationship between language and the social class

Yes

No

61

Social


class others

English

score

More

than

90%

70

to

90%

50

to

70

%

Less

than

50%

More

than

90%

70

to

90%

50

to

70

%

Less

than

50%

More

than

90%

70

to

90%

50

to

70

%

Less

than

50%

More

than

90%

70

to

90%

50

to

70

%

Less

than

50%

Percentage 9 69 11 11 8 63 12 17 00 63 27 10 00 21 68 11


9% students from the business class secure more than 90% marks in the English

subject, while 69% get between 70 to 90% and 11% secure 50 to 70% while

11% get less than 50%. 8% students from the jobholders class secure more than

90% marks in the English subject, while 63% get between 70 to 90% and 12%

secure 50 to 70% while 17% get less than 50%. 00% students from the

agricultural class secure more than 90% marks in the English subject, while

63% get between 70 to 90% and 27% secure 50 to 70% while 10% get less than

50%. 00% students from the business class secure more than 90% marks in the

English subject, while 21% get between 70 to 90% and 68% secure 50 to 70%

while 11% get less than 50%. 9% students from the other classes secure more

than 90% marks in the English subject, while 69% get between 70 to 90% and

11% secure 50 to 70% while 11% get less than 50%.

62

Diagram 15 showing the responses about the percentage in English subject

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80


More than 90%

70 to 90%

50 to 70%

Less than 50%

63

CAHPTER 5

5. Findings:

The respondents show the mix response. The word dominate is used 75 to 100

percent, large majority indicates 60 to 70 percent and majority denotes 40 to 60

percent of the responses.

33 percent of the students said that their father’s occupation is business .

36 percent informed that their fathers are jobholders.

28 percent of the students are from agricultural setup and only 3 percent said

that their father’s occupation is other i.e. labours.

3% students response that their fathers’ education is M.Phil.

43% said that their fathers’ education is master.

21% of them said that their fathers are graduated.

33% showed that their fathers are under graduated.

12% students’ mothers run the business and 39% are jobholders, while 49% are

housewives.

12% of the parents have monthly income in between 10,000 to 20,000.

64

17% are earning 20,000 to 30,000 per month.

29% of them have income from 30,000 to 50,000.

42% are earning more than 50,000 per month.

The students who are from the business class are studying in the English

medium schools and the students whose parents are jobholders, 98% are getting

education from the English medium schools. only 2% are attending the Urdu

medium schools.

The students from the agricultural families, 84% of them are studying in those

schools where medium of instruction is English and 16% are getting education

from the Urdu medium institutions.

The students from the other classes (labour) 75% are getting education from the

Urdu medium schools and only 25% are attending the English medium schools.

100% business class and jobholders families watch the English TV channels.

63% of the agricultural families watch the English TV channels.

12% from other classes watch English the TV channels.

2% from the business class society watches only English movies.5% watches

Urdu/Hindi movies and 93% watches both English and Urdu/Hindi movies.

65

Only 3% from the jobholder families watches the English movies and 27%

Urdu/Hindi movies, while 70% watches movies from both languages.

From the agricultural class only 6% prefers the English language movies and

53% Urdu/Hindi movies, while 41% prefers both.

The students from the other classes, only 1% of them watches English movies

and 74% Urdu/Hindi movies, while 25% watches movies from both languages.

No one from the business class watches the English TV channels. 7% of them

watches just the Urdu TV channels, while 93% watches both English and Urdu

languages channels.

0% students from the jobholders class watches only English TV channels and

27% prefers Urdu TV channels, while 73% watches both channels.

The students from the agriculture background do not watch the English TV

channels and 53% prefers only channels in the Urdu language, while 47%

prefers in both languages.

The students from other classes do not prefer the English TV channels, while

83% of them watches channel in the Urdu language and 17% prefers both.

9% students from the business class has Urdu as native language and 69% have


66

8% from the jobholders families have Urdu native language, 63% have Punjabi

and 12% have Saraiki native language while 17% have others native languages.

The students from the other classes, 0% have Urdu native language, 21% have



speaks both Urdu and English and 11% speak other languages at the home.


speaks both Urdu and English language while 16% have other languages at the

home.


speak Punjabi, 27% speaks both English and Urdu in the home and 30% speak

other languages.

10% students from the other classes speak Urdu, 21% Punjabi and 00% both

English and Urdu while 69% speak other languages at the home.


speaks both Urdu and English and 11% speak other languages with the friends.

67


speaks both Urdu and English language while 16% have other languages with

the friends.


speak Punjabi, 27% speaks both English and Urdu and 30% speak other

languages with the friends.

