English language teaching must be reformed<\/p>\n
By A. Chaedar Alwasilah<\/p>\n
This is the second of two articles on the need to reform the
\nteaching of English as a foreign language in Indonesia.<\/p>\n
BANDUNG (JP): The fact that English has established itself as
\nthe most important language in the world is a given, and its
\nexpansion here in Indonesia should be viewed as natural and
\nbeneficial. It is true that the globalization of English has
\ncultural and political implications for those who learn and use
\nit, but as critical educators we are convinced that by
\nreconceptualizing the teaching of EFL, we can provide a
\nsignificant contribution to national education.<\/p>\n
As the survey indicates, the teaching of EFL is not synonymous
\nwith cultural imperialism. With regard to fear of cultural and,
\nto be specific, Western propaganda, Pennycook has this to say:
\n" ... the spread of English, if dealt with critically, may offer
\nchances for cultural renewal and exchange around the world."<\/p>\n
Indonesia needs to put the teaching of English as a foreign
\nlanguage (TEFL) in the framework of national language planning,
\nwhere minor, national and foreign languages are proportionally
\naccommodated for the sake of national development.<\/p>\n
The burning issues of modernizing Indonesian, teaching English
\nat primary schools, the use of English as the medium of
\ninstruction at tertiary level and the policy of teaching local
\ncontent subjects remain controversial and call for informed and
\nprofessional solutions.<\/p>\n
While we inspire to be professional in teaching English, we
\nare aware that Indonesian should be modernized, and that the
\npresent teaching of Indonesian has been a failure. Muadz (1998)
\nsuggests that local languages be used as the medium of
\ninstruction instead of Indonesian until students are ready to use
\nthe national language -- a suggestion reminiscent of one made at
\na United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
\nOrganization (UNESCO) meeting of specialists in the 1950s.<\/p>\n
* Globalization brings with it an overflow of perplexing
\ninformation. Time is running out before informed decisions must
\nbe made. What education should do now is provide students with
\ncritical thinking skills.<\/p>\n
Thinking is reasonable when the thinker "... strives to
\nanalyze arguments carefully, looks for valid evidence and reaches
\nsound conclusions. The goal of teaching critical thinking is to
\ndevelop people who are fair minded, objective and committed to
\nclarity and accuracy." (Marzano, 1998).<\/p>\n
Teaching English should not be perceived simply as a process
\nof transferring the four language skills to students. The present
\npractice of teaching English here tends to put a strong emphasis
\non developing a good command of English, which is in fact never
\nthe case, without attaching the appropriate importance to
\ncritical thinking. To develop critical pedagogues to teach
\nEnglish we therefore need to revise current thinking with regards
\nto how we impart knowledge to our younger generation.<\/p>\n
* Important dispositions of critical thinking include, among
\nothers, looking for alternatives, open-mindedness and being
\nsensitive to others' feelings. Language education should expose
\nstudents to as much information and controversial issues as
\npossible and promote critical dialogs.<\/p>\n
Sensitive issues such as corruption, collusion and nepotism
\nhave potential for use as topics to develop critical thinking.
\nUse of these topics would place ethics firmly at the center of
\neducation.<\/p>\n
Thinking skills cannot be and should not be taught apart from
\ncontent because content is inseparably linked to language and
\ncognition.<\/p>\n
The emergence of local dialects of English should encourage
\nwhat is described as the broken interlanguage of our students,
\n"...where 'breaking' is an attempt to dislodge the central
\nlanguage norms and to recreate other possibilities." (Pennycook,
\n1994).<\/p>\n
The question of whose version of the language gains sway is
\nalways a political one. In the teaching of English as a foreign
\nlanguage, native speakers are always perceived as the only model,
\nan attitude which contradicts critical thinking, where creativity
\nand anomalies are accepted.<\/p>\n
Not only do native speakers tend to be dismissive of other
\npossibilities, labeling expressions unfamiliar to them as "not
\nEnglish", but they also stand out as representative of linguistic
\nhegemony.<\/p>\n
Emerging versions of English around the globe should be
\nrecognized and be treated fairly as dialects that deserve
\nacademic examination. A revised foreign language policy and
\neducation should endorse the emergence of Indonesian English.<\/p>\n
* The slogan that new ministers bring a new policy is popular
\nin our country, suggesting that our educational policies have not
\nbeen based on a well-defined visionary goal and change from one
\nminister to the next.<\/p>\n
At school level, there is a tendency among teachers,
\nheadmasters and supervisors to adhere faithful to the "holy"
\ncurriculum.<\/p>\n
English teaching should be redesigned to promote new forms of
\nknowledge and culture and this would require a great deal of
\nflexibility in our teaching methods. Critical English teachers
\nshould have a vision of social transformation and must work to
\nprepare students for the future.<\/p>\n
* The English curriculum and the curriculum in general should
\nbe revised so that they promote awareness and bestow a political
\nawareness upon students.<\/p>\n
Teaching politics forces us to develop an awareness of
\n"planning language and planning inequality", Tollefson (1991).<\/p>\n
Language policy should recognize that language -- be it local,
\nnational or international -- is a cultural practice located in
\nvery particular social, cultural and political contexts. The
\nteaching of English in Indonesia should therefore be put into a
\nlocal context, thus empowering Indonesian teachers, lecturers,
\ntextbook writers, curriculum developers and language policy
\nmakers to develop the language to the full.<\/p>\n
It is clear throughout the above discussion that the cited
\nauthors share many assumptions about the teaching of English as a
\nforeign language, although they differ on a number of sensitive
\nand crucial issues.<\/p>\n
Explicit teaching of politics and a tolerance of differences
\nin others constitutes an essential, albeit complicated issue that
\nwe must come to terms with academically and professionally.<\/p>\n
The English curriculum and national education should both be
\nrevised continuously so that they remain relevant in our ever-
\nchanging world.<\/p>\n
The writer is a lecturer at the Graduate School of the Bandung
\nTeachers Training College (IKIP Bandung) in West Java.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/english-language-teaching-must-be-reformed-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}