Critical thinking crucial to global success<\/p>\n
A Chaedar Alwasilah, Dean, Faculty of Language and Arts Education
\nIndonesian University of Education (UPI), Bandung<\/p>\n
On many different occasions Minister of National Education,
\nMalik Fajar has blatantly described Indonesian as a boring school
\nsubject. The method of teaching is monotonous, the teaching
\nmaterial is old, and the teacher has no vision. The subject,
\naccordingly, does not provide students with the required
\nknowledge and skills to develop themselves.<\/p>\n
Thus the language class is more a place for implementing
\ncurricular decisions than a forum of intellectual engagement.
\nMany have suggested that the language education curriculum from
\nelementary school up to college needs to be completely
\noverhauled.<\/p>\n
Upon careful examination of the literature on language
\nteaching methodology, we could say that up to now its substance
\nremains the same.<\/p>\n
Various methods and techniques of language teaching are
\ngrounded in the following dichotomies: (1) theory versus
\npractice, (2) product versus process, (3) behaviorism versus
\nintellectual development and (4) prescriptive versus descriptive,
\nto which textbook writers, curriculum developers, and educational
\nevaluators turn for theoretical justification.<\/p>\n
Appealing as all this esoteric jargon may sound, what the
\nstudents are concerned with most of all is whether the teacher is
\nempowering intellectually.<\/p>\n
Given that the substance remains the same, it would be
\nsimplistic to equate updating language teaching methods with
\nsimply piloting alternative methods of teaching or utilizing new
\ntechnology.<\/p>\n
It is the teacher, not the technology, that matters most. The
\nessence of updating language teaching is, as a matter of fact,
\nreconstructing the perspective of and having a new awareness of
\nthe essence of language education, especially on the part of
\nteachers, college professors, and educational bureaucrats. Basic
\nto innovation in language teaching is a complete understanding of
\nlanguage.<\/p>\n
Language is the medium of other school subjects, a tool for
\nthinking, and a tool of civilization in general. This suggests
\nthat professionally designed, language teaching will
\nsignificantly improve the teaching of other subjects, enhance
\nstudents' intellectual ability, and shape human civilization.
\nUnfortunately, there is a tendency for non-language teachers to
\ntake this for granted.<\/p>\n
Given all the discussion above, language education should be
\ntailored to meet the current challenge, namely to develop
\nliteracy for global competition. Guidelines for developing such
\nliteracy will follow.<\/p>\n
School teachers and college professors should be made aware of
\nthe importance of language proficiency for learning other
\nsubjects. There is a tendency among non-language teachers and
\nprofessors to take language proficiency for granted. In
\nevaluating students' assignments, they tend to focus on the
\nsubstance and ignore the language, thus underestimating their
\nlinguistic accuracy. As a result, the students erroneously feel
\nthat their language proficiency is adequate. This attitude is
\nprevalent especially among the teachers and college professors
\nwho lack writing skills.<\/p>\n
Teachers tend to emulate their former teachers in the
\nclassroom. The tendency to emphasize the theory rather than
\npractice of language has been a common phenomenon in language
\nclasses. And this practice seems to continue up to now. No
\nwonder our school students lack language skills in particular and
\ncommunication skills in general. It is high time to de-emphasize
\ntheory in favor of communication skills.<\/p>\n
Another theory asserts that students will work as much as they
\nare required to. Realizing that at present the final evaluation
\nconsists of a multiple choice type of test, they invest time and
\nmoney attending a learning center simply to familiarize
\nthemselves with the test format. By so doing, they beat the
\nsystem by means of memorizing patterns of tests. Such rote
\nlearning is not meaningful at all, and in the future this would
\nbe dysfunctional for developing critical thinking skills.
\nLearning a language -- be it Indonesian or a foreign language --
\nis perceived by students as learning the theory of language, thus
\nneglecting the functional side of language.<\/p>\n
The existing national examination system has motivated
\nstudents as well as teachers to concentrate on result rather than
\nprocess. Actually, it is in the process that real learning takes
\nplace. Students should be exposed to the vastness of
\npossibilities, and selecting the most feasible one is a feature
\nof adroit thinking, which is essential for developing life
\nskills. Life consists of multiple realities and to face them
\nstudents need to be equipped with life skills. Translated into
\nlanguage arts programs, it is high time to drive a campaign for
\nessay-type tests -- instead of objective type ones -- across the
\nschool curriculum.<\/p>\n
It is time to convince language teachers and curriculum
\ndevelopers that language is a tool for thinking. Language
\neducation should be redesigned in the framework of thinking
\ncurriculum, which encompasses critical thinking skills, i.e.,
\ngenerating possibilities, analysis, comparison and contrast,
\ninference and interpretation, evaluation and metacognition.<\/p>\n
These six skills should be incorporated in the basic
\ncomponents of curriculum: objectives, learning experiences,
\nteaching strategies, and evaluation. Through public speaking,
\ndebating, role playing, paper presenting, and essay writing,
\nstudents are encouraged to develop critical thinking, be open-
\nminded to accept criticism and differences. Through these
\nactivities not only will they exercise democracy in the
\nclassroom, but they also become good communicators.<\/p>\n
Realizing that our students have been left behind compared to
\ntheir counterparts in other Asian countries, we need to update
\nways of teaching both national and foreign languages at all level
\nof education, from elementary to university. Language teaching at
\npresent should be aimed at meeting global challenges. In the
\nfinal analysis, though, basic to success in global competition is
\nthe mastery of critical thinking.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/critical-thinking-crucial-to-global-success-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}