Medium of Instruction in Secondary Education in Post-Colonial Hong Kong: Why Chinese? Why English?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Medium of Instruction in Secondary Education in Post-Colonial Hong Kong: Why Chinese? Why English? Wei Zeng Universiy of Pennsylvania In 1997, the majority of secondary schools in Hong Kong changed their medium of instruction from English to Chinese (Cantonese) due to a mandatory policy of the government. This paper reports on a case study on this change of medium of instruction policy by synthesizing related studies and reports. The analysis intends to explain why English is pre- ferred as the medium of instruction for secondary schools, why and how the Hong Kong government implemented the policy while the domi- nant role of English as an international language becomes stronger and stronger, and what the interrelationship is between the policy and Hong Kong people’s preference for English as the medium of instruction. Introduction n July 1997, Hong Kong’s return to the People’s Republic of China marked the end of its one-hundred-and-fifty-year history as a British colony. This meant a significant transition for its society. In the same year, the Department of Education issued two documents to all sec- Iondary schools regarding their medium of instruction (hereafter MOI): a consultation document in April entitled “Arrangements for Firm Guidance on Secondary Schools’ Medium of Instruction” and its revision in September entitled “the Medium of Instruction Guidance for Secondary Schools” (Poon 1999). These two documents spelled out the Hong Kong government’s mother-tongue education policy regarding its post-colonial “biliterate (in Chinese and English) and trilingual (in Cantonese, Mandarin and English)” language education policy. They also emphasized that all secondary schools should adopt Chinese as the MOI by default from the beginning of the academic year 1998-99 for all sub- jects other than English language and English literature, unless they could prove that their teaching staff and students were capable of teach- ing and learning through English (Lai 1999a). As a result of this mandatory change of MOI, three hundred and seven schools, or 70% of government and government-subsidized secondary schools at the time of Working Papers in Educational Linguistics 22/1: 42-56, 2007 WPEL VOLUME 22, NUMBER 1 MEDIUM OF INSTRUCTION initial implementation, were converted from English-medium to For example, the Secretary for Education and Manpower, Professor Chinese-medium. Arthur K. C. Li commented on April 18, 2006 after his visit to Ireland and The rationale behind this government policy was mainly drawn from Switzerland that: 1) internationally acknowledged benefits of mother-tongue education, and 2) educational research and Education Commission research reports. The success of an economy hinges on solid investment and extensive col- The research found that instruction delivered in English or a mixed code laboration in the pursuit of quality education…there were a lot of of English and Cantonese was unrealistic and ineffective and negatively similarities between Switzerland and Hong Kong. We are both influenced students’ learning. For instance, the 1982 Llewellyn Report (in economies supported by a strong financial services sector, and we rely very much on technology and tourism…Switzerland's education and Tsui et al. 1999) described the secondary-school classrooms as follows: manpower development strategies are therefore very relevant to us (Education and Manpower Bureau 2006c). Many Chinese speakers find it almost impossible to master English at the level of proficiency required for intricate thinking, and yet pupils from non-English speaking Chinese families have to express themselves In addition, no huge disagreements in principle have been found in English at school. Under these conditions, more emphasis tends to be between the government and the people, regarding the qualities and ben- placed upon rote learning. If a pupil is expected to reformulate that efits of mother-tongue education (Kwok 1998). However, regardless of which he or she has learned in English but has few words at his or her common ground in their educational philosophies and understandings of command to express these thoughts, what can be done except to regurgi- mother-tongue education, there has emerged a discrepancy between the tate verbatim either notes taken during lessons or slabs from government’s rationale for its language in education policy and Hong textbooks?…Many of the problems associated with schooling in Hong Kong people’s reactions towards the consequences of the policy. This dis- Kong – excessive hours of homework, quiescent pupils – are magnified, crepancy has resulted from differing assumptions about the even if not caused, by the attempt to use English as a teaching medium cause-and-effect relationships between exposure to English and success- for students (203). ful learning of the language and between one’s English proficiency and a promising career. Nevertheless, the mandatory implementation of this policy aroused The following analysis seeks to understand this discrepancy and its strong and unprecedented reactions from the public, as a local English persistence in Hong Kong society from its implementation to the present. newspaper South China Morning Post reported on September 17, 1997: In doing so it addresses three principal questions: (1) Why is English the “Widespread fear and confusion about mother-tongue education have preferred MOI? (2) Why and how did the Hong Kong government imple- been revealed, just days before its compulsory introduction is to be for- ment the mandatory policy while the dominant role of English as an mally announced” (cited in Poon 1999: 139). Schools saw the policy as international language becomes stronger and stronger? (3) What is the socially divisive, taking away their autonomy, and among the schools interrelationship between the policy and Hong Kong people’s preference that changed their MOI from English to Chinese, 66% of the principals for English as the MOI from the perspectives of parents, teachers and stu- thought their schools had been turned second-class because of this dents? In his review of language planning and policy research, Ricento change (Tsui, Shum, Wong, Tse & Ki. 1999). Moreover, the policy was met (2000) points out that “the key variable which separates the older, posi- with extensive resistance and resentment from parents, who worried that tivistic/technicist approaches from the newer critical/postmodern ones their children, after receiving schooling in Chinese, would not achieve a is agency, that is, the role(s) of individuals and collectivities in the processes of high-enough English proficiency level to be competitive in the labor mar- language use, attitudes and ultimately policies” [italics added], and thus pro- ket for a promising job. A fear permeated different social sectors, poses an important but as yet unanswered question to future LPP particularly in business, that the decrease of exposure to English would research, namely: lead to a further decline in Hong Kong students’ average English lan- guage proficiency and thus compromise the city’s competitiveness and Why do individuals opt to use (or cease to use) particular languages and status as an international city (Lai & Byram 2003). varieties for specified functions in different domains, and how do those All these anxieties show that language in education policy is not only choices influence – and how are they influenced by – institutional lan- a school, but also a social issue. Parents’ concern and public fear reveal guage policy decision-making (local to national and supranational)? the strong cause-and-effect relationship between education and economy (208). in the educational philosophy of the given socio-cultural context, which is also reflected in the government’s point of view regarding this issue. Situated in the specific historical and socio-cultural context of Hong 43 44 WPEL VOLUME 22, NUMBER 1 Kong, this paper pays special attention to the roles of different collectivi- 1960s—exemplifies the situation pointed out by Fishman. As the world’s ties, such as the government, parents, students and teachers, in order to eleventh largest trading economy, sixth largest foreign exchange market, capture the dynamic relationships among them in the policy making and thirteenth largest banking center, tenth largest exporter of services and implementation. Asia’s second biggest stock market, Hong Kong hosts the regional head- quarters or offices of more than 3,800 international corporations (HKSAR Why is English the Preferred Medium of Instruction? government 2006). In mid-2004, its population was about 6.88 million, of which the foreign (i.e. non-Chinese) population reached 524,200 with the This section explores why Hong Kong society prefers English, rather three largest groups coming from the Philippines, Indonesia, and the than the local language Cantonese, as the MOI in secondary schools. The United States (Hong Kong SAR government 2006). All of these factors discussion will be carried out under two themes: (1) the historical and contribute to the continued prestige status of English in Hong Kong soci- present status of English in Hong Kong and (2) the history of English as ety and illustrate an interesting scenario that, “the end of a colonial era the MOI in educational institutions. has not brought about a feeling of ‘linguistic liberation’ among History of English in Hong Kong Hongkongers; nor is there a popular outcry for the ‘dehegemonization of The English language enjoys a long history in association with