On the Cultural Censorship of English Textbooks in Iran: Possible or Impossible, Necessary or Unnecessary

Dr. Seyyed Ayatollah Razmjoo,

Department of Foreign Languages & Linguistics, Shiraz University, Iran

Seyyed Behrouz Behzadi, PhD Candidate of TEFL

Department of Foreign Languages & Linguistics, Shiraz University, Iran

Abstract

The issue of culture in teaching and learning English has been controversial, in particular, in some Islamic countries like Iran. This study is an attempt to explore the attitudes of fifteen Iranian experienced instructors of English towards the censorship of cultural aspects of English in English Textbooks via semi-structured interviewing. Each participant was asked 13 questions aimed at eliciting their attitudes towards teaching cultural aspects of English in their classrooms. Furthermore, the study investigated the effects of teacher-related variables such as political background, viz being inclined to the right- or left wing or being a moderate, to see if that could influence how English instructors might look at the possibility and necessity of cultural censorship of English textbooks. The results suggest that there is a meaningful difference between the politically reformist and modernist on one hand, and the fundamentalist English instructors on the other hand in terms of their overall attitude towards teaching culture and its censorship. On the other hand, all the participants in the study seem to believe that there needs to be a profound change in how the issue of culture is dealt in English classes. Finally, the study cashing in on the results attained argues that it is neither linguistically possible nor pedagogically necessary to censor English textbooks. To this end, golden mean appears to lie in what Kumaravadivelu calls ‘raising cultural consciousness’: neither expurgating nor empathising but empowering learners to ‘elicit a synthesis’.

Keywords: Cultural awareness, Culture censorship, EFL context, English textbooks, Political affiliation.

(To Download PDF File of This Full Article in full Details, Click Here)

1. Introduction

The enthrallingly intricate interplay of culture and language has long been both dissected and disputed by the savants in the field. Meanwhile, what has taxed the minds of many a cognoscente is that which has got the whip hand, i.e. which is primarily influenced by the other. In ELT, however, less and less people dither if a language, here English, can be taught without giving special heed to its cultural aspects. This latter highly-buttressed assertion is of overriding significance because it sets ground for making decisions about language learning and language policy with substantive implications (Elmes, 2013).

In Iran, in particular, this has become more problematic since the Ministry of Education is accountable to protect the minds of Iranian students and learners against any cultural codes which might be in contradistinction with Islamic codes. This has led to the censorship of multitude of cultural aspects of the English notebooks published in Iran and consequently, but not surprisingly, as Khajavi and Abbasian (2011) have observed, these books are not suitable for teaching students an international language with all its cultural specifics. Alimorad (2014), in addition, drew our attention to the pivotal role the textbooks taught to English learners play in shaping the trajectory of an educational system, hence reminding the practitioners of how contents of these books need to be taken into serious consideration.

The present study is aimed to anatomise the aforementioned issue in a different way. So far, most of the studies conducted have chosen to examine aspects of culture with regard to some specific English notebooks or a certain group of learners. The author assumes much has been done in this regard, though more is needed to be done, yet there is an urgent need to zoom out a bit and deal with the issue in its larger aspect. This approach is justified, the author believes, since, as mentioned before, how culture has got to be dealt in the context of ELT is much dependent on the national policies and decisions made at the larger scale. Therefore, we need to utilise the specific research done to reach a broader understanding of the situation present.

To exemplify, it was founded that in ‘Right Path to English’ native speakers are not mentioned except one (John) whereas in ‘Cambridge English for Schools’, learners deal with native speakers’ characters numerously (Alimorad, 2014); this poses some serious questions. For the former book is issued by Iran’s Ministry of Education, one would ask what might have triggered them to exclude native speakers from teaching English to secondary students. If that is not done on the grounds of separating culture of target language from teaching it, which is not recommended by the literature in the field as discussed below, then is it not ideologically-motivated? Even though textbooks are likely to result in acculturation of students into the target culture beliefs and norms (Rashidi & Shahab, 2013), precluding students to have a first-hand experience with the target culture deprives them of attaining cultural awareness and being able to critically look at the target language culture. In probing to find answers to the questions such as the one just posed, this study looks linguistically at the possibility or impossibility of censoring cultural aspects in English textbooks in Iran, and, further, if it is pedagogically wise to do so. The study, in addition, examines if it is necessary or unnecessary given the very changing system of values in Iran over the course of the last two decades. In other words, socially, Iran has undergone changes like any other country in the world and thus the necessity of old practices need to be either reconsidered or revisited.

2. Literature Review

2.1 The Indissoluble Bond between Culture and Language

The issue of attitudes towards language and its culture is of paramount importance, specifically in the language teaching classrooms. Ammon (as cited in Jabeen, 2011) claims that the way learners deem the target language culture influences their attitude towards the language itself. Khuwaileh (2000) propounds similar idea and regards language classroom as a collection of various “cultural variables” (p. 282). He maintains that culture always manages to become a part of the language classroom. Thanasoulas (2001) goes a step further and opines that learning foreign language essentially involves learning its culture.

It goes without saying that culture has an important role on thought and language. Fotos (as cited in Dahmardeh, Memar, & Memar, 2001) classifies the views concerning the relation between language, and thought into four categories. The first one belongs to Sapir-Whorf suggesting that “both thought and language are determined by culture (p. 269)”. This view is known as linguistic determinism. The second one, Piaget’s view, insists that cognitive development in a child occurs in a predetermined way. It states that cognitive development precedes language, in addition. The third one, Chomsky’s view, states that language and cognition are separate. The last one, Vygotsky’s view, states that, from scratch, thought and language are separate but become interdependent as people go through communication and interaction. The above classifications underline the significance of culture. Culture is thought to determine thought and language as stated initially.

