The Ministry of Education recently announced that elementary school students in some areas must pass general proficiency tests in Chinese, English and mathematics in order to graduate, starting in the 2005 academic year. Sixth-graders who do not do so will be required to take supplementary courses to bring them up to the standards required for graduation.
This new policy will probably become a cause for concern for parents who expect their children to develop healthily and to experience the pleasure of learning.
Stephen Krashen, a professor of linguistics at the University of Southern California, has argued that teaching is unduly oriented toward the taking of tests. For a vocabulary test, teachers and parents urge students simply to memorize vocabulary and spelling. For a grammar test, teachers teach just grammar and the students study nothing but grammar.
Research, however, shows that reading for pleasure is the most effective way to develop vocabulary and grammar skills. Besides, the cognitive ability of children is generally insufficiently developed for rigorous instruction on the finer points of grammar. Rather, children should naturally take in grammar through human interaction and by reading for their own pleasure.
The proficiency test imposed on elementary school students will encourage teaching methods that count chickens before they are hatched. We can expect more and more mid-term, monthly and term exams for elementary English education. The exams will require students to memorize new vocabulary and sentence structures instantly.
But studies in Taiwan have long shown that difficulties memorizing vocabulary and problems understanding grammar are the biggest obstacles facing elementary English education. These are also the main reasons why some students lose interest in learning English.
In fact, the development of language skills occurs over a long period of time as part of a gradual, cumulative process. If a word is important, it will appear frequently. There is no need to get anxious if children cannot memorize it immediately. As long as they are interested and confident, they will get the hang of it sooner or later.
At present, many cram schools, teachers, and parents require children to memorize vocabulary and spelling. The new English proficiency test will further encourage belief in the misguided notion that the faster children learn the better they learn.
Wu Yin-chang
Wu also points out something particular in our culture: people get nervous and go all out for high grades if there is a test.
If proficiency tests for graduating elementary school students are to come into effect, one possible consequence is that the students will "go all out for the tests." One common problem shared by both elementary and junior high schools is that the level of proficiency varies greatly from one student to another. The tests will only review the problems experienced by the students.
I believe the time and money that the tests will cost would be better spent on raising the teaching skills of the teachers. How to teach classes of varying levels of proficiency, for example, is a constant professional challenge faced by English teachers. We should focus on new approaches to course planning and on how to innovate in English-language education.
Wu Ching-shyue is an associate professor in the Department of Applied Foreign Languages at Chaoyang University of Technology.
Translated by Grace Shaw
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS