Contradictions in
exam-oriented English education
BY RACHEL WANG
Referring to my project 1 narrative “Studying English in exam-oriented way”, I state my experiences of learning English in a typical Chinese exam-oriented way requiring memorizing vocabulary, analyzing grammar, studying test skills and practicing listening and oral skill additionally. My experience of learning English in project 1 reflects the Chinese exam-oriented English education. It makes students feel everything is organized, processed step by step and targeted at high level goal of “monolingual” communication ability. Canarajah redefined the “success” in learning a second language which contradicts the “monolingual” goal in Project 1. Also, Canarajah addressed the example of Saudi Arabian students doing English project with combination of Arabian and English and “linguistic hybridity of the performance” to illustrate how “translingual” way of using languages linked to cultural root and personal identity. The narrative in project 1 points out the emphasis of English test technique requiring high accuracy and limit students’ creativity, which would become a barrier to achieve the “monolingual” level of applying English. In narrative of Project 1, I state that “My English teacher was a Chinese woman talking in Chinese most of the time on class” who taught English in “translingual” way suggested as a communication method supported by Canarajah as a necessary and efficient way of communication. However, this method of teaching and learning English then contradicts the goal of achieving “monolingual” level of applying English again. However, as Canajah states “language complement each other”, the teaching way combining Chinese and English may benefit teaching English in some way. Therefore it’s worth discussing the benefit and drawback of exam-oriented way of teaching English by reference to the positive effect of “translingual” way of applying languages and by adding the point of how “translingual” method fail to work rather than “monolingual” way of teaching. In the passage, I will discuss the contradictions of the goals of achieving high English level with the opposite teaching method and deprivation of creativity and personal identity during English education. Also, I believe there will be a way to take care of all these factors and achieve a balance way of English education.
As Canarajah mentions the common definition of what “success” is for applying language in communication by addressing “We believe that for communication to be efficient and successful we should employ a common language with shared norms. These norms typically come from the native speaker’s use of the language” and “We also believe the languages have their own unique systems and should be kept free of mixing with other languages for meaningful communication”. This monolingual way of applying language requires fully developed skills in every aspect of the language, such as reading, writing, grammar, listening skill, oral skill and cultural background. As I mentioned it in project 1 narrative “ In the middle school, my English education extended the way from primary school, standing a more important position compared to other courses,” studying English took me a large amount of time and the goal of learning it is to be a perfect English user. My teacher pushes us hard in this way by assigning “grammar books, exercise books, specific reading book and packs of papers” and “listening and speaking practice”. The goal of the English education is to achieve the level similar to the “monolingual’ communication mentioned by Canrajah. It’s right for a language learner to try hard to reach native speaker level, which is one of the most obvious symbol of success in a certain language. All the behavior of mixing the language with another one would make the writing or dialogue less authentic and less coherent for the general meaning. Therefore, I think it is appropriate to keep the goal to learn English purely without mixing with Chinese, because English sounds more authentic with right order of sentences and native accent. Applying English in this way would help people achieve efficient communication and promote international cooperation.
Although Chinese exam-oriented English education requires such a high goal, the system find it hard to achieve. Not only do we need to revise the method of teaching but also rethink if the “monolingual” goal is necessarily important. Canarajah addressed two examples: “Buthainah considered a merging of all her linguistic repertoires as most effectively representing her identities and objectives” and “the linguistic hybridity of the performance draws from the artiste’s own sociocultural in-betweenness.” These two examples indicates how mixture of languages expressing personal identities, which is vital because it states the special features of individual distinctive from others. Regarded to English education, showing personal identity in writing can help a writer stands out. If a writer can write English article combining with his or her cultural background by addressing certain vocabulary or habits of putting word in certain order, it may be special and charming because readers have the chance to stand on writers’ position and experience the special expressive way. Also, it can help promote a writer for a distinctive reputation. On the other hand, as stated in Canarajah’s article “the language mesh in transformative ways, generating new meanings and grammas”, the ability to create words by combining words from different languages to make an English article description more vivid has never been discussed in Chinese exam-oriented English education. Regarded to my narrative “The writing class emphasizes techniques more, for example, we were taught several writing modes and asked for memorizing tens of examples to write in the exam. This method of writing does help us get pretty high marks in the exam, but besides addressing multiple examples, I usually felt my article was barely empty”, creativity is deprived from students in the writing class which is intolerable because everyone’s writing seems to be similar coming from certain resources without any brainstorm and not mention creating new words. Both Canarajah’s ideas of building identity and creating words can be considered to meet the high standard of English level that Chinese English education system looks for. However, both of these ideas involve the “translingual” application, which shakes the idea stated before that “monolingual” standard of English is the final goal.
There’s another contradiction between the “monolingual” goal to achieve standard English and “translingual” way of teaching English. Mentioned in narrative “My English teacher was a Chinese woman talking in Chinese most of the time on class”, we are immersed in an environment combining with two languages, although we are told to be a fluent English applier without mixing it with mandarin. It can benefit learning English and grammar part especially, because all the terms and rules are explained in mandarin. We can understand the terms efficiently in mandarin and apply well in English. When the students are not familiar with listening or applying English, giving lessons in English will be unwise since students easily get lost and receive information non-efficiently. Therefore, it could be effective using “translingual” way of teaching. However, it does bring drawback somewhat more. Since students can get immersed in an English environment, it’s hard for them to think in English way and react to conversation naturally without translating in the mind. Also, it would lead problems such as putting sentences in strange orders, speaking with strong accent and struggling with listening to fluent English speakers. In my opinion, we need to work to improve Chinese English education system through two ways: resetting the goal and revise the teaching method. As for the goal, “monolingual” standard language should not be the terminal goal of learning English, but the “translingual” standard forward involving creation and distinction. Also, it’s better get to know the cultural background when doing readings in English, because it may help people get to know how a writer think in English way and learn how to put sentence into right order at the same time. I suggest Chinese high school educational system decrease the amount of English test, because as I know a large number of schools aiming at high GPA and competitive position among all offer education mainly or only focus on test technique that will not help students learn the language rather than take the test. As for the exam paper, despite the common grammar and reading part, the exam board should develop more improvisational creative writing testing that students can get prepared for. In these ways, students can be easily pushed both being strength at applying English and creating articles with their own mind.