Language reflects culture, and is influenced and shaped by it. Brown (1994) describes the relation between the two as follows: “Language is a part of a culture and culture is a part of a language; the two are intricately interwoven so that one cannot separate the two without losing the significance of either language or culture” (p.165).

2.2 Culture and Teaching English: Integration or Separation?

Despite all these vehement assertions about the relationship between culture and language learning, there have been strong objections to introducing target language culture in the language classroom. The use of culture in ELT has triggered fierce debate among language teachers, planners and sociolinguists. Brown (2007), while asserting of the positive benefits of the “cross-cultural learning experiences” (p. 200), also recognised that some learners might face the second culture with resistance or experience discouraging effects of being exposed to it. All these debates focus on the behavioural and attitudinal outcome of learners. Correspondingly, Meng-Ching Ho (1998) related target culture teaching with positive attitudes to learning target language and higher level of motivation.

However, Krashen (as cited in Gonen & Saglam, 1982) refutes the idea that the classroom setting is an appropriate place to acquire both language and culture. To him, classroom is only appropriate to teach language rules. He and some others have argued that because the foreign language classroom underestimates what the learners already knows and believes, it cannot become a suitable place for teaching culture.

The importance of teaching culture gets clearer when we find that according to Harmer (as cited in Ghaemi & Oghabi, 2016), when the learners cannot find an equivalent word or term for a foreign word in their society, it is not easy for them to properly understand the word. Tsai (2012) puts emphasis on intercultural training as a way to help the learner become aware of how culture impacts one’s perspective. Thus, this kind of training has the benefit of aiding learners to deal with the stresses they may face in cross-cultural encounters and overcome cultural obstacles. On the other hand, one of the benefits of education and specifically second/foreign language learning is acquiring tolerance toward other people and their cultural beliefs. The onus is on the language teachers to guide the students to ponder on their own ethnic identities and help them in honouring other cultures and developing positive cross-cultural relationships (as cited in Mikhaleva & Régnier, 2014). The necessity for such intercultural competence has been recognised by the the second and foreign language education theorists in the last decades. As a recent instance, Sinicrope, Norris and Watanabe (2007) stress the significance of intercultural competence for bolstring learners’ communicative competence. They further remarked that foreign language colleges and programs play a pivotal role in aiding learners hone their intercultural competence.

2.3 Related Research

In this section, some of the studies done to explore the relationship between culture and English language learning and teaching are presented. Only the studies investigating the aforementioned issue in the context of Iran are paid heed to. The rationale for exclusion of non-Iranian studies here is that the scope of the present study, as delineated in the abstract, is Iran. Firstly, mention must be made of Ghaemi and Oghabi’s (2016) study acknowledges the existence of some cultural limitations, mentioned earlier in the abstract and the introduction, in teaching English in Iran.

In their study, Ghaemi and Oghabi’s (2016) attempt to give an overview of the cultural impediments exists in foreign language learning in Iranian context and discusses the issue with regard to the material development and language teaching. The results confirm that teachers can focus on cultural differences; however, the bottom line for teachers should be that no culture is superior to another. When teaching cultural values, they recommend, it is better that we adjust it to the learners’ age, level of understanding and maturity.

In a similar study, Erfani (2014) exerted to deal with the conflict of cultures between the local and the Target culture in teaching and learning English in the Iranian context. ELT teachers’ perception is examined on the issue of which culture should be presented in the classroom. The results indicated that teachers favoured both source and target values in language teaching while they insist on enabling students via effective appropriate techniques to observe and explore cultural interactions from their own perspectives.

Another study done trying to address the issue of cultural clashes in language education in Iran is the research carried out by Mokhtarnia (2011). Her taking on the issue is that language pedagogy in Iran is an instance of a pseudo-dialogue resisting an extensive embrace of target culture in the course of English language education. To wit, the researchers hold that this opposition is a potential clash of identities between two cultures.

Mahboudi and Javdani (2012), in their attempt to unpack the role of culture in teaching English in Iran, probed the attitudes of the Iranian high school and university learners. The obtained results indicated that all students had an overall negative attitude towards the way culture is addressed in ELT in Iran. The study concludes by recommending some guidelines that will help educators accommodate the modern needs of EFL learners.

More specifically and focusing on cultural influence of English Textbooks (Interchange and American File) on Iranian English Learners, Ashraf, Motallebzadeh, and Kafi (2013) interviewed 210 learners of English. The results exhibited a significant correlation between English textbooks and the cultural attitudes of Iranian EFL learners, viz. their attitudes significantly changed after studying these English textbooks.

Dahmardeh, Memar, and Memar (2012), utilising a Qualitative-quantitative, carried another research to critically examine the cultural aspects of a widely-used English textbook in Iran, i.e. Top Notch. It is recommended by Dahmardeh et al. (2012) that the cultural matters which convey a negative aspect and are regarded to be less frequent should not be included within textbooks or they should be taught figuratively.

In a relatively more encompassing study, Ahmadi (2013) looks at the Iranian and non-Iranian English books from a cultural point of view and how well cultures and cultural related topics had been taken into account in Iranian and non-Iranian English books in ELT. The result revealed that non-Iranian English books had paid much more attention to using culture in their books. The study concludes by hoping that Ministry of Education revises the Iranian Curriculum in English language teaching and selects English textbooks that are up-to-date and cultural subjects are included in them.

