English language teaching

English language teaching had been an experiment forever with changing Governments changing the curricula and priorities:

Jayatilleke de Silva

English is not only a premier world language but also the most accessible one for Sri Lankans. Besides, its use and utility has increased with the spread of the Internet and development of mobile electronic communication technology. Globalization with its drive for hegemony has also helped to ensure the dominance of the English language. The rapid increase of migration across borders with increased job opportunities in foreign countries, especially for citizens of the Third World has also increased the thirst for English language competency in developing countries.

Sri Lanka is no exception to this global trend. The rapid expansion of service industries, especially those in the financial sector has created many opportunities for those proficient in English. Accordingly, young people today, find it a necessary means of finding employment and enhancing their upward social mobility.

Today, school leavers have many opportunities that were unheard of a decade ago. There is a wide range of choices from medicine, engineering to marketing and dress designing that demand competency in English. At least a rudimentary knowledge of English has become part of functional literacy too. In the old days, the yardstick for such functional literacy was the ability to read and understand a telegram message (Those days telegrams could be sent in English only). Now a little bit of English would become handy even to read the instruction manual of a domestic appliance in the market.

All this explains why there is a craze for English. Most parents want their offspring to be well versed in the English language. Unfortunately, many fraudsters have made use of this popular yearning and have opened up tuition classes to cater to the growing demand. Since there is no regulatory system to monitor and ascertain the quality of education imparted, many have fallen prey to people with bogus qualifications. Some of these tuition masters have not even a pass in the English language at the G.C.E. (Ordinary Level) Examination.

Even the notorious fraudster Sakviti Ranasinghe, who ran an illegal financial concern and fled the country leaving thousands of depositors losing millions of rupees claimed that he was born to teach English. Though there are hundreds of institutions and individuals teaching English throughout the length and breadth of the country, there is no discernible improvement in the English language literacy among the population.

One reason for this situation is that those who follow these classes hardly use the language for communication. It’s some dumb learning. No one could retain one’s language skills if they are not practised in daily life. In fact, it is true of any subject.

The system of English language teaching in schools also leaves much to be desired. Even after nine years of schooling, the performance of students in the English language at the G C E (Ordinary Level) Examination is quite poor. Therefore, one may safely conclude that there must be a grave fault in the teaching of the language. Lack of resources including qualified teachers, lack of enthusiasm among the students and many other factors could be the reasons for this poor performance.

This situation has led the authorities to try various experiments. In fact English language teaching had been an experiment forever with changing Governments changing the curricula and priorities. Once they introduced a national Certificate in English (NCE) with much fanfare. Now it is not heard of. I believe there was not sufficient response from the public and no recognition by employers.

Various experts were brought down for curriculum development. Text books were revised. Yet for all the status quo remained with no significant change. Another method thought of by them was the introduction of English as the medium of instruction. Taken by itself the idea merits serious consideration. However, the manner in which it was originally introduced by a former Education Secretary raised doubts about the seriousness and the motives behind.

It was introduced like a bolt from the blue and rushed through without proper planning. The results of that adventure are seen only now. Just one example. In a considerable number of school students who qualified to study in the Advanced Level had no classes or teachers in their schools or in schools in close proximity to theirs. In fact they were stranded, Isn’t it bad planning?

What was the necessity to rush? The sky would not have fallen. Even a good idea badly implemented could be harmful. Even today there are no teachers to teach in the English medium. Even some of those who do so are not sufficiently fluent in the language. There has been no proper training, a woeful inadequacy of resources and a bad mix up of priorities.

It is a pity that our educationists do not learn by experience. A change in the medium of instruction should be introduced gradually, step by step so as to guarantee its success. Even the change over to swabhasha from English in the early 50s was gradual, taking one step, one grade per year.

Those who nostalgically clamour for bilingual education have forgotten that children spent two years in Grade Six when the language switch over was effected. That was even while English language was taught as a subject from Grade Two or Three.

Those of us who had the fortune to benefit from the switch over know the calibre of teachers who taught then. They were not only masters of the language and the subjects they taught but also extremely dedicated. Nor were they driven by mercenary interests. They also did not have the luxury of using multi-media facilities or modern teaching aids in teaching. They improvised and compensated any loss of facilities.

Students were not passive listeners, they had to communicate in English both with teachers and with fellow students. Besides, the schools were equipped with good libraries and every student had to borrow supplementary reading material from the library. Teachers used to check whether the books were read by questioning the students on their contents. Often students had to tell the story aloud in class in their own words or read the story. There were silent reading periods too.