In her Sunday Times article, Sumiko Tan wrote that she lugged along some English grammar book when she went on a trip. Immediately, I thought of how I used to lug work along on some of our holidays too. Disgusting, right?
Anyway, her article was about the English Language debate, about which many others have also written/spoken. Let me now be one of those others, too.
I think the heart of the issue is not the ‘native speakers’ the MOE wants to recruit but the real reasons for the state of the language here. Again, many have written/spoken about this.
A couple of questions:
1. Why did it take so many years for the authorities to come up with a (contentious) solution and why this solution?
I remember over the years reading letters in the Forum about how the use of the language was going down the drain, and, more importantly, about the ill effects of not emphasising grammar in school. So why is it we are only taking action now?
Some of you will remember English textbooks which had chapters organised according to grammar items, not themes such as 'Neighbourhood', 'Animals' or whatever (found in today’s textbooks). I was indeed fortunate to have had teachers who were sticklers for correct grammar, correct usage, correct pronunciation, etc. I believe many of them were taught by the Irish nuns. All my English teachers, as far as I can remember, were locals but they were well-grounded in the language and, as far as I can tell, gave us a pretty good grounding in the language too (along with those textbooks and First Aid in English).
In secondary school, we had this extensive reading programme in which, on top of the lit texts, we read something like a (prescribed) book a month. After that, we did mini projects on the book. It was something I enjoyed tremendously but I guess it would have been torture for those who hated reading. But torture or not, the exposure to more books was very likely not harmful. And you can see how this built upon our primary school programme.
So, as many have already pointed out, the solution is not getting ‘native speakers’ but focusing on the right things, and developing the right curriculum. And they had better do something about it fast.
2. Next, why are primary school teachers made to teach all 3 core subjects?
In an average, regular situation, if you are strong in English, you may not be strong in the sciences. If you are strong in the sciences, you may not be strong in English. In fact, if you are strong in math, you may not be strong in science, and if you are strong in physics, it doesn’t mean you are strong in biology too. In other words, some children are not getting a good grounding in language and/or math and/or science. And I would say it's not really the fault of the teachers but the system.
Therefore, another solution would be to have primary school teachers specialise.
Some other thoughts:
As for the native speaker teachers, I think they can certainly enhance language teaching here and they might well have that Irish nun effect. They can’t possibly be replacing local teachers, as some people fear; there is already a shortage of teachers. Then again, if the programme or curriculum is not right, even having the Queen of England or the King of Cambridge themselves here might not help that much.
I’m amused to read, not just once, but several times, the objections that many native speakers’ grasp of the language doesn’t measure up and native speakers have thick/unintelligible, etc accents. First, do people think that the MOE interviewers will select someone who truly has an accent that is too thick/unintelligible, etc? Will someone without the appropriate teaching qualifications even be shortlisted? Anyway, if children and teenagers have few or no problems with what they watch on television or in the cinema, why should they have problems understanding qualified teachers?
Flogging another dead horse, I want to say that I agree with all who have argued that the whole thing has to be looked at holistically: who is teaching, how the students are learning, how the students are using the language, how society (the family, school, media, etc) supports the correct use of language etc.
A negative example:
1. In the 19 June issue of the ST, there was a headline ‘Every feedback counts for new boss’. The article included this: ‘Every idea and feedback count, said so-and-so’. Then on 20 June, there was this Forum letter which went, ‘…we had received numerous feedback from the Residents’ Committee…’
All these passed under the editor’s/editors’ eyes. But ‘feedback’ is an uncountable noun, so how can there be ‘every feedback’ or ‘numerous feedback’?
What about 'every idea and feedback count'? Now if 'feedback' were a countable noun, which it is not, it should be 'every idea and feedback counts', right? Like 'every cat and dog has a tail'.
2. Also on 19 June, I heard this CNA reporter saying that our PM and the NZ PM met to ‘discuss about’ bilateral issues. Another error you might expect in a Sec 1 student’s essay but definitely not on national television. And that Sec 1 student might take national TV or the one and only broadsheet available to him very seriously. You know what I mean?
So, like I said, the solution has to be holistic.
Incidentally, since I no longer go on holiday with work chained to my ankle, I entertained myself with Asking for Trouble by Jason Hahn, a copy of InStyle and the local papers. More about Hahn’s book later.
Anyway, her article was about the English Language debate, about which many others have also written/spoken. Let me now be one of those others, too.
I think the heart of the issue is not the ‘native speakers’ the MOE wants to recruit but the real reasons for the state of the language here. Again, many have written/spoken about this.
A couple of questions:
1. Why did it take so many years for the authorities to come up with a (contentious) solution and why this solution?
I remember over the years reading letters in the Forum about how the use of the language was going down the drain, and, more importantly, about the ill effects of not emphasising grammar in school. So why is it we are only taking action now?
