EXPLORING TEACHERS’ REACTION TO THE IDENTITY CONSTRUCTION OF IRANIAN STUDENTS IN EFL CONTEXT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X19425Keywords:
Multiple identities, Cultural identity, EFL context, IdentificationAbstract
http://dx.doi.org/10.5902/2179460X19425
The substantial achievements of the current research in the field of teaching English as a foreign language highlight the monumental influence of students’ identity construction on acquiring a foreign language. Due to the dearth of qualitative research that probe teachers’ awareness of the learners’ identity construction in classroom-oriented discourse and their reaction to it, the present study is to develop a systematic explanatory theory of those aspects of EFL learners’ identity disregarded by teachers in Iranian EFL context. This grounded theory research is founded upon the volunteer and theoretical sampling of 8 under-achieving learners from Azad university of Birjand, Iran. In-depth semi-structural interviews which took three weeks were employed by the researchers. The data collection and analysis procedure occurred between January and February, 2015. The iterative process of analysis yielded teachers’ failure to acknowledge the learners’ multiple identity as the core category that pulled together three other sub-categories including 1) the ignorance of imaginative identity of the students by teaches 2) teachers’ disregard of the multiple and dynamic identity of the learners in educational context 3) teachers’ lack of awareness from students contradictory identification with the culture of target language speakers. The results of this study are almost novel and of great significance for Iranian EFL teachers and other practitioners in this field.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
