Current Problems of Teaching English in the World today

Nari Wulandari
2223170081 – 6 C
082210319372
Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa University

[email protected]

INTRODUCTION

Today, no one would doubt the fact that English has become an international
language. According to Crystal (1997), English is the language that has spread throughout the
world most extensively and is dominating in a number of important fields including
international commerce, education, and communication. Some countries is not an exception
to such a global trend. Some countries have included English in the school curriculum in
recognition that “it can contribute to students’ personal, linguistic, social, and cultural
development” (Le, 2004, p. 167). For example, in many post-colonial countries such as India
and the Philippines, English was chosen as one of the official languages and is still
effectively functioning as a dominant language. Moreover, the countries which had once
opposed foreign influence such as Korea, Japan, and China are now giving English language
teaching and learning much greater priority in their foreign language policy (Tsui, 2004).
These imply the significance of English language education in Some countries. However, not
much comprehensive information is available on English language education across Global
countries. Therefore, there is a need to investigate it in Global countries from a synthetic
perspective. This study has conducted a survey to gather information on English language
education in Some countries, that is, in 16 Global countries (18 regions in total) including
Korea, China (including Hong Kong and Taiwan), Indonesia, Singapore, Thailand, India,
Pakistan, Israel, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Based on the results of the survey,
current issues and challenges in English language education in Some countries are discussed.

THEORIES

The Status of English Language

 English used as a second or foreign language in some countries? It is not
always easy or straightforward to answer this question, as Greenbaum (1996) states that the
neat division into first, second and foreign languages “masks the untidiness in the real world”
(p. 241). It may be a matter of the attitude of users towards English (Rahman, 2007); thus, it
is necessary to consider “political, social, cultural and economic ideologies” (Rahman, 2007,
p. 84) to explore the status of English in each countries. The results of the survey on the
status of English illustrate that English is used as a second language (ESL) in Malaysia, the
Philippines, and Sri Lanka, as shown below, while it is used as a foreign language (EFL) in
nine countries (e.g., Korea, China, Thailand, and Israel).

Current Trends and Issues in English Language Education in Some countries

ESL context: Malaysia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka

ESL/EFL context: Hong Kong, Singapore, India, Pakistan, the UAE

EFL context: Korea, China, Japan, Indonesia, Thailand, Iran, Israel

Interestingly, it is used both as a second and foreign language in Hong Kong,

Singapore, Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, and the UAE. These countries/ regions are known as
ESL context; however, English is not entirely used for intranational or intraregional
communication, as David C. S. Li points out in the survey “the majority of Hong Kong
people (i.e., over 95 per cent of ethnic Chinese) tend to be reluctant to use English entirely for
intraethnic communication (EFL feature).” All the Global nations/regions where English is
used as a second language are post-colonial countries where English was a colonial language
(e.g., Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Hong Kong, India, and the UAE). Is this due to the impact of the
colonial period? The answer may be ‘yes’; however, the influence of the pragmatic needs of
those countries cannot be neglected, as noted in Tsui (2004). In other words, it is the result of
a tension between the ‘national-functional paradigm’ (Fishman, Rubal-Lopez, & Conrad,
1996) and the ‘international-critical paradigm’ (Pennycook, 1998; Phillipson, 1992;
Skutnabb-Kangas, 2000) in order to “retain or erect neocolonial superstructures
internationally for their own benefits” (Tsui, 2004, p. 6).

On the other hand, all the nations where English is not used for everyday
communication outside class, just learned as a foreign language, are the countries/regions
which were not former British or American colonies. This does not mean that in these
countries English is not as important as in the British or American post-colonial
states/regions. In most countries, these days, top priority is given to English proficiency and
English language education for individual career or welfare as well as national development
and globalization (Choi, 2007; Tsui, 2004), as Koike (2007) suggests the adoption of English
as a second language in Japan.

English continues to spread extensively around the world. No one would doubt that it
is a dominant second or foreign language in Global countries/ regions. English language
proficiency functions as gatekeepers to individual career or welfare as well as national
development. This implies the essential role of English language education in Some
countries.

English Curriculum in Some Countries

The national curriculum functions as the basic guideline and principle on what and
how to teach or learn, and what and how to test, for example, by specifying learning contents,
achievement standards, and teaching methods and testing. It is commonly regarded as an
effective and efficient means for achieving national educational goals (Kang, Lee, Ryu, Lee,
& Kim, 2006). The results of the survey reveal that all the 18 Global countries/regions have a
national curriculum for primary or secondary English, as shown below.