In conclusion, the teaching way of English can improve in two steps: cutting the amount of exams rather than focusing on the English teaching itself by trying to think in an English way and higher the goal to the creation level where we should aim at adding our distinct feature and let our work stand out.
As Canarajah mentions the common definition of what “success” is for applying language in communication by addressing “We believe that for communication to be efficient and successful we should employ a common language with shared norms. These norms typically come from the native speaker’s use of the language” and “We also believe the languages have their own unique systems and should be kept free of mixing with other languages for meaningful communication”. This monolingual way of applying language requires fully developed skills in every aspect of the language, such as reading, writing, grammar, listening skill, oral skill and cultural background. As I mentioned it in project 1 narrative “ In the middle school, my English education extended the way from primary school, standing a more important position compared to other courses,” studying English took me a large amount of time and the goal of learning it is to be a perfect English user. My teacher pushes us hard in this way by assigning “grammar books, exercise books, specific reading book and packs of papers” and “listening and speaking practice”. The goal of the English education is to achieve the level similar to the “monolingual’ communication mentioned by Canrajah. It’s right for a language learner to try hard to reach native speaker level, which is one of the most obvious symbol of success in a certain language. All the behavior of mixing the language with another one would make the writing or dialogue less authentic and less coherent for the general meaning. Therefore, I think it is appropriate to keep the goal to learn English purely without mixing with Chinese, because English sounds more authentic with right order of sentences and native accent. Applying English in this way would help people achieve efficient communication and promote international cooperation.
Although Chinese exam-oriented English education requires such a high goal, the system find it hard to achieve. Not only do we need to revise the method of teaching but also rethink if the “monolingual” goal is necessarily important. Canarajah addressed two examples: “Buthainah considered a merging of all her linguistic repertoires as most effectively representing her identities and objectives” and “the linguistic hybridity of the performance draws from the artiste’s own sociocultural in-betweenness.” These two examples indicates how mixture of languages expressing personal identities, which is vital because it states the special features of individual distinctive from others. Regarded to English education, showing personal identity in writing can help a writer stands out. If a writer can write English article combining with his or her cultural background by addressing certain vocabulary or habits of putting word in certain order, it may be special and charming because readers have the chance to stand on writers’ position and experience the special expressive way. Also, it can help promote a writer for a distinctive reputation. On the other hand, as stated in Canarajah’s article “the language mesh in transformative ways, generating new meanings and grammas”, the ability to create words by combining words from different languages to make an English article description more vivid has never been discussed in Chinese exam-oriented English education. Regarded to my narrative “The writing class emphasizes techniques more, for example, we were taught several writing modes and asked for memorizing tens of examples to write in the exam. This method of writing does help us get pretty high marks in the exam, but besides addressing multiple examples, I usually felt my article was barely empty”, creativity is deprived from students in the writing class which is intolerable because everyone’s writing seems to be similar coming from certain resources without any brainstorm and not mention creating new words. Both Canarajah’s ideas of building identity and creating words can be considered to meet the high standard of English level that Chinese English education system looks for. However, both of these ideas involve the “translingual” application, which shakes the idea stated before that “monolingual” standard of English is the final goal.
There’s another contradiction between the “monolingual” goal to achieve standard English and “translingual” way of teaching English. Mentioned in narrative “My English teacher was a Chinese woman talking in Chinese most of the time on class”, we are immersed in an environment combining with two languages, although we are told to be a fluent English applier without mixing it with mandarin. It can benefit learning English and grammar part especially, because all the terms and rules are explained in mandarin. We can understand the terms efficiently in mandarin and apply well in English. When the students are not familiar with listening or applying English, giving lessons in English will be unwise since students easily get lost and receive information non-efficiently. Therefore, it could be effective using “translingual” way of teaching. However, it does bring drawback somewhat more. Since students can get immersed in an English environment, it’s hard for them to think in English way and react to conversation naturally without translating in the mind. Also, it would lead problems such as putting sentences in strange orders, speaking with strong accent and struggling with listening to fluent English speakers. In my opinion, we need to work to improve Chinese English education system through two ways: resetting the goal and revise the teaching method. As for the goal, “monolingual” standard language should not be the terminal goal of learning English, but the “translingual” standard forward involving creation and distinction. Also, it’s better get to know the cultural background when doing readings in English, because it may help people get to know how a writer think in English way and learn how to put sentence into right order at the same time. I suggest Chinese high school educational system decrease the amount of English test, because as I know a large number of schools aiming at high GPA and competitive position among all offer education mainly or only focus on test technique that will not help students learn the language rather than take the test. As for the exam paper, despite the common grammar and reading part, the exam board should develop more improvisational creative writing testing that students can get prepared for. In these ways, students can be easily pushed both being strength at applying English and creating articles with their own mind.
In conclusion, the teaching way of English can improve in two steps: cutting the amount of exams rather than focusing on the English teaching itself by trying to think in an English way and higher the goal to the creation level where we should aim at adding our distinct feature and let our work stand out.