A language proposal

1. LANGUAGE policy
proposal

2. English language:
standardizing for
educational and socio-
economic betterment

3. I. Executive summary
Globalization is interwined in all
academic disciplines, and has
had a crucial role in organizing
political, economic, social, and
educational agenda worldwide,
and extending the influence of
English language in a great
number of countries (Heller,
2010; Ricento, 2012). Heller (2010)

5. The critical role of English has
been emphasized as a means for
the citizens to access a range of
knowledge, professions, and
advanced technology,
contributing to nation-building.
It allows the transfer of
knowledge and ideas, the
preservation of culture, a more
diverse, and the development of
social connections.
Ii. Introduction

6. • Language Competence
The use of English language correctly and appropriately in various
contexts, demonstrating a solid understanding of language rules and
structures
• Critical Thinking and Analysis
To develop the ability of evaluating and interpreting information in English
engage in thoughtful discussions, and express their viewpoints with clarity
and coherence.
• Fostering Cultural Awareness
Be exposed to different cultures, traditions, and perspective through
language learning. It helps to appreciate and respect cultural diversity,
develop intercultural competence, and become global citizens who can
communicate and interact in multicultural settings.
III. objectives

7. Iv. Scope
The study is designed to
understand the crucial role of
standardizing an English
language policy in a diverse
educational classroom;
therefore, this study is relevant
to teachers and students in the
practice of mixing language in
a multilingual education
settings.

8. The English language curriculum was
designed for implementation as one of 11
subject areas in junior high school (Grades
7-9). At the same time, Senior highschool
(Grades 10-12). Upon completion, where
students majoring in English are expected
to pursue careers as secondary school
English teachers (although many do not).
While unofficial estimates on that 70% of
students do indeed go on to employment
as secondary teachers of English. Their
English has reached a marketable level;
they find employment, including as
teachers.
V. Policy statement

9. vi. Justification
Other evidence of Timorese making choices
also suggests that English is popularly
favoured over Portuguese. When, for example,
parents are dissatisfied
with aspects of the formal education system,
they are prepared to invest in extracurricular
learning activities for their children (Li, 2006 ,
nicely illustrates this in a Canadian context).
In Timor-Leste, and particularly Dili, the
success of private English language providers
such as the Lorosa’e English Language
Institute (LELI) and the Science of Life
Systems (SOLS) schools attest to the demand
for English language instruction.

10. These two providers serve opposite ends of the
market. While
LELI operates as a business at the upper end of
the market, SOLS is a not-for-profit
organisation that caters to the wider
community. Fees are low to non-existent,
classes are large, and courses are popular, with
thousands enrolling during school holidays in
Dili. Furthermore, SOLS has schools in all of
Timor-Leste’s districts, suggesting that
demand for English language learning exists
beyond the capital. The relative popularity of
English was also evident in participant
comment in Sarmento’s
study ( 2013 , p. 62).

11. Although English courses are not free,
[people] are willing to pay to learn.
Portuguese, on the other hand, is provided
free of charge but the class seems empty
and emptier. This could be a hint for the
future of English and Portuguese.
As Dubin and Olshtain ( 1986 , p. 11) noted,
“An indication that language programs are
failing to meet learners’ objectives is often
signaled by the existence of
flourishing schools and courses outside the
official educational system.”

12. For language policy makers and planners in Timor-Leste, there is ample
evidence that the
supply of English language education is far out-stripped by demand.
There is also official recognition of the need to learn English for the
better operation of the civil service. For example, the InstitutoNacional
da Administracao
Publica (INAP) is mandated to provide training, including English
language training, to the public service.
Government officials, albeit small numbers, also participate in the New
Zealand Government’s English Language Training for Officials
programme, which allows participants from a number of mainly South-
east Asian countries to pursue their English language proficiency
development over a 5 month course in New Zealand.

