Native, defined by the Oxford dictionary, means inborn and natural or a person belonging to a specific place. Native people are usually people who are entrenched into the culture and language of their own local society. These are people who are often said to be the classic, if not the best, representation of their culture and in some cases language.
Recently, the Education Minister proposed the idea of hiring native English teachers to raise the standards of our English. Many questions were raised pertaining to the employment of native English teachers. Some were in favour while some were against this idea.
The use of native English teachers to teach English is somewhat similar to the Ministry's take towards the teaching of the Chinese language or other foreign languages such as German, French and Japanese. In the teaching of these languages, we see that native people have been hired to teach these languages. After all, these languages did not originate from Singapore. When native Chinese teachers were employed to teach Chinese, detractors lamented on their strong accent as one main flaw to counter the argument. However, these detractors were of a very small minority. In many schools today, we see native Chinese teachers being able to engage with their students on both a personal and professional level and have enriched many students through the culture and most importantly, the history of their motherland that they bring along with. Furthermore, the Ministry has, over the years, been sending batches of their teachers-to-be to renowned universities in China to master the language. This move has been widely accepted by the general public.
The use of native English teachers to teach English is however drawing much more public scrutiny and debate. The reason is simple. Singaporeans cannot accept the fact that the language that they have been using as a means for communication all these years, is riddled with flaws. To us, it seems that we have butchered a language so refined and pure in its absolute core but yet have embraced for such a long time. However, the question we should ask ourselves is whether our English standard is really at an acceptable level?
Today, when you go to a school and listen to students communicate with each other, it is distinctively clear that many of the sentences they speak are erroneous and grammatically flawed. Today, when you ask a student which paper is more difficult to pass in an exam, they will tell you that it is the English paper and not the stumbling Chinese block. This is very much so because in both papers, the method of testing is very much different. Unlike Chinese, in English, we do not see a common textbook with words for students to memorise and form sentences out of it. Rather, the English paper tests students on their understanding and appreciation of the language. There is no fixed syllabus for students to apply their all-so familiar rote-learning. The paper is very open and spans across wide genres for testing.
The issue at hand here should not be about the nostalgic approach where the earlier generation learnt and mastered their English. Neither should it be about accent. Rather, it should be about the teaching and use of the language in all areas and subjects. Listen to your Science or Mathematics teachers when they teach you Science or Mathematics. Pay attention to their enunciation, their grammar and their choice of words. Do you spot any flaws?
English is used as the medium for teaching in Singapore. Hence, if you want to talk about raising the standards of our local English, then deal with how this medium for teaching is being mangled by teachers who may not be teaching the language but are using it as a language for instruction in their teaching. If you can change them, then you can confidently change the bulk of Singaporeans.
Singlish, is to some, a 'native' language for Singaporeans because we 'invented' this language. To some ardent lovers of the English language, they often frown upon the use of Singlish. To them, Singlish is a vulgar and if not crude street language that speaks poorly of a person. Yet, is Singlish any bad?
The excessive use of Singlish such that it becomes our mode of communication with others is regrettable. However, as a street language for communication with people, there is nothing unfortunate about it. Think about it, if the use of Singlish can make you get a bowl of noodles at the coffee shop, rather than one that is prim and proper, which will you use?
Is there a then contradiction or should it rather be a status quo approach instead? It is neither. The rules of grammar in English should be very much emphasised in schools. It is a pity that after ten years of struggling with the English language at the primary and secondary level, many students are still unable to produce a work with minimal grammatical errors. The creative approach to the teaching of the language where understanding, appreciation and application should be enforced and recommended. A more thorough approach that involves more writing and oral should be encouraged. The idea of engaging students to articulate their thoughts on issues such as euthanasia, education, family etc. Should be favoured over a rather placid approach where the teacher and student communicate through their sub-standard written work.
Do I want a native English teacher to teach me my English? Maybe. However, so what if you can speak an immaculate English and you come from a country where everyone speaks English; if you cannot teach the language, then regardless of your credentials or birth country or even skin colour, you will be considered as the weakest link in the teaching of the language. Period.
To me, it is not and never about the person teaching. Rather, it is about the quality in the teaching.