35% students from the other classes speak Urdu, 23% Punjabi and 32% both

English and Urdu while 15% speak other languages with the friends.

32% students from the business class have visited abroad and 68% have not.

37% students from the jobholders families have gone to abroad and 63% have

not yet got the chance.

21% students from the agriculture background have enjoyed in abroad and 79%

have not visited yet.

25% students from the other classes have visited the abroad and 75% have not.

27% students from the business class read English books and 21% Urdu books,

52% prefer both Urdu and English books.

68

32% from the jobholders families read English books, 17% Urdu and 51%

prefers both Urdu and English books.

The students from the agriculture families, 12% read English books, 41% Urdu,

47% prefers both English and Urdu books.

10% students from the other classes read English books, 62% Urdu and 28%

both English and Urdu books.

All the students from all classes agreed that there is relationship between

language and the social class.

9% students from the business class secure more than 90% marks in the English


11% get less than 50%.

8% students from the jobholders class secure more than 90% marks in the


while 17% get less than 50%.

00% students from the agricultural class secure more than 90% marks in the



69

00% students from the business class secure more than 90% marks in the



9% students from the other classes secure more than 90% marks in the English


11% get less than 50%.

70

CHAPETER 6

6.1. SUGGESTIONS and RECOMMENDATIONS:

The relationships shown in the previous section between dominant home

language, and class has serious implications for children entering an English

medium school system as the combination of low income with a non-English

speaking home, can place the child „at –risk‟. Such children find it challenging

to cope with the demands of the curriculum.

The parents of children who do not speak English feel alienated from the school

and are unable to participate in school activities or help their children with

homework. In the Pakistani context this is likely to be the case with low income

families who tend not to speak English at home.

Furthermore the linguistic capital of disadvantaged homes does not include

literacy practices in English. The children from low income homes tend not to

read in English and watch TV in English. In school they tend not to mix with

children

who speak only English preferring the company of those who are, like them,

mother tongue dominant. In terms of social practice religious instruction for

children from low income homes tends to be in mother tongue. Their

experience of socialization is thus different from that of who speak mainly

English and frequent schools where services are conducted in English. As such

71

an English medium school system can be both a challenging and alienating

experience for the children from low income homes.

The relationship between social class and the English grades that the children

get in school is noteworthy.

6.1.1. The role of government

The Ministry of Education Pakistan should aware of this sociolinguistic feature

and offer various support programs to help children who enter school from non-

English speaking homes.

For this purpose the Learning Support Program (LSP) should be set up with the

purpose of locating at-risk children entering grade 1 and providing them with

intervention so that they can cope with mainstream education.

At-risk children should be identified using the School Readiness Test, also

known as the Primary 1 Screening Test.

Every year approximately 12,000 pupils or 20% of the cohort in a school are

identified as being at risk, though the percentage varies between schools.

However, the problem be dealt with at the preschool level itself. As most

children in Pakistan attend pre-school we think this site offers many

opportunities for intervention in English language and literacy.

72

LSP can do well in acknowledging the gap between home and school it has

some shortcomings. There should be “funds of knowledge” through which large

scale intervention can be conducted with similarly at risk children.

The main contributions of the funds of knowledge projects, should include the

use of bilingual teaching aides, home visits and instruction in the mainstream

classroom through new interactional patterns instead of pulling the child out

into a remedial environment, are not part of LSP.

6.1.2. The Professional Development of Teachers

The Pakistani teachers are reluctant to teach, just as any instructor might be

uneasy about teaching a subject without any in-depth knowledge or training.

Most of the teachers in our study sample put it plainly that their knowledge

does not qualify them to teach about it. The natural consequence of this lack of

knowledge and its accompanying uneasiness is to grant the subject in question

lower priority, or to ignore it completely.

The second demand is, thus, on the teacher's professional competence. The

interested authorities should think of ‘training teachers of language’ rather than

merely 'language teacher training'. This issue has been pointed out by the

findings of the experiment elaborated in the framework of this research,

according to which nearly half the trainees who had a two month-course on

culture did not fail to consider it when asked to design a language lesson plan.

73

To begin with, this training has to be interdisciplinary. Teachers should benefit

from some training in social sciences and cultural studies, just as some ESP

teachers need a background in science and technology. Additionally, this

training has to be concerned with both theory and practice that is, combining a

reflection on theoretical insights with practice-oriented activities. Teachers

should also be involved actively in their training through a task-oriented

experiential learning approach. This is very important in that, on the one hand,

it is of direct relevance to what they are supposed to do with the learners in

class; on the other hand, it helps them to develop competence themselves. In

fact, they need to have as good knowledge. Teachers are not merely purported

to amass a body of information about the facts and artifacts, beliefs and values,

but also to develop skills of gathering data, analyzing meanings, and assessing

self and other in a critical way.

