Toward better English skills

By Besral

BANDUNG (JP): In justifying educational programs, teachers around the globe are always the victims of a struggle between experts, parents and bureaucrats. Although some crucial factors evolved on the parts of supporting materials, students' motivation, bureaucrats' attitude and government policy, teachers usually bear the brunt of the criticism. They are blamed and pushed into a corner, when success is likely too far away.

English teachers, especially in Indonesia, have been treated like dolls and have been manipulated. They are ultimately regarded as the most responsible for the failure of teaching English in the country.

Such pressure on teachers is reflected in Alwasilah's article: Ways to better RI English skills, published in The Jakarta Post on Jan. 18, 1999. The paradigm shift, in regard to the improvement of TOEFL in Indonesia, should replace the whole mechanism in the context of systematic and well-planned language planning. Alwasilah's analysis and comments not only rise to the arguments of the linguists, but also encourage English teachers in Indonesia to introspect and challenge themselves toward highly qualified professionalism.

Alwasilah convincingly put a single aspect to fix the dilemma of some sources of failure in English teaching. TOEFL test scores and research findings, as Alwasilah put forward, show that Indonesian English students are weak at vocabulary. He further asserted that the majority of English teachers in the country lack understanding of the communicative approach.

In reaction to Setiono's argument (the Post, Dec. 28, 1998), which called for a certain set of criteria of success in the implementing the communicative approach, Alwasilah came up with the idea of critical pedagogy -- an attempt to explain the social and political aspects of English education. In other words, the analysis moved beyond classroom structures and processes.

To achieve language competence which stems from communicative language teaching, Alwasilah also reminded us of the theory of "interlanguage". He stated that communicative competence does not require native-like proficiency at all. Learners with fossilized interlanguage can develop communicative competence. However, as he experienced himself, many English teachers as well as practitioners conclude that communicative competence will never be successfully developed in Indonesian settings.

Putting down a single aspect to a certain circle, as Alwasilah ascertained the lack of vocabulary to primary source of failure, does not necessarily touch the root of the problem. The absence of integrative orientation on the part of students is more thoroughly emerged in our settings. This factor, which is more strongly linked to success in learning a second or foreign language, stems from a positive affect toward a community of its speakers (Gardner, 1985). It is a common view that learners from an early beginning up to university level learn English just to fulfill the tasks required by their respective institutions. In other words, to them, studying English means to get good grades.

Such a misconception toward learning a foreign language leads to the preparation of credible instructors who posses knowledge of the world -- circumstances under which Indonesian students should compete and exist in the global era -- instead of grading and blaming teachers, as asserted by Alwasilah. Understanding of the communicative approach on the part of teachers is only a part of what is required from them.

The critical pedagogy concept as proposed by Alwasilah in relation to an implementation of communicative language teaching in Indonesia, seems to deviate from the emerging situation. Critical pedagogy which tends to connect pedagogical theory and practice to wider social issues is obviously an immature concept, since teachers have no political power in Indonesia. Therefore, this kind of analysis is not representative to dealing with learners' problems.

Instead of arguing the belief of successful development of communicative competence in Indonesian settings, more attention should be given to upgrading thousands of English teachers who lack principled teaching and facilitating them with CLT simulations. Very often we hear "the talking is easy ...", therefore, creating such simulations on videocassette or other instruments is likely to empower the cornered teachers.

It can be inferred that Alwasilah's assertions on finding the source of failure and the way to improve the emergence situation, seem to give little contribution to the teachers' personal professions. On the other hand, teachers' positions as holders of professional jobs supported by the expertise of experienced linguists will surely improve learners if better English skills are to be realized.

I share Alwasilah's position on the following issues. First, to improve TOEFL in Indonesia it is imperative that a paradigm shift is exercised, that is, a systematic and massive change. We are aware of that, in Brown's (1994) words of changing winds and shifting sands, "as disciplinary of schools of thought -- psychology, linguistics, education, for example -- have come and gone, so have language-teaching methods waxed and waned in popularity"."

The communicative approach in foreign-language teaching has been appraised, though the teachers are forced to internalize several terms captured in it, such as cooperative learning, interactive teaching, learner-centered classes, content-centered education, whole language, and so on.

Second, learners with fossilized interlanguage can develop communicative competence. The interlanguage principle tells us that: second-language learners tend to go through a systematic or quasi systematic-developmental process as they progress to full competence in the target language. Successful interlanguage language development is partially a factor of utilizing feedback from others. In the minds of learners, a good deal of what they say or comprehend may be logically "correct" even though, from the standpoint of a native speaker's competence, such forms are incorrect. "Do they may receive our message?"

The clearly drawn determinant factors of creating better Indonesian English-learners are grounded in intrinsic motivation (integrative orientation), credible linguists, government policy and teachers' perspective of a future professional career. Expecting competent learners to exist, while leaving teachers in the blue sky will not accomplish the ideal. Times have changed and students' motivation may have been moving to wider perspectives. All these issues should be encountered thoroughly by responsible efforts.

Turning back to the Netherlands language-teaching system in achieving our destiny of competent learners is worthwhile. As one of the most successful schools at teaching math and foreign languages, Echnaton School Almere reportedly strongly motivates Dutch students to study language because as adults, they will be expected to use other languages regularly. (Newsweek, Dec. 2, 1991).

As Dutch officials make the ability to communicate the first priority, students engage in daily debates in English. They write letters in real situations, they report a stolen bike or they pay rent on their house. After all, in Holland, foreign languages are not reserved for an academic elite.