IN response to the declining standards of English and Chinese, the Government has put forward its Report No 6, which has made a number of recommendations.
Some of these recommendations aim at upgrading the qualifications of English teachers. The recommendations are welcomed, because they show that the Government is concerned about the language proficiency of students in Hong Kong. However, some fundamental issues should not be overlooked by the Education Commission.
Among the proposals is one to ensure the language proficiency of English teachers who are not trained or who did not major in English at university. It is good to demand a benchmark qualification, however, the Education Commission should be asking why there are so many teachers who are not qualified and why the turnover rate of qualified teachers remains high.
It is not uncommon so see English teachers with three classes of English at different levels, some at Certificate of Education, some at A-Level standard. The student-teacher ratio problem has been sorted out in primary schools, but in secondary schools, we still see classes of over 40 pupils.
Then, after class, the English teacher must sit down and mark students' written tests. Has the Education Commission given any thought to the massive workload language teachers have to bear throughout the academic year? Compared with teachers of other subjects, the pressure imposed on an English teacher is always heavier. In addition to the large number of students he has to teach (it is a compulsory subject) and the heavy marking load, the subject he has to teach is often subjected to public criticism. What is more, its syllabus changes much more than the syllabuses of other subjects. Even an experienced English teacher has to busy himself with the preparations for lessons.
Conscientious English teachers would like to do more to help their poor students. Yet, faced with a mountain of work, they must simply soldier on as best they can, doing a job that disrupts their personal lives.