How do you conceptualise native-speakerism within the context of English language teaching?

The dominance of languages is closely linked to economic, military, cultural, and political power. English has achieved unprecedented global reach. As a result, English language teaching has become a highly profitable international industry. Since the 1960s, demand for English has grown exponentially, with the U.K. and the U.S. dominating teacher education, research, publishing, and testing. Institutions offering tests and qualifications such as TOEFL, IELTS, CELTA, and DELTA are largely based in these countries. This concentration of authority reinforces the belief that native speakers are inherently better teachers.

Building on this historical dominance, how prevalent is native-speakerism in the global ELT profession today?

In the early days of the rise of English as an international language, there were very few professionally trained teachers of English as a second or foreign language. Teaching by native speakers was largely done by people with varying levels of competence, and their native status was assumed to guarantee competence. Since the 1960s, there has been a tidal wave of post-graduate courses in universities and various private organisations. Many of these have also been marketed to non-native speaker teachers from all over the world. So, in theory, trained native and non-native speaker teachers are equivalent, but, in practice, there is still an underlying bias in favour of native speakers.

To what extent do Western-centric models of ELT continue to sustain native-speakerism?

The professionalisation of ELT has largely been driven by English-speaking countries. Dictionaries, grammars, qualifications, and assessments have standardised English and concentrated control over the language in metropolitan centres. Standardisation enables reification — turning language into an object — which then allows commodification. Western models of “standard” English therefore underpin the continuing assumption of native-speaker superiority.

What specific challenges do non-native English-speaking teachers continue to face in accessing equitable professional opportunities?

Recruitment decisions are often shaped by the perspectives of ministries of education and school administrators, who in turn respond to client expectations. Parents, in particular, tend to hold uncritical beliefs about the inherent superiority of native-speaker teachers.

How does native-speakerism affect the quality, diversity, and inclusivity of ELT worldwide?

Clearly, native-speakerism has the effect of undervaluing non-native speaker teachers, which impacts their self-esteem and potentially reduces their motivation for professional development. In this respect, it can diminish the quality of the teaching on offer. But we also need to remember that, statistically, native-speaker teachers of English will always be in a minority. As the level of expertise grows in countries around the world, so the value of non-native speaker teachers is enhanced. We can observe this in the invaluable work of language teacher associations in many countries worldwide. So, I think the credibility of the native-speaker hegemony is on the wane, though it has by no means disappeared.

What steps can institutions take to ensure more equitable recruitment practices?

This is close to my heart. In 1998, I was invited to set up an M.A. programme at a prestigious private university in Thailand. I accepted on the condition that I would have a free hand in appointing faculty. As our students were from across Asia, I appointed lecturers of diverse nationalities: Indian, Singaporean, Italian, Burmese, Dutch and Thai. I was the only native speaker. This caused consternation in the upper echelons of the university, and also among our first batches of students, who asked, “Where are the native speakers?” However, the quality of the course soon established our reputation, showing that a more inclusive policy can work.

How do deeply held beliefs about “standard” or “correct” English continue to reinforce native-speakerism, even when inclusive practices are demonstrably effective?

Language use is inherently variable and constantly changing, yet humans attempt to codify and standardise it. Standardisation serves practical purposes, but it is also linked to power, control, and nation-building. So-called “standard English” is, therefore, a convenient fiction. While one or two standard varieties may be useful for international communication, learners should be prepared to encounter multiple Englishes.

What concrete measures can counter native-speakerist assumptions?

Teacher educators play a key role in raising awareness, and publishers and institutions such as the British Council are increasingly open to questioning long-held beliefs about native-speaker superiority.

How do you envision the future of ELT beyond native-speakerism?

We must rethink how English is taught and reassess its role as a global language. This reorientation allows us to imagine a more inclusive ELT profession — one that values competence over origin, embraces linguistic diversity, and recognises English as a shared global resource rather than the property of a privileged few.