English fluency will improve Hong Kong
Why are our top government officials and wealthy businessmen so keen on Cantonese as the medium of instruction?
Most of them studied in English-taught secondary schools or overseas in Britain or America. All have become successful members of society. They cannot deny that fluency in English is helpful.
So why are they so negative about creating an English environment in school for Hong Kong students?
If they're so positive about Cantonese teaching, why are they sending their sons and daughters abroad?
Proponents of Cantonese-medium teaching say English should be our second language, to build our competitiveness internationally. And the only effective way to make it our second, but not foreign, language is providing an English environment.
Hong Kong generally does not provide an ideal environment. We have only two English radio channels, two local English newspapers, and very few local English magazines. Schools are the best place to learn English.
At the moment, only English literature and English are subjects that must be taught in English. This provides us with limited opportunities for being immersed in English.
Psychologists have proved that the critical age for mastering a language is before 15. The education system plays a formative role in these years.
The proposed system of having sub-standard English-medium instruction (EMI) schools using Cantonese-medium instruction (CMI) and high-standard CMI schools switch back to EMI seems flexible, but in fact aims at enlarging the CMI group to promote the mother-tongue policy. Standards are subjective and therefore not trustworthy.
Some critics argue that English is too difficult and, if all subjects are taught in English, it will impact on students' ability to learn. But if students are immersed in English from a young age, they will overcome this barrier.
Pulcheria is a regular SYP columnist
