Native Speakers versus Non-native Speakers

Star Q

i.  Sandwich Bebola Daging Berkeju

ii.  Penataraan B. Inggeris PT3

iii.  SISC As I See It

There were a lot of grouses and dissatisfaction when the Education Ministry decided to implement the Native Speakers programme in selected rural schools to help improve the proficiency of English Language amongst the students here, a few years back.

Be that as it may, the misgivings slowly disappeared because we finally came to the conclusion that if there was anyone or any group of teachers who can lend a hand and help us in teaching English Language to our students, it would be a native speaker, be they from England or United States.  Being native speakers, they have the insight to the language, the received pronunciation and an added bonus; they come equipped with education background.

However, having said all that, it comes as a surprise when the ministry decided to bring in 300 trained teachers from India who are non-native speakers of English as SISC+ to assist in improving the proficiency and usage of English Language among our students who incidentally are just like them; non-native speakers!

This regressive move could in more way than one be detrimental to this country's education not least to the moral of the SISC+ who during the infancy of their appointment were  given the responsibility to do just that.  Another setback is the non-native import teachers mentioned above could have an adverse effect on our students oral skills especially their pronunciation.  No matter how trained these imported teachers may be, they will be prone to speaking with a slight slang in their own mother tongue.  It will not be surprising, when at the end of their tenure here, the students they teach will end up having the same slang.

This text is in no way judgemental let alone prejudicial, but let us be realistic.  How many reports from students in their tertiary education with institutions hiring lecturers from this particular country, have the ministry actually heard from complaining that they hardly understand what the lecturers are saying?  Or has any kind of data been collected from people involved in these situations for the ministry to come up with such a report?

I am quite skeptical that there is such a report just as I am skeptical that this programme is going to be a whirlwind success; unless they doctor it, which is another thing these people are good at.