Safa, Moradi, and Hamzavi (2015), in an attempt to pool the perspectives of both the teachers and learners on intercultural competence reflected in Top Notch Series, utilised a researcher-made textbook evaluation questionnaire. The questions elicited responses in terms of four factors of cultural awareness, cultural knowledge and attitude, intercultural skills, and cross-cultural understanding. The results indicated that both EFL teachers and learners were satisfied with the overall intercultural competence potentiality of the textbook. However, EFL teachers and learners’ perspectives on the text’s potential for creating the four factors mentioned above were significantly different. In addition, the results suggested that cross-cultural understanding is given skimpy heed in Top Notch series.

Finally, it is worth mentioning the study conducted by Mirdehghan, HoseiniKargar, Navab, and Mahmoodi (2011) who talk of cultural constraints in Iran and the possible up- and downsides of such limitation on ELT in Iran. 80 Shahid Beheshti University students are given a questionnaire the questions of which were mainly to diagnose the cultural elements which might hinder or foster the learning process. The results illustrated that English learning may be processed more effectively for Iranian students if both Iranian and English culture will be introduced and presented.

2.4 Objectives of the Study

This paper is aimed at providing some insights apposite the issue of censorship of cultural aspects of English textbooks. It is hoped that by interviewing three experienced English language instructors, more can be understood about how they perceive the role of culture in ELT. Their attitudes, moreover, towards the censorship of cultural points in English textbooks taught in Iran are investigated.

2.5 Research Questions

Having dissected each and every interview, the study concludes by providing tentative answers to the following questions:

1- Is the censorship of English textbooks possible or impossible?

2- Is the censorship of English textbooks necessary or unnecessary?

3- Does political background and affiliation of the English instructors impact how they see the censorship of culture in English textbooks in Iran?

2.6 Significance of the Study

As revealed in reviewing the literature, multitudes of studies have been conducted in Iran to explore the role of culture in language learning and teaching. However, to date and to the knowledge of the author, few studies have set to meet two things that the present study has attempted to investigate. First, this study is aimed at dealing concurrently with the issue of censorship of cultural aspects of English textbooks from two perspectives, viz. linguistically and socially. Secondly, the role of political background of teachers and its possible effect on their treatment of censorship is inspected in this research.

3. Methodology

3.1 Participants

As typical of case studies, three English instructors were chosen for this study. A couple of yardsticks were set to single out those apt for this study. First, it was the issue of experience. A benchmark of 15 years deemed to be fit-for-the-purpose. Having taught in different institutes and worked on different textbooks were the two other criteria for selecting the participants.

Each of the chosen participants had been teaching in numerous institutes such as Maarefat, Mehr, Iran Language Institute, Navid, and so on for more than 15 years. They had the experience of teaching English textbooks such as New Headway English Course Series, Interchange, Top Notch series, Four Corners, Getting Ready for IELTS, American English File, and one or two more, furthermore.

Another deciding criterion in choosing the participants was their political background. This criterion enabled the researchers to address the third question this study aimed to explore. As confirmed by themselves, one participant was profoundly conservative (following the right-wing in Iran), one profoundly reformist (espousing the causes of left-wing in Iran and the recent Green-movement), and the third one a moderate, i.e. not slanted towards either right or left wing. The identity of each participant is kept anonymous throughout this article.

3.2 Instrument

A set of 13 items (see Appendix for the full account of the questions) designed by the researchers were utilised in conducting the interviews. The questions were selected after much of perusal and deliberation on the relative literature and previous studies done to explore the attitudes and perceptions of teachers germane the issues tallying with the issue of the present study, i.e. culture in English Language learning and teaching. To be more precise, in devising the items to conduct the interview for the present study, four studies, in particular, and their corresponding questionnaires were consulted. These include the studies carried out by Karabinar (2012), Albirini (2009), Lázár (2007), and Genc and Badaand (2005). Obviously, the researchers did not curtail their trawl of the literature to these four studies, however. The questions are designed to explore both the linguistic and social/cultural aspects of censorship that English textbooks may be subject to. It must be noted that since the present research is intended to be a qualitative research, the questioned were designed to be as laconic as possible, hence leaving enough space for the interviewees to express themselves freely.

3.3 Data Collection Procedures

Each participant was asked to be interviewed separately. Two of them, still, insisted that they felt it would be more opportune and efficacious if they were both interviewed simultaneously and in one setting. Even though the researchers were cognizant of possible unlikely effects of such practice such as the effect of answers given by one on the other one, they felt following their suggestion would be met for two reasons.

First, both were quite well-established and committed to what they believed that there was little doubt, if any, that either of them would be negatively influenced by the other. In fact, the materialisation of the interview confirmed the independency of participants in their thinking since both challenged the other occasionally but in a very decent way. Secondly, there was a fear that not concurring with, or even acquiescing with their demand, might have ended in them spurning my invitation as to interview them. This, in turn, might have led to the abandonment of the whole study due to the lack of participants meeting all criterion specified in the “Participant” section.

         Finally, two of the participants, one from the right-wing and the other a moderate, were interviewed together. Upon their consent, their voices were recorded. They decided to answer the questions by a mutually-agreed order, i.e. the older answered first and the younger (the moderate) after him though there were one or two times which this order was not followed. Furthermore, the conservative refused to answer one of the questions (question 12). The other participant who lived in Esfahan was given the questions and was asked to record his voice while answering to each question. The researchers, in advance, ensured via phone conversation that the participant fully fathomed each of the questions. I must also add that the interviews were done in Persian and the recorded files of the interviews are available and would be handed in on demand.

3.4 Data Analysis Procedures

The content of the audio files of the interviews were written down. When needed, the author translated them into English for direct quoting. Both the translations and the transcript of the interview were substantiated by the interviewees.

The answer to each of the questions by the participants is discussed together. To wit, the answers to question number one by the three participants are put together and compared to find out the possible similarities and differences. This procedure is repeated for each question up to the last question.

