Language Teaching in Singapore

[Harold F. Schiffman]

Regarding the idea of "increasing the curriculum time" used for teaching
Chinese etc. e.g. teaching chemistry or whatever via Chinese medium,
Singapore has long done all teaching of science and other "practical"
subjects in English, and uses Chinese (and Malay and Tamil) for "moral
education" (and maybe some other humanistic stuff) only.  This is supposed
to keep the pernicious evils of western morality at bay, since they would
otherwise sneak in through embedded ideologies hidden in the English
language.  The problem with this, of course is that another hidden idea,
i.e. the notion that English is practical and other languages are not, is
clearly conveyed to mother-tongue students in Singapore, and has been a
problem with Tamil students for some time (i.e. Tamil is not seen as a
"practical" language in Singapore, and indeed has no economic value.  Now
it seems to be catching up with Chinese, as well, though this language has
been shown to have some economic value, e.g. for selling Singapore's goods
and services in China. More and more familiies use English as a home
language in Singapore, so there's no support for mother-tongues there,
either.

It used to be the case that you had to get a certain number of Cambridge
A-level passes in your "mother tongue" in Singapore in order to get into
the National University of Singapore, so students who didn't (and there
were more men than women who didn't) had to go abroad to study.  Now this
is apparently being relaxed as well, so as to keep these students home (?)

Singapore has recently allocated millions of dollars to improve education,
including "mother-tongue" education, and research money for various
projects is awaiting people to make proposals.  What will come of this
will be interesting...

Hal Schiffman


On Thu, 8 Apr 2004 sicola at dolphin.upenn.edu wrote:

