   |
Language Education
Mother-tongue teaching supported by research
By Lei Xuan
Policies
on language education in Hong Kong changed after the Handover in 1997.
Dr. Tang Lai Yiu, lecturer in the Faculty of Education at The Chinese
University of Hong Kong, said, “From 1997 to 2003, the two most
important changes were the application of mother-tongue teaching from
1998 and the Language Proficiency Assessment for Teachers from 2000.”
The policy of applying mother-tongue teaching has been discussed many
times since 1984, when Education Commission Report No. 1 encouraged
secondary schools to teach in the mother tongue.
Released in 1990, report No. 4 recommended that Secondary 1 entrants
be grouped in terms of their ability to learn in Chinese or English.
A 2-year research project was carried out to compare academic performance
of students in 25 Anglo-Chinese schools and Chinese middle schools.
Each of the 4,981 Secondary 1 to 3 students was tested in Chinese, English,
mathematics, science and history. Their performance was compared over
2 years.
The study found that students from Anglo-Chinese schools did better
in English and students from Chinese middle schools did better in Chinese
and history. Students from the latter schools also seemed to do slightly
better in science and mathematics.
This suggests that mother-tongue teaching helps students achieve proficiency
in academic subjects.
Contrary to public perceptions, the study, whose findings were reported
in report No. 2, showed that not many students could achieve a higher
proficiency in English by studying in an English-medium school.
The study also showed that students studying in English-medium schools
found it difficult to express themselves in language-loaded subjects,
particularly history.
The overall findings of the study were supported by report No. 4, which
said that the majority of Hong Kong secondary school students would
benefit from studying under mother-tongue instruction.
Nowadays, primary schools can determine their own medium of instruction.
Secondary schools are also divided into Chinese-medium-instruction schools
and English-medium-instruction schools.
Of the 499 secondary schools in Hong Kong, 114 schools use English as
their medium of instruction.
Schools using English should ensure that 85 percent of their students
are proficient in English.
Furthermore, teachers’ capabilities are to be based on the principal’s
assessment and certification. The schools should also give school-based
assistance to students.
However, some students do not agree with the findings of this study.
Gigi Wong, a Form 5 student from Sacred Heart Canossian College, said,
“Since my college is an English school, every thing here is in
English. I feel more comfortable expressing my opinions in English.”
Lau Pak Hin, a Form 5 student from SKH Tsoi Kung Po Secondary School,
said, “I think the most important factor of studying English is
whether you use it or not. As a Chinese school student, I am worried
that I will be less competent than students from English schools.”
Tong Choi Wai, assistant professor in the Department of Curriculum and
Instruction at the Chinese University, said, “As an educator,
I support the policy of applying mother-tongue teaching. The learning
process will be easier by using Cantonese.”
The drawback of having a mother-tongue teaching policy is that students
who study in Chinese schools have less exposure to English than their
counterparts in English schools.
Angel Lin, associate professor in the Department of English and Communication
at the City University of Hong Kong, said, “There are no well-controlled
studies showing that mother-tongue instruction has resulted in lower
English proficiency among Hong Kong students.”
However, public figures, especially business leaders, complain that
local school leavers’ English is poorer than before.
Facing the grumble of Hong Kong students’ declining English ability,
people blame the teachers.
The Language Proficiency Assessment for Teachers was introduced in 2000
to ensure that teachers are proficient in the language they teach in.
Teachers from local primary and secondary schools will have to sit for
an assessment by the school year 2006/2007.
The English assessment is comprised of five papers, including reading,
writing, listening, speaking and classroom language assessment. The
Mandarin assessment is comprised of four papers: listening and recognition,
pinyin, oral, and classroom language assessment.
The proficiency attainment rates so far are unsatisfactory. For example,
only 41 percent and 32 percent of candidates passed the writing section
in English assessments in March and September 2003, respectively.
The introduction of the assessment evoked debate. While parents and
the public think that there should be a way to assess teachers’
language proficiency, teachers consider the test just a political tool
of the government.
Erica Lau, a 24-year-old English teacher at Tsuen Wan Primary School,
said, “The test cannot show our proficiency in English. It is
just for the government to prove something to the parents about teachers’
language proficiency.”
Prof. Tong said, “Even if teachers pass the assessment, we cannot
say they are good teachers. The language requirement for teachers is
essential, but that is not all. It is like every English person can
speak fluent English, but not every of them can be a good teacher.”
Predicting Hong Kong’s policy on language education in the future,
Prof. Tong said, “In the long run, the government will promote
Mandarin teaching instead of mother-tongue teaching.
“However, the scarcity of teachers proficient in Mandarin and
their psychological resistance to using Mandarin as the medium of instruction
will be two major barriers to the promotion of Mandarin teaching.
“Furthermore, since Hong Kong is an international city, English
will still play an important role in the government’s policies.”
Prof.
Tong Choi Wai says that English
will still play an important role in the
government's policies. (Lei Xuan)