Letters to the Editor, July 1, 2014
I refer to the letter by Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee ("NET scheme needs overhaul to improve its effectiveness", June 27).

She is right when she says that "proficiency in English is of utmost importance to Hong Kong's continued success as an international city". She is also right to say that "the best way to master a foreign language is to immerse oneself in an environment where only that language is used" and that that is why parents send children to international or overseas boarding schools. She then points the finger at the native-speaking English teacher scheme for being the reason why the Diploma of Secondary Education English language pass rate is so poor, and implies that NETs choose an easy life by "reading poetry" rather than "correcting grammar".
Is she really suggesting that the policy of having one NET in each school can be held responsible for these exam results? And is she suggesting that the NET scheme is in any way comparable with the total immersion of an international school?
Has Regina Ip actually taken the time to visit schools and speak to NETs to see what an excellent job they do? I know many NETs who would love to show her around the English corners they have built, mostly in their own time, and who could explain to her the constant demands they are under to produce fresh and exciting teaching ideas.
NETs cannot be held responsible for the secondary school results. It is the responsibility of politicians who have been around for the same time, or longer, than the NET scheme, such as Regina Ip, for the lamentable standard of English of today's youth.
If you want "total immersion" then you have to pay for it by making all schools English-medium schools, but you are not going to get it from any number of politicians bashing NETs or the NET scheme.
