|
TEACHING METHODS MUST BE CHANGED |
In response to criticism that the English standard of Hong Kong students is falling, the Director of Education, Mr. Lam Woon-kwong, said that there was no indication of such a decline. He made these comments after the release of this year's Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examination (HKCEE) results. Mr. Lam Woon-kwong is perfectly correct, if one simply looks at the passing percentages in the English Language examinations. However, these marks have no bearing on the issue at all. The mechanism of the grading system for HKCEE subjects ensures that the passing percentages in each subject are more or less the same as those in the previous year.
This is to cater for any fluctuations that might occur in case questions in a particular year turn out to be particularly difficult, or easy. It is also believed that there is no significant difference in the abilities or performance of students in any two consecutive years. Students' performance is presumed to be stable.
Another feature of the grading system is that a certain grade of a subject does not actually reflect what or how much a student has learned, but only how well he has performed in comparison to other students in that subject. A closer look at the contents of the examination papers and the ways marks are awarded again suggests that Mr. Lam might not be quite right in insisting that standards are being maintained: It is almost invariably the case that questions require only very short answers.
In many cases, a short phrase or even a single word will suffice. How well a student uses the language in presenting an answer is not taken into account in awarding a mark. Indeed in markers' meetings, it has always been emphasised that mistakes in language, for example, grammar or spelling mistakes, or improper choice of words, should not be penalised in an otherwise "correct answer".
Although four marks are now set aside in most subjects to cater for how well an answer is presented, it is usually counted in only one question or section of the subject papers and amounts to about two per cent of the total mark. It would be naive to think that teachers and students will pay much attention to this two per cent and the backwash effect is obvious; teachers and students will concentrate their efforts in scoring the other 98 per cent of the marks.
Indeed, I would be surprised to see any script that has been awarded a grade E (that is, a passing grade) containing even one well -written sentence. It would be ignorant, and arrogant, to maintain that students' English standards are not falling. The importance of language skills necessary for Form Five students to further their studies (or for work) has never been put into proper perspective. They are vital.
Having said that, Mr. Lam should not be held responsible. On the contrary, his department is introducing the Target Oriented Curriculum (TOC) which emphasises, among other things, that students be taught the communicative skills necessary to explain concepts and knowledge that they learn at school. The introduction is limited to Primary One in the coming year and only in the subjects of Chinese, English and mathematics. Many schools are opposed to its introduction but I think they are misled by its "complexity". TOC is the right approach if we want our students to develop independent minds and have the ability to relate to others what is in their heads.
The objection I have to its introduction is the limited scope of its implementation. Students should not be learning Chinese, English and mathematics in a way which encourages inquiry, problem solving, communication, etc. and the rest of the subjects in ways which are very different. What will students think of this inconsistency? How will teachers of other subjects explain to them why they are teaching their subjects differently (we have to bear in mind that TOC is a better approach)?
It is high time that all teachers be more aware of the important role that they could and should play in nurturing students' language competence. Education is team work and language standards cannot be dealt with by language teachers alone.
Source: Adapted from the South China Morning Post, 31.08.95