The social subject

^{Touraine (1997)} suggested that social subjects are human beings able to understand reality. The author further asserted that each individual lives unique experiences that permeate his/her thoughts and his/her reality. It is through the awareness of such realities that individuals become social subjects. Along the same line, the social subject can be linked to the concept of Bildung.

Understanding Bildung not only from a historical viewpoint, but also from a modern concept, as stated by ^{Schuck (2020)}, ^{Vilanou (2001)} and ^{Gadamer (1996)}, integrates it in a humanistic and hermeneutic perspective in connection with pedagogy. Bildung is a complex concept which according to the European Association for the ^{Education of Adults (n.d)} has deep roots in European thinking and education. Bildung is related to the knowledge necessary to interact and care about oneself and others in society. It includes not only the knowledge of diverse disciplines but also moral and emotional maturity to be able to interpret one's past, comprehend one's present and foresee one's future.

Bildung then goes further than accumulating disciplinary knowledge per se, which is the theory, and it moves beyond to how the social subject takes this theoretical knowledge to help others. In practical terms, Bildung is necessary for education and pedagogy to transform realities in accordance with the context and needs. In this way, the construction of the social subject in English as a foreign language teaching education programs should be permeated by the concept of Bildung.

Thus, social subjects are not just human beings prepared for a competitive world economy; rather, they understand and comprehend cultural diversity. They are also critical and provocative individuals who challenge educational realities (^{Noguera-Ramírez & Parra, 2015}). As such, social subjects try to understand multiple forms of difference, interpretations, ways of knowing, and constructions of knowledges. In other words, social subjects resist against a globalized and capitalist society. Therefore, social subjects are not conversant with students competing for high levels of language proficiency, but they agree with developing their students' intellectual force. What this means for English as a foreign language teaching education programs is that their focus should be on cultural concerns over economic welfare as suggested by ^{Páez (2009)}.

In this sense, English as a foreign language teaching education programs wonder about how educational systems can account for socio-economic and cultural differences. Their curricula may answer the questions, such as: Whose worldview are educational systems trying to understand? How are identities constructed? How many realities are there? Who constructs knowledge? Which culture is represented in language teaching materials?

^{Zemelman (2010)} and ^{Touraine (1997)} concluded that in educational systems, there is a need to have social subjects who care about everyday people and their daily struggles, along with their multishaped identities and subjectivities. This leads us to the point that social subjects are able to comprehend other cultures.

Interculturality

To introduce the concept of interculturality, it is of paramount importance to comprehend what culture means. Culture is a concept that is used widely in both academic and everyday settings. It has been defined as the set of social, material, and ideological characteristics of a human group. This definition is so broad that it appears not to say much, which could be due to the fact that culture is difficult to define. Actually, it was not until the late 19th century that the concept was formally described by the English anthropologist Edward ^{Tylor (1871)}.

It is necessary to state that culture is not a univocal concept, in which people with different perspectives agree. On the contrary, as is the case with most crucial terms in the social sciences, culture is discussed and contested from many distinct perspectives. Undoubtedly, major contributions in defining culture have come from the field of anthropology.

The first approach, then, would be to examine Tylor's definition: "Culture in its wide ethnographic sense is the complex universe that includes knowledge, beliefs, art, moral, law and customs, as well as other capabilities and abilities acquired by people and members of society" (^{Tylor, 1871}, p. 6). The preceding definition has several implications. For example, it implies that culture is not biological; culture is acquired by people from their social context. The previous implies that people are not superior than others from a biological point of view. Instead, a child from anywhere in the world and with different physiognomic characteristics will acquire the culture of her or his environment, no matter how culturally or geographically far she or he is from their original culture. Although this notion seems obvious today, it challenged popular beliefs of white superiority in the 19^th and part of the 20th centuries. Thus, culture is a social construct as opposed to an individual one; it can only be created in society. Although, over time, Tylor's concept has been refined and shaped, most of his view continues to be valid.

Culture is usually taken for granted. People do not ponder about their own cultural features, unless they are contrasting themselves with another group. Nonetheless, people have different interpretations that make them unique. The previous remarks take us to the following point. In order to study culture, social scientists need some degree of contact with other cultures. It is through this contact that we become aware of the underlying structures and behaviors of our own and others' cultures. Therefore, being with the other is perhaps the only way to understand the power relationships and realities within our cultural structures.

Thus, to move towards such an understanding, the concept of interculturality needs to be considered. Interculturality, from a comprehensive and critical perspective, "aims at respect and coexistence between cultures, which allows not only an equal relationship but also mutual learning and enrichment" (^{Cruz, 2013}, p. 55). Comprehension of cultural structures and mutual learning might happen if one is aware of the intercultural practices in a given community. ^{Ramos-Holguín (2021)} suggests that "Intercultural practices are expressions in which interculturality can be perceived, and they connect to a person's academic and personal lived experiences" (p. 96). In other words, intercultural practices allow human beings to be aware of the diverse interculturalities which, in turn, is a key point to become social subjects.

