The government’s decision to omit
the teaching of English from elementary schools is huge.
When I first heard of the news on my Facebook
page, I was shocked. The impact will be linguistically enormous and I envision
a huge gap being created.
Those who go to public schools will be
linguistically cornered. Those attending international private schools will
have more opportunities.
As I was reading the news, I assumed that the
government would only be able to eliminate English from public schools. As stated
by the Deputy Education and Culture Minister for Education Musliar Kasim, in
terms of international schools typically using English as their language of
instruction, the ministry had not yet decided what to do (The Jakarta Post,
Oct. 12).
I question whether the government has the
authority to command these schools to eradicate English from their school
subjects. However, this should be not the focus now.
What concerns me more is that there is a
misperception about learning a second language at a young age. We must
understand that the core of the problem is not the lesson; it’s more about the
techniques to teach it. Like it or not, we need to fully realize that there are
still a number of teachers who teach their young students using a grammar translation-based
method.
English for some people is all about grammar.
Instead of “playing” and “having fun” with the language, students are forced to
sit down, translate word by word from English into Indonesian and to rote learn
all the patterns and tenses. If this learning situation continues, I share the
deputy minister’s opinion that it will only burden the students.
Some people residing in Indonesia told me that
it’s about nationalism; these young students need to learn about their own
culture before departing to learn about others.
Nationalism is not related to the languages we
learn to speak. We see a number of Europeans speaking many languages and still
retaining their national pride. Since we were children, Indonesians have
instilled the idea that language equals nationality.
In any event, the point is clear. It is not
English as a school subject, it is not the language and it is not about
nationalism. It is about the technique.
I don’t want to blame it on the teachers, but
teaching English with a more communicative approach in a less threatening
environment should again be promoted.
We need to raise our own awareness that every
child has their own right to learn the language in a more playful way, from the
likes of learning through songs, playing dough and playing scavenger hunts.
I am more than sure that there are innumerable
teacher trainers based in Indonesia who will share these fun techniques to
learn English, so that these young generations will learn English without being
pressured.
This idea is not new, but I am afraid to say
that its application may be hard to come by, as we are now reading this
shocking news from the government.
What will we miss if the government’s decision
is carried through? Learning a second language has a peak time frame.
In linguistics, it should be well noted that
the ability to acquire a language is biologically linked to age. It is referred
as the “critical period hypothesis” (Lennerberg, 1967) that claims that there
is an ideal period of time to acquire language in a linguistically rich
environment wherein students learn the language effortlessly.
That being said, if this certain period of
time is passed, language learning becomes much more difficult.
While it’s still debatable and controversial
in the field, some studies have shown that learning a second language at a very
young age will cognitively and socially benefit children. Not only are they are
able to converse with a wider audience, but they may also be cognitively
advantaged.
In a similar vein, The New York Times article
on March 17 this year confirms that learning a second language is “a command
system that directs the attention processes that we use for planning, solving
problems and performing various other mentally demanding tasks”.
Additionally, an article written by Housen et
al., (2011) says that teaching and learning English in an English as a Foreign
Language (EFL) context that balances between the L1 (first language) and L2
(second language) prominence and appropriate techniques will equip students
with a highly proficient language skills.
English nowadays is a global language that can
contribute to people’s success in securing a better life and a better
education.
Simply put, it entails some incentive
motivation. Language and education and nation should be seen as a dynamic
notion that requires our open mindedness.
Learning another language and another culture
shouldn’t equate with not being nationalistic or unpatriotic. It should be
noted that it is one of the government’s tasks to guarantee citizens better
lives by providing a good space to learn other languages and other cultures,
among others.
How are we going to provide for those who are
“linguistically unlucky” and unable to secure better jobs just because their
competitors speak excellent English?
This is more than a language problem. This is
a social problem.
Nelly
Martin ;
A
Doctoral Student in Second Language Acquisition,
Fulbright
Presidential Scholar at University of Wisconsin-Madison, US
JAKARTA
POST, 19 Oktober 2012
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar
Beri Komentar demi Refleksi