Afterwards, taking into account their political background, their answers to all the questions, and specifically two of the questions which were directly linked to the questions specified by this study as research questions, are dissected. This is done to draw possible conclusions or interpretations as to enable the researchers to answer the third main question of this study.

4. Results

Having closely looked at and analysed the transcript of the answers given by each participant to the 13 questions included in the interview, it was found that the answers to each of the questions can be categorised in three possible ways. Either the participant agreed, disagreed, or expresses his agreement or disagreement in a conditioned way by adding a ‘but’ phrase to his answer.

4.1 Interviews and the Analysis of Responses

         Items 1 and 2 of Interview:

1- Based on Linguistic Relativism (Sapir Whorf hypothesis), the structure of a language affects its speakers’ cognition or world view. Do you agree with this?

2- Culture Shapes Language; Language shapes culture. Which of these two propositions do you agree with?

As manifest from the transcript of the interview (see Appendix for the full transcript of the interviews) and the tubulisation of the answers by the researchers (Table 1) to each of the items, it can be construed that the first two questions are meant to elicit the participant’s responses’ germane the very general nature of the relationship between language and culture. In this regard, the examination of the answers indicated that all the three instructors recognised the point that there was an indivisible nexus between language and culture.

         Items 3 and 4 of Interview:

3- Globalisation: Iran and the change of values: does that allow for further cultural censorship?

4- Role of Technology and mass media: do you agree that technology and mass media have made the censorship less workable?

These two items are concerned with two extrinsic factors, i.e. globalisation and technology/mass media, and their impact on the English language learning and teaching. The participants were asked to tell us if they think these two factors taking place outside the realm language teaching could have an influence on what is going on in English language teaching, specifically the censorship of English books. The examination of the answers suggests that there is a difference on how they see these two issues. Germane the globalisation, one, i.e. the conservative participant, believed that it does not obviate the need for censorship while the two others disagree. On the issue of technology and mass media, while all acknowledging that these platforms have made censorship less effective, the right-wing candidate believes that Iranian students need to be committed to their own values and thus censorship is still needed in some respects.

         Items 5 and 6 of Interview:

5- Teaching English means only teaching English? Do you agree or disagree?

6- Communicative Approach is in the vogue: Do you think censorship allows for such approach?

These two items are designed to specifically target the participant’s approach towards censorship from a purely pedagogical aspect. The participants’ reply to the fifth question reveals that only one of them, the reformist, is vocally against the notion and believes that teaching English entails teaching its culture as well. The other two participants, however, maintain that in cases when one is gearing up to go to overseas for various reasons, pursuing his/her studies, then teaching should include other factors; otherwise teaching English could be restricted to teaching English and nothing else.

On the 6th item, the reformist and the moderate stand at odds with the conservative. The latter believes there is too little censorship in the English textbooks that it cannot affect the comprehensiveness of a powerful approach, i.e. communicative approach.

        Items 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 of Interview:

7- How much important is that we familiarise students with English singers, pop stars, and actors and actresses?

8- Does it make sense to talk of different English cultural events such as Halloween and Thanksgiving Day in the English textbooks?

9- Valentine Day is in your course book, do you teach it?

10- Do you think there is a need to tell students what Westerners eat and drink?

11- Imagine the theme of a conversation is a party of boys and girls, do you further talk about it?

These 5 consecutive items were designed to address different situations in which a sensitively cultural element of English was present. They specifically asked about pop culture, social events and ceremonies, Valentine Day, life style, and finally the relationship between girls and boys. The aim was to elicit reaction of each participant to these concrete examples thought to be controversial in Iranian context of teaching English, though at different degrees.

A dissection of the interviews showed that one of the instructors, the one from the right-wing, either disagreed or provided a conditioned answer to the integration of such cultural elements into English language teaching. He specified some conditions that allowed the partial teaching of Valentine Day and social events and ceremonies. However, he did not find the ideas of pop culture and opposite-sex relationship nearly absolutely unwarranted. The two other instructors unanimously expressed their consent with the inclusion of the aforementioned materials and subjects into their teaching and English textbooks.

         Items 12 and 13 of Interview:

12- Is the censorship of English textbooks possible or impossible (Linguistically)?

13- Is the censorship of English textbooks necessary or unnecessary (Socially and culturally)?

These two final items which are also two of the three main questions of this study meant to explore the overall opinion and attitude of the interviewees on the issue of the censorship of the English textbooks. Unfortunately, one of the interviewees objected one of the questions (item 13) and chose not to answer it. Notwithstanding this refusal, the interview and the questions were designed in a way that allowed for several sub-questions and this would not leave the author with no clue as to what the answer to that particular question might be by each of the interviewees.

Surprisingly, on item 12 and the linguistic possibility of censorship, the reformist and the conservative saw eye to eye with each other while the moderate was at odds with both. This can have its justifications and interpretations. The author proposes that the conservative does not feel conservative about the linguistic aspect of language while he does so for the cultural aspect of it and that is why he and reformist are in the same position linguistically but not culturally. The moderate, on the contrary to the two other instructors, took question 12 as purely a linguistic question and reasoned that, for instance, one can teach active and passive, or even listening, without tapping into the sources in which there is no trace of cultural aspects or elements.

As regards the cultural necessity of censorship of English textbooks, the conservative refusal to even respond to the question could cautiously be construed as an affirmation given what he had revealed his attitudes towards censorship during the interview. Suppose it to be so, then there is another alignment between the reformist and the moderate in repudiating the necessity of the removal of cultural aspects of English in textbooks.