Study visits to an English-speaking country may be planned, even if on behalf

of a limited number of teachers, selected form different parts of the country,

who would then report on their 'adventure' to their colleagues.

Reflection on attitudes and experiences is to be encouraged for it leads to self-

evaluation and eventually to improvement and progress.

What is more, teachers should learn ways to promote the language learning.

They should be able to design language lessons with culture built into them.

74

They are supposed to provide their learners with authentic experiences in the

framework of a systematic approach and a proper methodology. Accordingly,

they do not just need to know what to do with respect to the social component,

but also how to do it. Another important area is the evaluation of teaching

materials as regards the presentation and practice.

It is doubtless too optimistic to presume that the teachers' attitudes would

change, and their knowledge and skills develop by only one training

programme.

Nevertheless, the latter would undeniably enable them to learn some insights

and tools that will make them deal confidently with teaching. It would also

develop their metalanguage in this field, a fact which encourages reflection and

further research, and gives a sense of achievement. Furthermore, such training

would be an opportunity for teachers of different languages at different teaching

levels to exchange experiences and viewpoints.

In the following lines, we have included various recommendations for teachers

to improve their cultural knowledge, to help improve that of their learners and

to maximize the effectiveness of the course books they use.

It is widely agreed upon that media do enhance teaching, form non-

mechanical aids such as pictures all the way up to sophisticated aids such

as computers. They bring a slice of real life into the classroom. Teachers

75

should exploit the endless resources offered by satellite television, for

instance, in the area of English language awareness. It may provide

valuable materials that can be used in teaching contrastive and

comparative analyzes of cultural systems. Video tapes and computer

disks CD-ROMs are frequently accessible to many language teachers and

learners; their value in the English language classroom cannot be stressed

enough. Other available materials as pictures and photos are too often

ignored, when in fact they could be ideal sources of culture.

The teachers who are interested in widening their own knowledge, and

who wish to implement a social component in their classes have to

consider themselves as co-learners. They should encourage questions and

work together with the class to find answers, by consulting documents

such as encyclopedias. Other possible sources include:

o Subscribing to some of the English language journals and periodicals;

o Reading and analyzing the English langugae literature;

o Attending conferences and taking part in workshops dealing with this

subject;

o Cooperating with colleagues at the local, national and international

levels, through the exchange of social documents and instructional

materials. It is useful to keep abreast with the English language novelties

76

using all the resources available: books, magazines, web sites, foreign

friendships, and more common mass media as radio and television.

There should be, furthermore, an identification of the major issues to be

discussed in relation to a particular topic, so that the classroom debates would

be deep, leading to new knowledge, new insights and new understanding.

Without this deep engagement, critical thinking cannot occur.

One would say that all this is easier said than done. It is, indeed, particularly, in

the Pakistani context, where teachers tend to be overworked and underpaid. One

cannot expect them to do more efforts. Yet, to accept the task of teaching a

foreign language means also to accept the task of teaching something about in

which it is spoken.

6.1.3. Dealing with the Learners

The pupils need to realize that a good command of the English grammar, lexis

and phonology is necessary but not sufficient for a successful communicative

use of the language. They should be helped to recognize that such elements as

the significance of silence, the appropriacy of language forms or of the topic of

conversation to the situation, the interlocutor's assumptions and expectations are

equally important. They need to view their textbook of English and other

materials more than linguistic objects.

77

It is of great benefit for the learners to be provided with explicit information,

whether in English or in Urdu, about the interconnectedness of language.

When possible, organizing visits to an English-speaking country for the elite

can be a golden opportunity to restructure their views of language and social

class. The pupils should get acquainted with modern technology, namely

computers and internet webs, which could provide unlimited possibilities for

learning language. Moreover, much time should be invested to encourage them

to read all kinds of authentic materials, to develop their communicative

competence.

6.2. CONCLUSION

Throughout this thesis, the main concern has been the way the social

component is viewed and handled in the Pakistani institutions, in relation to two

important factors: social class and the learner.

It has been set about the work with an overview of basic issues that pertain to

social class, the relationship social class, language and communication, the

place of social class in foreign language learning. This has served to convey the

background of the field of foreign language and to set the context for our

research.