> Interesting article.  But it tends to oversimplify some of the bigger issues,
> as journalists love to do.
>
> First, it's an issue all of us language educators constantly confront. And I
> don't even mean second-language educators. In high school, the last thing I
> wanted to do was read a novel some old teacher told me I had to read because
> it was a "classic." *YAWN*.  Did I miss out on some wonderful books by Cliff-
> noting my way through them? Probably. I've actually gone back and read a few
> since then. But at 16, that's how many (most?) kids think. It just exacerbates
> the problem by doing it in a foreign language. And for every kid who wants to
> learn English as a foreign language to listen to music, read Harry Potter or
> watch Hollywood productions, there are plenty who don't want to learn it at
> all. It's the nature of the beast.
>
> On a more annoying level, this kind of comment kills me:
> "One way would be to increase the curriculum time in which
> Chinese is used. If a student is already good at English,
> why not have him learn chemistry or biology or history in
> Chinese, or a combination of both languages?"
>
> In an ideal world, yes. But inevitably, if you start a comment with "why
> not...?" there's probably a good reason or two. And the first one that jumps
> to mind are things like finding faculty who are able, willing, and certified
> to teach those subjects in both languages, or doubling the number of teachers
> to have one in each language, a budgetary and logistical nightmare. Then of
> course there is the problem of textbooks. They could have to be translated,
> since while there are likely ample chemistry texts in eihter language, they
> doubtfully cover the same material in the same way, which means students would
> not be receiving as "equal" education as possible, which many (from parents to
> governments) would frown upon. Plus, the schools would have to purchase both
> language sets; how many of each?
>
> Then there's the statement "if a student is already GOOD at English..."  How,
> exactly, do you define "GOOD"? Especially in the sense of good enough to study
> a content subject in English (or whatever L2) and still have enough bilingual
> skills and vocabulary to be able to pass the almighty university entrance
> examinations and other national standards tests, which may or may not be given
> in the same language in which the student studied the material. (I could go
> on, but I'll spare you... ;-) )
>
> The irony is that I am glad the author brought up the frustrating situation in
> which teachers and students too often find themselves. The notion of relevance
> for language learners is hugely important in motivation as an element of
> success. But the questions asked and assumptions underlying the simplistic
> solutions proffered show the lack of true understanding the media have
> regarding just what educators and education systems contend with, which makes
> our jobs all the more difficult.
>
> Okay, putting the soapbox to rest...
> Laura
> :-)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Quoting Francis M Hult <fmhult at dolphin.upenn.edu>:
>
> > 'Pop' and the Art of Language Teaching
> >
> > Tan Tarn How
> > The Straits Times (Singapore)
> > Feb. 28, 2004
> > Singapore
> >
> > THINKING ALOUD
> >
> > CHINESE-LANGUAGE teachers,it seems to me, have a much
> > harder time of it than their English-language counterparts.
> >
> > The reason is simple.
> >
> > For many students, Chinese is a dead language.
> >
> > To them, it is nothing more than a subject they have to
> > learn - painfully - at school.
> >
> > It is not something they use outside the classroom for
> > conversations with their classmates, with their family and
> > friends, or with strangers.
> >
> > They don't read it, unless made to, and they don't write it,
> > unless under similar forced circumstances.
> >
> > Learning Chinese is for them like learning Latin, a disused
> > tongue.
> >
> > It is extremely hard to pick up a language, not to say
> > master it, without constant exposure and use.
> >
> > I am reminded of this as I am now learning, or more
> > accurately trying to learn, Japanese.
> >
> > It is a slow plod because, besides the three hours a week
> > in the class, I have almost no other contact with the
> > language. It is also a dead language for me.
> >
> > What we know as common sense has been proven by rigorous
> > research.
> >
> > Take for example a mid-1990s study by the United States
> > Education Department, the counterpart of the Education
> > Ministry here, which looked at what would work when
> > teaching a second language through immersion in Canadian
> > and American schools.
> >
> > One of its conclusions: 'Language is acquired most
> > effectively when it is learnt for communication in
> > meaningful and significant social situations.'
> >
> > Not being used in meaningful and significant social
> > situations - its deadness - is the most important stumbling
> > block to learning that should be studied by the government-
> > appointed panel now reviewing how Chinese is being taught
> > in the schools.
> >
> > What can be done?
> >
> > One way would be to increase the curriculum time in which
> > Chinese is used. If a student is already good at English,
> > why not have him learn chemistry or biology or history in
> > Chinese, or a combination of both languages?
> >
> > The same report quoted above says: 'The first lesson to be
> > learnt from immersion is that when second language
> > instruction is integrated with instruction in academic
> > content, it is more effective than teaching the language in
> > isolation.'
> >
> > Another solution would be: Make the Chinese lessons
> > interesting.
> >
> > A pat answer that then begs the question of what is
> > 'interesting'.
> >
> > A narrow definition would be to have good teachers that can
> > bring some fun to the lessons.
> >
> > All of us who have been lucky to have had our passion for a
> > subject awakened by a wonderful teacher - like I owe my
> > love of literature to my Secondary 3 teacher Shirley Lim -
> > know this is of tremendous help.
> >
> > The more important and wider definition of 'interesting'
> > would be to make Chinese a live language.
> >
> > What needs to be done is for connections to be made between
> > the subject as taught in class and the things that are
> > happening in the life of students.
> >
> > To find out what is interesting to students, we only need
> > to look at their interests.
> >
> > What do they like to do?
> >
> > They watch television and movies, they listen to music,
> > they spend money shopping, they surf the Net, and they
> > (hopefully) read, whether Harry Potter, manga (comics) or
> > entertainment magazines.
> >
> > (Some of course read Tang poetry or Confucius' Analects in
> > classical Chinese, but we can safely say that they don't
> > need help.)
> >
> > The truth is that for the bulk of students - even for those
> > who are good in Chinese - these activities are carried out
> > mostly using the English language.
> >
> > The challenge for teachers is to get the students to do
> > these interesting things using Chinese instead.
> >
> > Lecturing them to do so won't do any good, as most parents
> > who try realise soon enough.
> >
> > Instead, the teacher will have to show in the classroom
> > that it is possible to pursue these hobbies using Chinese.
> >
> > And he will have to spend curriculum time on talking about,
> > reading about and writing about Lord Of The Rings (book and
> > movie, preferably in the Chinese versions), Home In Toa
> > Payoh television series, 5566 and David Tao, and mobile
> > phone models and their specifications.
> >
> > It may mean using the Chinese version of Harry Potter as
> > textbook.
> >
> > There will be resistance, of course, from teachers for
> > instance.
> >
> > For this group, it will mean extra work, keeping up with
> > the trends among their young charges. But they can make
> > their work easier by, say, forming a network, via the
> > Internet, perhaps, to exchange materials.
> >
> > Another group are the teachers and non-teachers who won't
> > want 'pop' to enter the classroom because they see the
> > Chinese language as the medium for the transmission of
> > traditional culture.
> >
> > To these people, I can only say that the baggage they have
> > foisted on Chinese is the very reason that Chinese is dead
> > for many students.
> >
> > Yes, they are right, Tang poetry is beautiful and ought to
> > be appreciated by every Chinese language student.
> >
> > But is it not better to let the child come willingly to it
> > then have it forced down her throat?
> >
> > I remember the story I heard a few years ago when the Vicki
> > Zhao television serial My Fair Princess was all the rage.
> >
> > In one school, some of the students had sneaked in the
> > cartoon book series of the story, based on the Qiong Yao
> > book.
> >
> > Instead of commending the student for reading a Chinese
> > book, and then going on to introduce her to the Qiong Yao
> > original, or to use the serial as a starting point for an
> > interesting lesson, the teacher promptly confiscated the
> > item.
> >
> > What a great opportunity lost.
> >
> > *****
> > >From the Language Policy Research Unit News Archive
> > http://www.asu.edu/educ/epsl/LPRU/newsarchive/
> >
>
>
>