English language teaching, as McKay (Reference McKay, Hornberger and McKay2010) highlights, was long dominated by the English as a foreign language (EFL) paradigm, according to which native speaker competence was the ultimate goal that teachers, students and other relevant educational stakeholders sought. The incremental increase in the number of non-native speakers of English worldwide and the subsequent need for effective intercultural interaction, however, led ELT scholars, almost from the early 1980s, to rethink the adequacy of the century-old native speaker model. Several scholars began to criticize that the model is utopian and unrealistic, hence doomed to failure (e.g., Seidhofer, Reference Seidhofer2005). Others, such as McKay (Reference McKay, Hornberger and McKay2010), further maintained that it implies that second language learners should ignore their social identities in cross-cultural communication. These scholars, in fact, argue for the legitimacy of all varieties of English, a recent ELT paradigm that has come to be known as English as an International Language (EIL).

This perspective towards English has confronted the field with a serious question: How to teach English with an international perspective? This edited volume brings together 17 papers focusing on the pedagogy of English as an international language. The book, overall, describes the way this new paradigm has been implemented and experienced by key educational stakeholders in a wide variety of social contexts. The organization of the book is straightforward. In the introductory chapter, the editors elaborate the conceptual framework employed in the chapters (i.e., EIL). This discussion is followed by an explanation of what is generally meant when one talks about the pedagogy of EIL, and the chapter is closed by the editors’ reasons for compiling this volume. The remaining chapters are organized around three main sections, each including a number of articles.

The first section, ‘Consider change’, primarily attempts to convince readers that the recent position of English as a means of communication among non-native speakers necessitates changes in the field of English language teaching. Kirkpatrick introduces six language teaching and learning principles that current ELT in Eastern and Southern Asia and other similar EIL contexts should observe. These include: (1) mutual intelligibility is the linguistic goal, (2) intercultural competence is the cultural target, (3) local multilinguals provide the most appropriate English language teachers, (4) lingua franca environments provide excellent learning environments for lingua franca speakers, (5) spoken language is not the same as written, and (6) assessment must be relevant to the local context. The two following chapters of the section then trace the issue in Australia and Korea. Sharifian addresses the major reasons for avoiding standard English in ELT pedagogy in Australia and brings reasons (e.g., the development of numerous varieties of English) to justify the adoption of an international approach to English. Park and Kim discuss the issues that impede the full implementation of the recently adopted EIL paradigm in Korea and in turn suggest practical ways to remove these hurdles.

The second section of the book, ‘Dimensions of Change’, includes six papers, each addressing a particular ELT dimension that requires major shifts to fit the international character of English. Honna and Takeshita (Ch. 4) argue that ELT in Japan needs to be revamped in three main respects including the pedagogical model, students’ perspective toward their own culture and that of speakers of different varieties of English. To emphasize the significant role that language educators’ perceptions play in the implementation of such paradigm shifts, the editors devote the two following chapters to the investigation of this issue. In ‘Teaching the target culture in English teacher education programs’, Doan highlights tensions between a monocentric and a pluricentric view of culture teaching among English teachers in Vietnam. The next article, ‘Implementing EIL paradigm in ELT classrooms’ by Ali, however, shows satisfactory evidence of a paradigm shift in the attitudes among Malaysian teachers. Putting these studies in consecutive chapters is significant in that the revealed perception differences among teachers working in varying cultural contexts helps raise readers’ awareness that a key first step towards the implementation of an EIL paradigm is to explore the attitudes that teachers hold as to this perspective, since they are the key agents in translating EIL principles into ELT classrooms (Li, Reference Li2017).

Having established the significant role of teachers’ attitudes, the volume makes the case that attitudes are not intractable. Hoven's experimental paper ‘Teaching teachers to teach English as an international language’ explains the ways in which a culture course aiming at teaching EIL in Korea helped teachers reconceptualise what English is and what functions it serves. Still sticking to the cultural aspect of this paradigm, ‘The relocation of culture in teaching of English as an international language’ by Zacharias reports on the experiences of 12 English teachers in Indonesia in attempting to reorganize their culture course according to EIL principles. Through presenting the challenges that teachers encountered in EIL teaching despite their knowledge of its core principles, the article highlights the fact that EIL teacher education should equip teachers ‘to work out solutions to unique problems’ that will appear in their teaching practices (Wysocka, Reference Wysocka, Drozdzial-Szelest and Pawlak2014: 50). The final contribution in this section targets another major aspect of English teaching in EIL contexts, that is, vocabulary. Xu, in ‘Teaching and assessing EIL vocabulary in Hong Kong’, demonstrates how vocabulary teaching and assessment in Hong Kong can be successfully aligned to the EIL paradigm through comparing various vocabulary teaching strategies and assessment approaches.

To many policy makers, ESL teachers and learners, EIL has the form of a benign paradigm which equals the mere appreciation of all English varieties. Through the last section ‘Critical Reflections on [Experiences of] Change’, however, the editors attempt to draw the readers’ attention to the thorny issues that arise when teachers attempt to incorporate EIL into their classrooms. The first paper, ‘The unequal production of knowledge in the sociolinguistics of Englishes’ by Tupas, provides evidence to the argument that the field suffers from mismatches between paradigm shifts proposed by scholars and the realities of classroom practice experienced by teachers (Canagarajah, Reference Canagarajah2006). The study demonstrates that EIL's key question - which variety of English to teach - is not the real concern that teachers are confronting in their classrooms. Hence, Tupas calls for more negotiations between scholars and teachers in the construction of knowledge. Reflecting on the situation of ELT in Japan, Toh's article, ‘The cosmetics of teaching English as an international language in Japan’, further discusses prevalent ideologies, policies and practices that hinder implementing EIL at the classroom level. In the following paper, ‘A critical reflection of teaching English as an international language in an Australian context’, Manara reports on another set of tensions and conflicts he witnessed in the classroom.

Chapter 13, however, turns its attention to another serious issue that may endanger the appreciation of English as an international language, that is, the perception that L2 users hold toward English varieties: Pollard's empirical study ‘The realities of real English: Voices from the exposed’, provides proof that native speaker idolisation still dominates among Korean learners of English. D'Angelo's paper ‘The WEs/EIL paradigm and Japan's NS propensity’ addresses the same issue with relation to a World Englishes program in Japan and finds similar results. The last paper in Section 3 ‘On teaching EIL in a Japanese context’ by Giri & Foo, presents an account of dilemmas and difficulties that an EIL teacher in Japan confronted in practicing EIL. Finally, the editors close the volume with an epilogue written by Mahboob. Although he acknowledges the significance of the information provided by the book, he considers it critical that teachers and students understand the various ways in which language variation, including English varieties, operates.

In the introductory chapter, Marlina promises ‘to showcase and/or trigger debates about how realistic it is to teach English as a pluricentric language’ (p. 11). By including articles on both how educational stakeholders react to this change and how they reflect on this change, the editors succeed in achieving their purpose. Although different studies appeal to different audiences, the book's treatment of EIL across a wide range of social contexts (contexts where English is the sole official language, is one of the official languages or has no official status) provide all readers with valuable insights into the issue. Teachers interested in adopting an EIL approach may find the volume especially valuable, as clear implications for the classroom arise from most of the studies.