4.2 Tabulation of the Results

For clarification and categorisation of the responses given by the interviewees, a table is provided which demonstrates the variation of answers to each question. The participants are recognised by their political affiliation or inclination to any of the parties known and recognised in Iran. As so, by conservative, reformist, and moderate I mean a person from the right wing, left wing, and neither-and-both of the previous ones, respectively.

(To Download PDF File of This Full Article in full Details, Click Here)

                Table 1

                Categorisation of Answers Given in the Interviews

No.	Questions	Participants		Categorisation of the Answers
				Yes	No	I Ag/Dis  BUT
1	Based on Linguistic Relativism (Sapir Whorf hypothesis), the structure of a language affects its speakers’ cognition or world view. Do you agree with this?	Conservative		1
		Moderate		1
		Reformist		1
2	Culture Shapes Language; Language shapes culture. Is it really a two-way interaction? (Both=I agree)	Conservative Moderate Reformist		2 2 2
3	Globalisation: Iran and the change of values, does that allow for further cultural censorship?	Conservative Moderate Reformist		3	3 3
4	Role of Technology and mass media: do you agree that technology and mass media has made the censorship less workable?	Conservative				4
		Moderate		4
		Reformist		4
5	Teaching English means only teaching English and nothing else? Do you agree?	Conservative				5
		Moderate				5
		Reformist			5
6	Communicative Approach is in the vogue: do you agree that censorship doesn’t welcome such an approach?	Conservative Moderate Reformist		6 6	6
7	We need to familiarise students with English singers, pop stars, actors and actresses?	Conservative Moderate Reformist		7 7	7
8	Do you agree that different English cultural events such as Halloween and Thanksgiving Day should be included in the English textbooks?	Conservative				8
		Moderate		8
		Reformist		8
9	Valentine Day is in your course book, do you teach it?	Conservative Moderate Reformist		9 9		9
10	Do you think there is a need to tell students what Westerners eat and drink, their life style?	Conservative Moderate Reformist		10 10		10
11	Imagine that the theme of a conversation is a party of boys and girls, do you further talk about it?	Conservative Moderate Reformist		11 11	11
12	Is the censorship of English textbooks possible or impossible? (Linguistically)	Conservative Moderate Reformist			12
				12
					12
13	Is the censorship of English textbooks necessary (I agree) or unnecessary (I disagree)? (socially and culturally)	Conservative		Refused to answer
		Moderate			13
		Reformist				13

                            Note: Ag = Agree, Dis = Disagree

 

5. Discussion, Conclusions, and Implications

The results of this study have provided answers to the research questions specified in the introduction:

5.1 Is the censorship of English textbooks possible or impossible? (Linguistically)

The results of this study suggest that such censorship is not possible and if it is to be done at any cost, it will lead to the distorted presentation of the realities of how English is perceived, used, and communicated in the English speaking countries. This impossibility, as reaffirmed by all the three interviewees, is due to the inextricable interaction between language and culture. It can be construed that the political ideologies of the instructors does not affect how they view the relationship between language and culture.

Is the censorship of English textbooks necessary or unnecessary? (Socially)

The results of this study also indicate that such necessity is no longer felt or needed in Iran. The findings drawn from the interviews are indicative of two main reasons why such practice, viz. censoring of the cultural aspects of English textbooks, is not necessary. First, it is the vast accessibility of mass media and the fast growth of communication technologies which have kept Iranians, and English learners no exception, fully abreast of almost everything happening in the world and have enabled them to sneak out into places which the state might have no real control over.

Secondly, the Iranian society has undergone substantive changes, partially due to globalisation, that censoring some cultural aspects of English in our books does not make sense any more. Valentine Day, for instance, which was once deemed to be a taboo has now become widespread, is practiced by millions, and its ubiquitous influence is felt everywhere.

Does political background and affiliation of the English instructors impact how they see the censorship of culture in English textbooks in Iran? (Political Considerations)

The findings of the study reveal that there is a strong and meaningful difference between how the instructors look at the issue of censorship based on which political party they belong to. It appears that the conservatives are more inclined to practice further censorship of the English textbooks. It is in line with their perspective of being in charge of protecting people against the malicious effects of other cultures, esp. the westerners’ culture. Furthermore, the results indicate that the reformist and the moderate in this study are united in their repudiation of the idea of cultural censorship of the English textbooks in almost all aspects.

Finally, it must be highlighted that although in many cases two of the interviews shared the same idea, the reformist was much more adamant in his agreement or disagreement and provide answers which were more unequivocal than the moderate. This assertion can be buttressed by the transcript of the interviews when the reformist replied the questions with words and phrases such as a straight ‘yes’ or ‘no’, “certainly”, “it’s clear that…”, and so on. The highlighting of this discrepancy between the two is important since that reveals the existing level of certainty in either of the two instructors towards the topics they were asked.

To recapitulate, it can be safely concluded that the issue of censorship of the cultural elements in English textbooks taught in Iran is more ideologically-driven rather than being supported by linguistic, pedagogical, or scientific observations and reasoning. The policy of protectionism which is for long affiliated with one of the parties in Iran, the right-wing, is to be the driving force behind such ideological expurgation.

5.2 Recommendations for Further Studies and Implications

This study is limited in scope in three aspects. Further studies could lead into more exhaustive result if the following suggestions are taken into account. One, similar studies that have been conducted in other Islamic countries on the censorship of English textbooks can help us form a broader and better understanding of the topic at hand. Secondly, more experienced participants are needed so that we can have a more compendious pool of ideas. Finally, a short questionnaire with calibrated items may aid the researchers to pin down more specifically what each participant thought towards the questions raised in the interview. To recap, although this study is relatively small in scope, it is deep in dissection of what it undertakes.