On the basis of the examination of the data collected from the students'

questionnaire, it has been to come to the conclusion that the social setup has

78

impact in foreign language learning. Yet, at least half of them do not have a

clear view of what this awareness implies in classroom terms, and do not devise

activities that promote knowledge and understanding. Moreover, most of the

informants put it openly that they do not have in-depth knowledge about

English-speaking.

Moreover, the second language learning experiences of privileged students have

not been documented as much as less privileged students, perhaps because

researchers see the situations and needs of the affluent and secure are less

serious compared to the poor and troubled. Their social economic status and

self-identified social class positions influences their opportunities to practise

English. The participants only attempt to communicate when their thoughts,

beliefs and social class status are validated by others with whom they interact.

Subsequently, the participants’ senses of their middle-class or upper-class

identities were reinforced during their English language learning. When they

perceived new behaviour and attitudes associated with middle class or upper

class, they tended to adjust themselves socioculturally. Influenced by language

teachers, peer pressure, the media, and the social environment, the participants

perceived that there was a link between social prestige and language learning.

Thus, they chose to wear certain brands to signify their social class identities.

79

Finally, the data suggests that the focus on middle-class in the language

classroom should be called into question. I would suggest that students should

be encouraged to think critically; language teachers also need to think about the

messages they are projecting, and to raise awareness of social classes and social

inequalities in the content of published materials and their experiences. In this

way, English language teaching will perhaps assist and inspire students to

combine concern and compassion with critical thinking and analysis.

80

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abderrahim, F. (1996) “Dividing the Chicken –A Djeha Tale” in

Expressions, Volume 5, N°1- Mai 1996- Université de Constantine (pp 147-

150).

Abe, K. (1991) “ Teaching English to Children in an EFL Setting” in

FORUM, October 1991, Volume XXiX, Number 4 (pp 6-7).

Abooty, K. (1997) “How Manieth” in FORUM, January 1997, Volume 35,

Number 1 (p59).

Altan, M. Z. (1995) “Culture in EFL Contexts – Classroom and

Coursebooks” in Modern English teacher, Volume 4, Number 2 (pp 58-60).

Anderson, G., and N., Arsenault (1998) “Fundamentals of Educational

Research” 2nd edition. Falmer Press teacher’s Library.

Learning and Teaching”, Council of Europe Publishing (pp 21-35).

Atkinson, D. (1999) “TESOL and Social class” in TESOL Quarterly,

Volume 33, Number 4, Winter 1999 (pp 625 -650).

Banon, P. and C., Reymond (2001) “Quand l’Oral se Dérobe…:Dialogues,

Trilogues et Polylogues” in "Le Français dans le Monde" Number 313,

janvier/Fevrier 2001 (pp 49-52).

Barrow, R. (1990) "Culture, Values and the Language Classroom” Modern

English Publications in association with the British Council (pp3-10).

Baugh, J. (1988) “Language and Race: Some Implications for Linguistic

Science” in Newmeyer, F. J. (ed) “Language: The Socio-Cultural Context”

Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey IV. Cambridge University Press (pp 64-

74).

81

Baylon, C. and P. Fabre (1975) “Initiation à la Linguistique" Editions

Fernand Nathan.

Canale, M. and M., Swain (1988) “Some theories of Communicative

competence” in Rutherford, W. and M., Sharewood (eds) “Grammar and

Second Language Teaching” Heinle and Heinle Publishers (pp 61-80).

Cheung C-K (2001) “The use of Popular Culture as a Stimulus to Motivate

Secondary Students’ English Learning in Hong Kong” in ELT Journal.

Volume 55/1, January 2001. Oxford University Press (pp 55 – 61).

Chew, P.G.L (1991) “Why Can’t Everyone Speak English?” in FORUM,

January 1991 (pp43-44).

Christison, M. A. (1998) “Applying Multiple Intelligences Theory in

Preservice and Inservice TEFL Education Programs” in FORUM,

April/June, Volume 36, Number 2 (pp2-13).

Chu, M. P. (2000) “Do We Share the Same Taboos? Social class Influence

on Language Choice” in Hwa Kang Journal of T.E.F.L , May 2000 (pp 1-

15).

Clarke J. and M., Clarke (1990) “Stereotyping in TESOL Materials” in

Harrison, B (ed) “Culture and the Language Classroom” Modern English

Publications in association with the British Council (pp 31-44).

Cooper, C.T. (1998) “Teaching Idioms” in Foreign Language Annals,

American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. Volume 31,

Summer, Number 2 (pp 255-266).

Corder, S.P. (1973) “Introducing Applied linguistics” Penguin Books.

