I BELIEVE the argument on the need for better English proficiency was won long ago. The overwhelming majority of Malaysians, regardless of race, recognise the need for better, if not good, English.
At times, too much of our time is spent trying to put forth the argument on the importance of the language, when in fact it is no longer necessary.
Of course, there are those who continue to suggest the Japanese or Germans did well without English.
There is logic in the argument, of course, but it is flawed, opportunistic and self-promoting.
By the same perverse logic, we can also argue that the architects, engineers and builders of the great pyramids of Egypt, the Taj Mahal in India and the Great Wall of China were obviously not disadvantaged by not knowing English.
They were still able to build magnificent monuments of human civilisation.
Why should we deprive ourselves of what is generally accepted as the world's most important language for business, diplomacy, science and technology?
The world is moving so fast that we hardly have time to understand things, much less translate them, before the next one comes along.
In the real world, at least in Malaysia, it is also recognised, fairly or not, that those with good English are generally likely to fare better than those without.
There are academically-superior graduates whose upward mobility has somehow been affected by their proficiency in the language, when compared with the academically-average but with superior command of English.
It should not be the case, of course, but surveys done on employers suggest that it is the case.
I was in India recently where even in the poorest of neighbourhoods in New Delhi there were signs, painted on buildings, signboards and banners, promoting private educational facilities from pre-school to technical institutions, offering English-medium education.
There, English is seen as a socio-economic mobility tool.
For the poor, it is a ticket out of the economic morass, especially when English is the language of business and government.
But before someone comes up with examples of people who did very well in spite of their command of English, it must be noted that it is not the rule.
Just as the Japanese, Germans, etc, do not need English to prosper, there may be captains of industry who cannot speak the language.
Since we all agree on the importance of English, the only issue is how we attain it.
There are many stakeholders along the way, at times too many, trying to influence the objective this way and that.
Generally, all mean well, but most are limiting their focus just to better serve their interests.
However, here is the hard truth. While we can do many things, we have to admit and accept the fact that there is no way we can have the level of English in our schools like how it was three or four decades ago.
Even then, when the level of English proficiency was better, not everyone mastered it.
But the propensity of those who were proficient in the language to be employed in commerce and government, as well as to be in high places, made us believe that we were generally better at English.
In fact, there were more people who did not speak English well.
Those who spoke or wrote English well were generally from English-medium schools, hence the clamour by some for the return of this type of institutions.
People also see English-medium schools as not only a solution for better English, but also a cure-all for other ills, ranging from national unity to the quality of the Malaysian football team.
The never-ending debate over the use of English for the teaching of Mathematics and Science is a manifestation of the desire to have more English in school.
Many parents believe it is a good thing and the decision to revert to Bahasa Malaysia, Mandarin and Tamil, unwise.
Of course, it is true that English is the dominant medium for science and technology.
Also, currently, too much energy is wasted to complain about the inability of schools or teachers to impart English language skills to our students.
That may be the case, but we must acknowledge that without the use of English as the medium of instruction in schools, the ability of most students to master the language is limited if their interaction with it is only in the classrooms.
In our system, either in national or vernacular schools, English is more of a subject than a language. Students "study" the language and sit for examinations, but do not "live" it.
No matter how much time or periods are added for the subject in school, or native speakers added to the teaching force, or even if Maths and Science are to be taught again in English, we must accept the fact that our kids' English proficiency will not be automatic.
These are all enablers and tools to get our children familiar and comfortable with the language.
I must say, if parents want their charges to have better proficiency in the language, stopping short of enrolling them in private English-medium schools, they must supplement their children's diet of English with books, movies or songs.
We must get our kids to practise English, rather than learn it.
Better English may start in school, but these days it must be promoted, nurtured and "lived" outside of the classrooms.
We can try to blame the authorities, but in the end, the finger is pointed at each of us.
Read more: English a ticket out of poverty - Columnist - New Straits Times http://www.nst.com.my/opinion/columnist/english-a-ticket-out-of-poverty-1.15897#ixzz1fpRSHU9f
Posts
1 kata anda:
would love to try that!!i'll check on ur website later on k!!thx for d great info..
Post a Comment