13. vii. Principles and guiding
values
The state’s goal of promoting English
for socio-economic and educational
advancement, these language policies
could largely threaten social,
educational and economic
development, and minority students’
linguistic and cultural ecology.
Emphasizes the;

14. vii. Principles and guiding
values
• Urgent need for a comprehensive
understanding of the
interconnectedness among effective
teacher professional development
• Cultural and linguistic complexity
• Language/literacy education;
• And socio-economic needs
throughout the processes of language
policy decision-making and
implementation

15. viii. Language usage
guideline/s
English had not featured in language
planning until the arrival of the UN following
the violence of 1999. Thus, it is present as
a school subject rather than a medium of
instruction, and is not introduced until
Grade 7, when it is taught for three periods
of 45 min per week; there is also provision
for English to be introduced in Grade 5, if a
school has the capacity to teach the
language, for two periods of 50 min each
week (Baldauf et al., 2011 , p. 315)

16. •English as the preferred international
language of communication.
•Nevertheless, English still overwhelmingly
dominates lessons in many classrooms
throughout the world where students read,
write, listen and speak only in English.
• In the school environment, both students
and staff should learn and appreciate the
differences between religions, cultures and
sexual orientation in the school community,
even if one's view clash with others' beliefs.

17. •School should provide new
ways of teaching and learning
to help every young person
learn well, for example by
having courses taught by
specialist practitioners
intercultural learning to
enable the students to benefit
from the expertise and
passion.

18. •English language training
Focuses on helping participants learn and practice
appropriate use of the English language in
business settings.
• Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)
Are online courses that are open to an unlimited
number of students. They are formal classes
taught by real teachers, and are often created by
prestigious universities or other educational
institutions. They allow anyone to take a high-
quality English course for free, and may allow you
to earn college credits or a certificate as a paid
service.
ix. Language support and resources

19. plurilingual
space, using
multilingual
signs to
decorate
the walls,
including
bilingual
books in the
library, etc.
Languages a
nd cultures
should be
considered
in terms of
collective

20. Cultural diversity in the classroom is on the rise.
In our increasingly diverse and multicultural
society, it’s more important than ever for
teachers to incorporate culturally responsive
instruction in the classroom -- whether teaching
elementary school, middle school or high school
students. And the increase of diversity doesn’t
only relate to race and ethnicity; it can include
students of different religion, economic status,
sexual orientation, gender identity, and language
background.
x. Promotion and awareness

21. There are several ways teachers and
administrators, such as principals
and coaches, can ensure that both
the classroom environment and
curriculum are responsive to the
increasing cultural diversity of our
society. These strategies will
encourage all students’ cultural
awareness, enhancing each student’s
sense of identity, and foster inclusion
in the classroom community.

22. •​Get to Know Your Students
•​Maintain Consistent
Communication
•​Acknowledge and Respect
Every Student
•​Practice Cultural Sensitivity
•​Give Students Freedom and
Flexibility

23. and equal
and
comparable
in amount,
scope,
sequence
and quality
to that
provided to
English
language
learner (or
non-ELL)
students
•Teachers
Xi. Compliance and enforcement

24. Incorporating the home
language in the student’s
learning can support the
development of English
language proficiency. It can
also promote the student’s
confidence and self-identity
and the valuing of their home
culture and language.

25. impacted
the ELPs.
Since the
1990s,
English
has been
introduce
d at all
levels of
education
and is
widely
used for
internatio
Xii. Monitoring and evaluation

26. Within the education
system, English is also
becoming increasingly
emphasized, as seen from
the key role of English in
the final and entrance
examinations at middle
school and tertiary levels
(Nguyen, 2005).

27. English has been expanding as a
multinational and multifaceted tool,
performing
multiple purposes, such as a vehicle for
economic development, increased employ-
ability and productivity, nation-building,
technological advancement, fulfilling per-
sonal needs, and serving the cause of
national integration
(e.g., Rubdy & Tan, 2008 ; (e.g., Rubdy &
Tan, 2008 ; Baldauf & Nguyen, 2012 ).

28. Ethiopia,
Kenya,
Malawi,
Rwanda,
Uganda
and
Zambia)
(Coleman,
2011) have
adopted
English as a
main
language,

29. In these countries, children are
required to learn English from grade
one onwards. The neoliberal English
influence
is so profound that local stakeholders
such as parents and teachers show their
strong
preference for English education (e.g.,
Trudell & Piper, 2013 ). English serves as
a
symbol of quality education and as a
mechanism for fuller participation in
national
and international opportunities.

30. XIII. BUDGET AND RESOURCE
ALLOCATION:
When it comes to standardizing English for educational and
socio-economic betterment, it is important to consider budget
and resource allocation. Here are some factors to consider:
1. Funding: Determine the available budget for the
standardization project. This could come from government
funding, grants, or other sources. Allocate funds for various
aspects of the project, such as curriculum development, teacher
training, and infrastructure improvement.
2. Curriculum development: Allocate resources for developing a
standardized English curriculum that covers all necessary
language skills, including reading, writing, speaking, and
listening. This may involve hiring curriculum developers, subject
matter experts, and English language specialists.