Cortazzi, M. and L., Jin (1999) “Cultural Mirrors – Materials and

Methods in the EFL Classroom” in Hinkel, E (ed) “Culture and Second

82

Language Teaching and Learning” Cambridge University Press (pp 196-

219).

Crystal, D. (1971) “Linguistics” Penguin Books.

Damen, L. (1987) “Culture Learning: The Fifth Dimension in the Language

Classroom” Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

De jong, W. (1996) “Open Frontiers” Heinemann.

Domoney, L. and S., Harris (1993) “Justified and Ancient: Pop Music in

EFL Classrooms” in ELT Journal, Volume 47/3, July 1993. Oxford

University Press in

McCarthy, M. (1991) “Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers”

Cambridge University Press.

Malkina, N. (1995) “Storytelling in Early Language Teaching” in FORUM,

January 1995, Volume 33, Number 1 (pp38-39).

Mantle Bromley, C. (1997) “Preparing Students for Meaningful Culture

Learning” in Heusinkveld, P. “Pathways to Culture” Intercultural Press (pp

437-455).

Massi, M. P and A.G., Meriňo (1996) “Films and EFL. What’s Playing in

the Language Classroom?” in FORUM, January 1996, Volume 34, Number

1 (pp20- 22).

Matikainen, Z. and C.B., Duffy (2000) “Developing Cultural

Understanding” in FORUM, July 2000, Volume 38, Number 3 (pp 40-47).

Mavi, M. (1996) “Language, People and Culture” in FORUM, January

1996, Volume 34, Number 1 (p54).

Mee Cheah, Y. (1996) “Language Learning or Culture Learning: English

Literacy Lessons in a Singapore Classroom” in Joyce, J. (ed.) (1996) “The

83

Language – Culture Connection” SEAMEO Regional Language Centre (pp

189-203).

Meriňo, A. G and M. P., Massi (1998) “Using the News in the Classroom –

A Discourse Approach” in FORUM, July/September, Volume 38, Number 3

(pp 16- 20).

Merrouche, S. (1998) “The Place of Communicative Language Teaching at

the Level of the Secondary School in Relation to the Teacher and the Second

Year English Textbook” Unpublished Magister thesis – University of

Constantine.

Morgan, C. (1993) “Attitude Change and Foreign Language and Social

class” in Language Teaching 26 (pp63-75). Cambridge University Press.

Newmeyer, F. J. (ed.) “Language: The Socio-Cultural Context ”

Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey IV. Cambridge University Press.

Niederhauser, J. S. (1997) “Motivating Learners at South Korean

Universities” in FORUM, January 1997, Volume 35, Number 1 (pp 8-11).

84

Appendix – A QUESTIONNAIRE

QUESTIONNAIRE

(For Students Only)

Here are some questions. Kindly answer honestly, because your answers will be

used for research purposes only. The answers you give us will be combined

with the results of other respondents; therefore no one will be able to trace your

responses.

1. What is the occupation of your father?

Business

Job holder

Agriculture


2. What is your father’s education?

M.Phil

Master

Graduation

Under graduation

3. What is your mother’s occupation?

Business

85

Job holder

House wife


4. What is your father’s monthly income?

10000 to 20000

20000 to 30000

30000 to 50000

More than 50000

5. Which medium of instruction is used in your school?

English

Urdu

6. Do you watch English channels at your home?

Yes

No

7. Which movies do you prefer?

English movies (Hollywood)

Urdu (Hindi) movies

Punjabi


8. Which TV channel(s) mostly you watch at your home?

86

English

Urdu

Both


9. Which is your native language?

Urdu

Punjabi

Saraiki


10. Which language is spoken at your home?

Urdu

Punjabi

Saraiki

English and Urdu


11. Which language you speak with your friends?

Urdu

English

Punjabi

Saraiki

87

English and Urdu


12. Have you visited abroad?

Yes

No

13. In which language do you prefer to read the books? (Novel, stories etc)

English

Urdu

English and Urdu both


14. Is there any relationship between the social class and the English

language learning?

Yes

No

15. What has been your percentage in English subject?

More than 90 %

80 to 90 %

60 to 80 %

50 to 60 %

Less than 50 %

88

Appendix – B

List of the Institutions

1. Lahore Grammar School EME Branch, Lahore Punjab

2. Bahria School System Bahria Town, Lahore Punjab

3. Punjab College Lahore Punjab

4. The Educator High School Elite Campus Johr Town, Lahore Punjab

5. My Academy Abpara Society Near EME Lahore

The role of social class in English language learning and teaching

Education

Transcript of The role of social class in English language learning and teaching