Tongue-tied over medium of instruction

JUST ONE WEEK remains of the extension to the Education Commission's consultation on medium of instruction (MOI) and secondary school places allocation. But the question of whether students should be taught in their mother tongue or English is such a hot issue that consensus still seems far off. While many critics have called its findings misleading and say they lack a sound academic basis, the commission's working group that spent some 18 months preparing for this consultation has also come under fire for appearing not to listen to differing viewpoints. Released in February, the guidelines in its consultation paper have far-reaching implications for the use of English in secondary schools across Hong Kong. Most contentious have been the working group's support for mother-tongue teaching and its plans to maintain the separation between Chinese (CMI) and English-medium instruction (EMI) schools - the latter taking the most academically-able students. The consultation was originally scheduled to last three months, but the deadline for the submission of views was later extended by two months. The extra time was intended to give the working group an opportunity to argue its case and win over more support. Speaking earlier this week, businessman Michael Tien Puk-sun, chairman of the working group, said he felt the extended consultation had been 'very successful'. 'It's not really for us to sell our policy, it's more for a dialogue to continue - because this thing, this whole issue, is very complex,' he said. Recently, he had begun to see a change in attitudes of parents and the proposals were receiving more support, he added. Mr Tien said the group received a stack of written responses from the public every day. Apart from the letters, he and other members of the working group had met with parents, teachers and students. 'We were able to give a fuller explanation and communicate with parents. When it came to the end of a session and I asked them again, I found that many times they had changed their minds.' However, he accepted there were still some parents and teachers who remained determined in their opposition to the group's proposals. 'As time passes by, I think more and more people understand the difficulty involved in implementing some of the so-called more ideal alternatives,' he said. Critics, however, say that the working group has failed to win public support for its proposals. 'It's worse,' said Edwin Wong King-por, head of the Hong Kong Institute of Education's (HKIEd) division of continuing professional education, referring to the deadlock between the working group and its opponents. Speaking at an academic forum on secondary school medium-of-instruction policy, held at the HKIEd campus in Tai Kok Tsui last weekend, Dr Wong said the extra time had simply given more people an opportunity to go over the proposals in more detail - and find more problems. He and other academics at the event said many of the working group's findings did not seem to be based on solid research. Ho Kwok-keung, chairman of Christian Zheng Sheng College's school board and a lecturer at HKIEd, said: 'A lot of what the government is saying is not based on facts.' Dr Ho also criticised the make-up of the working group, saying it lacked members with relevant academic experience in language. 'It seems when they selected members, they were more focused on allocation of places than language,' Dr Ho said. 'But when the report came out we were surprised to discover it was almost all about language.' While affirming its support for the policy of promoting mother-tongue education that was introduced in 1998, the working group accepted that a proportion of students could be taught in English. The document stated that the top 40 per cent of Primary Six graduates were currently proficient enough in English to be effectively taught in the language. Schools would only be able to use EMI if a minimum of 85 per cent of its students were in that upper segment. CMI schools would be allowed to devote a maximum of 15 per cent of class time to 'extended lesson activities conducted in English'. Dr Ho said he felt there was insufficient explanation in the document for how some of these figures were arrived at. Others have accused the working group of making selective use of research. 'Annex Two twists the facts,' said Kenneth Lam Ka-ho, a 'concerned parent' who has been lobbying the working group and LegCo over the proposals. Annex Two of the document contains references to academic studies the panel based their proposals on. 'You should not extract without quoting,' Dr Lam said. 'The way they looked at research is inadequate. The people involved only see what they want to see.' Despite having met with parent-teacher associations and students, the working group has repeatedly been accused of failing to listen. Dr Sun Pong Tak-ling, principal of St Catherine's School for Girls in Kwun Tong, said: 'We don't think it is a sincere consultation, because it seems they have already made up their minds.' Gilbert Tam Yiu-chung, a member of a parental concern group established in May to fight the reforms, said that although representatives of the group had met with Mr Tien and Permanent Secretary for Education and Manpower Fanny Law Fan Chiu-fun two months ago, they were still awaiting a formal response. 'Mr Tien said he couldn't respond to all the people he has met, as he wants to do it as a uniform gesture,' Mr Tam said. 'We don't know what they're thinking.' The group, made up of parents from seven distinguished primary schools - including La Salle, Salesian and St Mary's - rejects the basic principle that mother-tongue teaching is best. Mr Tien said that medium-of-instruction reform was a highly complex issue that needed to be looked at from historical, cultural and political perspectives. But the key, he said, was the educational. There are currently 114 EMI secondary schools out of a total of 501. Some parents and teachers who favour English-medium instruction fear the proposals will lead to many of those schools reverting to using Chinese if they cannot reach the 85 per cent threshold. Advocates of mother-tongue teaching say it boosts most students' motivation and aids comprehension in the majority of subjects. Learning in English - others counter - gives children more opportunities. Pecvin Yong, secretary of the working group, wrote in a letter: 'Factors like preserving the status of individual schools and protecting their English-medium label are not, and should not be, our key concerns.' But some parents, teachers and academics have also complained that making the distinction between EMI and CMI schools leads to the labelling and the creation of a two-tier system. They favour a less formal approach that would allow schools to decide the best language of instruction for students. Dr Ho is among those who suggest the government should take a more laissez-faire approach. 'If the government did not use strong intervention, this would take care of itself naturally,' he said. He disagreed with the assumption that if schools could choose their own language, they would lean towards English. Government figures showed that between 1982 and 1996 - when schools were free to decide on their own medium of instruction - the proportion of EMI schools fell from a peak of more than 90 per cent in 1986 to just 55 per cent, he said. 'Few people are aware of these figures,' Dr Ho added. Mr Tien said that while some of the alternatives critics proposed might seem attractive 'from a conceptual standpoint', they would not be feasible on a large scale. 'You are not talking about 10 or 20 schools, but 1,200 schools,' he said. 'You need to look at a policy that is easy to implement on a territory-wide basis.' Bilingual schooling has also been offered up as an alternative. That would leave schools able to decide which classes to teach in English and which in Chinese. Although the consultation paper did discuss mixed-mode schooling, it advised against it. It said the practice would lead to pressure on students to get into English classes and place a stigma on those who failed. The ratio of Chinese and English classes individual schools offered could potentially be seen as a way to rank schools, and competition could force schools to increase their EMI classes beyond their capabilities. 'This just isn't true. I don't know where they got this from,' Dr Ho said. Academic studies overseas had shown bilingual schools could be effective. Angela Cheung Wong Wan-yiu, who was chairman of the Education Commission's working group on language proficiency until 1997, said the worldwide trend dictated everyone should be able to communicate in more than one language. Bilingual education systems in some European countries had worked well, she added. A survey of principals at 139 secondary, primary and kindergarten by the Hong Kong Council for Education Administration - released at the HKIEd forum last week - showed stronger support for bilingual education than for the formal division of CMI and EMI schools. While 60 per cent of respondents said they were against the bifurcation policy, 55 per cent said they were in favour of schools being able to use both Chinese and English in classes. The consultation period may be drawing to a close, but the argument rages on. When the Education Commission closes its mailbag next Saturday, it will continue the task of sorting opinion and feedback. It will be working fast, so that the new allocation system can be introduced in time for students starting secondary school in 2007. The public must wait until early next month to learn the working group's final recommendations.