Based on the results of this study some pedagogical implications could be reached. The ministry of Education in Iran as one of the main organisations responsible for making decisions and national educational policies could take steps to listen more to the experienced instructors of English from all backgrounds so as to reach a consensus over the issue of censorship in English textbooks.

Likewise and based on the result of this study, other countries in the Middle-East and elsewhere which might practice a protectionist approach towards cultural aspects of English textbooks might find it favourable to 1) conduct similar studies to, for instance, the one presented in this paper but in a more elaborate fashion both in scope and depth, and 2) reconsider their previously-practiced policies towards target culture, particularly English culture, and deem its manifestation in English textbooks more as on opportunity than a threat.

References

Ahmadi, Z. (2013). Evaluating Iranian and non-Iranian English books in ELT from a cultural point of view. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 1(4-1), 20-25. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.s.20130101.14

Albirini, A. (2009). Using technology, literature and guest speakers to raise the cultural awareness of Arabic language learners. The International Journal of Language Society and Culture, 28, 1-15. Accessed at: http://aaref.com.au/en/publications/journal/journal-articles/issue-28-2009/

Alimorad, Z. (2014). Examining identity options in native and nonnative produced textbooks taught in Iran: A critical textbook evaluation. Research in Applied Linguistic Studies, 5(2), 95-112.

Ashraf, H., Motallebzadeh, Kh., & Kafi, Z. (2013). On the relation between English textbooks and Iranian EFL Learners‟ acculturation. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(9), 1658-1666. doi:10.4304/tpls.3.9.1658-1666

Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.

Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (5th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Education.

Dahmardeh, M., Memar, H. T., & Memar, A. T. (2012). English Language Teaching Textbooks in Iran: A Critical Analysis from Cultural Perspective. Paper presented at The Asian Conference on Education 2012: Official Conference Proceedings 2012, Osaka, Japan. Retrieved from http://iafor.org/archives/offprints/ace2012-offprints/ACE2012_014 0.pdf.

Elmes, D. (2013). The relationship between language and culture. National Institute of Fitness and Sports in Kanoya International Exchange and Language Education Centre, 46, 11-18. Retrieved from http://www2.lib.nifs-k.ac.jp/HPBU/annals/an46/46-11.pdf

Erfani, S. M. (2014). Source culture, target culture or interculture? Iranian English language teachers’ perspective on culture. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World (IJLLALW), 6(1), 317-337. Retrieved from http://www.ijllalw.org/final version6125.pdf.

Genc, B., & Bada, E. (2005). Culture in language learning and teaching. The Reading Matrix, 5(1), 73-84.

Ghaemi, F., & Oghabi, M. (2016). Cultural constrains in foreign language learning in Iranian context. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 5(3), 67-73. doi: 10.5861/ijrsll.2015.1250

Gonen, S. I. K., & Saglam, S. (2012). Teaching culture in the FL classroom: Teachers’ perspectives. International Journal of Global Education (IJGE), 1(3), 26-46. Retrieved from http://www.ijtase.net/ojs/index.php/ijge/article/download/143/181.

Ho, Meng-Ching (1998). Culture studies and motivation in foreign and second language learning in Taiwan. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 11 (2), 165-182. doi: 10.1080/07908319808666548

Karabinar, S. (2012). The attitudes of EFL teachers towards teaching culture and their classroom practices. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 2(2), 113-126.

Khajavi, Y., & Abbasian, R. (2011). English language teaching, national identity and globalization in Iran: The case of public schools. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1(10), 181-186. Retrieved from www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol_1_No_10_ August_2011/23.pdf

Khuwaileh, A. A. (2000). Cultural barriers of language teaching: A case study of classroom cultural obstacles. Compuetr Assissted Language Learning , 13 (3), 281-290. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1076/0958-8221(200007)13:3;1-3;FT281

Lázár, I. (2007). Incorporating culture-related activities in foreign language teaching. Retrieved from: http://www.ecml.at/iccinte/downloads/6-3-3.pdf

Mahboudi1, H. R., & Javdani, F. (2012). The teaching of English in Iran: The place of culture. Journal of Language and Culture, 3(5), 87-95. doi: 10.5897/JLC11.041

Mikhalevaa, L. V., & Régnierb, J. C. (2014). Parallel study of native and target-language cultures in foreign language teaching. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 154, 118 -121. Retrieved from www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042814055724

Mirdehghan, M., HoseiniKargar, N., & Navab, S. (2011). Cultural barriers: Pros and cons on ELT in Iran. International Journal of English Linguistics, 1(1), 15-20. Retrieved from http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijel/article/viewFile/8958/7020.

Mokhtarniaa, SH. (2011). Language education in Iran: a dialogue between cultures or a clash of identities. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 1998–2002. Retrieved from www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187704281100588X

Rashidi, N., & Shahab, S. (2013). Disciplinary acculturation: A comparative study of intradiscourse cycles of English and Persian introductory textbooks of sociology and linguistics. Research in Applied Linguistic Studies, 4(2), 33-50.

Safa, M. A., Moradi, M., & Hamzavi, R. (2015). Iranian EFL teachers and learners perspective on potentiality of Top Notch series for intercultural competence development. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 3(2), 47-66. Retrieved from http://www.urmia.ac.ir/sites/www.urmia.ac.ir/files/(4).pdf.

Sinicrope, C., Norris, J., & Watanabe, Y. (2007). Understanding and assessing intercultural competence: A summary of theory, research, and practice (technical report for the foreign language program evaluation project). Second Language Studies, 26(1), 1-58. Retrieved from http://www.hawaii.edu/sls/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Norris.pdf.

