Why English language teaching remains problematic
By Prof. Rajiva Wijesinghe
The training program for lecturers in English at Technical Colleges,
had been conducted by the British Council at a substantial cost. I was
told over six million rupees had been expended, though the participants
were expected to pay for their board and lodging, in comparatively
squalid conditions.
I have regularly been told by decision makers who agree that
standards of English have to be improved that they will ask the British
Council for assistance. Unfortunately they believe that the British
Council is an aid organisation, as was the case until the eighties, when
it provided seminal assistance with regard to English and other training
needs.Unfortunately no one in authority now seems to understand that the
Council is no longer run on the old lines, being also required to
function on commercial principles. In the old days the idea was to
develop Sri Lankan counterparts so that we could be self sustaining in
time, now the aim is to continue to be needed, so that it can go on from
contract to contract. Aid is thus a tool of business, with grants - and
even more often loans - being instruments of winning business deals,
which later have to be renewed without such support.
Phenomenon
I have come across this phenomenon in other areas, as with the many
unscheduled proposals brought to me when I was Secretary of the Ministry
of Disaster Management and Human Rights. These usually came from Sri
Lankan counterparts, some of whom were recommended by influential
people, and the criterion I used to judge such proposals - did the
country need them, and were they the most economical way of achieving
the desired objectives? - astonished those who dealt with me, given that
one was simply expected to agree, in return for which some sort of
personal benefit would also be granted.
I hasten to add that those benefits were not necessarily financial,
they could include trips abroad - with the healthy allowances that such
entail - or, in the case of Ministers with constituencies, special
projects for those constituencies.
I should note that, in the days when I worked for the British
Council, when it was an aid organisation, it did employ such practices
as when trips were arranged for officials whose agreement was needed for
projects, but the connection in those days between the means employed
and the stated goal was clearer. Now, in a ruthlessly commercial world,
it seems that anything goes provided business is done.
So the training, I gather, was not of the highest professional
standards, and some of the techniques laid down may not be entirely
suitable for our students. In addition, the textbook that was used did
not seem entirely suitable, since it is based entirely on British
situations.
I was reminded then of something similar that happened, when the very
effective syllabus Sabaragamuwa University had prepared for the Sri
Lanka Military Academy was nearly subverted by a British Council project
run by a earnest woman who had no qualms about trying to base the entire
course on British books describing very British situations. Though some
books had been donated, it was made clear that later, after all eggs had
been placed in that basket, they would have to be purchased.
She had taken no notice at all of the course that was already being
conducted, and I think was irritated at having to deal with someone who
knew much more than she did about both the subject and the context in
which she was supposed to be operating. We managed then, if not to stop
the exercise in continuing dependency that she was engaged in, to at
least salvage some of the original work and the more home grown systems
we had been using.
But rarely do we find counterparts who can deal with the British, and
indeed other aid givers, on their own terms. This is a great pity,
because when they work with people who know what national priorities
are, they tend to fall in line, because after all their commercialism is
not ruthless, it is based on a desire to help as well. But when they are
confronted with total ignorance or subservience, of course they do what
comes naturally, which is dominate in terms of their own predilections.
Aid community
I was reminded, listening to the description of what had gone on at
the Technical Colleges Course, of what I was told by the Deputy Head of
OCHA, just before he left. We had had quite a good relationship for the
most part, though initially the aid community was of the view that I was
very fierce - a myth the nastier elements in the Ministry of External
Affairs still propagate.
But they soon realised that I was happy to work with those who were
positive about this country, as many of them were. And before he left
the OCHA man told me that he thought many of those who came here had got
it wrong. He said that most of them had experience largely of Africa,
where in many places the writ of government did not run, and so they had
to make all the decisions. The situation was quite different here, he
acknowledged, and once they understood that, they could work more
productively.
The trouble, however, is that in some areas the situation is as bad
as what he had seen elsewhere. In the field of English certainly we have
deterioriated from the days when, in fact with creative British
assistance, we were on the verge of developing training capacity that
would have fulfilled all our needs.
But given what has happened in the last two decades, I can understand
the comment of an Australian diplomat, who left in 2001, who said that
he had never seen a county degenerate as swiftly as we had done in the
three years he had been here. Again he used a comparison with Africa,
but as we know many African countries have developed in leaps and bounds
in the last couple of decades and their decision makers are certainly as
sophisticated as ours were twenty years ago.
I was graphically reminded of all this because, a couple of weeks
before your invitation arrived, I had been the keynote speaker at the
launch of a book by Parvathi Nagasunderam, whom I had recruited to
Jayewardenepura when I left the British Council to run their English
programs. She went on to become Head of the English Department there
when it was set up, and was a seminal influence in the education and
development of several generations of undergraduates. She had done as
much in several incarnations earlier, first as a teacher, then as a
teacher trainer at the Pasdunrata College of Education, and then, just
before she came to Jayewardenepura, as a trainer trainer at the Higher
Institute of English Education. Both these last had been conceived and
largely set in motion by the British Council during its days of seminal
influence in this country, under the most productive Representative it
had, Rex Baker.
