In Taiwan, people often blame lack of an English environment for students not learning English well. But have you ever wondered why some people, maybe friends or classmates, in Taiwan seem to pick up English effortlessly and make impressive achievements in English proficiency, while many others struggle without gaining a decent command of the language? Are the former people more talented or smarter?
My research shows that people reaching a high level of English as a foreign language have at least one thing in common: They all actively participate in English-related activities outside the classroom, such as reading newspapers and magazines and watching TV programs.
Stephen Krashen, a former linguistics professor at the University of Southern California, has said there is a difference between language learning and language acquisition. According to Krashen, "learning a language," which usually happens in a classroom, is aimed at developing a conscious knowledge of the language, especially grammar. "Acquiring a language," on the other hand, is aimed at developing ability in that language by using it in natural, communicative situations -- that is "picking it up." Acquiring a language is to subconsciously use the language for real communication; on the other hand, learning a language is to consciously know about it.
A person's capacity in a foreign language stems from acquisition that is supplemented with learning. For this reason, comprehensible input from teachers in classrooms is very limited in what it can achieve for students.
Of course, all language learning is limited to some extent, by time if nothing else, and if learning cannot be substantiated and complemented by acquisition, the effect of it is even more limited. This explains why some people who get good grades in English still cannot use it and why some people who attend English cram schools for years don't achieve fluency. They rely primarily on learning in a language classroom; however, they receive very little comprehensive input -- especially that which takes them beyond their current level of English proficiency, or their English "comfort zone" according to Krashen -- outside the classroom.
This is not to say that studying English is not important. Acquisition, however, is more important and natural than learning and is the main and more effective way to obtain ability in a second language. Thus, one of the most important goals in a second language classroom is to motivate students to get more language input outside the classroom.
English education in Taiwan has been criticized for placing too much emphasis on grammar. Reforms have been proposed: that textbooks should be rewritten to emphasize using English for communication, that Taiwanese English teachers should only speak English with their students and that conversation classes should only be taught by qualified native speakers of English. The list goes on and on.
I don't oppose any of these proposals. However, there is a more basic issue we have to deal with: how to motivate students to willingly and happily get more out-of-class English input. For this reason, teachers need to motivate students to obtain more input outside the classroom.
There are many ways to do this. For instance, teachers may show students how to make use of TV programs, movies and DVDs for aural input, as well as interesting newspapers, magazines and books for written input. Schools and parents have to do their best to help students access all the comprehensive input mentioned above.
The best way to improve our English education is to teach students to be independent acquirers instead of passive learners.
Kao Shih-fan is an assistant professor at the National Taipei College of Business.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing