李光耀承認推行雙語教學政策錯誤

papa_pop

The headline is definitely a draw.  But, again, like some press stories, you have to read between the lines to really see what Lee Kuan Yew is confessing.

IF one interprets that Lee confessed the bilingual policy a total failure, it would certainly draw a lot of objections - among his fellow Singaporeans and peoples from other Western countries, esp those taking Singapore as a location of choice for their businesses and jobs.

If not for the Singlish accent, I would say that most Singaporeans are truly bilingual (if one 'defines' bilingual as someone 'perfectly mastering' two languages, that's another story.  In that sense, I doubt even some Europeans can claim themselves as bilingual or multilingual).  Their mastery of English can 'export' them as native-English teachers to other places, HK included.

As to why Lee had to admit failure, as someone pointed out, it's more a political gesture.  What he's trying to say, perhaps, is that he's TOO biased towards English in his bilingual policy.  However, one has to admit that generally Singaporeans (born after 1970s) command a native-level of English and speak at least one (own) ethnic language.  That already works well with the international world of business, finance, education....

By the way, what would he do to 'rectify' his mistake?

papa_pop

Perhaps I should have made myself clear in the first place - in case someone mistook it - I would never intend to insult Singaporean.  Their mastery of English allows them to 'export' native English-speaking teachers.  Here's the original post I put on 21 Nov:
"If not for the Singlish accent, I would say that most Singaporeans aretruly bilingual (if one 'defines' bilingual as someone 'perfectlymastering' two languages, that's another story.  In that sense, I doubteven some Europeans can claim themselves as bilingual ormultilingual).  Their mastery of English can 'export' them asnative-English teachers to other places, HK included."

In fact, I respect the vision of Lee Kuan Yew, who has, virtually single-handedly, MADE English their first language.  You can read Lee's autobiography which would give much insight into his thinking and rationale behind the changes he brought to Singapore.

Anyway, if someone just hand-picked a word or two out of such a lengthy post (out of context?), what can I say?

Perhaps the word "Singlish" has made someone irritated.  But I didn't mean insulting at all.  By the way, I got quite some opportunities to meet and interact with their students.  Their accent could sometimes make it difficult for one to understand clearly.  Nonetheless, most of them are able to 'tune' the accent if they spend some more time interacting with people from different countries (and with different accents).

By the way, the Singaporean publish quite a few books about Singlish (I guess they are not insulting themselves) to help tourists to get familiar with the Singaporean culture.  They even present these books to their visitors as a souvenir.

Take it easy and you'll be happy.

papa_pop

My interpretation of Lee's confession about his bilingual policy remains - that is, he is NOT referring the bilingual policy as a failure in itself.  What Lee meant is, the "way" Singaporean have been taught Chinese in the past few decades does not work to his expectation. I reckon, what he's trying to say (to the Beijing government?) is that hehad never thought his bilingual policy would have led to a decline in theChinese proficiency of his fellow Singaporean.

He admitted his failure as the way English being put as their de facto first language has belittled the importance of Chinese (and other languages).  By the way, isn't the "dominance of the English language" in the city state what Lee has intended all along since Day 1?

Now that Lee has increasingly shown his respect for the Beijinggovernment, that's also the reason why I said his confession carried apolitical gesture.  He said he'd spend the rest of his life reinstating the interest in learning Chinese among Singaporean.  And he's talking about pedagogy, not the policy.

So, guys, don't take Lee's confession as a confession as such.

papa_pop

Well, whether it's a political gesture could be subjective or judgmental.  But the gist is that I don't think he admitted the bilingual policy - in itself - was a mistake (as the headline suggests), but the pedagogy and expectation - the way the Chinese language had been taught and the proficiency level students were expected to attain.  

Now he realised the importance of interest in the learning process, and that a compromise should be made - emphasising "pinyin" and "word recognition" and attaching little importance to "writing" which is deemed unnecessary in the Internet world. In short, he is 'lowering the bar' so as to stem the declining Chinese proficiency among the younger Singaporean. True that the bar would be lowered but I doubt if the students' Chinese proficiency (or their interest) would be upped.

I am not inclined to say that one can master perfectly -  and equally well - two languages, perhaps with the exception of those really gifted and fortunate ones. But one can definitely be bilingual or multilingual - as are most of the Europeans, esp Dutch, Swiss, Belgian and Finn. (Please don't bother with the accent issue of Singlish or Chinglish). And Lee is multilingual though he confessed he still cannot speak Mandarin perfectly.

