Toward better English skills<\/p>\n
By Besral<\/p>\n
BANDUNG (JP): In justifying educational programs, teachers
\naround the globe are always the victims of a struggle between
\nexperts, parents and bureaucrats. Although some crucial factors
\nevolved on the parts of supporting materials, students'
\nmotivation, bureaucrats' attitude and government policy, teachers
\nusually bear the brunt of the criticism. They are blamed and
\npushed into a corner, when success is likely too far away.<\/p>\n
English teachers, especially in Indonesia, have been treated
\nlike dolls and have been manipulated. They are ultimately
\nregarded as the most responsible for the failure of teaching
\nEnglish in the country.<\/p>\n
Such pressure on teachers is reflected in Alwasilah's article:
\nWays to better RI English skills, published in The Jakarta Post
\non Jan. 18, 1999. The paradigm shift, in regard to the
\nimprovement of TOEFL in Indonesia, should replace the whole
\nmechanism in the context of systematic and well-planned language
\nplanning. Alwasilah's analysis and comments not only rise to the
\narguments of the linguists, but also encourage English teachers
\nin Indonesia to introspect and challenge themselves toward highly
\nqualified professionalism.<\/p>\n
Alwasilah convincingly put a single aspect to fix the dilemma
\nof some sources of failure in English teaching. TOEFL test scores
\nand research findings, as Alwasilah put forward, show that
\nIndonesian English students are weak at vocabulary. He further
\nasserted that the majority of English teachers in the country
\nlack understanding of the communicative approach.<\/p>\n
In reaction to Setiono's argument (the Post, Dec. 28, 1998),
\nwhich called for a certain set of criteria of success in the
\nimplementing the communicative approach, Alwasilah came up with
\nthe idea of critical pedagogy -- an attempt to explain the social
\nand political aspects of English education. In other words, the
\nanalysis moved beyond classroom structures and processes.<\/p>\n
To achieve language competence which stems from communicative
\nlanguage teaching, Alwasilah also reminded us of the theory of
\n\"interlanguage\". He stated that communicative competence does not
\nrequire native-like proficiency at all. Learners with fossilized
\ninterlanguage can develop communicative competence. However, as
\nhe experienced himself, many English teachers as well as
\npractitioners conclude that communicative competence will never
\nbe successfully developed in Indonesian settings.<\/p>\n
Putting down a single aspect to a certain circle, as Alwasilah
\nascertained the lack of vocabulary to primary source of failure,
\ndoes not necessarily touch the root of the problem. The absence
\nof integrative orientation on the part of students is more
\nthoroughly emerged in our settings. This factor, which is more
\nstrongly linked to success in learning a second or foreign
\nlanguage, stems from a positive affect toward a community of its
\nspeakers (Gardner, 1985). It is a common view that learners from
\nan early beginning up to university level learn English just to
\nfulfill the tasks required by their respective institutions. In
\nother words, to them, studying English means to get good grades.<\/p>\n
Such a misconception toward learning a foreign language leads
\nto the preparation of credible instructors who posses knowledge
\nof the world -- circumstances under which Indonesian students
\nshould compete and exist in the global era -- instead of grading
\nand blaming teachers, as asserted by Alwasilah. Understanding of
\nthe communicative approach on the part of teachers is only a part
\nof what is required from them.<\/p>\n
The critical pedagogy concept as proposed by Alwasilah in
\nrelation to an implementation of communicative language teaching
\nin Indonesia, seems to deviate from the emerging situation.
\nCritical pedagogy which tends to connect pedagogical theory and
\npractice to wider social issues is obviously an immature concept,
\nsince teachers have no political power in Indonesia. Therefore,
\nthis kind of analysis is not representative to dealing with
\nlearners' problems.<\/p>\n
Instead of arguing the belief of successful development of
\ncommunicative competence in Indonesian settings, more attention
\nshould be given to upgrading thousands of English teachers who
\nlack principled teaching and facilitating them with CLT
\nsimulations. Very often we hear \"the talking is easy ...\",
\ntherefore, creating such simulations on videocassette or other
\ninstruments is likely to empower the cornered teachers.<\/p>\n
It can be inferred that Alwasilah's assertions on finding the
\nsource of failure and the way to improve the emergence situation,
\nseem to give little contribution to the teachers' personal
\nprofessions. On the other hand, teachers' positions as holders of
\nprofessional jobs supported by the expertise of experienced
\nlinguists will surely improve learners if better English skills
\nare to be realized.<\/p>\n
I share Alwasilah's position on the following issues. First,
\nto improve TOEFL in Indonesia it is imperative that a paradigm
\nshift is exercised, that is, a systematic and massive change. We
\nare aware of that, in Brown's (1994) words of changing winds and
\nshifting sands, \"as disciplinary of schools of thought --
\npsychology, linguistics, education, for example -- have come and
\ngone, so have language-teaching methods waxed and waned in
\npopularity\".\"<\/p>\n
The communicative approach in foreign-language teaching has
\nbeen appraised, though the teachers are forced to internalize
\nseveral terms captured in it, such as cooperative learning,
\ninteractive teaching, learner-centered classes, content-centered
\neducation, whole language, and so on.<\/p>\n
Second, learners with fossilized interlanguage can develop
\ncommunicative competence. The interlanguage principle tells us
\nthat: second-language learners tend to go through a systematic or
\nquasi systematic-developmental process as they progress to full
\ncompetence in the target language. Successful interlanguage
\nlanguage development is partially a factor of utilizing feedback
\nfrom others. In the minds of learners, a good deal of what they
\nsay or comprehend may be logically \"correct\" even though, from
\nthe standpoint of a native speaker's competence, such forms are
\nincorrect. \"Do they may receive our message?\"<\/p>\n
The clearly drawn determinant factors of creating better
\nIndonesian English-learners are grounded in intrinsic motivation
\n(integrative orientation), credible linguists, government policy
\nand teachers' perspective of a future professional career.
\nExpecting competent learners to exist, while leaving teachers in
\nthe blue sky will not accomplish the ideal. Times have changed
\nand students' motivation may have been moving to wider
\nperspectives. All these issues should be encountered thoroughly
\nby responsible efforts.<\/p>\n
Turning back to the Netherlands language-teaching system in
\nachieving our destiny of competent learners is worthwhile. As one
\nof the most successful schools at teaching math and foreign
\nlanguages, Echnaton School Almere reportedly strongly motivates
\nDutch students to study language because as adults, they will be
\nexpected to use other languages regularly. (Newsweek, Dec. 2,
\n1991).<\/p>\n
As Dutch officials make the ability to communicate the first
\npriority, students engage in daily debates in English. They write
\nletters in real situations, they report a stolen bike or they pay
\nrent on their house. After all, in Holland, foreign languages are
\nnot reserved for an academic elite.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/toward-better-english-skills-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}