31. 3. Teacher training: Allocate resources for training teachers in
the standardized English curriculum and teaching
methodologies. This could involve workshops, seminars, and
professional development programs. Consider the costs
associated with hiring trainers, organizing training sessions,
and providing teaching materials.
4. Infrastructure improvement: Allocate resources for improving
infrastructure to support English language learning. This could
include setting up language labs, providing access to digital
learning resources, and ensuring classrooms are equipped with
necessary teaching aids.

32. MISSION OBJECTIVES
5.Assessmentandevaluation:Allocateresourcesfordeveloping
assessmenttoolsandconductingregularevaluationstomeasure
theeffectivenessofthestandardizedEnglishprogram.Thiscould
involvehiringassessmentexperts,developingtests,andanalyzing
data.
6.Communityengagement:Allocateresourcesforengagingwith
thecommunityandpromotingtheimportanceofstandardized
Englishforeducationalandsocio-economicbetterment.This
couldinvolveorganizingawarenesscampaigns,community
events,andpartnershipswithlocalorganizations.

33. MISSION OBJECTIVES
7.Monitoringandevaluation:Allocateresourcesformonitoring
andevaluatingtheprogressofthestandardizedEnglishprogram.
Thiscouldinvolvehiringmonitoringandevaluationspecialists,
collectingdata,analyzingresults,andmakingnecessary
adjustmentstotheprogram.
Itisimportanttoprioritizeandallocateresourceseffectivelyto
ensurethatthestandardizationeffortshaveameaningfulimpact
oneducationalandsocio-economicbetterment.Regular
monitoringandevaluationwillhelpidentifyareasof
improvementandensurethatresourcesareallocatedefficiently.

34. XIV. Timeline
The standardization of the English language for educational
and socio-economic betterment has evolved over centuries.
Here's a brief timeline of key developments:
1. Old English (5th-11th century): English began
as a collection of Germanic dialects.
The Norman Conquest in 1066 introduced Norman
French influences into English.
2. Middle English (11th-15th century): English evolved
with Latin and French influences. Chaucer's
"Canterbury Tales" (late 14th century) is a
notable work in Middle English.

35. 3. Early Modern English (15th-17th
century): The Great Vowel Shift
occurred, changing pronunciation
significantly. The printing press (late
15th century) helped standardize
spelling.
4. Late Modern English (18th-19th
century): Samuel Johnson's dictionary
(1755) and Noah Webster's American
Dictionary (1828) contributed to
standardizing English on both sides of
the Atlantic.

36. 5. 20th century: English became a global
lingua franca, with the British Empire
and later the United States playing
major roles. The Oxford English
Dictionary (1928) furthered
standardization.
6. Today: English continues to evolve,
influenced by global communication
and technology. Various English
language authorities, like Oxford and
Cambridge, provide guidance on
standard usage.
Standardization has been crucial for education
and socio-economic advancement, ensuring a
common language for communication, trade,
and academia.

37. XV. Stakeholder Engagement
Standardizing the English language for
educational and socio-economic
betterment involves engaging various
stakeholders. This process should include
educators, policymakers, linguists, and
community representatives to ensure
inclusivity and effectiveness. The goals
should encompass improving access to
quality education, enhancing
communication skills, and promoting
economic opportunities for all English
language users. Collaboration and ongoing
dialogue among these stakeholders are
essential for achieving these objectives.

38. XVI. CONTINGENCY PLAN
Developing a contingency plan for standardizing the
English language for educational and socio-economic
betterment is crucial to address potential challenges
and uncertainties. Here are key elements of such a
plan:
1. Stakeholder Communication:Maintain open lines of
communication with all stakeholders, including
educators, policymakers, linguists, and community
representatives, to keep them informed about the
standardization process and its goals.

39. OBJECTIVES
2. Research and Assessment:
Continuously assess the
impact of standardization on
education and socio-
economic factors. Conduct
research to identify potential
areas of improvement and
adapt the plan accordingly.
3. Flexibility:
Be prepared to adjust the
standardization approach as
needed based on feedback and
changing circumstances.
Flexibility is essential to ensure
that the process remains
relevant and effective.

