Supporting Language Enhancement in a Tertiary

Environment: A Case Study

David NunanThe English Centre

University of Hong Kong

OverviewOverview

Aim of the presentation Language policy at HKU Background to the English Centre Issues and controversies A view from the learners Looking to the future

Language policy at HKULanguage policy at HKU

English as the medium of instruction Credit-bearing courses in and

English and Putonghua as part of the undergraduate curriculum

Background to the English Centre

Background to the English Centre

Pre-1991: English courses offered as part of the Language Centre

1991: EC established as a separate entity

1997: Courses compulsory and credit-bearing for all undergraduates

1997: Financial review of the Centre

2004: Academic review of language policy at HKU

Issues and controversiesIssues and controversies a lack of fit between official University policy and

practice uncertainty as to where the Centre belongs

administratively within the Academy the status (or lack of it) of language teaching as a

form of disciplined inquiry ongoing controversy over the relationship

between language and content an inability on the part of non language

specialists to discriminate between proficiency and achievement

Lack of fit between policy and practice

Lack of fit between policy and practice

EMI as official policy

The ‘high cost’ of English enhancement“In evaluating and reviewing budgets to departments, it was the

perception of the Vice-Chancellor’s Resources Liaison Group (RLG) that the unit cost per student of English was relatively

high.” (HKU 1997).

Where the unit should fit organizationally

Where the unit should fit organizationally

Independent unit or part of a faculty?

Which faculty?

The status of English language teaching as a form of disciplined

inquiry

The status of English language teaching as a form of disciplined

inquiry

The ‘teacher’ / ‘non-teacher’ distinction.

“If you can speak a language, you can teach it.”

The content / language controversy

The content / language controversy

The ‘toolbox’ approach to language teaching.

Content free language teaching Communication is always about

something.

Proficiency versus achievement

Proficiency versus achievement

The perennial ‘falling standards’ debate

Admission policy in an EMIThe 2004 Review “… called attention to the need for

help to be provided to students who were not up to standard in terms of their English proficiency and those who had difficulty with grammar and usage.”

Proficiency versus achievement

Proficiency versus achievement

The EC brief

“ helping students attain high levels of proficiency should be the goal of the Centre.”

“students should be streamed on the basis of their language proficiency.”

(Academic Review of Language Policy 2004)

Do English Centre courses make a difference?

Do English Centre courses make a difference?

The “Gain Report”

mean SD

Pre-course 56.48 6.98

Post-course 63.49 5.71

A repeated measure t-test indicated that the difference was highly significant. (p < 0.0001) (English Centre 2004/05: 2)

Learner attitudesLearner attitudes

Should students admitted to an EMI institution on the basis of their Use of English scores be required to undertake a course in academic English?

The ‘slippage’ issue.

The ‘good’ learner study The ‘good’ learner study

The ‘better’ learner: communicative orientation

these learners exhibit a degree of autonomy and goes on to say that “There can be a certain self-directedness involved in deliberately using interactions for learning purposes, and in this way an underlying field-independence may show itself.” (Willing 1993: 153).

The ‘good’ learner studyThe ‘good’ learner study

The ‘weaker’ learner: authority-oriented

“These learners exhibit characteristics of field-dependence and passivity. This learner type prefers structure and sequential progression. They do better in ‘traditional’ classrooms and look on teachers as authority figures”.

The ‘good’ learner studyThe ‘good’ learner study

The better learner: preferred strategies1. “I like to learn by watching / listening to native

speakers.”

2. “I like to learn English words by seeing them.”

3. “At home, I like to learn by watching TV in English.”

4. “In class, I like to learn by conversation.”

5. “I like to learn many new words.”

The ‘good’ learner studyThe ‘good’ learner study

The weaker learner: preferred strategies1. “I like the teacher to tell me all my mistakes.”

2. “I like to learn English words by seeing them.”

3. “I like the teacher to help me talk about my interests.”

4. “I like to have my own textbook.”

5. “I like to learn new English words by doing something.”

The ‘good’ learner studyThe ‘good’ learner study

Out of class useLess than an hour More than 10 hours

per week per week

A 22% 29%

B 28% 13%

C 40% 7%

D 46% 3%

E 66% 4%

The ‘good’ learner studyThe ‘good’ learner study

Proficiency and academic specialization

Better students: Arts, Law. Medicine

Weaker students: Engineering, Science

The ‘good’ learner studyThe ‘good’ learner study

Perceptions of the importance of English

Virtually all of the students (97%) agreed that English was either ‘very’ or ‘extremely’ important.

The ‘good’ learner studyThe ‘good’ learner study

Self-rating of language ability

Fifty-six per cent of the higher proficiency students identified the two highest level statements as describing them, while only six per cent of lower proficiency students selected these statements

The ‘good’ learner studyThe ‘good’ learner study

Enjoyment in learning English

“I enjoy learning English a great deal.”

Higher: 40%

Lower: 2%

Looking to the futureLooking to the future

Faculty acceptance that language issues are their responsibility

Greater flexibility of course offerings Greater learner choice and self-

responsibility Retaining / recruiting a critical mass

of competent English-speaking teachers

Faculty acceptance that language issues are their

responsibility

Faculty acceptance that language issues are their

responsibility

EC has responsibility for 4% of the undergraduate curriculum

“excellence in the use of English should be made an objective of the entire curriculum.” (p28).

“English in the Major” courses

Greater flexibility of courses offerings

Greater flexibility of courses offerings

Persistence of ‘traditional’ ways of thinking.

“Abandon the better student.”

versus “Abandon the weaker student.”

Greater flexibility of courses offerings

Greater flexibility of courses offerings

In the first instance, proposals had to be pedagogically defensible. In addition, they had to:

be cost effective / efficiency of resources involve some degree of student choice foster student self-responsibility retain an EAP focus be administratively feasible cater to increased diversity of language

proficiency

Greater learner choice and self-responsibility

Greater learner choice and self-responsibility

Learning is not about cramming in information. It is about learning by doing. It is about looking at issues in various ways and developing capacities, especially the ability to research and dig beyond the surface to reach the truth. It is also about finding the right information to solve problems and finish tasks. That is why our goal is to teach students to learn how to learn, rather than merely passing information to them. (Tsui, 2006:1)

Retaining / recruiting a critical mass of competent English-

speaking teachers

Retaining / recruiting a critical mass of competent English-

speaking teachers

The impact of localization

ReferencesReferencesBenson, P. and W. Lor. 1998. Making Sense of Autonomous Language

Learning: Conceptions of Learning and Readiness for Autonomy. English Centre Monograph No. 2 University of Hong Kong.

Benson, P. and D. Nunan (eds.) 2002. The experience of language learning. Hong Kong Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7, 2.

Benson, P. and D. Nunan. (eds.) 2005. Learners’ Stories: Difference and Diversity in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

English Centre. 2004/05 English Provision for Law Students: Final Report. Littlewood, W. Tsui, Lap Che. 2006. Interview with the Vice-Chancellor. Dialogue. May,

2006. Willing, K. 1993. Learning Styles in Adult Migrant Education. NCELTR,

Macquarie University: Sydney. University of Hong Kong. 1997. Financial Review of the English Centre. University of Hong Kong. 2004. Review of Language Education in the

University.