By the way, I've sent my kid to a so-called bilingual school but I would not expect him to be equally good at both languages. A working level of both is what I'm after. So far, he's doing okay in terms of speaking, listening and reading in both, though a bit weak in Chinese writing (improving).

papa_pop

I think Lee set out his bilingual education policy such that all Singaporeans possess 兩種語言能達到差不多相同母語級水平: with English MADE their common language and keeping their mother tongue (Chinese, Malay, Indian, etc).  He opined that one can never master two languages equally perfect.  He launched the Speak Mandarin Campaign 30 years ago to unify the Chinese language spoken by Chinese Singaporeans, closing down all dialect programs on TV and radio and making Mandarin the mother tongue of all Chinese Singaporeans.  He even asked parents to speak Mandarin (instead of English) to their children lest their next generation will lose it.

By the way, Lee is still upholding his bilingual education policy though he's kind of refining it to make it more 'balanced', which most (himself included) would consider a feat of his.  stccmc's contribution of balanced bilingual is worth consideration.

You despise the so-called bilingual schools for claiming "強調中、英俱佳，其實是誤導父母以為入讀的子女能建立雙母語能力，即英文及得上國際學校，而中文及得上本地學校。其實只是給父母們一個不切實際、虛假的夢"  As you said, one cannot be equally good at two languages. So what? And what for?  If  the kid is good enough to get a decent grade in two languages in IBDP, the parents should be more than happy.

Perhaps you are looking to tooHIGH an expectation of 'being bilingual'.  When you look out to Belgian, Dutch, Finn and Singaporean, they can definitely claimthemselves as bilingual or even multilingual.  Even when you take a look at our kids in some of the better HK kindies, aiming bilingual is not toofar-fetched as you expect.  In fact, some of the IS in HK are doing more and more toencourage bilingualism.

papa_pop

"ISF adopts a variant of the Immersion Program and it seems promising toproduce bilinguals who have both languages at near native-level, or onenative, the other near-native." That's my observation too I'm not an ISF parent though.

Apart from the school focused on bilingual education, it also benefits from a 'balanced' student body whose mother tongues comprise both English and Mandarin.  This has put ISF in an advantageous position when compared to other so-called bilingual schools.  Most of the kids there can master two languages at native or near-native level as they only need to pick up one more language on top of their mother tongue.  Sure parents have many other considerations apart from the language environment when choosing a school for their kid.

In comparison, local bilingual CKY stands a lesser position as its student body comprises 99%+ local HK Chinese with Cantonese as mother tongue. They would need to aim for biliterate and trilingual.  Again, the immersion approach has worked wonder for my kid - well, I'm not aiming too high to get him to master an English standard comparable to IS students and Chinese comparable to local students.

By the way, Avatar, I don't think there are many parents who are embracing your "不切實際、虛假的夢" when enrolling their kids in these schools.  But thank you for giving us a heads up once and again.

papa_pop

Although I have tried not to sidetrack to the accent issue, I'm tempted (after all, it's me who mentioned Singlish in the first place on this thread).

Frank McCourt (Angela's Ashes, Teacher Man), a teacher turned writer (when he's over 60) born in New York to an Irish family, moved back to Ireland when he's about 5.  Studied there till 19 when he returned to New York to join the US Army (such that he could enrol in New York University using GI Bill).

When McCourt started his teaching career at 28 in New York, he was embarrassed by his strong Irish accent and teased by his students (and parents), and was almost told to go back to his Old Country with his 'brogue'.  Mind you that he was teaching in a vocational and technical high school where students would proceed to become plumbers and machine men, not an independent private school for US brats.


[ 本帖最後由 papa_pop 於 09-12-5 12:09 編輯 ]

papa_pop

Thankful should be thanked for pointing out my logical fallacy in the sentence "If not for the Singlish..." while noting that Singaporeans are bilingual.  Think some of the heated arguments stem from my poor English.  

I agree that accent does not matter as much as 'content' as long as it does not hinder the effectiveness of the verbal communication.  But some accents do bother us a bit (non-native and native included), especially those who have not 'tuned' the accent to the wider community of the English-speaking world.  No need to second guess my position on the above.

By the way, the school McCourt was teaching in New York in late 60s has a student body comprising quite a few second- or third-generation of Irish and Italian immigrants.  In fact, he had spent a couple of years at the pier as he had difficulty finding a teaching job (he attributed it to his Irish brogue) despite a college degree in English from NYU.