Unfortunately, his successor, who thought he represented the new
commercially successful British Council, destroyed all the relationships
Rex had built , which contributed to the destruction of the institutions
the Council had helped nurture.
But that was essentially the fault of the Sri Lankan institutions who
actively encouraged this process of self-destruction. The catastrophe
arose from what was perhaps the silliest thing President Premadasa did.
In his efforts to distance himself from President Jayewardene, he
removed Ranil Wickremesinghe from the Education portfolio, which he had
handled better than he did anything else in his life, before or after.
The President instead gave it to someone he thought would respond to
grassroots needs. As a result we had mayhem. The Director of English, M
A de Silva, who had expressed some dissent, was got rid of, and the
superb first President of the Pasdunrata College, Charlie Gamage,
followed suit. The Department of English Education was downgraded, and
its imaginative and efficient head, Lakshmi Cumaranatunga, was got rid
of.
The superb range of courses she had introduced, supported by a trio
of dedicated British consultants, with training in curriculum
development, in evaluation, in the use of new technologies, were all
forgotten. The concentration on English at Pasdunrata gave way to
conformity with the increasingly meaningless requirements the NIE laid
down, so that general subjects were recycled and less attention paid to
English. As the students told me when I was asked to report on the
situation as Adviser on English to the Ministry, they had learnt the
reproductive system over and over in school and now they had to learn
about it again, when what they needed was practice in English,
improvement of speaking skills and encouragement to read and write in
the language.
The result is that we have not developed counterparts who can direct
assistance in a productive manner. The Educational Management Course the
British Council had set up was completely forgotten, and has now been
replaced by ad hoc arrangements, which were the subject of an almost
tearful plea to me last month from NIE personnel to try to do something
to salvage at least some professionalism. I have reported this to the
only other person still in service who has some historical memory of
what had been attempted in educational reform, but he is far too busy to
devote attention to what I assume seem unimportant matters with so many
other problems in the country.
To return to the complaint that made me again reflect on all this,
there seems to be no one in the Technical College system who can provide
conceptual inputs into the development of a new curriculum for English
and a training programme to go with it. At intervals I have been asked
to advise, both for General English and for the dedicated English
courses. With regard to the first, I prepared a new curriculum, which
was forgotten when the World University Service of Canada, which was
providing a tremendous amount of aid, changed the personnel involved. I
had almost forgotten about this until the last head of WUSC told me she
had found copies of the book I had prepared and was using it. I was
touched, and she kindly gave me a copy, which brought back fond memories
- but she has gone now, and I believe WUSC assistance is winding down,
and the wheel will once more be reinvented.
With regard to the dedicated English courses, I was astonished to
find that students who had joined to improve their knowledge of the
language were expected to read Anna Karenina. I believe I managed to
make some dents in the mindset that had set up such a system and allowed
it to continue for years, but dispensations kept changing and I don't
think changes were coherent or as radical as was needed.
This absurdity is relevant, because part of our problem is the
excessively academic orientation of those who exercise authority in the
field of English studies. This goes back to the elitist view of
University education which we inherited from the British, and which we
clung to long after the British had adapted to the twentieth century.
Thus, while outsiders thought University English Departments were
helping to produce teachers of English for the nation, they were doing
nothing of the sort. Instead they were producing experts in English
Literature with knowledge of the whole gamut of English Literature. As
the Head of English in Colombo proudly told me, when I wondered why the
curriculum had not been changed, her students could go on to do advanced
degrees at Cambridge.
Critical skills
So when those Departments got funding to expand their staff on the
grounds that they would provide special courses for teachers, they
offered them degrees that compared - in content if not in critical
skills - with what was on offer in England. And when it dawned on those
in charge that English teachers were needed, since English Language
Teaching was a profession, and not something that universities should
deal in, they introduced linguistics instead.Indeed, when some years
back, when I was at the Ministry, I tried to suggest that at least some
modules English Language Teaching should be offered by the Universities,
they all sniffed and looked askance, except thankfully Ms Nagasunderam
at Sri Jayewardenepura. ELT is now part of the USJP external degree,
which has long been the most popular external degree in Sri Lanka.
I should add that there are exceptions to the rarefied world in which
English academics in Sri Lanka live. During the nineties we finally
managed to convince the Ministry to make General English compulsory at
Advanced Level, though this was only in the strange Sri Lankan sense of
the word compulsory, which means you do not have to pass it.