1st to 10th grade: the Philippines

1st to 12th grade: Taiwan (Taipei and 9 other cities), Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Bangladesh,
India, Sri Lanka, the UAE

1st to 13th grade: Hong Kong

1st to graduate level: Pakistan

3rd to 12th grade: Korea

3rd to college: China

4th to 12th grade: Israel

6th to 12th grade: Vietnam and Iran

7th to 12th grade: Japan, Indonesia, and Taiwan (in other areas)

The national curriculum covers first-grade English to the highest high school grade
English (10, 12, or 13th grade English) in the countries/regions where English is introduced
from first grade (e.g., Hong Kong, Singapore, Sri Lanka, and Pakistan). In Pakistan,
interestingly, the national curriculum covers up to the graduate level.

In Korea, China, Israel, Vietnam, Iran, Japan, Indonesia, and Taiwan (in other areas
than Taipei and 9 cities), the national curriculum covers from the grade where English is
introduced to the end of secondary education, except for China. Chinese national curriculum
covers up to college English (CE). This demonstrates the central control of the Chinese
government on higher education, which is illustrated by the fact that China has a professional
committee responsible for CE (a government organization) (Wen & Hu, 2007).

Primary or secondary English classes are fundamentally based on the national English
curriculum in all the Global nations/regions except for India, where the curriculum can be
revised depending on locally available cultural and natural resources. The curriculum can
also be revised in Taiwan (in Taipei and 9 other cities), and Indonesian teachers can develop
their own syllabus. In Bangladesh and Pakistan, the national curriculum is fundamentally for
state-run schools.

Teaching English Through English

English is instructed in English (Teaching English Through English, henceforth

TETE) regardless of school levels in the five Global countries in ESL context: Malaysia, the
Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, and the UAE. Interestingly, English is also taught in
English in Israel regardless of school levels, though English is not an official second
language. Besides these countries, primary school English is taught in English in Taiwan
(required, but not in remote areas), as shown below.

primary English: Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, the UAE, Israel, Korea
(recommended, but mostly not), Taiwan (required, but not in remote areas)

junior secondary English: Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, the UAE, Israel,
Korea (recommended, but mostly not), Indonesia

Current Trends and Issues in English Language Education in Some countries

(varies with schools), Hong Kong (30%), India

senior secondary English: Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, the UAE, Israel,
Korea (recommended, but mostly not), Indonesia, Hong Kong (varies with schools), India,
Bangladesh (mixed)

tertiary English: Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, the UAE, Israel, Korea
(varies with schools/courses), Taiwan (mixed), Indonesia, Hong Kong, India, Bangladesh
(mixed), China (mostly), Thailand (mostly)

DISSCUSION

One of the issues is the amount of officially allotted time for English language
education, especially in primary and secondary schools: its starting grade and class
hours per week. This issue is related to the amount of exposure to English. As
discussed above, English language education starts at first, third, fourth, sixth, or
seventh grade in the Global countries/regions surveyed. There is no one agreement on
when to start second/foreign language learning. It is often stated, however, that “the
longer the exposure to the L2, the more native-like L2 proficiency becomes” (Ellis,
1985, pp. 105-106) or “as far as success in pronunciation is concerned, younger
learners do better” (Ellis, 1985, p. 106). These common beliefs are often substantiated
(Krashen, Scarcella, & Long, 1982; Long, 1993). No one can deny age effects in
second/foreign language learning (DeKeyser, 2000). In the nations/regions where
English language education begins at sixth or seventh grade (e.g., Iran and Japan),
thus, a second thought should be given on its starting grade for its effectiveness.
Furthermore, class hours per week are not large enough, which leads to low efficiency
in some Global EFL countries (e.g., Korea (primary English),Vietnam, and Iran). The
inefficiency issue caused by the lack of class hours (e.g., 1 hour for third or fourth
grade in Korea) leads to a distrust in public English education so that the number of
young children who study abroad has increased (Choi, 2007). As a minimum of about
2,200-2,400 hours is suggested to acquire a new language (Yonhap News, August 14,
2006), the significance of constant exposure to English and of the intensity of
learning, especially in EFL context, cannot be neglected (Collins, Halter, Lightbown,
& Spada, 1999; Lee, 2003). Thus, it would be desirable to take a serious consideration
on class hours in Global EFL countries with limited class hours to enhance the
effectiveness of English language education as much as possible in Global ESL
countries.
 The next issue is related to TETE or EMI: should English be taught in English
or should English be used as the medium of instruction in non-English subjects to
enhance the effectiveness of English language education? Expansion of the number of
English-medium subjects in Global countries such as Hong Kong (Miller & Li, 2008),
Korea (Choi, 2007), and China (Wen & Hu, 2007) clearly manifests the essential role
of English in a global community. Furthermore, it is the impact of the promotion of
the benefits of content-based instruction (CBI): “fostering academic growth while also
developing language proficiency” (Pessoa, Hendry, Donato, Tucker, & Lee, 2007, p.
102). In CBI classes language is used as a means of instruction or communication so
that language learning can be more meaningful since language is used for real
interaction rather than studied as the target object (Brinton, Snow, & Wesche, 1989;
Richards & Rogers, 2001). It is not simple to implement TETE or EMI because the
former requires the teacher’s high proficiency in English and the latter requires the
teacher’s dual ability in content and English or a team teaching of content and English
teachers. No one can ensure that EMI actually enhances the effectiveness of English
language education in Global countries. However, it is a commonly shared belief that
EMI or TETE can lead to the improvement of the student’s English ability, as shown
in the survey of Korean undergraduates on this issue (Jung, 2007). Consequently, they
can be suggested as a way to reform English language education in Global countries.