Thanasoulas, D. (2001). The Importance of Teaching Culture in the Foreign Language Classroom [online]. Radical Pedagogy, 3 (3). Retrieved from http://radicalpedagogy.icaap.org/content/issue3_3/7-thanasoulas.html

Tsai, Y. (2012). The effects of intercultural learning on English learning motivation among students studying abroad. New Horizons in Education, 60(1), 23-34. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ974076.pdf.

Appendix

Here, each of the 13 questions designed for interviewing the participants is presented. Afterwards, the replies provided by the three English instructors, the participants of the study, are given. It must be added, however, that the answers provided here are only an encapsulation of what was observed by each of the participants. Each participant is recognised by his political views, viz. conservative, moderate, and reformist. They are referred to as Con., Mod, and Ref., respectively.

1) Based on Linguistic Relativism (Sapir Whorf hypothesis), the structure of a language affects its speakers’ cognition or world view. Do you agree with this?

• Cons.: Though I know little about this hypothesis, it sounds reasonable to me.
• Mod.: Linguistic relativism or linguistic determinism is a notion both accepted and rejected by the scholars in the field. I think it is to some degree true especially the weak version of it.
• Ref.: Yeah, I agree that the structures of a language can affect the attitudes of its speakers. Since I’ve been teaching Persian and English, and know Arabic quite well, and my mother tongue is Turkey as well, so I know since I know four languages, I live in ‘four worlds’. The language not only shapes our present worldview, but it may also shake our previous understanding prior to our encounter with a particular language.

2) Culture Shapes Language; Language shapes culture. Which of these two propositions do you agree with?

• Cons.: They both impact each other. Still, the way that culture affects culture is more tangible. For example, forms of addressing others are one area to be looked at.
• Mod.: It is clear that they both influence each other in a mutual way.
• Ref.: Talking from my experience in teaching languages, we cannot accept either is true without the other. These two notions are the two sides of the same coin of a cognitive process. One affects the other and is affected by the other.

3) Globalisation: Iran and the change of values: does that allow for further cultural censorship?

• Cons.: If it does or not, that is another question. We need to be committed to our values, ideas, and beliefs.
• Mod.: yes, that is what I think. Censorship is not the right way, it won’t help us. What we need to do is to vaccinate our students, to educate them, to teach them rather than keeping them away from something that they sooner or later may find out by themselves.
• Ref.: No, globalisation is like a contest, a match between different groups, here nations. Each nation introduces its customs, values, and so on, and the values of those which are the most powerful, exciting, and appealing, they will spread to other nations. As so, censorship cannot permanently impede this process.

4) Role of Technology and mass media: do you agree that technology and mass media has made the censorship less workable?

• Cons.: First of all, the use of the word ‘censorship’ to me is not an appropriate term here. As you know, each nation in the world has got its system values and it matters for them that the people of that country follow and respect those values. So if the authorities try to keep some values which are diametrically opposed to their people’s values away, then it is not called censorship. After revolution and even before that, many of our young people lost their lives and they were among thousands of martyrs dedicated their lives for Iran and Islam. Yes, our young generation is bombarded with information from everywhere, but this does not mean we should not do anything, do not handle the situation. We should take steps to keep our values.
• Mod.: I’d like to differentiate between two forms of teaching. Sometimes you teach students that there is something called TV, or TV Satellite. Sometimes and in a different approach, you not only teach but also encourage them to use it and these are totally different. In the Holy Quran, we have the story of ‘Yusef and Zoleikha’, the aim is not to encourage the reader to follow whatever the characters do, the aim is to educate. Censorship can’t do us any good, it won’t work. Simply our students have access to thousands of other ways to get to know what we hide from them. We need to teach them how to effectively utilise mass media or technologies at hand.
• Ref.: Certainly, the prevalence of both technology and mass media would one day make the censorship of information, and this practice in our English textbooks as well, totally useless and effective.

5) Teaching English means only teaching English? Do agree or disagree?

• Cons.: If someone is going to pursue his/her studies abroad; then he/she might need to know more than the linguistic aspects of English.
• Mod.: It depends on what the learner wants to achieve from learning English. If he/she simply is trying to learn English to receive good marks at school, then it can be so. Otherwise, no, we need to go further than teaching certain grammar rules. Surely, in teaching the cultural aspects of the English speaking countries, there would be elements that they view them respectfully, but e don’t and we can make it clear rather than brush it aside at all.
• Ref.: No, it is not so. Teaching a language is not only teaching its vocabulary, its grammar, and its structures. If one wants to be able to listen, speak, read, and write in a particular language, English is no exception, then you need to search and know about the cultural aspects that language and the culture of the speakers of that language as well. If somebody has learnt English without these cultural and social aspects, then he has learnt English in a ‘vacuum’ and will not be able to use it in the real context.

6) Communicative Approach is in the vogue: do you think censorship allows for such an approach to succeed?

• Cons.: Censorship is very limited and thus could not be deemed as an impediment to this approach. Furthermore, this approach as it is said in the question is now trendy and might not be as useful as ten years from now. So, we cannot simply follow the trends adjust our grand policies based on what the fashion is.
• Mod.: Even though I agree that the parts removed are few, I think we need to open our minds a bit more and be more easy-going towards English culture. This can help us teach English in a more effective way through Communicative Approach.
• Ref.: Censorship, I believe, is a great hurdle or setback in teaching English if we are to follow the principles of communicative approach. Censorship hinders such teaching; it also works as a hindrance to permit students to see for themselves what is real.

7) How much important is that we familiarise students with English singers, pop stars, and actors and actresses?

