I was not surprised with recent figures stating that 66 per cent of a number of Primary Six students tested in English failed to reach Primary Two level, and I would not be surprised by the same or even worse results from Form Four or Five pupils. But how can this be possible in today's 'learner-centred' education environment? Unlike the lucid writer and teacher Mr Phillip Yeung in his Open Forum column (Education Post, November 10), I don't place quite as much blame on my local teacher colleagues, whom I see as victims of a system from which they have no escape. Each year they have an annual teaching plan and a textbook, both of which must be completed. Neither book nor plan seem to take into account students' previous learning experiences or level of attainment. The fact that schools have to promote a certain percentage of the students each year predestines those who, at best, have just scraped through the previous year to another year of non-understanding and consequent failure. And each teacher, so busy marking and keeping up with the annual plan, has no time either for those students who need help, or to prepare the communicative lessons that may help students see that English is a living language, not just a set of grammatical rules learnt for an exam. But unlike Mr Leung, I believe that the communicative skills of listening, speaking, reading and writing can be taught, enjoyably mastered and assessed in a meaningful social context, even in Hong Kong. But, before this can take place, some major changes are needed. In my opinion, the first is to the examination syllabus. In many other countries, foreign languages are taught in the context of meaningful topics, with all grammatical structures, expressions and vocabulary being prescribed. Students may be far more able to cope with and enjoy a more relevant, attainable English than that with which they are currently confronted. The second change will have to be in teacher education: to prepare the thousands of teachers who passed through and now perpetuate the old system would be a big process, but a successful period of professional development run by enthusiastic teacher-motivators for teachers already within the system could help pave the way. The third major change is going to have to be in class size. I believe it is well-nigh impossible to teach communicatively and to assess a class of 40-plus learners. These numbers must be lowered if effective learning and communication is going to take place. Changes are never easy, and those needed here are enormous, both from above and within the schools. But how much worse does the situation need to get before those who control the examinations and the syllabus realise that things aren't going too well, and - rather than just foisting another change on the frontline teachers - do something that will actually encourage our learners to learn? CRAIG BOSWELL Aberdeen
