Energizing the Teacher Potentials for Teaching English in Diverse Socio-Cultural and Geo-Political Contexts in Nepal

Authors

Naresh Prasad Tiwari

English Department (Nepal)

Article Information

DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI.2026.1306000447

Subject Category: English Language

Volume/Issue: 13/6 | Page No: 6018-6024

Publication Timeline

Submitted: 2026-06-06

Accepted: 2026-06-11

Published: 2026-07-17

Abstract

In Nepal's multilingual and multicultural context, teaching English poses distinct challenges and opportunities. Teachers are central to ensuring effective English language learning, but their potential is often undermined by inadequate training, poor infrastructure, and mismatched national policies that fail to consider local diversity. This study explored how to energize teacher potentials by focusing on socio-cultural inclusivity, professional development, and geo-political considerations in Nepal. Drawing on qualitative data collected through interviews, observations, and document analysis, the research investigates the current challenges and emerging solutions from teachers’ perspectives across different regions. The findings show that teachers can become transformative agents when equipped with context-sensitive pedagogy, culturally responsive training, and community engagement tools. The study recommends decentralizing teacher education, investing in continuous and reflective professional development, and involving teachers in curriculum design. Energizing teacher potential is thus framed not just as a pedagogical goal, but as a socio-political project essential for equitable and effective English education across Nepal

Keywords

English language teaching in Nepal, Teacher professional development, Socio-cultural inclusivity, Culturally responsive pedagogy, Multilingual education Educational equity

Downloads

References

1. Awasthi, L. D. (2003). Teacher education with special reference to English language teaching in Nepal. Journal of NELTA, 8(1–2), 17–28. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Benson, C. (2009). Designing effective schooling in multilingual contexts: The strengths and limitations of bilingual “models.” International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 12(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050802153178 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Carney, S., & Bista, M. B. (2009). Community schooling in Nepal: A genealogy of education reform since 1990. Comparative Education Review, 53(2), 189–211. https://doi.org/10.1086/597757 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Central Bureau of Statistics. (2012). National population and housing census 2011: National report. Government of Nepal. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change (3rd ed.). Teachers College Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. García, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education. Palgrave Macmillan. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Giri, R. A. (2009). The politics of linguistic homogenization in Nepal: The case of English language education. Linguistics and Education, 20(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2009.01.002 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Giri, R. A. (2010). Cultural identity and the status of English in Nepal. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 31(5), 409–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2010.498448 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Hornberger, N. H., & Skilton-Sylvester, E. (2000). Revisiting the continua of biliteracy: International and critical perspectives. Language and Education, 14(2), 96–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500780008666781 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2003). Beyond methods: Macrostrategies for language teaching. Yale University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MOEST). (2020). Annual education report 2020. Government of Nepal. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Paris, D., & Alim, H. S. (2017). Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning for justice in a changing world. Teachers College Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Phyak, P. (2011). Beyond the façade of language planning for Nepalese multilingual realities: Monolingual ideologies and English-medium instruction policy. Journal of Education and Research, 1(1), 1–20. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Phyak, P. (2013). Language ideologies and local languages as the medium-of-instruction policy: A critical ethnography of a multilingual school in Nepal. Current Issues in Language Planning, 14(1), 127–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2013.775557 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Poudel, T. (2016). Challenges of teaching English in rural Nepal. Journal of NELTA, 21(1–2), 70–78. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Sah, P., & Li, G. (2018). English medium instruction (EMI) as linguistic capital in Nepal: Promises and realities. International Multilingual Research Journal, 12(2), 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2017.1401448 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2000). Linguistic genocide in education – or worldwide diversity and human rights? Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Tollefson, J. W., & Tsui, A. B. M. (2004). Medium of instruction policies: Which agenda? Whose agenda? Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

Metrics

Views & Downloads

Similar Articles