40. 4. Inclusivity:
Ensure that the standardization process
remains inclusive of diverse English
language users, including regional
variations and dialects. Avoid
marginalization of any linguistic
community.
5. Resource Allocation: Allocate resources
efficiently to support educational
initiatives, teacher training, and access to
learning materials. Adequate funding and
resource allocation are critical for success.

41. 6. Monitoring and Evaluation:
Regularly monitor progress and evaluate the impact of
standardization efforts on education and socio-economic
development. Use data-driven insights to make informed
decisions.
7. Community Engagement:
Continue engaging with local communities and gathering
their input to ensure that the standardization efforts align
with their needs and aspirations.
8.Adaptive Strategies:
Develop contingency plans for unexpected challenges, such as
linguistic resistance or unforeseen socio-economic issues.
Having backup strategies in place can help address these
issues effectively.

42. 9. Policy Review:
Periodically review and update policies related to
English language standardization to reflect evolving educational
and socio-economic goals.
10. Global Collaboration:
Collaborate with international organizations and English-speaking
countries to share best practices and leverage
global resources for the betterment of English
language education and socio-economic opportunities.
By incorporating these elements into a comprehensive
contingency plan, the standardization of the
English language can be pursued with greater
resilience and effectiveness, ultimately contributing
to educational and socio-economic betterment.

43. XVII.Conclusions
This chapter provides a critical
analysis of the state’s English
Language Policies, looking
essentially at teacher education
and the roles of the policies in
advancing students’ educational,
linguistic, and socio-economic
betterment through language
implementation.

44. The chapter responds to various studies (e.g.,
Coleman, 2011; Kubuta, 2011; Ferguson, 2013) in its
claim that the role of English in education and the
state’s and individuals’ educational, linguistic, and
socio-economic advancement is extremely complex,
ambivalent, contested, and highly politicized, as well
as being socially, linguistically, and economically
situated. The chapter further suggests that different
languages serve different functions across disciplines,
space, and time. Throughout the policy analysis, the
study argues that it is salient that national language
policy makers,

45. transnational education providers and
teachers be mindful of the need to value and
respect local perceptions and their
stewardship of linguistic human rights, and
the capacity for self-determination before
and throughout the process of language
policy creation, implementation, and
practice. Policies should be developed upon a
robust foundation of public understanding
and comprehension, cross-boundary
engagement and equitability to ensure the
provision of sustainable education that
accommodates the shared values and social
realities of particular settings.

46. While numbers of students from linguistic and
economical and socially disadvantaged
backgrounds have found English to be increasingly
irrelevant, at the national level it has been
consistently promoted as a key resource to save the
nation from political and economic isolation and in
addition promising to enable the state’s youth at
the age of employment to function effectively in the
transnational job market. For individuals, English
continues to function as a supportive language in
healthcare, technology management, and
administrative systems even in remote areas.
Therefore, rather than excluding English, it is critical
to turn it into a supportive language across domains
and populations. In this way, the ecology of
linguistic and cultural wealth could be sustained

47. Understanding local needs, struggles, and resources
and remaining sensitive to local needs and practices
function as the most sustainable practice for building
a democratic and effective language policy. This
chapter provides an in-depth and forward-looking
understanding of struggles, inequality, possibilities,
and of teacher agency in language policy. It has also
emphasized the need critically and reflectively to
examine the state’s English Language Policies
ranging from the stated national policy to its
implementation on the ground. The chapter hopes to
contribute to theory building in critical language
policy analysis while at the same time providing
insight for future researchers, policymakers, and
stakeholders in the field of LPP and across related
disciplines.

48. Furthermore, the article expects to contribute to a
movement in scholarship in Language Policy and
Planning towards being more interrelated,
interdependent, and interdisciplinary (Tollefson,
2013). This study recommends that future
researchers continue to collaborate with multiple
actors including authorities, NGOs, communities,
activists, educators, children, students and
parents at intersecting levels to foster critical and
reflective analysis of English language policies as
well as collaborative intervention toward
linguistic, educational, and social equity.