• Cons.: Well, I don’t see the necessity of such items in teaching English. Why should we focus on such things that we know there are things not totally in line with our culture?
• Mod.: Let me make myself understood with an example. Martyr Chamran didn’t receive his PhD in Iran in Qom’s cleric schools, he got it from the US, yet when he received his degree as the best student, he returned to Iran and went to fight for Iran in the battlefields. So simply familiarizing students with these cultural aspects shouldn’t make our students prone to westernisation.
• Ref.: Willy-nilly, the students will get to know the English singers, pop stars and the actors when watching films. Knowing some general information about these different social classes is needed.

8) Does it make sense to talk of different English cultural events such as Halloween and Thanksgiving Day in the English textbooks?

• Cons.: As far as we teach them, it is fine. But, it is suggested that plethora of our teachers knowingly or unknowingly encourage students to have the same social events which had shaped somewhere else in Iran. That is the problem.
• Mod.: As a general rule, I believe in exposure rather than expurgation. These two and many other specially-bound cultural and social events have got to be introduced to our students, they wouldn’t harm their feelings and they’ll broaden it in some way.
• Ref.: To talk of social and historical customs prevalent in English when teaching English is unavoidable. I’ll do it if it is included in the textbook.

9) Valentine Day is in your course book, do you teach it?

• Cons.: In my perspective, it depends on a couple of factors. First, the gender of students needs to be considered. Secondly, the age, and thirdly where the teaching is taking place, in public schools or in private English institutions. As gender is considered, a teacher of the same sex with the students will have no problem in explaining what Valentine Day is. On the second factor, the intellectual maturity of the student has got to be taken into consideration. Specifically, learners between 14-20 need a more measured treatment. On cases, the instructor can ignore this part or put it off for another time. And finally, if it is in an English institute, then the experience of the instructor is important, we should ask if he/she is morally and ethically competent and skilled to introduce such sensitive issue.
• Mod.: Actually, Valentine day has become so common in our culture that even where I work, my colleagues talk of it when it is due. Secondly, to love somebody and express passion is not prohibited in our Islamic culture. Look, we should look at these cultural aspects in a different way, if not, we face many problems. I will teach it as I have taught it, still I’ll try to localise/adapt the whole concept and will encourage students to look at it from our own perspective. For instance, I’d tell them that we can broaden the concept and on this day, you can also send gifts to your parents, your sisters, brothers and so on.
• Ref.: If it happens while teaching, I encounter a topic called ‘Valentine Day’, as I emphasised earlier that I’m against censorship, I’d talk as much as needed about it in the class, its history, and even if I am asked about things not covered in the textbook.

10) Do you think there is a need to tell students what westerners eat and drink, their food?

• Cons.: The answer to such question depends on a couple of factors. If students of a class ask the instructor about such things, then he/she might well provide them with some information. The other factor to be taken into account is the proficiency level of students.
• Mod.: In any rate, the language is a tool for communication, for making different cultures familiar with each other. Food and what we drink is also part of our culture. If, here in Iran, we have aborigine stew, the Chinese have their own and Japanese as well. Therefore, when teaching a language, we need to talk about what the speakers of that language eat and drink.
• Ref.: Like the previous question, if something is mentioned in the book, we need to talk about them; otherwise, there is no need since a great number of English learners already know what the food and etc. is like in the English speaking countries and that is due to globalisation that has happened in everything, in economy, in food, in clothing, etc.

11) Imagine the theme of a conversation is a party of boys and girls, do you further talk about it?

• Cons.: I don’t think so. Such a party is not recognised in our country, some have been arrested and then should I teach such party to my students in the class?
• Mod.: I talk about it as much as the book and the class require me. That a boy and a girl have a friend from their opposite sex is well accepted in English speaking countries, you simply can’t ignore it. Sometimes, it is seen that the words girlfriend or boyfriend are replaced with their opposite in our English Textbooks, this could lead not only to confusion but also to a worse effect. Once, the reading was about a boy and this boy went out with that boy, kissed each other, and …finally got married! At the end, half of the students were laughing and half were baffled and they all asked me: “do they really treat their same-sex friends this way?”
• Ref.: We don’t have any fear to talk about such issues in the class if we are asked or if that’s what we’ve got to teach.

12) Is the censorship of English textbooks possible or impossible? (Linguistically)

• Cons.: Given the fact that how language is a whole, a holistic whole, and so we cannot censor some aspects of it linguistically. Language is something universal and its elements are not reducible.
• Mod.: Let me give an example. If the aim is to teach students to get a good mark in school or get prepared for the entrance exam, here it is possible to censure some aspects. On the other hand, there are students who are planning for their future and want to be totally aware of whatever is in English. He or she is longing to go overseas and continue his/her studies there. A concrete example is that when we want to teach ‘active vs. passive’, we can teach it not using cultural elements, for instance using sentences in a film, and do it anyway.
• Ref.: Teaching English and the books designed to teach English cannot be censored from a linguistic point of view though you might decide to cut some parts and that is possible in this respect.

13) Is the censorship of English textbooks necessary or unnecessary? (socially and culturally)

• Cons.: I cannot answer this question.
• Mod.: No, let’s look back at Iran before revolution. Before revolution, even those who were not studying English knew anything about the West; the people took it as something ordinary. After revolution, however, we had some who had been living with western culture and norms but now is saying those norms are in stark contrast with ours. This generation tried to keep the next generation unaware of the West. The current generation, once again, has taken steps and has familiarised themselves with the West and what it is. Therefore, I don’t feel any necessity for such censorship any more.
• Ref.: From our perspective, such necessity does not exist, yet there are occasions which we are obliged to do so since there is something culturally in stark contrast with our values. This censorship can only happen in Public language institutions and public schools, but the private institutions and schools and universities do not need to follow such practices.

 

(To Download PDF File of This Full Article in full Details, Click Here)