Unfortunately, with the NIE and the Universities meant to collaborate on
the syllabus and the textbook, nothing moved, until the then
Vice-Chairman of the Task Force who was in charge of the subject hit on
the happy idea of telling the others that he would ask me to write the
textbook on my own if it were not ready soon. That spurred them to
action, though he had to call me in to deal with the animosities that
were apparent.
Unfortunately, though those involved all had much talent, they could
not appreciate the input of what they saw as the other side. Fortunately
the NIE leadership had been students of mine at Peradeniya, and did not
see me as a threat, while the University academics involved could not
sniff at me since I had in fact been to Oxford, and this - though not
Cambridge - could not be looked down on.
In fact the book they produced was most impressive, and though it was
unwieldy given that the predilections of all had to be accommodated, a
later streamlined edition proved extremely popular. Sadly it has not
occurred to those in charge of English at the Technical Colleges to take
a look at this book and adapt it for their needs, or indeed to ask any
of those who had been involved in that exercise for their advice on how
to proceed.
Nor will they dream of looking at the texts we used for the General
English Training Course which I was privileged to coordinate islandwide
for seven years, together with Oranee Jansz of USJP. The textbooks we
produced were taken on by Cambridge University Press in India, and were
even prescribed at universities there, but that is India, and our
authorities required something better, or at least more expensive, with
genuine British characters for our Technical College students to
emulate.
I should add that the Supplementary Reader we commissioned, a book
called Historical Buildings by Goolbai Gunasekara, is now on my blog,
and is read by hundreds of students around the world every day, with
over 100,000 having looked at her account of the Taj Mahal. But it will
never occur to any Sri Lankan in a position to prescribe books for
students to refer to this, since Goolbai is Sri Lankan, so her work
would not be up to the required standard. So, we will continue to
reinvent the wheel, at vast expense, though doubtless those who freely
spend state resources on all these novelties will also benefit from the
exercise. I was indeed told that those responsible for an earlier
workshop that was supposed to develop management capacity have now been
interdicted. But I suspect, even if this is true, that nothing will come
of it, and we will go on as before, with no effort to build on what has
been done previously.
Typical of our continuing amateur attitude to learning is what has
happened with the National Centre for Advanced Study of the Humanities,
which I mentioned earlier. We set it up with high hopes of advanced
degrees being offered, because we knew that lecturers in Arts Faculties
found it difficult to gain higher degrees, since these are erratic in
Sri Lanka, and scholarships are not given readily for their subjects. We
also around the same time set up a Postgraduate Institute of English,
since Peradeniya had by then killed its Master's Degree in English, and
all that was available was a course in Kelaniya which was not regarded
as sufficiently weighty for promotions.
I should add that the Peradeniya Professor warned us that entrusting
the Institute to the Open University would be a disaster, and I fear he
was proved correct, because the MA they offered took ages to complete.
It also seemed to me that the approach was unnecessarily rigid, which is
doubtless why hardly anyone has qualified, a decade or so after the
institute was started, though I am happy that one of our staff here is
amongst the brilliant or the lucky ones to have done so.
National Centre
With regard to the National Centre, I was horrified to discover when
it presented its report to the Committee on Public Enterprises that it
had done hardly anything except provide funds for university staff to
obtain higher degrees from institutions abroad. There is nothing wrong
with this, given that there is no alternative method for lecturers in
the humanities to obtain postgraduate qualifications, but we had
envisaged the Centre offering degrees itself, by bringing together staff
from different universities who would offer modular courses plus
supervise young academics to help them develop wider understanding of
cross-cutting issues whilst also obtaining the required qualifications.
But I suppose that was too much to expect. Both institutions, set up
with such high hopes nearly a decade ago, have not promoted the
attitudinal changes we had hoped for. We will therefore continue to be
parasitic on other countries, and continue also to bemoan the decline in
standards which we have done little to arrest.
But I should not end on a pessimistic note. It was heartening to see
so many of her students gathering at Parvathi Nagasunderam's book launch
in appreciation of what she had done for them. Lakshmi Cumaranatunga was
also there, and Professor Wilson, the Dean of Arts at Jayewardenepura
who had been so supportive when we tried radical innovations. Despite
the opposition of the then Head of Department, and the caution of the
Vice-Chancellor, we succeeded in the end because of his support. And his
daughter, who began her teaching career here, is now on the staff there,
and though she did not get a Master's Degree from Peradeniya given the
chaos that prevails there, she is now qualified and on her way, I hope
soon, to a doctorate.
Here we have much to be proud of, the new Senior Lecturers in
English, the new Head of Department who is perhaps the best exponent of
the bilingualism this country is committed to promoting, and our
students who, despite the harsh critiques from the established
universities of our programme when we started it, now teach in many
other universities. I hope they will set examples of active coordination
and ensure the continuity that will ensure the progress in English
Education nationwide that this country so desperately needs.
Excerpts of a lecture delivered at the University of Sabaragamuwa
|