49. It appears to be particularly important to continue
making interconnections between language policy and
such disciplines as health care, technology, science,
law, and environmental studies (e.g., Bui, 2013). Were
such an effort to occur, it would illuminates a collective
intellectual movement that might enable researchers
and language policy makers at multiple levels to
assemble nuanced and persuasive evidence about the
ways that language policy can support or threaten
people’s educational, linguistic, human, social, and
economic rights and equitable access. Such an
approach may further provide resources and concrete
initiatives for institutional and policy reform within the
researchers’ context and beyond.

50. XVIII. REFERENCES
• Agnihotri,R.K.(2007).Identityandmultilinguality:The
caseofIndia.InA.Tsui&J.W.Tollefson(Eds.),Language
policy,culture,andidentityinAsiancontexts
(pp.55-72).NewJersey:LawrenceErlbaum.
• Ali,L.H.(2013).Languagepolicyandplanningin
Malaysia:ManagingEnglish-mediuminstructionat
tertiarylevel.(PhD),TheUniversityofQueensland,
Brisbane,Australia.
• Adoniou,M.(2013).PreparingTeachers–The
ImportanceofConnectingContextsinTeacher
Education.AustralianJournalofTeacherEducation,38
(8),47-60.
• Annamala,E.(2013).India'seconomicrestructuring
withEnglish:Benefitsversuscosts.InJ.Tollefson
(Ed.),Languagepoliciesineducation:Criticalissues(pp.
139-155).NewYork:Routledge.

51. • Appadurai, A. (2001). Deep democracy: Urban
governmentality and the horizon of politics
EnvironmentandUrbanization,13(2),23-43.
• Appleby, R. (2010). ELT, gender and international
development: Myths of progress in a neocolonial
world.Bristol,UK:MultilingualMatters.
• Baldauf,R.B.Jr.&Nguyen,H.T.M.(2012).Language
policy in Asia and the Pacific. In B. Spolsky (Ed.),
TheCambridgehandbookoflanguagepolicy(pp.
617-638).Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
• Bourdieu,P.(1991).Languageandsymbolicpower.
Cambridge,UK:PolityPress.
• Bruthiaux,P.(2002).Holdyourcourses:Language
education, language choice, and economic
development.TESOLQuarterly36(3),275-296.

52. • Bui,T.T.N.(2009).“ChallengesofEnglishLanguage
LearningforThaiMinoritystudentsinVietnam”.
Master’sthesis.UniversityofHawaii,USA.
• Bui,T.N.T.(November,2012).Ideologies,realities,and
possibilitiesofEnglishlanguageeducationpolicy:A
casestudyoflocallanguageschoolinginVietnam.
PaperpresentedattheAmericanAnthropological
Associationconference,SanFrancisco,California:USA.
• Bui,T.N.T.(2013)."Canabaskethideanelephant?”—
Languagepolicyandpracticestowardlinguistic,
educational,andsocio-economicequityinVietnam.
Doctoraldissertation,CollegeofEducation,University
ofHawaiiatManoa,USA
• Bui,T.N.T.(November,2013).Englishasideologies:
Deconstructingpoliticalandeconomicideologiesof
theEnglishlanguagepolicy.Paperpresentedatthe
AmericanAnthropologicalAssociationconference,
Chicago,Illinois:USA

53. • Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. (2011). A holistic approach to multilingual education:
Introduction. The Modern Language Journal '95 (3), 339–343. doi:10.1111/j.1540-
4781.2011.01204.x
• Coleman, H. (2011). Developing countries and the English language: Rhetoric,
risks roles and recommendations. London: British Council.
• Chua, S.K.C., & Baldauf, R. B. Jr. (2011). Micro Language Planning. In Hinkel, E
(Ed.), Handbook of Research in Second Language Learning and Teaching (Vol 2)
(pp. 936-951). New York: Routledge.
• Dang, T. K. A., Nguyen, H. T. M., & Le, T. T. T. (2013). The impacts of globalisation on
EFL teacher education through English as a medium of instruction: an example
from Vietnam.
• Current Issues in Language Planning, 14 (1), 52-72. doi:
10.1080/14664208.2013.780321
• Butler, D. L., & Schnellert, L. (2012). Collaborative inquiry in teacher professional
development. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of
Research and Studies '28 (8), 1206–1220.

54. THANK YOU SO
MUCH!
Helarie Ann Aprentado
Jassel Marie Diado
Nelly Jean Zerrudo
Nikkie Buendicho
Trecia Mae Araola
Recel Belonio
Remeline Seberias
Ara Grace Bustamante
Rejene Dula-ogon
MEMBERS: