Second Language Acquisition, a sub-field of Applied Linguistics, is a growing area as it provides insight into second language teaching and learning. It, through research, has informed about language teaching to teachers, scholars and policy makers across the world. Thus, the language policy, in developed countries, are made based on such theories. However, Nepal represents the country that makes policy without much consultation to SLA theory. Moreover, there is hardly any research carried out to inform ELT policy in Nepal.
One of such policies that the government has adopted with regard to ELT is English as the MOI. While the Interim Constitution (2063 B.S.) has made a provision to learn and teach, in primary level, in the learners' L1, the education policy also allows school to switch the MOI to English. Obviously, learners are likely to feel much comfortable when they are given instruction in their mother tongue. It can also be predicted that learning is likely to be more successful.
Nepal, being a country that houses 123 ethnic groups and equal number of languages, has a multiple ethnic society. As a result, many schools, as I know, in Hilly, Terai and Lower Himalayan Region, have students who come from different ethnic backgrounds. Thus, even the L1 MOI policy has many complexities associated with it as. Firstly, the translation of text books and other teaching materials. Next, the availability of competent teachers is scarce. Thirdly, given that the school is a melting pot of different ethnic groups, what happens to the needs of minority groups. So changing MOI from Nepali to L1 of learners might be beneficial to some but a disadvantage to others. Thus, the safest way would be to adopt NEPALI MOI as most of the people speak and understand Nepali.
Nepal, being a country that houses 123 ethnic groups and equal number of languages, has a multiple ethnic society. As a result, many schools, as I know, in Hilly, Terai and Lower Himalayan Region, have students who come from different ethnic backgrounds. Thus, even the L1 MOI policy has many complexities associated with it as. Firstly, the translation of text books and other teaching materials. Next, the availability of competent teachers is scarce. Thirdly, given that the school is a melting pot of different ethnic groups, what happens to the needs of minority groups. So changing MOI from Nepali to L1 of learners might be beneficial to some but a disadvantage to others. Thus, the safest way would be to adopt NEPALI MOI as most of the people speak and understand Nepali.
Talking about ENGLISH MOI, a few things need to be highlight first. With the growing number of English medium private schools across the country and the results that these schools have secured in SLC examination have created a false scenario that ENGLISH MOI is road to quality education. Parents and other stakeholders have felt that English medium of instruction is better than Nepali medium of instruction. Parents, though illiterate, think that better English opens up countless number of doors to opportunities. So, they have either sent their children to private schools or forced state run schools to switch their medium of instruction to English so that their offspring may be able to compete with their counterpart who receive education in English.
Nonetheless, they have not understood the other side of the story yet. A language can only be learnt when the quality of the instruction is good. Moreover, when it comes to learning other subjects in English, all these teachers must have good knowledge of English language along with good content knowledge. However, I as someone involved in the field have noticed that most of these teachers, when they are forced to teach their subjects in English language, can't do their best. Besides, it also paralyzes students understanding of the subject matter. Consequently, their critical thinking ability is completely underdeveloped . In consequence, what learners receive is substandard education without any critical thinking ability.
Thus, government has to think and make informed decision about MOI in both the private and public schools. We all educators, teachers and other stakeholders need to know our priorities. What is it that we want. Do we want citizens that are intellectually sound or the citizens whose thoughts are paralyzed. If learners have good knowledge, they can learn the medium of expression soon after they realize its need. Moreover, the government, educators, and other stake holders could look for the ways to bring positive changes in ELT. We could think of ways to improve the quality of teaching of English so learners would be equipped with knowledge that they require to converse in English if the prime objective of learning English in school level is to acquire the functional knowledge.
No comments:
Post a Comment