Some of you will remember English textbooks which had chapters organised according to grammar items, not themes such as 'Neighbourhood', 'Animals' or whatever (found in today’s textbooks). I was indeed fortunate to have had teachers who were sticklers for correct grammar, correct usage, correct pronunciation, etc. I believe many of them were taught by the Irish nuns. All my English teachers, as far as I can remember, were locals but they were well-grounded in the language and, as far as I can tell, gave us a pretty good grounding in the language too (along with those textbooks and First Aid in English).
In secondary school, we had this extensive reading programme in which, on top of the lit texts, we read something like a (prescribed) book a month. After that, we did mini projects on the book. It was something I enjoyed tremendously but I guess it would have been torture for those who hated reading. But torture or not, the exposure to more books was very likely not harmful. And you can see how this built upon our primary school programme.
So, as many have already pointed out, the solution is not getting ‘native speakers’ but focusing on the right things, and developing the right curriculum. And they had better do something about it fast.
2. Next, why are primary school teachers made to teach all 3 core subjects?
In an average, regular situation, if you are strong in English, you may not be strong in the sciences. If you are strong in the sciences, you may not be strong in English. In fact, if you are strong in math, you may not be strong in science, and if you are strong in physics, it doesn’t mean you are strong in biology too. In other words, some children are not getting a good grounding in language and/or math and/or science. And I would say it's not really the fault of the teachers but the system.
Therefore, another solution would be to have primary school teachers specialise.
Some other thoughts:
As for the native speaker teachers, I think they can certainly enhance language teaching here and they might well have that Irish nun effect. They can’t possibly be replacing local teachers, as some people fear; there is already a shortage of teachers. Then again, if the programme or curriculum is not right, even having the Queen of England or the King of Cambridge themselves here might not help that much.
I’m amused to read, not just once, but several times, the objections that many native speakers’ grasp of the language doesn’t measure up and native speakers have thick/unintelligible, etc accents. First, do people think that the MOE interviewers will select someone who truly has an accent that is too thick/unintelligible, etc? Will someone without the appropriate teaching qualifications even be shortlisted? Anyway, if children and teenagers have few or no problems with what they watch on television or in the cinema, why should they have problems understanding qualified teachers?
Flogging another dead horse, I want to say that I agree with all who have argued that the whole thing has to be looked at holistically: who is teaching, how the students are learning, how the students are using the language, how society (the family, school, media, etc) supports the correct use of language etc.
A negative example:
1. In the 19 June issue of the ST, there was a headline ‘Every feedback counts for new boss’. The article included this: ‘Every idea and feedback count, said so-and-so’. Then on 20 June, there was this Forum letter which went, ‘…we had received numerous feedback from the Residents’ Committee…’
All these passed under the editor’s/editors’ eyes. But ‘feedback’ is an uncountable noun, so how can there be ‘every feedback’ or ‘numerous feedback’?
What about 'every idea and feedback count'? Now if 'feedback' were a countable noun, which it is not, it should be 'every idea and feedback counts', right? Like 'every cat and dog has a tail'.
2. Also on 19 June, I heard this CNA reporter saying that our PM and the NZ PM met to ‘discuss about’ bilateral issues. Another error you might expect in a Sec 1 student’s essay but definitely not on national television. And that Sec 1 student might take national TV or the one and only broadsheet available to him very seriously. You know what I mean?
So, like I said, the solution has to be holistic.
Incidentally, since I no longer go on holiday with work chained to my ankle, I entertained myself with Asking for Trouble by Jason Hahn, a copy of InStyle and the local papers. More about Hahn’s book later.
Comments
but i agree that we have to take a holistic approach. language is very much a part of life, which means if the people around the learners speak bad english, it's very difficult for the learners to learn proper english. eg, i personally know some parents who speak terribly broken singlish to their children at home, thinking it will help. unfortunately, that only makes it a lot harder for these children to learn proper english since they communicate with their parents the most outside the school.
dee from royal leisure
Ya, and actually, I would say the same for Mandarin, too. Many parents/grandparents speak not-so-accurate Mandarin to children and so they end up speaking not-so-accurate Mandarin, even though that's the language they are most comfortable with.
All this makes for very hard work for the teachers, I think.
My wife and I teach English to PRC workers and Korean ladies for free as well as in Batam.
The key to teaching English is really grammar; but the way this is taught is a far cry from when our teachers used to drill us in the tenses,etc. Instead we teach them to speak the language in sentences of increasing grammatical difficulty. No longer is it a case of learning rules.
I believe much of the teaching methodology in schools is out of date; as would be the case when you are more concerned with exams than with having students speak correct with correct diction and grammar.
Native teachers are not the solution. We need to upgrade our teaching methodology.
Grammar + methodology + curriculum + proper use by the media/society.
Heh heh... yes, we do not HAVE to have the native speakers. But, like I said, I don't think there will be any harm bringing in good teachers from wherever, as long as there is a sound curriculum/plan. I suppose they will be doing something about that...
jus happen to see your blog.
jason hahn has got a new book in end of month call "Table for Three".
he also has a blog www.saffyamanda.blogspot.com
very funni...:-)
jan