The third issue is related with centralization or decentralization of English

language education in terms of the national curriculum and English textbooks. The
national English curriculum is often revised as an effort to enhance English language
education or to reflect emerging needs of the society, as noted in Korea (KICE,
2004a, 2004b) and Indonesia (Suwarsih Madya, 2008). The finding that primary and
secondary English education is framed by the national curriculum in the 18
nations/regions illustrates that in Some countries education seems centrally controlled
by the government. The curriculum seems basically developed by the means-ends
model (a rational-planning model), which is a top-down product-oriented curriculum
development (White, 1988) rather than a school-based curriculum development
allowing school autonomy. Moreover, the findings from the survey reveal the lack of
teachers’ adaptation or revision of the English textbook in Global countries, as shown
in the lack of teacher autonomy and the control of the centralized national curriculum
on teaching methods in Jordan (Mustafa & Cullingford, 2008). This top-down
approach is no longer an effective means in the period of decentralization, as
decentralization of education has been mandatory in Indonesia since 2003 (Suwarsih
Madya, 2008). As suggested in Kang et al. (2006), the national curriculum should
play a role of a basic guide rather than control details in English language education.
School-based curriculum autonomy (the adaptation of the national curriculum) or
diversification of the national curriculum should be promoted. English language
education should also be adapted for regional needs, as shown in China, which allows
economically developed areas, such as Shanghai, to construct their own English
syllabi to encourage educational innovation and diversity of English provision in
order to cater for varying local needs (Hu, 2005). This decentralization issue is also
related to problems caused by discrepancy in students’ English ability. Though a
diversity in English abilities is noted between students of metropolitan areas and those
in remote island areas because of their socio-economic context (e.g., private tutoring,
contact with native speakers, or language training overseas) (Choi, 2007) as well as
within a class (Park et al., 2007), the students of diverse English abilities have to
study English using the same textbook based on the same national curriculum.
Regional development or adaptation of curricula or textbooks, or school discretionary
activities should be thus ratified to meet such individual or regional needs, as planned
in Korea (Choi, 2007). In addition, diverse supports for schools that are lagging
behind in socio-economic aspects (e.g., financial support or ICT materials) should be
provided, as the lack of proper resources and teaching materials is noted as a problem
in primary and secondary English education in Some countries such as China, the
Philippines, Bangladesh, and Pakistan.

CONCLUSION

English language education has been surveyed across 18 Global

nations/regions. Commonalities and variations among the Global nations/regions have
been revealed. English language education in each Global nation/region seems an
outcome of diverse factors including political environment, social and individual
needs, and resources (e.g., teachers and computer).

The findings from the study have provided a general picture of English
language education in Some countries in the topics surveyed. Further investigations
are needed to present a more penetrating depiction. In addition, a survey is needed on
the topics not investigated such as teaching methods and techniques, and teacher-
student interaction in order to shed light on what happens in real classroom.

REFERENCES

Brown, J. D., & Yamashita, S. (1995). English language entrance exams at Japanese
universities: What do we know about them? JALT Journal, 17, 7-30.

Chang, S. (2005). Who do you like?: Korean parents’ preferences in the selection of
English teachers for their children. English Language Teaching, 17(4), 1-31.

Choi, Y. H. (2006). Impact of politico-economic situations on English language

Crystal, D. (1997). English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Data’ Hjh Noor Rezan Bapoo Bt. Bapoo Hashim. (2008). ELT curriculum innovations
and strategies for implementation in Malaysia. In Y. H. Choi & B. Spolsky (Eds.),
ELT curriculum innovation and implementation in Asia (pp. 131-143). Seoul: Asia
TEFL.

DeKeyser, R. M. (2000). The robustness of critical period effects in second language

acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 499-533.

Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.