In the following section we will open a discussion based on the challenges and opportunities for English as a foreign language teaching education programs in order to create formative spaces that help in the construction of future English teachers as social subjects.

Challenges and Opportunities

First, the processes of building social subjects would not be possible without the active participation of future teachers and the community. English as a foreign language teaching education programs can provide formative spaces for future teachers to be involved with the community. ^{Ramos and Aguirre (2016)} stressed the need for teachers to be part of the community they work with. The authors suggested that "Teachers must be introduced to the community's relevant ethnographic information in order to smoothly enter into the community, avoiding conflicts that could arise by not having cultural information about the group in question" (Ramos & Aguirre, 2016, p. 215). Researchers like ^{Moll and González (2004)} have demonstrated the benefits of getting to know familiar contexts well and then building connections with families and communities. In fact, this might help future teachers to understand the intercultural practices in a specific context which in turn might guide them to become critical and provocative social subjects in their educational communities.

When future teachers develop empathetic feelings towards the community, they are involved in, they foster a connection with one's roots, they engage in social participation, and they question realities. Questions that can be answered in unison with members of the community to promote sharing include: How are human rights understood in my community? How is the right to liberty exercised and appreciated when there is a lack of freedom of speech? How does the community conceive globalization? How is life affected when food and health care are not fully available? and how is happiness understood?

Second, English as a foreign language teaching education programs could contribute to move future teachers from being users to be critical and influential actors in the selection and use of teaching materials. The idea of having curriculum that promotes superiority of certain cultures is now understood as colonial education. For example, textbooks often exalt the target culture, but students are rarely asked to question, discuss, and compare this culture with their own daily experiences. In this vein, ^{Martínez Boom (2004)} argues that power nations, through publishing houses and textbooks, promote cultural supremacy.

Undoubtedly, teaching materials may have supported political and economic interests of pre-established systems; thus, conserving the dominant status quo. Academics such as ^{Núñez-Pardo (2018)}, ^{Soto-Molina and Méndez (2020)}, ^{Rico (2012)}, ^{Pulverness (2003)}, ^{Tomlinson (2003)} and ^{Canagarajah (1999)} have examined the nature and social function of materials development and they have identified a mercantilist global interest. As a result, the materials development industry sustains the standardization and homogenization of pedagogic and cultural practices connected to the teaching of foreign languages regardless of the specificity of each region, country or continent. This suggests that publishing companies are indifferent to specific local needs.

The choice of teaching materials, textbooks, and the way contents are negotiated in classroom are not devoid of ideology, nothing is. Everything in a text is a way of displaying what is considered important. For instance, an English language learning textbook may exclude other varieties of Englishes except for British or American English. Additionally, the selected texts might systematically avoid social, intellectual, or cultural problems. In these cases, we can find ideological traces of what the author(s) considered important or not.

Issues, such as human rights, refugees, global economics, nutrition, environment, and health, can be addressed in the materials. Some of the questions future teachers need to answer are: Would students with a low socioeconomic status be interested in discussing world issues? Would students be interested in understanding how other countries have solved problems related to health, nutrition, etc.?

Third, English as a foreign language teaching education programs should promote sensitive pedagogies. It is a fact that in Colombian classrooms, as ^{Aguirre and Ramos (2011)} mentioned, "there is a mixture of students in the classrooms coming from different backgrounds, socioeconomic statuses, ethnicities and religious beliefs" (^{Aguirre & Ramos, 2011}, p. 170). Lately, there has been a tremendous awareness in EFL classrooms about the realities of students and their diverse backgrounds. Beyond concerns about gender, ethnicity and race, invisible diversities such as exclusion, social class, upbringing and life experiences have started to be recognized. As such, ^{Ramos and Aguirre (2014)} further asserted that the Colombian population attending schools nowadays demand a teacher who can adapt his or her methodologies to meet the diverse needs of class. This implies for teachers to rethink their relationships with students, be open and flexible, challenge misconceptions, and disrupt hierarchies. Then, the concept of particularity (^{Kumaravadivelu, 1994}) comes into play.

Particularity relates to the need for a pedagogy that is both relevant and sensitive to a particular group, which includes teachers and learners pursuing specific goals in a particular institutional context embedded in a unique sociocultural milieu. Future English teachers should think of alternatives for reconceptualizing English language teaching contexts as global spaces. In such a way, future teachers would not adopt whatever is prescribed but they adjust and negotiate global and local agendas. They also recreate possibilities for them to be, become and know.